Leaderboard

I don't believe for a minute Murray was duped by Whyte. Was he under pressure to sell by a struggling bank exposed by a financial crisis? Of course. Was part of the agreement to do so that he could retain important elements of his family business? Lloyds and AJ suggest so despite SDM's protests to the contrary. Do we really think a businessman of SDM's standing or his banking associates weren't aware of Whyte's bona fides (or lack thereof)? Pull the other one. As such, as much as various people played their part (especially LBG and HMRC), never let anyone tell you that Sir David Murray acted other than to protect himself throughout with Rangers a distant second in his thoughts and actions.

The claim by Murray that Whyte duped him is frankly insulting. The simple truth is he sacrificed Rangers and did so for no other reason than personal gain. He knew full well what fate awaited Rangers when he handed them over to Whyte. That Lloyds let him cherry pick every thing of value out of his companies before liquidating them reeks to high heaven.

Re: Semi Final CCCS The club is awaiting confirmation of the allocation for Hampden - last year we received about 20k tickets - of that allocation about 16.5k were available to CCCS RangersFC SLO @RangersFCSLO · 2m Replying to @RangersFCSLO There are currently 22k on the continuous credit for Semi Finals and Finals with 19k having purchased tickets for every cup match so far. Therefore it is likely that some will miss out on the match but the majority signed up will receive tickets. RangersFC SLO @RangersFCSLO · 2m If we progress in to the final, it is planned that those who have missed out will get a ticket for the final. The emails will be out asap following the club receiving the confirmed allocation and tickets - further info will be released when it is available

The idea SDM didn't know everything about Whyte is preposterous. That kind of diligence is both second nature and easily acquired. It would be easy to be defamatory in describing SDM so care should always be exercised. However, surely only the terminally gullible could still think he was an innocent participant in the troubles of RFC

Thanks for the update Frankie. It'll take a few pods before everyone settles into it, but I'm sure I speak for all of us when I say that we can't wait. No matter how many issues you have with it, I'll just be delighted to hear more people talking about Rangers. It's our favourite subject afterall. And if you're ever struggling for subject matter experts on any aspect of our club you've got plenty of smart people on here (myself excluded), and if that's not enough there are a few thousand Celtic fans that you can call on too. They know everything about us. Good luck to all those involved!

Just a quick sit rep on this. After some very positive initial discussions between interested parties, we're about to begin some proper testing over the next fortnight with the aim of releasing our first pod at the start of April (after our away match against Motherwell). We have hosts in place, as well as a few guests which we'll initially be rotating between shows. From there, we'll be looking to factor in other forum member contributions and try to make it as interactive as possible. Watch this space!

One of the best reads in a long time, excellent article. During my pursuit of HMRC one of the most astounding facts I came across was the fact that in one case (name escapes me unfortunately) was that they actually bought stolen property as they believed it contained evidence which strengthened their case. Anyone who doubts the author's assertion that persons within HMRC may have acted improperly to assist with the case against Rangers is, imo. naive. Sue Walton, head of HMRC's anti-avoidance group writing in the Tax Journal 21 April 2011: “To recap then, HMRC’s approach to compliance is, first and foremost, to minimise the need for enforcement – it is in everyone’s interests to do that. But where a risk of non-compliance is identified, we aim to detect that as early as possible and resolve it as quickly as we can.” You have to wonder why it took them 9 months to act on Whyte's failure over PAYE at Rangers - particularly when they were already pursuing him for millions over an anlogous episode with a previous company.

I really respect the author of this article as he's positioned the questions very well, and suggested some areas for further focus. I also really appreciate the intent of those who take steps to get answers to what went on. Having said that, for me it's now a case of doing two things. The first is to take steps to ensure it doesn't happen again, and hence why I pay into Club 1872. The second is to put our energies into returning our club back to the top of Scottish football. I can't even begin to imagine the amount of energy these detractors had to put in to cause the problems for our club, and I personally don't want to waste any energy trying to unravel it all. The best way to return the favour is for us to win 55. I know we are all angry with what happened but I'm not sure what will be achieved by wasting our time tying to work out leaks, etc. I think the fact remains that an extremely well orchestrated group of people tried to kill us and failed, because we are the people.

