Vladimir Romanov has grown bored of his Hearts experiment as an investment of tens of millions of pounds failed to change the side from mid-table strugglers into a team capable of something Motherwell seem able to do on significantly less.
Romanov wanted to transform Hearts into the biggest club in Scotland but failed to address the structural limitations of the club. While Hearts may be the biggest team in Edinburgh, Edinburgh is a net exporter of football fans, Tynecastle is squeezed into a cramped corner of the city and provides very little opportunity to harvest corporate income, and, in case you haven’t noticed, there were two well-established competitors in a larger, net-import city with ample corporate income opportunities.
Various Hearts boards have looked to relocate the club or extend facilities at Tynecastle without much headway being made. A bid of £22m was received from a house builder for the stadium some years ago but without a viable alternative the deal stalled.
A viable alternative could come onto the market soon.
If Rangers go out of business Romanov is in a unique position to take advantage. Craig Whyte holds a floating charge on Ibrox and Murray Park but any bid in excess of his liability, which would be considerably less than the value of the properties, which have a book value of £139m, would secure both pieces of real estate.
Hearts could sell Tynecastle and Hearts training ground, raising enough funds to considerably offset what they would need to pay to secure Ibrox, if not provide a surplus, and establish foothold in the Glasgow market to complement their historical Edinburgh fan base. One club would have a pull on a huge proportion of Scotland’s two largest cities.
At a stroke Romanov would ensure his club were for all time, at the very least, the second largest team in Scotland, and, eventually, could push Celtic for top spot.
It would be a ballsy move, but if you want to create a super-club you need to think a little creatively.
943 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- ...
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
Regarding today’s meeting of the SPL clubs, this “blog” from Doncaster has “pave-the-way-primer” written all over it.
They will undoubtedly try to use an excuse along the lines of :-
“…well, at the times that some things are alleged to have occurred, Platini & UEFA had not yet opined and so really it was ok then because it was normal & everyone was in the same boat and there was nothing wrong with any of it. Now of course, we need to look to the future blah blah blah…….”
It’s all written – very deliberately written – in the future tense and purports to be about coming up with the bold new initiatives that this kick-ass SPL of ours is going to implement.
They must not be allowed to get away with any attempts to cloud the retrospective cheating of the huns, and if ever there was a time for Celtic PLC to break silence, it could well be at this meeting. I hope they are manning up for it.
Call me a cynic but I believe the discussions on the “existing rules on financial fair play” will try to paint a picture of a problem (referring to huns fiscal cheating) not covered because it was not foreseen.
They are gearing up to try & get the huns a free pass, as is their default behaviour. Although I think the odds appear to be stacking up against them, the corrupt & filthy Masonic hand cannot be dismissed lightly. They are still “at it” just as they have been for 140 years. They must be stopped.
p.s. – I wonder who has the brass neck – or indeed any authority – to be the huns representative at this cosy little gathering?
CEO Blog – Financial Fair Play
Football and finance have often sat uneasily together. But with some of our clubs under intense financial pressure, it is no surprise that questions about ‘financial fair play’ have once again been raised in the context of Scottish football.
Crucial to an understanding of financial fair play, is an appreciation of why it is vital that clubs live within their means. This blog is an attempt to set out what is meant by ‘financial fair play’, and why prompt payment of players, the taxman and other member clubs is so important to football as a whole.
‘Financial fair play’ is a phrase that is often trotted out in football circles. It was one of 11 key values presented by UEFA President Michel Platini to the 2009 UEFA Congress. Its stated aim was to “restore well-being to the European club game”.
But what does ‘financial fair play’ really mean? UEFA’s explanation, in 2010, was that the concept would require clubs to balance their books over the medium term, not spend more than they earn, and operate within their financial means.
This is all seen as important for one key reason: because any club that is spending more on players than they can afford, is automatically gaining a sporting advantage over every other club it competes with. Whether the precise system of measurement used by UEFA is perfect is a moot point. But the logic behind the principle however is, I think, broadly sound. And it is this same principle that explains the position of the SPL.
