God love Packie Bonner, spend “£20m to £30m to bring those quality players the fans are desperate for”.
There are two opposing world views: one where people call for unaffordable money [those figures would be]to be spent because fans of a football club are “desperate”, the other where people want football clubs to spend what they can afford.
The latter group remember football’s crash-and-liquidate days – and learned the lessons. The former also remember the crash-and-liquidate days, but they are impervious to lessons.
We can debate what the size of an affordable spend is, but a couple of parameters have to be observed:
If it increases the cost base to such an extent that a reversal on the field would plunge the club into financial disarray, it’s unaffordable.
Players need to be appropriate for the environment – with neighbouring clubs earning £100m each season from TV deals, only players of a certain profile will play for a club with a considerably smaller wage bill (and turnover).
We live in a time when Scots Steven Naismith went for £8.5m (1 goal in 9 starts) and Ross McCormack went for £11m. These are common values for this calibre of player. We all want Celtic to improve, but that will not be achieved by spending unsuitable or unaffordable money. Packie, think back to Valentine’s Day 2012 and add a dose of perspective.
Get better at scouting, get fitter, improve the coaching – and spend everything you can afford, not any more. That’s the model for Celtic.
898 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- ...
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- »
Hope the res 12 bhoys have got it right , and this geezer is talking through his erchie . Where’s
BRTH when you need something disected . I,ll also contain my excitement until I hear what PL has to say on the matter .
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
SIPSINI on 10TH MAY 2016 10:46 PM
Auldheid…
Lifted this of hunmedia, I would have linked it but couldn’t see the option available. I’ll catch your response to it tomorrow if you catch this post, as it’s kip time for me. Ps, sorry it’s a long read, just scroll by…
TheLawMan
Club Legend
3,422
11,538 posts
Gender:Male
Location:Glasgow
Posted 14 hours ago.
Paul67. How is the lamb at peters house. Succulent ?
You mentioned two opposing views but seem to have missed out the third
View one Spend spend spend. Spend lots of money you don’t have and get liquidated
View two. Spend what you earn and keep debt low. Eg if you sell 3 players at 18m and qualify for CL you invest the money in new players. You don’t give the manager about 8m and keep the rest for AGM balance sheet and bonus
View three. Sadly this is the view used by Peter Lawell Ensure that debt is zero at all costs. Cut cut cut. Buy cheap and only buy players who are right age to be sold to EPL. Buy lots of rubbish and hope that one can be sold to epl. Low cost from coach to scouts. Keep debt zero.
We now know the outcome of view three , it’s been tried and only winner is Peter Lawell pension.
Ps paul. Don’t insult intelligence about EPL and its billions. Molde , Malmo , Maribor and legia don’t play in epl but we are embarrassed year in year out by these clubs. Why? See view three
Get a grip paul. You know the big picture but for some reason don’t want to admit to it publicly.
Keep on running. Spencer Davis Group
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TyZrK9meebo
67 Cup Winners,
Yes I agree with you re Roy.
I spent a good bit of time looking at Brendan Rodgers for example.Watford finished 13th, Reading left by Mutual Consent.
Swansea, he was there just under 2 years. Won the Championship Play Off. When he left for Liverpool he had a win average of below 45%. Ok we are talking matches in the EPL etc.
Liverpool, net spend of £90m. Arguably should have won the league but didn’t. Won nothing and dismissed.
Season one Liverpool, 7th season 2, 2nd He got League Manager of the Year. Sacked in season 3, when 10th.
Ok, he lost Suarez, Gerrard was finished he had a win average of 51.2%, less than Roy Evans but still 9% higher than Souness.
Big club management experience. Intelligent, media friendly. The support should like him. If we can afford him?
Gimme Some Truth
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=orz9-85Fr14
And. . . . Out.
Gute Nacht, Allen.
Winning captain has teased for last few weeks and nothing materialised.
Hope tomorrow brings us satisfaction but not really confident.
The corrupt generally get away with it and especially when it gained the outcome a small banana republic desired.
When you see crooks and cheats like Ogilvy and Dallas entrenched in EUFA then it seems the corrupt SFA have their guys in play so our genuine grievance will never be addressed.
“Winning captain has teased for last few weeks and nothing materialised.”
Fan a tic,
Obviously nothing will have materialised if tomorrow/today is the story he has been teasing.