Is suggesting she could sit in my seat but I'll be sitting there too a bit much?

Yeah but she would need to run across the pitch naked on the day to take attention away from it at that time.

Souness is right of course but the very best thing that could happen is that we hammer them and go on to win the league.

Get your hard hat on for the coins, knotted scarves, lighters and everything else they manage to throw! it is a shit seat if you lose! but great if we win

Just got my ticket through. I’m in the corner GW1 right next to the soap dodging Mhanky mob!. A bit close for my liking but a ringside seat for their meltdown if we win

It would be comforting to ascribe their behaviour to 'rogue anti-Rangers elements' within HMRC. But it wasn't, it was just plain old HMRC., unless we are to believe the revenue is completely out of control and unaware of a campaign run by the EK1 CSC. I certainly won't forget about LBG, Murray or the rest of them. I keep coming back, though, to the common denominator, the demands from HMRC. Without them, if there had been some kind of arrangement, everything else would (I think, anyway) have been manageable. Murray could have held off for a non-rocket buyer, Duff & Phelps wouldn't have been near us, admin could have been avoided, to say nothing of what came after...no, whatever groups of RTC/Pacific Quay moon howlers were out there (and by heck, they were out there!) everything depended on HMRC offering no comfort. Gits!

Dundee were in the SFL at that point and didn't vote in the SFL vote to "admit" us due to a conflict of interest as they were the team that benefited from us being voted out of the SPL.

RangersFC SLO @RangersFCSLO We have had only 78 tickets utilising the secondary ticketing scheme at the Club - all seats sold will receive a £30 credit off of 2019/20's ST #letIbroxbefull Secondary Ticketing - Rangers Football Club, Official Website rangers.co.uk

The RTC Blog provided the mood music for events surrounding our club. The PQ Gang Hut members were all main contributors and readers. Cosgrove utilised the name of his Donegal born maternal grand mother as his nomme de guerre. What the RTC Blog did, was put all of them on the same page. The language being used on the blog became the language employed to discuss matters Rangers. (eg cheating on an industrial scale). They did so knowingly, because if you accept the language of your opponent, then you have lost the debate. Cosgrove has been honed, fashioned by the RTC Blog, Scottish football monitor, and even Pie and Bovril; he has always been a hater, he has learned to be a careful hater. Whereas, Jum Spence's hate became over emotional. Cosgroves actions on Scottish Cup final day 2016 should have been the end of his broadcasting career, but he apologised on air, late in that day's coverage. He knew he could come back every week and continue the hate by doing so, he has never disappointed in that regard. I keep saying this over the years, the RTC Blog won the Orwell Prize in 2013/14. It's a prestigious award, who's mantle piece does it sit on? Do you think Cosgrove would tell us?

IIRC the first day Charlotte Fakes appeared on the scene, 'she' leaked an alleged e-mail from Jack Irvine to Craig Whyte from around late August 2009. It was Irvine boasting about using his Nexus Lexus search engine to aid him in 'tidying up' CW's history on the web. Consider that in the same month Sir Duped had stepped down from the RFC board (or most probably was nudged by the Bank). Within a month or so, the bank would put 'their man', Donald Muir alongside the MIH man, McGill on the board. And that Jack Irvine was also an advisor/spindoctor of Sir Duped. And that Irvine had known what type of person CW was for years before that. Ducks in a row and all that. As Forlan said, it doesn't half reek.............. .

