Jump to content

 

 

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'politics'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Main Forums
    • Rangers Chat
    • General Football Chat
    • Bluenose Lounge
    • Forum Support and Feedback

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


About Me


Location


Interests


Occupation


Favourite Rangers Player


Twitter


Facebook


Skype

  1. Great stuff on our main site today from @Rick Roberts - make sure you check it out when you can: https://www.gersnet.co.uk/index.php/news-category/current-affairs/915-dave-king-s-statement-of-intent Dave King's Statement of Intent There’s a basic rule of thumb that wherever competition exists then you have to put effort in to just stand still, to keep your place. To stay ahead you have to adapt, react and put the work in, put more and better work in than those you’re competing against. As soon as you ease off then others will step up and take your place - especially when that place is at the top of the pile. We need to recognise that there are external forces actively acting against our club. It took a lot of hard work and no lack of talent to build Rangers FC into the great institution that we find today but with our position come many that are jealous and want to damage and weaken it. We as a support cannot take our position and football club for granted. Take the analogy of a boiling kettle - you need to put energy in to keep the water hot. If you don’t do anything then over time it will naturally cool. Likewise, it will cool quicker if people pour cold water on it. The following points are based on general observations and my conclusions drawn from them. It’s all very broad brush and there is also an element of it that may seem a bit unnecessary, remembering we are meant to be talking about football here. But to be honest it is a ridiculous situation to find ourselves in. Unfortunately I have to use Celtic and its fans as a reference point here. One, they are our immediate rivals and exist in the same space as us, and two, most of the hostility derives from their fans, or at least some of the prominent ones. This may be an unfair to many of the support but those are the ones currently directing the bus just now - and it's driven by Peter Lawwell. In my opinion there’s some fundamental differences between the fan bases. Historically the Celtic support have been fed and have thrived on grievance. Most of it either greatly exaggerated or fabrications to suit a purpose – the referees conspire against them, other teams have cheated, Thatcher stopped me passing my exams, the Israeli army stole food from my table etc. This circles the wagons and feeds their controlling identities - ethnicity, faith and politics. Ultimately these authorities are happy to have a bloc to control and that sense of grievance keeps the group pliable. Of course, particularly in recent years, Rangers FC has been set as the target for most of this grievance. Politically, in particular, they’ve been keen to paint us as the bête noir – somehow getting one over Rangers now settles scores for things never quite achieved in life. And further, when power is acquired and grievance (real or imagined) requires satiating, then vengeance emerges. This is why I believe we have seen some unprofessional behaviour from people of in positions of responsibility - even they can't hide it. The want for revenge in the name of Celtic (the vessel that often carries their wider cultural identities) overrides professional pride. Rangers fans on the other hand: we may not like Celtic, it may be stated clearly or bluntly or often, but it usually ends there. It’s contained and not all-consuming. We don't have various websites running from donations that concentrate on what they're doing on a daily basis and we don't ask people to pay for films and plays discussing how hard done by we've been. A point that’s been missed in recent years is that Rangers and its support has been condemned even whilst simply defending itself from attacks, at the same time the aggressor has been overlooked. To wit… Even the unemployable Stan Collymore was lashing out again this week. We all know that he is a bit of a joke figure, but his denigrating lies regarding Rangers (and his pro-Celtic myths) have the potential to reach his 800k followers on twitter, which is not insignificant. Pinch of salt or not, that’s a lot of cold water to be thrown at Rangers and some will lap it up. Whilst I agree that the guy isn’t worth the hassle of the club engaging, we could see this as an opportunity. There’s plenty out there who have never heard the story of Rangers humble origins, it’s a proper football story, so we should put it out there and people like Stan can be used as a springboard when they parrot their lies. The club and the support has a duty to retell the story - as it’s one of the many unique selling points our great club has, so we shouldn’t be afraid to use it. Repetition for emphasis as my old English teacher used to say! Now let’s be honest with what’s been happening. There has been a collated effort and a concerted message from some against our club. Years of tribal, cultural and professional grievances have been sowed and these have grown into fully formed agendas. Tribes at war, PR arms races, clashing of cultures, competitors vying for the top spot - it is all relevant. It also helps to acknowledge that this is now the status quo (and has been for a longer time than we probably want to admit). Now whether Rangers FC is your world or is a pastime you enjoy occasionally it still merits and requires defending to maintain its status and we can all help. We may not be able to stop all of the derision and cold water but we can at least counter some of it and we all have energy to add back into the system. Last week we witnessed the overdue and most welcome sight of Rangers go on the front foot. Firstly against the “independent” SFA Celtic fan non-executive director Gary Hughes who likes to label our fans as the great unwashed. Other than the predictable gnashing of teeth from Celtic's media attack dogs (which they would do regardless) I could see few negatives in this move. It highlighted a problem (part of a larger ongoing issue with Scottish football's governance) and at very least has increased awareness of this. Personally I don’t want Celtic season book holders being involved in decisions involving Rangers - especially when they're supposed to be independent. I’ve seen enough in six years to know that some with an allegiance and the will to get involved at that level are not to be trusted. So it puts the pressure on the SFA. And whilst the SFA and the media are busy dealing with this issue it means they have less time plotting their next charge against Rangers and will perhaps consider their options in future. Additionally, it follows that if less comes our way then the good people at Rangers have more time to deal with other matters. Rangers also released a statement on next season’s ticket allocations which was largely a popular move amongst the home support. The announcement was welcome but equally surprising as this was the type of thing that had been discussed amongst the support for years but never actioned. Our rivals didn’t need to react but Celtic did and their response looked amateur and petty. They have had it their own way for a long time and they are used to throwing mud so perhaps this is a sign that they don’t cope too well when it goes the other way. They have some very driven and capable people who have caused us great damage but perhaps behind that front-line they still suffer self-doubt. There has been