D'Artagnan

Thats fine and up to you Lucy - but Im not going to sit behind the safety of a computer & risk giving advice that would see my fellow bears subject to imprisonment - and thats where we are at the moment. Until someone goes to court and challenges this successfully that is the status quo The imbalance and inequality behind all this sticks in my throat as much as it does yours but we have a choice here and I think when you lay out the pros and cons of each argument the pros for a slight adaption strongly outweigh the other.

It’s probably a good time to check the moral compass. Let’s be honest when a song about Glasgow gang culture from the 30’s is deemed more headline grabbing than chants celebrating an active and proscribed terrorist organisation responsible for the deaths of thousands ‘“ then quite simply you know the game is a bogey. And knowing the game is a bogey is the important benchmark for us as Rangers supporters. If sectarianism is the Scottish government’s equivalent of a lucrative sex trade then quite simply Graham Spiers is its biggest whore. His lack of integrity was exposed on National Television by my fellow blogger Chris Graham, in a manner which was not only scrumptious but also unequivocal. Well’¦. to the best of my knowledge it was. So we as Rangers will not be taking morality lessons from the morally bereft Spiers. Is that too ‘complicated’ for you Graham? If not ‘“ then quite simply ‘“ do one, you absolute weasel and charlatan. They hate the Billy Boys, though I actually doubt however if the content and words is the primary motivating factor. As an anthem it is second to none in football, it is intimidating, it unites and reminds us that running through the very DNA of our football club is a refusal to acquiesce, a refusal to bow down on one knee, an utter revulsion at the prospect of surrendering. They don’t like that ‘“ a Rangers who refuse to give in, who triumph over adversity and after several years of being battered from pillar to post the mere prospect of such a mind-set returning terrifies them. If you find yourself continually moved to apologise for what we are and what we believe in and cherish ‘“ then perhaps you ought to seek another club. I don’t intend to spend time arguing over the linguistic history of the word ‘******’ ‘“ suffice to say its inclusion as a sectarian term is an utterly ridiculous notion proposed and championed by people with an utter hatred of our club, unfortunately aided by those who follow our club and are less than careful, lazy even, with their choice of language and its entailment and consequences. But the loaded dice have been rolled and it’s in such an environment we now operate. Those on message forums who boldly tell you to sing the Billy Boys in its original form ‘“ will they pay your fine if you are arrested? Will they explain to your children why daddy has lost his job or is going to jail? Time to box clever bears. The words need to be altered so that we can belt out one of our most enigmatic anthems without fear, without compromise and without damage to our beloved club. I’ll leave the revised version to the better qualified songsmiths out there. A revised and revamped Billy Boys delivers a message to the world – we will adapt and change as circumstances suit, but we will never, ever, go away.

Alot in there to agree with Frankie particularly this part : I think Kiernan, Ball and Wilson are all good enough but because Tav and Wallace are so far up the park and Halliday is also so attack-minded that leaves our central defenders isolated to quick and/or direct counters, including long balls. Usually they can deal with them easily enough but, like it or not on Saturday, the wind was an issue in that sense whilst too many individual errors also cause us problems. Sometimes we need an extra body in there - whether it's Tav or Wallace sitting back for a period It comes as no susprise to that our dip has occurred with a similar dip in form for Tav. His distribution in recent weeks has been very poor - and such failing is compounded when he gives the ball away in a forward position thus leaving our CB's exposed as you highlight. There was an interview Neil McCann did earlier in the season with Wallace & Tav and not only did he suggest to them both there was a danger with our FB's pushing on so adventurously he actually highlighted footage showing them both in the opposition box at the same time - something both of them actually denied in the interview they were guilty of !

If you want to connect the word omnishambles exclsuively with the previous incumbents Craig - then fill your boots bud. My reference to them in comparison to the new board was actually "chalk and cheese"

Im referring to the 500K for the loan repayment CS.

I wouldnt call it transparency Craig, nor even too transparent to use your words, if the revelation is not accurate.

If the necessary investment had been there - in place CS - then the omnishambles which followed would not have come to fruition.

A national newspaper - the Guardian - appears to be doing a better job exposing MASH than I ever could.

