Rangers deny doncaster’s version

[ian1964 10,447]

SPFL chief faces grilling over Rangers EBT letter to SFA as his own board demand clarification.

 

Neil Doncaster will be asked to explain the letter that called for a review into the use of EBTs at Rangers when the SPFL board had made it clear any such review must not focus on the Ibrox club.

 

by Gary Ralston

 

Neil Doncaster faces a grilling from the SPFL board over claims he misrepresented their position to the SFA.

 

The SPFL chief executive is under pressure to explain the headline on a letter to SFA counterpart Stewart Regan that called for a review into the use of Employee Benefit Trusts (EBTs) at Rangers.

 

SPFL officials called for no such inquiry and now they’re set to demand clarification from Doncaster at their next board meeting on Thursday.

 

To add to Doncaster’s embarrassment, Hampden sources confirmed Rangers have written to express their anger and dismay at the way the issue has been handled.

 

Pressure is mounting on Doncaster after his letter, received by the SFA on August 18 and referenced in correspondence between Regan and Celtic chief Peter Lawwell.

 

The SPFL board includes Ann Budge of Hearts, Les Gray of Hamilton, Martin Ritchie of Falkirk, Morton’s Warren Hawke and Iain Dougan of Stranraer.

 

Doncaster, new SPFL chairman Murdoch MacLennan and independent non-exec director Karyn McCluskey are also on it.

 

The SPFL board met to discuss the aftermath of the Supreme Court verdict in July that ruled EBTs were taxable income, bringing an end to a long-running dispute between Rangers and HMRC.

 

Ibrox managing director Stewart Robertson is also a member of the SPFL board but was not allowed to take part in discussions and played no part in the decision taken by his colleagues.

 

In the end they agreed a review of processes aimed at avoiding future financial traumas among Scottish clubs as well as how such events would be handled in future would be beneficial.

 

Significantly, however, the SPFL board made it clear any such review must not focus on Rangers and its use of EBTs that ultimately led to its financial collapse in 2012.

 

Despite that, Doncaster’s letter to the SFA was headlined, “Independent review of use of tax avoidance schemes at Rangers FC and actions of Scottish football authorities”.

 

Surprisingly given the headline, it’s understood the narrative of the letter followed the terms of reference handed down in the original brief by SPFL board members.

 

Three days after receiving the letter, Lawwell also wrote to the SFA expressing his disappointment at the decision of their board to draw a line under the issue by refusing calls for further inquiries into the Ibrox financial collapse.

 

He wrote: “I am disappointed to note the position of the Scottish FA board in relation to our request for a review and indeed the request by the SPFL, on behalf of the 42 clubs in Scotland, for a review.”

 

The SPFL refused to comment last night.

[Frankie 8,182]

Good - Doncaster is useless (as is Regan) and it would be great if we could remove both and replace them with people we can help headhunt as opposed to the usual Coors conveyor belt.

[Uilleam 5,492]

Even Coors Light would be, well, unpalatable.

[compo 6,215]

I wouldn't trust Doncaster as far as I could throw him .

[RANGERRAB 3,299]

Doncaster should be toast. SR needs to show leadership him & force him out

[der Berliner 3,283]

Doncaster should be toast. SR needs to show leadership him & force him out

 

I would assume that SR has no say in that matter at all. In any case, it is utterly astonishing that both Regan and Doncaster (and cohorts) are still in office after all the shambles since 2011 and how the Scottish game went downhill on nigh all frontiers afterwards. The big problem is that they essentially would have to sack themselves for that to happen ...

[aweebluesoandso 290]

Doncaster impartiality is clearly compromised, he was working for one club, Celtic when that letter was drafted. The questions now must be was he supervised by Lawwell to write it, or did Lawwell simply hand him the letter for the attention of the SFA?

Edited September 15, 2017 by aweebluesoandso

[Uilleam 5,492]

Doncaster is merely the hired help, and, I imagine, has little independence on business matters beyond the mundane. He should advise, and take instructions from the Board.

In this' latest, instance it is clear that this process has been subverted under the guidance of Piggery Peadar.

 

Both of them should tender their resignations, which should be accepted by the Board, posthaste.

 

If neither does the honourable thing (and let's not hold our breaths), the Board should put forward a motion of no confidence in Peadar, and a motion to dismiss Doncaster, at, in the circumstances, an appropriately Emergency Board Meeting.

[craig 5,199]

I would assume that SR has no say in that matter at all. In any case, it is utterly astonishing that both Regan and Doncaster (and cohorts) are still in office after all the shambles since 2011 and how the Scottish game went downhill on nigh all frontiers afterwards. The big problem is that they essentially would have to sack themselves for that to happen ...

 

Actually he would. The fact that they would be requesting Doncaster's resignation over his handling of this is, technically, not a conflict of interest for Robertson - the question is simply whether or not Doncaster ignored his orders from his superiors.

[craig 5,199]

Doncaster is merely the hired help, and, I imagine, has little independence on business matters beyond the mundane. He should advise, and take instructions from the Board.

In this' latest, instance it is clear that this process has been subverted under the guidance of Piggery Peadar.

 

Both of them should tender their resignations, which should be accepted by the Board, posthaste.

 

If neither does the honourable thing (and let's not hold our breaths), the Board should put forward a motion of no confidence in Peadar, and a motion to dismiss Doncaster, at, in the circumstances, an appropriately Emergency Board Meeting.

 

How can the SPFL Board have a motion of no confidence in Lawwell ? He isn't on that Board anymore.