[SCO] Scottish Premier league 2012/2013 (7 Viewers)

Red

-------
Moderator
Nov 26, 2006
47,024
Saw the incident briefly and couldn't see much by way of aggression in it, even if there was some sort of coming together.

Any idea if they are appealing the decision?

Would be quite happy if he was suspended when Aberdeen play St. Johnstone in a couple of weeks.
 

Red

-------
Moderator
Nov 26, 2006
47,024
Laughing at that joke makes you a bad person.

I'm away to contact the Daily Record or The Sun so they can run a story about you being a sick yob.
 

AngelaL

Jinx Minx
Aug 25, 2006
10,215
Laughing at that joke makes you a bad person.

I'm away to contact the Daily Record or The Sun so they can run a story about you being a sick yob.
:cry:

He does have two legs even though they are artificial, and he can stand and walk on them.

Seriously, I don't think that he was personally involved. They already had blue noses in position to manipulate refs in the SFA. Murray was just the money man; - the walking wallet!
 

Red

-------
Moderator
Nov 26, 2006
47,024
I think Murray was behind the dual contracts thing, which the cheating currently in question.

And I don't think 'Rangers' ever need to bribe or anything to get their way.

Funny handshakes are all that is required.
 

Red

-------
Moderator
Nov 26, 2006
47,024
Murray & Co. maneuvering to try and save themselves?

Good Evening.

Let me ask a question: Have you ever stopped and thought about how you go about producing a Radio Programme. It might be one with music and so on, or it might be a talk show– or indeed a mixture of both?

Well let me reveal– not so much a secret– as just a process that is logical.

Radio Programmes are produced from the end to the start. If the programme is 2 hours long, the studio clock– or should I say the really important studio clock — will start at 2:00:00 and proceed to 1:59:59 and work its way down. This is the way that a producer times the show. If a music piece lasts 5 Mins and 5 seconds then that time– less say a few seconds is then worked into the timing and deducted from the time allocated to the show. This process then goes on until the whole show is covered.No other clock matters– and nothing stops the clock other than the end of the show!!

Further, the announcer or DJ will have a script as often as not– or at least they used to— and each spoken piece will also have a time allocated to it– and this is then taken account of when working out the timings on the show.

So that is how it is done— Backwords! Tic Toc goes the backwards clock.

Backwards thinking is perfectly logical, and so with that in mind, I now invite you to review Sir David Murray’s statement of Today— Backwards. You might find it illuminating.

By that I don’t mean you should read the statement from the end back to the start. No, what I mean is that you should read the statement from the viewpoint from the end of the “process” that this sorry legal saga has taken— in other words from the point of view of the Liquidators. They are the guys who are left with the husk that is Rangers PLC– they are the guys who legally have to wind up the business of Rangers PLC, and as has been pointed out, these are the guys who have the right to investigate and, if necessary, pursue those responsible for the failure of the business.

Everything that you hear coming from Ally, Minty, Big Eck, Walter, Wee Billy and everyone else should be looked at from their perspective… and in that way you will see why it was said and what they are actually saying.Everything that is said by those named above are aimed at the Liquidators– not the fans, not the SPL, not Harper McLeod, not the press– just the Liquidators! No one else counts.

Remember always, that the liquidator can only take action against certain people– Directors, shadow Directors, and others responsible for the “management” of the company. They are not the Liquidators of the MIH trust and so have no power over the trust itself— that is a completely separate legal entity with, as Sir Minty has pointed out, independent Trustees and so on.

Also– you should be aware that in normal circumstances, a liquidator can undo transactions which were not in the best interests of the company– for example selling an asset at undervalue– or making a completely discretionary gift to someone for no apparent reason— but only if it happened within a period of 5 years prior to the date of their appointment.

That 5 year period can be extended— If the Liquidator thinks that there has been some kind of Fraud. Fraud ,of course, requires a higher legal standard of wrongdoing and is harder to prove— though obviously it is not impossible.Fraud also carries heavier penalties than just maladministration or mismanagement.

However, it should always be remebered that once you have rolled a heavy ball up the hill and it starts to roll down the other side, anyone wanting to shove it back up faces an even heavier task—- once the pieces that show Fraud fall into place on the face of it— the defence really has to go some to reverse the interpretation of the evidence, and avoid the conclusion that a Fraud occured.

So, with all of that in mind, have a look again at what Sir David Murray had to say today. Don’t think of the SPL dual contracts investigation– that is not what Murray’s statement is about– look at it from the point of view that he is trying to save his personal skin! The Liquidators have a duty to get money back in to Rangers PLC in the interests of that company’s creditors. If it succeeds in collecting a sufficient sum of money so that the creditors can be paid, then of course the Directors can sleep easy in their bed at night.

It is logical for the Liquidators to start by getting back the money that Rangers PLC just gave away— to the trustees of the MIH EBT.

