[SCO] Scottish Premier league 2011/2012 (3 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Boksic

Senior Member
May 11, 2005
13,380
See the Glasgow Press is praising Old Firm fans for their behaviour, since there were 'only' 17 arrests at the game at the weekend.

You'd have though World War 3 was upon us after Rangers v Aberdeen a couple of months ago when 7 people were arrested.

Arseholes.
To be fair, I think majority if not all of the arrests at the old firm game were from idiots shouting things they shouldn't have.

The one with Aberdeen was 7 people randomly attacking fans at a subway station. I'm sure if there was a fight with Celtic/Rangers fans attacking one another that would have been more of a story too.

On a side note, my second team (St. Johnstone) has booked there place in the top 6. Pretty happy with that especially after McInnes left.
 

Buy on AliExpress.com

Red

-------
Moderator
Nov 26, 2006
47,024
The attack at the subway station wasn't random.

Huns were targetted.

---------- Post added 27.03.2012 at 23:55 ----------

And that still doesn't explain why the Weegie Press thinks 17 is a number of arrests that warrants praise for the Old Firm fans.
 

Red

-------
Moderator
Nov 26, 2006
47,024
Revealed: the payments that may lead to Rangers' downfall
Friday 30 March 2012
Alex Thomson Chief Correspondent

As Rangers faces potential liquidation, Alex Thomson reveals the extent of transactions and payments made from offshore accounts that have so interested the taxman.
News

Celtic fans might want to cover their ears for this next bit, but Rangers are - arguably - the biggest club in Scotland and without question one of the biggest in the UK. Their fan base unquestionably global, and loyal. But right now that very loyalty must surely be stretched to near breaking point.

For Rangers FC is staring into the abyss of potential liquidation. If they fail to win their current appeal to a tax tribunal a bill of almost £50m from the taxman awaits.

The club - already in administration due to accrued debts away from all this, is something of a financial and footballing car-crash. Points have been deducted. The championship is heading to Parkhead and Celtic, and that is it for football this season pretty much.

But it could be a great deal more serious than that. Rangers does not have a buyer at the moment, let alone someone willing to stump up £50m which currently just ain't in Ibrox, search where you will.

No sign of that Gulf sheikh or Russian billionaire oligarch coming up the Clyde bearing gifts and buying the club, either.

To find out how they got into this state it might be useful to go to that well-known Glasgow suburb - Weybridge, Surrey. Here, in a gated community, lives none other than Paul Baxendale-Walker, the man who claims to have invented the employee benefits trust (EBT): the financial arrangement which might spell doom soon for Rangers.

Surrey might not be the obvious place - Mr Baxendale-Walker not the obvious person. A former solicitor, now struck off, he still advises upon taxation issues whilst also running an adult TV channel.

So what of the EBT?

Paul Baxendale-Walker told us this: "Somebody obviously advised Rangers on the constitution of this employee benefits trust. And what that somebody would have to have done is refer to my book or at least referred to the principles in it. And then Rangers as a company went and did something else. This is why there is a tax case."

He says he merely introduced the EBT concept to Murray International Holdings (MIH) - Sir David Murray's company, who owned Rangers from 1988 to 2011.

The legality of the EBT

The EBT is perfectly legal. Several thousand firms use them across the UK. But equally those firms have recently been contacted by HMRC to effectively say; "please come in and see us for a cuppa and the nicely-nicely - before we come round to your front door and do nasty-nasty."

Why? Because the taxman reckons they are really about tax avoidance and possibly even evasion, slipping the wrong side of the law.

Basically what they do is allow highly-paid staff to get money in loans from an offshore trust based in a tax haven, instead of getting it PAYE with 50 per cent income tax.

In his letter, Martin Bain says it was suggested to him that "...any pay rise I got should be paid through the trust, obviously as a discretionary bonus as it cannot be contractual."

Of course the loan must be paid back in time - but how much time? In some quarters they're dubbed 'lend and forget' deals.

So to Rangers. Well we know a little bit more after the latest turn in the Channel 4 News investigation into the club's finances.

Their EBT was set up by Murray International Holdings. And we can now reveal that according to MIH's Finance Director Mike McGill, not one of these loans has yet been paid back.

"I do not believe that any loans have as yet been repaid," he told us.

We asked when or if these loans would ever be repaid and he emailed back: "We do not consider it appropriate to make any further comment at this juncture."
News

For the first time Channel 4 News can take you inside Rangers during the time of the tax dispute in the early years of this century. Documents we have seen from Rangers executives reveal the extent of their use of the trust payment system. It is not for us to say this was wrong or right, legal or illegal - that's for the tax tribunal in the coming days.