To turn a blind eye, to allow clubs to continually fail to make prompt payments as they fall due, would be to allow those clubs to gain an unfair sporting advantage over all those other clubs that pay their players, the taxman and other clubs on time. That is one of the reasons why, whenever the SPL receives a request from players to adjudicate on their contracts, it has a duty to do so.
The fundamental basis of any football league is that all member clubs are treated equally. But, increasingly, leagues across the world are going further. In England, for example, the Football League routinely imposes a player embargo on clubs who fail to pay their players in full and on time. And, in League Two, clubs have accepted limits on the amounts that they can spend, relative to their income.
The whole issue of ‘financial fair play’ will no doubt continue to be developed across the whole of football. In the meantime, it is vital that the Scottish Premier League continue to treat all member clubs even-handedly.
It may put the SPL in the uncomfortable position of having to rule against member clubs in certain instances. Whenever we are requested by professional players to adjudicate on their contracts, for example, we should continue to do so. And, where appropriate, to rule in the players’ favour and to make orders for on-time payment by our member clubs.
The integrity of the entire League – and the long-term interests of all 12 member clubs within it – demands that we do just that.
More widely though, it is important that we keep the whole issue of financial fair play firmly in the spotlight. Improving our rule book and making it less likely that our member clubs end up in financial difficulty in the first place should continue to be a priority. And with this in mind, all 12 SPL member clubs will meet this Monday. On the agenda will be our existing rules on financial fair play and whether our current rule book needs improvement in the face of the financial challenges being faced by several member clubs.
If agreement in principle is reached, this could mean our clubs voting on new, tougher, rules on financial fair play at a general meeting, either in April or July this year. It will be a difficult debate. But it is vital that we do not shy away from these issues or bury our heads in the sand.
It may be uncomfortable to address these thorny problems head-on. But the long-term health and prosperity of Scottish football demands that we do just that.
Neil Doncaster
Chief Executive, Scottish Premier League
Morning,all.
I noticed a wee reference to Goram and Novo re the possibility of them having a second contract,mainly due to the fact that the ones produced in court were for ridiculously small sums.
I recently mentioned a comment from Gazza during a somewhat rambling interview with Alan Brazil on TALKSPORT.
During it,he said that while everyone seemed to think he was skint,he still had a couple of million stashed offshore!
I also mentioned the “PETROL MONEY” contract or one of the De Boers-canny remember whether it was the one who missed the penalty or the other one.
I concur with the poster who said last week that the practice probably began during the Souness years.
Would be L-O-V-E-L-Y if that could be proved!
PS-Jobo,did you need a chisel for the windscreen this morning?
Summa of Sammi…. on 5 March, 2012 at 03:56 said:
—-
SoS – Sammi wasn’t dropped, he had to get three flights to make it back to Glasgow for Friday. Mr Lennon bemoaned this on Saturday. Think Vic only landed back in the country at 7pm on Friday night, and also Ki wasn’t even in the country. With the options available, I was happy with the selection.
But agree, Sammi needs to be back in next weekend.
HH
Giggs
Mention of the DeBoers reminded me of one of my all time favourite songs.
One’s called Ronald
One’s called Frank
One missed a penalty
The other ones a ****
Cheered me up thinking of that on a Monday morning………..:-)
Celtinental at 06:21
RE: today’s meeting of the SPL clubs on Financial Fair Play.
Funny how this hasn’t got a mention in any of the papers today (or maybe I missed it?).
Financial Fair Play: they just don’t want to talk about it do they?
