SteveC 150 Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 I don't agree. All of the instances highlighted in the article are Celtic personnel on a personal basis. None of the film investment schemes were administered by Celtic, unless my memory fails me. Two very different situations. Not overtly but surely they were in conversation 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveC 150 Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 Celtic have released a statement that puts pressure on the authorities to review their position on titles, etc. Scottish football is about to eat itself. Again. That would be the Celtic run by Liewell who was promoted (against the rules) to run Scottish football? So he's telling himself to 'review Rangers' titles"? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,245 Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 (edited) Statement from Bheast FC: WE note today’s decision by the Supreme Court. Celtic's position on this issue has been consistent - that this has always been a matter for the courts of law and also the Scottish football authorities, whose rules are intended to uphold sporting integrity. In 2013, we expressed surprise - shared by many observers and supporters of the game - over the findings of the SPL Commission that no competitive or sporting advantage had resulted. Today’s decision only re-affirms that view. We are sure now that the footballing authorities in Scotland will wish to review this matter. Celtic awaits the outcome of their review. EDIT: The current SPFL board consists of ... Neil Doncaster Ralph Topping Karyn McCluskey Peter Lawwell Ann Budge Ian Maxwell Leeanne Dempster Eric Drysdale Ken Ferguson ... so we impartiality all over the place. Edited July 5, 2017 by der Berliner 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuGers 477 Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 Statement from Bheast FC: This could have violent consequences unfortunately. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,245 Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 Every single paper article you read that has a comment section is littered with Yahoos throwing the cheated argument about and want titles stripped. Wonder of wonders ... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,245 Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 (edited) In any case, I find it quite bizarre that CEOs of participating football clubs can be on the board of the League (SPFL) or working at the SFA. Conflict of interest all along the way. You would hope King and Co. have their legal teams set and ready should either of the governing bodies blink. Edited July 5, 2017 by der Berliner 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,258 Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 The LNS enquiry was to determine whether there had been sporting advantage or not gained by using EBT's. It ruled not. Today was whether tax was due on EBT's. They are separate issues. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,195 Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 Well, not officially. You wouldn't expect anything different from the sleekit ones. As long as they weren't officially involved they can completely wash their hands of it. It matters not that we believe they were involved in "advising" staff but the reality is that any individual involved in those investment schemes did so from a post-payroll tax perspective, meaning CFC carried out their obligation to deduct payroll tax at source - what the individuals then did to avoid tax was irrelevant to CFC. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,245 Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 The LNS enquiry was to determine whether there had been sporting advantage or not gained by using EBT's. It ruled not.Today was whether tax was due on EBT's. They are separate issues. Every single Rangers fan and anyone from the club will say the same. The ultimate question is: will the SFA and SPFL whip up a new commission and whether they actually have any ruling to strip anything (methinks no) - thus far. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveC 150 Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 This could have violent consequences unfortunately. It is having them already in my insides 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.