Celtic did enough in the opening 16 minutes to put this game beyond Dundee United but only managed to score once, an excellent effort from Gary Hooper, before United tightened up and made a contest of the game.
Georgios Samaras sprung past the United defence inside the first 30 seconds and squared the ball across the six yard line but Stokes arrived a split-second late to convert. That signalled a period of relentless Celtic pressure as the home team found it impossible to get out of their own half or hodl any kind of possession.
Gary Hooper controlled a long clearlance inside the centre circle on 12 minutes before knocking the ball square to James Forrest, who had space to exploit. Forrest drove forward before returning the pass to Hooper inside the box. The Celtic striker turned outside Gunning before driving a shot low inside Dusan Pernis’ right had post to open the scoring.
Celtic continued to press forward with Forrest again involved in their most dangerous moves. The young winger threaded a through ball to Anthony Stokes on the edge of the area before racing past the defensive line to meet the return pass on the volley but his shot struck Pernis.
Give-and-go football was proving effective for Celtic and on 41 minutes Cha Du-Ri played a one-two with Forrest but could not convert his shot.
Celtic were so dominant in the first half their only real concern must have been why they were not further ahead but the second half proved to be more of a contest. Dundee United’s passing was poor all afternoon but Celtic slipped to their level, frequently succumbing to unforced errors. The visitors were never in any trouble defensively but Neil Lennon decided to shake things up in midfield, and substituted central defender, Glenn Loovens, pulled Victor Wanyama back and brought Scott Brown into midfield.
The subsequent change, bringing Ki on for Stokes gave Celtic more athleticism and meant that the final few minutes, which are often tense when defending a one goal lead, were contested almost exclusively in the United half. Fraser Forster had a few catches and the odd punch but had a relatively easy afternoon.
940 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- ...
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- »
Henrik’s Sombrero @ 10.00 – I had noticed exactly that in Celtic games this season, obviously I don’t watch as many other games not involving Celtic nor pay quite as much attention to the ref when the opposition is attacking. However my general feeling is the Scottish ref’s are just inept in this respect. My reasoning is they are either displaying a herculean level of positional awareness and concentration, or they’re just clueless. I have to go with the most likely scenario.
Also noticed a clear advantage situation yesterday when the ball broke to, think it was Ki, thompson waited to see if there was an advantage, and then blew the whistle for a foul when it was clear there _was_ one! Think he’s been reading the rulebook upside down again.
The Lizard King says:
5 December, 2011 at 10:55
Here’s how the BBC reported the elbowing in the orcs game v Dunfermline;
”
bournesouprecipe
A throw-in to Celtic should be renamed ‘free-kick for the opposition’.
A corner for us is a by-kick for them, with the added advantage of a 3 on 1 counter.
just seen the huns dive.
lets make no bones about this here
its not an honest mistake
its cheating
its as clear as day
can uefa be informed that there is collusion with the refs and the scumbags
and be sent a dvd of these incidents.
cheating scumbags
SonsOfErin says:
5 December, 2011 at 11:03
Just said the same to AJ CFC – kind of hoping someone just smacks into a ref soon, which then brought us into a related discussion about Johnny Doyle and that red card.
Just seen the Aluko pen. Astonishing decision. The referee had the clearest view in the stadium ! I never ever buy the rags or click on their links. I’m assuming there is a media backlash this morning against this cheating ?
Will Duffield comment given his history of being so repulsed by simulation in the past ?
Interesting stat hmmmm
SINCE they lost Steven Naismith a month ago, Rangers have scored seven times in five games. Three of these strikes have come from the penalty spot and two in the form of own goals.
up_over
For every fiver Celtic spend, Rangers will sign a diver?
It’s very quiet on the ole Blog
Celtic are winning?
Easy Threesy
http://sport.stv.tv/football/scottish-premier/rangers/285333-football-talk-sone-aluko-storm-continues-islam-feruz-big-news-at-chelsea-socrates-tributes/?
check out the impartial picture used by STV to demonstrate Sone Aluko´s dive at Ibrox on Saturday.
I think the huns are taking their penchant to be Nazis far too far these days.
