An open letter to St Johnstone Chairman Steve Brown

[scotpages]

I'd add to the letter to the Chairman:

Take it as a dire warning that Rangers as newco will not accept any sanctions to be let back into the SPL. You can see this from their legal action against the SFA for taking action against them that wasn't already written.

Mr Brown, if you fail to have any written sanctions which would be applicable to any club wishing to gain direct entry to the SPL, then you are culpable of allowing a gross mismanagement of the system, and a failure to protect good clubs like St Johnstone from being the victims of pernicious cheats.

Waiting to see what happens with Rangers is grossly unfair. A written protocol should be in place BEFORE any club declares themselves a newco. This way, anyone considering forming a newco will know in advance what legal obstacles will be in place.

If Rangers form a newco before the SPL have decided on sanctions then, if they are allowed back in, no sanctions can be applied retrospectively.

The people in charge at the SPL are not stupid, they know this is the case, and fans cannot understand why this procrastination persists. I await an explanation as to why nothing is being done to bolt the stable door before the horses shit on the pitch.

[soulfulsaint]

Two alternatives: Rangers are "abolished". Won't happen, can't happen.

I understand why in your opinion it won't happen - but "can't happen" is that another rule RFC (IA) has found that only applies to them. Factually untrue - it can happen.

Edited May 25, 2012 by soulfulsaint

[Abernethy Saint]

I understand why in your opinion it won't happen - but "can't happen" is that another rule RFC (IA) has found that only applies to them. Factually untrue - it can happen.

Thanks. Interesting - can you expand on that? I could form a team tomorrow, and apply through various leagues, win them, and eventually get to the SPL (although very difficult in Scotland through lack of pyramid system - an argument for another day).

How can a football authority - essentialy a private club - tell a PLC that it can't exist?

[soulfulsaint]

I was using the old Rangers trick of conflating the club with the legal and fiduciary entity of the PLC (which has had its shares suspended and is currently not trading stock). The club can be abolished e.g. Third Lanark but the shell entity may wish to continue trading in areas only margical to football - for example hiring Albion Rd Car Park. Or maybe they might be demoted for failinig a CVA as Darlington did earlier today.

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18209679

[Abernethy Saint]

I was using the old Rangers trick of conflating the club with the legal and fiduciary entity of the PLC (which has had its shares suspended and is currently not trading stock). The club can be abolished e.g. Third Lanark but the shell entity may wish to continue trading in areas only margical to football - for example hiring Albion Rd Car Park. Or maybe they might be demoted for failinig a CVA as Darlington did earlier today.

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18209679

Kudos for the post with the most multi-syllabic entities ever. Care to explain your argument in English?

[john1962]

Darlington have been relegated 4 divisions in England for failing to reach agreement with their creditors. Super League West and derbies with Pollok for Rangers.

[Abernethy Saint]

Darlington have been relegated 4 divisions in England for failing to reach agreement with their creditors. Super League West and derbies with Pollok for Rangers.

[soulfulsaint]

Kudos for the post with the most multi-syllabic entities ever. Care to explain your argument in English?

Yes a club can be abolished e.g. Third Lanark. A PLC's shares can be suspended it can also be liquidated under law and thus 'abolished'.

[Abernethy Saint]

Yes a club can be abolished e.g. Third Lanark. A PLC's shares can be suspended it can also be liquidated under law and thus 'abolished'.

TY.

[Calypso Kid]

Rangers will exist in some form or another. The partisan nature of their support will ensure something crawls out of the debris and spawns it's horrible sentiment into another guise.

All being well, this latest act will mean it's not the SPL they ply their trade in.

[NeilSJFC]

Remarkable turn of events now with Rangers taking the SFA to court over the signing embargo handed down after appeal.

Worth looking at how Sion got on with a similar case of late if you're interested.

It is, even by this farce's high standards, an incredible move.

And, as you suggest, a potential suicidal one?

[Smarmy Arab]

Aye but the benefits they have cheated for have come in the form of tax savings. They haven't directly benefited from misrepresentations to the SFA (only indirectly in that it stopped their tax cheating being exposed).

Not sure I'm with you Monk? The whole issue of dual contracts is the fact that RFC were using tax evasion to inflate wages, thus securing the services of players who may not have otherwise gone to Ibrox. Eg Ronald De Boer would have had a variety of offers from around the continent, but chose Rangers. Would he have chosen Rangers without the tax free incentive? Therefore they have gained a sporting advantage over every other club. The convention in UEFA is to overturn every result, were illegally registered players played, and award a 3-0 victory to the other side. Any money gained from attendances, prize money, even sponsorship is clearly related to their success on the pitch, and the subsequent denial of the same to their opponents. It is such a heinous crime cos it cannot be undone. 10 years of such behaviour in SPL, Scottish Cup, League Cup, CL, Europa league.....must mean expulsion!