a consistent and effective smear campaign against us for a long time and I think we’d started to believe their hype - probably partially comatosed by dignified silence but also some disbelieving and not wanting to admit that the game has changed so much and Celtic had taken the fight against our club to the floor. This week and another statement. Another conflict of interest. An oversight on the fit and proper test. The Chairman of the SPFL is a long-time Celtic fan, publicly no fan of Rangers and a key employee of Dermot Desmond, Celtics largest shareholder. You get the picture. The statement was justified. The questioning of his placement is justified and a review of his remit and performance is merited. Unless you're the Chief Sports-writer at BBC Scotland who apparently only seems to want the 'files thrown open' if it's Celtic doing the complaining. The narrative is fairly straightforward and very easy to glean. Celtic FC and their support and their place-men in the media want Celtic-minded and/or controllable people in all positions to help their club when they can. A fair part of this strategy also involves hampering Rangers FC. Now most clubs would probably act in the same selfish way (Rangers included of course!) but balance, integrity, the good of the game are not a requirement. Ergo, those kidding themselves on in that regard really need to look in the mirror. And a point for fans of all other Scottish clubs: you would be dealt with if you were to get in Celtic's way or call them out. It’s your football league too - surely sporting integrity doesn’t just apply to Rangers? My own personal gripe is the compliance officer position – the text book example of what needs fixed and should never have been allowed. Effectively created by the then Celtic lawyer Paul McBride almost seven years ago. A position that has since been filled by two Celtic fans whereby the performance and balance of both has been questionable. Just me seeing a pattern here? In any case, it appears our board and Dave King have said enough is enough and have taken up the fight. The last week has seen a welcome change in direction in defence of the club and our interests after the SFA once again moved the goalposts in terms of historic charges against the club. Tomorrow's arrival of Steven Gerrard, be it through a sense of duty following some poor managerial choices, is a big club move. A real statement of intent. But we need all others to play their part. That includes our influential fans, be it ex-players, celebrities, media or politicians. They got a pass through the banter years because no-one knew what was going on. A few stuck their head above the parapet and we should show them our gratitude now. Unfortunately, we have some who seem happy to pick at the club (and essentially do our rivals' bidding) presumably to assist their careers in newspapers and television. Sort yourselves out guys, you know who you are. Can the club and supporters regain a bridgehead in the media? From a union of people across the media? Create a career-safe haven for anyone brave enough to upset the apple cart and spills the beans on unreasonable editors or policy? Finally, onto the fan base. It is enough to support the club or even just talk fondly about it. People spend considerable time and money doing just that and it all deserves credit and respect. But opportunities exist and arise to contribute and do more when we wish. We need to learn to flex our collective muscle from time to time. We are notoriously compartmentalised but need to remember we share the same goals and when pointed in the same direction we should have unstoppable momentum. This could be spending five minutes to lodge objections to parking restrictions at Ibrox. It could be talking to friends, colleagues and neighbours and matching the momentum of the Foundation of Hearts or even just building Rangers Lotto into the envy of the nation again. It could be buying strips in record numbers, enough to make commercial entities sit up and make them review which teams jersey they display in the front of their shops, which kit kids wear in the playground or tourists pick up at airports. We have the buying power and online footprint to force papers and other commercial outlets to review their strategy regarding their coverage of Rangers, and where they won’t change then we empower their competitors. We can use the tools available to us to voice concerns, to correct errors, shut-down venom on comments sections and supply truth and facts on our great club where required. We have the power to put pressure on MPs and MSPs and demand fair treatment and decent, responsible behaviour from the corridors of power. We should have the power to create some noise and finally sort out BBC Scotland - hopefully sooner than later on that one. We are the majority and we can be the Establishment again. When do we say enough is enough? Tomorrow a new Rangers era begins - the time for change has never been better.
  2. https://m.facebook.com/rangersfansboard Rangers Fans Board 25 minutes ago · EGM DATE: The RFB can officially announce, as informed tonight by Derek Llambias, that the EGM is to be held on the 6th of March 2015
  3. enjoy : http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/feb/04/dundee-west-labour-voters-general-election
  4. RST Statement on Old Firm Violence 3rd February 2015 The Rangers Supporters Trust (RST) is extremely concerned at some of the incidents surrounding the Old Firm game at the weekend. We spoke last week about our fears that certain elements in the Celtic support were using the internet to raise sectarian tension ahead of the fixture. Sadly our concerns appear to have been well founded. First of all, we would like an explanation of how the Green Brigade were once again allowed to bring an offensive, sectarian banner into the game? This group has previous for openly supporting Irish Republican terrorism, disrupting Remembrance Day, and overt sectarian behaviour. If a Rangers fan group consistently disgraced our club with offensive, sectarian banners, we would expect the club to take decisive action. Not only does Celtic Football Club tolerate the Green Brigade, they encourage them and facilitate their displays. The use of the term “Hun” on the banner in question, despite some apologists in Scottish politics and the media playing down its significance, is clearly sectarian. Its origins in Northern Ireland are well known. All anti sectarian charities acknowledge that it is a sectarian term. We will not accept it as 'banter'. Furthermore, the use of the term “monkeys” to describe Rangers fans on another Green Brigade banner has clear parallels with historic racist language. The purpose of the terms used by the Green Brigade - “monkeys” and “huns” - is to dehumanise Rangers fans. In addition to the Green Brigade, we highlighted the likes of Phil MacGiollabhain, Angela Haggerty and others using dehumanising language online ahead of the fixture. Rangers fans are described regularly as “the klan”, references are made to “Stalag Sevco” and “fascists”. Again the clear purpose is to characterise Rangers fans as less than human or liken them to the worst elements of humanity – in other words, fair game for the hard of thinking who the writers seek to, and in some cases successfully, influence. The effect of this is clear. A ten year old Rangers fan bottled by Celtic fans who forced their way onto a Rangers supporters’ bus. Another Rangers fan assaulted outside a pub by Celtic fans and hospitalised with possible brain damage. Nacho Novo once again threatened online. Curiously, instead of accurate media reporting, we see some outlets