Companies have a statutory duty to produce financial reports in line with commitments made to shareholders. The failure of Rangers to fulfil those commitments was put down to a lack of clarity over the future outcome of the on-going tribunal with HM Revenue and Customs. As a consequence of this failure, trading in Rangers shares have been suspended by the Plus Stock Exchange.
The Plus Stock Exchange also told Rangers broadcast partner, STV, they were “currently conducting an investigation into the circumstances under which Craig Whyte’s seven year disqualification from acting as a director in 2000 were not disclosed at the time of his appointment to the board of Rangers FC on May 6, 2011”.
Rangers today suggested there was “little, if any, tangible benefit for the club to be a listed company”. This may be true but the benefit of a listing is heavily weighted towards shareholders and creditors, who should have received structured financial information in a timely manner. Shareholders have also been denied the opportunity to attend an Annual General Meeting, which, in line with stock exchange rules, should have been held before 31 December 2011.
Many of you have watched Rangers speculate wildly for over two decades with the feeling that they would crash and burn. This has been a painful period for those who follow clubs who stick to budget, unprepared to take a seat at the roulette table. The day of reckoning draws closer.
You can order a hard copy of CQN Magazine, issue 5, with credit/debit card or Paypal and buy direct from the UK for only £3.50 + £1.50 postage and packing. Shipping costs £2 to ROI, £3 to Europe and £4 to elsewhere. Click on the link below to order.
Click here to view the new issue of CQN Magazine online for free. You can support the online edition by making a discretionary donation here.
858 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- ...
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- ...
- 23
- »
When was the last time Celtic had a home tie in the S C??
Who broke the blog? lol
HH
OK, who broke the blog?
What have I missed?
Paul67 what you do? lol
HH
Astonishing comments from Steve Lomas in tomorrow’s Express.
Sounds like a Hun hurtin’ at the behaviour of the Huns.
Loves the bit where he says Murray always conducted himself with dignity…
“FUMING St Johnstone manager Steve Lomas has gone on the war path and claimed that SPL champions Rangers have disgraced themselves with the way they have handled the Francisco Sandaza transfer fiasco.
The straight-talking Ulsterman, who has told the Light Blues to put up or shut up, is furious about the under-hand way that the Ibrox giants have tried to get their top scorer to sign a pre-contract at Ibrox.
Lomas let rip at chairman Craig Whyte and director of football Gordon Smith for their penny-pinching ways and leaving Spanish star Sandaza in an almost impossible position.
Lomas, who rates Sandaza at £350,000, said: “If they really want him then Rangers should do a deal where both sides are happy. They shouldn’t be trying to take him on a cheap.
“There is a way of conducting business and I don’t believe Rangers have gone about things in the proper manner. We have two complaints. Firstly, they have unsettled our player when we are in a great position.
“Secondly, Rangers have asked Fran to gamble his fitness on a pre-contract between now and the end of the season and that is also pretty poor.”
“I have spoken to Ally and I have told that I am unhappy with them approaching the player before they got in touch with us. I know that happened because Francisco admitted that was the case.
Express Sport understands that the Sandaza transfer has caused problems behind the scenes at Murray Park and at one point over the weekend McCoist pulled the plug on the deal.
It is now back on but on vastly reduced terms than were originally offered to the St Johnstone striker.
Rangers are also trying to by-pass Sandaza’s representative, Clive Jagger to do the deal with their own agents.
Despite this a pre-contract is expected to be concluded this week.
Lomas confirmed: “I have spoken to Gordon Smith myself and told him I was unhappy with how he was operating. I accept they have issues but I have said to them before the transfer window opens that if you want Fran then do it the right way.
“If Sir David Murray had still been in charge then he wouldn’t have conducted things the way the current regime have. For me, there needs to be some leadership up above at Rangers. Rangers have always had a tradition, under Sir David Murray, of conducting themselves right.
