Baxter Parp Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 it is surely going to be impossible to prove double contracts unless someone involved in it comes clean? Don't see why, contracts don't have to have "Contract" in big letters at the top, they may even be verbal. even if rangers lose the big tax case the findings of the tribunal will remain private. They're published in a gazette, actually. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 I can't, it's in an envelope that is locked safely away in the late Alex Cameron's drawer. As are the ancient mysteries of the east and the secret of eternal youth, yes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speckled tangerine Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 That`s retailer `Game` in the hands of the administrators. They employ 6000 people. What`s the betting that redundancies will follow quickly (sadly) and stores will close in an effort to cut costs and keep the chance of a buyer for a going concern. The administrators are not Duff & Phelps. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pollymac Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 You're right we would be right back to the Lennon suspension scenario. Rangers would bring in lawyers to say that EBTs were not playing contracts and were within the rules. The SFA would need to lawyer up costing untold thousands of pounds with no guarantee they would win any legal dispute. I don't think so. Celtic got in the 'best lawyer they could' to essentially tell the SFA to apply the rules that were quite clear in their wording, i.e. that his [Lennon's] second suspension should commence 14 days after the date of the infringement (or whatever it was - can't really remember, tbh). In this case, and based on an adverse FTT finding, the cost of outsmarting any lawyer der orkenkind could afford would be less than the solitary £1 agent Whhyte bought them for. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pollymac Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 That`s retailer `Game` in the hands of the administrators. They employ 6000 people. What`s the betting that redundancies will follow quickly (sadly) and stores will close in an effort to cut costs and keep the chance of a buyer for a going concern. The administrators are not Duff & Phelps. Purchasers of boxed set special edition games deserve better 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weebud Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 it is surely going to be impossible to prove double contracts unless someone involved in it comes clean? even if rangers lose the big tax case the findings of the tribunal will remain private, the sfa can't ask hmrc to hand over evidence. I totally agree hence the reason I questioned their existence, even if they do exist it is in neither Rangers nor the players interests to disclose them. What is in the original "players contracts" (or not) is where this could be attacked. I run my own business and regularly lend "employees" money, it is never done without being documented and signed for though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T_S_A_R Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 They're published in a gazette, actually. i thought companies had a right to privacy concerning their tax affairs? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dungolfin Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 it is surely going to be impossible to prove double contracts unless someone involved in it comes clean? even if rangers lose the big tax case the findings of the tribunal will remain private, the sfa can't ask hmrc to hand over evidence. Why not just ask the former players? Under oath, Mr. Cannigia/De Boer/Laudrup/Amoruso/Gattusso/Gascoigne how much were you paid by Rangers? What was the structure and terms of your payment? Now they may, or may not, come clean but perhaps with UEFA involved we might see some light shed on the situation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 I'm not the HMRC. We are all the HMRC 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Right - first thing to say before this post is that I simply must be missing the glaringly obvious explanation somewhere, but I am confused... Duff & Phelps are desperate to sell Rangers, and have said 5pm today is the deadline for bids. The most visible, perhaps credible bid, is the Paul Murray Blue Knights consortium - featuring Ticketus. So, D&P are courting Ticketus with a view to them part-owning Rangers. However, at the same time, D&P have taken Ticketus to court, to get their 24 million season ticket deal declared null and void. Lawyers for Ticketus say the deal is legally binding. So, D&P and Ticketus are involved in talks on a possible take-over, while at the same time are fighting each other over the 24 million deal. Confused? Damn right I am. If the SFA have deemed Whyte not fit and proper, how could they approve any consortium that included Ticketus? To sum up my probably dim-witted view - how can Ticketus simultaneously be fighting D&P and courting D&P? It smells as fishy as a fishy thing that smells of fish. No? You don't understand how the parties can be fighting and yet courting at the same time You sir are clearly lucky enough to have never sat through a screwball Romantic Comedy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted March 21, 2012 Author Share Posted March 21, 2012 You don't understand how the parties can be fighting and yet courting at the same time You sir are clearly lucky enough to have never sat through a screwball Romantic Comedy. I've seen the one where Tom Hanks screws Meg Ryan in the Ticketus office. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killingfloorman Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 (edited) Purchasers of boxed set special edition games deserve better Think about the tea ladies Game are not 'A Scottish Institution' sic, so the press and politicians won't care Edited March 21, 2012 by killingfloorman 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ribzanelli Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 (edited) I've seen the one where Tom Hanks screws Meg Ryan in the Ticketus office. Screws her out of £24 million? Edited March 21, 2012 by ribzanelli 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 i thought companies had a right to privacy concerning their tax affairs? Not if they're naughty, ask Barclays bank. The tribunals ruling is published. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim McLean's Ghost Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Why not just ask the former players? Under oath, Mr. Cannigia/De Boer/Laudrup/Amoruso/Gattusso/Gascoigne how much were you paid by Rangers? What was the structure and terms of your payment? Now they may, or may not, come clean but perhaps with UEFA involved we might see some light shed on the situation. Under oath? This will be sorted out by an SFA committee, not a court room. The SFA has no powers to compel anyone to show up, much less swear an oath. I don't understand why people think UEFA will get involved. Rangers have broken no UEFA rules, they have no powers to act in this situation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real Saints Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 I'm getting sinfully bored of this. It reminds me of some pretentious movie that keeps dragging on and becomes far too complicated to keep track of. Just wake me up when the evil p***ks finally get their comeuppance. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trackdaybob Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 I'm getting sinfully bored of this. It reminds me of some pretentious movie that keeps dragging on and becomes far too complicated to keep track of. Just wake me up when the evil p***ks finally get their comeuppance. Me too 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highlandmagyar Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 That`s retailer `Game` in the hands of the administrators. They employ 6000 people. What`s the betting that redundancies will follow quickly (sadly) and stores will close in an effort to cut costs and keep the chance of a buyer for a going concern. The administrators are not Duff & Phelps. Eh!! my faltmate works for them and although I had heard of trouble,this is a bombshell!!!!!!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dungolfin Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Under oath? This will be sorted out by an SFA committee, not a court room. The SFA has no powers to compel anyone to show up, much less swear an oath. I was hoping that the HMRC case which I understand was under oath might have sought evidence from players - maybe they did, I don't know. I don't understand why people think UEFA will get involved. Rangers have broken no UEFA rules, they have no powers to act in this situation. Are you sure? I was under the impression that if they've made undeclared payments to players then those players registrations be invalidated and are ineligible to play for the club. Given that Rangers have taken part in UEFA competitions then I'd suggest that they might be interested to know if Rangers have indeed fielded ineligible players. No? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaffenThinMint Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 I've seen the one where Tom Hanks screws Meg Ryan in the Ticketus office. The follow up to their 1993 classic, this time it's "Penniless In UpShitCreekNoPaddle" 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.