The Daily Record today report the contents of a document drawn up after a meeting between the SFA, the SPL, the SFL and Sevco suggesting “punishments for Rangers for the Employment Benefit Trust tax dodge used by Sir David Murray’s regime to pay players”.
The document details that Rangers would be stripped of titles and trophies ‘won’ by the club while they fielded illegally registered players, described by the Record as “the harshest ever seen in football”.
While Rangers EBTs had been in the news for close to two years, it was Celtic Quick News who first raised the question of Rangers players being illegally registered in an article on 22 February this year. Clubs are required to note all payments players receive in connection to football with both the SFA and SPL as part of the player registration process. Failure to register EBT payments is completely separate to the legality or otherwise of how the EBT was conducted, and until we raised the issue, there was no question over player registration, and no possibility of league titles being stripped.
Two weeks after Celtic Quick News brought the matter to public attention the SPL appointed solicitors Harper MacLeod to investigate the case. The subsequent report concluded Rangers had a case to answer.
There are a number of alarming aspects to today’s Daily Record report (the newspaper appears to have the main story but don’t notice its relevance):
Sevco should not be involved in any discussion around the guilt of Rangers or any subsequent consequences. Fan power in recent weeks had shown that we are not a Banana Republic. Disciplinary issues are subject to establish procedures. Any attempt to meet with a party acting on behalf of Rangers to agree an outcome with both the investigating body and the appeals body, before an independent inquiry takes place, contaminates all who participate.
Scottish football has independent judicial procedures for dealing with serious breaches of rules. Executives from the SFA and SPL have absolutely no authority to set-aside these procedures, nor are they appropriate people to act instead of the independent procedures.
Stripping Rangers of titles and trophies if they are found guilty of cheating is not a punishment; this simply reflects the legitimate winners of past trophies. When an athlete is found to have cheated to win a medal, his punishment is not the withdrawal of the medal, which is an obvious consequence of being caught, he will also face a sporting or financial penalty, often a ban.
There seems to be no end of attempts to subvert sport in Scottish football. There must be no backroom deals, not even if they bring a barrel load of trophies to Celtic, we cannot be bought-off by bling. Independent disciplinary procedures must take place.
Although Rangers failed to register players EBTs, this matter is separate from what the Record calls “punishments for Rangers for the Employment Benefit Trust tax dodge used by Sir David Murray’s regime to pay players”.
If the First Tier Tribunal (remember that?) rules that Rangers broke tax rules the club could yet face football disciplinary procedures for failing to pay social taxes.
Last month we reported that the SFA was set to remove independent judicial oversight from the game as its existence was getting in the way of their plans for ‘Rangers’. Although the Daily Record seem to be oblivious to the fact, they appear to have found documentary evidence that this is the case.
1,086 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- ...
- 29
- »
ASonOfDan,
If a church doesn’t believe in same sex marriage then it shouldn’t have to conduct same sex marriage ceremonies – I agree.
But if a church does want to conduct them, why should it not be allowed to? Doesn’t that infringe their religious freedom?
TMWT
Is shoe money short for EBT?
Gordon j..,
they cant procreate, the best they can achieve is another civil contract through adoption, else extra maritial contract, too many compromises make a mockey of the sacrament.
3mick3 on 18 July, 2012 at 12:55 said:
Ideal mate! Cheers….
Any chance you could drop me an email at archdeacon1888@gmail.com
Just whenever you get the chance.. Thanks..
mockery as well
Homophobia is just plain daft and speaks of inner insecurity and failure to recognise one’s own gentler side.
And if marriage is a sacrament,and I believe it is,then why would you deny it to some of your fellow citizens ?
The nazis hated gays. Take a look at the nazis : how uptight and repressed were they?
There is so much more to worry about than deflecting hatred onto citizens who have done nothing wrong.
And if loving each other has to be seen as ‘wrong’,then society is ‘wrong’.
Some citizens need to get a grip…..and a mirror.
Dead & Loving It.
Naw you were right the 1st time. £700. o))
DBBIA @ 12:24;
“Guy of Gisborne plus head
From memory he was very keen to take Maid Marion wassailin’. ”
—————————–
Jeezo, you must be even older than me if you remember back that far.
