Fair Play at FIFA?

The following post comes about as a result of the research and work put in by Auldheid.

He has drafted the submission to FIFA detailed below after closely looking at their rules, and taking on board the points contained in the Glasnost “Golden Rule” blog. TSFM has attached the blog’s name to the report since the overwhelming – but not unanimous – view of our readership is that the SFA and the SPL have again gotten themselves into an almighty and embarrassingly amateur fankle over this issue.

We believe that tens of thousands of football fans will be lost to the game if the outcome of the LNS enquiry is not perceived to be commensurate with the scope and extent of the rule breaking that LNS found had taken place. In view of this, we believe that we have to do what we can to explore all possibilities for justice for those who love the game so much and yet are utterly disillusioned by recent events.

LNS is not being questioned here. He has found that RFC were guilty as charged by the SPL.

What is being questioned is the SFA’s crucial – and seemingly conflicted  – role in the LNS enquiry, as is the effectiveness of LNS’s recommended sanction as either a deterrent or an upholder of sporting integrity.

It came to our notice last week that FIFA have created a web site at

https://www.bkms-system.net/bkwebanon/report/clientInfo?cin=6fifa61&language=eng

that tells us that FIFA have implemented a regulatory framework which is intended to ensure that all statutory rules, rules of conduct and internal guidelines of FIFA are respected and complied with.

In support of that regulatory framework FIFA have set up the above site as a reporting mechanism by means of which inappropriate behaviour and infringements of the pertinent regulations may be reported.

FIFA say that their jurisdiction encompasses misconduct that (1) relates to match manipulation; (2) occurs in or affects more than one confederation, so that it cannot adequately be addressed by a single confederation; or (3) would ordinarily be addressed by a confederation or association, but, under the particular facts at issue, has not been or is unlikely to be dealt with appropriately at that level.

Discussions arising from the previous blog on TSFM, “Gilt Edged Justice”, which was published after Lord Nimmo Smith (LNS) ruled on the registration of Rangers players who had contractual side letters that were not disclosed to the SFA as part of their registration, suggest that there may be possible unfortunate consequences for football arising from the evidence presented by the SFA to the LNS enquiry that informed its findings on registration and consequent eligibility. There is also a question of the propriety of the SFA providing evidence on an issue which could have had a negative impact on them had it been found that they had failed to carrying out their registration duties with due rigour over a period of ten years when the existence of EBTs was known to officials within the SFA.

On the basis that the LNS findings require that registration rules be clarified by FIFA and rewritten globally if necessary to remove any ambiguity and under clause 3 above, this appears to be an issue that the FIFA should examine and that the SFA cannot address.

The following report has therefore been submitted by TSFM on behalf of its readers to FIFA drawing on the content and debate following the “Gilt Edged Justice” blog in respect of the possible footballing consequences of the LNS enquiry.

The hope is that by speaking for so many supporters, FIFA will give the TSFM submission some weight, but individuals are free of course to make their own points in their own way.  We await acknowledgement of the submission.

The report Submitted to FIFA is as follows;

This report was prepared on behalf of the 10,000-strong readership of The Scottish Football Monitor at https://scottishfootballmonitor.wordpress.com/
It is our belief that FIFA general rules of conduct were breached by the SFA and their employees in both creating and then advising The Lord Nimmo Smith (LNS) enquiry into the non disclosure of full payment information to the Scottish Football Association (SFA) by Rangers F.C during a period of player registration over 10 years from 2000.

We believe that although the issue has been addressed by the SFA the particular facts at issue suggest that it has not been dealt with appropriately and we therefore ask FIFA to investigate. The facts at issue are that the process and advice given failed to uphold sporting integrity, and that a conflict of interest was at play.

We believe the advice provided and the enquiry set up, where SFA both advised and is the appellant body, breaches not only the integrity the registration rules were intended to uphold, but also totally undermines the integrity of the SFA in breach of General Conduct rules 1, 2 and 4. (See below.)

1.  Firstly we believe that the advice supplied to LNS that an incorrectly registered player was eligible to play as long as the registration was accepted by the SFA however unwittingly, undermines the intent of the SPL/SFA rules on player registration and so undermines the integrity of football in three ways.

• It incentivises clubs to apply for a player to be registered even if they know that the conditions of registration are not satisfied, in the hope that the application will somehow ‘slip through the net’ and be granted anyway (in which case it will be valid until revoked).

• A club which discovers that it has made an error in its application is incentivized to say nothing and to ‘let sleeping dogs lie’ – because it would be in a better position by not confessing its mistake.