refer to the perpetrators as “rival fans”. It is quite clear that a minority of morons in the Celtic support are listening to, and acting on, the bile churned out by MacGiollabhain, Haggerty and the Green Brigade. Instead of ineffective legislation which produces inconsistent and at times bizarre outcomes, the Scottish government should be educating the next generation of Old Firm fans on why sectarianism is not acceptable. In addition, they should be clamping down on the online hate campaign waged by certain individuals and dealing with the type of organised, premeditated sectarianism perpetrated by groups like the Green Brigade. The overwhelming majority of Old Firm fans, and indeed all Scottish football fans, are decent people who love their club. They are often targeted for disgraceful treatment and demonised whilst the real culprits are ignored. We thank the Celtic fan who started a collection for the young Rangers fan attacked at the weekend. We hope his club and the police will start to take the actions of online hate-mongers and the disgraceful, sectarian Green Brigade seriously and belatedly deal with them. - See more at: https://www.therst.co.uk/news/rst-statement-on-old-firm-violence/#sthash.JOxr8LGc.dpuf
  5. FOREWORD: The author would like to thank the author of The Football Tax Havens Blog for the provision of some of the information used in this article. There is one thing I can say with some certainty regarding the HMRC enquiry into Rangers Football Club and that is that it has left a legacy of confusion, contradiction, misdirection ( some of which may either be deliberate or as a consequence of gross negligence) and of course, last but not least, accusation. The fact that some of the key players involved in the whole process now face criminal prosecution should confirm, for even the casual onlooker, that all has not been above board. Allow me to illustrate courtesy of these two links, which contain contradictory information, but nonetheless, were written in good faith by the respective authors. http://sport.stv.tv/blog/203241-rang...ions-answered/ http://www.accountancyage.com/aa/new...kets-by-gbp73m The former link written by Mike Farrell for STV attributes HMRC as the largest single creditor at the time of rejection of the CVA whilst the second link written by Rachael Singh for AccountancyAge suggests at the time HMRC vetoed the proposed the CVA they were in fact the second largest single creditor. What we do know is that at some point Duff & Phelps added the outstanding potential estimated liability regarding EBT’s to the overall bill due to HMRC. A potential bill which never came to fruition due to the rulings of various Tax Tribunals in favour of Rangers. What is both concerning and alarming is that such “confusion” appears to extend to high level executives within HMRC itself as this Public Accounts Committee Q & A demonstrates. http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevi...ral/11443.html In question 54/55, tendered by Anne McGuire MP, Mr Jim Harra – Director General Business Tax HMRC, moves to correct Ms McGuire regarding her apparent “misapprehension” by responding as follows: “It has been in the media. This dispute on employee benefit trusts was not the reason why Rangers went into liquidation. It was for non-payment of their standard pay-as-you-earn and VAT obligations.” No Mr Harra that is not entirely accurate either. That is the reason that Rangers went into administration. The reason Rangers went into liquidation is because, as either the primary or secondary creditor, HMRC the organisation you represent, vetoed the proposal for a CVA. It is really asking too much of HMRC officials, particularly high ranking ones to provide accurate information in response to questions from Members of Parliament who sit on a Public Accounts Committee? Furthermore, just to add some added spice to this bubbling pot of confusion and accusation, the reasons for such refusal are themselves subject to considerable speculation. http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/q...0639n.24716091 http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/h...probe.24725771 In the questions aforementioned Ms McGuire also raises the subject of pre-litigation settlement. It is perhaps worth highlighting at this point that Rangers were not the first football club to fall foul of HMRC. In 2005 during Ray Parlour’s divorce proceedings it was revealed that during season 2000/01 Parlour paid tax at a rate of only 22% courtesy of an off shore benefit trust operated by Arsenal. HMRC reacted to this information billing Arsenal for £12 million which they settled in full. While the differing circumstances of each case make a side by side comparison impractical, it does raise the question of why HMRC waited 5 years to pursue Rangers in respect of an EBT payment scheme previously declared in annual accounts) Returning to the subject of settlement Mr Harra responds: “In terms of when we decide to litigate, we have a published litigation and settlements strategy that states we will settle only for what we believe we are due under the law. If we believe that we have a greater than evens chance of getting more by litigating than what we can get by settling, generally speaking that is what we will do: we will litigate. We are proud of the success record that we have in litigation. In avoidance cases, we win about 80% of all the cases that we litigate, but that does mean we are not successful in 20% of them. We are disappointed by the upper-tier tribunal decision in the Rangers case. It is still something that can be the subject of appeal, so I cannot go into too much detail about the litigation itself, but, as I said, we have a very good track record and we may not have reached the end of the line on this one.” Of course such litigation is at public taxpayer’s expense. Perhaps Ms McGuire would care to ask HMRC at the next Q & A why a government agency whose remit is to bring people to account for failing to keep meticulous financial records, cannot themselves keep accurate records with regard to their own operating costs. http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/h...-case.26228807 So in summary we have HMRC continuing to pursue Rangers FC (Oldco) at public expense, having refused an offer of an earlier settlement, in the belief they will be “getting more by litigating than we can by settling” despite the fact HMRC themselves forced the company they are pursuing into liquidation. Perhaps Ms McGuire would care to ask what financial settlement HMRC hope to achieve from a liquidated company. The more you add up the sums the less it makes logical or financial sense, in fact it only serves to add credibility to the accusation that HMRC’s rejection of a CVA was to ensure an investigation into Rangers directors and owners. If the circumstances aforesaid have caused you to utter the words “scandalous” then you may want to re-think your choice of words. In the Rangers Tax Case HMRC considered that the appointment of EBT funds on to a sub-fund or sub-trust for the benefit of a particular employee and/or their family gave rise to a PAYE charge. HMRC were also of the opinion that loans provided from these sub-funds were not loans, but were akin to a bonus available without any chance of repayment and, therefore, again subject to PAYE. What lifts this above even “scandalous” is such arguments have been challenged unsuccessfully before in the cases of Dextra Accessories ([2005] STC 1111) and Sempra Metals ([2007] STC 1559), yet HMRC continue to put forward this argument, at the tax payers expense of course Sometimes “scandalous” is just not enough.
