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
- ...
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- »
Wilson, (bigot who attacked Lenny) has posted a drawing on his facebook page with ‘Neil Lennon RIP’. Probably spurred on by our “justice” system.
Tom McG
I’m off for the bus to Paisley but I will reply to your overnight post (your 2nd mis-reading of mine) later. The 2 clowns posting on the back of your points are just irrelevant fleabites.
Today is about football. I expect a win and will be disappointed with anything less. But for those who are demanding Celtic must win the SC to make this a palatable season, I part company.
We must win 3 matches , starting today to win the SC. Winning 3 matches in a row is achievable but is never a gimme and never has been a gimme, even for our best teams.
So, if we lose today or in the semis or at the final, it will be a major loss but this will still have been, historically, a high point season.
Reaching the last 16 of the CL and possibly beyond, is superior to being in the q-f of the old EC, a feat we did not acheive since 1980.
Had an interesting conversation with the most intelligent Sevco fan in my office yesterday. ‘Victory’ he said as he past my desk. ‘Well if you call being guilty on all four count’s a victory, then good for you. ‘ said I . ‘ You’s Celtic fans are obsessed with Rangers, what has it got to do with you anyway ? ‘ said Sevco man. ‘ Well you brought it up with your ‘Victory’ comment and secondly it was an SPL commission , my team is actually in the SPL’ ……..I await his reply !
baku/black isle celt
10:54 on
2 March, 2013
——————————————-
The Blackthorn sponsorship is just for one year. How long before both sets of shirts are displaying the same logo again? I know this is out of our Board’s hands and it will be down to C&C. Watch this space. We will slowly be dragged into the Old Firm nomenclature again and eventually the fact that they died will be forgotten.
Any news as to how the other teams in Scotland received the news concerning TFOD and the LNS report?
Just heard Platini on the radio. .
He said that the Qatar World Cup will have to be held in the winter..[ no problems there , Mr P]
He also said he wants some of the games to be played in Saudi Arabia/ Bahrain / Oman / Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates.
Apparently Mr Platini is a very well paid and respected Football Administrator.
South Of Tunis
Whatever team he puts out we have a mountain to climb, who was the last team to score three or more at Juve???
borgo67
Sorry, missed your post.
150 games, 1950 player ratings, 10 formations, 256 combination ratings…
Hasn’t agreed with me once.
God loves a trier.
HH
SPIERS in sensible article shocker!!!
He points out today how ridiculous the Sevco mob are. They were found GUILTY.
Moreover LNS is perhaps helping setting up HMRC with some salient points for the appeal..
starry plough .
Inter scored 3 last November .
Result was 1 -3..
South Of Tunis
A glimmer of hope, love it..
arranmorebhoylxv11
11:18 on
2 March, 2013
HH
As someone who is not overly fond if speirs, do you have a link to his latest musings?
A SON OF DAN
Hopefully,Plod will feel his collar and do their job properly this time. He is clearly a twat of the highest order.
This from KDS (Adam Smith) says it all about the LNS conclusion.
From the ruling of the now great and fair LNS, which we always accepted he would be:
“If it had not been intended that the player would directly benefit from the EBT arrangements then there is no real reason to believe that the player would have agreed to the overall financial package offered”
There it is, the slam dunk.
The technicalities of the seemingly not fit for purpose (defending the integrity of the sport) registration process stopped him saying it was a sporting advantage.
They hid £47m of payments, McCoist accepted it and apologised for it, LNS no less (the paragon of virtue) states that the players would not have signed otherwise.
This is what we have always argued, there were players on that park where the trophies were won who would have not been there but for this deliberate concealment to allow this to happen.
Every fan in the country knows if they could have an extra £80k per week of wages (not far from Sevcos current wage bill which is the second highest in Scotland) this would give Their team an advantage.
That’s just great, a mason from Kilwinning lodge at the head of investigations, honourable chap my erse.
I think Spiers tries ever so hard to be the serious journalist he wants to be. Sadly he is mentally scarred from being run outa town by Minty for criticising him around 2004.
Difficult to criticise him for that,and he still has his good moments.
