barca72

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/610067/Rangers-Nicky-Law-sympathises-Peter-Houston-game-changing-decision Rangers star Nicky Law sympathises with Peter Houston after game-changing decision RANGERS midfielder Nicky Law admits Peter Houston might have a valid point after the Falkirk boss blew his top over a game-changing free-kick decision at Ibrox on Saturday. ... Law said: “It has split opinion. A few of the boys felt it wasn’t a foul and some thought it was. At the time, I didn’t know the boy had nicked the ball. I just felt the contact when he and I clashed and it forced me down onto the ground.

Who gives a shit, he's fun to watch !!!

Premiership Sunday October 4 Hamilton 1-2 Celtic Att: 4,910 Saturday October 3 Aberdeen 1-5 St Johnstone Att: 13,405 Dundee 2-1 Motherwell Att: 5,152 Hearts 1-1 Kilmarnock Att: 16,461 Partick Thistle 3-0 Dundee United Att: 3,675 Ross County 1-2 Inverness CT Att: 5,473 Championship Saturday October 3 Dumbarton 2-1 Livingston Att: 819 Q of South 0-3 Hibernian Att: 2,745 Raith Rovers 2-1 Morton Att: 1,754 Rangers 3-1 Falkirk Att: 45,135 St Mirren 1-1 Alloa Athletic Att: 2,994 League 1 Saturday October 3 Airdrieonians 0-1 Stranraer Att: 847 Ayr United 5-0 Cowdenbeath Att: 1,171 Dunfermline 3-0 Albion Rovers Att: 3,086 Peterhead 2-2 Forfar Athletic Att: 573 Stenhousemuir 2-2 Brechin City Att: 348 League 2 Saturday October 3 Arbroath 0-2 Annan Athletic Att: 492 Berwick Rangers 2-1 E Stirling Att: 423 East Fife 1-1 Stirling Albion Att: 673 Elgin City 1-1 Clyde Att: 672 Queen's Park 0-1 Montrose Att: 342 "If all the teams in each division got the same money that would be a start" Okay, if you're serious about this then you have to give 'Thinker's' point in post #7 more weight. That means we cut away 20 teams and keep 22. Look at yesterday's crowd totals and just say for the sake of argument that this is a weekly representation of crowd attendance, which of course can vary, but we need a point of reference. I would say all teams below 1000 attendance should be cut from professional status ( given a couple of season's notice ). They are no more that community clubs, and should be treated as such. They should have no more funding that any other semi-professional or amateur team in the Scottish game. Right then, this leaves the Premiership and the Championship. Now if you want to talk about sharing a TV purse then you are getting closer to a truly viable group. The teams who are close to being able to sustain full-time clubs - such as Ayr Utd. and Dunfermline can compete in a playoff for promotion. There are all kinds of permutations that can be brought into this new picture for competitive purposes. This would also concentrate future talent coming through into a smaller pool, which should help competition (remember each club would have more TV money for wages and could help the talent drain to England). Obviously this is an arbitrary proposal and would need more attention to detail, but the object is to sell Scottish football to a bigger tv audience and hence gain more income. The hope would be that there would be more competitive self-sustaining pebbles that support the boulders - Rangers and Celtic - that are known globally as Scottish football. Honestly, who in their right mind would contemplate paying to see, e.g. Stenhousemuir vs Brechin City? Kids have never heard of them.

Good compromise thinking, especially helpful for this board to catch up to the job required to be done.

ManU should have scored three or four by half time. Rooney and Memphis missed absolute sitters.