  6. ByPAUL THORNTON The Sun Published: 18 minutes ago CHEEKY Celtic fans are planning to light the blue-touch paper on next week’s long-awaited Old Firm clash - with a full page ad explaining why Rangers are a new club. Sections of the Hoops support have clubbed together to take out the message in a Sunday newspaper one week before the tie. The lengthy message sets out why some Celts reckon the Gers are a different outfit from their historic rivals following the oldco’s liquidation in 2012. After organising through forums and supporter sites a group of dozens of fans have clubbed together a four-figure sum to place the statement. The message states: “As Celtic supporters, we regrettably recognise that our club had an association with Rangers (1872) through the collective descriptive term, The Old Firm. We believe this term is now redundant following the liquidation of Rangers (1872). “On 1st February Celtic supporters will support our team in the semifinal against a new club, which came into being in 2012. “This will be the first ever meeting between the two clubs and the purpose of this statement is to place our position on record so that Celtic supporters can enjoy the occasion for what it is and without playing any part in what we see as the Rangers ‘club continuation’ fiction.” The stunt is sure to wind-up Bears who were buoyed by Lord Nimmo Smith’s report which saw Rangers retain their titles in 2013. At the end of December SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster firmed-up that view when he insisted the team were “absolutely” the same club. He said: “It’s the same club, absolutely. “The member club is the entity that participates in our league and we have 42 member clubs. “Those clubs may be owned by a company, sometimes it’s a Private Limited Company, sometimes it’s a PLC, but ultimately, the company is a legal entity in its own right, which owns a member club that participates in the league. “It was put to bed by the Lord Nimmo Smith commission some while ago – it’s the same club.” Bosses at the paper where the ad is due to run contacted Police Scotland to make sure it would not spark trouble between the supports. Last night the force said: “We are aware of the advert.” Rangers declined to comment. But Union of Fans spokesman Chris Graham said: “We’ve been over this time and time again. The football authorities have said it’s the same club and Lord Nimmo Smith has said it’s the same club. “I don’t think Rangers fans are paying any special attention to the online crackpots among the Celtic support who continue to put forward this notion. I’d have thought they’d have better things to spend their money on.”
  7. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/jack-irvine-paul-murrays-more-5015233? THE Easdales have launched an astonishing attack on Paul Murray, mocking the former Rangers director and questioning his commitment to the club. A statement released by Jack Irvine, family adviser to the Ibrox club’s major shareholders, hits back at Murray for speaking out against the current regime in today’s Record Sport and savages him for being part of the board when former chairman David Murray sold the club to Craig Whyte for £1. Irvine said: “ So like an episode of The Living Dead, Paul Murray emerges from his borders lair having vowed never to return. He says he expects a smear campaign against himself and Dave King and in the same breath compares the Rangers board to Gerald Ratner. Hypocritical? You decide. “If Mr Murray and Mr King ever do get anywhere near the club they are welcome to carry out a robust financial investigation. The Easdale brothers have never taken a penny from the club and nor have they claimed any expenses. “One begins to wonder if we are not dealing with Paul McKenna as opposed to Paul Murray who appears to have hypnotised himself and his cohorts into obliterating the memory fact that they sold their beloved club for one pound. Rangers men? You decide.” In fact, former Deutsche Bank executive Murray launched an eleventh hour bid to persuade former David Murray against the Whyte deal. Forecasting the liquidation crisis which just over a year later brought the Glasgow giants to their knees, he said at the time: "In my opinion, Craig Whyte has not adequately demonstrated what his strategy is for managing and funding a negative outcome on this matter."
  8. https://twitter.com/jimwhite Jim White ‏@JimWhite 41s42 seconds ago Kenny McDowall has resigned as Rangers caretaker manager, citing personal reasons for stepping down. #Rangers
  9. http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/12218558.html
  10. Who gives the lowest dealing charges. Decide to do my wee bit and up my share holding. Halifax £12:50 per trade.
  11. It’s good to see that HMRC’s latest failing - being unable to furnish costs of their continual and apparently relentless pursuit of Rangers over EBT’s - has galvanised the Rangers support into a long overdue unified sense of purpose. After a period of unhelpful adjectives and metaphors, which military men would aptly describe as “blue on blue”, we are at long last reminding ourselves where the real enemies of our club are, and it’s certainly not from within. It is not surprising that HMRC’s latest hypocritical incompetency, and I use that term deliberately in view of the fact we are talking about an investigative government agency who hold both private individuals and companies accountable for failing to keep meticulous financial records, has given rise amongst some of our fans to suggestions of a grandiose conspiracy. I don’t subscribe to such a conspiracy theory, and those who read this blog regularly will know that as far as I’m concerned “Evidence is king”. There appears to be little or no evidence available at this time to suggest any high level conspiracy, instead I will in the course of this article offer you an alternative evidence based theory to explain why HMRC’s pursuit of our club has all the characteristics of a witch hunt. Before dismissing such a conspiracy theory completely however it is worthwhile pointing out that the South African Tax Authorities have recently discovered what has been described as a rogue unit working within their organisation. Furthermore much closer to home, the families of the Hillsborough victims had to suffer considerable ridicule for suggesting that the Police were involved in some kind of conspiratorial cover up over events that tragic day. Several years later the 160 odd altered Police Statements and deliberate, false and malicious briefing of the press by the Police, are now a matter of public record and the subject of an ongoing enquiry. Therefore despite the absence of evidence of conspiracy perhaps the best course available to us is to at least keep an open mind whilst concentrating on the evidence which is available to us. Discounting such a conspiracy theory does not however also discount the ruthless nature of this enquiry, nor the attempts by HMRC to deliberately mislead the Rangers support during the course of it. It would come as no surprise to any of us if, in the near future evidence was uncovered which demonstrates HMRC have acted in both an unscrupulous, unprofessional and unedifying manner throughout the course of this enquiry. After all, it wouldn’t be the first time. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ianmcowie/100014676/2000-tax-dodgers-confess-but-should-hmrc-have-paid-for-stolen-information/ Some will note the particular irony of HMRC paying for stolen evidence, given the fact a considerable amount of evidence in the Rangers Tax Tribunal, ended up in the possession of BBC Scotland journalists and proved to be the catalyst to “The men who sold the jerseys” documentary. However the Redknapp case was not the only one which had brought the professionalism and competency of HMRC under a very public spotlight, leaving it’s investigators with red faces and questions being asked. https://www.accountancylive.com/cassidy-hmrc-should-eat-humble-pie-over-montpelier-case I doubt there is a Rangers fan out there who doesn’t feel a sense of the tunnel vision Mr Cassidy alludes to during the Montpelier case. It appears history may well be repeating itself as HMRC continue to pursue Rangers despite a number of failed appeals chaired by some of the most qualified tax experts in the country. These spectacular high profile failings and questions of competency, integrity and professionalism served to bring HMRC very much under an intense spotlight, most notably by the public accounts committee. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/28/hmrc-chiefs-mps-lost-tax http://economia.icaew.com/news/november-2014/pac-slams-hmrcs-anti-tax-avoidance-strategy So we have a government investigative agency, with a spectacular series of high profile failures, even despite indulging in some fairly unscrupulous means of obtaining evidence which in itself calls into question the very integrity of the organisation itself, under considerable pressure to re-dress their very public humiliation in a series of failed prosecutions. It certainly puts into some kind of perspective the relentless and ruthless nature of HMRC’s pursuit of Rangers. Quite simply after so many failings they simply had to get a result. But if HMRC were in a bit of a hole prior to and during the investigation, rather than stop digging as the age old saying goes, they appear to have taken the equivalent of a JCB to the situation. Apologies for the following paragraph in advance, as it deals mainly in conjecture rather than facts, but it is worth mentioning all the same. Despite HMRC’s claim to be unable to furnish the cost of the Rangers Tax Case, rumours abound of figures at or around the £10 million mark. Furthermore it is common knowledge that Sir David Murray attempted to settle with HMRC over EBT’s offering anything between 10-12 million pounds. Even taking the lower settlement figure HMRC are now looking not only at £10 million lost revenue, but also perhaps £10 million costs for pursuing a case against a company from whom they will be unable to recoup anything even if they were to eventually be successful in a forthcoming appeal. One wonders what the Public Accounts Committee will make of all this. Moving on from public accounts to public accountability and the HMRC JCB appears to have been working in overdrive to dig a bigger hole for themselves. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/ex-rangers-owner-craig-whyte-being-3992415 Perhaps HMRC would care to explain to Rangers shareholders, and any other interested parties for that matter, why they allowed Craig Whyte, who they were already pursuing for a sum of £3.7 million and whom they had threatened with bankruptcy as a result of failed tax returns, to take control of an organisation and run it into the ground by failing to make PAYE payments for nearly 9 months. If you cannot hear the alarm bells by now, then you either are deaf or have your fingers, quite firmly, in your ears. HMRC’s JCB next wrong turn was in the form of a generic reply via correspondence. As thousands of Rangers supporters and shareholders wrote to complain about confidential tax documents and other paperwork appearing in the public domain, HMRC responded by asserting it did not comment or respond to speculation about alleged breaches of confidentiality. “Speculation”? “Alleged”? The subject of those complaints were The Rangers Tax Case Blog and the BBC Documentary “The men who sold the jerseys” both of which went onto win national awards, with the latter being broadcast on national television. Journalist Tom English described the Rangers Tax Case Blog as follows: “If you wanted to know the latest news on their tax travails, rangerstaxcase was a place you went because, unlike newspapers or radio stations, rangerstaxcase was connected to the heart of the FTT and everybody knew it. It had documents and detail that were beyond dispute. When illustrating one point it was making it would summon up information that could only have come from somebody within, or very close to, the tribunal” (The Scotsman 25.11.2012) Why have HMRC deliberately prevaricated and failed to respond to this clear breach of confidential information. How can they justify describing a national television broadcast and an award winning blog, whose plaudits and awards are based around the revealing of confidential information, as mere “speculation”? As others outside the Rangers community have since commented both these outlets of confidential information presented it such a way as to infer the guilt of Rangers FC. Was the same unscrupulous culture within HMRC which saw them buy stolen property in the Redknapp case alive and kicking also in the Rangers Tax Case – a kind of win at all costs mentality? Whilst the source and nature of those confidential leaks has been subject to many theories and discussions, confirmation about one of the sources was provided courtesy of Lord Nimmo Smith, in his SPL Independent Commission Report. "Meanwhile, BBC Scotland came, by unknown means, into possession of what they described as “dozens of secret emails, letters and documents”, which we understand were the productions before the Tax Tribunal. These formed the basis of a programme entitled “Rangers – The Men Who Sold the Jerseys”, which was broadcast on 23 May 2012. BBC Scotland also published copious material on its website. The published material included a table containing the names of Rangers players, coaches and staff who were beneficiaries of the MGMRT, and how much they received through that trust.” (Section 98) Perhaps not so much a case of “Who sold the jerseys” but more of a case of Who sold the evidence? That is of course the evidence, or as Lord Nimmo Smith terms “productions”, which was seized by HMRC during the course of their investigation into Rangers and which was presented before the Tax Tribunal. The question is why the removal of this evidence and its subsequent use in the BBC Scotland documentary aforementioned, was not the subject of a Police enquiry until after the verdict of the tax tribunal, when complaints by both Sir David Murray and myself saw the launching of a criminal enquiry. It raises serious questions about the safe handling and storing of productions, as well as duties and responsibilities of investigative agencies with regard to the loss or theft of productions. In particular it raises questions about how and why Lord Nimmo Smith was able to arrive at such a conclusions with regard to the source of the material which BBC Scotland subsequently came into possession of. http://www.v3.co.uk/v3-uk/news/1996757/cameron-promises-transparent-government It’s time for you to deliver Mr Cameron and the Rangers support will not rest until you do. We want a full government enquiry into this whole process and we will not rest until we get it. We will play to win – and win at all costs.