Crazy that a journo is praised for doing his job once in a erm blue moon,mind.
Just for a laugh, let’s speculate on what Neil’s response to the question should have been. ….
“One more question on this sordid subject, and I will ‘liquidate’ this press conference”
starry plough .
Conte is really intense [ rumor mongers claim that many of the players think he is way too intense ]. He seems to be big on tactics . Heard him on the radio earlier —
” all the experts think we’ll approach the game differently , I am not so sure “
There is something about the Rangers mindset that lies at the heart of the differences between them and us and it is their incapacity to admit to wrongdoing.
Even when found guilty of it their mental welfare depends absolutely on being in the right or not being wrong.
The absence of true contrition is marked throughout this affair because a precondition is being wrong.
To the other traditon of contrition this mindset is exasperating as it removes any possibility of a reconciliation.
However no matter how many judges say no wrongdoing took place (even when it clearly has) the judge of life, sometimes called Karma rules different and the consequences flow. It is interesting that it chose to do so in the strips of Malmo and Maribor and on the field of play rather than finance but Ive held the view for a while life or Karma has a sense of humour and right now he/she is helpless on the floor pissing him/herself laughing.
This is an interesting post from TSFM: (sorry if it’s been posted before)
itsalitany says:
Saturday, March 2, 2013 at 01:05
2 0 Rate This
First time poster. Long time lurker here and previously on RTC.
I’m driven to post for the first time (and probably only) time by my incredulity at LNS’s interpretation of the rules on the eligibility of the players with undeclared side letters to play in official matches.
Rule 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.
In my opinion, and I drafted contracts for a living for many years, this rule means, in layman’s terms that “all other agreements providing for payment etc” must be delivered to the football authorities. If this is not done, the consequences are twofold: (1) a condition of the player registration requirements is broken; and (2) a player is not eligible to play in official matches.
LNS concludes that the side letters were such “other agreements providing for payment”. He determines that the side letters had not been delivered. The two consequences of this failure to deliver the side letters, as provided in D1.13 and as Hirsute Pursuit and majorcoverup have already pointed out are clearly in my view (1) that the registrations were flawed AND (2) that the players were ineligible.
On the registration point, LNS accepts seemingly without question the SFA’s Mr Bryson’s evidence that, as far as the SFA are concerned (1) a registration is valid until it shown not to be valid and even then, only becomes invalid from the point when the factor which invalidates it comes to light and is proved and (2) remains valid through any period during which it should not be valid but the invalidating factor is not yet known to the SFA. LNS quotes no precedents for this approach having been taken in the past and no SFA rule underpinning such an approach.
LNS goes on to state that SPL rules in his view should be interpreted to agree with related SFA rules. Therefore, he interprets D1.13 to provide that while the non-disclosure of the side letters was a breach of the registration conditions, the fact the non-disclosure was not known to the SPL meant the registrations of the affected players remained valid and that, as they were validly registered, they were eligible to play. If the registrations were subsequently proven to be invalid, they would only became invalid from the point of time they were proven to be invalid (i.e. now) and cannot retrospectively be challenged or set aside.
LNS then relies on rule D1. to determine that, following his conclusion above, no ineligible players were fielded by Rangers FC as a result of the non-disclosure of the side letters.
Rule D1.1 states that: “Subject to these Rules, to be eligible to Play for a Club a Player must first be Registered…”
Rule D.1 clearly, in my opinion, means that a player cannot be eligible to play if he is not registered.
It cannot in my opinion, reasonably be taken to mean that if a player is registered, he is therefore eligible.
Yet that is how LNS has interpreted it.
A quick analogy. In order to be pregnant, one must be female. By the logic of LNS’s interpretation and application of D1.1, however, if one is female, it follows not only that one is pregnant, but also that one will be forever be deemed to have been pregnant during such period as passes from the point one became female until the point one proves that one is not pregnant.
The most bizarre aspect of the LNS findings on eligibility of the affected players is that it goes to such lengths to determine that the players were validly registered when valid registration is just one of a number of requirements for eligibility and when, in terms of D1.13, another of the requirements for eligibility to play is clearly absent.
