SS-18 ICBM Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 "Rule 1 (b): All members shall: (b) be subject to and comply with the Articles and any statutes, regulations, directives, codes, decisions and International Match Calendar promulgated by the Board, the Professional Game Board, the Non Professional Game Board, the Judicial Panel, a Committee or sub-committee, Fifa, Uefa or the Court of Arbitration for Sport; "Rule 2: Each member shall procure that its officials, its Team Staff and its players act in accordance with Rule 1. "Rule 14 (g): Full membership or associate membership may be suspended or terminated, or a fine may be issued, in any of the following circumstances:- (g) where a full member or an associate member suffers or is subject to an insolvency event. "Rule 66: No recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player, referee, or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall bring the game into disrepute. "Rule 71: A recognised football body, club, official, Team Official, other member of Team Staff, player or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall, at all times, act in the best interests of Association Football and shall not act in any manner which is improper." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS-18 ICBM Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 SFA Rules Rule 1: All member clubs shall: (a) observe the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship in accordance with the rules of fair play; (b) be subject to and comply with the Articles and any statutes, regulations, directives, codes, decisions and International Match Calendar promulgated by the Board, the Professional Game Board, the Non-Professional Game Board, the Judicial Panel Protocol, a Committee or sub-committee, FIFA, UEFA or the Court of Arbitration for Sport; recognise and submit to the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport as specified in the relevant provisions of the FIFA Statutes and the UEFA Statutes; (d) respect of the Laws of the Game; (e) refrain from engaging in any activity, practice or conduct which would constitute an offence under sections 1, 2 or 6 of the Bribery Act 2010; and (f) behave towards the Scottish FA and other members with the utmost good faith. Rule 2: Each member shall procure that its officials, its Team Officials and its players act in accordance with Rule 1. Rule 66: No recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player, referee, or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall bring the game into disrepute. Rule 71: A recognised football body, club, official, Team Official, other member of Team Staff, player or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall, at all times, act in the best interests of Association Football and shall not act in any manner which is improper. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 Look ... it was a tax avoidance scheme. We all know that. Well at least that's something. There's some Rangers fans - even normally sensible ones - refusing to admit this self-evident truth over on the 'loans or wages?' thread. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS-18 ICBM Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 (edited) If it did then just about every club in the SPL and quite a few others are guilty of cheating. People really need to think before they spout this rubbish. If any other clubs are guilty of cheating they should receive whatever consequences result from cheating, just as Rangers FC (R.I.P.) did. Which part of the SFA's Rules and Regulations are you referring to as 'rubbish'? Edited November 23, 2012 by SS-18 ICBM 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paquis Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 If any other clubs are guilty of cheating they should receive whatever consequences result from cheating, just as Rangers FC (R.I.P.) did. Which part of the SFA's Rules and Regulations are you referring to as 'rubbish'? Which bit of the rules you quote refer to 'debt'? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS-18 ICBM Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 Not paying debt does not amount to cheating no matter how you dress it up Not paying PAYE for 9 months does amount to cheating, without 'dressing it up'. See the 'SFA Rules & Regulations' in regards to clubs bringing the game into disrepute (by not paying dues). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS-18 ICBM Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 Which bit of the rules you quote refer to 'debt'? All of them. SFA Rules Rule 1: All member clubs shall: (a) observe the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship in accordance with the rules of fair play; (b) be subject to and comply with the Articles and any statutes, regulations, directives, codes, decisions and International Match Calendar promulgated by the Board, the Professional Game Board, the Non-Professional Game Board, the Judicial Panel Protocol, a Committee or sub-committee, FIFA, UEFA or the Court of Arbitration for Sport; recognise and submit to the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport as specified in the relevant provisions of the FIFA Statutes and the UEFA Statutes; (d) respect of the Laws of the Game; (e) refrain from engaging in any activity, practice or conduct which would constitute an offence under sections 1, 2 or 6 of the Bribery Act 2010; and (f) behave towards the Scottish FA and other members with the utmost good faith. Rule 2: Each member shall procure that its officials, its Team Officials and its players act in accordance with Rule 1. Rule 66: No recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player, referee, or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall bring the game into disrepute. Rule 71: A recognised football body, club, official, Team Official, other member of Team Staff, player or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall, at all times, act in the best interests of Association Football and shall not act in any manner which is improper. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paquis Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 Not paying PAYE for 9 months does amount to cheating, without 'dressing it up'. See the 'SFA Rules & Regulations' in regards to clubs bringing the game into disrepute (by not paying dues). Since when was PAYE a 'due'? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS-18 ICBM Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 Since when was PAYE a 'due'? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 Meanwhile, back in the SPL's land of milk and honey... Aberdeen v Inverness CT: One (£10) or Two (£19) Tickets (Up to 59% Off) via Groupon http://www.groupon.co.uk/deals/aberdeen/aberdeen-football-club/13298491 A voucher for dolly FFS -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Republic Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 The prize money was sold to Mr Green as an asset. He then played hard ball with the SPL and said they could keep it :lol: And now he wants it back ! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paquis Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 :lol: And now he wants it back ! Talking of tax cases ... how is Neil Lennon doing? http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/neil-lennon-tax-scheme-blow-1173612 -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killingfloorman Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 (edited) http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/20470165 Arsenal's new £150m deal with Emirates will give the club extra money to spend on new players next summer, says chief executive Ivan Gazidis. Dubai-based airline Emirates will pay Arsenal £30m per season for shirt and stadium sponsorship. "This will be one of the biggest deals ever struck in the game of football," said Gazidis. "We'll have additional money this financial year, which will be available to invest in the summer Chuck must be fuming. By my calculation that puts Arsenal back just ahead of the berzz in world football financial terms (sarcasm alert!) edit for spelling and to add at least chucky has 500 million fans worldwide to comfort him Edited November 23, 2012 by killingfloorman 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS-18 ICBM Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 Talking of tax cases ... how is Neil Lennon doing? http://www.dailyreco...me-blow-1173612 What 'individuals' choose to do with their earnings after PAYE has been payed upon them is their personal business (and potentially HMRC's if they are participating in schemes associated with taxes) not the clubs or the SFA or any footballing authority. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnforever1992 Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 (edited) http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/20470165 Arsenal's new £150m deal with Emirates will give the club extra money to spend on new players next summer, says chief executive Ivan Gazidis. Dubai-based airline Emirates will pay Arsenal £30m per season for shirt and stadium sponsorship. "This will be one of the biggest deals ever struck in the game of football," said Gazidis. "We'll have additional money this financial year, which will be available to invest in the summer Chuck must be fuming. By my calculation that puts Arsenal back just ahead of the berzz in workd football financial terms (sarcasm alert!) A very good deal for Arsenal. Edited November 23, 2012 by Bairnforever1992 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 (edited) Talking of tax cases ... how is Neil Lennon doing? http://www.dailyreco...me-blow-1173612 That's pyoor different so it is. Rangers avoid tax - the morals of the nation are in peril. Think of the hospitals, think of the forces... Plastics avoid tax - shrewd, understandable, who can blame them, f**k the hospitals and the forces... Edited November 23, 2012 by Bendarroch -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnforever1992 Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 That's pyoor different so it is. Rangers avoid tax - the morals of the nation are in peril. Plastics avoid tax - shrewd, understandable, who can blame them, f**k the hospitals and the forces... Rangers liquidated for nothing doh! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingrodent Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 Look ... it was a tax avoidance scheme. We all know that. It was used by lots of people and lots of companies and it was all legal. The Tribunal established that fact. Now, we can all have a view as to whether tax avoidance schemes are moral or immoral. But while they are legal they will get used. Just look how many well-known people have been using various schemes such as film companies for just that purpose. The only issue we are left with now is the SPL/SFA investigation into dual contracts. My view is that this decision will make that much more difficult and will open the SFA/SPL to being challenged in the Court of Session if they try to strip any titles. The result of the Tribunal has made this into a high risk strategy for the SPL/SFA. My guess is that it will fizzle out with a strongly worded statement and nothing more. I take your point here, and maybe it's because I had a court job many moons ago, but I always thought we as a nation took a vague interest in justice. I feel like I've been coming at this from totally the wrong angle. I've been thinking of it as primarily a matter of football justice. After checking the dissenting opinion, I now think the football issue is a comical triviality, and that it'll be a travesty of justice if nobody winds up in prison. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 Let me get this right HMRC wrongly accuse Rangers of stealing £49M Rangers get a little upset over this and understandably don't feel like cooperating with said accusers, but as a good will gesture offer said accusers £10M so they can get on with playing football Even by your standards Tedi, that constitutes a brilliantly fantastical interpretation of events. As you well know, the £10m offer was not a goodwill gesture; it was an attempt to pay much, much less than the sum Murray thought he'd been caught out for. Despite his noises this week, it's abundantly clear that Murray also thought Rangers would lose this case - pretty compelling evidence that they should have done. Had Rangers really wanted to "get on with playing football", they wouldn't have delayed and obstructed the process at every turn. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paquis Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 I take your point here, and maybe it's because I had a court job many moons ago, but I always thought we as a nation took a vague interest in justice. I feel like I've been coming at this from totally the wrong angle. I've been thinking of it as primarily a matter of football justice. After checking the dissenting opinion, I now think the football issue is a comical triviality, and that it'll be a travesty of justice if nobody winds up in prison. In terms of football justice ..... as the EBT scheme was legal, any other club could have used it. As such, Rangers derived no advantage. In terms of morality I think we need to be intellectually honest here. The vast majority of people will take whatever steps are available to them to reduce the amount of tax they pay. I know that I certainly do. That could be as simple as getting tax relief on pension contributions or charitable donations. Some people and companies have more opportunity to take advantage of tax avoidance schemes than ordinary people. But that does not change the 'morality'. I really don't see how anyone can wind up in prison. The dissenting opinion represents a minority viewpoint. Dr. Poon is entitled to that view. But it does not represent a finding in law. 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.