Our titles- Scaremongering

[Big Jaws 570]

Here is the somewhat confused opinion of everybody's favourite creepy masturbator.

 

 

I want to see SFA reopen the case on what took place at Rangers

Graham Spiers

July 8 2017, 12:01am,

The Times

 

.

..

 

He's right about one thing though there is, and has been for forever, a visceral anger in Scotland against Rangers and Rangers supporters which incidentally he also demonstrates in his own irrational gibberish. From reading that my feeling is he was setting out to write yet another hatchet piece but had to rewrite it. In light of the Statements by RFC and RFC fan groups its dawned on him that if what they wish for is realised then the game in Scotland would be torn apart because from those two statements its patently obvious we're not going to be kowtowed by this shower of shite.

Edited July 8, 2017 by Big Jaws

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Here is the somewhat confused opinion of everybody's favourite creepy masturbator.

 

 

I want to see SFA reopen the case on what took place at Rangers

Graham Spiers

July 8 2017, 12:01am,

The Times

 

What are the Scottish Football Association to do about Rangers? Where can the leading governing body of Scottish football now hide when there is such a widespread public outcry to right a wrong? The past week has not just been shameful for Rangers FC, it is now sorely testing the mettle of those who are trusted with ensuring fairness, truth and integrity prevail in our game.

 

Last Wednesday morning Rangers finally lost their long-running dispute with HMRC over their years of tax avoidance. The legal dispute was complex but, in a nutshell, the claim of HMRC remained quite simple: it believed that in the years between 2001 and 2010 Rangers owed it tens of millions in unpaid taxes. With five Supreme Court judges unanimously backing the previous judgment of three law lords in the Court of Session, we now appear to have an emphatic view that the pre-2012 Rangers FC’s use of employee benefit trusts (EBTs) was quite the tax dodge.

 

Some call it “aggressive tax avoidance”. Others call it “a tax wheeze”. Others have called it “blatant evasion”. HMRC, who have made a point from the start of not asserting any of these pursuits as criminal cases, have nonetheless proved that millions of pounds should have been paid by Rangers, but were not. We do have tax laws in this country, and they are there to be enforced, which is HMRC’s primary aim.

 

It won’t do here to rake back over all the trophies — 14 in total — that Rangers won during the EBT years. But it must have given the Ibrox club a considerable advantage to have all this extra money to spend, and invest in playing assets, when in fact the cash should have been the keep of Her Majesty’s collectors.

 

With the Rangers versus HMRC now concluded, it all looks grossly unfair on every other club that Rangers faced during those years. Add to this the guilty verdict handed down to Ibrox by the Lord Nimmo Smith inquiry in 2012 into undeclared side-letters involving Rangers and the SFA, and it is little wonder that the emotive word “cheating” is being used of Rangers during this time. Such conduct going on at Ibrox had dodginess and tawdriness and a lack of honesty written all over it.

Last Thursday, with the white heat of the Rangers case fanning out all across Scottish football, the SFA was forced to stick its head out of its bunker. The ruling body issued a stony-faced response to the Supreme Court ruling, which basically said that its own legal advice was such that the Rangers case was closed for them. There was nothing more, the SFA averred, to say or do on the matter.

 

This was a wrong response but it was no great surprise. This vexed Rangers case has been the scourge of the SFA, to the point of terrifying it. From the very top, where once Campbell Ogilvie was an SFA president, having also been a Rangers FC board member and an EBT recipient, the saga has proved excruciating for the governing body. And now it doesn’t have the stomach for the legal fight, as it would surely become, if any title-stripping of Rangers relating to those years was pursued.

 

Yet doing nothing does not seem to be an option for the SFA. There is a visceral anger towards Rangers across the Scottish game which, as things stand, is not going to be quenched. Saying “we intend to do nowt” only aggravates that sense of injustice. Until this week, it was perfectly feasible for the SFA and the SPFL to stall and obfuscate, because the EBTs saga had not been concluded. But it has now — and emphatically — and Scottish football fans are angry.

 

It could be that there is not a case, as deplorably as Rangers FC behaved, for title-stripping. I’m not fully convinced of the arguments for it myself. But the SFA should, at the very minimum, reopen the case and explore fresh legal advice. A review will cost money but, for the sake of justice and integrity, that money needs to be spent.