  12. But as if that wasn't enough .."Rangers are a new club" Haggerty dropped this clanger... Happy New Year !!
  13. Thought this worth sharing from FF: "Lifted this from another forum, some things we didn't know about players, training etc!! Training seems like a hoot! http://www.hat-trick.fr/sebastien-fa...st-jimmy-bell/ You’ve been here for two years now. What does “Rangers” mean to you? (After a long time spent thinking) Well it’s easy to say this and a bit of a cliché, but it’s a religion. There’s football here which is one thing, but then there’s Rangers, the fans, and everyone else associated with the club, it’s amazing…even after the club was relegated to Division 4, people kept their jobs at Ibrox or at Murray Park. And they are just so proud to work here, and they so proud to say “I work for Rangers”. When you are a professional player, you tend to move from club to club, it’s part of the job. It’s not easy to really absorb the culture and ethos of a club, apart from those who stay for years and years and really become ingrained in the fabric of the club, like Lee McCulloch. Sometimes, the supporters shout at you or get angry. But you can’t let it get to you, you can only do your talking on the pitch. They’ve had so much good football over the years that I think they sort of have a right to be angered, to be honest. In any case, playing at Ibrox is far from easy. There’s so much pressure. You can be winning 2-0, but if you misplace just one pass you’ll be whistled. I mean I heard a few boos at the Gerland (Lyon stadium), but never like the one’s you get here sometimes! (laughs) Did it take you long to learn what it meant to play for a club like Rangers? What did you expect when you came over? No, I didn’t expect it to be honest. I knew Rangers were a massive club, but I didn’t know how they were perceived by the other Scottish clubs. The Glasgow clubs really are hated by the other Scottish clubs. It’s incredible! What’s more, you have to understand that I was a but unsure about coming over here in the first place. I said to my agent: “You’re kind, but I’m not sure if I want to be dropping down to play in Division 4 in France” and he said “It’s Division 4 in Scotland”. He said: “Seb, please, just go over for a few days, check out the facilities and the stadium, you’ll soon change your mind.” On the first day of my trial I trained with the reserves, and it went well. That night, I went to see the first team play in the League Cup again East Fife. It was a Tuesday night, we won 4-0 and almost 40, 000 fans were there. It was…mad, just mad. I called up my agent and said: “If you can sort it out for me, I really want to stay here!” Everything you do and say is reported on and scrutinised at a club like Rangers. Has the press had an influence on the atmosphere at the club? First of all you need to understand that the press and its reporters here are a million times worse than in France! I’m sure I’ve seen the word “crisis” used to describe our club just about every day of the year, even when we win. Taking this into consideration, I do think that it’s had an influence. I must say, not on me personally. To be very honest, I don’t read the papers, apart from when they discuss politics or cover stories from France. But at the level of the club more generally, they have definitely had an influence. Ten days ago, an old team mate of McCoist’s, John Brown, said to the Sun: “You are a disgrace!” The coach brought us the article and he had an argument with Kenny Miller. After we got beaten by Hearts, apparently Miller had called up a journalist wanting to speak to him to tell him the manager had made some bad decisions, although it turned out that he hadn’t. McCoist got so angry: he threw the paper, he stamped on it, he was shouting and screaming! It’s the first time I’ve ever seen him like that. Blacky brings the Sun in every morning, and we read it. McCoist reads all the papers every morning in his office at Murray Park, which by the way is enormous (laughs). I think that its mainly at the level of the club staff that the papers have an impact. In your eyes, who represents the soul of the club? Jimmy Bell the kitman. He’s been here since 1972, I think. It’s amazing that he was taking care of McCoist and Durrant when they were players, and now its them who are in charge. It’s an amazing story and an amazing history, one which you wouldn’t get at many clubs at all. Jimmy’s got his own room in Ibrox where he displays all the Rangers kits and all the Rangers photos that he’s collected over 40 years. In his office at Murray Park, there’s a room, which we are forbidden from entering (laughs), which has all of his souvenirs, his trophies…it’s his very own museum! When it looked like they might be re-possessing Ibrox, he had to pack up all his stuff because he was scared that it would be taken off him. He is really the soul of the club, its him, its Jimmy. He’s a great guy, even if he’s always sulking. You need to get to know him…I remember when I arrived on trial, I didn’t speak English. “You don’t speak English, ****ing French!?” he said (laughs). But I mean really nasty to me! But nowadays, along with Bilel, he tells us loads of stories, loads of jokes. He’s really a top guy, he’s golden. I’m trying to help our readers understand the complete devotion that Rangers inspires in people. To give us more of an insight, is it true that one of the players has got the logo of the club tattooed on his calf? Yeah its Danny Stoney! He’s a good lad who we’ve loaned out to Stranraer. He’s got a tattoo that’s blue, with red around it, and five golden stars in the middle. It’s amazing, simply amazing. When I was at Lyon, even though I was also a Lyon fan, I would never have got a Lyon tattoo. It would never have crossed my mind! It’s just a different type of relationship to the club here. At Lyon, if I’d have got a club tattoo while I was at the academy I’d have had the piss taken out of me! “Suck up!” they’d have said. Here, it is praised! But by contrast, at Lyon if you change your hairstyle or your clothes, people will talk about it. Here, no one cares! The outfits people wear here, and I’m talking about the players, are just….Take Lee Wallace for example, I’ve never seen him wearing jeans (laughs)! At Lyon, you dress well to be stylish or whatever, but here, not at all.