Hail Hail
The Lizard King says:
5 December, 2011 at 10:55
Phenomenal analysis. With investigative skills like that, you should work for the BBC. Oh wait a minute, I see from your CV you went to a school starting with St. Thanks for your application, we’ll be in touch!
In all seriousness, only in Scotland.
HH
dirtymac says:
5 December, 2011 at 10:43
re Cha incident.
And Lurgan
Surely we can consider that the players lunge was a factor in the shot missing the target.
Although perhaps he would only.get the penalty if he scored.
CynicCSC
bournesouprecipe
90% flippant, 100% on the money.
JinkyvJohnGreig-saysitall says:
5 December, 2011 at 11:16
Thanks. Due to the universal attractiveness of all things Celtic, I am one of the many supporters who have never been to St. anywhere – so I may be ok for that BBC job!
We are under attack from so many directions. The in built MIB bias has got subtler (less decisions AGAINST Celtic directly) – this seasons modus operandi is a) allow the opposition to kick Celtic players and b) protect Rangers players from any physical contact.
Dunfermline were awarded 1 foul on Saturday. 1. ONE. Against Rangers?? I know Weir wasn’t playing, but were Rangers players helping wee old ladies across the road or handing our seasonal soup to the poor to be bothered with a physical football match? 1 foul.
We need to ensure we are paying attention at all time.
HH
TLK
ernie lynch says:
5 December, 2011 at 10:48
Who in particular?
googybhoy ♥ Celtic says:
5 December, 2011 at 11:23
Although perhaps he would only.get the penalty if he scored.
—
Was kind of my point re the shot being fired off=no penalty. I’m almost positive the same thing happened at Tannadice last season.
It really doesn’t surprise me to such an extent that I was hoping he wouldn’t shoot as it had penalty stamped all over it. There would (aye right) have been no other decision to make had Cha lightly touched the ball.
Afternoon bhoys, warm the sun is out, and hun free.
Awe Naw
When the Mrs. was studying for her degree, she showed me something about peoples responses to headlines/ pictures in the press, and I was astonished that over 90% of people who see and read believe, and only about 7% will then question the content.
I can’t remember what it’s called, something like first learned response ???
That pic of Aluko. and the happy pics of fat sally along with pics of Lenny snarling are as you say Nazi like.
.
Just had one of they Spam emails You Know the Ones..
I’m a Nigerian Princess Bla Bla Bla..Who is Broke..
EnyWhooo..
At the End She say’s her Brother (A Prince)..is a Footballer..and if l send her $1,000 she will Give it to Her Other Brother..Who is a Bookie..and He Puts the $1,000 on the Prince to Win a Penalty in a Football Match @ 10/1..Seemingly it’s all Fixed..
She says she Will then Send me Back $2,000..
And She her 2 Brothers and The Football Team..Who are also Broke..Split the remaining $9,000..
As if that Could Happen..
Summa
dirtymac says:
5 December, 2011 at 11:34
I think there is a universal application of football laws whereby if an attacker gets whacked after they have got a shot off, a foul is NEVER given. So I don’t think this was a specifically anti Celtic one!
Similarly:
A defender is never punished for obstructing an attacker when shepherding the ball out for a goal kick;
An attacker is always booked for fouling a defender if there is contact by the attacker whilst the defender effects a clearance;
Defenders can take throws ins near the corner flag pretty much wherever they like (using the Gary Neville yardage calculator);
Defenders encroaching at a free kick are never penalised.
HH
TLK
hamiltontim says:
5 December, 2011 at 11:32
‘Who in particular?’
It’s just a general impression I’ve gained from watching games rather than a documented forensic analysis.
Bear it in mind next time you see a game and decide for yourself.
Pompey and the fit and proper person test
The adequacy of the fit and proper person test has been a long running problem in football. When a club is in trouble and an apparent saviour who can show he has some money comes along it is perhaps not surprising that neither the club nor the football authorities want to probe too deeply.
In the case of Pompey Vladimir Antonov has spent some money. He has paid out £10.5m on transfer fees and wages and was servicing the club’s old creditors who were being paid back 20p in the pound over a five year period. Quite what will happen about their money remains to be seen.
