When asked on Twitter four years ago how Rangers were granted a licence to play European football in season 2011-12 when they were overdue with HMRC, SFA chief executive, Stewart Regan, replied, “If someone sends you a bill you disagree with then you do not accept it was overdue”.
Any business is allowed to dispute a tax demand, but former Rangers director, Donald McIntyre’s evidence at the High Court in Glasgow yesterday was clear, Rangers had accepted liability for unpaid PAYE and National Insurance claims in connection with the Wee Tax Case (DOS) in 2010.
If, as Regan suggests, Rangers misrepresented this fact to the SFA Licencing Committee in their March 2011 application, the Association now have action to consider.
If you have been around this story for the best part of the last decade you will recall a number of us writing on the perilous state of Rangers finances while the club was under the control of Sir David Murray. This was robustly disputed by the club at the time, but in his evidence McIntyre noted that, under Murray, the club appointed an insolvency expert to ensure they were not trading illegally.
Just one month before the sale of the club to Craig Whyte in May 2011, in an email produced by Craig Whyte’s counsel, Donald Findlay, Mr Mike McGill of Murray Holdings, advised that “it would appear forecasts for club have deteriorated, we will breach bank facility”.
Asked by Findlay if “HMRC were coming for the club and were after blood”, McIntyre said “Yes.” The directors of Oldco Rangers omitted this sentiment from their public comments at the time.
Rangers were a football club running a perilous financial strategy from the 1990s until liquidation was eventually confirmed in 2012. They established a mindset, not only in their own support, but in parts of ours too, that spending money you couldn’t afford on casino football was the only acceptable way clubs should behave.
You still hear the echoes of those times, from Willie Henderson’s request that Newco spend £50m, to comments a lot closer to home when Celtic fail to win a football game.
Please remember that while it is OK to report evidence discussed at court, you should not comment on matters pertaining to the charges against Craig Whyte.
T-SHIRT STOCK UPDATE: Remaining stock as follows….Small 2 left, Medium 3 left, Large ONLY 1 left, XL 11 left and XXL 8 left. There won’t be a re-print so order now if you want the t-shirt (£14.99) or t-shirt and book (£19.67) at cqnbookstore.com
808 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- ...
- 22
- »
TIMALOY, 11.18 its only a bit of banter, Do a smell HUN
I’m just hoping Chick and Traynor get summoned to discuss Johnston’s nod…..
Barton banned for 18 month
MWD,
I will be looking for the Plc to be writing to UEFA and demanding an investigation on the existing evidence. The more damning revelations become the stronger this argument becomes.
WEEBAWBABITTY on 26TH APRIL 2017 1:20 PM
TIMALOY, 11.18 its only a bit of banter, Do a smell HUN
___
I’ve been posting on here for years pal.
We’re watching the false narrative around Rangers get chipped away a little more each day. We have plenty of things to laugh about.
Making fun of a guy for being disabled is poor. If I’m a hun for calling it out, does that mean you HAVE to make fun of the disabled to be a tim?
Calm down lads
Calm down
Canamalar
That is good news.
MWD
So Murray reckons the club’s failure WASN’T inevitable? And yet he sold a business with assets valued at over £200m for £1? The generosity of the man clearly knows no bounds…..
TIMALOY , plenty more posting jokes about it al take it back and apologise it was in poor taste sorry for calling you a Hun
PRAECEPTA on 26TH APRIL 2017 1:03 PM
Joey Barton gets 18 months ban from football.
PRAECEPTA
The minute any player joins that mob…they are in effect banned from playing football…….for example the ” MISS Match” that occurred last sunday !
HH mate.
Why is this Trial not on Cooncil telly ?
it’s better than OJ feckin Simpson’s !
HH
WEEBAWBABITTY on 26TH APRIL 2017 1:41 PM
TIMALOY , plenty more posting jokes about it al take it back and apologise it was in poor taste sorry for calling you a Hun
___
It’s alright.
I’d just like to remind anybody else indulging in those jokes…… some people posting here may be in a wheelchair themselves or have family in that position.
The huns are a joke anyway.