“I do believe Craig Whyte and Gordon Smith have to back Ally. They are in charge of a great club with a great tradition.
“Unsettling our player and asking him to gamble on a pre-contract is not good enough for Rangers FC. A lot of Rangers fans would agree with that statement as well.
The Light Blues are actively trying to add to their squad and even if Sandaza does arrive in this window then they will still be looking to add another striker. David Healy is currently getting a game but he could still be offloaded in the window. He has turned down a lucrative move to China and is also on the wanted list of St Johnstone manager Lomas.
Manager Ally McCoist has also told Kirk Broadfoot that he is not for sale although other officials have openly said he is available.
Championship outfit Leeds United are keen on taking the Scotland international on a loan with a view to a permanent £1 million move.
McCoist has also made it clear top stars like Nikica Jelavic, Steven Davis and Allan McGregor are not for sale. Liverpool, Everton and West Bromwich Albion are all keen on Jelavic while Olympiacos and Malaga want the Ibrox No. 1.
Sheffield United and Blackpool are also still keen on John Fleck although McCoist has put a temporary halt to any possible loan deal.Other summer signings like Juan Ortiz and Matt McKay have also failed to make an impact and could be moved on if the price is right
test
watching Fight Club,kinda strange….not what i expected.
Test????
Bwahahahahaha
‘It is now back on but on vastly reduced terms than were originally offered to the St Johnstone striker.
Rangers are also trying to by-pass Sandaza’s representative, Clive Jagger to do the deal with their own agents.’
is Sherida still injured and still at St Johnstone..
Sandaza tapped up so we need somebody to try against them..
Maybe time for Ally to have another “wee chat” with “Craig” to see “what deals can be done”.
Tell you what, Ally, why don’t you pick another under-contract player, and publicly tell the world how he is a player you “really, really, admire”.
Or would that be tapping up?
Rangers are also trying to by-pass Sandaza’s representative, Clive Jagger to do the deal with their own agents
Surely a man who used to be an agent isn’t trying to poach players away from their current representatives to sign up with a friend of his whereby he gets a ‘taste’ of any deal?
Paul67:
Now that the blog is back I can retire for the evening, the wonders of the electronic age…:)
Roll on the 31st January and not because the transfer window will close…I will leave you all with that thought.
Until we meet again…
Keep the Faith!
Hail Hail!
Good Evening,
Can I just try and clarify a couple of things.
First, I agree with Barca that the admission of a “New” member to the SPL other than by way of the normal promotion and relegation proceedure is a reserved matter and therefore is simply NOT a matter for the board of the SPL.
The articles of association make it clear that a special qualified resolution is required for:
(e) any expansion of the League by the addition or admission of new members (other than as a result of the operation of the Rules governing promotion/relegation between the League and the SFL);
(f) any reduction in the number of members of the League (other than as a result of a member ceasing to be a member of the League in accordance with the Rules and/or these Articles);
(g) the allotment and issue of a Share;
A special qualified resolution requires the vote of 83% of the members.
But let’s not rest there because I think the matter is more complex than that.
I believe that some at Celtic Park thought that the reason for the “Board” of the SPL having the matter within their grasp is because the provision of the articles dictate that the “Board” has the right to order/determine/ demand the transfer of the share held by any club in the SPL company, AND because any club which goes out of business must transfer the share that they hold.
Article 11 says as follows:
Except where such transfer is occasioned by the promotion of an association football club from and relegation of a Club to the SFL the consent of the Board shall be required before the transfer of any Share shall be registered.
So, on the basis of this provision, the transfer of the share– effectively determining who is a member of SPL ltd and who holds the shares in that company– IS a matter for the board.
However, that provision simply does not entitle the board to determine who is in or out of the league at all. It merely confers on the board the legal power to demand and where necessary implement the transfer of the appropriate shares to the legal entities that own and operate the clubs that are deemed BY THE COMPANY to be members of the company and therefore the league!