We can disclose that the former chief executive of Rangers, Martin Bain, was offered £100,000 bonus from the trust in 2005.

We've seen a document which says: "...please pay Martin Bain £100,000 through the remuneration trust in respect of his bonus for the financial year to June 30, 2005."

Not only that, but just one month later in July 2005 in another document, Martin Bain requests from The Murray Group Management Trust in Jersey a further loan of £100,000 "as soon as possible for the purposes of investment".

These are the kind of things which have excited the interest of the taxman.

In what could be a key document in the tax dispute, Martin Bain, when he was a director at Rangers, wrote to Chairman John McClelland on December 18, 2003. It is strongly worded - he asks that his pay rise be paid through the club's trust.

In his letter Martin Bain says it was suggested to him that "...any pay rise I got should be paid through the trust, obviously as a discretionary bonus as it cannot be contractual..."

A suggestion which would have made a big reduction in his tax bill.

Widespread practice?


But this isn’t just about Martin Bain. He was just one of many benefiting from this tax scheme. As he says himself: "...my increase was to be non-contractual put through as a discretionary bonus as I do with players. Coaches and more recently John Greig."

So it was far from just Martin Bain - Rangers players were getting the trust's tax-free payments. Rangers coaches. And John Greig, Rangers legend and former director. This indicates just how widespread the trust scheme was being used across Rangers with already high earners making significant tax savings.

And then, in the document we have seen, yet more startling information. Martin Bain writing to Rangers Chairman John McClelland, says that his contract letter from McClelland, would be destroyed, shredded, by a female official at MIH - the company which owned Rangers. Martin Bain wrote: "at the end of the meeting I gave her back the letter addressed to me from you that stated my contractual increase for her to shred."

Now what they were doing could well be perfectly legitimate but it’s questions like these upon which the tax case may hinge.

Rangers's legions of fans want answers. For the taxman this is a test case. For Rangers it is about the club's very survival. But fans may well question whether a high price has been paid for attempting to make tax savings at their club.

http://www.channel4.com/news/revealed-the-payments-that-may-lead-to-rangers-downfall

:tuttosport::tuttosport::tuttosport:
 

Red

-------
Moderator
Nov 26, 2006
47,024
Is Doping Acceptable in Scottish Soccer?

Imagine if you will an athlete. Let’s say he’s a 100m runner, and he has dominated the field for 10 years. He’s so successful, so popular, so charismatic, that many people consider the future of the event itself depends on his continued participation, and success in, competition.

He brings millions of dollars into the sport in sponsorship and television deals every year, and if he was to retire, no one would be interested in attending track meets or watching them on television any more.

Now this athlete has been at the top of his game for many years, but time is catching up with him. It emerges that he has recently been using a new type of performance enhancing drug, and this discovery throws up the revelation that actually, he has been using steroids for his whole career. What should happen to our now disgraced hero?

Should he be stripped of every Olympic and World gold medal he has won while using performance enhancing drugs? Should his personal records be removed from their placing in the world records? Should he be banned from all competition for at least the minimum period prescribed in the rules?

Or should he be forgiven and excused it all as a simple matter of expediency? We can’t have the money-tap for the sport turned off, after all. Can we?

What’s more, years of steroid abuse have caused serious physical deterioration in our athlete, and he may have to retire from the sport. Should the sport pay for his medical treatment to allow him to continue?

Consider then the curious case of Rangers Football Club. The most successful club in Scotland, they have won the Scottish title 54 times and claim over 100 first-class honors in their history. They attract the second-highest attendances in the SPL and their fan base probably provide the majority of the viewing public for SPL matches televised on Sky Sports and ESPN.

Despite this, Rangers is in trouble. Since the club was taken over by Craig Whyte in May 2011, they have not remitted any of the taxes due to Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) in Pay as You Earn (PAYE) tax and National Insurance Contributions (NIC).

Under previous owner Sir David Murray, the club operated an Employee Benefit Trust (EBT) scheme from 2000 to 2010. This is a scheme whereby employees are paid (and taxed on) a very small percentage of their wages. The remainder is paid into a trust, which then gives “loans,” to the employee, which are non-taxable and never repaid.

This is perfectly legal, but the key word is “trust.” The employee must “trust” the employer to ensure they are paid, “loans,” from the trust. Contractual payments absolutely cannot be made through the EBT. Evidence has emerged in the public domain which suggests that Rangers players were assured in writing that they would be paid from an EBT, and that they would never have to repay the money.