• And most importantly, it incentivises fraud.  By deliberately concealing relevant information, a club can ensure that a player who does not satisfy the registration conditions is treated as being eligible – and therefore allowed to play – for as long as a period as possible (potentially his entire spell with the club). Then, if the club is no longer around when the deception is finally discovered, imposing meaningful sanctions may be impossible.

2.   Secondly we believe the process followed was inappropriate due to a Conflict of Interest. Had the LNS enquiry not ruled on the basis of advice supplied by The SFA, they and those persons advising the LNS enquiry, could have been subjected to censure and the SFA to potential compensation claims had LNS found that the players were indeed ineligible to play and results then been annulled as was SFA practice when an ineligible player played.

3.  Finally we contend that a law should not be applied according to its literal meaning if to do so would lead to an absurdity or a manifest injustice or in this case loss of football integrity.
See http://glasnostandapairofstrikers.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/gilt-edged-justice/

4. We therefore ask FIFA to investigate both the process used and advice given to Lord Nimmo Smith to satisfy themselves that FIFA’s intentions with regard to upholding the integrity of football under FIFA rules have not been seriously damaged by the LNS findings and also to reassure Scottish football supporters that the integrity of our game has not been sacrificed by the very authority in whose care it has been placed to promote the short term cause of commercialism to the games long term detriment.

General Rules of Conduct (These are taken from the FIFA web site itself and can be found as part of completing the submission process)

1. Persons bound by this Code are expected to be aware of the importance of their duties and concomitant obligations and responsibilities.

2. Persons bound by this Code are obliged to respect all applicable laws and regulations as well as FIFA’s regulatory framework to the extent applicable to them.

3. N/A

4. Persons bound by this Code may not abuse their position in any way, especially to take advantage of their position for private aims or gains.

Advertisements

About SFM
The Scottish Football Monitor is following the lead of RangersTaxCase in an attempt to hold the Scottish mainstream media to account and to question. If they do not ask the difficult questions, we will.

4,058 Responses to Fair Play at FIFA?

  1. scapaflow14 says:
    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 14:57

    Mr Keevins reporting an independent commission to be set up?
    ——————————————-
    At last a real job for Campbell Ogilvie!

  2. They prob had to adjourn the board meeting until after the Glasgow Derby ,Charlie will have hours of spiv talk to spout, each question will have about 2 hours of drivel spouted out and the plebs will be distracted into defeat around the table,Charlie will live a little longer me thinks.

  3. The CE says:

    Did St Mirren change their mind about league reconstruction before Charles Green visited ?

    ———————————————————————————————————————–

    FFS, people still pushing this nonsense of a top- secret (live on SKY) deal between Stewart Gilmour and Chuckles. 🙄

    Apart from the criminal act of SMFC honoring another clubs request for tickets and hospitality, is there any actual evidence of this ‘deal’?

    You know, maybe, just maybe, SMFC do not think the take it or leave it(always the sign of a dodgy salesman) reconstruction offer, is good for SMFC or Scottish Football. It seems some of the more rabid elements on here would rather their clubs voted for it just because Green doesn’t like it.

    Still waiting for the Usual Suspects such as Paul Brennan to back up their mindless smears on SMFC. I won’t hold my breath. It seems Fans of TRFC are not the only people struggling to absorb the lessons of last year. Despite the numerous false predictions and resulting egg on faces(mine included!) it seems people are lining up to have their wishful thinking presented as a fait accompli.

  4. nowoldandgrumpy says:

    justshatered says:
    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 15:13
    0 0 Rate This
    Who is going to pay the independent commission?
    Bleeding cash left, right, and centre and they’re going to spend more on an independent commission!!
    Will they be bound by the results?

    All academic anyway as I think the police or the Stock exchange will come to a verdict long before this commission reports. I don’t think the stock exchange or police will say ‘Oh hold on a minute the company are having an independent commission lets shelve ours until they report.’
    ==================

    A good get out clause now for the SFA, they can state that they will await the outcome of Sevcos’ independent commission so as not to prejudice the result. I wonder if they were advised what to do?

  5. Long Time Lurker says:

    I wonder if TEGF will give the independent inquiry a helping hand – more tapes and documents to enter the public domain perhaps?

    Also – what has CG to gain by staying on at the Club as CEO (other than salary)? Given all the other plates that are spinning in the air it may have been advantageous for CG to have taken the opportunity to exit stage left today.

  6. jimlarkin says:

    Long Time Lurker says:
    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 15:13
    8 0 Rate This
    Long Time Lurker says:
    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 15:05

    Chick Murray – reporting that Charles Green has taken his seat in the Ibrox directors box, with Malcolm Murray and Walter Smith

    Apologies to Mr Murray – should have typed Chick Young (obviously)

    ============================================

    chic young and chic marray – a right pair of comedians

  7. scapaflow14 says:

    greenockjack says:
    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 11:25

    Looks like a score draw.

