RANGERRAB

He probably looked at himself coaching in a joke league in his 40's and saw us a springboard to better things.

Or maybe he'll be back in Qatar sooner than he thinks.

Wonder what the DoF thought of last week's result in luxembourg ?

Still no goals from Morales & Herrera I see

Dick Advocaat had the problem of coming up against one of the greatest football brains in the world, Wim Jansen. Even today in Holland he is still classed as one of the most knowledgeable people in football

Advocaat never faced Jansen when he was Rangers manager

Has anyone in say Club1872 tried to contact Gordon Smith to verify if he wrote the letter.

If he did he goes down in my estimation of him.

Why ? Is his criticism of PC wrong?

Despite what some may say, I don't think the title stripping in 2012 was ever going to happen.Removing honours could easily have led to sponsors & TV companies(having paid in large sums) taking legal action against the Scottish football authorities.

I disagree with ur statement about not paying tax debt. We got put in SFL3 because the then SPL wouldn't allow us to transfer our SPL share from oldco to newco following the CVA rejection. The tax debt was Whyte not paying PAYE/NI at the time. It wasn't EBT-related which is what the current hysteria is about and I believe what it was mostly about in 2012. But it's outcome was unknown then

But what we're now dealing with is individuals & supporters groups who were led to believe back in 2012 that had Rangers lost the BTC then titles stripping would take place. These people never considered the legal aspects of EBT's which Lord Hodge laid bare last week. They were not illegal.

So how they now proceed in their title stripping remains to be seen. The likes of LIewell, Milne & Thompson may well have some explaining to do to appease their slabbering, Rangers-hating hordes.

Eight clubs haven't said one way or the other yet! Strange?

Doesn't matter what they think.

Anyone in any doubt should read or listen to what Lord Hodge said on Wednesday.

Quite clear to me what their chances would be of removing our trophies won. A big fat NIL

They could set up a fighting fund!

They could but why bother when the SFA clearly wouldn't support them after their statement on wednesday

The SPFL couldn't afford an expensive legal battle. They don't have the funds to do so.

Should not be to hard as to arrange a few friendly matches between now and the Motherwell match they all need match time .

Won't be easy. The LC starts soon

The penalties were added to the original tax bill.

I think that original tax bill may get disputed by BDO now

How can HMRC add penalties for something they only learned last Wednesday they were entitled to

Wouldn't read too much into this. None of these players will be anywhere near the first team any time soon.

And their ebt

They did, of course, pay the tax on Juninho's EBT ( after he left was it not ?) Just as BDO are now going to do.

And can someone may enlighten me here but did BDO not at one time question the amount of tax due on our EBT's and that is was nowhere near the figures being quoted in the mhedia?

My own view of PC so far is he seems to have ideas & ambitions well beyond his own abilities as a manager

Can Spiers and his fellow pondlife explain how the use of EBT's was cheating if they were considered legal by Lord Hodge?

I think this formed the basis of the SFA statement released later in the day on Tuesday.

Why was Pedro so important a candidate has to be asked. Judging by his CV it should have been binned at the first stage. Now we have thrown millions at him. Why were the Parks so much an influence in that decision. I wish I could be more positive but I still don't think he has a scooby what he is doing. Tuesday's set-up just cements my thoughts. Goalkeepers rarely make good coaches as their football brain is not developed the same as outfield players. That is my opinion and not an investigated fact.

Who applied who had a better cv?

we are tramping the same road with pedro as the five previous managers,failure,question is why and who is responsible for repeating this pattern.

The persons who are responsible are the ones who appoint the manager I.e. the board.

What we've got now though is a D of F who was appointed after the manager got appointed which I think is wrong

You have to be careful where you look for the debate on this Ian.

 

The bank he is linked to was not run by him, despite him being a large shareholder. Why would they strip titles from CFC for a bank completely unrelated to them being fraudulent ? The only connection is DD - CFC never ran the fraud so why would they have titles stripped ?

 

There are certainly areas where you could question "sporting advantage" but this wouldn't be one of them. Soft loans from Co-op, GCC land deals etc are all ways to suggest sporting advantage was gained - remember.... sporting advantage isn't about "legal or illegal" - it is about unfair sporting advantage - CFC received such, particularly with the land deals and soft loans at deeply discounted interest rates. Fight the fight on THAT level. Not this one.

 

This bank fraud is nothing to do with CFC, only the personal shareholding of DD.

But does Desmond's involvement with this bank mean he's a F&PP as per the SFA's rules ?

Yahoos who question King should look closer to home IMO

Don't think it's possible

Id rather win the league. Id also like to factor in the stage of the cup.

 

Perhaps murty can manage the early cup rounds. Give pedro some time off.

 

I repeat pedro is demonstrably more likely to win than murty.

Caixinha was correct when he decided the squad needed a complete overhaul after last season. But that overhaul needed to be completed before the ELQ's. But it wasn't. It should have been.

The yahoos put out that statement the other day in attempt to shift the blame onto the SPFL.

The funny thing is.... Mad Joe's statement, and the sentence in particular that you highlight... actually supports the case to NOT strip the titles.

 

Mad Joe's assertion is that LNS made his judgement on the basis that the EBT's were legal. Ergo, Joe is saying that if they were legal then no sporting advantage was gained. Mad Joe is now making the spectacular mistake of suggesting that the EBT's were legal. Even the findings from the SC the other day stated that the EBT's were bona fide legal tax avoidance schemes and, therefore, no titles should be stripped.

 

Joe, didn't realize you were a closet Bear - but thanks for the above statement and thanks for providing the Celtic fans with the statement they needed to hear - one that proves beyond doubt that titles shouldn't be stripped because, as LNS says, no sporting advantage was gained because the EBT's were legal.

The bit I don't get is that if they were legal tax avoidance schemes why does oldco owe tax on them?

Hay should ask his own club about the special banking arrangements his club had with the co-op bank. Ultra soft loans & overdrafts

So did Whyte actually save Rangers after all ( whether intentionally or not) ?

The club and its assets had to be taken out the oldco & transferred to a newco before the BTC bill landed.

Whyte did that albeit by dubious means so did he effectively save Rangers ?

Must be difficult for the likes of Thomson, Cosgrove, Spence etc.

They were desperately hoping the BTC would finish us.It didn't. We survived intact with our history.

I feel their pain......