It must be emphasised that Antonov has no criminal convictions and has never been insolvent, thus meeting two key criteria. However, the financial regulatory authorities did have some concerns about aspects of his activities and one wouldn’t have had to dig too deep to discover that.
In 2007 the Financial Services Authority refused Antonov permission to open a bank in England because of concerns about his willingness to cooperate with the regulatory body. In January 2010 an attempt by the Antonov-owned company Spyker Cars to buy Saab from GM was held up and only approved when Antonov sold his majority shareholding. The Swedish security police had found what they believed to be connections between the family of Antonov and organised crime, including money laundering.
The Football League argue they haven’t got the time to pursue such matters, but perhaps they ought to devote more resources to it. With the number of unemployed graduates around, it wouldn’t cost that much.
Indeed, all the relevant information is on the internet. Of course, one can’t believe everything that is on the internet, even Wikipedia. There is a lot of false information, speculation and half truths out there. But the amount of information about Antonov should have rung some alarm bells and prompted a more detailed investigation.
Given that the Football League does not come out of this very well, it would be particularly harsh to deduct points from Portsmouth, not that they have any football debts that I am aware of anyway.
—————————–
The Scottish Football Association is investigating Craig Whyte after the Rangers owner admitted that he had been disqualified as a company director.
And if it is not satisfied that Whyte falls into its fit and proper person guidelines, it will take action against the Ibrox club.
Rangers issued a statement to the Plus stock exchange on Wednesday confirming Whyte’s seven-year disqualification.
The club says it is happy to discuss the matter with the SFA fully.
“The Scottish FA has noted the Rangers FC statement to the stock exchange regarding the club’s owner Craig Whyte,” said chief executive Stewart Regan.
“We have been in dialogue with the club on this matter and in light of today’s developments have requested clarification by return.
“We await disclosure of key information before we can make any further comment.”
The governing body’s articles of association state that office bearers with their football clubs must meet their board’s fit and proper criteria.
The SFA board reserves the right to make such a judgement “after due consideration of all relevant facts”.
Asked if it was the SFA’s duty to check such matters when a person takes over a football club, Regan told BBC Scotland on Thursday evening: “Every club in Scotland supplies an official return and by supplying that official return they are effectively signing up to the articles of the Scottish FA.
“The rules and regulations are laid out very clearly as to what is and what isn’t allowed as far as company directors are concerned.
“Given that clubs are changing their directors and people are coming and going every day, it’s impossible for the Scottish FA to investigate every single person across every professional club in Scotland.
You would think that AT THE VERY LEAST the SFA would at the very minimum perform a mandatory and rigorous check on those teams that have qualified for European competition. Is it not gross negligence not to do so ? The fact that these clubs are representing the association and the country it is surely a minimum requirement to demonstrate that no financial doping is occurring. This statement by Reagan proves that he and his organisation is turning a blind eye to this fact. This astonishingly weak admission Stewart Reagan can NEVER recover from. Campbell Ogilvie cannot sit in judgement over this anyway.
WHEN ARE WE GOING TO SPEAK UP ABOUT THIS ?
“When anything happens to indicate that a breach of those articles has taken place, that is the point at which the Association gets involved.”
BUT HOW WOULD THE SFA EVEN KNOW IF IT REFUSES TO EVEN ADMINISTRATE AND CHECK THE INFORMATION IT HAS BEEN GIVEN BASED ON THE BARE FACED LIE BY THE SFA`S CHIEF EXECUTIVE THAT IT TAKES TOO LONG AND THERE ARE TOO MANY THINGS TO INVESTIGATE
A spokesman for Rangers said: “At no stage did the club believe there had been a breach of SFA regulations.
“The club will be happy to provide the SFA with all the relevant information and discuss the matter with them fully.”
Article 10.2 (g) makes reference to a person who has “been disqualified as a director pursuant to the Company Directors’ Disqualification Act 1986, within the previous five years”, with the caveat that the list is “acknowledged to be illustrative and not exhaustive”.