I know DBBIA is off for Lent,so if he’s looking for something to do to occupy his spare time,I recommend this.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2110260/Christina-Hendricks-says-leaked-nude-internet-photo-fake–admits-phone-hacked.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Of course,the article doesn’t have the photo,but then DBBIA does have some spare time….
sixtaeseven on 5 March, 2012 at 07:50 said:
Saw some mention of it between here & RTC at one time or another but only came across Doncaster’s effort today – the subject has quite possibly been dissected by others already when I haven’t been able to keep up with the blog, so apologies if that’s the case.
Reading back my own post I guess I come across all “conspiracy theorist” ….
Well sorry, but I wouldn’t trust the motives anyone in the SPL or SFA right now or for the foreseeable future, especially when they’re being put into defensive postures by the recent spate of daily revelations/allegations.
Paisley road west closed between broomloan road and edmiston drive – some local access available……teeheehee…..beware the snides of march……the big house must stay open (with local access)
Antifa on 5 March, 2012 at 01:54 said:
I’ve known Ross Perry all his life, a fine young man who would do well at Celtic.
Martin O’Neil tried to sign him. I actually have photos I took of him playing for us at Celtic Park, and one with him and Lubo.
Mornin all CQNrs,
Sunny and bright day here in Glasgow, could not come onto site last night.
So sad to hear of the death of Paul McBride. He was an important player for us and he will be deeply missed. His intellect and approach to understanding what others needed to do to achieve better levels of justice was essential for us and his profile so important. Rest in Peace Paul McBride.
HH
Strathclyde Police have advised all motorists to avoid the Morose Park area of Milngavie today as there has been a breakdown, its not clear if this is a breakdown in:
Communication
Tears
Finances
Co operation
Or whether in fact it has anything to do with rangers (in administration) at all.
So elbows has offered to play for no pay.Great I want him on the pitch when we hump them and win the title.
Slow down, you move too fast, you’ve got to make the moment last
Just kickin’ down the cobble-stones, lookin’ for fun and feelin’ groovy
Feeling groovy
Morning, I see the bares this morning once again feel the world owes them after decades of financial doping.
HMRC should accept a pence in the £1.
How can you sack players! It means a new owner would have to out more money in.
Why cant we just put in£700,000 and grab that money off the lawyers.
boo f**king hoo…
Elbows will play for nothing. What he probably means is, rip up the declared contract and I will live off my Two undeclared ones.
HH
I know this is a dreadful admission that I am making but I do have to be offline for a few hours today.
What time are the unemployment figures due to be announced by Diouff and Phelps?
Just watched Sportscene. Rangers’ penalty claim was a bump in the back and the attacker took a dive. Probably a penalty but practically never given especially at a corner. Hearts’ penalty was arms wrapped round the attacker and the attacker only had eyes on the ball. Little should have been off for studs into the goalies chest anyway. Errors evened out over the highlights never mind a season.
Is there anybody there?
This article was re-posted by Rangers Tax Case earlier this morning-he first posted it on 22/4/2011.
Prescient or what?
Whispering The L-Word
22/04/2011
In the few short weeks of the existence of this blog, we have seen Rangers problems with HMRC move from being dismissed variously as “Celtic supporter fantasy” and “it’s a problem for the parent company, not Rangers” to Rangers’ own Chairman admitting that if the club get hit with the full potential of the tax bill, the famous Glasgow football team would be forced into administration. It is with no small amount of pride that I note that media outlets in Scotland and the UK generally are using this blog as a reference. If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then the number of blogs conducting outright plagiarism should be taken as a great compliment. The scale and speed of change in the tenor of reporting has been dramatic. I do not claim credit for all that, but if this blog has helped push the truth forward, then it has been worthwhile.
To summarise the situation, Rangers FC are currently appealing tax assessments for underpayment of taxes of £24m and interest of between £10-12m. If the club loses the current case, it will be the subject of a penalty hearing that could see an additional £18-24m being piled on top. The evidence against the Ibrox club is overwhelming. I have seen evidence that leaves me in no doubt that within Rangers the knowledge that what they were doing was illegal was both widespread and explicit.