I believe RTC was a blog with differing roles as events developed and that those involved pushing it changed dependent on role. The individual who became known as 'RTC' and was deeply involved with the HMRC and associated matters was the first person who posted fairly frequent output for a while. However entering 2012, there started the initial publicly pushed steps to mount a campaign that would involve Scottish football fans (except us of course and especially others in SPL1) to call for what they considered would be a 'suitable action' for the governing bodies to take. As events unfolded, this centered on SPL1 clubs being pressured by their own fans threatening to not buy ST's. The blog was an important part in the pushing the idea and handing out cyber pitch forks. This was under the RTC blog but it was other people pushing it (not the original 'RTC') that you could broadly say, were 'Celtic-Minded'. Further down the line, the SFM blog replaced the RTC blog. The Celtic-Minded quickly realised the power of social media used in this way and cleverly looked to rebrand in a way that would try and appear as a more rounded pressure group representing Scottish football, when the truth is that it's run by and is property of the Celtic-Minded and has a relatively small percentage of other fans involved.

To be honest, I can't remember the full time-line of RTC but I reckon it was used as a vehicle to publicly share information that the main players may not have wanted to release themselves (or were unable to via the mainstream media). This increased speculation so helped drive the various narratives we seen as the media (Daly, Thomson etc) picked up the baton. Charlotte Fakes had a similar affect and funnily enough William Stevenson - charged with stealing the emails - had his charges dropped last year too.

It may well have had an impact on the press, but not on the actions of any of the main players as far as I can see. Perhaps it helped whip up some of the opposition to us remaining in the SPL, but I'm sure that opposition would have existed to a similar extent had RTC not existed. I don't see the need to give them any sort of credit for what happened to us as there's a huge list of people who actually impacted events.

I think it's difficult to judge RTC's effect as we simply don't know who was involved. However, if we consider Stuart Cosgrove was a leading light in it's Scottish Football Monitor offspring then that shows the kind of power anonymous blogs can wield. I doubt RTC conducted the choir per se but it certainly led the singing from time to time.

I just checked my Twitter just now and saw a few tweets suggesting that Martin is out for Sunday. I've no idea if any of the sources are reliable, but I'm not sure it makes much difference because Alves can fit in anyway. The more worrying ones would have been Murphy and DJ.

It should be noted that Murray admitted his group did no due diligence on Whyte and blamed Collyer Bristow for not doing their homework. Alistair Johnston also felt that he and the independent board looking into the deal were misled by Murray and LBG. Going by my own experiences with SDM, the idea he knew nothing about Whyte's background (recorded due diligence or not) just doesn't tally in the slightest.

It will now be interesting to see if HMRC do go after other clubs as was their reasoning for going after Rangers

I agree with pretty much everything he says there. This article doesn't put any pressure on us, but it does to them and he knows it. Nice work Clint!

Genuinely wonder how they can afford this. They've been living hand to mouth these past few years without a training ground and not paying any transfer fees for players. But can find £50m for a new stadium ??

I'm in no doubt that there was an organised campaign set out to totally destroy Rangers when it was discovered that Murray had once again been playing Big Casino with other folks money. His arrogance made him a prime target but it was Rangers they were after. The whole media circus was driven using stolen personal information from within HMRC, banks and football authorities. Why there has never been mention of who was doing the thieving/leaking is another question I wanted answering. The Rangers fans will never be as organised as those connected to Penn State FC - half of them have never been inside the Paedodome and are only interested in bringing down Rangers.

Boabie. Here's where i think it shows how politically naive and disorganised we are as a support in general (not a bad thing btw, as it should be football and not a tribal dog fight, but that now the environment we exist in). There's plenty of guys wanting to help out and do something but no way of making a real difference or anything happen. For example, look at the recent referee displays, we cant even muster a story in the press putting forward our point of view and setting a narrative. My thoughts is that somewhere out there is a Bear who has access to a smoking gun and wouldn't even know it e.g. proof of certain people meeting up. The next question is would we know how to use that information?

Cheers Frankie. And thanks for the help. Hopefully everyone keeps pushing on this.

This really is an excellent bit of writing so please give it the time it deserves and share widely...