According to Mark Hateley, Jack Nicholson agreeing to work with Shelley Duvall again is like a new Shining.
canamalar,
If marriage is primarily about procreation should heterosexual couples who can’t or don’t want to have kids be barred from marrying?
There was no homophobia.
It was sarcasm.
TBB
Shurely not?
Gordon_J backing Neil Lennon on 18 July, 2012 at 12:55 said:
Joe Filippis Haircut on 18 July, 2012 at 12:47 said:
.However,I also know the Bible condems it now if the t he Bible is truly the word of God ought not we to be following it ?
———
There’s a great big if in the middle of that statement.
Would following the bible include things like allowing slavery and banning clothes made from mixed fabrics?
_______________________________________
….Or God forbid that any of us would ever be caught eating pork sausages or oysters.
Sometimes we’re old co some time wee new. Co ate like when u want the jelly fish money from everton still !!
…& let us pray that Joe Filippi’s haircut is not of the Beatle’s type.
Leviticus 19:27 reads “You shall not round off the side-growth of your heads nor harm the edges of your beard.”
When does ‘damage limitation’ become ‘controlled demolition’?
Or are they pretty much the same?
From the bottom of the totem (Chic Young) to the top (Platini) you can imagine them begging….
Contain it. Please contain it.
Marriage is a safety net for children,always has been and always should be and if we want to be progressive and equal where homosexuality is concerned we shouldn’t be railroading gay catholics into being at odds with their local catholic community for going against the wishes of the faith,divide and conquer,the oldest trick in the book.
See all this crap about rebuilding a magnificent club? It is a denial of a world that has had its day.
When you get right down to it what the world wanted to watch was the equivalent of bare knuckle fighting where the two contestants hate each other.
Anything based on hate is doomed to fail. Rebuilding “Rangers” as a truly magnificent club is going to take a change in the foundations on which it is built for a start.
Only a fool would attempt to rebuild on a swamp that engulfed his previous hoose, no matter how big it was.
So why no statements defining magnificent? Why no distancing themselves not just from CW and SDM but also the mindset SDM had and was trying to please?
Has Scotland such a poor opinion of itself it thinks we are only attractive to the outside world by highlighting the worst in us. Do we fear the bigots or the loss of the bigot pound so much we will continue to sell hate?
What in the name of a loving God is driving the SFA thinking?
What will it take for those trying to resurrect «Rangers» to realise what died is not worth rebuilding.
When will the penny finally drop that honesty , real honesty is the only antidote to the poison that has killed their club and come clean on their motives.
If there was any sign of admission of wrong and the sheer scale of it then I could start thinking of forgiveness and mercy.
But without the honest truth emerging what is there to forgive,?How can the wrongs of the past be buried allowing everyone to move on, if the undertakers refuse to give the deceased an honest burial and lower the coffin?
So it seems that the Bible is a hard book for us normal folk to follow because it seems to make us face difficult decisions if we are to truely follow it.However,that doesnt mean that it is wrong.H.H.
Gordon J- a Church has to have faiths and beliefs based on it’s interpretation of Scripture; above all else it has to be true to itself.
The Church is therefore perfectly entitled to disagree with the secular powers on this issue.
I don’t want any “tainted ” trophies from that mob,leave the history books blank,says so much more IMO.
Dontbrattbakkinanger,
Agreed – and the proposed law would allow churches to opt out if that’s what they believe.
But, equally, others should be allowed to carry out same sex marriages if that is their belief.
Re the EBT issue,this is where eventually UEFA might get involved with the hun shambles.They have contaminated every competition they were involved in,including European tournaments.Here come the law suits.
For those scrabbling clumsily round the bra straps of Same Sex Marriage, everything you ever wanted to know but were too afraid to Google:
Quest Policy Statement on Same Sex Marriage
April 26th, 2012
Background
The coalition government at Westminster announced in 2011 that it is to launch a consultation in the spring of 2012 on proposals to change the law in Englandand Walesto allow gay marriage by 2015. Meanwhile, the Scottish Government began its own process of consultation in 2011 calling upon interested bodies and organisations to submit their comments, etc by 9th December 2011. Reaction from the Catholic bishops on both sides of the border was immediate and critical of the proposals.
