stucommando Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 I know its been asked on here before but has anyone managed to come up with an answer yet? HOW MANY OTHER COMPANIES IN THE WORLD "NEGOTIATE" A PUNISHMENT? Surely its just a case of the SFA saying "this is going to a panel who will judge, take it or leave it?" To be fair, the NEWCO dont really need to accept any punishment because its a totally new company and Rangers dont exist anymore. So surely its Duff and Phelps who should be arguing to have titles kept as it really isnt anything to do with Green. I do think, that these punishments transferring to Newco is some kind of trade-off for the fact the newco dont actually meet new entrant to SFL conditions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 My link So are the EBT's an SPL only matter? I asked about this the other day. It seems to imply that none of their Cups will be removed, but SPL titles still could be, which is a stumbling block at the moment. If true, it strikes me as outrageous that the SFA, having rightly hammered various teams down the years for registration errors, can turn a blind eye to such serious, intentional and sustained offences. How they would then have the credibility to issue punishments in future, I've no idea. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fasda Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 My link So are the EBT's an SPL only matter? No but the dual contracts are. Sorry to be pedantic but the EBT thing is with HMRC, the SPL are investigating dual contracts that were associated, purely a football matter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 I asked about this the other day. It seems to imply that none of their Cups will be removed, but SPL titles still could be, which is a stumbling block at the moment. If true, it strikes me as outrageous that the SFA, having rightly hammered various teams down the years for registration errors, can turn a blind eye to such serious, intentional and sustained offences. How they would then have the credibility to issue punishments in future, I've no idea. Seems to be an extension of the "If you owe the bank £100 it's your problem, owe them £1m and it's the bank's problem". "Register a sub wrongly sort of and it's explusion from the competitoin, systematically cheat for a decade with whole teams of unregistered players and it's no harm, no foul". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 My link So are the EBT's an SPL only matter? The SFA are staying out of the investigation so that they can be a neutral appeal body. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 No but the dual contracts are. Sorry to be pedantic but the EBT thing is with HMRC, the SPL are investigating dual contracts that were associated, purely a football matter. I can't get my head round this. Do clubs not submit all contracts to the SFA? If so, if there is a failure to submit all documentation to the SFA, why would they not deal with this? Surely for the sake of consistency on something like this you can't pick and choose which governing body leads an enquiry? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 So i am unsure what else you need to clarify this,as the first comment i read from you on this was the one of saying Airdrie Utd fans think we are a continuation of the old Airdrieonians....well that is just BS....there may be a handful,but i can assure you the rest don't think of Utd as this. I don't know where you live but I am presuming you support your local team. Your local team used to be Airdrieonians and now it's Airdrie Utd. Can't see anything unusual in that. Keep up the good work. (I did meet some unappealing Airdrie fans at Italia 90, but hey ho.) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 The SFA are staying out of the investigation so that they can be a neutral appeal body. In that case it will be interesting to know whether the SPL can rule on a club no longer under their jurisdiction and secondly whether they can impose sanctions or punishments which extend beyond their remit e.g. suspension or expulsion. It makes no sense at all not to let the SFA handle this and let UEFA act as the next stage of the process. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 (edited) And he warned SPL bosses he would QUIT if they took back honours won by Rangers. At last, Ally finds the exit hitherto denied him. I know it's the Sun but " he warned them"! Oh No! WTFDHTHI? Edited July 25, 2012 by cyderspaceman 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Northerner Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 (edited) In that case it will be interesting to know whether the SPL can rule on a club no longer under their jurisdiction and secondly whether they can impose sanctions or punishments which extend beyond their remit e.g. suspension or expulsion. Stuff hanging over OldCo which *may* be transferred to NewCo as part of the membership 'debate': 1) SPL investigation into Dual Contracts 2) SFA may ask (and in fact should do so) Appelate Tribunal to reconvene to choose a new sanction Edited July 25, 2012 by The Old Northerner 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fasda Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 But do you think this would be the case if the diddies hadn't mobilised so effectively and called "time" on the MSM's bias? RTC and others have been working tirelessly to make sure there are no rugs in Scottish football (apart from Gordon Smith's) to allow anything to be swept under, and without them I'm not so sure the position would be the same. Some of the commentators on this forum seem to have a firmer grasp on due process than those in charge and this is in of itself a huge concern. Whether Hughie's playing a blinder in scuttling TRFC and making it look like like sabotage is a bit of a side-issue. The fact remains that those in charge of the game knew about Ranger's underhand methods well in advance of them going into administration, and by all accounts shouldn't have allowed them to even compete in season 2011/12. Ogilvie's still in a job and now Regan