Here is article 14 which makes this clear:
14. If:-
(i) a Member shall cease to be entitled to hold a Share; or
(ii) a trustee in sequestration, manager, receiver or administrative receiver shall be appointed in respect of a Member or any property of a Member, or an administration order shall be made in respect of a Member or any property of a Member or an order shall be made or an effective resolution passed for the winding up of a Member otherwise than for the purpose of reconstruction or amalgamation;
then that Member or its manager, receiver, administrative receiver, administrator or liquidator or any other person entitled to the Share shall, on receiving notice in writing from the Board following the Company in General Meeting passing a Qualified Resolution that such notice should be issued by the Board and confirming the identity of the proposed transferee, transfer its Share to such other person as the Board shall direct at the price of £1 and the Club owned and operated by such Member shall forthwith cease to be a member of the League and the Club owned and operated by the transferee shall become a member of the League in its place.
So, from that you would conclude that I am of the view that the board do not have the power to say who is in or out of the league, and that any application by Rangers New Co would have to be approved by a vote of 83% by way of a special qualified resolution!
Well, sorry but I think it is yet more complicated because the articles of association do not exactly say that at all.
Look at the provisions surrounding the special qualified resolutions again.
Rules (e) to (g) quoted above specifically and clearly talk about the EXPANSION of the league other than by relegation and promotion.
That word was inserted there quite deliberately and so therefore must mean something.
In this instance, unless I am very much mistaken, we are not talking about the EXPANSION of the league AT ALL!
What we are talking about, is one member club becoming completely defunct. It has ceased to be. It does not and cannot complete the fixtures envisaged by this league set up.
So imagine that happens. Imagine there is no application at all by a Phoenix club. How then does the SPL determine who will be in the league the following year?
You had 12 clubs, you now have 11 and one of those should be relegated and its place taken by the club sitting at the top of the lower league.
However, if the club which won the Scottish Football League does not meet the membership criteria, then, AND ONLY THEN, does the club which would have been relegated get to keep its place!
This is governed by the SPL rules:
Here is rule A2.3
A2.3 In the event that the Candidate Club for any Season, if promoted from the SFL and admitted entry to the League, would, in the opinion of the Board in its absolute discretion, fail to fully comply with the Membership Criteria and no waiver, relaxation or period of grace is or has been granted to the Candidate Club in terms of Rule A2.7, then the Candidate Club shall not be promoted from the SFL and admitted entry to the League and the Club which would otherwise have been relegated from the League to the SFL in accordance with Rule A2.1, shall retain its place in the League
But we don’t have that here do we?
The club at the very bottom of the league would still be at the bottom and so should be relegated.
I presume that the club winning the SFL would comply with the membership criteria and so should be promoted.
That still leaves us with 11 clubs.
There is only one way to resolve this situation and that is to either allow the bottom club to remain OR to promote two clubs from the SFL.
Neither is action is constituting the league by the normal promotion and relegation is it?
AND it is not the EXPANSION of the league, but both steps seem perfectly logical and arguable.
So let’s throw a third possibility in and that is an application from a legal entity which has no track record in football at all. A Limited company which has no history in football and has never played a game in the Highland league, the Junior League, Under 19 League and which is not a member of the SFA etc.
Does this application strike you are more likely to be EXPANSION of the league by means other than promotion or relegation?
I would argue not, because as we have seen above there are means– perfectly logical means– by which the size and status of the SPL can be maintained which involve no more than an extension of the rules of relegation and promotion.
We are not talking about EXPANDING the league at all here, we are talking about inviting someone to become a member of the league– the same size of league– but by means other than normal promotion and relegation.
And the rules just simply do not allow for that at all. The Articles do not envisage it– and they certainly do not envisage a mechanism whereby a Phoenix company can take the place of a team that has already played and worked under the structure of the SPL and the league below from which it is obliged to accept members provided that they qualify and meet the membership criteria.