Here's the latest story I could find ... http://www.theherald.com.au/story/3371017/jets-deal-done-ffa-forecasts-sale-after-kick-off/ Jets deal done: FFA forecasts sale after kick-off By ROBERT DILLON Sept. 23, 2015, midnight FOOTBALL Federation Australia officials are confident a deal has been done to sell the Newcastle Jets. ‘‘The FFA has advised me today that the broad terms of the sale have been agreed,’’ Jets chief executive David Eland told the Newcastle Herald on Tuesday. ‘‘That’s really positive news for the club. Unfortunately, the timing has been delayed until after the season kicks off. ‘‘My recollection was that FFA were hopeful the transaction would be completed by the start of the 2015-16 season, but it looks like that is going to be pushed back. ‘‘But we’re only talking a matter of weeks, not months.’’ Eland said he could not confirm the identity of the prospective owner, but it is the A-League’s worst-kept secret that FFA and Scottish multimillionaire Stephen Thompson have been engaged in negotiations for months. The chairman and majority shareholder of Scottish Premier League club Dundee United, Thompson was first linked to the Jets late last year but refused to meet former owner Nathan Tinkler’s asking price. When Tinkler was ousted in June after placing the franchise into voluntary administration with millions of dollars in liabilities, Thompson started dealing directly with FFA and has conducted extensive due diligence, liaising with prominent Newcastle business and football identities. Thompson politely declined to comment when contacted by email on Tuesday. He told the Herald in May: ‘‘I would prefer to deal with business matters privately, rather than in the public domain. ‘‘It’s well documented that I believe the A-League is on the up. Football is a growth market in Australia and I think there is a huge opportunity to build something big in Newcastle.’’ FFA has maintained since Tinkler’s demise four months ago that it hoped to have a new owner in place by the start of this season. It is understood other recent issues, such as the precarious financial predicament at Brisbane Roar and the collective-bargaining agreement impasse with Professional Footballers Australia, have become logistical priorities for the governing body. Thompson’s track record at Dundee United is encouraging. Since he assumed the club’s helm in 2008 after the death of his father, Eddie, Dundee United have repaid more than $12million to the banks to wipe out the club’s debt. The Tangerines own their stadium, Tannadice Park, and have recorded a profit in four of the past five years, while improving their performances on the pitch. Eland was hopeful news that the Jets would soon have a new owner would encourage Novocastrians to jump on the bandwagon. ‘‘Once again, this is a sign that the club has a really bright future,’’ Eland said. ‘‘If there are people out there who are thinking about engaging and becoming members of the club, I’d hope that this news today is the catalyst to confirm their membership for season 2015-16.’’

Maybe we will when the charges against him are resolved satisfactorily.

Sorry Chuckles, when you are convicted of Fraud you will have breached any contracts in place ... Fraud A false representation of a matter of fact—whether by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of what should have been disclosed—that deceives and is intended to deceive another so that the individual will act upon it to her or his legal injury. Fraud is commonly understood as dishonesty calculated for advantage. A person who is dishonest may be called a fraud. Fraud is a specific offence with certain features. Contracts Agreements between two entities, creating an enforceable obligation to do, or to refrain from doing, a particular thing. Nature and Contractual Obligation The purpose of a contract is to establish the agreement that the parties have made and to fix their rights and duties in accordance with that agreement. The courts must enforce a valid contract as it is made, unless there are grounds that bar its enforcement. Statutes prescribe and restrict the terms of a contract where the general public is affected. The courts may not create a contract for the parties. When the parties have no express or implied agreement on the essential terms of a contract, there is no contract. Courts are only empowered to enforce contracts, not to write them, for the parties. A contract, in order to be enforceable, must be a valid. The function of the court is to enforce agreements only if they exist and not to create them through the imposition of such terms as the court considers reasonable. It is the policy of the law to encourage the formation of contracts between competent parties for lawful objectives. As a general rule, contracts by competent persons, equitably made, are valid and enforceable. Parties to a contract are bound by the terms to which they have agreed, usually even if the contract appears to be improvident or a bad bargain, as long as it did not result from Fraud, duress, or Undue Influence. The binding force of a contract is based on the fact that it evinces a meeting of minds of two parties in Good Faith. A contract, once formed, does not contemplate a right of a party to reject it. Contracts that were mutually entered into between parties with the capacity to contract are binding obligations and may not be set aside due to the caprice of one party or the other unless a statute provides to the contrary.