The Liquidator, says to the Trustees, ” Give me back all that money– let’s start with the money given in the last 5 years for now!”.

” We don’t have it– we loaned it out” says the trustees!

Well– Today Sir David Murray has told the world that that money was loaned out with a specific set of repayment dates and with accruing interest. Oh yes, it might be some date in the future, but the money is due to come back at some point– all of it– at least every last penny that was the subject of a loan!!

Of course, the Liquidator can’t pursue the players directly– he is not the liquidator of the trust– but hey he/she can bring big big pressure on the trustees of that trust– especially if there is an allegation that they too were party to a fraud.

The sensible trustee, sitting on a series of loan notes, will be best advised to go collect the money just as fast as possible.If that means he has to accept 50p in the pound loaned out , then hey, …. a trustee has gotta do what a trustee has gotta do at times!!

The players? Oh they may well have indemnities– but correct me if I am wrong– weren’t those indemnities against there being tax due on the money? They were not indemnities against ever having to repay the loans– unless of course there are indemnities from someone who says that the loans are never to be repaid at all– and if they exist– then of course there were never any loans in the first place– were there? And documents which purport to set out one legal position but which really mask another– in most cases show Prima Facie evidence of………. frau! The land where no one wants to go!.

Will the players want to admit that they or their advisors were party to a crime? No Chance– they will run a mile– even pay back a proportion of a loan they thought they would never be called upon to repay.

At least…. that is one theory.

So– go on— look at what Murray said. He said, that each and every one of the “loans” was due to be repaid. Will the players agree to repay a proportion of those loans— even if it is only some of the money they received for a quick and dirty settlement—- or be faced with potential involvement in a criminal case?

You can bet some will and in that way some money starts to come back into the Rangers PLC coffers– and the more money comes back into the Rangers PLC coffers the less Sir David and his fellow Directors will have to find personally.

This statement today has little to do with the SPL enquiry– other than that the SPL enquiry might throw up some evidence that might not suit those who were previously in charge of Rangers PLC.

No– David Murray was not protecting his former employees today– he was selling them down the legal river– and telling everyone about it. The players— and others—- borrowed that money and it is due to be repaid no matter what any documents delivered to anyone says. Or else! That is today’s Murray Message.

What a parcel of Rogues? Undoubtedly!

However, if just one righteous man among the EBT beneficaries told the FTT the truth, then today’s statement may just be redundant.

Meanwhile—————-Tic Tic Toc goes the studio clock—- because nothing stops the clock other than the end of the show!
 

Boksic

Senior Member
May 11, 2005
14,338
There was nothing wrong with using EBTs When they were doing so, I know of many businesses that used them.

Surely the auditors would have assessed them when payments were made. So i dont think that there is any need for David murray to be protecting himself.

I guess it all comes down to whether there were spl rules against them.
 

AngelaL

Jinx Minx
Aug 25, 2006
10,215
I think Murray was behind the dual contracts thing, which the cheating currently in question.
And I don't think 'Rangers' ever need to bribe or anything to get their way.
Funny handshakes are all that is required.
:agree: Don't forget the funny pinnies too! ;)
 

Red

-------
Moderator
Nov 26, 2006
47,024
There was nothing wrong with using EBTs When they were doing so, I know of many businesses that used them.

Surely the auditors would have assessed them when payments were made. So i dont think that there is any need for David murray to be protecting himself.

I guess it all comes down to whether there were spl rules against them.
EBTs were legal, if used properly.

How Rangers are alleged to have used them (as wages rather than as loans, in order to dodge tax) is not legal.

And from the footballing point of view (which is what I'm more interested in) making any payments to players that are not disclosed to the SFA is illegal.

---------- Post added 08.08.2012 at 00:03 ----------

Rangers took advice from some sleazy financial adviser (who is a pornstar in his spare time) who told them that using EBTs the way they did would be fine.

He may well have given bad advice, though.
 

Red

-------
Moderator
Nov 26, 2006
47,024
Digging The Hole Even Deeper

This week has seen strident denials from David Murray that Rangers have done anything wrong in paying 83 employees through the Murray Group Management Remuneration Trust (MGMRT). According to Murray: “No rules were breached or circumvented, and I reject and resent any suggestion that anything was done which amounted to cheating.” This blog-post will provide an illustrative example that demonstrates just how absurdly untrue Murray’s claim really is.