In parallel with the tax drama, we have had front-row seats to a theatre of the absurd production: Rangers’ takeover saga. With the assistance of a well-oiled media machine, public relations teams for prospective custodians have had little difficulty getting publicity. Truth and transparency have been victims in these killing fields of agenda-driven misinformation. Most damaging of all for Scottish football is that Rangers’ supporters have been handed a never-ending series of straws at which to clutch.
The takeover scenarios boil down to two options currently: Craig Whyte and a hurriedly thrown together trial-balloon linked to current Rangers directors Paul Murray (no relation to former Chairman, Sir David) and South African-based Dave King. Murray and Lloyds Banking Group appear to be throwing their weight behind the Whyte plan. However, the sub-committee of the Rangers board charged with assessing Whyte’s proposal are less than impressed. Everything I can glean from this situation suggests that they are right to be concerned.
Whyte does not have the money to fund the takeover on his own. However, he does appear to have secured some of the credit required to allow him to conclude a deal. His plan would pay off the bank completely (allowing Lloyds to get off stage and to be nowhere near the scene should the tax bill hit). Sir David Murray will also benefit by putting as much distance between himself and the imminent disaster that awaits what was once the jewel in his crown. (I am very doubtful if Murray will receive much, if anything, for his shares. Rangers’ shares are truly almost worthless to any informed investor just now.) As discussed in the previous blog, it is a virtual certainty that Whyte will flip the debt taken on to finance the deal back on to Rangers FC. So far from becoming debt-free, the debt may actually increase as a result of this transaction. (Whyte’s reluctance to speak on the record provides the cover of deniability when the saviour status accorded him in many corners of the press falls short of reality). The deal for Whyte becomes a low-cost gamble. If the tax case hits, he and his creditors will have priority to pick over Rangers’ bones. It is likely that he seeks more control than the 85% shareholding Murray can give him to further enhance the claims of Rangers’ new creditors in the event of administration.
If Whyte is able to clear the bank debt for £20-21m, he can get rid of Murray for a nominal fee. There are other creditors who would not be cleared now, but so long as they can be subordinated down the creditor priority list in the event of administration, they will not matter. In this scenario, Whyte may not have much reason to care about the tax bill! If Whyte’s due diligence has produced fire sale valuations of Ibrox, Murray Park, and player contracts in place at the time as exceeding this total, then he and his backers have no reason to fear the tax bill. The worst case would be that they get their money back. The best case would be that Rangers win their appeal of the tax bills in their possession and they could then sell the club for a decent profit.
There are a couple of challenges with this analysis. Firstly, it takes a very generous valuation of property values around Ibrox and Murray Park to get close to these valuations. How much will continuing player contracts be worth in August 2011? Others will be able to estimate these values better than I can, but I struggle to make this deal add up. That would not present a problem. In every deal, there is someone whose optimism and valuation exceeds that of the man on the other side.
Much more serious for Rangers fans are implications of such a strategy for Rangers as a football club.
Under the status quo, Lloyds would be treated as both a secured and preferred creditor. HMRC would have by far the largest claim on Rangers assets, but would be an unsecured creditor. With total debts in the region of about £90m, Rangers’ survival would depend upon Lloyds and HMRC agreeing to accept pennies on the pound and allowing the football team to continue in operation. The PR problems that would face a High Street bank in being held responsible for closing Rangers would help build pressure for both Lloyds and HMRC to do a deal. However, a new creditor in the form of Whyte and his backers, would be more immune to such special pleading. Their business plan would explicitly require that they do not share with any of the subordinated creditors. HMRC can veto any creditor deal that would keep Rangers going. Whyte and backers would only be able to force the discussions to a conclusion that sees them take virtually all Rangers’ assets by pushing for… the L-word: Liquidation.