  14. Not only do we love to do names, we have become adept as a support at pigeon holing people. “****”, “Fan ****”, “ “Pro board” “Anti board” “The enemy within”, not forgetting the latest addition from the AGM - “Rats” - there seems little room for manoeuvre for those confused bears who wander around in a kind of no man’s land not knowing how to take the latest serving of propaganda from one of the various groups. In fact some would have you believe you are the “enemy within” if you dare to occupy that no man’s land, or more accurately, don’t agree with their viewpoint. I’ve never been a fan of emotional, descriptive terms to stir up feelings – they are a very poor substitute for cold hard facts. Ally’s shambolic departure was the perfect case in point. Some felt it necessary to leap to his defence as some kind of weapon against the board, whilst others indulged in less than complimentary negative emotional language. The sum total was to exacerbate an already extremely messy situation. I understand some even planned to sing “Super Ally” at the AGM in an effort to shame the board – you know at that point to wave goodbye to rational thought and reasoned thinking. A quick glance at our financial accounts, or the state of our club overall would tell you that we don’t need to sing songs glorifying a manager who has failed comprehensively to shame this board, the state of our club and the way they have “governed” is an indictment in itself. The masochist in me delights at mentioning our on field problems, only because they serve to remind us we are a football club and not a soap saga, though it’s hard sometimes to differentiate in this day and age. But for a support already disillusioned with off field events the added component of a failing team only compounds the problem. It not only rips into but comprehensively invades the world of the supporter who cares not a jot for boardroom politics and falling attendances along with absent season ticket holders bear testimony to that. It is a dangerous concoction and one any normal board would do well to take cognisance of. Of course some of us have seen it all before. It took David Holmes and a considerable amount of cash as well as revolutionary thinking to remedy the situation. Whether there is such an “out of the box” thinker or the necessary cash today is open to debate. What is not open to debate is the debilitating effect of the omnishambles both on and off the park and sadly, I see little or no evidence to suggest that it is being addressed. So as you sow, so shall you reap. Rangers is not a business, nor merely a football club it is way of life for so many of us. It’s not just about success on the park, it’s about the way the club conducts and carries itself, it’s about the standards it sets and seeks to uphold. We don’t wax lyrical about the “Rangers Way” for nothing. I’ve mentioned Harry Reid previously, an Aberdeen supporter who contributed to the book Born Under a Union Flag. Harry contributes much of the eroding of our standards and identity to the Murray years. “A club’s identity, or, to be more highfalutin, its soul, is a particularly precious thing. Forfeit it and you lose everything. If a club becomes the plaything of over-ambitious folk who have no understanding of it, there is serious trouble ahead. If it becomes the plaything of people who have no knowledge of its traditions and its values, then the trouble can be noxious.” I’d respectfully suggest we are now at security state “noxious” to use Harry’s words. If I had a pound for every Rangers fan who has said to me our club bears little semblance to that which they grew up with well we wouldn’t need a lottery winner to have a Rangers man in charge. I even know of one dyed in the wool bear on Gersnet forums who even muted starting up all over again, such are the levels of disillusionment. I’m reminded though of a chapter from Mary Pyper’s book “Writing to save the World”. She speaks of people displaced from the corridors of power, disempowered from the decision making processes, watching forlornly as, in some cases, their country’s become a mere shadow of what they once were. But rather than surrender or acquiesce to the unacceptable standards being foisted upon them, she directs the reader to those who have struggled to keep the social and moral conscience of their nation alive and in doing so ensure that the flame to which so many aspire to is never extinguished. It is up to us, the Rangers support to do this. We have to carry that mantle, because quite simply there is no-one else fit for purpose at this moment in time. The standards and values we cherish so dearly should be applied to one and all consistently, without fear, without favour and without malice, these are the standards we were raised with and safeguarding them together, I dare anyone to try and take them away. The greatest threat to that flame being extinguished is not from the SFA, the media, or any number of Rangers haters, the clear and present danger comes from ourselves and our inability to apply those standards we value so much, towards one another. “There is more power in unity than division” (Emanuel Cleaver)
  15. So the rumours say, more Palace than Rangers.
  16. ...if they want to get their club back Former Rangers chairman Malcolm Murray has told supporters to make some "noise" if they want to get their club back. The former pension fund manager was speaking after Monday's stormy Ibrox AGM. The 90-minute meeting saw PLC chairman David Somers, chief executive Derek Llambias, director James Easdale and his brother Sandy - chairman of the club's football board - face a barrage of abuse from shareholders. Chants of "out, out, out", "sack the board" and "scumbags" were hurled at the directors as they made their way out onto a flimsy tent erected on the Ibrox pitch. There was little detail given to the irate fans on how the board plan to bridge the £8.3million funding gap which currently separates the Glasgow giants from safety, other than to say a fresh share issue was to be expected, while Somers was the focus of much of the ire after comments which sparked even more anger. Despite the flak, the chairman, Llambias and James Easdale were all re-elected to the PLC board with the help of Mike Ashley and other institutional investors. But Murray claims the fans must act if they want to force real change. Speaking outside the AGM, Murray - who was the club's first chairman after it was reformed following its 2012 liquidation crisis, only to quit a year later after falling out with Charles Green - said: "That was the most arrogant display I have ever seen in third of a century of attending AGMs. "There was complete disregard for shareholders and fans. They say they will operate without fans. We actually ended up knowing less than when we started, which takes a bit of doing. "What can the fans and shareholders do? They have to make more noise. I am not saying they should boycott but they have to make a lot more noise. I think eventually the board will get worried that that the fans are not turning up and not buying kit. The mood in there, well, I have never known anything like it. "Will fans turn their backs on the club? In the short term, yes. But my message to the fans is to stick with it. We will be here a lot longer than them." http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/rangers/u/murray-rangers-fans-need-to-make-some-noise-if-they-want-to-get-their-club-back.1419322367