    Corporate Governance 1 Spivs 1

    Worst of all worlds, oh dear

  8. Palacio67 says:

    Wonder if LNS will get the gig to chair the Independent Commission? 🙂
    Definitely believe this is an intentional delay, the SFA will do nothing in the meantime, all focus now on getting the SB money in from the berrs.

  9. Long Time Lurker says:

    Phil MacGiollaBhain ‏@Pmacgiollabhain 10m
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rplaYVgBk0E
    He hasn’t left the building.

    Phil – are you saying that CG did not leave Murray Park for the game at Ibrox?

  10. allyjambo says:

    Scapa, a leaf straight out of the SFA handbook.

    “Wattie, lift up the edge of the carpet”
    “Certainly, Neil, do you have the brush?”

    A calm descends over Ibrox, and all is well.

  11. slimshady61 says:

    Green lives to fight another day.

    And next week he will successfully defend himself from the SFA charge…after all, he uses that terminology allmthe time, calling the MBB “my little Whyte friend”, the new club sponsors “my little Blackthorn” and his MSM pals “my little hackie friends..”

  12. greenockjack says:

    Scapa
    Today was a Cup Final rather than a League game.
    ie. the stalemate (draw) shouldn´t have been an option

  13. torrejohnbhoy says:

    statement…

    Following a meeting today, the Board of The Rangers International Football Club PLC issued the following statement:

    “The Board has announced today it is to commission an independent examination and report in view of recent allegations in the media concerning the Chief Executive, Charles Green, the Commercial Director, Imran Ahmad, and their management of the Club.

    The decision to commission the examination was taken unanimously by those in attendance at today’s meeting including non-executive and executive directors. The independent report will be commissioned and completed as speedily as possible and presented directly to the non-executive directors of the company.

    The Chief Executive will not be involved in the conduct of the examination. The Board wishes to make clear that is not prejudging any of the issues involved and that the object of this exercise is to clarify the situation to the satisfaction of shareholders, supporters, staff and Board members.

    Instructions recently given to lawyers in England and Scotland with a view to taking legal action to challenge these recent allegations will form part of the independent examination.

    Also at today’s meeting, the Chief Executive of the Club apologised unreservedly to Board members and the wider Rangers support for any offence caused by remarks he made in an interview last week regarding Imran Ahmad.

    Mr. Green told the Board that in trying to make a point in the interview that, as Chief Executive, he would not countenance any form of prejudice towards employees or players at the Club, he had exercised poor judgement in the words he chose. He apologised.

    The Board accepted the explanation that there had been no intention to cause offence and accepted the Chief Executive’s apology. The Board is satisfied that the Chief Executive did not act in a racist manner but reminded him of the importance of all office bearers at Rangers upholding the standards expected by the Club.

    Mr. Green will deal with the pending S.F.A. charge on this matter on a personal basis. The Board wishes to re-iterate Rangers is a Club which is opposed to all forms of prejudice and has a long-established policy of working extensively in the community through a variety of programmes and initiatives to tackle issues such as racism and sectarianism.”

  14. scapaflow14 says:

    greenockjack says:
    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 15:56

    Agreed, hence worst of all worlds comment. Right now it looks to me like the non-execs are simply not up to the job. Bad, bad decision not to send Mr Green off on Gardening Leave, AIM et al are not the SFA, when it comes to things like this.

  15. Rabo Karabekian says:

    THE STATEMENT

    Hollow words award of the week. Fair enough if you want to find out about the conduct of the people involved in the purchase, but do you really need a commission to ascertain the ownership of assets?

    They are playing for time that is rapidly running out. They need to have a whitewash job done on this before the ST offers go out. It will also have a bearing on the pricing of STs.

    It is difficult to see how even a best outcome scenario will put them ahead on this.

  16. Long Time Lurker says:

    Does anyone have any views on how the City/AIM/Cenkos may react to the announcement by the Board of TRFC that there will be an independent investigation into allegations reported in the media concerning CG and TGEF?

    Would the inquiry have any bearing on whether shares in TRFC are suspended or otherwise, if there is questions over the validity of the IPO and the ownership of the assets of Ibrox and Murray Park etc?

  17. Rabo Karabekian says:

    It will be interesting to see how the MSM lynch-mod respond to The Statement. Remember that WS has put his name to this – and his bum on a seat next to Charlie immediately afterwards.

  18. Rabo Karabekian says:

    LTL
    It seems to me that the RIFC board are saying that there are some serious questions to answer involving the legality of the purchase of assets and their ownership.

    Surely the regulatory authorities have to heed that, and from a lay perspective, the obvious course of action would be to suspend trading.

