Dundee Hibernian Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 And if they did win the BTC? Thought they'd lost the BTC, and it had progressed to appeal. Progressed being an oxymoron in this instance. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamish_ict Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Thought it was expulsion that was deemed too harsh. So if that's too harsh, and Cup ban nae harsh enough, looks helluva like a suspension? So how about splitting the difference - suspend them for half a season in the SPL. They forfeit those games 0-3. Then they come back into the league halfway. Most likely the'd still survive relegation, but if they weren't dead by then it would still be amusing. Not a serious proposal BTW 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnstoun Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Thought they'd lost the BTC, and it had progressed to appeal. Progressed being an oxymoron in this instance. It isn't like a legal case. The HMRC told Rangers that their use of EBTs was not permitted under tax laws, and demanded payment of the tax that they believed was due. Rangers have appealed that decision. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dundee Hibernian Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 It isn't like a legal case. The HMRC told Rangers that their use of EBTs was not permitted under tax laws, and demanded payment of the tax that they believed was due. Rangers have appealed that decision. Cheers, I clearly don't understand taxation. Signed C Whyte 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forest_Fifer Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 What, no posts in half an hour? The Big Thread must stay open! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Doesnt matter. That just makes it a legal requirement. Not paying your footballing debts is something UEFA and FIFA frown upon. As has already been covered on here, Dundee made arrangements to pay their footballing debt in full outwith the CVA. I'm wondering if the RFFF might end-up being the way around this? I.e. Rangers don't pay the football creditors 100p in £ as it'd annoy HMRC - but the RFFF pays them? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 According to the Herald its suspension AND expulsion. http://www.heraldsco...er-ban.17737010 edit for link There is nothing in that article which states that it WILL be suspension and expulsion. It suggest only that there could be a less severe or a more severe punishment open to the panel,nothing else. Nowhere does it state what will happen. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I just want real news of what is going to happen. If that was the case we would still be on page 1 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7-2 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Regan says the SFA will not consider additional sanctions against Rangers for taking their case to the civil court, and not to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. "There is a consideration that we have within our articles where going outside of the Scottish FA's articles and going to a civil court technically could have breached the Scottish FA's articles," he said. "However, in light of Lord Glennie's comments and having discussed the matter with Fifa, it is not our intention to take any action. "We are aware of the reasons why Rangers did what they did and we will not be pursuing them for that." Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. More lube please... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 There is nothing in that article which states that it WILL be suspension and expulsion. It suggest only that there could be a less severe or a more severe punishment open to the panel,nothing else. Nowhere does it state what will happen. How could The Herald possibly know anyway? Exactly the reason i never even bothered opening the link -3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. More lube please... What else could they say? The appeal to arbitration was blocked by the SFAs own rules so Rangers had no option. Now it is obvious that FIFA got involved only to reprimand the SFA on this issue and all the talk about FIFA looking for Rangers to be punished was more utter drivel from our media. Regan really is getting away lightly here by both the media and the supporters. -4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjc Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I'm wondering if the RFFF might end-up being the way around this? I.e. Rangers don't pay the football creditors 100p in £ as it'd annoy HMRC - but the RFFF pays them? but there's no "privy of contract" though ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnstoun Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. More lube please... I am reading it that he is leaving no recourse to return to the court. If he states that Rangers are to be punished for going to court, or the punishment will be harsher for going to court then the SFA may be vulnerable. He has made it clear that the avenue of going to the CAS is available, therefore further appeals by Rangers to CoS could be punished separately. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stirlingshire_staggie Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 How could The Herald possibly know anyway? Exactly the reason i never even bothered opening the link They are a newspaper funnily enough. They look into these things. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagsman411971 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I dont think Baron Greenback's plan to change the name of Murray Park will capture the imagination of the Orcs. I'm sure a large number of them went to bed last night wondering "What the f**k has Charlton Heston got to do with this club?" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claymores Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I'm wondering if the RFFF might end-up being the way around this? I.e. Rangers don't pay the football creditors 100p in £ as it'd annoy HMRC - but the RFFF pays them? I don't see what you're getting at - I'm sure I've read that the total raised by the RFFFFFFFFFFFF was less than £600k and they pissed most of that away on legal counsel and reseeding. To take just a few examples - how does RFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF settle:- Chelsea - £238k Hearts - £800k Arsenal - £136k Man city - £328k Rapid - £1m 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macshimmy Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Regan says the SFA will not consider additional sanctions against Rangers for taking their case to the civil court, and not to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. "There is a consideration that we have within our articles where going outside of the Scottish FA's articles and going to a civil court technically could have breached the Scottish FA's articles," he said. "However, in light of Lord Glennie's comments and having discussed the matter with Fifa, it is not our intention to take any action. "We are aware of the reasons why Rangers did what they did and we will not be pursuing them for that." That is a terrible precedent. I have an image of all the ghosts of SFA blazers past screaming at Regan. He might have sowed some evil seeds here. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caff Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 What else could they say? The appeal to arbitration was blocked by the SFAs own rules so Rangers had no option. Now it is obvious that FIFA got involved only to reprimand the SFA on this issue and all the talk about FIFA looking for Rangers to be punished was more utter drivel from our media. Regan really is getting away lightly here by both the media and the supporters. For someone who takes great joy in lambasting people for conjecturing, you do a hell of a lot of it yourself 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I am reading it that he is leaving no recourse to return to the court. If he states that Rangers are to be punished for going to court, or the punishment will be harsher for going to court then the SFA may be vulnerable. He has made it clear that the avenue of going to the CAS is available, therefore further appeals by Rangers to CoS could be punished separately. That's what you'd expect to happen, yep. Although their was ambiguity in their rules the SFA have now made clear, off their own bat, that they'll be happy with a club going to CAS as the legitimate recourse. If Rangers were, for example, to be suspended/expelled, then launch an appeal on the basis of the original tribunal saying that is too harsh, you'd imagine it'd be to CAS not CoS. In any case, going to CAS could mean a lengthy interim period (as cases often take ages) with the punishment set aside for that duration, buying time. In practical terms, CoS probably wouldn't get into matters of appropriate punishment anyway, hence futile destination. Only grey area could be r.e. going back to original panel v appeal panel. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 That is a terrible precedent. I have an image of all the ghosts of SFA blazers past screaming at Regan. He might have sowed some evil seeds here. Im not so sure. As we know, Rangers went to court to appeal the process, in effect, rather than the actual punishment. Therefore, theres no precedent that would allow, for example, a player sent off to appeal their suspension - as long as they were punished in accordance with the rules. The SFA can avoid any other clubs taking action by making sure they apply the rules exactly as they are written. Trying to take action against Rangers for going to the CoS would open up a whole new round of legal wrangling with Rangers claiming they had no choice and the SFA claiming that the wording of the rules doesnt actually preclude an appeal to CAS. It wouldnt achieve anything, ultimately. 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.