First a quick recap of the rules. For the MGMRT, an Employee Benefit Trust (EBT), to be operated legally for tax purposes, money is deposited in the trust by the employer. Thereafter, the employer must have no control or involvement in the disbursement of funds. Employees can then apply to the trust for loans. The loans must be discretionary i.e. contractual obligations or wages (of any kind) cannot be paid tax-free through an EBT. Any payment through an EBT for wages or other contractual obligations would be liable to tax. Paying wages or other obligations through an EBT without deducting PAYE & National Insurance is a breach of UK tax law and is illegal. HMRC has investigated Rangers’ use of the MGMRT EBT and found it to be a sham designed to avoid due PAYE & NIC. The Rangers FC plc (In Administration) appealed this determination and this appeal was heard by the now infamous First Tier Tribunal (Tax). Rangers FC (the oldco) was able to pay higher wages to sign and retain better quality players during the decade in which the scheme operated. In fact, had Rangers paid staff the same take home wage, the club would have had to find an extra £49m to pay tax on these wages legally. This much we have discussed many times.

The next rule in question is that of the Scottish Premier League (SPL). The SPL requires that all payments to registered players are declared in the contractual documents submitted to the league (and to the SFA). The combination of illegally using an EBT scheme to obtain a £49m advantage in paying for players and violating SPL rules on declaring payments to players is premeditated financial doping. The reason for not declaring the EBT payments in player contracts is that doing so would have caused the EBT scheme to fail immediately. Players and their agents are no fools and wisely would not trust the nods and winks of the shifty wide-boy types attracted to football club ownership. They insisted that promised payments were documented. These additional documents- side-letters, second-contracts… call them what you will- blow Rangers’ and Murray’s claims of innocence out of the water.

In a previous post, this blog attempted to help the SPL’s investigation team to establish a prima facie case against Rangers. Obviously, we have no way of knowing if this was helpful in moving this case along, but it might help the media and anyone investigating the case against Rangers if we provide a road-map to just one example of what really happened. Please note that this example has been selected for its clarity rather than the importance of the player. Many of the cases, especially the earlier ones when Rangers tended to be more concerned with obscuring their actions, are quite complex. The SPL’s investigators should ensure that they see the documentation referenced below.

Gavin Rae signed a three and a half-year contract with Rangers on 1 January 2004. This contract- the official one filed with the SFA & SPL- lists an annual wage of £260,000. Curiously, the contract does not mention appearance money or bonuses. On the very same day, 1 January 2004, Rangers provided Gavin Rae with a letter that said that money would be deposited in a sub-trust of the Murray Group Management Remuneration Trust on his behalf. These amounts total £336,000. The letter also said that Rae would receive £1,000 as an appearance fee for every competitive first-team game played. From February 2004 to July 2007, Rae received five payments totalling £336,000. He also received the following amounts through the EBT for appearances: £11,000 (2003/04); £8,000 (2005/06); £20,000 (2006/07). The appearance money matches his first team appearances for Rangers.

This side letter torpedoes the argument that these payments were not contractual. (A simple guide to contract formation under Scots Law can be found here. Short version: these letters constitute a contract under Scots Law). This letter, and the others like it, demonstrate that Rangers used the EBT scheme to pay wages (appearance money) and contractual obligations related to employment. This is just one fragment of the masses of evidence that demonstrate that Rangers were “at it”.

The task for the SPL’s investigators is simple in this case. Obtain Gavin Rae’s contract as submitted to the SFA & SPL. Next, they should demand to see Gavin Rae’s side letter. After that, the task is to review the actual payments. There will be a match between promises and payments. Repeat for each of the 82 other employees of Rangers FC (now In Administration) who used the trust scheme.

The current PR campaign from Murray, and other senior Rangers’ personnel who were beneficiaries of the EBT scheme, is designed to reverse any sense of inevitability regarding amending the sporting record to reflect the cheating that took place between 2001-2011. All Scottish football fans- Rangers fans included- were cheated during these years. Do not believe the spin and dissembling from those who did most to damage Rangers FC and Scottish football.
http://rangerstaxcase.wordpress.com/

What a chance for Rae to fuck them over and move to rid himself of the stench of hunnishness that still lingers around him.
 

Red

-------
Moderator
Nov 26, 2006
47,024
Depends on your definition of Weegie.

On the strict definition of Weegie, probably not, what with the health notice appearing to be from Edinburgh City council.

On the broader definition of Weegie - anyone in Scotland who lives south of Stonehaven - yes.
 

Red

-------
Moderator
Nov 26, 2006
47,024
First win of the season. :weee:

Bring us up to what is probably about par for the opening three games.

Coach finally seems to be giving 4-3-3 a chance, instead of insisting on 4-4-2, and - wouldn't you know it - suddenly we are able to control games much more easily.

Couldn't be that is because of finally putting an extra guy in midfield, like I've wanted for ages, could it? :rolleyes:
 

The Curr

Senior Member
Feb 3, 2007
33,705
Had sevearal long conversations tonight about scottish football. Red, I'm afraid they were with a Celtic season ticket holder. Conclusion: scottish football is not fucked just because Rangers are.
 

Red

-------
Moderator
Nov 26, 2006
47,024
Scottish football was dying a slow death prior to the Rangers situation.

What has happened has given the chance for something to change, though.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 7)