This explains the hostility to the Whyte proposal from the existing Rangers board. Whyte is anything but a messiah, and actually amplifies the risks to Rangers’ existence. Venerable Rangers-first types like Johnston and Greig would see that far from revitalising their club (as the PR leaks promised), this is a vulture capitalist play. It is actually quite a good and credible distressed debt investing opportunity that exploits the aversion of Lloyds, and in particular, Sir David Murray to be on stage when the curtain could fall. The only real mystery remains over quite why Whyte wants the support of the board. With 85% of the shares, he would be free to fire the board within minutes of taking over. Per the previous blog, 15% of shareholders can block a change in shareholder rights. There may also be a ’poison pill’ provision with this threshold as part of previous deals with Dave King. This remains yet another factor that the main players seem reluctant to clarify, but Rangers fans and small shareholders must be used to being lied to and misled by now.
The Paul Murray / Dave King situation seems to be a poorly thought out effort to maintain morale while they oppose Whyte. Putting actual cash into Rangers FC just now by a capital increase would be a waste of money prior to the tax case being resolved. After the tax case, if Rangers, by some strange quirk of fate, manage to win, there will be plenty of financing options available, and one that leaves the bank and/or Sir David Murray in place would not be amongst the most popular. However, we come back to the central point of this blog: no discussion of Rangers’ finances or ownership can be made without reference to the tax case. We have already deconstructed the idiocy of believing that anyone else will pay the tax bill on Rangers’ behalf. It is a stupid notion that could only be promoted by the most cynical or the most innumerate. The Whyte plan appears to greatly increase the chances of Rangers FC disappearing altogether should he win his battle but the club loses the tax case
iki on 5 March, 2012 at 08:59 said:
Is there anybody there?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
We all packed up for the day after your stunning revelation at 0840!
Obituary from today’s Herald:
http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/obituaries/paul-mcbride-qc.16934751
Paul McBride, QC
Criminal lawyer.
Born: November 13, 1963; Died: March 4, 2012.
Paul McBride QC, who has died aged 48, was a highly respected Scottish criminal lawyer. Among the high-profile cases of his career was leading the legal team which saw charges of perjury against Gail Sheridan dropped in the case of HM Advocate v Sheridan and Sheridan in December 2010.
Mr McBride was involved in the Moira Jones murder trial, the Rosepark care home fire fatal accident inquiry, as well as representing Celtic Football Club.
His past clients include Thomas “TC” Campbell and Joe Steele, whose convictions for their role in the Glasgow Ice Cream Wars were quashed in 2004.
He won the acquittal of human rights lawyer Aamer Anwar for contempt of court in July 2008.
The only child of George and Mary McBride, he attended St Aloysius’ College, Glasgow, before going on to study law at the University of Strathclyde aged 16. He graduated with a Bachelor of Laws (LLB) at 19, once confessing he still had “a lot” of pimples when he started lawyering.
Mr McBride was called to the Scottish Bar in 1988 and soon established himself as one of the most highly-regarded and sought-after criminal lawyers in the country. At the age of 35 he was appointed a Queen’s Counsel, said to be the youngest-ever QC appointed in the UK.
Rising through the Scottish legal ranks Mr McBride became known for his trademark unshirking style in court. “I watched Graham Bell in the appeal court and he really had the ear of the court, which could be gleaned even from the way the judges looked at him,” he once said. “I watched Donald Findlay’s cross-examination style which was tremendous and I also borrowed elements of Lord MacAuley’s style. In the end you develop your own style but everybody borrows something from somebody else.”
Mr McBride’s was a colourful and illustrious career but one not without controversy. Among his regular clientele were murderers and rapists who had strayed to the wrong side of the law. “There is such a thing as evil – and such a thing as God,” he is quoted as saying.
His peers described him as “an absolute one-off” noting that he had a charisma and presence which saw people flock to him whenever he entered a room. Colleague Aamer Anwar said of Mr McBride: “Whether people loved or hated him they recognised Paul’s remarkable intelligence, his quick wit and that he was a force to be reckoned with. I watched people tremble in court under his cross-examination.”