 

It cannot be beyond the wherewithal of the SFA to appoint a number of legal minds and substantial football figures to reconsider all the facts. And, that done, if there is deemed no need for title-stripping, then let that be the association’s final say on the matter.

 

Sir David Murray, a wounded man this week, has stated that using EBTs allowed Rangers to have players the club might otherwise not have been able to afford. Alex McLeish, the former Rangers manager, said something very similar when interviewed. Dave King, the current Rangers chairman, in a spurt of graciousness, even appeared to apologise for the EBTs racket going on at Ibrox.

 

Rangers themselves obviously have regret, bordering on remorse, for what went on. It was deeply wrong and gave Rangers an advantage.

 

The SFA needs to look again at the matter. It is no good saying “the case is closed”. Adopting such a stance makes the governing body look timid and weak and lacking in credibility.

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/scotland/i-want-to-see-sfa-reopen-the-case-on-what-took-place-at-rangers-8c2qfs62h

 

I fail to see dishonesty when the trusts were declared in the accounts. 'Dodginess@ and 'tawdriness' are matters merely of opinion: do I suppose that Spiers would condemn each and every mechanism and instance of tax reduction similarly? Do I cocoa. An unmistakable miasma of stale hypocrisy emanates from him, as usual.

 

The Creep is 'unconvinced' of the argument pro title stripping, yet wants the SFA to spend time and resources on re-exploring this issue. Clearly he feels that titles should be expunged from the records, can't think of a proper argument, he is certainly not clever enough, and hopes that a brainy big boy will (be appointed and told to) come up with a rationale.

 

The SFA issued a statement under legal advisement,the import of which which seems to have escaped his notice. Of course that advice was not what Spiers wanted to hear, so he chooses to ignore it. I imagine that Spiers' solution would be constant re examination, until somebody, from somewhere, comes to a conclusion with which he would 'feel comfortable'.

The amount paid by rangers wouldnt have differed. Only who got it.

 

 

[RANGERRAB 3,337]

Can Spiers and his fellow pondlife explain how the use of EBT's was cheating if they were considered legal by Lord Hodge?

 

I think this formed the basis of the SFA statement released later in the day on Tuesday.

[pete 2,499]

EBT's were legal at the time the SC judges have judged on that. HMRC will get the largest share of the pot from oldco thus Tax paid. What is there left to discuss? End of lets move on!.

[Uilleam 5,521]

They will never let up.

 

If you want a vision of the future, imagine a dog returning to its own vomit, on Groundhog Day.

[SteveC 150]

They will never let up.

 

If you want a vision of the future, imagine a dog returning to its own vomit, on Groundhog Day.

 

Agreed. This is never going to go away. They'll either succeed or continue to fight to succeed in it for evermore. Expect league tables to appear altered in their match programmes and other such nonsense.

 

We're possibly approaching the closure of the professional game in this country, the way this is going.

Edited July 8, 2017 by SteveC

[Bearman 9]

It could be that there is not a case, for title-stripping. I’m not fully convinced of the arguments for it myself. But the SFA should, at the very minimum, reopen the case and explore fresh legal advice. A review will cost money but, for the sake of justice and integrity, that money needs to be spent.

 

He's not convinced of the case for title stripping, yet wants the SFA to throw money at it to see if there is?

 

What f**kin planet is this bellend on?

[Gribz 743]

Graham Tut Spiers seems to be attempting a comeback and using anti Rangers propaganda to make him popular.

[MacK1950 2,253]

We see this from Spiers,Jackson,McLaughlin et all is their any newspaper/television media outlet that doesn't want to have a go at us??????????????????????GRUY

[der Berliner 3,318]

Ain't there a controling body for papers and/or journalists per se in Britain, Ofcom or the like? While it might be possible to voice an opinion or present something from a certain point of view, constantly implying that something which didn't happen actually "did happen" - i.e. winning titles by "illegal means" - is sure violating a certain code of conduct to which all non-free lancers etc. should adhere too? Should journalist not deal with facts instead of presenting opinions as facts without marking it out as such?