White was disqualified from 2000 to 2007, while in charge of Vital UK Ltd, as revealed in a BBC Scotland documentary on 20 October.
Hail HAil
ernie lynch says:
5 December, 2011 at 11:42
I think I’m in agreement with you but I see it in one or two individuals rather than something that is permeating the entire team.
Interesting points by many on low-key incidents that can influence a game’s result due to MIB interpretation.
Noticed one in injury time yesterday – wee JF was fouled but rode the tackle and remained on his feet with the ball. DU had been attacking – defence stretched – JF has an obvious free 15-20 yard run to their penalty box – a definite case for applying the advantage rule.
MIB has perfect view and option to allow play-on – no he whistles for a free kick to us – allows DU to regroup and we lose the advantage.
Apply the rules evenly or assist your favoured team by waving play-on (when they are attacking) or stop the game for a free-kick (allowing them to defend)?
MIB decisions/ performances should be subject to the same scrutiny/ review as those in the EPL.
“Craig Whyte is not authorized by the Financial Services Authority. He was a Director of LM Logistics which collapsed into Administration 9 months ago. Independent Auditors said that the annual accounts of LM had been presented by Whyte in a way that was misleading.
The same problem was found in the accounts of another Whyte company, Countryliner. 2 groups within Countryliner have recently gone into liquidation causing widespread job losses. Another Whyte company Tixway UK have still not shown their accounts which were due last October. They are about to be struck off the Stock Exchange.
Merchant Interactive is another Whyte company which has late accounts and will probably be struck off the Stock Exchange. Whyte was also a director of Zemfill until he recently resigned. This company’s financial statement is also very overdue and it is on the point of liquidation.
Whyte has created yet another company – the Rangers FC Group.
Having watched what counts as fitba’ in this wee cHUNtry for as long as i can remember i really don’t see what all the fuss is about over the Aluko penalty.
Isn’t this the way it’s always been?
And remember,they were 1-0 up when it was awarded,whatever that means.
Apart from the penalty,what about their first goal?Total football!
This mob and their cronies are starting to feel the heat,the deafening,repetetive howls of “15 points” have been replaced by “s**t,it’s only 4″ and they KNOW worse is to come.
Keep up the wins Celtic and come May they’ll have to face up to their most terrifying nightmare,”and manager of this season’s champions,Neil Francis Lennon.”
RIP Socrates,a player for the people,a man of the people.
Iloved the big dude.
FOREVERANDEVER!!!
praecepta
I posted this yesterday, I could post it after every match we play in scotland btw.
THE EXILED TIM says:
4 December, 2011 at 20:45
Malorbhoy
Thompshun was brilliant today, a true master class in how the cheat without making any contraversial decisions, for a change I was calm cos I felt the team were in complete control.
He broke up our momentum time after time, he was superb.
bournesouprecipe says:
5 December, 2011 at 11:12
It’s very quiet on the ole Blog
Celtic are winning?
………..
It was quiet last night innaw, where were you? Watching Beyonce on tv perchance?
V
Let me say straight away it was never a penalty.
Let me say right away that if Aluko gets done for it while Gary O’Connor got off scot free for his, then they are questions to answer, do you agree?
Now spare me the sanctimonious clap trap, all players do it, it is rife in the game, annoying but deal with it.
After all Larsson, Petrov, Sutton, Maloney, Di Canio, McGeady were’nt bad at it, either, to name a few.
The Lizard King says:
5 December, 2011 at 11:31
To be honest, as I typed it I did think that I’ve got a few friends who support Celtic and are from various ethnic and religious backgrounds, but I suppose over the last year I’ve felt drawn into the rut of thinking that the underlying bias is against the incorrect perception that Celtic represents Scots Irish Catholics.
Personally I’m 35 and have had the same question (not which school did you go to, but a more blatant what team do you support) asked on 4 occasions at interview in the last 12 or 13 years.
On three of the four occasions I declined the offer of employment on that basis alone. The one I did accept was purely because it was asked by an Australian female who had clearly been set up by a Celtic supporter who became my boss, as he had said his one criteria for employment was that they could not support R*ngers – It does work for you sometimes!