A Phoenix Company can never qualify for the SPL because it will never have played a game in any league whatsoever.
Accordingly, the only true safe legal basis that the SPL can admit an application from a previously unregistered football club with no history at all in terms of its own articles is if the SPL does so by way of a qualified resolution to alter its articles of association to specifically allow such a situation.
A qualified resolution would require a vote of not 83% but 90%– which by my calculation put Celtic in the driving seat.
However, even then I can forsee a challenge potentially from SFL members because remember that the SFL and the SPL are contractually related. Many in the lower league will be less than happy with such gerrymandering and will complain that they are not being treated in the same way as one of the big two.
Think Dundee– Livingstone etc.
Further, let’s be quite clear, I doubt very much that the SKY TV deal will simply disappear if Rangers disappear. It may well be adjusted in terms of revenue paid but I think it will only stipulate a reduction in money should there not be 4 Celtic/Rangers games per year.
This whole situation is a legal mess and anu application to depart from the stated rules had better be fronted by someone squeaky clean and super persuasive because if the SPL get it wrong legally then they could grant an application and find themselves in the courts for a very long time to come.
Note– this is just a quick view and could well be tested by counter argument but having really looked at it for the first time tonight my gut tells me that any Phoenix application is in trouble in terms of rules as they stand.
Paul67
is this new york or new year ?
Film4 10.50pm
Hunger
Drama starring Michael Fassbender as Bobby Sands, the Republican prisoner who took part in a hunger strike at the Maze prison in Belfast in 1981 when he and his fellow IRA detainees had their Special Category Status removed. Their aim was to be declared political prisoners and not classed as criminals.
http://www.radiotimes.com/film/wtm7/hunger
Mullet and Co says:
9 January, 2012 at 21:20
That £20M is not all in one dollop. In the interests of the integrity of the game and allowing Celtic to continue to participate on good faith, UEFA should be approached for a bail out.
They can well afford it. If they want good governance in football, and they do, they must be prepared to aid it where aid furthers that aim.
It is the unfair distribution of UEFA money in the first place, not only to ther biggest countries but the winner takes all for title winners, that created the desperation that has corrupted our game. They owe us one.
Regarding the ‘by-pass Sandaza’s representative’ part – players have contracts with agents. If Sandaza signs for the orcs using an orc representative, he’s opening himself up to litigation from Clive Jagger. All so that the orcs can get Sandaza on further reduced terms ergo saving them more money, but costing Sandaza money. Which sounds familiar.
No shame whatsoever.
Just a thought here,…Does the contract with sky and the sfa actually say that there must be Four premier league matches between CELTIC FC and rangers fc?? that in my view still gives sky enormous room to cut the deal if/when they go under!! as obviously a newco Rangers IS NOT rangers fc.
Would love to find out.
Lennybhoy:
Thought the tax case was from the 15th to the 18th?
Just asking like…
Tricoloured Ribbon says:
9 January, 2012 at 21:24
Oglach,
Did Cliftonville re-sign Liam Boyce?
************************************
He re-signed today mate. We now have 6 forwards, 2 of which a few people here will know. Diarmuid O’Carroll and Declan Bunting who also signed today.
BRT&H
I think you might be interested in looking at article 14 in relation to transfer of a members share.
MWD
Duffield, as an ex agent showing there is no honour amongst thieves,by trying to cut out Sandancers agent.Dignity indeed.
To all the sinners over in Govan
“Repent – For The End Of The Club Is Nigh”
Hail Hail
West Wales Celt says:
9 January, 2012 at 22:39
The Whyte Knight has committed himself to publish their accounts by 31st January, we’ll see.
As I would say, Aye right I will crack the jokes…:)
Really need to go, night…
Keep the Faith!
Hail Hail!