As stated above, D1.13 provides that “for a Player to be eligible to Play in Official Matches…a club must…deliver all other agreements providing for payment”. This could not be clearer in my view. It matters not a jot whether the players were validly registered. In terms of D1.13, if the “other agreements for payment” were not delivered (which LNS confirms they were not), the players were not eligible to play, irrespective of the validity or otherwise of their registration.
Yet LNS concludes that the side letters were “other agreements for payment”, concludes that they were not delivered, but concludes that the affected players WERE eligible to play.
Try squaring that circle. I can’t.
==================================
auldheid
11:25 on
2 March, 2013
“If it had not been intended that the player would directly benefit from the EBT arrangements then there is no real reason to believe that the player would have agreed to the overall financial package offered”
———————————————
quite sure at the FTTT player and lawyers stated that they would not have signed for RFC(il)
it was only when the club returned and said we can get you the cash required if you use the ebt system
the players and lawyers questtioned the legal implication
RFC (il) then issued side letters
THE STENCH FROM HAMPDUMP WILL LINGER FOR MANY MORE YEARS TO COME
jam67
Findings did not lead to stripping of titles but nor did they cover Rangers in glory
Spiers on Saturday
Graham Spiers
Saturday 2 March 2013
Forgive me if I’ve got this wrong but, did Lord Nimmo Smith in his independent commission declare an “innocent” rather than “guilty” verdict on Rangers on Thursday?
The guilty verdict was greeted as a victory by Rangers and their supporters
From some of the reaction – especially that of some Rangers fans and even certain media commentators – you would think that was the case.
This was a very odd experience for me. I locked myself away to study in silence Nimmo Smith’s findings; reading of his guilty verdict on Rangers’ repeated breaches of Scottish Premier League rules and of his conclusion that only a “substantial financial penalty” could cover the club’s wrongdoing.
Having digested all of this I came blinking back into the sunlight to find people declaring it a marvellous day for Rangers, even a “total vindication” of the side-letters policy at Ibrox. On television Charles Green hooted about how the stain had been removed from his club, and even more, about how apologies were now due.
I had to go back and look again at Nimmo Smith’s verdict. No, sure enough, he had found Rangers guilty. He deemed the club’s undeclared payments to at least 43 players over 11 years – worth something between £40m and £50m – to be a blatant disregard for the house rules of Scottish football. Yet this finding had Rangers fans punching the air in celebration.
The truth is, everyone had become preoccupied with the punishment, not the crime. The theme of “title stripping” – coincidentally something I have always been vehemently against in the context of Rangers – had become in the public mind the be all and end all of this case. So when Nimmo Smith ruled out title stripping and imposed a financial penalty as punishment, this apparently was enough for his actual verdict on Rangers to be viewed as little more than an incidental.
Briefly, let’s just go back over these findings, to double-check what was found. Fundamentally, had Rangers flouted football’s rules, in terms of undeclared payments to players, or not? Yes, said Nimmo Smith. The non-disclosure had been “a seriously misconceived plan” for which “the directors [of oldco Rangers] must bear a heavy responsibility.” He added: “The non-disclosure [of the payments] was deliberate.”
Nimmo Smith opted to explore why Rangers had deliberately withheld the fact of the infamous side-letters and stated that the evidence was “clear” that the club had feared its tax-avoiding EBTs scheme might be either hurt or compromised. “The evidence clearly indicates a view among the management of ‘oldco’ that it might have been detrimental to the desired tax treatment of the payments being made to have disclosed the existence of these side-letters to the football authorities.”
In this regard, Nimmo Smith especially highlighted witness statements by Douglas Odam, who had been the Rangers company secretary until he left in 2003, and who had taken charge of the preparation and signing of player contracts. “It is clear from Mr Odam’s evidence,” wrote Nimmo Smith, “that Oldco’s failure to disclose the side-letters was partly motivated by a wish not to risk prejudicing the tax advantages of the EBTs scheme.”