Joey Barton’s statement on his ban:
The FA have announced I am banned from all football for 18 months and fined £30,000 and costs for offences against The FA’s Betting Rules. I am very disappointed at the harshness of the sanction. The decision effectively forces me into an early retirement from playing football. To be clear from the outset here this is not match fixing and at no point in any of this is my integrity in question.
I accept that I broke the rules governing professional footballers, but I do feel the penalty is heavier than it might be for other less controversial players. I have fought addiction to gambling and provided the FA with a medical report about my problem. I’m disappointed it wasn’t taken into proper consideration. I think if the FA is truly serious about tackling the culture of gambling in football, it needs to look at its own dependence on the gambling companies, their role in football and in sports broadcasting, rather than just blaming the players who place a bet.
I am not alone in football in having a problem with gambling. I grew up in an environment where betting was and still is part of the culture. From as early as I can remember my family let me have my own pools coupon, and older members of the family would place bets for me on big races like the Grand National. To this day, I rarely compete at anything without there being something at stake. Whether that’s a round of golf with friends for a few pounds, or a game of darts in the training ground for who makes the tea, I love competing. I love winning. I am also addicted to that. It is also the case that professional football has long had a betting culture, and I have been in the sport all my adult life.
Given the money in the game, and the explosion in betting on sport, I understand why the rules have been strengthened, and I also accept that I have been in breach of them. I accept too that the FA has to be seen to lead on this issue. But surely they need to accept there is a huge clash between their rules and the culture that surrounds the modern game, where anyone who watches follows football on TV or in the stadia is bombarded by marketing, advertising and sponsorship by betting companies, and where much of the coverage now, on Sky for example, is intertwined with the broadcasters’ own gambling interests.
That all means this is not an easy environment in which to try to stop gambling, or even to encourage people within the sport that betting is wrong. It is like asking a recovering alcoholic to spend all his time in a pub or a brewery. If the FA is serious about tackling gambling I would urge it to reconsider its own dependence on the gambling industry. I say that knowing that every time I pull on my team’s shirt, I am advertising a betting company.
I say none of this to justify myself. But I do want to explain that sometimes these issues are more complicated than they seem.
As for the scale of my football betting, since 2004, on a Betfair account held in my own name, registered at my home address and verified by my own passport, with full transparency, I have placed over 15,000 bets across a whole range of sports. Just over 1,200 were placed on football and subject to the charges against me. The average bet was just over £150, many were for only a few pounds.
For the modern footballer, downtime and rest are important and I spend much of my time away from training in front of a TV screen, channel hopping across a range of sports, and betting on the outcome of games. I like watching sports and predicting the outcome. Set alongside what we are privileged to earn as footballers, my betting stakes are relatively small. Betting for me, is less about how much money I win or lose, and more about whether I can correctly predict the outcome of the game I’m watching. I hate losing more than I like winning, and this mindset has helped prevent me from placing big bets, for fear of losing big.
Raised at the hearing was that between 2004 and 2011 I placed a handful of bets on my own team to lose matches. I accept of course that this is against the rules, for the obvious reason that a player with an additional financial stake in the game might seek to change the course of it for his own personal gain. However I’d like to offer some context.
First, in every game I have played, I have given everything. I’m confident that anyone who has ever seen me play, or played with or against me, will confirm that to be the case. I am more aware than anyone that I have character issues that I struggle with, and my addictive personality is one of them, but I am a devoted and dedicated professional who has always given my all on the pitch.
Second, on the few occasions where I placed a bet on my own team to lose, I was not involved in the match day squad for any of those games. I did not play. I was not even on the bench. I had no more ability to influence the outcome than had I been betting on darts, snooker, or a cricket match in the West Indies. I should add that on some of those occasions, my placing of the bet on my own team to lose was an expression of my anger and frustration at not being picked or being unable to play. I understand people will think that is childish and selfish and I cannot disagree with that.
Third, I should point out that the last of these bets against my own team was six years ago (and in a reserve game), when I was going through a particularly troubled period, and when the FA were not nearly as hard on gambling as they are now.