Taken from
http://blog.emiratesstadium.info/archives/16931
Football enters the crisis stage, from Rangers to Kettering, from Portsmouth to Everton
Follow us on Twitter @Untold Arsenal
———————————-
“Making the Arsenal” – is available on Amazon, Arsenal on line, the Woolwich Arsenal site and in the Arsenal store.
by Tony Attwood
I recently wrote about Everton’s financial situation, and received a number of comments from Everton fans putting the point that the current owner had always taken money out of the club, rather than being the saviour as I had suggested.
I’m going to mention Everton again later, but my point here is that they are just one among many clubs that are in a serious situation. You wouldn’t know it, the way the Leagues carry on, but there is a crisis in football that is running all the way through the game, and which one day soon will result in an explosion.
My overall point however is to compare what is going on in clubs and what has happened and is happening at Arsenal.
Portsmouth has become a by-word for collapse, and now we hear that the company which owns Portsmouth, Convers Sports Initiatives is in administration and its majority owner, Vladimir Antonov, has been arrested for alleged large-scale bank fraud and forgery. Clearly if this gent is found guilty this will be another great victory for the fit and proper person test.
Just for the record he offered “long‑term stability” to the club. Portsmouth are now once again running out of money and the prosecutor general in Lithuania is looking to freeze all the assets of CSI – including Portsmouth.
It is hardly funny, but in a black humour sort of way we might note that Portsmouth’s chief executive is David Lampitt who was previously head of regulation at the Football Association. Mr Antonov is currently facing a hearing to see if he has to be extradited to Lithuania.
Portsmouth, lest we forget, has previously walked off with £37m of taxpayers’ money, and at best we’ll only get 20% of it. Quite possibly now we’ll get none.
Portsmouth started to deteriorate under Harry Redknapp, who ran up mega debts for the club in taking them to the cup final in 2008 and the administration of 2010 came directly from that. Harry Redknapp we may note will be in court next year on issues arising from his time at Portsmouth.
Interestingly, in December 2007 the Financial Services Authority in the UK stopped Mr Antonov’s bank Snoras from opening a branch in Britain and rather more famously two years later the European Investment Bank refused to lend money to Saab if Mr Antonov was involved in the deal.
But he is still a fit and proper person.
Meanwhile all the Championship clubs except Birmingham (who have desperate financial positions of their own, since their part owner was arrested for money laundering and they were sued by West Ham) have agreed to reduce their losses to £5m a year by 2017.
This is still going to be a huge problem for them – because of the gap between the Premier League and the Championship – a matter dealt with at length by Phil Gregory in his Untold Arsenal submission to the House of Commons Select Committee on football governance.
In 2009-10, 21 out of 24 Championship clubs made a loss. Bristol City lost £12m and another £11m in 2010-11 – the year Ipswich lost £15m, Nottingham Forest £12m and Sheffield United £19m.
So the question is, what are they going to do with clubs who don’t obey the new rule?
Meanwhile the situation in Scotland has become (at least from an English perspective) so laughable it can’t be true.
For months, maybe years, we have all known that Craig Whyte the owner of Rangers has been banned for seven-years from being a company director. He has done everything to deny this, and indeed when the BBC mentioned it, he said he was taking legal action against the Corporation. If he is then it will be fun to watch.
Now finally, with the tax man ready to pounce and the club in total meltdown with judges putting their money into accounts that the club can’t touch, so that creditors stand a chance of getting something, the SFA’s in a statement from its chief executive has said: “The SFA has noted the Rangers FC statement to the stock exchange regarding the club’s owner Craig Whyte. We have been in dialogue with the club on this matter and in light of today’s developments have requested clarification by return. We await disclosure of key information before making further comment.”
A more realistic comment might be “we have been conned by the club, and are looking utterly feeble ourselves, so are winding the SFA up at once”, but they didn’t say that. mores the pity
The SFA like its English counterpart, has fit and proper person rules which are just ignored wholesale, and there are no penalties in place for breaking them.
And so back to Everton where we now see that the director of communications has left the club after his emails which criticised the chief executive of the club, have come out into the open. One of the emails described Everton as like “working in a kindergarten” and another talked about a “financial meltdown”.
Everton is looking for a new director of communications.
.
And what then of Kettering, also mentioned in my headline. One of my local teams, they have a long history of links with Arsenal. They play in the Conference and have a crumbling ground on which there is a lease of another 18 months or so to go – at the end of that the owner wants them out and wants to sell the land for property development (it is in the middle of a residential area).
.
So the owner of the club has moved them 10 miles down the road to the ground of their bitterest rivals, Rushden and Diamonds who were also in the conference but this season went into liquidation and now are no more. Diamonds had a wonderful ground built and paid for by the Doc Martins company and given to the club.
.
Kettering’s chairman has signed a 15 year lease on the Diamond’s ground, and tried to excite people by selling discounted season tickets before the season started. But the fans wouldn’t travel to a rival’s ground, and crowds have collapsed. All the players are up for sale, and it looks like Kettering could follow Rushden out of existence in the same season.
.
And Arsenal? Following our defeat by Manchester City in the game that saw the most expensive shot of all time (see my earlier article), some people wrote in saying we would never win anything unless we followed that club’s approach in bringing in vast amounts of money to the club.
It is the same thinking as has led to the collapse of football clubs large and small across the UK. I for one hope we never go down that route.
Liar
You only list Celtic players. Strange that. If you wish to be taken seriously you’ll need to at least give the impression of objectivity.
hamiltontim: The subject of penalties encourages selective recall – for/against/tax.
truth 4767
A wee site for you to look at,and a chance for you to reflect on what,deep down you KNOW to be the truth!
I know I shouldn’t,AWE NAW,so forgive this transgression just the once.
http://itcantbeparanoia.blogspot.com/
Smething of a statistical anomaly,no doubt….
Does anyone know what the outcome of this was ?
Courts to decide on legality of ‘football creditors’ rule this week
The Football League will find out this week whether it is lawful for it to insist that football players, managers and other clubs get paid before other creditors if a football club enters administration.29 Nov 2011
HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) is challenging the so-called ‘football creditor rule’, which requires football-related debts such as money owed to players, staff and other clubs to be paid in full before a club is eligible to compete again in the league.
Restructuring expert Nick Gavin-Brown of Pinsent Masons, the law firm behind Out-Law.com, said that if the longstanding dispute was not resolved by the High Court the Government could do so using legislation.
Insolvency law dictates the order in which different debts are settled when a company goes into administration. Secured creditors, who hold fixed charges indicating that a specified asset can be used to satisfy a particular debt, are normally paid first. Any surplus is then made available alongside the proceeds of the sale of other assets to settle the expenses of the administration, employee claims and other debts. This means that in the majority of insolvencies unsecuredd creditors will remain unpaid or only receive a small percentage of the debt.
Changes to insolvency law introduced in 2003 abolished HMRC’s status as a preferential creditor, meaning that unpaid taxes are now treated in the same way as other unsecured debts. HMRC has argued that the football creditor rule gives those creditors preferential status, and that all creditors who are considered unsecured creditors under insolvency laws should be treated the same way.
The UK tax authority challenged the legality of the football creditor rule in a case in 2004 when Wimbledon became the first football club to enter administration after its preferential status was abolished. The then Inland Revenue challenged an arrangement that saw it receive 30 pence in the pound in respect of a debt of £525,000. However it was unsuccessful in this case, as the money paid to the football creditors came directly from the buyer of the club rather than from the club’s own finances.
“So far, the courts have refused to condemn the football creditor rule – not least because the rule has been implemented with the approval of the majority of creditors and is funded by purchasers,” said restructuring expert Nick Gavin-Brown.
“If the High Court does not support HMRC and local non-football creditors, they may still be able to rely on the Government’s own determination to reign in financial mismanagement in football.”
Earlier this year an influential committee of MPs suggested that if HMRC was unsuccessful in its case the Government should instead step in to legislate against the football creditor rule. In its report on football governance, the Culture, Media and Sport Committee said that the rule “epitomises the extent to which financial priorities are being distorted”, as it meant that the tax authorities got proportionately less than they were due while smaller creditors, such as St John’s Ambulance and local tradesmen, were unlikely to get paid at all.