A workaholic, he was known for having a mobile phone almost permanently glued to his ear, admitting: “When it stops ringing I feel like a politician who is suddenly out of power: lonely.”
“I don’t really get to relax,” he said in an interview with The Herald last year. “It is an interesting life. You only get one chance and you have got to take it.”
Active in politics, he made a high-profile defection from Labour to the Conservative Party in 2009 to become justice adviser to Annabel Goldie. In 2011, however, he quit after branding the Scottish Tories “dysfunctional morons”.
Despite his high profile in the public eye, little was known about his life away from the legal profession. Friends talked of his love of travel with Dubai, Barbados and New York among his favorite places.
A self-confessed “hopeless” football player, Mr McBride was once an SFA referee. He ran the line at Premier League games until the mid-1990s saw him take silk and land a prime job as an advocate depute. His last game as an official was a Rangers victory over Kilmarnock.
In April 2011 Mr McBride was threatened with legal action by the Scottish Football Association after branding the organisation “the laughing stock of world football” and “not merely dysfunctional and dishonest but biased”.
He made the statement after an SFA disciplinary hearing involving three members of Rangers staff. Mr McBride later apologised for the remarks.
He was a proud and vocal fan of Celtic Football Club and Mr McBride regularly appeared on television and radio espousing the merits of the team as well as representing high-profile players and its manager Neil Lennon. Two men are currently on trial at the High Court in Glasgow accused of conspiring to murder Mr McBride, Mr Lennon and former MSP Trish Godman by sending improvised explosive devices to them between March 1 and April 15 last year.
Mr McBride was in Pakistan on business with fellow lawyer and close friend Aamer Anwar when he passed away. He is survived by his parents and his partner Gary Murphy.
BOBBY MURDOCH’S CURLED-UP WINKLEPICKERS
“We all packed up for the day after your stunning revelation at 0840!”
:-)
And here was I thinking that nobody would even notice, let alone care, that I had gone.
Gooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooood
Morning………………………………..CQN
Sunny 21 degreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees inDAAAAAcosta
BIGJOEondaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaHouse
Morning Bhoys from a cold Airdrie. More Hun news today and lets hope we get some action from the soft administrators today. got off light so far.
KLV
Heading 2 Florida in a couple O weeks time.
Anybody got any info on where I could take in the reeeeArangers game
BigJoeALLexited
Since it’s quiet…a thought occuerd to me. What happens if Rangers go bust after the split but before the end of the season? The 6th and 7th placed clubs could be switched with Rangers results removed. I suppose we carry on like nothing happened but it would look ugly. Another thing… if Rangers go bust before the return to Celtic Park do we get a guest team in to fulfill the fixture? Who would we like to see?
Big Joe
Ask for Terry
THE LUCKY LEPRECHAUN
7032 INTERNATIONAL DR.
ORLANDO, FL 32819
Tel (407) 352-7031
Email: theLuckyFlorida@aol.com
SILVER CITY 0922
Third Lanark!
Are any of them still alive?
new article posted.
SILVER CITY
Probably more life in them by then than in RFC.
How can this man talk about integrity, were was his when he turned a blind eye to all
that was transpiring down Govan way. He is hurting and now deflecting. Well Jim wont be long now. Your second team,I believe you are a Airdrie supporter, will soon be
dust.
Integrity is name of our game
By jim Traynor on Mar 5, 12 07:30 AM in
The main currency, in fact the only currency any of us in the newspaper game should have in our moral banks must be integrity.
Without it we, as journalists, are of no use to anyone. We have no value. None at all.
Without integrity we fail our readers, our papers and our employers. But just as importantly we fail ourselves.
Integrity, honesty and the desire to call it out no matter the consequences is what defines us. Thankfully it’s also what sets us apart, especially from all those ‘brave’ keyboard thumpers out there in the world of social networking sites and football forums.