It is Rangers vs Mr. Mash Buster, and poor performances wont serve us well against a very slimey and dangerous opponent.

If we Rangers fans were to re-write the Christmas story the 3 wise men would bring us transparency, investment and good governance instead of the traditional gold. frankincense and myrrh. In fact if gifts were at a premium we could dispense with the latter – three wise men would do fine. For there was little wisdom in evidence regarding the board’s handling of the Sports Direct loan repayment. From inappropriate choice of words, grandstanding to the press via misleading and erroneous soundbites, and a failure to properly brief the QC as to the status of the loan repayment left us with the kind of clusterfuck often associated with David Somers. What is it with Rangers chairmen and unnecessary grandstanding soundbites ? If I had a fiver for every time a grandstanding press soundbite had come back to bite us on the arse – well let’s just say I’d have more than a tenner by now. The same book which brought us the Christmas story also gave us the warning that “Pride goeth before a fall”. The bright star above Ibrox which heralded the removal of the previous incompetent charlatans for Rangers orientated men has certainly dimmed a little in recent weeks. Demands for good governance, but more importantly criticism when it is absent, should be consistent not dependent on whom is sitting on the board. While there were certain elements of the press, along with some anti-King elements in a variety of guises who made the most of this faux pas, let’s be honest enough to admit that this was a mess of our own making the blame for which lies fairly and squarely on the shoulders of our board and Dave King in particular. Investment, good governance and transparency were the promises the new board heralded following their successful takeover and I hope the appointed fans reps on the board remind them that on this occasion they comprehensively failed on all 3 counts. That’s just not good enough – not by a long shot and the fact that such failure has been overseen by Rangers men, serves as an aggravator not as an excuse. Only a fool would deny there is not a chalk and cheese difference between King & the 3 Bears and the Ashley Aide De Camps which they replaced, running of the club, and long may such differences be blatantly obvious. Let us hope the clusterfuck we witnessed over the Sports Direct repayment was very much a one off in Royal David’s City.

Its abundantly clear from that article & his responses to me on twitter in relation to it, that the Scottish Pres Corps dont do serious inward reflection. How they can suggest we should have handled it better is beyond me. Ask a direct question - receive an unequivocal answer and then proceed to ask the same question, in a round about way, time and time and time again.

There was a touch of farce to the Celtic blogger’s article in today Daily Record. It appears that the words “tax evasion” were overlooked by the Record’s editorial team, clearly leaving the newspaper potentially liable to legal action. Notwithstanding the subsequent correction, it provided a valuable insight into the narrative at work. Perhaps the words “tax evasion” and “cheats” have been so thrust with such force to the front of the narrative that even seasoned pro’s like the editorial team of a national newspaper are willing to accept it without question. Not that further proof was required, but the one dimensional aspect of this current Rangers bashing campaign was totally exposed courtesy of a non-Rangers fan Alex Mooney, a retired journalist. Alex asked both Brian McNally and Alex Thomson whether they intended to extend their campaign for sporting justice to other clubs such as Arsenal. Not only was no answer forthcoming – he was subsequently blocked by both of them. There is no debate, just a one dimensional campaign to inflict damage on Rangers, and much, if not all, is driven by jealousy and hatred. However the hypocrisy monster had not yet finished preying on Rangers. A Dundee United blogger was then given exposure in the Daily Record suggesting his club had been the victims of the sporting advantage gremlin in the 2008 league Cup Final. The problem is some of us are able to recall the successful Dundee united team of the Jim McLean era. Additionally, we also remember the contracts many of these young players were tied into as later being declared unlawful. Should we re-visit that era and see which honours warrant forfeiture? Because surely sporting advantage is sporting advantage and has to be applied consistently. That’s assuming it is about upholding sporting integrity and not just punishing one club. None of the current agitators wish to apply their arguments against Rangers to those other clubs who have benefited from EBTs, from accumulated debts being written off by banks or contracts which were subsequently declared to be unlawful; furthermore there is no moral outrage at players and officials from a variety of Scottish clubs who availed themselves of tax avoidance schemes now coming onto the radar of HMRC. The latter of course was what Rangers did, availed themselves of a tax avoidance scheme which until the Court of Session ruling last week was seen as a legitimate form of reducing tax liabilities. It’s just their treatment for doing so which is different. It’s also why the tax community has expressed such an interest in this case with a whole series of experts offering various viewpoints on the subject, as well as the need to review current tax avoidance protocols and procedures. But bubbling away, out of sight, in the cauldron of the Scottish legal system is an issue may prove to have greater meltdown potential for Scottish football than anything we have seen to date. I refer of course to the alleged fraudulent scheme to acquire Rangers assets, and which ongoing legal procedure prevents me from discussing in any detail, other than what is already in the public domain. But it is not difficult to envisage the potential liability of punishing a member club who were victims of crime. One might reflect on the sporting disadvantages they have been subjected to, the unlawful punishments imposed upon them and the loss of revenue and trophy opportunities as a consequence. Perhaps then people will learn that deviating from the facts, acquiescing to hate driven agendas, often based on lies, has severe consequences. Pandora my dear, open the box if you wish, but be crystal clear of the consequences.