The rule may have been justifiable in the past by the need to protect clubs which managed their businesses reasonably effectively from the odd exceptional reckless behaviour, the report suggested. However, such reckless practices are now “absolutely endemic”. The Committee received evidence that when Portsmouth FC became the first Premier League club to enter administration last year its players and other football creditors were paid in full in the region of £30 million, while other creditors received approximately 16 pence in the pound, it said.
However the Football League told the Committee that the rule was a “much maligned and misunderstood area of policy within the game”, which protected the integrity of the competition by preventing individual clubs from gaining an unfair sporting advantage by entering administration to avoid paying their debts.
Trevor Watkins, a sports law expert with Pinsent Masons, said that although the rule left ordinary creditors with very few pennies paid out of every pound owed, it had a part to play in maintaining the integrity of the Football League.
“Removing the football creditor rule without rebalancing the rest of the game’s regulations is likely to lead to considerable club instability,” he said. “Clubs will default on their debts to other members and creditors, restructure and play on. Creditors will continue to go unpaid and many lower-league clubs will be at risk. Change needs to come with a basket of measures and not just the abolition of one.”
Nick Gavin-Brown said that if the football creditor rule was abolished either by the High Court or through legislation, football clubs could face expulsion from the Football League on insolvency.
“The Premier League and Football League may have to re-assess whether there are other ways they can look after their own,” he said.
Revenue takes on football creditor rule
By Jane Croft and Roger Blitz … Financial times
Revenue & Customs has launched a landmark High Court battle to prevent football clubs and their employees being paid ahead of other creditors if a football club becomes insolvent.
Gregory Mitchell QC, opening the case for the Revenue, told the court that the case was about the “the ugly side of the beautiful game”.
Under the so-called football creditor rule, other clubs and leagues owed money by a failed club get preferential treatment ahead of all other creditors including the revenue.
Critics of the rule say it is unacceptable to allow highly paid footballers to be first in the queue of creditors ahead of cash-strapped small businesses and charities such as St John Ambulance.
Mr Mitchell told the court that the rule meant that “football creditors are paid in full and treated as preferential creditors when they have not been granted that status by parliament” and added the rule was “contrary to the fundamental principles of insolvency law”.
The Revenue wants the High Court to declare the rule is unlawful and void, and has argued in court documents that the rule causes “real financial prejudice” to the Revenue.
Mr Mitchell told the judge: “Whenever the football creditor rule is applied there is always a loss to the taxpayer. That’s why we are bringing these proceedings.”
“In insolvency, all of the football entities are paid in full and unsecured creditors receive a very modest dividend or sometimes nothing,” he added.
The football creditor rule has been “invented” by the Football League and Premier League and it is “not a rule created by parliament”, the court was told.
“There is no similar rule operating in another country or industry,” Mr Mitchell added.
The case is significant because there had been 36 Football League insolvencies between March 2002 and 2011 and insolvency was a “very real hazard in the Football League”, the court heard.
The Football League, which will present its case later this week, is due to argue that football is a closed industry and it is untenable to expect a club to continue in a competition against other clubs to which it has failed to pay its debts in full in the event of an insolvency.
Ghuys.
Please ignore the HUN.
NBM and IT will go away.
MWD
hamiltontim says:
5 December, 2011 at 12:09
Liar
You only list Celtic players. Strange that. If you wish to be taken seriously you’ll need to at least give the impression of objectivity.
—————————————————————————————————————————————————-
I am being objective, did I not point out that diving is all encompassing, a scourge in our game, did I not say it was never a penalty.
I was merely listing Celtic players who dived, merely pointing out a Rangers jersey is not the common factor.
For us, looking back, Davie Wilson probably invented diving, but was so bad at it, he lost us more claims than he won by his laughable dying swan act.
Good at it, in fact he was so good it took a few takes to see it, was Claudia Cannigia. Yes, we have had a few, is thatobjective enough for you.