You asked for the grounds upon which an appeal is either granted or refused. I can't be more specific. Who do you think contests these things? Lawyers? Perish the thought. Now should this verdict come down such that an appeal follows, I've no doubt you will be interested on what the mhedia call a 'source' and what reason they will give for an appeal. But you'll already know now, won't you.

wrong thread

Stop the video and this is what you see. Diver Commons completely hurdled Boughie and was never touched. It was all a deliberate sham.

We don't know the decision from the Court of Session yet, so all of this may not be required. However, I would say that if HMRC wish to appeal any decision by the CoS, then their case will have to be very strong. I have printed these sub-paras so that you can judge for yourself how an appeal may come about. These are the conditions under which an appeal is applicable. https://www.supremecourt.uk/docs/practice-direction-01.pdf Civil appeals from Scotland 1.2.25 Under section 40 of the Court of Session Act 1988, permission to appeal is not required in appeals to which sub-paragraphs (1) and (2) apply; permission to appeal is required for appeals to which sub-paragraphs (3) and (4) apply. 1) Permission to appeal is not required from an interlocutor* of the Inner House of the Court of Session on the whole merits of the cause. 2) Permission to appeal is not required from an interlocutory** judgment of the Court of Session where there is a difference of opinion among the judges or where the interlocutory judgment is one sustaining a dilatory*** defence and dismissing the action. 3) Permission to appeal is required for an appeal against any interlocutory judgment of the Court of Session that does not fall within sub-paragraph (2), and only the Inner House of the Court of Session may grant permission. In such cases a refusal by the Court of Session to grant permission to appeal is final and no application may then be made to the Supreme Court. 4) Permission to appeal from the Court of Session is also required for an appeal under the provisions of certain Acts of Parliament, and permission may be granted either by the Court of Session or, if refused by the Court of Session, by the Supreme Court. In the cases referred to in sub-paragraphs (1) and (2), the notice of appeal must be signed by two counsel who must certify that the appeal is reasonable. ‘Counsel’ for this purpose includes an enrolled solicitor with a right of audience in the Supreme Court. When permission to appeal is granted pursuant to sub-paragraph (3) or (4) it is not necessary for two counsel to certify that the appeal is reasonable. *interlocutor - NOUN 1. formal a person who takes part in a dialogue or conversation. **interlocutory - ADJECTIVE 1. law (of a decree or judgment) given provisionally during the course of a legal action. 2. rare of or relating to dialogue or conversation. ***dilatory - ADJECTIVE 1.slow to act:

Poor Ajax team. Gifted them their first goal on the first time they reached the Ajax 18 yd line and were nowhere at the corner for their second goal. Although Ajax were parked in their half for most of the game, Ajax just could not "clean up".

Same as in every sport. Would you buy a season ticket knowing your team had a marquee player at the start of the season but that he could walk away at any time?

Liewell announces a 'huge' new sponsor deal coming up ... http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=JN.WeBY9/ylDt5%2b7NhvCC9nMA&w=300&h=300&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0