Last week we were informed that Charles Green and friends will face no further criminal proceedings with regard to their dealings after they bought Rangers. So there we go, another fraud chapter closed. A lot of bears are happy to leave these things in the past – it was a painful time so I understand that. The feel good factor currently on and off the pitch certainly helps to erase bad memories. But for me too many questions remain unanswered and that’s not just confined to Charles Green. This is a subject I’ve attempted to write about before but each time I’ve given up. The depth of content and number of threads involved is huge. The cast of characters (or villains) is legion. Much of the narrative is also simply beyond my understanding and such was the quantity and rate of change that I lost track of much of it years ago. It was also difficult to put thoughts into words without being aware that reality may be disappearing over the horizon. However, the story is very important to Rangers’ history, and should be to all Rangers fans, and I strongly feel it needs more attention. Hopefully it eventually gets the coverage it deserves and will be dissected and commented on by people with the appropriate knowledge and expertise. We need to continue to discuss it, join the dots and improve our understanding of what happened. As such, I’ve thrown some thoughts together that represent my patchy understanding of events and I’m happy to correct any facts that I may have misrepresented or recalled incorrectly. A recurring thought I had during the EBT appeals, the admin turmoil and beyond was that there’s a lot happening here and I really hope it gets revisited and explained at some point. Dark days turned to months, which turned to years and Rangers-related news got buried under further avalanches of Rangers related news – which often had to be seen to be believed. At the time there was a feeling that a lot of it didn’t feel right; be it the source and trajectory of the stories, the points to prosecute on and some of the stops along the way. It didn’t feel natural or normal. Added to this it was the issue that it was never presented or discussed in the right manner – many of Scotland’s sports media simply weren’t up to the task and I don’t think we even got half the story, but then we were probably never going to be given the whole story from some. Indeed, even when you thought that an ‘external’ journalist may have the dispassionate background to approach the issue, it quickly became clear they too lacked objectivity. Where incomplete information exists then people will fill the gaps with their own explanations as to how something came about. Likewise, where a given explanation is lacking or insufficient then a more plausible explanation is preferred. The Rangers story is riddled with examples of that, where anomalies in actions or procedures occurred that had no real precedent and we can be pretty sure wouldn’t be allowed to occur that way again. We were told what to think throughout the whole saga and there were a couple of reasons for that. One, the Rangers Tax case (RTC) site planned and drove much of the story. Two, the media willingly went along with that anonymous narrative and many happily improvised and weighed in once the avalanche had started. This bit isn’t up for debate - we know that the RTC website was full of people who wanted to damage Rangers (and may well have had contributions from folk in the media itself). They dubiously obtained a lot of information about Rangers tax business from within HMRC. Through a lot of hard work, planning and no lack of ingenuity, RTC were then able to shape their ill-gotten information into a weapon to damage the company and club. It was also delivered in such a way that guilt was automatically assumed and that to anyone listening it would seem like a steady stream of shocking revelations. However, it’s probable that this scheme was years in the making and shaping before it was unleashed. And that leads to a question. Murray’s actions with EBTs weren’t a secret, they were in the accounts, and the way he was running them wouldn’t have been unknown to people in the right circles. Someone saw this as an opportunity. How much work or influence was required to make things happen? One thing we have learned from the behaviour of the media is that some are no friends of Rangers. But more than that, some do forsake their professionalism to have a dig at Rangers. It happened with alarming regularity throughout the Rangers story. It happened at reputable broadcasters too, and those free of the commercial pressures of tabloids, and often without any apparent consequence for the perpetrator. In fact, such was the mood and feeding frenzy at the time that some appeared to be outdoing each other for hyperbole, including straight-out lying. Knowing this, it is not too much of a leap to imagine that similar minded professionals in place at other organisations would willingly help out when the call or opportunity came. Hence, more