    That is of course only a lay point of view.

  19. angus1983 says:

    Rabo Karabekian says:
    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 16:13

    Hollow words award of the week. Fair enough if you want to find out about the conduct of the people involved in the purchase, but do you really need a commission to ascertain the ownership of assets?

    They are playing for time that is rapidly running out. They need to have a whitewash job done on this before the ST offers go out. It will also have a bearing on the pricing of STs.
    ——

    Exactly what I thought. How difficult would it be to ask Mr Green to produce documentation which proves his side of the story? If he can’t come up with the goods, the door’s over there.

    Independent examination. Pah. Independent of who, exactly?

    This is simply the latest piece of fannying about, with participants other than Mr Green simply feart to do anything even half decisive.

  20. valentinesclown says:

    Independent investigation (ah know Independent Rangers Scotland) FFS. It sounds like a Pinewood production Carry On Regardless with Charles Green as Sydney James.

    Cannot help but think the non execs would have wanted rid of Charlie (season books on horizon).
    Has Charlie got something on them? Or maybe when he does leave he will not have the confidentiality clause that is par for the course from the Govan departed.

    Like Pinewood this is a real comedy classic, Craig Whyte, Charlie Green, Bomber Brown have all produced pure comedy gold.

    Always look on the Whyte side of life.

  21. Long Time Lurker says:

    Rabo Karabekian says:
    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 16:21

    Indeed, perhaps the Board should approach the authorities, noting that there are serious questions to be asked over the ownership of the assets.

  22. Still I ask the question– who funded Ticketus just days before the money went from them to Whyte/Collier Bristow?

  23. MikeC says:

    Another delaying tactic by the Rangers Board, whilst it pushes everything into the long grass for a while, the inevitable will happen. Suspect that all these delays, peculiar legal decisions and charity commission delay etc relate to the ongoing police investigations. They are all scared to make a decision that may impinge on criminal activity and charges being brought against various individuals.

  24. Humble Pie says:

    So, am I right in thinking that RIFC are going to commission an ‘independent’ examination of how they managed to acquire their own assets?

    Given how much money the board and shareholders stand to gain from this acquisition being declared legitimate, what are the chances of this ‘appointed’ panel finding against their paymasters?

    How likely is it that the SFA will push ahead with an investigation into the Rangers fakeover before this panel of invited consultants has delivered its findings?

    I’d say no chance and extremely unlikely.

    Also, the statement indicates that CG “will not be involved in the conduct of the examination”. Does that mean he won’t be able to ask himself any questions or that he won’t be asked any questions at all ?

    For the life of me I just don’t understand why they don’t simply look at their own records and check their veracity with the relevant authorities……..unless it’s just a rouse in an attempt to deflect from any proper investigation at least until they get to the end of the season?

  25. neepheid says:

    To me it is unthinkable that AIM can possibly allow trading to continue in a company whose ownership of the assets which were boasted about in the IPO prospectus only 5 months ago is unclear.

    So given my forecasting track record to date, on Monday you can expect everything just to carry on as if nothing whatsoever has happened.

    I also find it hard to believe that the Serious Fraud Office aren’t yet involved in this utter disgrace. Does anyone know whether they are or not?

    As for the TRFC “independent examination and report” I am sure that Lord Hodge or Lord Nimmo-Smith can be persuaded to produce the required answers. And doesn’t this sentence kind of prejudge the outcome?

    “Instructions recently given to lawyers in England and Scotland with a view to taking legal action to challenge these recent allegations will form part of the independent examination.”

    Or does it mean that the examination will consider the validity of these instructions?

  26. upthehoops says:

    greenockjack says:
    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 15:56

    Agreed, hence worst of all worlds comment. Right now it looks to me like the non-execs are simply not up to the job. Bad, bad decision not to send Mr Green off on Gardening Leave, AIM et al are not the SFA, when it comes to things like this.
    ===============================================

    Firstly I admit I’m a cynic, my views fueled by the hopeless inaction of the football authorities to properly deal with the RFC liquidation scenario like I believe they would have with any other club, including Celtic.

    However, if there is clear evidence that Whyte was indeed involved as a director of Sevco, and TRFC directors know it to be a fact, can we look at this ‘commission’ as nothing other than a delaying tactic as the SFA would come under severe pressure on what action they are going to take? No doubt this ‘commission’ will be viewed positively by the SFA as a pro-active move, meaning they need do nothing for now.

  27. redlichtie says:

    I’m sure The Rangers Board will wish to see an independent commission appointed that is widely agreed to be above reproach.

    Step forward independent commission chairman Turnbull Hutton!