Nimmo Smith also presented a picture in his report of various figures associated with Rangers ducking and diving, for want of a better phrase, when it came to providing documents and information which would aid his enquiry. Such prevarication or stalling tactics only served to hold up the whole investigation. This continuing failure to be transparent, wrote Nimmo Smith, was a further “serious breach of the rules”.
The commission’s findings cast further light on the way this EBTs scheme was operated by Rangers. Steven Davis, for example, was entitled to receive £1.2m via the scheme. Shota Arveladze would receive £990,000. Barry Ferguson, it had been previously stated, received £2.5m in total over a number of years from the scheme. These are pretty hefty sums of money being “paid” (or “loaned”) without any tax being due and there are two possible conclusions to be drawn about what this meant for Rangers. Either the club saved itself millions in tax liability, or it was able to offer players a bottom-line salary it might not otherwise have been able to afford.
In this context, some in Scottish football will continue to be baffled by Nimmo Smith’s conclusion in regard to no competitive advantage being gained by Rangers. In truth, it is the weakest part of his report and is a subject skirted over in a few cursory paragraphs, though he stated that, all being considered, no football advantage was gained by Rangers.
Or does he? Even here Nimmo Smith actually hedges his bets a little. “We are unable to reach the conclusion that this led to any competitive advantage,” he wrote. But he also states: “If the breach of the rules by non-disclosure of the side-letters did confer any competitive advantage, then that could only have been an indirect one.”
I have to admit, I’m not sure what all this amounts to. Nimmo Smith reached a judgement about Rangers not gaining any advantage but he did so in less than resolute fashion.
Having said that, for different reasons I’m glad he reached the conclusion he did about no titles being stripped from Rangers. First, because this whole saga is so convoluted. Second, because going back and erasing football history seems to me to be a dodgy exercise. And thirdly, because what would be gained by it? Title stripping of a now defunct company (or club?) would have served next to no purpose. The fact is, these titles Rangers won during the EBT years will now be forever bickered over by supporters, especially those of Rangers and Celtic.
The last 48 hours have been pretty bizarre around Rangers. The club’s fans have been near-jubilant at this Nimmo Smith verdict. One media figure even said: “So, a good day all round for Rangers, then?”
I guess it depends which way you look at it. Rangers’ guilt or innocence was one thing, the apparent vulnerability of five of the club’s 54 domestic titles, it now transpires, was something far greater.
Paul67 and all,
Totally unrelated to the current debate on the blog…
Mr and Mrs Craggy are proud to announce the safe arrival of their baby boy, Craggy Island Junior. He was born yesterday and weighed 8lbs 1oz.
Mother and Son both doing well.
Father and the Craggy Twins all delighted!
Hail Hail to the Celtic Family’s newest arrival.
craggy island gaa
cloud9csc
Off oot to do some shopping. Can I ask someone to act as my proxy for the 12.15 podium slot, Philvis are you about? ;-
hen1rik
11:27 on 2 March, 2013
That’s just great, a mason from Kilwinning lodge at the head of investigations, honourable chap my erse.
……………………………
No hen1rik The Speculative Society of Edinburgh was founded in 1764 by Masons from the Lodge Canongate Kilwinning, Edinburgh.
They formed a new group which has never had more than 30 current ordinary members since then.
The ordinary member does 2/3 years of meetings/debates in the old Edinburgh University and is then granted “extraordinary privileges”.
What they are who knows but the Spec are not part of the Grand Lodge of Masons of Scotland.
Lord Burton a past Grand Master described them as a “super Mason” group IIRC in the News of the World.
Senor Pablo Diablo
10:36 on
2 March, 2013
Only way the game in Scotland can move forward with any degree of integrity is if the SFA are disbanded.
FTSFA
——————————
If all SPL clubs were to play in UK leagues with the SFL leagues being treated as a region that gave access to those leagues then we would not have any of the issues that plague our game.
All Scottish clubs would find their level, gates would be healthy because of better competition and the poisonous relationship that eventually killed Rangers would never surface again. The rivalry would still be intense but the twin corrupting element of Rangers and SFA would disappear.
Congratulations to the Craggy family.
Hail! Hail!
jungle jam67
11:37 on
2 March, 2013
It all really is disgusting …….