  17. http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/rangers/rangerscomment/mccoist-set-to-face-the-music-but-rangers-fans-will-have-little-to-192156n.114751404? McCoist set to face the music but Rangers fans will have little to sing about AND now the end is near ... Christopher Jack Sports Journalist Wednesday 17/12/2014 and so he faces the final curtain.. Ally McCoist likened his appointment as Rangers manager to taking over the mic from Frank Sinatra. Today, he will face the music. McCoist has taken the blows and did it his way at Ibrox, but his time in the spotlight is coming to an end, and he will soon exit the stage. Whether it comes in the aftermath of his meeting with Derek Llambias and Sandy Easdale today, at the end of the season or in 12 months' time, the day when McCoist is no longer Rangers manger is approaching. Like all matters at Ibrox in recent years, money is at the heart of the matter and the crux of the discussions. McCoist is due several hundred thousand pounds if the board wish to dispense with his services before the end of his notice period, but with an £8million black hole in their finances, they seemingly have no way to pay the 52-year-old off. He will leave with a cheque, but there is unlikely to be a thank you for his efforts. Whatever figure is settled on, McCoist will be due every penny for what he has done for Rangers, the fights he has had to fight, the controversies and characters he has had to deal with and overcome. However a deal is struck, whether it is in cash now or later or even shares, it will be a fraction of the multi-million burn that has seen Rangers blow their chance of financial stability and a platform, on and off the field, to go on and establish themselves at the top of Scottish football once again. It is only a matter of time before the most remarkable managerial reign in Rangers' illustrious history comes to an end - but it will solve few problems. McCoist's abilities as a coach and tactician have been called into question for some time. The argument for not having him as manager can be fairly easily made and stacked up and many fans will be pleased there will be new methods on the training pitch at Murray Park and instructions from the Ibrox dugout. Against a different backdrop, he probably wouldn't have lasted as long. But McCoist's ethos and approach to the game, the failings of his side and embarrassing results, are not Rangers' biggest problems. Defeats to Hearts, Alloa and Queen of the South have piled the pressure on his shoulders but football, even with the Premiership in sight, is of secondary importance once more. The heart and soul of Rangers is up for grabs. The proud, distinguished club, Scotland's most successful, is a shadow of its former self and another cornerstone is about to be removed when McCoist departs. There is a different feel around Rangers these days as supporters, battle-scarred and weary, turn their back on the club in their thousands. Familiar faces have gone, standards have fallen and bonds have been broken. Where past generations could put their faith in Bill Struth, Willie Waddell or Walter Smith, the fans of today have a far different proposition. Some of those who have made their way up the marble staircase in recent years and do so today are not of the same calibre. They don't appear to hold the same values or share the love of, and commitment to, the club. Fans may not want McCoist the football man, but they need McCoist the Ranger. His rallying cry of 'we don't do walking away' during the dark days of February 2012, became the motto of Rangers' fight for survival and his most famous soundbite. McCoist may leave the club, but it won't signal the end of his service as he goes back to simply being a fan, and surely a concerned one at that. His departure will be welcomed by those whose only focus is football, but some fans will once again miss the big picture. Having fought so hard to save the club, his club, during its fight for survival, and been instrumental in the battle to retain their titles, McCoist has seen the face of Rangers change significantly in the last couple of years. Colleagues have been punted out the back door in a bid to save thousands of pounds while millions are haemorrhaged through bad business decisions and 'onerous' contracts. Friends have lost their jobs just weeks before Christmas, and left the club without the golden handshakes awarded to so many who have given nowhere near the same level of service. It should serve as a warning of what has been and what is coming that McCoist feels he is now better off out of Ibrox. There may be better people available to manage the team, but there is nobody better than him to manage the club. McCoist will become the third Light Blue legend to say enough is enough at Rangers. John Greig continues to stay away from the club, as does Smith, and McCoist has now decided he doesn't like what he sees behind the famous red brick facade. Smith removed himself from a 'highly dysfunctional environment' when he stepped down as chairman in August 2013, yet there has been little progress made since then to resolve the myriad of issues facing the club. The faces in the boardroom may have changed but the problems remain, the questions stay unanswered and the fears are very much justified. McCoist's decision to step down should set alarm bells ringing once again. The savage cuts, the headlines, the in-fighting and politics have taken their toll. In truth, he is probably better off out of the place. But Rangers will not be in a better place with him out of there. With McCoist gone, who do the fans turn to and put their faith in? Who can they be sure is acting in the best interests of Rangers? Would they trust Easdale, chairman of the football board, to hand-pick the right man to lead the club back to the Premiership and oversee that journey? Or would they rather Mike Ashley, the man who has bulldozed his way to control and has the club's merchandise channels tied down in his favour, continue to call the shots from afar? Whoever has the final say, the outcome for McCoist will be the same and the future for Rangers will be uncertain. There will surely be few fans who will be glad to see the back of McCoist, the man they remember as a nine-in-a-row hero, their record goalscorer, Super Ally. He has been let down by a series of chairmen and chief executives, seen promises made and broken. He has been let down by too many of his players, with performances abject and faith not repaid on the pitch. He deserves better than the hat-trick being completed with the fans letting him down and deserting him at the end, too.
  18. I was “invited” to attend a meeting at Ibrox today with Rangers’ Director of Communications, Irene Munro and Jim Hannah, Supporters’ Liaison Officer. I had to ask three times by email about the nature of the meeting and eventually was told only that it was “to discuss complaints raised against you by other fans board members”. I asked to be supplied with the details of the complaints before the meeting but this was denied. At the meeting I was told that as a result of two complaints by colleagues on the Fans Board and one complaint from a member of the public, I was being removed from the Fans Board. The complaint from the member of the public was in connection with or as a result of information that I posted about the Rangers Fans Fighting Fund. I was not told the nature of the complaints by members of the Fans Board. These are the relevant sections of the Constitution: 17.Conduct of members of the RFB 17.1 The Elected Representatives shall, in exercising his/her functions as a member of RFB, act in the interests of the Club and RFB; and, in particular, must (a) seek, in good faith, to ensure that RFB acts in a manner which is in accordance with its objects (as set out in clause 3 this constitution); (b) act with the care and diligence which it is reasonable to expect of a person who is managing the affairs of another person; and © in circumstances giving rise to the possibility of a conflict of interest between RFB or the Club and any other party (i) put the interests of the RFB and the Club before that of the other party, in taking decisions as a member of the RFB; or (ii) where any other duty prevents him/her from doing so, disclose the conflicting interest to the RFB and the Club and refrain from participating in any discussions or decisions involving the other Elected Representatives with regard to the matter in question. (d) If, in the opinion of the Club, any Elected Representative is in breach of paragraphs (a), (b) and © above, or in the opinion of the Club, brings the Club into disrepute, the Club shall have the power to terminate that individuals Membership and remove them as an Elected Representative with immediate effect and without notice. There is no right of Appeal. The Fans Board had agreed an interim Code of Conduct which includes up to three warnings but this was not applied because it provides for complaints to be referred to the Office Bearers and there are no Office Bearers in place at this time. I was told that in the opinion of the Club I have not been acting in the interests of the Fans Board and that my position was not tenable, so I was being removed. I was given the opportunity to resign, which I declined. I was then told that Rangers would issue a statement saying that I had “left the Fans Board” but I asked that if they were removing me they issue a statement accordingly.
  19. I'm watching this again (for a fourth time) and I am still learning from it. A brilliant piece of work. anyone else watched this?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.