unknowns and with it even more questions. Did the first information come from within HMRC or someone connected to Rangers? Or did the request come from outwith and someone reciprocated by providing the private documents? Either way, one of those seemed to happen. Which means someone held and collated the information. Other persons were involved and contributed. Knowing this, then furthers actions and scheming is probable. Were other friendly helpers then searched out at different places of influence? Did they voluntarily answer a call to arms? Were points of weakness identified that could be leaned on or manipulated? Were people put in place at other governing bodies who could then help out later when the call came? Would there be people with sufficient stake in the game, sufficient power and political nous to pull some of these levers? If possible, then this would certainly explain why some seemingly improbable coincidences started to mount up, why the media was happy to keep to script and why not too many awkward questions were asked, and still haven’t been asked. Most doubters could get a pass at the time because few probably knew what the hell was actually going on. Now before I disappear down the rabbit-hole all together some of what occurred may well have transpired eventually to some degree. Rangers had a tax related liability (though manageable/solvable) and yet it seemed there was little or no negotiation on this. Further, David Murray had lost interest it’s claimed wanted to sell Rangers to maintain his other family business interests – pressurised by a bank that were exposed themselves by their own crisis of 2008. Add to this Rangers is a polarising figure; its success and associated envy means we have plenty who wouldn’t mourn our fall, as a fan-base we aren’t without this self-awareness (nor our faults). However, without negative interference I’m certain that another route could’ve been found that would have not been remotely close to the extremes and damage we actually experienced. My view has flipped back and forth on many of the incidents over the years, from desperation to downright denial and back again, but the one point that has crystallised is that the sale to Craig Whyte was the key to inflicting maximum damage. If you could control that then the events that could cascade from there would be crippling. Again, Murray’s situation was known. His desire to sell was known. The impasse with the HMRC was known. The information RTC had and how that could be used was known. Again, not a leap of faith to suggest some people could make big gains from bringing Rangers down and would do something about it. After all, a network of experts and willing, connected contributors was already in place. In my view, once Whyte was in then liquidation was inevitable. And during his nine months in charge things went from bad to worse for Rangers. Once in the hot seat he had access to all sorts of private documents and information. The opportunity was used to cause more havoc with HMRC through non-payment of PAYE. Meanwhile the club lost key staff who warned against his purchase. Selling sentimental heirlooms like our Arsenal shares was probably a happy accident for him and others. According to current director Alastair Johnston, who was also chairman at the time of its sale, Whyte “should have been charged with murder, murder of an institution.” Prosecutors, instead, charged him with fraud relating to his takeover of the club but a jury acquitted him last year. With last week’s announcement about Green et al, Craig Whyte is one of only a few to face a jury but he’s clearly far from the only villain. So once again the questions pile up. Administration - despite what people say there’s not much anyone, especially Rangers supporters, could’ve done to prevent this course of events. Police Scotland also felt Duff and Phelps were part of the plan. Liquidation would be the Holy Grail and effectively checkmate. Whyte’s tenure had stripped the club of any personnel on the inside who could actively defend it and effectively left it prone and unconscious. Open season. With Whyte at the controls and HMRC the major creditor the club’s fate was sealed. And so it went. It would then have been known that liquidation would’ve resulted in suspension of the SFA license. Was the referee strikes of 2008 a ruse to get the rulebook poured over, amended and put people in place? Rangers were then voted out of the SPL (not voted in, whatever). The lack of leadership in the face of the “no to newco” campaign was laughable and should be an eternal embarrassment to the SFA for its treatment of a member club. As was the behaviour of the media – where every point of discussion or action appeared to default to the maximum punishment. The course of justice was shelved given guilt was assumed and the possible censures discussed freely across the nation. Five way agreements were formed, changed, challenged and formed again. Legal or not. A distinct memory for myself was the lack of