The Big Accountability Thread

[TRVMP]

Celtic said in that statement it had the same position as the SPFL board. That's more than one club then isn't it?

 

Yep, although Milne at Aberdeen has since said he's not bothered.

[Toby]

In the case of Farry that was the correct outcome. And Smith was just ****ing useless.

 

It was Farry I was referring too, but if Regan falls by the sword because of his reluctance to act here, I'm inclined to think that would be the correct outcome.

 

Yep, although Milne at Aberdeen has since said he's not bothered.

 

Milne's head may be swayed if his fans put pressure on him to start digging up about it though.

[TRVMP]

It was Farry I was referring too, but if Regan falls by the sword because of his reluctance to act here, I'm inclined to think that would be the correct outcome.

 

 

Milne's head may be swayed if his fans put pressure on him to start digging up about it though.

 

I just don't understand the SFA's reasoning here. They don't want to go over old ground - that's fine on the surface of it, but it's not old ground because the material facts have changed. There are new things to investigate.

 

Doubtless a lot of the pressure will be from Celtic and their fans wanting to shaft Rangers but it's still the right thing to do.

 

Obviously the 'rangerstaxcase' guy is biased but he's right when he says title-stripping isn't a priority here. The top two prioriteis are figuring out exactly what happened, and then finding ways to ensure it doesn't happen again with any other club. That's the exact right approach here but the authoriteis now finally have Rangers back in the top flight and don't want to upset the apple cart at all. Nobody is asking for a relegation so I don't understand their reluctance.

[TRVMP]

contrived loss making partnership schemes

 

Ed, what schemes were these?

[dunning1874]

Being pedantic here, but they were elected to join the League by taking up the vacant slot in what is now League 2.

Parachuting implies they were dropped from the top flight to the bottom, and follows the media misapprehension that they were relegated three leagues. They fended off zero competition (wrong procedure IMO) and were shamelessly voted in by the majority of the member clubs. Even more shameful were the minority who wanted them put straight into the second tier. Not shameful at all were Stranraer, who voted to not let them in at all.

That implication wasn't my intention... I was using 'parachuting' in the context of trying to put them into a place they had no right to be (the first or second tier), in the same way as you might describe a politician being 'parachuted' into a safe seat when they've never set foot in the constituency before.

[AyrshireTon]

That implication wasn't my intention... I wss using 'parachuting' in the context of trying to put them into a place they had no right to be (the first or second tier), in the same way as you might describe a politician being 'parachuted' into a safe seat when they've never set foot in the constituency before.

Fair enough.

[Ed de Ball]

Ed, what schemes were these?

Various iterations of the Ingenious LLP film partnership schemes

 

Most of the image rights cases, which are huge in England, are bespoke and involve individual player's slave companies based in a tax haven. Player is paid monthly say £1k as a wage, and £9 is paid as image rights on which club does not operate PAYE or NIC. If the player is a non dom he can keep the £9k offshore. The Spanish version of this is what landed Renaldo et all in court.

[TRVMP]

Various iterations of the Ingenious LLP film partnership schemes

 

Most of the image rights cases, which are huge in England, are bespoke and involve individual player's slave companies based in a tax haven. Player is paid monthly say £1k as a wage, and £9 is paid as image rights on which club does not operate PAYE or NIC. If the player is a non dom he can keep the £9k offshore. The Spanish version of this is what landed Renaldo et all in court.

 

I was asking about the contrived loss schemes, not the image right schemes.

[Ed de Ball]

I was asking about the contrived loss schemes, not the image right schemes.

So you got a bonus, be grateful.

[TRVMP]

So you got a bonus, be grateful.

 

Or you could just answer the question.

[Ed de Ball]

Or you could just answer the question.

"Ed what schemes were these?"

 

"I was asking about the contrived losses schemes not the image right schemes."

 

Maybe you should phrase your questions rather more precisely, but never mind even more mindless red dot opportunities for you and the muppet to earns his corn working for a globalised tax avoider.

[TRVMP]

"Ed what schemes were these?"

 

"I was asking about the contrived losses schemes not the image right schemes."

 

Maybe you should phrase your questions rather more precisely, but never mind even more mindless red dot opportunities for you and the muppet to earns his corn working for a globalised tax avoider.

How is this not precise? I quoted you talking about schemes, and asked you about the schemes:

 

 

Then you start rambling on about image rights, which I didn't ask about.

[TheGoon]

Suspect this won't go down well, Hibs don't want the review either https://t.co/StWaheP79R

[Ed de Ball]

How is this not precise? I quoted you talking about schemes, and asked you about the schemes:

Then you start rambling on about image rights, which I didn't ask about.

Ok I get it now, you think that in terms of the degree of opprobrium the SFA should bring to bear there is somehow a distinction between an avoidance scheme and an avoidance arrangement.

[Nickaton]

So is the Hibs chairman also involved. This is a cover up or are clubs scared in case what happened to raith rovers chairman happens to them

[TheGoon]

So is the Hibs chairman also involved. This is a cover up or are clubs scared in case what happened to raith rovers chairman happens to them

So long as Lawell's on their side they should be alright. Hibs stance is strange.

[TopCat]

A decent thread about a contentious issue and then Red Ed gets on board.

 

Personally I couldn't care less about EBTs and title stripping as I think most fans (including some Rangers fans) see those titles as tainted in some way anyway.

 

The interesting bit for me is the governing bodies cosy looking relationship with Charles Green while he was raising - and blowing - massive amounts of cash, especially during a period where multiple court cases were ongoing over financial mismanagement.

 

As for Celtic, they'll always find an axe to grind as it keeps their fantasist base onside. However, corruption has been rife in football across Europe so maybe they're right to keep asking questions.

[TRVMP]

Ok I get it now, you think that in terms of the degree of opprobrium the SFA should bring to bear there is somehow a distinction between an avoidance scheme and an avoidance arrangement.

No, I'm asking you what contrived loss schemes took place. Or you can call them contrived loss arrangements. It's a very straightforward question.

[BishopTon]

I was far more concerned when Airdrie managed to cheat there way into League 1 buying Clydebank. This was far more detrimental to Morton - could not give a toss about Rangers TBH.

[TRVMP]

I was far more concerned when Airdrie managed to cheat there way into League 1 buying Clydebank. This was far more detrimental to Morton - could not give a toss about Rangers TBH.

 

It may have been unseemly but it certainly wasn't cheating. Clydebank were an absolute basket case for years and the blame for their demise needs to be lain at the door of:

 

1) the Steadmans and the subsequent owners (forget who they were) - there are real shades of Hugh Scott in what they did to Kilbowie

2) the SFA/SFL for not implementing a fit and proper persons test when it was clear that the club was being managed towards liquidation

 

I was mad at the time but now I don't blame the Airdrie United consortium for doing what they did. The fact is that they had the appetite to preserve league football in their town and the means to do it. Clydebank only had, at best, the first of these, and even that is up for debate.

 

The main lesson is that when clubs end up in liquidation, it's usually because the people running them are up to no good and the authorities are either none the wiser or willing to turn a blind eye - bringing us neatly back to Rangers.

 

edit: not Clydebank FC-related, but remember when East Stirlingshire's owners - also the Steadmans - tried to move them to Clydebank in a similar arrangement to Airdrie United, it was the court of law and not the footballing authorities that stopped them, although that was in large part due to the ES shareholders opposing the "merger" with Clydebank Juniors, as opposed to a problem with a club's moving per se.