Interesting times.
BEATBHOY on 11TH MAY 2016 12:33 AM
Gimme Some Truth
==========================================
References to “Tricky Dicky” way prior to talk of impeachment.
Amazing perspicacity from John Lennon.
See also ” Crippled inside “
Well I tried to stay away but the recent coalescence of res 12 has piqued my interest.
Despite all the bedbugs and ballyhoo about new managers new staff new Celtic ( and most importantly new Keano season tickets) its just that…hullabaloo. Neganon2 take note.
So Celtic Slow news and lazy journalism has decided that their mouthpiece is winning captains soon to be demoted to losing lieutenant.
I think res 12 could ultimately become resolution 13 14 and 15 but lets hear what master Lawwell says tomorrow.
However, since he is a lame duck like so many on here don’t hold your breath. Dermott was most embarassed and a raging Irish billionaire at the hun semi final and getting the finger.
(oops can you say that on CQN..getting the finger).
In my opinion I think paul67 should demand PL’s presence immediately in his office, eye to eye, manno on manno, andask why our illustrious accountant benefactor Lawwell has lied to him indirectly for 10 years and to his face for 4, knowing fine well what the SFA were up to and knowing fine well their MO on hunnery.
Methinks PL’s days are numbered and Paul67 may chuck it in soon to losing lieutenant.
All’s well that ends Lawwell and Celtic liaison officers too (John Paul whatshisname and company secretary lawyer O’Gullible)
I should have been a pair of ragged claws scuttling across the floors of silent seas.
Geordie Munro
He has been hinting at jam tomorrow for quite a few weeks.
Today is just another tease.
Hopefully this time tomorrow the wait will have been worth it.
But not really optimistic .
Hope i am wrong.
MARGARET MCGILL on 11TH MAY 2016 1:02 AM
Mair retirements than Sinatra.
macjay
just trying to be frank.
Frank
or Peg ?
How about an each way bet ?
AC/DC might suit .
or back in black?
No bad words , please , Frank.
Children read this site.
sipsini on 10th May 2016 10:46 pm
Auldheid…
Lifted this of hunmedia, I would have linked it but couldn’t see the option available. I’ll catch your response to it tomorrow if you catch this post, as it’s kip time for me. Ps, sorry it’s a long read, just scroll by…
I’ll respond to each point so its a long scroll.
TheLawMan
Club Legend
3,422
11,538 posts
Gender:Male
Location:Glasgow
Posted 14 hours ago
Just as a preamble, I have said in the past on here that I have a number of acquaintances whom I met through Rangers over the years I was fortunate to have hospitality with the club. Over a period of 10+ years a small group of 9 of us kept close even after most of us had moved on to pastures new including moving abroad and down south.
Between us we have a huge professional and financial background and range from Self Employed small family businessman through to Audit partner and qualified lawyer. We often share emails, thoughts and views on all things Rangers and it’s fair to say that in the most we hold pretty similar opinions on a lot of things. 9 times out of 10, our thoughts and views are not aligned with the majority of our support but we offer them when asked without fear nor favour. Never was that more prevalent than back in 2011/12 when we could see exactly what was happening and I was sending out all the warning signals much to a lot of unhappy replies.
I thought it important to give this background as what im about to write has been shared by email between us all, checked and verified as standing up by people who have an advantage over the general Scottish football fan and I don’t mean that to sound demeaning in any respect, just to point out that checking information, looking at regulations and legal documents etc is what they have done most of their working life.
The recent report which claims that the SFA wrongly approved a licence for Rangers to play in Europe which was compiled by an Independent group (The Offshore Game) based on information supplied to them by Celtic supporters. The first thing to note is that, for once, I genuinely believe the author is independent and not a Celtic fan/Rangers hater. I believe however the evidence presented was tainted and hand-picked before sending it however I am about to prove why the report is wrong and why all the moon howling by Celtic fans on Resolution 12 is dead in the water.
