der Berliner 3,240 Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 UEFA will know ... anyway, AFAIK, the first appeal body if the SPL comes up with funny stuff is by default the SFA. Hence they refrain from any comment so far. If they uphold any SPL decision, the next step would caught both. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Moon 1,113 Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 It would be extremely harsh to strip us of titles on a technicality ie the side letters, especially since the EBTs were declared to the SPL every year. As for the latest catchword that is getting right up my nose, "financial doping", the payment of big money signings by Celtic directors is exactly the same. The players are paid what they are paid. Our players were paid by the club, end of story. The EBts are not illegal, apparently the way we administered them was. It has been said repeatedly that this was done after consultation with experts and that the club did not knowingly administer them wrongly. In other words a technicality. As for the explanation of Celtic's EBT being after The player left. Don't insult my intelligence by expecting me to believe that it was not by prior agreement ie a side letter. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,255 Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 It would be extremely harsh to strip us of titles on a technicality ie the side letters, especially since the EBTs were declared to the SPL every year. As for the latest catchword that is getting right up my nose, "financial doping", the payment of big money signings by Celtic directors is exactly the same. The players are paid what they are paid. Our players were paid by the club, end of story. The EBts are not illegal, apparently the way we administered them was. It has been said repeatedly that this was done after consultation with experts and that the club did not knowingly administer them wrongly. In other words a technicality. As for the explanation of Celtic's EBT being after The player left. Don't insult my intelligence by expecting me to believe that it was not by prior agreement ie a side letter. I don't think these EBT's were declared to SPL. That's the so-called problem although I'd be interested to know exactly which SPL rule has been broken (if you've read them like I have). Having said that these EBT's were declared in section6 of our accounts every year and the SFA gave us a licence to play every year so in that respect you have to ask serious questions who's behind all this and why (we probably do know but 'they' won't come out & say so) 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 I think one thing that Celtic have in their favour is that they only had one EBT therefore when the accounts are disclosed his second payment is transparent. Whereas ours were a total of all the payments and so individual payments were not disclosed. They have probably found a couple of incidental technicalities that allow them to get off while we can be hammered. That's why they are going ahead with it. I'd bet it would have been dropped otherwise. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,410 Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 Rangers owner Charles Green has to stop wailing over EBT case and allow lawyers to do their work THE issue of EBTs will loom large on the horizon between now and the commission announcing it’s findings on Rangers conduct in mid-November. CELTIC will bring a sanitised air to our toxic atmosphere when they begin their Champions League adventure on Wednesday night. A straightforward game of football in the biggest club competition of them all. A contest between a Scottish side and foreign opposition that offers a reasonable chance of Celtic getting off to a winning start. A manager revered by his public and whose image could take on a whole new lustre if Neil Lennon can plunder the Portuguese. The Celtic fans will hope to get their money’s worth. The vast majority of the Rangers supporters will watch the game with gritted teeth and clenched fists hoping that their rivals fail to progress before they start to think of making even more money than they’ve already banked. This is perfectly understandable, bog-standard partisanship of long- standing existence. No offence intended and none taken. When Rangers return from their extended tour of Scotland’s rural communities and rejoin the world of European competition the Celtic fans will wish them no success whatsoever. What we don’t need in the meantime is Charles Green and his liking for inflammatory language about “bigotry” and thinly-veiled insinuations about certain SPL clubs. Whoever is bringing Rangers’ owner up to speed concerning the ways of the world in the hopelessly divided West of Scotland is doing an absolutely magnificent job. He arrived here as the archetypal “Where there’s muck, there’s brass” Yorkshireman and now comes across as someone who first went to Ibrox on the Govan ferry with a black pudding supper in his hand. But now is not the time for anyone to pander to the baser instincts of a certain element of the Rangers support. Now is the time for cool heads and temperate language. When Charles mentioned a few weeks ago that “bigotry” was at the core of the move to place Rangers in the Third Division he was cut some slack because, as an Englishman, he didn’t use that word in the context in which it’s used in everyday life in Scotland. But we have enough loose cannons to be going on with in this part of the world. There are definitely no vacancies for any more, particularly when they hold positions of authority within the game and can inflame public opinion. The issue of EBTs will loom large on the horizon between now and the commission announcing it’s findings on Gers’ conduct in mid-November. Opinion will be polarised depending on which team you support. It will also be the first time Lord Nimmo-Smith and his legal bretheren will have been accused of being biased in favour of one football team over another rather than owing their unswerving allegiance to the legal system. The SPL stand accused of double standards by a Rangers support incensed to find Celtic have no case to answer over their use of an EBT to sign Juninho. One man’s golden handshake is another man’s illegal payment to their way of thinking. And so it will go on until his lordship delivers a ruling on the alleged use of dual contracts. Green has thrown in his views on “breathtaking hypocrisy” and a “fundamentally misconceived” SPL process. If that’s what he believes then he’s fully entitled to express his opinions in public. But spare us the sloganeering and the sly digs that there’s more than one club at it over the use of EBTs. Have the courage of your own convictions and name names. Better still, say nowt and leave it to our learned friends. Has anyone taken into account the fact that the SPL commission could determine innocence as well as guilt? Now is not the time to start a row over something that hasn’t even happened yet. by Shug Keevins 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Amokachi 0 Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 'CELTIC will bring a sanitised air' 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewarty 1,876 Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 'CELTIC will bring a sanitised air' I smell shite! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 'CELTIC will bring a sanitised air' Read the first few lines. Absolute epitome of Rangers bad Celtic good journalism. I don't even see how the two topics end up in one article? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stimpy 0 Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 Second last paragraph is bollocks. Other than Rangers fans, the rest have assumed guilt. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,240 Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 It will also be the first time Lord Nimmo-Smith and his legal bretheren will have been accused of being biased in favour of one football team over another rather than owing their unswerving allegiance to the legal system. Yes, we saw his competence and allegiance when handing out the transfer embargo ... When Rangers return from their extended tour of Scotland’s rural communities ... Does he actually get that Rangers will do more good to Scottish Football than anything else that happened these last 40odd years? 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.