There is no mechanism or process for us to be stripped bud, but that has never stopped them before. The 5 way agreement shows they were willing to do it before - I suspect things are evn less favourable now.

I think the problem may be Ian such an action depends on a presumption that those inside the SFA disagree with the forfeiture, or are willing to stand up to rather than acquiesce to the hate driven agenda - history tells us otherwise.

Who knows bud. You only need to look at the events of 2012 to see how hatred drives the agenda - even amongst the authorities.

There was a considerable response to my last blog “Gunning for Rangers”, with surprise support and agreement from some elements of the Celtic fraternity with whom I’m normally “jousting” with on Twitter. Of course they were in a minority compared to those who wished to point out that Arsenal paid the money due to HMRC. When I use the term minority – I refer of course to social media given that a number of high profile ex Celtic players and an ex-manager have already publicly stated they have no desire to see Rangers forced to forfeit honours. This is of course was a fact already alluded to in the blog but it served to underline the problems the “title stripping inquisition” have created for themselves with the “sporting advantage” argument. If EBTs are used as a tax avoidance measure, does it really matter in terms of sporting advantage if retrospective payments are made to HMRC? If the sporting advantage has been gained it is utterly preposterous to suggest that retrospectively paying the back tax nullifies or negates the alleged sporting advantage which was gained at the material time, in Arsenal’s case 2001 (Perhaps Earlier) – 2005. Of course some still don’t get it – despite us having a wealth of tax experts such as Jo Maugham and Richard Murphy providing alternative opinions on the subject. But the reality is they don’t want to get it they just want to see Rangers punished or in some cases eradicated. One is reminded of the atmosphere which was the catalyst to one of the best narratives I read in those dark days of 2012 – Alex Mooney writing for the Rangers Standard. http://www.therangersstandard.co.uk/index.php/articles/current-affairs/196-the-witch-hunt-that-shamed-scotland Any hopes that lessons have been learned from that period are fading fast. The usual suspects within the media, and some new additions, are already leading a very anti-Rangers narrative. Those familiar with the Allport’s Scale of Prejudice will recognise the motivation behind this Tom English tweet following the Rangers statement today. For those who are not familiar with Allport’s work let me lay it out in its simplest form – How dare the victim have the audacity to stand up for themselves. Shades of 2012. Unsurprisingly, in a narrative which talks about sporting advantage, living beyond your means and signing players you could otherwise not afford, there has been a deathly silence with regard to those clubs who benefited from having their debt written off by the bank. Would they be signing the players they have in recent times if they were still saddled with their accumulated debt? Does this fit the narrative of sporting advantage, living beyond your means or signing players you couldn’t otherwise afford; or is there an essential part of the narrative missing – Rangers. Will the many Scottish individuals from Scottish football who availed themselves of the tax avoidance schemes operated by Inside Track Productions, Ingenious Film Partners 2 LLP and Ingenious Games LLP find themselves subjected to the adjectives applied to Rangers these last few years? http://news.stv.tv/west-central/308290-high-profile-scottish-football-figures-in-sweat-over-tax-avoidance-scheme/ Im not sure whether it will prove to be a Greek tragedy or farce, perhaps both, but nonetheless these lines seem very apt :- “Pandora flung herself at the box. She caught the lid and managed to fit it on. But it was too late. All of the awful things were out of the box”

Its been on the radar for some time now Ian http://news.stv.tv/west-central/308290-high-profile-scottish-football-figures-in-sweat-over-tax-avoidance-scheme/

And youre not the only one BG

Ive highlighted the inconsistency in HMRC public statements/policy is settling such cases previously FS - do you think their fairly "robust" pursuit of us and deviation from the norm was down to him ?