Raymac
Same story for us. Had two dogs for 14 years – a rescue dog that was pregnant – we kept one of the pups..great dogs but probably became too much of a mini pack so never as socialble with other dogs as they might have been – although great with kids. Both died this year. we then went on the dog sitting routine with mates dogs as they went holidays..had a run of black labs and took to them.
Went online and got a 7 month lab from a couple who had split up – house trained, command trained, fantastic temprement. Best thing we’ve done – he was called Indie – but we changed it to Fergus…as he seemed to wince with Indie…went all the way to Sheffield for him – best journey I made last year…!
Barcabhoy says:
9 January, 2012 at 20:01
‘MWD
A club applying to enter the SPL other than via the normal method of promotion, is a reserved matter. Reserved matters have to be voted on by all SPL clubs and not only by the smaller SPL board.’
I think that relates only to expansion of the league by admisiion of new members.
I don’t think that’s the scenario that will arise.
It’s more likely to be an application by the liquidator of the huns to transfer their league membership to a newco huns. That’s covered by article 14 (ii) which requires a 90% vote of all league members who are eligible to vote.
’14. If:-…….
(ii) a …. receiver ……. shall be appointed in respect of a Member or any property of a Member…….then that Member or its … liquidator…shall,
on receiving notice in writing from the Board
following the Company in General Meeting
passing a Qualified Resolution
that such notice should be issued by the Board and confirming the identity of the proposed transferee, transfer its Share to such other person as the Board shall direct at the price of £1 and the Club owned and operated by such Member shall forthwith cease to be a member of the League and the Club owned and operated by the transferee shall become a member of the League in its place.’
http://www.scotprem.com/content/mediaassets/doc/SPL%20Articles%20as%20at%2015-Apr-10%20(CURRENT).pdf
This been posted yet?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmdhDf7m8W8&w=480&h=360
Tim Malone Will Tell says:
9 January, 2012 at 21:07
One of the groups would be the Celtic Trust who can act for/advise shareholders…….
Mullet & Co.
The SPL board makeup is already in place.
Currently consist of a Celtic (think its PL), Dundee Utd’s Stephen Thompson, St Johnstone Rep, another members rep. (poss mirderwell), CEO of SPL and a legal representative.
So if it is a Board matter then Newco is in. Better chance with GM and Qualified Resolution as it would require Celtic and one other (maybe a Mad Vlad?).
MWD
Film4 now
paulsatim is neil lennon says:
9 January, 2012 at 22:49
This been posted yet?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmdhDf7m8W8&w=480&h=360
—————————————————————————————–
Top drawer mate!! haha
Moonbeams WD. Kano 1000 \o/ Supporting Neil Lennon 100%. says:
9 January, 2012 at 22:51
‘SPL Board announcement
At today’s General Meeting, Stephen Thompson of Dundee United FC was elected to the SPL Board of Directors.
Stephen joins Ralph Topping (SPL Chairman), Neil Doncaster (SPL Chief Executive), Eric Riley (Celtic FC), Derek Weir (Motherwell FC) and Steven Brown (St Johnstone FC) on the SPL Board.’
http://www.scotprem.com/content/default.asp?page=s2&newsid=10664
Huns on Rangers Media finally, finally realising all is not well in the camp.
Their response? An all out attack on the Hunger Strikers..
Good God.
SPL Rules & Regulations for Dummies
The huns really have the luck of the devil. They are put under pressure for the first time this season when Celtic turn a 15 point deficit into a 2 point lead.
However, the next games for the huns see them receiving their obligatory 3 points from Motherwell courtesy of Stuarty, then a fairly straightforward cup win followed by a league clash against a club whose main striker they have been tapping up.
Oiche mhaith
Árd Macha
Tricoloured Ribbon says:
9 January, 2012 at 22:55
I saw that.
They’ll get worse as the penny finally drops.
TopCorner says:
9 January, 2012 at 22:36
Yip, can I suggest that some of the “move-on” advocates watch and remember just why the Celtic support should never be cowed to forget.