One thing I can state with absolute certainty – I have never placed a bet against my own team when in a position to influence the game, and I am pleased that in all of the interviews with the FA, and at the hearing, my integrity on that point has never been in question. I could not live with myself, nor face my team-mates or the fans of the clubs I played for, if they seriously thought I would bet on my team to lose a game whose outcome I could influence.
The Commission that heard my case made clear in their reasons on a number of occasions that “there was no suggestion [I] was involved in match fixing” and I am publishing a list of my bets because I want the full facts of my case to be known.
A ban of 18 months is longer than several bans handed to players who played in matches where they bet for their team to lose and – unlike me – were found to have had an ability to influence the games. The only players to be banned for 12 months or longer bet against their own teams and played in the matches in which they placed those bets. Players who did not play in the matches they placed the bets in have never been banned for longer than 6 months. I feel the ban is excessive in this context.
Throughout my career I am someone who has made mistakes and owned up to those mistakes and tried to learn from them. I intend to do that here. I accept that this is one more mess I got into because of my own behaviour. This episode has brought home to me that just as I had to face up to the need to get help to deal with alcohol abuse, and with anger, so now I need to get help for my issues with gambling, and I will do so.
I want to thank the Burnley FC board, management, players and staff for their faith and understanding, and their belief that I would play for them, and play well, even with this hanging over me, and I want to thank the Burnley fans for the support they have given me throughout. They have been brilliant.
Having consulted with my friends and lawyers, I have decided I will be appealing against the length of the ban. I hope that I shall be afforded a fair hearing by an independent Appeal Panel. If I am, we are confident that the sanction will be reduced to a fair one that both reflects the offences as well as the mitigating factors and the fact that there was nothing untoward or suspicious about the bets I made.
I’m keen to be open about it, here are the thirty most pertinent bets as determined by the FA:
A look at the twitter page of James Doleman,
it reminded me of this
https://youtu.be/rZtJG7NFQZs
BARRYBHOY on 26TH APRIL 2017 1:45 PM
Must’ve made a killing eftir the 5-1 gemme……
Taken from John Dolemams site a few minutes ago,
Lady Stacey made a comment today about the legality of tax evasion/avoidance, when seeking clarification from Findlay about a line of questioning about the wee tax case. Findlay had been asking about the scheme but in terms of tax avoidance rather than evasion when it became clear that tax rules had been broken. Her Ladyship commented that as soon as the rules are broken (in her view) it becomes evasion.
it went to state that Findlay was being careful not to overload the Jury with too much info on matters.
Well the BBC seem to have forgotten their narrative to separate The Club from The Company going by their latest report on the trial:
“Former owner Sir David Murray has said the deal to sell Rangers to Craig Whyte was in the best interests of the club – if it had been seen through.
In 2007, Sir David put the club up for sale, but said no deal had been agreed after concerns about the plans of one potential buyer.
He said that by 2009 Rangers had accumulated a bank debt in “the low 30 millions”.
However, Sir David insisted that there was no talk of the side entering administration while he was chairman and that the club’s financial problems had been “grossly exaggerated”.
Asked by prosecutor Alex Prentice QC if the club’s failure was inevitable in the run up to its sale to Mr Whyte, he replied no.
He told the court that in November 2010 he met Mr Whyte in the South of France after the latter expressed an interest in buying Rangers.
Sir David told the court: “Everything seemed ok at the time, I have to say”.
He thought the deal was in best interests of club if it had been seen through, but that Mr Whyte did not fulfil the terms of the agreement.
Mr Murray told the court that no takeover deal would have been done with Mr Whyte if he had been told that the club’s bank debt would be cut using funding from future ticket sales.
Mr Whyte is accused of pretending to former Rangers owner Sir David Murray, and others, that funds were available to make all required payments to acquire a “controlling and majority stake” in the club.
The funds included clearing the £18m bank debt, £2.8m for the “small tax case” liability, a £1.7m health-and-safety liability and £5m for the playing squad.
The Crown alleges Mr Whyte had only £4m available from two sources at the time but took out a £24m loan from Ticketus “which was held subject to an agreement or agreements being entered into between the club and Ticketus after said acquisition”.
