Last year we attempted to quantify the money other SPL clubs were denied by Rangers improperly registering football players – on the assumption that being found guilty of improperly registering football players was actually worthy of punishment.
Below is an excerpt of the article and figures:
Some of the losses were easier to calculate than others. For example, it was easy to calculate that when Rangers won the title in 2009 with improperly registered players, earning automatic qualification to the Champions League group stage, they denied Celtic £15m European earnings, plus £340k SPL prize money. Other losses are less clear, specifically when a club was denied a place in a qualifying round for the Champions League or Uefa Cup, which they may or may not have progressed from.
We have established three figures for each club in the SPL during the season just finished, to cover the period from 2000 to 2012:
Minimum loss:
The absolute minimum each club was denied from European and SPL prize money as a result of Rangers finishing above them with ineligible players.
Weighted loss:
The figure based on Scottish clubs gaining entry to Champions League/Europa League (Uefa Cup) group stages from 20% of their qualifying campaigns (which is slightly less than trend).
Maximum loss:
The maximum a club could have achieved if it qualified for the European group stage it was denied entry to.
Out estimates take no account of the subsequent effect money has on future years. For example, If Celtic earned an additional £15m from entering the Champions League group stage in 2009-10 their league challenge for that season would have been £15m stronger, and Rangers £15m weaker, potentially resulting in consequences in future years.
This multiplier effect would have benefited Celtic but it would be likely to have a greater effect on other clubs, some of whom would be denied the enormous percentage increase in budget automatic qualification to European group stages would have brought.
Hearts finished immediately behind Celtic and Rangers more often than any other club over the period and suffer the greatest potential losses, even more so than Celtic. Hibernian, Aberdeen, Dundee United and Motherwell also suffered significant losses.
Several clubs got nowhere near European football over the period, and some of the 11 spent only a few years in the SPL but each club lost over £1m.
Figures for each club are:
Hearts
Maximum: £72.3m
Weighted: £16.3m
Minimum: £6.2m
Celtic
Maximum: £46.7m
Weighted: £21.9m
Minimum: £17.4m
Hibernian
Maximum: £34.8m
Weighted: £8.4m
Minimum: £3.6m
Aberdeen
Maximum: £21.1m
Weighted: £5.5m
Minimum: £2.7m
Dundee United
Maximum: £20.8m
Weighted: £5.2m
Minimum: £2.4m
Motherwell
Maximum: £16.7m
Weighted: £4.4m
Minimum: £2.1m
Kilmarnock
Maximum: £5.1m
Weighted: £1.9m
Minimum: £1.3m
Dunfermline
Maximum: £3.4m
Weighted: £1.8m
Minimum: £1.5m
Inverness
Maximum: £1.3m
Weighted: £1.3m
Minimum: £1.3m
St Johnstone
Maximum: £1.1m
Weighted: £1.1m
Minimum: £1.1m
St Mirren
Maximum: £1.1m
Weighted: £1.1m
Minimum: £1.1m
In the event Rangers fielded ineligible players during the period under consideration, which everyone apart from Neil Doncaster knows, and even he will be unable to deny next week, we know the following:
Rangers received a minimum of £40.9m which should have gone to the 11 other clubs, assuming each club lost all their European group stage qualifying campaigns. This calculation does not include earnings from clubs now in the Scottish Football League, such as Hamilton Accies or [then]Dundee.
If Scottish clubs progressed to the group stages of European competition on only 20% of their qualifying campaigns the loss would be £69.0m.
The figure for total potential losses if clubs successfully progressed to every European group stage is, as the figure for 100% failure, more illustrative than likely, but the maximum cost to the 11 SPL clubs is £224.6m.
You can read our calculations here. European income figures were sources from Uefa data.
The people who really matter in this entire debacle are those who buy tickets for Celtic Park, Pittodrie, Easter Road, Tynecastle, Tannadice, Fir Park and elsewhere. It is patently clear that the game in Scotland is failing fans and clubs alike. It is time for fans of SPL clubs to unite and move beyond the busted grip of the SFA.
Only SPL fans, working together, can ensure each of clubs has a viable future.
885 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- ...
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- ...
- 24
- »
Joe Filippis Haircut
Why would Neil be targeted, the Huns think they have Won?
Was the only question I asked.
