WhiteRoseKillie Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 Haven't they renamed Murray Park yet? Thought it would have been one of the first things Green would have done I thought Green was letting ST buyers vote on the new name? It does seem a wee bit strange, given the current status of (S)DM in the world view of his beloved Orcs.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 Have McCoist and Smith ever been asked the question about having an EBT to either confirm they had or not. Again i'm quite sure being who they are their answer would be well reported by the media and let's be honest after all the investigative journalism on this hasn't found anything linking either as beneficiaries i think if there was anything there it would have been found. After all Murray is mentioned as having benefited,as has Souness,Barry Ferguson,McCleish,Numan,Ogilvie,Advocaat, Greig,Bain,LeGuen. The fact that all of these have been uncovered as beneficiaries but nothing about McCoist or Smith makes it unlikely that they received any EBT payment. Unless the BBC decided to leave two of the most high profile people at the club in the last twenty five years out of the listing through some sort of loyalty,again very unlikely. The beeb would have ran with what they were given, and we know it wasn't the whole shebang. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 I'm asking for conclusive evidence that McCoist wasn't a beneficiary of an EBT. So far you've been unable to provide such evidence. The weight of probabilities indicates that he would have benefitted from an EBT. Doesn't the accuser have to provide proof? As i haven't accused anyone of anything i await proof that he is a beneficiary. Not one person has shown anything stating that he has benefitted. Also we aren't speaking of probabilities we're asking for conclusive proof that he is a beneficiary. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 I thought Green was letting ST buyers vote on the new name? It does seem a wee bit strange, given the current status of (S)DM in the world view of his beloved Orcs.... Maybe he can't rename it because he doesn't own it 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 Have McCoist and Smith ever been asked the question about having an EBT to either confirm they had or not. Again i'm quite sure being who they are their answer would be well reported by the media and let's be honest after all the investigative journalism on this hasn't found anything linking either as beneficiaries i think if there was anything there it would have been found. After all Murray is mentioned as having benefited,as has Souness,Barry Ferguson,McCleish,Numan,Ogilvie,Advocaat,Greig,Bain,LeGuen. The fact that all of these have been uncovered as beneficiaries but nothing about McCoist or Smith makes it unlikely that they received any EBT payment. Unless the BBC decided to leave two of the most high profile people at the club in the last twenty five years out of the listing through some sort of loyalty,again very unlikely. The names you mention were all (I think) on the BBC's list. There is a fair bit of EBT money "declared in the accounts ()" unaccounted for, so I think it's fair to assume that there's others not listed - possibly Sally & Wattie, possibly a load of Admin staffs' Christmas bonuses. As to questions being asked - isn't one of the main root causes of the situation the disinclination of ANYONE in the Scottish media to ask uncomfortable questions for a period of over a decade? Rather than allow the suppositions to continue and gain currency, would it not have made sense for Sally (as the highest-profile possible recipient STILL at the club) to declare that he had not been a beneficiary? Or, if he had, to make a clean breast of it and move on? After all, transparency's a good thing, right? -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 The beeb would have ran with what they were given, and we know it wasn't the whole shebang. Wunfellaff, the BBC would have investigated diligently on this to confirm if McCoist and Smith were beneficiaries and if there was anything they would have found it. You know that and i know that. Do you believe that they would have investigated about McCoist on this and wouldn't have reported if anything was there. They've been investigating on this month on month,nothing has came up about McCoist or Smith. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 Wunfellaff, the BBC would have investigated diligently on this to confirm if McCoist and Smith were beneficiaries and if there was anything they would have found it. You know that and i know that. Do you believe that they would have investigated about McCoist on this and wouldn't have reported if anything was there. They've been investigating on this month on month,nothing has came up about McCoist or Smith. I refer you to the Silly Billy factor. He was a pundit they had hours of access to, only took them months to get round to asking, and then let him off the hook when he dumped the whole club in it re illegal dual contracts. I quite believe the ones with access to McCoist may not have asked. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 Wunfellaff, the BBC would have investigated diligently on this to confirm if McCoist and Smith were beneficiaries and if there was anything they would have found it. You know that and i know that. Do you believe that they would have investigated about McCoist on this and wouldn't have reported if anything was there. They've been investigating on this month on month,nothing has came up about McCoist or Smith. As recent events have shown, if the BBC didn't have iron-clad proof, they won't run with it. Their lawyers will have advised caution, especially given the possible reactions from that "minority" we're always hearing about. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 The names you mention were all (I think) on the BBC's list. There is a fair bit of EBT money "declared in the accounts ()" unaccounted for, so I think it's fair to assume that there's others not listed - possibly Sally & Wattie, possibly a load of Admin staffs' Christmas bonuses. As to questions being asked - isn't one of the main root causes of the situation the disinclination of ANYONE in the Scottish media to ask uncomfortable questions for a period of over a decade? Rather than allow the suppositions to continue and gain currency, would it not have made sense for Sally (as the highest-profile possible recipient STILL at the club) to declare that he had not been a beneficiary? Or, if he had, to make a clean breast of it and move on? After all, transparency's a good thing, right? We're speaking of a BBC investigation here,i wouldn't say they were disinclined to ask uncomfortable questions within the club over this issue,would you? The fact is,after all the investigation by the BBC, McCoists name hasn't came up and as i said considering the high profile he has it's likely he would be one of the more prominent names they would have looked at. Anything connecting McCoist as a beneficiary would be headline as soon as,but nothing has been found. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 I refer you to the Silly Billy factor. He was a pundit they had hours of access to, only took them months to get round to asking, and then let him off the hook when he dumped the whole club in it re illegal dual contracts. I quite believe the ones with access to McCoist may not have asked. So after all the investigation work put in regarding who received EBTs they decide to leave McCoist out of the equation. Behave yourself,they would have had him down as their major story out of all beneficiaries,no danger of that. And if they thought there was something they would have kept digging. Mark Daly would not have let anything go as regards this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 So after all the investigation work put in regarding who received EBTs they decide to leave McCoist out of the equation. Behave yourself,they would have had him down as their major story out of all beneficiaries,no danger of that. And if they thought there was something they would have kept digging. Mark Daly would not have let anything go as regards this. lol, there are many camps in the beeb, Daly is only 1. And I doubt he would get close enough to ask questions. The ones that could, won't. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 We're speaking of a BBC investigation here,i wouldn't say they were disinclined to ask uncomfortable questions within the club over this issue,would you? The fact is,after all the investigation by the BBC, McCoists name hasn't came up and as i said considering the high profile he has it's likely he would be one of the more prominent names they would have looked at. Anything connecting McCoist as a beneficiary would be headline as soon as,but nothing has been found. Just think of two reasonably well-connected "peepul" at the Beeb. Would Wee Chico ever ask a question that made Sally or Wattie at all uncomfortable? We've all seen the YouTube clip that shows what happens when he does.... Doddsy - quite happy to drop the club in the shite on air and in print. Subsequently pretty quiet on the subject and (admittedly I'm in Englandshire), I've not heard him being grilled on the subject. Something doesn't smell right with the whole affair, and the suspicions don't do rangers any favours. As I've said, would it be too much for Sally to say, for the sake of transparency, whether he did benefit, or not? After all, have the fans not got a right to know? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 Are the BBC still banned from Ibrox? I remember Whyte banning them after that documentary. But I can't remember if Green also banned them? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 Are the BBC still banned from Ibrox? I remember Whyte banning them after that documentary. But I can't remember if Green also banned them? Different club so ban didn't carry. They have got 'difficult' after The Heros tapes got aired though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 Just think of two reasonably well-connected "peepul" at the Beeb. Would Wee Chico ever ask a question that made Sally or Wattie at all uncomfortable? We've all seen the YouTube clip that shows what happens when he does.... Doddsy - quite happy to drop the club in the shite on air and in print. Subsequently pretty quiet on the subject and (admittedly I'm in Englandshire), I've not heard him being grilled on the subject. Something doesn't smell right with the whole affair, and the suspicions don't do rangers any favours. As I've said, would it be too much for Sally to say, for the sake of transparency, whether he did benefit, or not? After all, have the fans not got a right to know? The fans may well like to know but I'm not sure they have the right to know about an individual's tax affairs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 The fans may well like to know but I'm not sure they have the right to know about an individual's tax affairs. Not in minute detail, just 'involvement'. For clarity 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS-18 ICBM Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 Fact No.1 lol, there are many camps in the beeb, Daly is only 1. And I doubt he would get close enough to ask questions. The ones that could, won't. Fact No.2 Just think of two reasonably well-connected "peepul" at the Beeb. Would Wee Chico ever ask a question that made Sally or Wattie at all uncomfortable? We've all seen the YouTube clip that shows what happens when he does.... Doddsy - quite happy to drop the club in the shite on air and in print. Subsequently pretty quiet on the subject and (admittedly I'm in Englandshire), I've not heard him being grilled on the subject. Something doesn't smell right with the whole affair, and the suspicions don't do rangers any favours. As I've said, would it be too much for Sally to say, for the sake of transparency, whether he did benefit, or not? After all, have the fans not got a right to know? 'Rangers' are dead, you shouldn't expect intelligent replies from their zombie fans. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 The fans may well like to know but I'm not sure they have the right to know about an individual's tax affairs. It's not about rights, or about probing into an individual's affairs. I am sure, if he was a recipient, he would have been given the same porn=star advice that everyone else was, and can say he bvelieved the advice given. And, if he didn't receive an EBT, that's one less stick to beat the club with. I'm just saying that there's nothing to stop McCoist declaring his status re: EBTS in order to remove at least one cloud of suspicion over the club. An uncharitable view could be that he's got something to hide. Coupled with his demands for publicity over the tribunal's membership, it's not great PR. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 It's not about rights, or about probing into an individual's affairs. I am sure, if he was a recipient, he would have been given the same porn=star advice that everyone else was, and can say he bvelieved the advice given. And, if he didn't receive an EBT, that's one less stick to beat the club with. I'm just saying that there's nothing to stop McCoist declaring his status re: EBTS in order to remove at least one cloud of suspicion over the club. An uncharitable view could be that he's got something to hide. Coupled with his demands for publicity over the tribunal's membership, it's not great PR. Well why did you ask about the fans having a right then? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenolly Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 It's not about rights, or about probing into an individual's affairs. I am sure, if he was a recipient, he would have been given the same porn=star advice that everyone else was, and can say he bvelieved the advice given. And, if he didn't receive an EBT, that's one less stick to beat the club with. I'm just saying that there's nothing to stop McCoist declaring his status re: EBTS in order to remove at least one cloud of suspicion over the club. An uncharitable view could be that he's got something to hide. Coupled with his demands for publicity over the tribunal's membership, it's not great PR. Maybe he never had one, or was one of the players that had one butknew nothing about them as they didn't have a side letter, several of the players had no side letter but had a take home pay as part of their contract, as far as they were concerned rangers dealt with their tax as long as they had the pay agreed depositted in their account they were happy 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.