Catholic doctrine of marriage
The most common argument against the proposals is that same-sex marriage redefines the meaning of marriage, i.e. a social institution under which a man and a woman freely consent to live as husband and wife by making a public, legal commitment. The Catholic Church expands this bald definition, teaching that marriage is divinely ordained and is a permanent, exclusive and indissoluble bond between a man and a woman who complement one another, and that procreation is the specific and intrinsic perfection of marriage. Marriage is regarded as sacramental when both parties are baptised Christians. Underpinning the sacramental theology of marriage is the image of the Church as the Bride of Christ drawn from the writings of St Paul (Ephesians 5); an image originating with the prophets to describe God’s relationship with his unfaithful people.
The marriage of baptised Catholics in a civil ceremony is considered invalid or non-sacramental by the Church because it lacks canonical form, i.e. it was undertaken without the permission of the Catholic authorities and not according to an authorised Catholic rite. Marriages to be officiated by a non-Catholic minister require a dispensation from canonical form. It follows that baptised gay Christians who undertake a civil marriage are not confecting a sacramental or valid marriage, not only because they are have failed to obtain the necessary dispensation but because the ‘accidents’ or ‘symbols’ are wrong, i.e. they are not of the opposite sex.
Complementarity and sociological/psychological developments
Quest respects the centuries-old teaching of the Church and recognises the distress that many Catholics experience as our secular society increasingly challenges traditional Christian values and moral principles. At its most basic, the stress placed on complementarity as the exclusive domain of heterosexuals by those opposed to same-sex marriages relies almost exclusively on biological arguments based on anatomy to defend the complementarist position. However, significant advances in social sciences, psychology and of the natural world in recent decades have led us to see same-sex attraction as a perfectly natural, minority variant in the world of human sexual preference. Lesbians and gay men in relationships are often heard to articulate that their partner complements them, that they feel more whole and fulfilled when they are with that person. Critically, if one asks this of a religious lesbian or gay couple, they are likely to adopt language which has its roots in spiritual terms. Such people “give thanks to God” for the gift of their partner, they feel called to bear witness to God and the divine life in the context of their relationship.
In everyday language gay men and women, their families, friends and colleagues often refer to the registration of civil partnerships as ‘weddings’. Since December 2005 when the first registrations took place many of the rituals associated with heterosexual weddings have been adopted. Traditional arguments in favour of same-sex marriages have frequently been rooted in secular terms that take as their inspiration the equality of all before the law. If all human beings have entitlements to be treated with respect and dignity, it is argued, there can be no justification for discrimination against groups of people solely on grounds of their sexual orientation. Marriage, in civil terms, carries with it a number of taxation and benefits rights which, if exclusively the domain of heterosexuals, amounts to unfair treatment of thousands of lesbian women and gay men.
If, as we believe, all love and fidelity between human beings has its ultimate grounding in God, then Quest sees no inherent reason why the dedication of two human beings, committed in a public act of self-giving and devotion, should not take place in an explicitly religious setting. Indeed, for people of faith, not to include that element in an act of public devotion would be to exclude an essential dimension, the dimension of faith. These considerations are primary for a lesbian and gay Catholic group like Quest since they have very serious implications for questions not only on marriage in the civil context afforded and supported by the State, but also on the extra dimension of whether places of worship should become the settings for marriage ceremonies.
Same-sex marriages in places of worship
It will be the good fortune of those gay sisters and brothers whose faith groups welcome them as a greater or smaller part of their communities that same-sex marriage ceremonies on religious premises may become the norm where permitted by the principles and practices of those faith groups. Quest nevertheless recognises that the history of Christianity is the history of different traditions, beliefs and practices and that the Catholic Church in the light of its current teaching on homosexuality will prohibit such ceremonies.
In his visit to theUnited Kingdomin September 2010, His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI drew attention to “worrying signs of a failure to appreciate not only the rights of believers to freedom of conscience and freedom of religion, but also the legitimate role of religion in the public square.” Coercion by the state in requiring faith-based groups to solemnise same-sex marriages in places of worship and the use of other premises would be clear contrary to democratic values and respect for religious freedom.