I think you can see from this statement from the gaffer just how a winning 1st team experience can impress upon, and teach a young player coming up from the academy just what is required of him ... Most of the good players serve an apprenticeship, and if a few good loan signings give us the opportunity to allow our young fellows the time to grow and mature properly, and at the same time are adding value to the first team where is the harm in that? http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/10128-singing-praises-of-signings Wednesday, 16 September 2015 15:00 Singing Praises Of Signings Written by Nick Thomson Singing Praises Of Signings IT’S not often a club can do the level of transfer business Rangers did over the summer and declare each and every one of the new signings a success. But manager Mark Warburton is able to claim that honour with all of his 10 first-team signings having made a positive contribution so far. The boss explained: “A lot of work goes into the character of the players, and what value they add both on and off the pitch. “I’ve used that expression many, many times, and sometimes it’s used very cheaply, but it’s really important for us that we build our dressing room on unity, harmony and workrate, and we need to make sure the characters are right. “They can have great quality on the pitch, but if they are the wrong type of the pitch, they can cause more problems than good. “We have to be aware of that, and we’re very happy that our homework and investigative work has gone well so far, and every player has come in and contributed for us.” But while the new signings have contributed excellently, Warburton has also been pleased with the Academy players who have been training with his squad so far this season, and he also spoke highly of Dylan Dykes who was the 19th man for the Raith Rovers and Livingston matches. He said: “On Monday we brought up three younger players – Ross McCrorie, Max Ashmore and Dylan Dykes – to train with us, and we have no hesitation or no qualms at all over using the boys from the Academy. “They are there and they are working hard, and they deserve to be with us. “We’ve seen Dylan come on for the under-20s as a substitute a couple of times and make a positive contribution. “He deserves his chance and we’re pleased with him. I see a player with a languid style who can see a pass and time his forward runs very well. “For a young man to be 19th man at Ibrox two weeks on the bounce and experience everything that goes with it and seeing how the first team players prepare and ready themselves for a game at first-team level is fantastic for him, and it’s all part of his development. “Hopefully he relays those experiences down to the Academy guys, and they feed off of that.”

Give me an honest answer, do you think they have improved the team?

You DON'T know that. Winning is a habit we can get used to, and we don't want to break a winning habit. The way this team is going we could have the league sewn up by Feb./Mar., that leaves plenty of time to allow our own youngsters to show their stuff. Pride comes before a fall. Get promotion before operating on ideals.

Just in case you think I was the only one who wants this lot culled ... http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/gordon-parks-gordon-strachan-compounded-6434716 Gordon Parks: Gordon Strachan compounded Celtic's error in confusing workmanlike with class 12:36, 13 September 2015 by GordonParks GORDON wants Strachan to cut the dishonesty and highlights the rarity of a forthcoming manager in football's shop floor. THE story of Scotland’s Euro 2016 campaign reads like a script straight from The Emperor’s New Clothes. Anyone who doesn’t appreciate the finely woven splendour of our international side is either unfit, too stupid or incompetent to see. In dressing-up defeats to Georgia and Germany, Gordon Strachan spun out the lines. Having taken counsel with his nearest and dearest, he concluded we didn’t do enough to win the match in Tbilisi but did enough not to lose. It was a tall tale and plainly untrue having failed to have a single pop at goal. He’s old enough to know honesty is rarely forthcoming in football’s shop floor, especially when asking the equivalent of “Does my bum look fat in these?” Nobody in the wee man’s court would dare tell him the truth and if they genuinely agreed with that risible assessment then they were talking out of their backsides. The rest of Group D were already laughing behind their fingers as we floundered against the world champions days later. But a post-match assessment of being “Just a fraction away from the perfect performance” was a stretch of the decimal point too far. And as for being “Three or four passes from being a right good side”? Hans Christian Andersen eat your heart out. He’s selling a fairytale of our chances of being in France. Scotland’s strengths are being suited and booted with character, hard work and camaraderie. But it isn’t the clobber for major finals. The reality is we aren’t wearing anything at all. The high-end garments of the international game are made from steel, inspirational on-field leadership, guile and goalscorers, sparkled with that magical touch of individualism. Look at the fabric Strachan’s being asked to work with ... We don’t have a dominant central-defender to our name. He’s handed the keys of our dressing room to Scott Brown and compounded Celtic’s error in confusing workmanlike with class. One of the wisest phrases in football came to mind this week: ‘Don’t worry about what position you play – your position will find you.’ Alan Hutton, again not able to hold down a place at his club, is still marauding down the right and may be the exception to that rule. Charlie Mulgrew?What is he, a centre-half? Left-back? Holding midfielder? He’s played the lot for Scotland. Steven Fletcher used to be our best player but when Kyle Lafferty is scorching ahead inthe goal stakes then it’s time to start asking some searching questions. A striker who doesn’t score goals surely is a positional identity crisis. There’s another age-old adage which fits the bill: “In football, you always find your level.” James Forrest found his on Monday and it isn’t going toe to toe with the likes of Germany – it’s against Hamilton and Partick Thistle I’m afraid. The Celtic kid looked like a little boy lost and is another who has been exposed during the Euro 2016 quest. Years ago, a teenage Forrest terrorised Belgium for Scotland U21s, fully justifying Campbell Money’s assertion he was the best young player he’s seen and all in attendance bought into it. Against Holland a short time later he did it again and led the U21s to a 2-1 win. It seems a long, four years ago now. He has pace to burn but no longer enough to go with it and his peers have eclipsed him in progressing to a finished article. It happens. Strachan claimed fortune didn’t go our way against Germany. No luck? Both of our goals had jammy written all over them and James Morrison should have been sent off. Patronising pap. A generation of sports reporters have never sampled the working environment of a European Championship Finals or, for that matter, a World Cup. Our children have no conception of what it’s like to see Scotland head for distant shores. We speak about qualifying for finals as though it was some kind of bygone age. The real weavers are to be found at the SFA and after a failure to reach France we’ll be told we’re perfectly suited for Russia 2018. They’ll tell us our game’s in rude health so surely it’s time for our Scotland side to have the decency to go and put some clothes on. They are already talking about giving Strachan a new contract. God help us.