THE ISSUE
In relation to the report there are 4 main accusations, which mirror the ones made constantly by Celtic fans, and Auldheid in particular, not forgetting John James though he falls into the first category:
1) As at 31st March 2011, Rangers had an overdue tax bill which meant the SFA should not issue a licence to play in Europe
========================
No that was never the case. The bill did not arrive until May so couldn’t be overdue. There was however a liability that went beyond potential (see below) and the question is did the description of an accepted liability (why did CW take it on and agree to pay?) as a potential one throw the SFA or should they have asked more questions and been on alert at later points. the SFA made a great deal of play that they granted the licence properly under UEFA rules Art 50 and they did technically and made much of it. No bill had arrived so it couldn’t be overdue was the inarguable point to justify the granting at 31st March
===========================================
2) As at 31st March 2011, Rangers claimed this bill was “a potential bill” instead of stating it was actually a bill which meant the SFA should not issue a licence to play in Europe
============================
No again no dispute at 31st March
====================================
3) Even if the bill at 31st March was only “a potential bill” as at 30th June 2011, it had became a proper bill which meant the SFA should not issue a licence to play in Europe.
=====================
No it always was an accepted liability that CW agreed to make provision for in his Takeover Statement but by 30 June it had become an overdue payable, The bill being delivered on 20th May with 30 days to appeal. There was no appeal and no payment so it became overdue before 30 June. There was expert tax advice on this point.
===============================
4) As at 30th June, Rangers declared that they had a bill but were waiting on a schedule of payments from HMRC, which meant the SFA should not issue a licence to play in Europe.
THE RULES
In order to understand each of the 4 accusations we first need to understand the actual rules they refer to which can be found here:
http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/Tech/uefaorg/General/01/80/54/10/1805410_DOWNLOAD.pdf
In relation to the first 2 issues, Article 50 of the rules states:
Article 50 – No overdue payables towards employees and social/tax authorities
1 The licence applicant must prove that as at 31 March preceding the licence season it has no “OVERDUE PAYABLES” (as defined in Annex VIII) towards its employees as well as social/tax authorities as a result of contractual and legal obligations towards its employees that arose prior to the previous 31 December.
To understand what constitutes an “OVERDUE PAYABLE” we need to turn to Annex VIII as directed.
Annex VIII states:
ANNEX VIII: Notion of ‘overdue payables’
1. Payables are considered as overdue if they are not paid according to the agreed terms.
So to be crystal clear, a Social Tax is ONLY considered as “OVERDUE PAYABLE” if there is a debt owed to HMRC (or other tax authority) and that the terms of the amount due have been agreed then not met. Article 50 and 66(later) solely deal with overdue pyables.
To help understand if our club had a debt which met the above, we can use the evidence in The Offshore Game report. Here is the timeline of the evidence:
3rd March – Andrew Thornhill recommends to the Rangers Board that they “seek a settlement” with HMRC in relation to the Small Tax Case
21st March – A hand written note states that HMRC have agreed “IN PRINCIPLE” that the settlement seems the right thing to do. A decision which then needs to become a formal offer by HMRC and an agreement by the Club.
===============================
No what the note was written on was a spreadsheet showing what RFC thought the liability was. Not arguing the liability but negotiating the amount. They managed to drop Moore off the bill (probably because there was no side letter for him) and agreed to the amount if HMRC did not apply penalties. HMRC (not RFC) agreed the amount of the liability in principle but somewhere between 3 March and 23 March the liability was accepted by RFC, then on 23 March the amount agreed, why would they agree an amount if they disputed the liability?
=========================================
31st March – 1st disclosure due to SFA for licence by the Club. At this point, the Social Tax is NOT overdue as no formal agreement has been reached and no payment date set by HMRC. This means according to Clause Viii of UEFA guidelines they are not “overdue if not paid according to the agreed terms” I have no idea if Rangers disclosed them on the submission, however if they did, they would have done so without any formal disclosure requirement.
1st April – Rangers released their interim accounts confirming: “Discussions are continuing with HMRC to establish a resolution to the assessments raised.” This is in line with the evidence presented in the report.
===================
Clearly there were no continuing discussions as they had already taken place and the description RFC Chairman A Johnson gave as it being a potential bill led to the narrative that there was some dispute. There wasn’t.
==========================================
Again to be clear. As at 31st March 2011, HMRC had not made an official agreement with Rangers nor set out the terms of which they wanted any money to be paid. According to UEFA own rules, the £2.83m was NOT an “OVERDUE PAYABLE” and therefore required no disclosure whatsoever as part of the licence process.
Therefore the evidence actually shows that Issue 1 and Issue 2 outlined above are false and that the licence requirements were fully met.
==================
We are all agreed that at 31st March licence was properly granted under UEFA FFP but not that the liability was potential or in dispute. That needs to be clarified.
=============================================
Moving onto the more contentious Issues 3 and 4. To understand if we broke any guidelines here, we need to refer to Article 66 which states:
Article 66 – No overdue payables towards employees and/or social/tax authorities – Enhanced
1 The licensee must prove that as at 30 June of the year in which the UEFA club competitions commence it has no overdue payables (as specified in Annex VIII) towards its employees and/or social/tax authorities (as defined in paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 50) that arose prior to 30 June.
2 By the deadline and in the form communicated by the UEFA administration, the licensee must prepare and submit a declaration confirming the absence or existence of overdue payables towards employees and social/tax authorities.
4 The following information must be given, as a minimum, in respect of each overdue payable towards social/tax authorities, together with explanatory comment:
a) Name of the creditor;
b) Balance overdue as at 30 June, including the due date for each overdue element.
5 The declaration must be approved by management and this must be evidenced by way of a brief statement and signature on behalf of the executive body of the licensee.
In summary the above requires the same disclosures as 31st March but clarifies what you need to do in the circumstance that you do have an overdue payable and this is where the confusion really kicks on for the authors and Celtic fans complaining about it.
For understanding of our situation, here is the timeline between 1st April and 30th June as presented by the author of the report:
5th May – HMRC make a formal offer of settlement for the club to decide to pay or not and give the club 11 days to sign the offer(16th May) and a further 30 days after the signature to pay it(15th June). At this stage, this is still not an “overdue payable” according to UEFA rules. This letter also confirms that no bill was formally agreed prior to 31st March.
===================
At 5th May HMRC say “AS LIABILITY AGREED” I want you to sign an offer and then I’ll issue a bill. However if you do not reply by 16th May I’ll start collection proceedings (which they did on 20th May). So 5th May letter has nothing to do with the date from which an overdue payable would be measured.
6th May – Craig Whyte takes over Rangers.
===============
And agrees to meet the agreed liability of £2.8m in his Takeover statement.
===============================
20th May – As Rangers, now under different ownership, failed to agree to the offer received on the 5th May sent to and agreed by the previous owners, HMRC issue Formal determinations to the value of the agreed amounts made by the previous Board. The amount is now an “overdue payable” according to UEFA rules and subject to disclosure for the first time.
==================
New ownership is a red herring. CW agreed the liability remained and he had not (and never ever did) dispute it). What HMRC did say at 5th May was that they had allowed collection to drift BECAUSE of the takeover but were now in collection mode.
========================================
6th June – MCR write to HMRC on behalf of the club asking HMRC to consider a payment schedule and to allow more time for the new owners to work out cashflow and working capital.
There is then no evidence of any replies from HMRC which is quite surprising given that other documents from HMRC which paint a “bad picture” seem readily available yet the 1 document which can prove beyond any doubt the situation at 30th June is missing.
=========================
In fact HMRC did reply on 16th June. It was reported at a Management meeting on 11th May that HMRC suggested a payment to mitigate the level of penalty loading and £200k was offered on the 6th June by RFC. HMRC suggested on 16th May a cheque be made payable to HMRC. Nothing more.
================================================
30th June – Ken Olverman emails Craig Whyte to confirm that he is disclosing the “overdue payable” and commenting that they are waiting a schedule of payments from HMRC as per the letter dated 6th June.
CRUCIAL CLARIFICATION POINT
UEFA regulations do not forbid a club from having an overdue payable. UEFA regulations do not state that if you have an overdue payable, that you cannot get a licence. UEFA regulations simply state that if you have an overdue payable then under Article 66 section 4 that you must disclose the debt and state why its overdue. Ken Olvermans email is 100% consistent with this. Rangers disclosed their overdue payable. Rangers followed the regulations. The licence was issued.
==============================
Correct. Clubs can have sums due to HMRC at 30 June but to be excluded from the overdue payable category there has to be a written agreement by 30 June TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE FOR PAYMENT beyond the applicable overdue deadline (mid June). No such agreement existed at 30 June, So awaiting a scheduling of payments was NOT justification for the sum due not to be treated as an overdue payable and importantly if what Olverman reported to CW is what was reported to UEFA the status of the overdue payable was not postponed because that required a written agreement to justify that statement. There was none but there is always the possibility the submission to UEFA said different but regardless, in the absence of an extension to deadline an overdue payable existed. What UEFA have to do is confirm this point and if untrue explain why and if true establish how it was not questioned under their rules. There is a bit more on what happened in July when an extension was given then pulled a week later that suggests RFC were playing HMRC who got tired of it.
MALAGA RULING
The report gets another aspect hugely wrong by referring to The Malaga Ruling. It states:
“The (Malaga) judgement confirmed that in order to meet the rules, a club must have written agreement in place to pay any outstanding tax liability” which is completely wrong.
The Malaga judgement confirmed that the “EUR 8,450,000 had to be considered as OVERDUE, because of the lack of any written agreement between Malaga and the tax authorities.” This ultimately means that as an OVERDUE amount, Malaga had a duty of disclosure under Pargaraph 4 of Article 66. It does NOT mean that they had to have a written agreement in place to meet the rules. It also does NOT mean they wouldnt have got a licence if properly disclosed. Malaga failed to disclose this amount completely and this is why they breached the rules. The overdue payable in itself was NOT a breach of the rules.
It is important to note at this stage that if any club has a written agreement with the tax authority then no disclosure is required at all. This does not change anything in relation to our situation, as we did not take that route. We disclosed it.
It is also even more important to note that in the case of Malaga, on the 30th June, they disclosed an overdue payable of 9.42m EURO(this was in addition to the undiscosed amount above) yet they were granted a licence by the RFEF (Spanish SFA) and the licence was rubber stamped by UEFA. Rangers fully disclosed an overdue payable of 3.4m EURO(35% of Malagas) yet some would have you believe the SFA should not have granted the initial licence. They use Malaga ruling (wrongly) when they want to and ignore it when it doesnt suit the agenda.
=========================
The parallel with Malaga is that in both cases at 30th June an overdue payable existed and neither club had a written agreement to extend the deadline beyond 30th June, both clubs used ongoing discussion with tax authority as an excuse to retain their licence. It was on this basis UEFA asked Malaga to produce future financial forecasts and by which time Malaga were playing in the CL. So sanctions applied from the following year. Malaga appealed on basis they had been in discussion with Spanish tax authorities but the Court of Arbitration in Sport upheld UEFA’s interpretation that unless there was a written agreement to extend the deadline an overdue payable existed. This seems to have got lost in the ToG report version.
What is true is that expulsion from the CL had RFC still been in it was unlikely but it was a sanction open to CFCB and what is not known is just what did RFC say at 30 June that let them slip by scrutiny whilst Malaga didn’t a year later?
SO THERE WE HAVE IT
31st March – HMRC had not officially agreed the final bill and given a due date means no disclosure was required. Rangers may have actually have disclosed it incidentally, but it was not a requirement.
30th June – Rangers had to disclose the overdue payable and comment on the current position. They did this.
There is a further checkpoint at 30th September, however by this time, Rangers were out of Europe and have not had a licence since. Any noise around the 30th September is just nonsense.
================
Oh no it isn’t.
==================
THE OFFSHORE GAME
All of the above has been sent to the author, over various emails and he agreed it was “very thoughtful” and “considered”. A review was promised with the co-author however on Twitter yesterday, the account continued to reply to tweets on the subject with no sign of taking a step back and considering this game changer. A few of my acquaintances have taken to other forms of Social Media to ask questions of others with a lot of sweeping, blocking and deleting going on. Its funny that all of these people cry for these things to be out in the open yet when presented with credible evidence, they shrink into the tortoise shell.
We await a reply and correction from the author of the report unless evidence is hiding in the wings to disprove the position above. (tu)
UPDATE : The author has replied and accepted a number of points around other issues not listed above. There is ongoing dialogue at present and I will update once we reach a conclusion.
=============================
Only the Malaga part of TOG needs clarification.
====================================
hmmmmmmm….the thought plickens….
Correction
HMRC suggested on 16th JUNE a cheque be made payable to HMRC. Nothing more.
Auldhied
“HMRC suggested on 16th JUNE a cheque be made payable to HMRC. Nothing more.”
Did they suggest the amount? £200k or £2.8m ?
The time to disparage the host for posting factual errors is after unequivocal facts emerge contradicting the post.
Maggie et alii, a healthy dose of scepticism is commendable, but it’s better to wait until AFTER the outcome before insulting those who have lifted cudgels on behalf of us all
It pays to keep your powder dry.
Auldheid
Reading your comments on the Hun response, I get the distinct impression you think they are obfuscating.
Level 5 are being kept busy. Will they be paid?
Auldheid. With the shocking news coming out of Celtic park that Peter Lawell has given an exclusive interview with the sun , days after the relatives of hillsborough paraded at Celtic park
Is it not a good time to lay aside resolution 12 and have a united grin to get this vile person out of Celtic park , which will help resolution 12 anyway
This is final straw. Out Lawell you are not fit to be CEO of our fine club after giving exclusive interview with the sun
Sydneytim
It was posted on here earlier that PL has briefed all the MSM.
Only the Sun is claiming it as an exclusive.
Keep your powder dry.
That’s twice I’ve posted that, but no one will notice.
GG the fact that he is briefing anyone 4 weeks after the disaster is a disgrace. He should be gone
Mr law well sun interview
THEY couldn’t even spell his name correctly.
But Peter Lawwell — two Ws, not one — didn’t squirm or shift in his directors’ box seat as that banner was unfurled.
Instead he just shrugged.
Lawwell
Lawwell will never risk Celtic spending beyond their means
Sure, the Parkhead chief executive would love to be Mr Popular with each and every one of the club’s 40,500 season-ticket holders.
But that’s just not realistic.
Not when the words ‘Lawell and Desmond’s legacy, empty jerseys, empty hearts, empty dreams and empty stands’ are written in five-foot high letters.
But then if there’s one thing the 56-year-old has urged supporters to hold onto during his 12-year tenure at the club, it’s realism.
On and off the park that’s all he says he’s interested in — as he urges those fans who demand big changes and big-money signings to do the same.
Lawwell told SunSport: “Supporters are very much entitled to their opinion.
“When things don’t go as well as they hope then there is always somebody to blame. In terms of the banners I don’t take that personally.
“I take it as a sign of the times, but the answer is this: If I’m not here, then there will be a new me.
“And he’s not suddenly going to find tens of millions of pounds stuffed in the bottom drawer. And he’s only going to try and do the same things that I’ve been doing to maximise the future of this club.
“Listen, I can understand why people on the outside looking in have their opinions but they don’t actually know how the club is run.
“We see it at the Emirates, we see it at Goodison and Villa. That’s where we are in today’s society. When supporters become frustrated and disappointed they look for people to blame.
“At first it was Ronny who got it and he’s now going so the sights are trained on me but my view is that, as a club, we’re in very good shape.
“We’ve had a very, very tough year but we look forward with a new manager and a new beginning.
“At the moment I’m focused on getting the right manager in and preparing for the new season.
“Criticism is par for the course when you’ve been at the club as long as I have. There are going to be lows and you’re going to get it in the neck. It’s the same for Dermot who’s been here even longer.
“I can understand why it happens because the supporters always look for more. But my life is based on reality, not perception. I know exactly where we are as a club. We’re in a good place.
Banner
Frustrated Celtic fans make their feelings clear towards the board
“If I decide to go or the board decides it’s time for me to go, then the club is merely going to get a new me. Now the new me might be better but he might not be as good. But the club will continue down the same track.”
Lawwell could have upped and left long ago. He could have easily accepted one of the enticing offers from England of much more money for far less grief.
And frankly when Celtic supporters think of that prospect there will be many of them who wish to hell he had. But he didn’t, for one reason.
Lawwell added: “I love the club. If it was about the money I wouldn’t be here. I’ve had opportunities to go — for a LOT of money — but I chose to stay.
“It’s not just been one opportunity either. But Celtic is my life. It’s more than a job, it’s a passion.
“I’ve supported Celtic all my life. I’d like to think when I do eventually go I can look back and say: ‘I did this, that and the next thing’.
“You’ve got social media and the bloggers, posters and trolls who think they know what’s going on at the club. They don’t.
“They don’t have all the information. The reality is different from their perception and I need to deal with reality every day.
“But criticism comes with living a public life in 2016. People dislike me having never met me, but that goes with the territory and you either put up with it or you don’t.
“And at the moment I’m putting up with it because I’ve got things to do. But I’ll be honest, the job is all-consuming, it’s 24/7.
“There is very little time in my life when I don’t think about Celtic and my job.”
Lawwell’s priority right now is to identify and appoint a manager to take Celtic into the Champions League. To do what Ronny Deila couldn’t.
But whether it’s Moyes, Rodgers, Lennon, Keane or AN Other what’s certain is that there isn’t going to be a huge pot of money to spend.
Lawwell added: “We’d love to go to the new manager and say we have a £40million warchest or a £50m warchest to buy the best and go for it.
“But we play in Scotland, we don’t have that. The reality is we don’t have an alternative to what we’re doing. For me that’s an exciting project for the right manager, the right guy. This is Celtic.
“It’s an iconic club, one of the biggest in the world. Even today we’re highly regarded as one of the best-run clubs in Europe.
“There is an excitement here which should be an attraction for somebody to come, get a hold of it and take us back into the Champions League.
“If your ambitions are to win the Scottish Premier League and move on then I can see that. But our ambition is to go further so for me it’s a very attractive proposition for somebody who wants to come in and create something.
“We get criticised for our strategy but I just don’t see any alternative. Everything we take out we put back in. But that’s it.
READ MORE:
Peter Lawwell: Celtic are ready for any title challenge next season
SPFL to net £1M windfall from Betfred sponsorship deal
Hibs boss Alan Stubbs furious over ref’s handball howler
Celtic’s Leigh Griffiths tried to be like his Hibs heroes O’Connor and Riordan
“We’re not going to take on any debt. We don’t have any other resources other than the ones we create for ourselves but that’s fine because we’ll spend everything we can. But it’s about getting the right manager to spend it wisely.”
Celtic won’t speculate to accumulate. The argument that spending just slightly more — say £20m on players — would boost their chances of reaching the Champions League group stages doesn’t wash with the Parkhead chief exec.
He added: “It might. But if we take the club into £20m worth of debt, and it doesn’t happen, where does that leave us?
“For a Scottish club to owe that kind of money leads to trouble. You don’t have to look very far to see the consequences of people trying things which ‘might’ happen.
“That is something we will not do. But it’s not like we don’t spend money — our average is £10m a year on transfers.
“We can be flexible but we’re not going to take on debt which could ultimately be very dangerous.”
Lawwell on Broony…
Brown
Kenny Ramsay – The Sun Glasgow
PETER LAWWELL has defended under-fire Scott Brown and insisted criticism of the Celtic skipper is unfair.
The Parkhead chief executive paid a glowing tribute to the Scotland midfielder, branding him a true leader of men. Lawwell said: “Scott has had criticism which is a sign of the frustration and apathy.
“But then I don’t know who hasn’t been getting it tight around the place.
“But I would pay special tribute to Scott, who has held the team together in terms of his leadership.
“He’s played with his tendonitis and gone through a lot of games when he’s not been 100-per-cent fit.
“He’s now going to get a break, he’ll have seven weeks off, and I’m sure he’ll be back roaring.
“But he should take credit, not criticism, for being the leader and captain. He’s been fantastic and has already started coaching the younger lads, which is great.
“Hopefully there will be opportunities here for him later on.”
Lawwell on Tierney…
Tierney
Kenny Ramsay – The Sun Glasgow
PETER LAWWELL has confirmed Young Player of the Year Kieran Tierney is set to land a bumper new deal at Celtic.
SunSport revealed yesterday that the teenage left-back will be offered a five-year contract and a well-earned pay rise.
The home-grown kid has already been hailed as the best young player at the club’s end-of-season ceremony, and he was also named the PFA Scotland Young Player of the Year.
He’s a frontrunner for the Scottish Football Writers’ Association award in Glasgow this weekend.
Now Celts hope to protect their asset by securing him on a new deal, with talks expected to start with his agent within weeks.
Lawwell said: “Kieran has three years left after the summer.
“He’s done brilliantly well and normally when that happens we’ll sit down with them and try to reward them.
“We’ll do that with Kieran and look to extend his contract. I’m sure that’ll happen over the summer.
“The kid wants to stay and we’re eager for him to stay.”
Lawwell on the Green Brigade…
GB
PETER LAWWELL insists he does not have a broken relationship with the Green Brigade.