[john1962]

Not sure I'm with you Monk? The whole issue of dual contracts is the fact that RFC were using tax evasion to inflate wages, thus securing the services of players who may not have otherwise gone to Ibrox. Eg Ronald De Boer would have had a variety of offers from around the continent, but chose Rangers. Would he have chosen Rangers without the tax free incentive? Therefore they have gained a sporting advantage over every other club. The convention in UEFA is to overturn every result, were illegally registered players played, and award a 3-0 victory to the other side. Any money gained from attendances, prize money, even sponsorship is clearly related to their success on the pitch, and the subsequent denial of the same to their opponents. It is such a heinous crime cos it cannot be undone. 10 years of such behaviour in SPL, Scottish Cup, League Cup, CL, Europa league.....must mean expulsion!

I also read somewhere that Uefa may/could/will ban any national association if they feel the punishment is too lenient. Is that correct?

[Smarmy Arab]

I also read somewhere that Uefa may/could/will ban any national association if they feel the punishment is too lenient. Is that correct?

i'm not 100% John, but i think they threatened the Swiss FA with this during the Sion debacle.

[henryhallsdanceband]

..and if the SFA don't act as UEFA would like, what chance Scotland getting even a part share hosting of a European Championship Finals or a Champions League or Europa Cap final. I would think we might as well forget it. And Scottish representation on various UEFA or FIFA committees - hmmm. a football McBackwater we might well become.

[slf]

a football McBackwater we might well become.

we already McAre

[Calypso Kid]

i'm not 100% John, but i think they threatened the Swiss FA with this during the Sion debacle.

Yep, the Swiss FA stuck with the party line and decided on a 36 point deduction which effectively relegated Sion.

Taking your national FA to court isn't the done thing and is a brazen infringement of the articles of association for both the SFA and UEFA. In short, Rangers have pulled the suicide card and will take as much down with them as possible. I'd imagine they have good reason for doing so. Probably because they know the Newco route will get the nod from the other SPL chairmen and any further sanction won't apply to the phoenix club.

Edit, I saw an excellent description on another site of a 'scorched earth exit'.

Edited May 26, 2012 by Calypso Kid

[Percy Johnston]

It's not just UEFA, it's also FIFA (i.e. World Cup, which I appreciate is somewhat academic to Scotland in recent years ).

In 2009, FIFA said it would not allow Chile - who had already qualified - to compete at the 2010 World Cup Finals, because a club side (absolutely brilliantly called Rangers, you couldn't make it up) had begun a civil litigation case against the Chilean FA. There was enormous pressure placed on the club and they withdrew their lawsuit. They were then relegated from the Premier League by the Chilean FA.

I would suggest that Glasgow Rangers are extremely unlikely to withdraw their lawsuit lodged yesterday, given their utter disdain for the rest of Scottish football

So, Steve Brown, let me ask you this - you might well be willing to gain a few quid for Saints by voting to keep Rangers in the SPL, but are you also prepared to jeopardise Scotland's future participation in the World Cup by so doing?

[Calypso Kid]

We're now on a different path from where we were when this thread started. Rangers Football Club as we've always known it is dead and awaiting the doctor's declaration.

Our chairmen have a responsibility to protect the association and their own clubs. The choice is clear and only fools would **** this up. It's an open goal.

[mainstand]

Taking your national FA to court isn't the done thing and is a brazen infringement of the articles of association for both the SFA and UEFA. In short, Rangers have pulled the suicide card and will take as much down with them as possible. I'd imagine they have good reason for doing so. Probably because they know the Newco route will get the nod from the other SPL chairmen and any further sanction won't apply to the phoenix club.

Can any of the historians tell us what happened in 65 to the SFA and us when we took the SFA to court over a £25 fine relating to a testimonial.

Think we are actually the only club that has ever done it.

[Calypso Kid]

Can any of the historians tell us what happened in 65 to the SFA and us when we took the SFA to court over a £25 fine relating to a testimonial.

Think we are actually the only club that has ever done it.

It would be interesting to know. What an odd reference it was, seeing it on the news.

[Kilgour]

Darlington have been relegated 4 divisions in England for failing to reach agreement with their creditors. Super League West and derbies with Pollok for Rangers.

Darlo are serial offenders a la Dundee.They built a stadium when effectively they were broke.Gone through quite a few chairmen rapidly and at least one of them is languishing in the jail.

[soulfulsaint]

<B> Please take 10 minutes </B> to read this very compelling piece by Andrew Smith, the Scotsman journalist:

<B> Rangers: Seeds of club destruction sown by McCann </B>

By ANDREW SMITH - Sunday 27 May 2012 01:51

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spl/rangers-administration-seeds-of-club-s-destruction-sown-by-fergus-mccann-1-2320898

<I> THE cast list took on the proportions of a Cecil B DeMille production. Yet BBC Scotland’s investigation into Rangers’ monetary meltdown, The Men Who Sold The Jerseys, made no reference to the man who can be held, at least indirectly, responsible.

Football law-breaking and the collapse of the club’s financial stability seem to be the consequences of Rangers using Employee Benefit Trusts (EBTs). And David Murray’s decision to turn to these risky schemes can be traced to the rebirth of Celtic. Which makes a key player in Rangers’ downfall none other than Fergus McCann.