Why do you think Neil will be targeted, Neil is mixing with the real heavyweights of the Footballing World now and beyond that going into the entertainment industry and all the high profile people there.
He will still, always, plant whatever Trophy in front of the most deserving.
The Green Brigade are now the Neil Lennon IMO.
These scumbags are very dirty.
ASonOfDan
I am not interested in giving Fat Sally or Green a slap in the coupon, you could’t mark them with a blowtorch anyway. They will snigger at that statement. This is about the SPL, the rules and the future. That mob are an irrelevant distraction to the issue now.
Does anyone remember when the Rangers offered a 17 year old a five year deal which was deemed illegal.
Was this deal “revoked”, didn’t think it was possible!
If it wasn’t possible and couldn’t be revoked, then what would be the point of the first rule??
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/9539581/SFA-set-to-reject-Barrie-McKays-new-five-year-contract-at-Rangers.html
“Because McKay is under 18 he’s regarded as a minor and both Fifa and SFA statutes insist that long-term contracts for players of that age are inappropriate.
Rule 2.2.3 of the SFA’s Registration Procedures states: “The registration of a player who is under 18 years of age at the time of signing a Non-Recreational Player Registration Form may be for a period not exceeding three years.
“Any clause referring to a longer duration within the relative agreement between the player and the club shall not be recognised and the player’s registration only effected for a period of no more than three years.”
leftclicktic
As my auld ma used to say ” there is more than wan way tae choke a horse”
———————————————————————————————-
Wouldn’t have liked to get on your auld Ma’s bad side :O) hh
Well said Neil!! Now get that lot sorted out for 2 morro!!
weeminger
19:04 on
1 March, 2013
Monteblanco – I never want us to stoop to their level.
me too
weeminger
Wanting assurances that if we play to the rules then the rules are applied evenly is not stooping to their levels?
I love Neil Lennon. Love him.
There is a man making his feelings crystal clear, knowing that there will be people who want to hurt him, who will believe him provocative, for doing it.
I’ve no ticket for tomorrow but I’m going. If I get a ticket for the Celtic end, great. If not I’ll go in the home end.
Either way, I hope our magnificent support proclaim their appreciation of the man for fully 90 minutes.
A Celtic legend.
SwanseaBhoy
HMRC appeal panel consist of 2 accountants and 1 QC. When rangers won the appeal it was 2 QC’s and 1 accountant.
I hope this is true.
Roddy MacKay
@ The_Badgeman
Broke the rules but did not cheat. Fined, but not guilty. Liquidated but same club. Scottish Football – where rangers are untouchable
#SFA
Really hope Lenny writes a book on his time at Celtic once he’s out of harms way in Scotland – what a read it could be !!!
Wee didnt stoop to their level. That wd be physically impossible and I might do masel some harm!
Sent an email to Puma expressing my views on their deal with the huns.
What good will it do?
Probably nothing – but it made ME feel good!
HH!!
Campbell Og.
Patience is a virtue.
Evening Celts, not read CFCs statement or Neil’s interview, are we suing the establishment for loss of earnings, do it Celtic.
Vmhan
Watch Lenny’s presser. Man’s a legend.
SwanseaBhoy
weebobbycollins
19:03 on
1 March, 2013
I am one of the slightly older guys on here…but you know what? I hate them more now than at any time in my life…
Well I saw the wee barra play myself so probably round about the same age & ye know what?
I feel exactly the same way.
WE ARE ALL NEIL LENNON
Tallybhoy
19:42 on 1 March, 2013
Stop fussing about Sevco, let them do what they are wanting to do. They are an irrelevance to Celtic, you are highlighting that shower of sh*t.
HH m8ty
I asked P67 a few months ago if there was a Mr Big behind the daily orchestrated anti Celtic bollox ,a Jack Irvine/Media House type .P67 kindly replied and doubted it.I have seen NL’s press conference,nothing in it,unless you manipulate and manufacture lies.Ban them Celtic,we have New Media.As far as a puppet master behind the scenes? I beg to differ from Paul,with respect.
Ntassoolla 19:12 on 1 March, 2013
Well done ACGR for spotting the jungle floodlight. Does this mean you’ve regained your sense of smell?
It’s good to know he’s still fighting
………………………………………………………….