  28. ecobhoy says:

    The outcome is much as I predicted and I think people have got to take a bit of a reality check and stand back a bit.

    The NEDS have a duty first and foremost to the shareholders of RIFC Plc and that is a legal duty. To have sacked or suspended Green today would have badly affected the share price and very possibly have led to a suspension in dealing.

    It would also have created an absolutely mad kicking and screaming Green quite capable of manning the Ibrox ramparts and calling on the faithful to guard the walls – I kid you not and I am sure that the NEDS – or at least three of them – will have seriously considered that possibility.

    This way they get the season ended – I doubt very much if any inquiry will ever take place because it gives time for an orderly resignation and departure of Green and for a new management mechanism to be built and no AIM suspension.

    I realise that might bitterly disappoint some but that will be the likely outcome I reckon. I honestly don’t think that decent Rangers supporters deserve to be kicked in the teeth with their club destroyed after all the effort and money expended in ensuring that football was still played at Ibrox this season.

    Yea there’s lots of things I am unhappy about with sections of the Rangers support just like I am unhappy about certain sections of the Celtic support and that re-education struggle must continue.

    It is possible of course that Murray, Walter and Hart were outvoted 4-3 and though I doubt that we will soon see as Green won’t be able to contain himself. No matter what – one thing is for sure and that is that Rangers is operating on a broken financial model and that has to be addressed if it is to continue in anything but the short-term. And that’s without anyone disappearing with a war chest stuffed with wonga.

  29. MikeC says:

    Have got to agree with the previous comment the SFA will do absolutely nothing, Rangers will reply to their enquiry they sent a few days ago that they have set up a Commission to look at the points they requested answers to. Not being privy to the Board Meeting comments, although CW may have bugged it, the fact they all agreed to this Commission indicates that the NEDs did not get the assurances they were looking from CG as to his involvement with CW. If the NEDs hadn’t set up this Commission they may well been open to legal action from Shareholders if CW produces even further evidence of his involvement.

  30. chipsandblog says:

    I don’t think the UK has a serious fraud office or serious any office anymore. They were replaced by the faintly interested fraud office.

  31. 61patrick says:

    Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:

    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 16:41

    25

    0

    Rate This

    Still I ask the question– who funded Ticketus just days before the money went from them to Whyte/Collier Bristow?
    ————————-
    The question that even the best Internet bampots cant get to the bottom of>
    Why????????
    Who is protecting the names of the men behind the ticketus deal?
    A key answer in this wholw charade.

  32. iceman63 says:

    So we all know now. Green has lied both to AIM and SFA. The ownership of the assets by Sevco Scotland appears a sleight of hand. All of the assets and the share issue sppear somewhere between dubious and bogus. In essence they are trading shares illegally and under galse pretences. The NED’s must somehow represent shareholders who have invested well some of them in a fraudulent enterprise.
    And no independent enquiry can find anything diferent. Thus it is a stalling exercise to negotiate a buying off of Whyte a remival of Green and a new CEO to be put in place with no questios asked by either AIM regulators the police and the SFA. They are clearly desperate and probably doomed.

  33. jonnyod says:

    BRTH 16:41
    That my friend is the key to this whole scam the illusive SMOKING GUN

  34. Long Time Lurker says:

    What gets me if a similar event happened in my place of work, more likely than not, the CEO would be suspended on full pay awaiting the outcome of the inquiry.

    The SFA should step in now – they have the game and the interests of fans (not least TRFC) fans to protect.

    It appears to be the case that the SFA provided a licence on TRFC on the basis that CG had no links with TGEF. Now that there is reasonable doubt on this matter, the SFA as the licensing body should investigate. They should not outsource that responsibility to the club in question.

  35. scottc says:

    I wonder if Cammy Bell has had a chat with his agent in the last few days? Pre-contract is after all, NOT a contract

  36. slimshady61 says:

    BRTH

    The monies were raised from private investors into an Octopus eis/VCT fund. There is no big secret about that, one of my clients put money in.

    The real question is what communications were there between Ticketus, Murray, Whyte and Lloyds? Follow the money, concentrate on the facts. The rest is film flam.

  37. smartie1947 says:

    Those on the panel of RFC Independent Commission have just been announced as follows:-
    Neil Patey,
    Derek Johnstone and
    Dame Vera Lynn
    ( In the event of any disagreements, a majority verdict will be accepted.)

  38. chipm0nk says:

    Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 16:41

    As I understand it the Ticketus companies are set up specifically for each of the season ticket purchases. There is a different company for each of them

    Once the deal has been completed the individual companies are liquidated.

    It is actually Octopus Investments who operate as the investment company. It’s all this Venture Capital Trust tax avoidance rannygazoo.