Go ahead - you may not get an answer however !

The reaction to HMRC’s victory at the Court of Session in respect of the action against Murray Group Holdings and others, has been a mixture of both expected and unexpected. I think many of us Rangers fans expected the implosion from fans of other clubs, most notably Celtic, calling for titles to be stripped and cups to be taken away. Perhaps the unexpected element came from some sections of the media, with the exception of course, of some of the usual suspects. The notion being promoted is that not only were we “cheats” with “tainted titles” but Rangers, through use of EBT’s, and failure to disclose side letters, gained an unfair sporting advantage – a notion previously dismissed by the SPL Independent Commission chaired by Lord Nimmo Smith. “Rangers FC did not gain any unfair competitive advantage from the contraventions of the SPL Rules in failing to make proper disclosure of the side-letter arrangements, nor did the non-disclosure have the effect that any of the registered players were ineligible to play, and for this and other reasons no sporting sanction or penalty should be imposed upon Rangers FC.” There is a particularly Scottish flavour to this clamour for retrospective punishment by way of honours forfeited. Rangers are not the only club to have fallen foul of HMRC over use of EBT’s with Arsenal previously coming to the attention of HMRC, resulting in a considerable dent in their 2005 accounts as they paid back monies HMRC deemed they were due. http://www.theguardian.com/football/2005/sep/09/newsstory.sport9 Arsenal’s use of the EBT scheme came to light in July 2004 during Ray Parlour’s fairly acrimonious divorce from his wife Karen. During the course of the court proceedings it was discovered that Ray Parlour had only paid 22% on a salary of £1.5 million in season 2000/01. The merits of this case and the considerable contrast in reactions to Arsenal and Rangers use of EBT’s were discussed in detail in an excellent article by Colin Armstrong writing for the Rangers Standard in 2013. http://www.therangersstandard.co.uk/index.php/articles/current-affairs/214-the-untouchables As Colin points out in that article Ray Parlour was not the only Arsenal player with an EBT, with the likes of Thierry Henry, Patrick Vieira, and Dennis Bergkamp also recipients. Whilst it may well be that Arsenal were operating EBT schemes prior to the 2000/01 season, for the purpose of this article we will only review the honours won by Arsenal between that season and 2005 when the bill was settled. These were as follows:- 2 League Championships (2002, 2004) 3 FA Cups (2002, 2003, 2005) 2 Charity/Community Shields (2002, 2004) Despite the fact that during this period Arsenal did not pay what was due HMRC there are no demands for them to be stripped of the honours won during this period. They are not accused of cheating or gaining an unfair sporting advantage. No journalists were snubbed by the FA. No children were deprived of schoolbooks nor soldiers sent into battle without the necessary equipment. No, this appears to be an issue exclusive to Scotland. Which of course will come as no surprise to many of us after all… It’s all about the Rangers.

And prior to the formation of the Trust Frankie, there were plenty of us decrying various aspects of Murray's stewardship - while often being mocked by some within our own support.

Its a very fair and valid series of point you make John, and Im in no way disagreeing with their sentiment. Its just having observed our enemies over the years - their hatred of our club rarley limits such attacks to merely the thought process.

I remember that line being peddled by our detractors BG I dont recall anyone at the club saying it. In fact Im sure SDM is on record as saying had we not gone down the route of EBT's we would still have acquired those players by other funding means.

Im referring to their decision making process, and how they appear to have qualified it BD which appears to hang on an application of common sense. What did you think of this line in the conclusion BD - given the likely costs involved ? We will reserve the question of expenses in view of the history of the appeals.