ian1964 10,514 Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 RANGERS' defence that payments made to players via Employee Benefit Trusts were "discretionary" rather than "contractual" could be thrown out by a Scottish Premier League investigation, leaving the club open to wide-ranging punishments. The SPL announced 17 days ago that it was investigating allegations that Rangers made payments as far back as 1998 without disclosing them to the SPL or the SFA. That would be in direct contravention of both governing bodies' rules but Hugh Adam, a former Ibrox director, has repeatedly insisted that the practice was commonplace until he left the board in 2002. The owner at the time, Sir David Murray, has denied any wrongdoing. But Herald Sport understands that Murray's defence that the payments into EBTs were discretionary may not spare Rangers from a guilty verdict and punishment after the inquiry. The investigation is still in its early stages and is being handled by the SPL's solicitors, Harper Macleod, rather than the SPL executive. So far requests have been to Rangers' administrators, Duff & Phelps, for documents going back to 1998. Paperwork has been exchanged and the administrators have complied with all of the requests. SPL rules D9.3 and D.1.13 impose a prohibition on players "receiving payments for playing football or participating in an activity connected with football except where such payments are made in accordance with a form of contract approved by the SPL and require that all such contracts are submitted to the SPL within 14 days of being entered into". The essence of Murray and Rangers' defence is that the payments need not be covered by a routine football contract. But that is open to question and the investigation could take the view that it would be absurd to claim a player received payments, even discretionary ones, into an EBT for any reason other than "participating in an activity connected with football". The recent inquiry chaired by Lord William Nimmo Smith for the SFA completed its work in only 21 days but that covered only the nine months of Craig Whyte's ownership. The SPL inquiry covers several years' worth of alleged payments dating back 14 years, and the Harper Macleod team will be given far more time to assemble its evidence. Only when all the necessary documentation has been sourced will any attempt be made to interview the likes of Murray, Adam and other Rangers directors and players from the period covered. When Harper Macleod's findings are complete, the solicitors, along with SPL chief executive Neil Doncaster and secretary Iain Blair, will compile a report for the SPL board. The board consists of Eric Riley (Celtic), Stephen Thompson (Dundee United), Derek Weir (Motherwell), Steven Brown (St Johnstone), SPL chairman Ralph Topping and Doncaster himself. A decision will then be taken on whether the information provides prima facie evidence of any breach of SPL rules. If so, and given the seriousness of the allegations and their repercussions, the case almost certainly would be passed on to a specially-created three-man Independent Commission, probably chaired by a Law Lord. It would be the Independent Commission, rather than the SPL which would make a final ruling and also apply any possible sanctions to Rangers. Because the allegations are unprecedented for the SPL, the governing body may take legal advice before applying any punishment if Rangers are found guilty. Any potential punishments for a guilty verdict could be lessened if Rangers successfully argue that their breach of the rules was inadvertent, not willful, or was based on poor advice. The SFA has left the SPL to do carry out the investigation because it (the SFA) would be the appellant body if Rangers submit an appeal. But once the SPL investigation, and any appeal, is over the SFA could also lay its own separate charges at Rangers' door for breaking its rules by not disclosing payments. The whole process is expected to last for several weeks. Last night secretary Blair said the SPL was prepared to be patient while Harper Macleod worked with Rangers' administrators. "It is important that the investigations are being carried out by the SPL's solicitors and not directly by the SPL executive so there is a degree of independence and separation there," he said. "At the moment it would be inappropriate to make any pre-judgements on a) what the investigation might uncover or b) what decisions might then be taken about the next step in the process. "What we have asked Harpers to look at for us going back over a period back to 1998. There may well be a significant amount of trawling back through old records to be done. We also have to recognise that while the administrators are absolutely working to co-operate with us they have a number of other priorities, court appearances and all the rest of it. So I think that while we want to reach a conclusion as quickly as we possibly can, it's more important that it's done thoroughly and properly rather than to any particular deadline we may apply. A deadline would become importantly only if there was any suggestion of a lack of co-operation, and there is absolutely no suggestion of that." http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/doubts-surround-rangers-ebt-defence.17102845 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dutchy Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 What are all these lawyers and law lords costing the game in Scotland in general? As Hugh Adams suggests himself, dodgy payments were rife in football for years. It's certainly not the first time I've heard of the infamous 'bung' culture. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,363 Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 I'm sorry, but I cannot see an independent board including people from some, but not all SPL clubs, especially, if they only act against one club and on such an important issue, an issue that may soon find their own clubs under suspicion too. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluebear54 0 Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 I can't help thinking that we are witnessing a perfect storm scenario. I don't think this is generated by CFC. I think this is the rest of the SPL manoeuvring so that they can get their vote to change the SPL voting structure. Quite dangerous. Almost certain we will get some serious sanctions down the line. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,363 Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 ... you mean we are being targetted while the SPL kindly overlooks that Kilmarnock and Hearts are running at serious debts (for their size) without anything being said about it, The Pars having to cut players' wages because an outstanding payment from Rangers to the tune of 85k? The SPL teams are in a dire shyte state and the more they push it, the nearer their own end cometh. A blind man on a galloping horse would see that, but ... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,363 Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 When Harper Macleod's findings are complete, the solicitors, along with SPL chief executive Neil Doncaster and secretary Iain Blair, will compile a report for the SPL board. The board consists of Eric Riley (Celtic), Stephen Thompson (Dundee United), Derek Weir (Motherwell), Steven Brown (St Johnstone), SPL chairman Ralph Topping and Doncaster himself. A decision will then be taken on whether the information provides prima facie evidence of any breach of SPL rules. Now hold your breakfast ... HMcL Scottish law firm Harper Macleod has reported an upbeat set of results in a year chairman Lorne Crerar descrbies as "the most difficult in our history". The firm achieved growth in turnover of 2.5%. Harper Macleod said it has avoided making any redundancies or reduction in working hours in the the face of the recession - one of the few law frims in the top 20 to have achieved this - keeping all 241 employees. Chief Executive Martin Darroch said: "We're viewing the past year as an enormous success. Any legal firm achieving growth in the current climate is doing well and we are delighted to have come out the other side with our talent pool intact and a genuine increase in market share." In the past year Harper Macleod has won business from new clients such as Glasgow City Council, Bradford & Bingley and the Forestry Commission, adding to an existing portfolio which includes Celtic football club, William Hill, Scottish Coal and Optical Express. ... or ... "Our clients include Celtic FC and the European Rugby Cup. We advise several senior football and rugby clubs, as well as a number of Scotland's leading professional sportspeople." "We have recently acted in a number of disciplinary and regulatory cases attracting major publicity. We represented the British Lion and Scotland's most capped rugby player Scott Murray following his red card in the Six Nations championships in 2006, Celtic FC's former manager Martin O'Neill before UEFA's control and disciplinary body and represented the British skier Alain Baxter in his appeal against being stripped of his bronze slalom medal at the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City" "What Our Clients Say: "Lorne Crerar has shown the vision and management excellence to create a very dynamic and strong growth firm. Rod McKenzie clearly has had a role to play in this development and in addition, he is still "on the tools" and provides great support to our Club. They also have a very impressive Chief Executive in Martin Darroch. The working environment, partnership and employee relationship appears to be first class and clearly the excellent pattern in staff retention reflects this." Peter Lawwell, Chief Executive, Celtic F.C. Limited www.celticfc.net" Impartiality personified, it seems. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,363 Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 An FFer suggested this ... If we are punishd in this regard, we should sue the SFA just before the first qualifying roung for the UCL forcing UEFA to bar all Scottsh teams from that season's competition. ... if that is possible, well ... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
capstans 0 Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 What happens when the FTTT returns a no case to answer ruling ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,200 Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 What happens when the FTTT returns a no case to answer ruling ? Surely you mean 'if' they return that verdict? Even if they do, the kangeroo court will find another stick to beat us with. We've already been found guilty. It's just the crime required to fit the verdict now - anything will do. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
capstans 0 Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 I think I mean when, also if they find another stick it had better be a lawful one otherwise we are entitled to swing the baseball bat. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.