  39. ecobhoy says:

    Long Time Lurker says:
    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 17:35

    What gets me if a similar event happened in my place of work, more likely than not, the CEO would be suspended on full pay awaiting the outcome of the inquiry.

    The SFA should step in now – they have the game and the interests of fans (not least TRFC) fans to protect. It appears to be the case that the SFA provided a licence on TRFC on the basis that CG had no links with TGEF. Now that there is reasonable doubt on this matter, the SFA as the licensing body should investigate. They should not outsource that responsibility to the club in question.
    =====================================================================

    If it wasn’t a public company then I would agree that the CEO should probably be suspended but I obviously don’t know what was said at today’s board meeting.

    I think if the SFA were to wait until the independent inquiry reported then they would probably stipulate that they had to approve the mechanism of the inquiry and the personnel. You have to remember that any report from an independent inquiry would only be one piece of evidence eventually examined by the SFA so they aren’t outsourcing their responsibilities as the footballing decision is separate from that to be taken by the Rangers International Board.

    If the SFA didn’t wait they would only really be able to question Stockbridge, Ahmad and Green as I doubt if anyone else including the NEDS have a clue as to what is going on. So does anyone actually expect Green to incriminate himself or Ahmad for that matter?

    By waiting on the outcome of an inquiry, which won’t happen IMO, the SFA are also able to dodge the poison bullet as to whether Rangers were ever legally licencsed to play this season which has all sorts or possible ramifications.

    So I don’t think Green will go immediately to provide some cover for the SFA and locked-in investors who can’t sell before the end of June. I truly believe Green can’t take the chance of the enquiry outcome as it could destroy his reputation and it provides a strong lever for Ahmad and Stockbridge to jump ship and leave him to it. Green is a lot of things and might even be made but he isn’t stupid and he still doesn’t know what else Craigie will throw into the mix.

  40. ecobhoy says:

    Typo 2nd last line

    made = mad

  41. bestdressedchicken says:

    They can internally investigate themselves till the cows come home.
    I somehow don’t think Graigie’s going to respectfully wait ’till that’s over before he lobs in his next grenade though.

  42. scottc says:

    ecobhoy says:
    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 18:02
    0 0 Rate This
    Typo 2nd last line

    made = mad

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Och, and here was me thinking you were going to get the mafia involved. 😦

  43. Senior says:

    Don’t be fooled, they are caught in the headlights. This is serious stuff. Criminal proceeding will ensue if even half of what’s reported is true.
    The independent commission is a case of ‘kicking the can down the road’ It will give the impression, they hope, that some course of action is being pursued, but without prejudicing anyone, particularly themselves.

  44. Tic 6709 says:

    Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:

    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 16:41

    Still I ask the question– who funded Ticketus just days before the money went from them to Whyte/Collier Bristow?

    ================================

    Was it Dave King through Ocktopus ?.

  45. ecobhoy says:

    scottc says:
    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 18:08

    Och, and here was me thinking you were going to get the mafia involved. 😦
    ——————————————————————————————————-

    If it was only the Mafia involved I wouldn’t be worried 🙂

  46. allyjambo says:

    Regarding the question ‘how will the AIM view this?’ l wonder if the NEDs have actually acted on their advice/instruction and AIM will be happy to await the outcome. We’ve seen how so many regulatory bodies, including law lords, seem happy to ‘wait and see’, and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if we see this again. I’d be surprised if AIM would want to act before giving a member company a chance to sort it out themselves and risk being accused of jumping the gun and suspending it/causing a price collapse without justification. They may even have given them a date to sort it out by, or else!

  47. Flocculent Apoidea says:

    “Mr. Green will deal with the pending S.F.A. charge on this matter on a personal basis.”

    Because it’s the individual, not the club, at fault. Nothing to do with us, guv. The figurehead of the organisation makes questionably racist comments but that shouldn’t reflect on the club. Blah, blah, blah. In light of the current situation and impending investigation, Green must be “unable to do his job”. With his previous experience, maybe Ogilvie could assist. Again.

  48. bayviewgold says:

    going back to an earlier comment – why would TRFC need to appoint an independent commission at all to “uncover” the truth? Surely they know their own story – after all they were all there at the time. And given their statements recently they know their story is the “truth”. So why the commission? unless they know that they are open to suspicion and simply want to delay the inevitable. I cannot see any other rational need for a company to open an inquiry on itself. Other than to delay and give a false veneer of respectability for the market. This as much as anything tells me there is merit to CW claims. From a market perspective I am still waiting for the regulators to question the non-disclosure of CW threats to sue. The recent discussions around an MVL are a non-starter, esp claiming it would happen any day, remember they are a publicly traded company to do an MVL I would expect at minimum an EGM, vote, resolution etc and all the associated periods of notice to take place, so I think the MVL is not on the cards at all any time soon.