They aren’t governed by the laws which must be observed by newspapers like this one and are allowed to bash out the most insane, insulting, illogical and confused messages.
I shouldn’t complain, though, because it all demonstrates their lack of intellect and common decency.
Which might explain why they prefer to hide behind anonymity or childish pseudonyms.
But sadly there are some high-profile football people using this gift as conduits for their own propaganda and if you’ve looked at some of these sites you’ll know just how easy it is to influence and stir unrest.
There is certainly a lack of integrity in cyberspace but it’s honesty that persuades the editors at the Daily Record and Sunday Mail to employ their journalists in the first place. It’s why they trust us to make best use of the platforms given to us.
And it’s because of that integrity we stand by our story which revealed Celtic did not fulfil a ticket agreement with Rangers.
Last week (Tuesday, February 28) while working on Rangers’ financial meltdown, information was received that Celtic had decided not to pay in advance for their ticket allocation for the Old Firm match at Ibrox on March 25. Rangers believed there was a verbal agreement in place for Celtic to do so.
I along with Keith Jackson ran the story on our back page and that morning Celtic reacted strongly, insisting no such assurance had been given.
Then they said there was an agreement but later added it was dependent on Rangers not being in administration. Which, of course, they are today.
But at no time in my conversation with Celtic on the day the story appeared was it stated the agreement was dependent on Rangers’ remaining solvent. That caveat was never mentioned.
However, it was admitted there was some agreement and that confirmed what was written in our paper. Not that we required further proof.
The agreement which Rangers insist was in place and which Celtic continue to protest didn’t exist was the result of the Parkhead club demanding payment up front from Rangers for their allocation of tickets for the Old Firm game at Celtic Park on December 28.
It should be stressed most of us agreed that it was wise for Celtic to have asked to see the money first because of the fragile state of Rangers’ finances.
But our information says that both clubs agreed Celtic would also pay in advance for this month’s match.
Indeed, on January 21 Rangers requested payment ahead of the tickets being issued in a message which stated it had been agreed. About 50 minutes later Celtic responded by thanking Rangers for their invoice and added it would be passed on to finance for payment to be made as soon as.
Perhaps it would also help jog memories if it is pointed out that five days earlier Ali Russell, who was Rangers’ chief operations manager at the time, told his ticket office staff that Celtic had agreed they would pay in advance.
Celtic didn’t pay and no matter how much they jump up and down in protest that is the way it is. Rangers paid up front, Celtic didn’t.
Incidentally, it’s easy to understand why Celtic would have been reluctant to pay in advance. Any business would be extremely worried about handing over money to Rangers at this time but the Ibrox club have no doubt they had a deal.
So, too, do Rangers’ administrators Duff and Phelps who said through a spokesman: ‘It is regrettable that an apparent initial agreement was unfulfilled.’ Celtic might have been concerned also that they were being blamed for costing jobs at Ibrox and Murray Park but no one here suggested that. Let’s be absolutely clear on this, Rangers and Rangers alone are to blame for their decline into administration and any job losses.
None of this is the fault of Celtic or anyone at that club.
But our evidence and the content of conversations with Rangers and Celtic made it clear an agreement was in place.
Celtic, though, want to underline that if it hadn’t been made obvious the agreement was dependent on Rangers avoiding administration then it should have been.
Rangers say they are unaware of any condition attached to the arrangement but it changes nothing.
Let’s just say, for the sake of argument you understand, that the deal was conditional on Rangers remaining out of the administrators’ hands. Even if it was, the agreement must still have been broken because Rangers were not in administration when Celtic were asked to pay up.
The request for the cash was made 24 days before Rangers were tipped over. Of course we’d all been expecting Rangers to go under but the fact is they were still running under their own steam when they asked for the ticket money in advance.
Therefore, even allowing for the caveat that Celtic insist would have been part of the deal, they chose not to proceed with the arrangement.
That is all we ever said. And that is the truth of the matter.