Aye buddy, I could always find you:-)
Jungle Floodlight / TBK was a good un. His spats with the nazicroat poster were legendary and he was missed when he was perma-papped. I hope it is the same guy. I remember him using the “WE ARE CELTIC” and me then putting it as “Copyright of TBK”, that really got the huns blood boiling.
How’s the move coming along? It must be difficult organising that on top of running the London Stock Exchange…………………………………..ha ha
Hail Hail Bruv.
Dick Emery’s daughter turns up as a granny in Coronation Street – I feel old.
Evening Folks,
Disappointed with Celtics statement. A bit of a damp squib for me.
Fine article by Paul outlining potentially how much money Scottish Football clubs have lost due to Rangers breaking the rules.
I think Celtic’s strategy so far of keeping their own counsel has been a good one. However my own thoughts were when Rangers were eventually found guilty, as they were yesterday, the club should come out with all guns blazing.
I think the other clubs fans in Scotland are looking for a leading force to mobilise the fight back against the incompetent establishment that runs Scottish Football for the benefit of mostly one club.
In my opinion this is Celtic Football Club’s opportunity to unite Scottish Football and rebel against what’s transpired so far and to take Scottish Football forward.
A one time opportunity, it will be messy, but in history there are times to step up, and I think this is it for Celtic.
If Celtic now continue as they have to this point without forcefully challenging what’s gone on before, I think the game in Scotland will continue to a slow lingering death.
Over to you the Celtic board. Can you convince me that all your doubters have been wrong and finally we will see the bold leadership that we as Celtic fans would expect?
HH Dan
Let Govan Fitba’ Flourish
There’s the rule that was never broke,
There’s the fine that was never paid,
There’s the club that was never dead,
There’s the peeple that never cared.
Apologies if already posted or read. The following is from the Scottish Football Monitor site and deserves to be read…..
—————————————————————————–
I just want to repost the following from Hirsute Pursuit. These words, and yesterday’s similar post by majorcoverup, are potentially among the most important reactions I’ve seen to yesterday’s farrago. Surely the SPL board cannot ignore such a blatant misreading of their rules.
HirsutePursuit:
I am gald I am not the only one stumped by the Bryson / MacKenzie evidence in relation to eligible players.
Bryson seems to say what the SFA position is in realtion to registrations staying valid until revoked but there is no reference as to where the revocation process (or offenses that may lead to a registration being revoked) is included in the SFA Articles and Rules.
If the SPL don’t have a rule in place to retrospectively terminate the registration of a player, then where exactly does it exist in the SFA other than in the mind of Mr Bryson?
Why was this article or rule not highlighted in the LNS report as the one that took precedence.
If such an article or rule isn’t written down then how can it take precedence over rules that do exist as Bryson’s evidence is then merely an opinion not backed up by hard facts.
I keep hoping people will put me right and this has been explained in the LNS report or point me to the relevant sections of the SFA Articles and Rules but I am still waiting!!!
===============================================
Is the registration of a player the only factor in determining a player’s eligibility to take part in a competition?
D1.1 Subject to these Rules, to be eligible to Play for a Club a Player must first be Registered either as a Professional Player or as an Amateur Player.
Does this rule or any other rule or article, suggest that registration as a player automatically confers eligibility?
No! Player Registration is simply a first step towards eligibility to participate in any competition that the club enters. There are, of course, other competition-specific factors: he could be suspended, cup-tied or be subject to any number of matters that could affect eligibility to participate in a given match.
Let’s be absolutely clear about this. The status of a player’s registration is an utterly bogus issue here. The question is only about the eligibility of players to play for a club in specific SPL matches.
Whilst it is true that a void registration would make players ineligible that is not the point here.
D1.13 A Club must, as a condition of Registration and for a Player to be eligible to Play in Official Matches, deliver the executed originals of all Contracts of Service and amendments and/or extensions to Contracts of Service and all other agreements providing for payment, other than for reimbursement of expenses actually incurred, between that Club and Player, to the Secretary, within fourteen days of such Contract of Service or other agreement being entered into, amended and/or, as the case may be, extended.
This rule covers registration AND eligibility. Even if the registration (though later found to be defective) cannot be revoked retrospectively, the eligibility of players to play in official matches is a separate matter.