  49. deldons says:

    so no suspension of Green whilst an independent commission investigates the inner workings of the ‘DEAL’. So Green will still be in the building influencing, moving stuff, talking his gibberish. What a weak willed statement that was from TRFC. Green should have been suspended on the spot and escorted to his car as a show of CLUB strength for gross misrepresentation of the CLUB. But they can’t as Green is directly connected to the backers and they can’t upset them can they? TRFC have an inverted hierarchy at Board level. The hired hand in the CEO-Green is not fully answerable to the Non- Executives and both parties know it.

  50. Re an independant enquiry into the relationship between C Green and C White during the asset buying debacle last year at Sevco/RFC (IL). If the independant enquiry finds that there was collusion and misrepresentation who can take it to the next level. What happens if guilt is found?

  51. bayviewgold says:

    Carfins Finest. (@edunne58) says:
    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 18:41

    What happens if guilt is found?

    No guilt will be found, the commission has no power to gather evidence so they will only get what they are fed. They are funded by one party in the dispute and that party will give them what they want the other part(ies) are likely to ignore them. Everything will be reported as above board and a shining example of good corporate governance and a credit to Scottish football.

  52. I can hear Hugh Keevins’ voice in my head, responding to some future, awkward question posed by Tom from Tomintoul on Clyde SSB:

    “We cannot possibly comment at this juncture because these matters are being considered by an Independent Inquiry chaired by (select from the following: Lord NNNimmo Smith/Lord Hodge/Lord Andy Stewart of Upper Buttcrack, etc, etc)”.

    When I take the medication, the voices go away.

  53. timtim says:

    We learned in “Yes Prime Minister” not to open an inquiry if we don’t know what the findings will be.
    For reference to the real world I would like to point towards the official commision into the events of 9/11
    Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton the co chairmen of that inquiry stated
    “we thought we were set up to fail, we got started late,we had a very small time frame,we did not have enough money, they were afraid we were going to hang somebody, that we would point the finger and we were appointed by the most partisan people in Washington”

    At the end of the day ,that enquiry delivered what Washington required as it was denied the evidence and the right to question people under oath or in public . The public were also denied the right to hear the testimony of George Dubya ,Donald Rumsfeld or Dick Cheney .Bush and Rumsfeld also demanded to appear and testify together .

    Enquiries (Independent or otherwise) are not set up to reveal the truth but to justify the crime
    We all know Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction ,we know it was a lie to enable the invasion of Iraq which in itself was a war crime . Blair walks free today ,still in a position of authority and still picking up his 30 pieces of silver .
    I have no faith in any inquiry organised by Rfc* the SFA, the SPL or the Tufty club
    do you ?

  54. wottpi says:

    Can anyone remind me how the last ‘private investigations’ and the findings / warnings from an ‘independent’ board worked out? 🙂

    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/the-whyte-files-private-investigation-revealed-1407428

    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/rangers-in-crisis-martin-bain-says-1118199

  55. So the company that was specifically set up by Green to take the assets away from Whyte has set up an investigation into why that happened and what was involved?

    Mmmmmmm?

    This is why we need a Bismarck.

    New Post

    https://scottishfootballmonitor.wordpress.com/2013/04/13/scottish-football-and-the-case-for-a-bismarck/

  56. ecobhoy says:

    allyjambo says:
    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 18:19

    Regarding the question ‘how will the AIM view this?’ l wonder if the NEDs have actually acted on their advice/instruction and AIM will be happy to await the outcome. We’ve seen how so many regulatory bodies, including law lords, seem happy to ‘wait and see’, and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if we see this again. I’d be surprised if AIM would want to act before giving a member company a chance to sort it out themselves and risk being accused of jumping the gun and suspending it/causing a price collapse without justification. They may even have given them a date to sort it out by, or else!
    =================================================================

    I have absolutely no doubt that at the very least AIM would have been sounded-out on the ‘plan’ and may well have given tacit approval. You might be right about a deadline as Green thought the RIFC Plc Board Meeting wasn’t going to happen until 20 April – I think it was – but it was brought forward and held as soon as Hart returned from abroad. It may well have been the slump in share price on Friday that precipitated that with AIM not wanting to start a new week on Monday with more rumours sweeping the market and possible a collapsing share price.

    This way there is a plan in place for Monday but if there are further sharp falls in share price then AIM might be unable to wait for the ‘plan’ playing-out and might need to act which essentially would mean the immediate end of Green – only his removal would be seen as sufficient.