Quest believes that the proposed introduction of same-sex marriage in parts of theUnited Kingdomis an opportunity for a more radical change in the marriage laws and we therefore call for a separation of civil registration of marriages from faith-based ceremonies. We advocate a system similar to that found inFrance, where only civil marriage is recognised. Religious ceremonies are optional and have no legal status; they may only be held after the civil ceremony has taken place (which can, but need not be, on the same day). In this way, faith-based groups will be under no obligation to marry same-sex couples and may continue to abide by their own traditions.
At present a heterosexual marriage is civilly registered in the context of a religious ceremony. If this practice was to continue following a change in the law allowing same-sex marriages to take place in religious buildings, a divergent situation would arise between those faith groups that allow such ceremonies to take place in its buildings and those which do not. In essence, the state would legitimise discrimination by faith groups opposed to same-sex marriage whilst those same groups are fulfilling state functions in respect of heterosexual marriages.
At the very least, it would be better for those faith groups that will not solemnise same-sex marriages or allow their premises to be used for such ceremonies on an equal basis with opposite-sex marriages, to forfeit the right to civilly register opposite-sex marriages in the context of a religious rite, i.e. a complete separation of the civil registration in space and time from the faith-based celebration of a marriage.
Conclusion
Quest supports the proposed legislation to redefine marriage to allow homosexuals to marry in civil ceremonies inScotlandandEnglandandWales. Quest wishes those faith groups well who consent to civil partnerships being registered on their premises.
Catholic lesbians and gay men who choose to make a public and formal commitment in a civil marriage ceremony do so in full knowledge that they live in contradiction to the Church‘s teaching and thus risk official censure. The best that might be hoped for in a pastoral sense is that the law of gradualism would apply. As defined in Father Kevin T. Kelly’s influential work, Divorce and Second Marriage (Collins, 1st edition 1982): “The law of gradualism refers to the kind of dilemma situation in which two different points of focus have to be kept in view even though for the present they cannot be fully aligned with each other”. In effect, as Fr Kelly goes on to explain, the first focus is “the universal value or law which is concerned with the good of human persons in general and which challenges the individual regardless of his particular situation. The second focus . . . involves the individual’s capacity at this stage in the history of his personal development and also any features in his particular situation which may have special human significance.” The aim is for an eventual growth towards alignment of the universal with the particular. Of its nature this process of alignment can take time, even many lifetimes.
Encouragement and support for a couple entering into an exclusive physical and emotional relationship serves to strengthen that relationship. In turn they, by their loving union, are living witnesses to divine love, drawing us all more deeply into God’s wondrous design of love; bringing love and harmony, peace and friendship to our world.
Acknowledgements
Germain Grisez, Living a Christian Life (The Way of the Lord Jesus, Vol. 2). Franciscan Press, 1993.
Kevin T. Kelly, Divorce and Second Marriage – Facing the Challenge. Collins Liturgical Publications, 1982.
Catechism of the Catholic Church. Geoffrey Chapman, 1994.
Quest, Response to the Consultation on Civil Partnerships on Religious Premises, 23 June 2011.
The Canon Law Letter and Spirit, Geoffrey Chapman, 1995
Gordon_J
You have raised this before. Whatever a guy wants to do with another guy, he can’t marry him. You have to call it something else.
In sacramental theology, for the sacrament to happen there is always a series of things that need to be in place. For example, a bishop could go through all the motions and try to ordain someone who had never been baptised, but it would be in vain. It wouldn’t work.
In this case for God to join the two partners in the marriage bond, the criteria include the stipulation that one of the partners be a woman and the other a man. Even then, if one of the partners is there under duress, or if one of them is already bound to another partner through a licit and valid marriage, it won’t work, no matter who conducts the ceremony, no matter where, no matter when.
Clearly there is more to the debate than sacramental theology, but as far as sacramental theology is concerned, you, me, David Cameron, Cardinal O’Brien, Peter Tatchell … nobody can change that.
You are right to say that some Christian denominations have said they want to be able to celebrate the union of homosexual couples in the same way as they celebrate the union of heterosexual couples, but I am not aware of any Christian denomination that regards marriage as a sacrament, as the Catholic Church does, that is calling for this. Lutherans, for example, hold that only baptism and the Eucharist are sacraments (and in some cases confession too).
If you can point me in the direction of one that does believe marriage to be a sacrament and wants to include same-sex couples, I will be happy to look at it further with you.
Some of our more learned posters can perhaps help me out here.