HMRC maintain that the payments made to Rangers players in this period were contractual in nature, and therefore taxable. They have presented Rangers with a bill for £24m in unpaid taxes, and £12m in interest. Should the First Tier Tax tribunal find in their favour, a further penalty will be imposed, which could see the final bill reach as much as £75m.

Since at least 1999, when a similar tax dodge was operated (Rangers admit this and have committed to paying £2.8m to HMRC), Rangers has therefore used non-payment and evasion of tax to give the club a financial and sporting advantage over every other club.

That’s not all. As Rangers has made payments to players which were not included in their contracts, the players involved were not correctly registered with the national association, and so ineligible. The accepted sanction for fielding of ineligible players in soccer is for the match to be recorded as a 0-3 defeat.

Since 1999, Rangers has won the Scottish Premiershit seven times, whilst fielding ineligible players whom they could not have afforded to pay if they were not avoiding making tax payments on their wages.

To the outsider, it seems simple. Rangers must be stripped of all honours won during their financial “doping” years.

It goes beyond even this. The President of the Scottish Football Association is Campbell Ogilvie. He has held influential positions with the SFA and SPL over a period of many years, going back to the 1990’s. At which time, Campbell Ogilvie was the Secretary of Rangers FC.

Indeed, Campbell Ogilvie was himself paid via an EBT during his time at Rangers. Both the SFA and SPL have launched investigations into Rangers’ conduct in the years since 1998, but there is no confidence within the Scottish soccer community that they will take any serious steps to deal with Rangers’ wrongdoing.

One thing Rangers cannot escape though, is financial reality. It finally caught up with them on 14th February when the club was placed into administration.

This is a UK legal term which basically means that a court-appointed team take over the running of the company. It prevents creditors from taking legal action against it, and the administrator must take steps to make the company profitable to ensure creditors are paid.

The administrators may seek to arrange a Company Voluntary Agreement (CVA) with the creditors. This requires the agreement of 76 percent of the creditors by value. It means that all creditors would accept a pennies-to-the-pound deal. Once they are paid, for example, 30p for every pound owed, the company can exit administration and emerge debt-free.

If the creditors do not agree a CVA and the company cannot pay them in full, it is then liquidated. All assets are sold off and the proceeds distributed evenly amongst the creditors. As the majority of Rangers’ debt is owed to HMRC, the chances of a CVA are unlikely. It is the policy of HMRC to reject CVA’s.

The most likely outcome for Rangers FC is that they will soon be liquidated. The club will cease to exist. Here’s where it gets interesting. The SPL yesterday published a set of proposed changes to their Financial Fair Play policy.

Amongst them, is a proposal to allow a club, on liquidation, being allowed to transfer their, “share,” or membership of the SPL, to a new company. This would mean that should Rangers be liquidated, their directors, or anyone else who wants to buy their stadium, training ground and players, can do so and be given Rangers’ place in the SPL.

Effectively, this would mean a debt-free company, called Rangers FC, playing in blue shirts at Ibrox Stadium next season, while HMRC and other creditors (Rangers are in debt to possibly as much as £134m) are left with nothing.

One of those creditors is Heart of Midlothian FC, from whom Rangers signed full-back Lee Wallace. They still owe £800,000, which is unlikely ever to be paid. Another is Rapid Vienna, from whom Rangers purchased Nikica Jelavic, whose goals were instrumental in their winning of the SPL last season. Rapid are still owed £1m, and despite Rangers selling him to Everton FC for £5m in January, Rapid are unlikely to ever see their money.

Effectively, the SPL propose to issue a cheats’ charter, and coincidentally I am sure, just as it looks like Rangers are to be liquidated. Nothing like this happened just four years ago when Gretna FC were liquidated.

Rangers FC is in serious danger of being liquidated because they have lived beyond their means for far too long, in the process distorting the market in Scotland.

It has abused the tax system to give itself an unfair sporting advantage over the rest of the clubs in the SPL.

It has bought players from other clubs it could not afford to pay for and had no intention of ever paying for.

And the Scottish sporting establishment, governing bodies and media, want everything possible to be done to facilitate Rangers, who have destroyed the sporting integrity of the Scottish game, escaping the consequences of their self-inflicted troubles.

To return to our doped up and physically damaged by self-inflicted wounds athlete, it appears that in Scotland at least, all the stops WOULD be pulled to ensure his continued participation in the sport.

We can’t allow the money-tap to be turned off, after all. Can we?

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...eague-is-doping-acceptable-in-scottish-soccer
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 3)