Simply by getting so much right, McCann caused Murray to send Rangers down a path which has proved patently so wrong. McCann was the antithesis of Murray. The Scots-Canadian detested what he called football’s “jam tomorrow” philosophy of Murray. And, as Rangers rampaged to nine consecutive titles between 1989 and 1997, for all his brilliance in rebuilding Celtic, McCann lost the on-field battle.

By the summer of 1997 – year four of McCann’s five-year plan – Celtic were still stuck in the shadow of Rangers. Murray made sure of that. For much of the 1990s, Rangers had run at a profit. With no challenge from across the city, they needed only the occasional luxury such as Brian Laudrup and Paul Gascoigne, which they could just about afford. However, in order to rack up a historic tenth straight title, Murray decided greater investment was required. A Scottish record close-season spend of almost £15million was sanctioned.

A posse of players, headed up by Italians Lorenzo Amoruso, Marco Negri and Sergio Porrini, each of whom cost around £4m, was added to a proven squad. In contrast, under new head coach Wim Jansen, Celtic reconstructed their entire team with what they brought in from the sale of prized assets Pierre van Hooijdonk, Paolo Di Canio and Jorge Cadete. The modest £650,000 acquisition of Henrik Larsson was mocked.

In the end, Walter Smith’s final season brought no silverware to Ibrox Celtic winning the title and League Cup. Everything changed. Almost, it seemed, as an act of vengeance, the bullish Murray escalated the arms race and put his club on a path to self-destruction. With cash injections from new investors Dave King and investment firm ENIC totalling £60m, he recruited Dutch manager d*** Advocaat and allowed him to lavish a British record summer spree of £24.5m on players. But, even though Murray’s credit tap from the Bank of Scotland was flowing freely throughout his business empire, he saw the need to make efficiency savings… of the tax variety. For it was in 1998 that discussions began with Paul Baxendale-Walker over such schemes.

Moreover, in that summer, the legacy that McCann would leave Celtic when selling up his stakeholding the following year was cast in bricks in mortar as stadium rebuild was completed. With a 60,000 capacity, it ensured a revenue advantage over Rangers, whose Ibrox home housed 50,000. Only borrowing or fresh investment could allow Rangers to keep pace.

EBTs were a means by which Murray could even up the figures. Ultimately, the £47m paid into them between 2001 and 2010 can be implicated in all sort of ways in the predicament Rangers now find themselves – and the possibility that they could be stripped of 13 trophies won during that period.

EBTs allowed them to retain a spending level to compete with Celtic when the club’s bankers halted the easy access to credit while debts across Murray Group spiralled out of control. It is no coincidence that the zenith of EBT use came in 2007, when Celtic won the title, reached the last 16 of the Champions League and posted a £16m profit. However, these trusts were administered in such a fashion that, a year later, HMRC hit Rangers with a demand for unpaid back taxes of £24m. That is the basis for the Rangers appeal, subject to a first-tier tribunal that has yet to deliver a judgment. It is expected to pass down a harsh one that could land the club with a £50m bill.

Baxendale-Walker says that EBTs were only a “problem [for Rangers] because of how they implemented the structure”. Rangers’ botch is that in order to fulfil the discretionary and loan elements of legal EBTs, they could not lodge payments made to these trusts in the playing contracts forwarded to the SPL and SFA. However, few agents would accept payments to their players that were simply verbal understandings. Hence the fact that, of the 63 Rangers players who are thought to have had EBTs, the BBC claims 53 had side letters detailing payments that were made for contractual fundamentals such as appearances and bonuses. SPL and SFA rules state that all payments made in respect of a player’s playing activities must be included in the contracts lodged with these authorities. Essentially, in seeking to serve, however dubiously, the tax laws, Rangers were not able to serve footballing law.

It is difficult to see how Rangers can now avoid being found to have improperly registered almost half their players between 2001 and 2010. In the past, clubs who have been guilty of this offence have had their results voided. In Rangers’ case, this would mean their title successes of 2003, 2005, 2009 and 2010 would have been won unlawfully, and likewise the Scottish Cup victories of 2002, 2003, 2008 and 2009, and the League Cup triumphs of 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007 and 2010.

That would be a bitter blow. But no more bitter than the fact that, were it not for the EBT case hanging over Rangers, Murray would have found a buyer other than a shyster such as Craig Whyte, and the club would have avoided the descent into administration and possible oblivion. (ends) </I>

<B> ++ For Saints context. <?B> McCann bought Celtic in 1994 and the first game of his new ownership was at Perth - St Johnstone 0-1 Celtic.

++ On the final day of the 1997-8 season St Johnstone were visitors and Celtic won the League title with a 2-0 victory. (Larsson, Brattbakk)

++ Easily forgotton that we travelled in hope that day and narrowly missed Europe by only two points, Killie going into the UEFA Cup

Edited May 27, 2012 by soulfulsaint

[Kilgour]

Certainly food for thought there SS.Its a horrible mess that wont be sorted by the start of the season unfortunately. I hope SB votes with honesty and then gets on with SJFC and let them lie in their own piss.

[Calypso Kid]

Interesting piece, I wonder how our League Cup final at McCann's shiny new stadium was perverted by Murray's misappropriation.