and Cockwomble are flailing about entirely unsure of what to do. If Sally hadn't been so inept then TRFC should have at least beaten Maribor and this would have allowed some cash injection to keep the wolf from the door for another season, and allowed the powers that be to keep feathering their nests. Any investigation into the EBT's is going to ably demonstrate that the SPL and the SFA were well aware of them and failed to take any action because some of their board were beneficiaries. This leaves them in the invidious position of being unable to allow TRFC to skate when all the "customers" are up in arms about blatant cheating, or allowing the matter to be fully investigated and the sword of Damocles falling on their fat necks. I agree the present position is satisfactory but think this is entirely by accident and not design. The delays are unacceptable and only show-up the governing bodies as self-preserving fools. This is not a judicial process, it's an in-house quasi-legal one specifically designed to prevent such unacceptable whataboutery. New broom time, not Trigger's. No I definitely do not think that! I totally agree, I'm just pointing out that they're not very good at this so far are they? Admin, liquidation, TUPE, fines, sanctions, SPL, SFL1, SFL3, License etc etc. I have faith in their continued myopic, weurrapeepull driven incompetence. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 I can't get my head round this. Do clubs not submit all contracts to the SFA? If so, if there is a failure to submit all documentation to the SFA, why would they not deal with this? Surely for the sake of consistency on something like this you can't pick and choose which governing body leads an enquiry? With three different bodies and an unprecedented perfect storm of rule breaking, they've chosen the practical path. There's no point in duplicating the enquiry. And,as, Craig says, it allows the SFA to rule independently on an appeal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 Stuff hanging over OldCo which *may* be transferred to NewCo as part of the membership 'debate': 1) SPL investigation into Dual Contracts 2) SFA may ask (and in fact should do so) Appelate Tribunal to reconvene to choose a new sanction I think my point still stands. Can SPL deliver a sanction that could be transferred out of their jurisdiction - even as part of a handover? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flash Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 My link So are the EBT's an SPL only matter? SFL has a rule in respect of disclosing payments: 127.1.3 The agreement between the player and the club shall state the player’s full financial entitlement from the club, including signing-on fees, additional lump sum payments, remuneration, bonus payments, removal assistance and benefits in kind. In any dispute between the player and the club, the remuneration contained in the agreement shall be deemed to be the player’s complete entitlement. Any club failing to detail a player’s full financial entitlement in the agreement shall be dealt with as the Board may decide. Although it is open to interpretation whether "full financial entitlement from the club" would cover payments to an EBT and a subsequent loan from the EBT to the player which, no doubt the club would argue, were discretionary payments made by the trust. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Northerner Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 I think my point still stands. Can SPL deliver a sanction that could be transferred out of their jurisdiction - even as part of a handover? That'll be part of the debate - so you want to be the 'same' club? Fine, here is what was left for you (in a football sense) by the previous owners 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Diamond Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 I don't know where you live but I am presuming you support your local team. Your local team used to be Airdrieonians and now it's Airdrie Utd. Can't see anything unusual in that. Keep up the good work. (I did meet some unappealing Airdrie fans at Italia 90, but hey ho.) Wow,things are really looking up when an Airdrie Utd fan gets to feel the love from a Partick Thistle fan Must be something in that French air you're breathing as for Italia 90,yes i have heard the stories,and saw the pics of a trip there by some of the lads.They were probably pished anyway,would never have known who or what you were Were not all nasties mind you,some of us even have our own teeth,and buy a round 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScarf Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 I may be being super-whoosed here, but is the whole title-stripping not because Rangers used dual-contracts to lure better quality players on higher wages so they could win said titles? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Diamond Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 Doddsy is at it again. Sign and be an Ibrox hero 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Roth Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 No I definitely do not think that! I totally agree, I'm just pointing out that they're not very good at this so far are they? Admin, liquidation, TUPE, fines, sanctions, SPL, SFL1, SFL3, License etc etc. I have faith in their continued myopic, weurrapeepull driven incompetence. Yeah, I'm getting that. It was dawning on me that we were on the same page when I was typing earlier but had to let my rant peter out. This forum's good for allowing you to get your thoughts down in writing, even if they are basically agreements on other's thoughts and things that have been said a million times before. I would like to nominate it for an award for services to mental health issues in the community; I'm sure I'd have been sectioned if I had to rely on the BBC/DR/Sun/Mail over the last few months. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Leitch Loyal Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 Anyone got a link to Off the Ball? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.