    Meanwhile on the Darkside the Bears go back to their slumbers with virtually all happy to await the outcome of the enquiry which will surely vindicate their ‘Dear Leader’ and I have no doubt he will become very expensive to shift.

  57. Jack Jarvis says:

    From the master of obfuscation and deflection, Sir Humphrey Appleby:
    “The less you intend to do about something the more you have to keep talking about it.”
    ” Never appoint an independent inquiry without firstly informing them of the required outcome”

  58. Sugar Daddy says:

    Best part of 5 hours to decide an enquiry is needed. Really?

    I wonder if anyone phoned in to the meeting, perhaps an international call? If Craigy goes quiet were they sanctioning his payoff?

    No inside info but having sat in many a board meeting something else had to have been discussed for it to last so long.

    When the enquiry pronounces everything is fine who is going to take notice? Just the non-exec directors. Walter & Co just saved themselves from being banned as directors.

  59. Jack Jarvis says:

    Sorry Timtim. Way too quick for me.

  60. ecobhoy says:

    deldons says:
    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 18:39

    Green is directly connected to the backers and they can’t upset them can they?
    ================================================================

    Don’t see why not – he got the cash from the backers and he’s spent it and they got their shares. There’s quite a bit of ‘evidence’ that some of these original backers weren’t happy about the way the deal panned out and certainly those who paid £1 a share must be spitting tacks.

    Also in the STV interview Green has said that some have cashed-in and made good money on their ‘cheap’ shares which cost as low as low as 1p. The only investors important to Green or RIFC Plc are the ones to be pulled-in at the next flotation to keep the Titanic limping on.

  61. Not The Huddle Malcontent says:

    after todays RIFC/TRFC board room nonsense, I think the 1st thing ANYONE needs to do, in the words of Charles Green is….DEFINE “THE RANGERS”

  62. iceman63 says:

    Amazingly with their new found powers of investigation and independence The Rangers have now in truth become a Law unto themselves. How darethe rest of us meremortals doubt the impartiality/thoroughness/wide ranging and appropriate powers and sanctions of such a fine august body and its remarkably transparent and wise decision to investigate and deliver judgement upon itself? Shame on us all for ever doubting!

  63. bayviewgold says:

    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 18:50

    Carfins Finest. (@edunne58) says:
    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 18:41

    What happens if guilt is found?

    BG. It was a poor attampt at sarcasm on my behalf.

  64. enoughx2 says:

    smartie1947 says:

    Those on the panel of RFC Independent Commission have just been announced as follows:-
    Neil Patey,
    Derek Johnstone and
    Dame Vera Lynn
    ( In the event of any disagreements, a majority verdict will be accepted.)
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    I think you have been misinformed.

    Curly
    Larry
    Moe

    Surely?

  65. enoughx2 says:

    Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 20:09

    0

    0

    Rate This

    smartie1947 says:

    Those on the panel of RFC Independent Commission have just been announced as follows:-
    Neil Patey,
    Derek Johnstone and
    Dame Vera Lynn
    ( In the event of any disagreements, a majority verdict will be accepted.)
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    I think you have been misinformed.

    Curly
    Larry
    Moe

    Surely?
    =======================
    Who is Surely?

  66. bangordub says:

    Any word on the outcome of the board meeting ladies and gents?

  67. carntyne says:

    Following a meeting today, the Board of The Rangers International Football Club PLC issued the following statement:

    “The Board has announced today it is to commission an independent examination and report in view of recent allegations in the media concerning the Chief Executive, Charles Green, the Commercial Director, Imran Ahmad, and their management of the Club”.

    We would like to reassure Tribute Act fans we intend to supply the commission with lashings of whitewash and a very large carpet and brush.

    So don’t worry!

    😉 😉 😉

  68. resin_lab_dog says:

    Wouldn’t it be nice if the gers fans found a way to renew their season tickets using.. for example a £3 note.

    Of course, this £3 note wouldn’t be legal. But if a fan owned organisation was set up, and promised to issue them to rangers fans, who could then supply them to TRFC, who could then … provided certain conditions were met… swap them for proper negotiable currency with which to buy players/ pay staff/ run the club/ award dividends to board members etc. In pre agreed tranches.

    One of the conditions would, of course be that the RFC fans had sufficient confidence in those who were running their club to ensure that their interests would be met.

    See these £3 notes could be swapped back at any time for her majestey’s sterling, less admin fees, by any fan who felt that the club had let them down.

    Think of it as like Ticketus, but backwards.

    If such a scheme were set up honestly, I think there might be an appetite. And it could be the model for fan power.

    All we need is an honest broker to adminsister such a scheme in the interests of the fans and teh game as a whole… Damn… just spotted the fatal flaw in this otherwise infallible scheme!

%d bloggers like this: