Green has more to worry about than title stripping


Charles Green, owner of “The Rangers Football Club Limited“, formed in May this year, yesterday released a remarkable statement yesterday, ahead of the SPL Commission into How Rangers FC, formed in 1872, registered football players for over a decade.

“In short, what was decided by the SPL membership is that Rangers was finished as a member of the SPL. Despite this, the SPL now see the new owners of the company, and the new company itself, which owns all the assets of Rangers FC – including SPL championship titles – as fair game for punishment for matters that have nothing to do with us at all.”

We dealt with the purchasing of history on here some months ago. Once we realised it was possible, I snapped up ancient Egyptian history, the period from the pharaohs until Mark Antony. I AM responsible for the Pyramids of Giza but any slavery which may or may not have been used in their construction is NOTHING to do with me.

No one complained about the use of slaves at the time and I am sure each pyramid would have been constructed whether slaves were used of not. If slaves were so necessary for the construction I am sure “we” would have built many more.

Mr Green seems keen to protest against the SPL process, however, he, frankly, fails miserably. He doesn’t “question the impartiality of the individual panel members” but assets “whatever decision they reach is a decision of the SPL”.

So that will be independent members reaching a decision for the SPL! I think he doth protest too little.

There is also a threat: “”To make it crystal clear, the new owners purchased all the business and assets of Rangers, including titles and trophies. Any attempt to undermine or diminish the value of those assets will be met with the stiffest resistance, including legal recourse.”

Charles Green took steps to undermine his new company’s claim on Rangers titles in a BBC interview in June when he said that if his CVA proposal was to fail (which it did) and Rangers were to be liquidated (which they are), “the history, the tradition, everything that’s great about this club is swept aside”.

“Legal recourse”, which is prohibited by Fifa and which the SFA accommodated from Duff and Phelps, acting on behalf of Rangers, will provide Scottish football with a further drama.  We mentioned at the time that the true cost of the SFA being so accommodating would be a repeat performance.

Mr Green asks why the “football authorities do nothing to address an issue that was public knowledge for at least two years, and was reported in the Club’s accounts for several years”? I think I can help here. Sir David Murray, who owned Rangers during the duration of its Employee Benefit Trust years, categorically denied that the club issued players with second contracts which were not submitted to the authorities. He reiterated this point most recently on a Sky News interview in March.

The football authorities have no issues whatsoever with Employee Benefit Trusts, it’s player contracts they insist are registered. Rangers insisted they had no case to answer until the SPL set a deadline on Duff and Phelps to fully disclose the nature of the alleged second contracts.

Charles claims during those lurid weeks when the SPL and SFA were negotiating with Green, that Neil Doncaster “repeatedly stated he was not interested in stripping titles from Rangers”. If he had evidence of this, ANY evidence, it would be fascinating.

If not, we should dismiss this claim.

A curious barb is made in other directions, “Rangers was not the only Club in Scotland to use EBTs yet nothing was done and little has been heard about it”.

One more time, for Mr Green’s benefit, EBTs are not against football regulations whatsoever. They are entirely legal and permitted by the SFA and SPL. The SPL Commission is not investigating whether Rangers used EBTs or not, it will investigate whether or not all player contracts were registered.

Mr Green goes on to make varied comments against “powerful representatives from Clubs within the SPL…. who appear hell bent on inflicting as much damage on Rangers as possible”, and that some “clubs were placed in an invidious position and we believe their interests were not best served by those in more powerful positions”.

Let’s have some context here. If we were to make a list of those who inflicted most damage on Rangers, representatives from other clubs would scarcely merit a mention. Those who allowed the club to spend more than it earned for so many years, who introduced the perilous tax avoidance system, those who failed to make accommodations for HMRC’s claim when it was first made, and those directors who personally benefited from the EBT scheme all carry primary responsibility.

Then would come the cheerleaders for the disastrous Craig Whyte regime – those who last year campaigned for the takeover, including putting pressure on Lloyds Banking Group to accept the terms.

Rangers opponents were spectators throughout this period. Any suggestion that our club were anything but opponents to Rangers, and alleged victims of trophies won by illegally registered players, when they should have been campaigning on behalf of their rivals, seriously misreads what was an established Glasgow rivalry. Of course it would be the same the other way – and rightly so.

Despite clearly feeling strongly about the Commission, Green didn’t address the key point….

There was no denial of the central charge that for a decade or more Rangers fielded improperly registered football players.

Yesterday some people suggested Green had offered the Lance Armstrong defence but Armstrong denied he was guilty while refusing to participate in the investigation into doping. This is a different matter altogether. Green has offered up something for every conceivable paranoid condition without actually claiming Rangers are wrongly accused.

The headlines today are all about titles being stripped but that is not the main topic in play. More importantly, after titles are stripped, what punishment will the SPL Commission levy on the Rangers membership, granted to Sevco in June?

The sheer scale of the charge makes this question incalculable. The toxicity attached to that membership is untenable and no bogeymen at other clubs, at the SPL or SFA are responsible for that.

You can continue to read CQN Magazine FOR FREE, or can subscribe for £10 or £20 and our sponsor, Executive Shaving, who offer an enormous range of grooming products, are offering readers a £20 voucher for all £30 CQN Magazine subscribers.

[calameo code=0003901711e92eb7539d6 lang=en page=14 hidelinks=1 width=100% height=500]
Click Here for Comments >

About Author

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 25

  1. Hearts defender Ryan McGowan says he rejected the chance to join Rangers before the transfer window closed as he did not want to drop down to the Third Division.



    Rangers saw a bid accepted for the 23-year-old, but were unable to persuade the Australian to make the move to Ibrox.



    McGowan confirmed he spoke to Gers boss Ally McCoist about a possible deal, but he feared dropping out of the SPL would harm his international prospects.



    “Hearts accepted a bid but I rejected it,” said the full-back in the Daily Record.



    “Ally McCoist called me to go and see him, which I did out of courtesy, but I explained I didn’t think it was the right move.



    “I was put in a position with Hearts accepting the bid. Rangers may have good players but you only improve by playing against the best, and that’s in the SPL, not Division Three.



    “It’s a massive club but it wouldn’t have helped my international prospects. It was a football decision.”

  2. What would be the process to transfer the “Sir” from David to Andy?



    Would he have to buy it?

  3. Djokovic says he doesn’t think he lost his title and has applied to buy it so that the record books reflect that it was he, not Murray, who won yesterday…….

  4. Massive congratulations to Andy Murray, a magnificent achievement!



    I lasted until half way through the 4th set before I couldn’t prevent my eyes from knitting together any further.



    What a joy to stand in the back garden at half 6 this morning with a fag in one hand and my phone in the other scrolling through the pages of CQN to find out the conclusion. I actually smiled when I read it.



    Usually it’s only Celtic that have the ability to do that in sporting circles.

  5. The msm won’t say it. I will.


    As for Green…..a low and greedy man, playing on the prejudices of the fools he is fleecing, taking the Scottish people for fools and treating us all with arrogant contempt; treating the law as a plaything to circumvent reality and buy himself time to garner as much hard cash as possible, then depart, leaving behind a radioactive mess unable to be cleaned up for aeons, so toxic it will be. Now, that’s what I call ‘nuclear’. Green has knowingly pressed the button….for profit.


    What a man.

  6. Paul67 – sure it’s not conceivable that Green is intentionally riling the SPL/SFA with a view to leaving them with no choice but to expel them from the leagues altogether?


    His behaviour is confrontational in the least. Erratic and bizarre but always designed to confront.

  7. Paul 67



    “There was no denial of the central charge that for a decade or more Rangers fielded improperly registered football players.”




    It’s the above timescale that’s got me baffled ?


    Mo Johnston said to Jim White on -Scotsport in November 1989 that – when I came over to talk to Celtic from Nantes – they(Celtic) were told that I had an outstanding tax-bill for 150k at which point – Celtic said they would try to come to a deal – after MJ was paraded before Billy McNeill’s floundering team of the 1988/89 seasons SCF v’s the huns and gave Celtic the lift they needed to stop the huns winning the treble – days later the deal collapsed amidst stories of Celtic being unable to pay MJ’s TAX-BILL ?!?!


    Fast-forward a couple of weeks and MJ’s signed for the huns AND had his TAX-BILL sorted ?!?!


    Please note the year Paul – 1989 ?!?!


    Hail Hail

  8. Charles Green is clearly some sort of business guru. Bill Miller may have dreamed up an incubator but Chuck has gone one better. He has found a way to buy the assets of a company that you want like, move them to a different company and yet leave behind the bits you don’t want. And ditch the debts of course. Leave the creditors in the old company and move on.



    It’s so brilliant I don’t understand why everyone isn’t doing it.

  9. It’s difficult to see how this tribunal can avoid stating unequivocally whether the sevco huns are, or are not, a new club and what right, connection or claim, if any, they have to the history of the old club.



    Maybe that’s what all the bluster is about.

  10. Dontbrattbakkinanger on

    The Craig Whyte regime ‘disastrous’?



    Call me ole fashioned but I thought things went rather swimmingly when the MBB was at the helm.

  11. saltires en sevilla on



    08:42 on


    11 September, 2012




    Waterstones should have it


    Sauchiehall ST 08432908345


    Argyle ST 08432908343



    Tel numbers





    Cheers mate and thanks to others for info





    Marvellous article,PAUL67.



    Obviously you weren’t watching the tennis in the wee hours…..



    IMO,what Green is effectively saying is that he and the administrators have changed the names and status of both oldco and newco,we can do whatever you like and you can’t do anything about it.






    An interesting gambit,but doomed to failure when it breaches football rules,tax regulations,accountancy/insolvency codes and,erm,ather worryingly old son,the law.



    I think it is also interesting that the only “heavyweight” journo backing him is Jabba,the rest are backing off.



    In fact,The Sun and Herald articles bear very strong resemblances to each other.



    I think he has seriously overplayed his hand,but did he mean to?

  13. saltires en sevilla on




    Would prefer if he didn’t mean to …



    However, I suspect he meant to …suggest he thinks he has ‘head cover’?

  14. Dontbrattbakkinanger on

    Chas Green Esq is playin’ to the ole hillbilly gallery; he’s in no hurry to get the ole explodin’Larkhall Love Letter in the mail.

  15. The sheer scale of the charge makes this question incalculable. The toxicity attached to that membership is untenable and no bogeymen at other clubs, at the SPL or SFA are responsible for that.





    More suspended sentences after they appeal anyone?

  16. The Battered Bunnet on

    This morning I feel as if I have walloped about the head with a large salmon. The confusing image this analogy presents is indicative of the weariness I feel.






    Andy bleedin’ Murray!



    Dear Lord. Cruising he was. A straight sets win served on a plate for him. Bed by midnight.



    Oh no, not Andy. He has to go and do it the hard way, putting me, you, and 5 million other Scots through the wringer, the mangle, and the rack. It was a virtual waterboarding.



    What sport. What spectacle. He and Djokovic knocked blue murder out of one another for 5 hours, neither prepared to allow the other the decisive moment in the game until finally, with both spent and breaking, Murray prevailed.



    What a moment for him. What a moment for us.



    Sport is made of such moments.




  17. The Prince of Goalkeepers on




    As this is an SPL investigation, what sanctions are open to them if Sevco are found guilty of making payments to players for football related activities over and above those declared in their registered contracts? They could strip them of titles, and possibly exclude them from the SPL for a period of time once/if they become eligible for promotion via SFL1, but what else can they do?



    The suspension/removal of their membership would be an SFA function, and as the SFA have made clear they have washed their hands of this as they could well have to deal with an appeal from Sevco if the SPL find against them against them.



    Wouls a separate SFA investigation then be required?

  18. Prize money for 23 clubs withheld


    Published: Tuesday 11 September 2012, 10.30CET


    The UEFA Club Financial Control Body’s investigatory chamber has announced that 23 clubs involved in 2012/13 UEFA club competitions have had their prize money temporarily withheld.



    The UEFA Club Financial Control Body has taken its first measures


    ©uefa.com 1998-2012. All rights reserved.




    Clubs’ prize money withheld



    The UEFA Club Financial Control Body’s (CFCB) investigatory chamber, chaired by former Belgian Prime Minister Jean-Luc Dehaene, has today announced that 23 clubs involved in 2012/13 UEFA club competitions have seen the payment of their prize money temporarily withheld pending further investigation.



    As part of the first measure of the financial fair play requirements included in the UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations 2012, the clubs participating in 2012/13 UEFA club competitions had to provide information regarding the status of any overdue payables as at 30 June 2012. Following its last meeting in August 2012, the CFCB investigatory chamber has identified that important overdue payables towards other clubs, and/or towards employees or social/tax authorities existed in 23 cases.



    These cases involve the following 23 clubs:


    FK Borac Banja Luka (BIH)


    FK Sarajevo (BIH)


    FK Željezničar (BIH)


    PFC CSKA Sofia (BUL)


    HNK Hajduk Split (CRO)


    NK Osijek (CRO)


    Club Atlético de Madrid (ESP)


    Málaga CF (ESP)


    Maccabi Netanya FC (ISR)


    FK Shkendija 79 (MKD)


    Floriana FC (MLT)


    FK Budućnost Podgorica (MNE)


    FK Rudar Pjevlja (MNE)


    Ruch Chorzów (POL)


    Sporting Clube de Portugal (POR)


    FC Dinamo Bucureşti (ROU)


    FC Rapid Bucureşti (ROU)


    FC Vaslui (ROU)


    FC Rubin Kazan (RUS)


    FK Partizan (SRB)


    FK Vojvodina (SRB)


    Eskişehirspor (TUR)


    Fenerbahçe SK (TUR)



    Consequently, the CFCB investigatory chamber will continue their investigations and request these clubs to provide an updated situation as of 30 September 2012 with regards to overdue payables towards other clubs, employees and social/tax authorities.



    This conservatory measure will remain into force until all identified balances have been settled in full or until a final decision by the CFCB adjudicatory chamber is taken.

  19. Dontbrattbakkinanger



    Explodin’ Larkhall Love Letter



    Good one, had a fair old chuckle there!

  20. From A Caledonian Mercury piece about C Green’s time at Sheff Utd.



    Interesting story arc, some similarities emerging already?



    “Green was keen to stress that Sheffield United were a club on the up: “We’ve got a very solid business here with perhaps the best land bank in British football – if we exclude Chelsea (Village PLC) and take out the London values. We’ve got a club with massive upside in all its revenue streams and we see there is enormous growth.”



    However, this optimism was short-lived: Green faced criticism from fans early on when a group of Sheffield United fans called on the Department of Trade and Industry to investigate the stock market flotation of the club. The group, led by Barrie Cottingham, then chief executive of SIG Insulation, argued that “documents sent to United’s shareholders at the time of the float were inaccurate and misled some shareholders as to the value of their shares”. According to reports at the time, it was clear that Sheffield United and Green in no way accepted the claim that the documents were incorrect.



    Some of Green’s early work in bringing players to the club was welcomed by players and fans. Green helped to bring highly rated striker Brian Deane to Bramall Lane from Leeds United in a £1 million deal – Deane rejected offers from Italy and Spain to sign for the Sheffield club.



    Green also appointed Nigel Spackman as manager of the Blades following Howard Kendall’s departure, Spackman had been Kendall’s assistant before taking on the job. Green said of the appointment: “Nigel wasn’t popular as a player, but it speaks volumes for his character that he stuck at it. As caretaker, he stamped his mark on the team.”



    The chief executive was instrumental in the signing of Dean Saunders to help with the Blades’ promotion push the following season. Saunders described how “I had options to go to a Premier club but after speaking to chief executive Charles Green I felt I was signing for Real Madrid.”



    Sheffield United sold strikers Brian Deane and Jan Åge Fjørtoft in the same day: a day described by the fans as “Black Thursday”. The sale of the two players led to the resignation of Spackman as manager. A 1–0 loss to Ipswich prompted 1,000 Sheffield United supporters to gather in the car park and confront Green alongside club chairman Mike McDonald.



    McDonald resigned shortly after the confrontation and the Sheffield United board announced that they had called a meeting where they would “consider the position” of Green, adding that following the sale of Deane and Fjørtoft they would “consider Charles doing a slightly different job”. Green’s move was confirmed a few days later when the club announced that he had taken a “move away from football affairs”. A further few days later it was confirmed that he had “stepped down as chief executive”.

  21. Paul67,



    Smashing post. Do we have any rough timescales for findings from both SPL investigation and the FTT?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 25