Let us assume Sevco get the OldCo licence. They acquiesce to the demands of the SFA so as to get their marketing nirvana of the OldCo’s history.
We will then have a football club playing in the same colours as a liquidated company.
A football club playing from the same venue as a liquidated company.
A football club using the same logo’s as a liquidated company.
A football club claiming to be a continuation of a liquidated company.
However this football club will also crucially have agreed to pay the legitimate footballing debts of a liquidated company. Debts running into millions of pounds.
Whould other creditors, one in particular who has been stung to almost £100m, have any recourse here?
OVER 8,000 teams from 40 countries playing at Under-15 level have been whittled down to the last 20 and the Celtic Youth Academy’s side are among them representing the club as the best teams in the world at that level compete for the Nike Cup in Shanghai.
The youngsters left for China on Tuesday after winning the British Nike Cup last season in which they beat the cream of English football to lift the trophy.
The tournament, jointly hosted by Manchester United and the Shanghai FA will be played at Shanghai Shenhua’s Training Ground starting this coming weekend.
The competition will reach its conclusion next Wednesday, July 25 when the final two teams go head-to-head at The Shanghai National Stadium in a curtain-raiser to the Shanghai Shenhua v Manchester United match.
The opening ceremony and draw takes place on Saturday with the first matches going ahead on Sunday.
Celtic Under-16 Academy Manager, Michael O’Halloran said: “The tournament in Shanghai brings together winners of national finals which took part in the various countries.
“The national tournament in Britain was invitational and took place at Warwick University in Coventry. This tournament was made up of English Premier League clubs and ourselves.
“There were 20 teams in total taking part in group format with five teams in each group, ours being made up of Chelsea, Bolton, Stoke and West Ham.
“After the group stages we went into the quarter final, semi-final and then the final.”
He added: “We view competing in tournaments as an important part of our players´ football education. It helps prepare them for the future when hopefully they will progress to Under-20s and eventually the first-team.
“At this current age group we don’t play for points or cups domestically. It’s also a fantastic opportunity for our players and coaches to pit their wits against opposition that we wouldn’t usually come up against.
“Aligned to this we were able to compete against the very best clubs in England and the knock-on from winning the British tournament is that we get to go up against the best in the world now. Again this will be seen as a fantastic addition to our players and coaches´ development.”
2 new investors?? broonies no gonnae be pleezed!! <:o((
This is all mindbogglingly complex…
There is no end to Hun atrocities nor SFA/SPL/SFL attempts to avoid punishing them
Properly.
Having said that, old Huns Dead, new Huns in Div3 with a transfer ban and trophies returned seems fair enough to me. Unless they are getting kicked out of Scottish football ( which we know the aren’t) then I’m content that they should be left to wither.
Time to look forward for fans of other clubs and leave rancid Hun History behind?
Jude2005
Your right, I was just going to leave it as it was
Re the rant on FF blaming Rangers FC (IL) firmly on the shoulders of ‘The unseen Fenian hand’ (AKA PL).
I am always suspicious believing that any ‘loyal’ poster on FF would not have the mental capacity to put forward such an argument regardless of how bizarre it seems. Any post that shows any semblance of a thought process i automatically assume to have come from a deep cover Timterloper fecking with the orcs simply for the fun of it.
However if PL is even fractionally responsible for any of Rangers FC (IL) problems he has my sincere gratitude.
Keep up the good work sir you are indeed a credit to the ‘Unseen Fenian hand society’
RL -yes, I would hope so, as they can’t have it both ways.
The ‘history’ and the ‘debt’ are both woven into the fabric of the Club and are indivisible.
Bada Bing
They were our trophies in the first place,if you don’t follow the rules your not part of the competition,it just took a while to realise that’s all.
Phew, back to football?? Things were getting a bit heated there on the marriage debate.
Disappointed no one developped the discussion on my argument for polygamy >:((
If loving Philvis is wrong, I don’t wanna be right.
The big GOLD * does it for me!! Put their history on top of those bonfires they like.
Sh&te dizznae burn tho!!
The UFH:
http://youtu.be/msX-SizUAiQ?t=30s
DBBIA – I am not very familiar with that sort of stuff but it seems to me the paying of footballing debts is opening a rather large can of worms….