So the CLUB was up for sale. The CLUB had financial problems, the CLUB’s failure was inevitable, the debt belonged to the CLUB, the funds were to clear the CLUB’s bank debt / small tax case / H&S liability etc.
HH
Joey Barton’s statement summed up:
I’m sorry but loads of other people do it. And it’s not even my fault anyway.
TIMALOY 29 cheers, problaby I am trying to hard to join in with the blog .
DAVIDOPOULOS on 26TH APRIL 2017 2:01 PM
He also points out the hypocrisy of football’s relationship with the betting industry.
When I was Barton’s age I spent most of my money on alcohol, women and cars.
Squandered the rest.
ernie lynch on 26th April 2017 2:04 pm
DAVIDOPOULOS on 26TH APRIL 2017 2:01 PM
He also points out the hypocrisy of football’s relationship with the betting industry.
————————————————————————————————————————-
I tried to cover that with the “And it’s not even my fault anyway” part as Joey has only raised this point because it suits him to do so.
Marketing of alcohol is abundant in football, does that excuse a player running out for a warm up half cut?
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t like the gambling industry and it’s involvement in football but Joey Barton did what he did because he wanted to…sorry, my mistake, because he’s a winner or something like that…not because there was a Bet365 advert at half time during a match.
Anyone note the warning from Lady Stacey about the difference between tax evasion and avoidance? Warning Findlay not to cross a line.
A witness is not obliged to answer any question which may incriminate them in a criminal offence.
It is going to be a long afternoon for someone.
Also, I think it is very possible that there will be more news before the end of the day.
Barton: Ban means I’ve been forced into early retirement. Think Scott Brown did this to you Joey.
Spot on to the guys chastising those that descend to Hun levels regards murray’s condition .
We are better than that , we are celtic men , remember that .
davidopolous and ernie lynch
He also points out that he is/has an addictive personality. Is that not an illness where help is more important than punishment?
JJ
Joey Barton, GIRFUY. Horrible wee man that’s taken squillions from the game and also a former new Hun.
Hope Joey doesn’t slip into a midlife crisis…..
Leigh Griffiths says that James Travernier told him that he wants Sevco to provide a guard of honour – honestly – he did. Well at least that is what the MSM are reporting – not.
Hot Smoked
I head what you’re saying but…
His statement just has alternating paragraphs of:
“I was wrong”
“But I did it because of X”
“I accept I breached the rules”
“But I did it because of Y”
Moreover, this para seems to suggest that his gambling habit is no big deal:
“For the modern footballer, downtime and rest are important and I spend much of my time away from training in front of a TV screen, channel hopping across a range of sports, and betting on the outcome of games. I like watching sports and predicting the outcome. Set alongside what we are privileged to earn as footballers, my betting stakes are relatively small. Betting for me, is less about how much money I win or lose, and more about whether I can correctly predict the outcome of the game I’m watching. I hate losing more than I like winning, and this mindset has helped prevent me from placing big bets, for fear of losing big. ”
That sounds like someone who is making controlled choices, not an addict struggling to control his habit.
*I hear what you are saying
Hearing involves my head though so I was kinda correct first time round…
13 Nov Murray to Whyte “let’s ensure we remain tight on HMRC situation, don’t want any online/media speculation”
#WhyteTrial
4 Nov 2011 Murray to Whyte “Tax tribunal starts soon, give me a call”
Murray says can’t recall if there was a phone call.
13 Nov Murray to Whyte “let’s ensure we remain tight on HMRC situation, don’t want any online/media speculation”
Now we are getting to it perhaps.
Findlay: contact with Mr Whyte after Murray knew of Ticketus
“I don’t know why the Ticketus deal not mentioned, can’t answer that just now”
Findlay “The rules of this place are I ask questions and if there is no objection you answer them.”
Ooooft
James Doleman @jamesdoleman 54s55 seconds ago
More
Findlay “The rules of this place are I ask questions and if there is no objection you answer them.”
Ouch.
GLASSTWOTHIRDSFULL on 26TH APRIL 2017 2:20 PM
Hope Joey doesn’t slip into a midlife crisis…
At the Huns he slipped into a “Midfield crisis”