Rangers fans brought into the media to discuss their club’s affairs and travails – and yet others were – I believe STV once managed a panel of Celtic fans yet never extended Rangers fans the same courtesy. It was something to behold and some of the “experts” allowed airtime and column inches should have seen Editors fired, especially with hindsight. And on and on… The other clubs merrily voting to be part of their own Christmas dinner based upon a handful of their more vocal fans. TV companies, sponsors and fans deserting Scottish football. The curious case of the SFL and SPFL's panicked rush to merge should be a story on its own. Bizarrely as Rangers fans were ordered to show contrition to help heal wounds they had caused, scabs continued to appear and be picked at. Internet forum accounts of directors. Penny shares. Family businesses. Bank representatives. Detestable shareholders. And the seemingly anything-goes world these people inhabit. Board members wreaking havoc and embarrassing everyone but themselves. Mike Ashley’s involvement. And with it, onerous contracts with tentacles reaching years into the future. Again, whom did these benefit? Neither party directly involved apparently. Outside the Rangers circus and the world kept on turning. Focus on Rangers meant that other stories got scant mention or simply a free pass. The 2014 Commonwealth Games. Claims of State Aid against Lennoxtown. Other clubs’ extra-curricular tax affairs. Hearts’ CVA. The Penn State scandal and its Scottish parallels. None were given the gravity or wide-ranging debate of the Rangers story. Mention them now and you’re just a bigot! For fans concerned primarily with football it’s initially unsettling to think that people were so driven to put that time and energy into RTC and the associated spin-offs that remain now. But then the rewards were huge. Rangers lost hundreds of millions of pounds. Not to mention the humble tax-payer – the supposed real victim – won’t receive anything like the sum they could have had if a more common sense approach was taken to negotiation ten years ago. Back on the pitch, we lost a full team of title winners, we lost the right to fight for at least four top flight titles and to compete in Europe. Of course, the converse is also true and one team has benefited from our plight. Each year we pay £40m to compete for the title but it’s easier to remove the competition, right? The other SPL teams thought they could reap the rewards too but ultimately haven’t (and were never really going to) and Scottish football is poorer because of it. Yes, Aberdeen might have had a triumphant few years as vice-champions but Hearts, Hibs and Dundee Utd certainly don’t have their troubles to seek. Was a Scottish Cup worth it for some well-connected St Johnstone fans? In saying that, I have the feeling that those involved with RTC and behind the scenes would’ve done what they did for no reward, just to satiate their hatred of Rangers. Don’t believe me? There’s plenty of willing combatants still out there throwing mud at our club. Just remember to donate… All the above is only the tip of the iceberg as far as I’m concerned. Volume after volume could be written on each aspect of the story, the characters involved and who is to blame. Myself? I’m fairly satisfied with the conclusion that pressure was applied in many places throughout the timeline to allow the chips to fall the way they did. Maybe there are simple explanations and maybe we caught some bad luck, but then again maybe not. We need to examine what we know and decide what this means if true? Because let’s be honest, no-one else is going to do it for us and others would rather we just forget it ever happened. In conclusion, Rangers’ fans need to keep asking these questions. We may not like all the answers and sometimes the mirror doesn’t reflect well either but it’s our story, and we shouldn’t be afraid to tell it. We need and deserve the truth.

Was delighted to see Cummings do so well on Sunday. 2nd & 3rd goals especially, he's unlikely to get another goal where he has 6 (six) touches inside the penalty box before shooting as he did for his first. Great finish, though. But just about the worst defending I've seen for a long time & Ithat's from someone who watched Ross Perry when we were in Div3. Even so, if it's one up front then Morelos for me.

Collum became hated among the manks when he awarded Rangers that penalty. Since that day he has done nothing to benefit us. Quite the opposite. No doubt the usual moonhowlers will be posting right now about how FC Paedo don't get a fair shake. Beaton was described by them as a Rangers man last week. Collum, a religious education teacher at a bigot factory is probably viewed as the same.

There's only one good thing about that - it's not Beaton!

He probably had just turned 15 when the first discussions were had between the boys. Fellow Founder William McBeath was voted in as our first ever President in 1874 at the age of 17.

Fascinating story. Many thanks for posting.