The rules clearly envisage a situation were the non-eligibility of a player to play in an SPL match comes to light after a game is played:
D1.11 Any Club Playing an ineligible Player in an Official Match and the Player concerned shall be in breach of the Rules.
The rules DO NOT say that:
An incomplete contract renders the players registration void and therefore – as a consequence of the non-registration – the player becomes ineligible to play official matches.
The rules DO say:
An incomplete contract means the player is not properly registered AND is ineligible to play in official matches.
The commission was certainly entitled to consider the issue of registration and (perhaps) – on the evidence provided – come to the conclusion it did.
But the commission also had a duty to consider the issue of player eligibility as a stand-alone matter. That appears, in fact, to have been their remit.
Why it chose to fuse registration with eligibility I simply cannot fathom from the published decision.
——————————————————————————-
Hail Hail – I trust the lords and the house of lords as much as I trust the sfa!!
pyfinl
Phyllis Dietrichson
Cheers,was wondering were I’d seen her :O(
tigertim you missed this part of the article that you quoted selectively.
It is the bit from the helpful Sandy Bryson:
The SFA have confirmed that they won’t accept McKay’s new contract.
“If you read the rules it says that effect won’t be given to the portion that’s over it – in this case, the last two years,” said Sandy Bryson at the SFA’s Registrations Department.
“Effectively, it will be a three-year registration. It might well be, though, that the club – if and when we receive any registration from them – might want to pare it back anyway.
“This will certainly be pointed out to them. They could enter a three-year contract for him just now and then, when he turns 18 [on Dec 30], offer him a longer one if everyone is still agreeable to do so.”
I don’t post much lurk most nights
thanks to the club for e-mailing me the real media conference those msm guys want to hold there heads in shame with their loaded questions to Neil no wonder this guy gets bullets and bombs in the post shame on them
well done again NFL you done great there
HH
Monteblanco, 18.58
“Why should we operate within the rules of the game when others don’t and when they don’t they are exempt from due process? I don’t want to be assured of that!”
Doing the right thing isn’t always the easy thing. But it’s always the right thing. Hail Hail.
!!Bada Bing!!
19:46 on 1 March, 2013
I asked P67 a few months ago if there was a Mr Big behind the daily orchestrated anti Celtic bollox ,a Jack Irvine/Media House type .P67 kindly replied and doubted it.I have seen NL’s press conference,nothing in it,unless you manipulate and manufacture lies.Ban them Celtic,we have New Media.As far as a puppet master behind the scenes? I beg to differ from Paul,with respect.
______________________________________________________________________
My views and opinions change over time, I think that is a good thing. P67 has called a lot of things right, most things in fact but yesterdays verdict shook all of the Celtic Family but all it has done has shaken us, perhaps we needed that at this precise moment.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOCaYEV3jDc
I see Sepp Blatter refused to discuss any questions regarding Rangers.
Bit strange the MSM are asking for quotes from him when none have been forthcoming from Doncaster or Reagan.
McCoist is asked for quotes, Neil Lennon is asked for quotes, Charles Green is asked for quotes, the people who “run” Scottish football have yet to give a statement. Shocking!!
http://sport.stv.tv/football/international/216024-fifa-president-refuses-to-comment-on-rangers-on-arrival-in-scotland/
tigertim
Ole Sepp will be asking his aide ” Who are these Rangers ah thought thy wur deid”
in Swiss german of course…
petec
Understand what you are saying – they ARE an irrelevance to Celtic, but I still hate them and everything they stand for.
Won’t mention them again tonight!
Is the quiz on btw?
HH!!
Having endured the greatest of hostility, Neil Lennon has the courage to comment in the manner in which he did today.
A remarkable man.
setting free the bears
19:08 on
1 March, 2013
The Celtic statement is a fair start. A reasonable start. But, thus far, it is just a start.
I understand that they will be light on elaboration over the next few days but please do not believe that one statement expressing surprise and mild disappointment is going to be sufficient for any purpose.
I will be patient and await developments.
========================
The fat lady has still to sing on this episode. That was just a mild clearing of the throat.
Hamiltontim
Like swatting flies the way he dealt with those droogs….
Chiellini puts Juventus 1 up away to Napoli
Just watched Neil’s press conference.
Handled it superbly with a few barbs thrown in for good measure.
The msm should be asking Ogilvie and his cohorts these questions.
HH!!