The Hoops supremo has held talks with the fans’ group after flashpoints at domestic and European games, and says they share the common goal of ensuring Celts improve on the field.
He said: “I’ve met with those boys on several occasions. They have come into Celtic Park and they’re nice lads.
“They’re Celtic supporters. Most of the time they’re so positive for the club but there are times when there is a display or flares which is disappointing.
“It’s not always necessarily the guys in the Green Brigade, there are fans who attach themselves to the group, so I think at times they get a hard time.
“It’s the times when things happen which tarnish the reputation of the club that are disappointing. It creates headlines around our supporters which I don’t think they deserve.
“It’s a broad church with hundreds of thousands of supporters and at times when a few let you down it tarnishes everybody.
“Every club has Ultra fans. They’re going to be at the games whether they’re up in the one section or somewhere else. But we have dialogue with them.”
NOW READ
Main Image
Thibaut Courtois will tell Antonio Conte he wants to quit Chelsea… but Blues want £65m
GOALKEEPER is on Real Madrid radar after Chelsea missed out on Champions League
Alex Ferguson
What was Spurs boss Mauricio Pochettino doing having lunch with Man Utd legend Sir Alex Ferguson?
TOTTENHAM chief snapped with Red Devils legend in Mayfair
West Ham said goodbye to Upton Park with a firework show after their win over Manchester United
‘It is a special night’: Slaven Bilic in tears as West Ham say goodbye to Upton Park
FIREWORKS and a legend show entertain the crowd
David De Gea has bottles of water thrown at him as he celebrates Manchester United’s equaliser
David de Gea has missiles thrown at him while celebrating United’s first goal
VIDEO: SPANIARD came under fire on a night where violence marred West Ham’s Upton Park farewell
West Ham
United’s top-four hopes in tatters as Reid seals thrilling win in Upton Park finale
WEST HAM 3 MAN UNITED 2: WINSTON REID’s late header sinks LVG’s side on emotional evening
Like us on facebook
And get all our stories first
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Did you have PPI? This simple trick will tell youMoney Short Cuts – Sponsored
This Morning Presenter Removed For SpittingEntertainment Daily – Sponsored
Brilliant Laser Eye Treatment Sweeping The UKClinic Compare – Sponsored
This Morning Presenter Absent After SERIOUS Head InjuryEntertainment Daily – Sponsored
What Marcia Brady Looks Like Now Is Insane!goodmad – Sponsored
Giant panda Ai Bang welcomes newborn cubThe Sun
Modern Hairstyles for Women Over 50Daily Spikes – Sponsored
This thief picked the wrong girlThe Sun
Recommended by
If that’s the best Lawwell can do to rally the troops,he should have kept his mouth shut.
Basically told us all to eff off,it’s his way or the highway.
so much for the big “exclusive” – just more of the same old pants.
OVERSEAS BHOY
He’d “only be replaced by someone doing the same thing”
Aye,I’ll take that chance. Half-a-million saved right away.
I wish he had said nothing. Up till then,I thought he viewed us wi contempt.
Now I know he does,the arrogant b……
expecting some new banners at St.Johnstone tomorrow night methinks
Pathetic.
The same regurgitated nonsense from before.
As for him having the opportunity to go for a “lot” of money, does that mean he regards his current remuneration as a pittance and he’s doing us all a favour by staying?
Crass.
Succulent mutton.
Disappointing exercise .
Our average spend is £10m a year on transfers.
That’s misleading at best and lies at worst.
We have made net gains on transfers year on year for some time now.
TWISTSNTURNS
We can only hope it’s his Ratner moment.
Bobby
Awful interview. After the build up it was being given on here last night? Dear God.
Did paul67 or Peter Lawell write it , I am getting confused. All the same Nonsense
Listen Peter we have failed because all you do is buy 15 players hoping to sell one to EPL for cash. That’s why we have failed. You have failed at your job as lower teams in Europe are skelping us
You have made a whooping decision to appoint a coach wiry virtually zero European experience. Your decision
Go. Now. We sack you
I am searching for a rationale behind such a destructive PR piece.
Is he wanting to be laid off /paid off?
Or is it just the reality of The View from an Ivory Tower?
Perplexing.
I am sure The Mint was quoted as saying ‘Bring It On’ in the original succulent lamb article.