Stephen Thomsons rather late resignation from the SPL board and the reasons for it become more interesting.
What did he know ?
HH
SPL Statement – Independent Commission
The SPL Board appointed the Independent Commission to consider all aspects of the above matter and at no point provided any direction to the Commission on any aspect of the case.
The SPL Board notes that the Commission has upheld a number of complaints against Rangers OldCo and that Rangers OldCo has been found to have breached SPL and Scottish FA Rules over an 11-year period in relation to the non-disclosure of financial arrangements involving many of its Players.
The SPL Board are assured by the integrity of the process followed and thank The Rt Hon Lord Nimmo Smith and his colleagues, Nicholas Stewart QC and Charles Flint QC, for their time and effort.
The Board wishes to give the detail of the decision further consideration at its next meeting.
—————————
LNS report
Since Issues 1 to 3 relate to a single course of conduct, a single overall fine is appropriate. Taking into account these considerations, we have decided to impose a fine of £250,000 on Oldco
—————————
someone signed this off at hampden ?
someone decided that the choice of punishment would be a £250000 fine to oldco in liquidation?
someone provided advice to LNS that the punishment fitted the serious charges ?
THE STENCH FROM HAMPDUMP WILL LINGER FOR MANY MORE YEARS TO COME
jam67
Auldheid
11:33 on 2 March, 2013
_______________
It is implicit in your post that one side is conditioned to examine their own shortcomings, admit them to themselves & confess them to third party.
The other is not.
It had never really occured to me, that the fact that so many of us took this acceptance of our faults, & confession of them, was so beneficial to us in life.
Food for thought indeed.
Sycophantic triumphalism coming from a media outlet I’m do glad I cancelled last week. ESPN firmly nailing their Sevco colours to the mast now ! Leading questions chuckles n fat Sally spouting anti Celtic propaganda ! Craigan and Smith asking for heads and who are these people ! Disgusting !
How many ‘journals’ from the MSM have given chuckster a comparable (to NFL) time about his ‘him or me’ statement?
Some suggested questions:
What did the real owners have to say to their misbehaving employees?
What were the nature of the complaints made about Murray? (Given what was acceptable in the deidco boardroom, it must have been pretty horrendous!)
Why has Murray not made any comment to anyone about the smears?
How many of the 100 companies associated with Minty were involved in making extraordinary payments ( e.g. EBTs) to players, former employees and others (e.g. journalists/pundits)?
What were the other schemes referred to by Davy ‘it was part of my contract’ Dodds?
Can you tell us where the £22m is? (Just under half the amount paid out in undisclosed payments-that is known about-over 11 years)
Any team news
The only thing that bothers me about real media folk like AT and decent paper print articles posted yesterday is the use of phrases like ‘the green half of Glasgow’ or ‘on the other side of the city’. This isn’t about Celtic v Rangers – it’s about a club being treated wildly differently from every other club from Aberdeen down to Hutchison Vale Community Sports Club.Credit is due to p67 for not focussing on Celtic as he has not done in blogs several times. A dons fan or Motherwell or Hearts fan has been let down by the ‘authorities’ just as much as we have if not more as we have a large fan base to help us insulate ourselves from the incompetance and poormorals of their leadership. Until we demistify the relationship rangers have with us and the rest of the Scottish footballing community, they will abuse just about every arrangement and understanding which goes with running a league with 11 other teams.
craggy island gaa,
Many congratulations. A good result today will only add to your celebrations
auldheid
11:33 on 2 March, 2013
The main difference between them and us is that they are corrupt, cheating, bigoted hooligan, lying barstewards who have been protected by a similarly constituted football estabishment for many decades………we won the war, since they are now deed………and, to satisfy their lust for bigotry, the establishment are now clinging onto some new club they sneaked into SFL3, as have the oldco fans……..not to worry, we’ll whup them also, unless greengo beats us to it……LOL
Can anyone confirm if the SFA have accepted the LNS recommendations and what is the due process to do so ?
Considering that Stewart and Flint QCs sit on UEFA financial fair play comittees. I wonder what Brian Quinn thinks of it all ?
HH