Unfortunately db HMRC cannot deliberately break the law, and the information was required in 2011 HMRC Policy to “Name and Shame” Deliberate Tax Defaulters (Including Individuals) November 19 2013 As part of the government’s crackdown on tax evasion, the names and details of deliberate tax defaulters are now being published by HM Revenue and Customs (“HMRC”). The purpose of this is to act as a deterrent to those who have received penalties for either making deliberate errors in their tax returns or deliberately failing to comply with their tax obligations. HMRC may publish this information under Section 94 Finance Act 2009, which came into force on 1 April 2010. Although these powers were granted in 2010, HMRC are only now beginning to use them in earnest. ... Section 94 Finance Act 2009 Under section 94(1) of the Finance Act 2009, HMRC may publish information about any person if a) in consequence of an investigation conducted by the Commissioners, one or more relevant tax penalties is found to have been incurred by the individual, and b) the potential lost revenue in relation to the penalty (or the aggregate of the potential lost revenue in relation to each of the penalties) exceeds £25,000. ... A relevant tax penalty includes a deliberate inaccuracy in a tax return or document for a tax period beginning on or after 1 April 2010, a failure to comply with certain obligations (such as the obligation to notify HMRC of a VAT liability) or excise wrongdoing that occurred on or after 1 April 2010. ... Section 94 (6) Finance Act 2009: Safeguards for Individuals Under section 94 (6) of the Finance Act 2009, individuals can prevent HMRC from publishing this personal information. Before publishing any information, HMRC must inform the person that they are considering doing so, and provide that person with a reasonable opportunity to make representations about whether such information should be published. Details are published only once all appeal routes are exhausted and details must be published within 12 months of the tax penalty becoming final. HMRC are under a legal obligation to ensure that the information is not published for longer than 12 months.

You mean, as Messi put it, "anti-football"

All the football discussions were getting too complicated with so many numbering schemes.

Rab, Read these two stories through and it might clarify why HMRC forced a liquidation. ... http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13169479.Liquidation_of_Rangers__was_forced_for_tax_probe_/ Liquidation of Rangers 'was forced for tax probe' Herald Scotland: Martin Williams, Senior News Reporter / Thursday 10 July 2014 / News "HMRC voted against the CVA proposed by the administration. *Liquidation allows a full investigation into the conduct of the owners and financial officers of the company, which would not be possible in a CVA. "It wouldn't be the case that HMRC would vote down a CVA based on *wanting directors' conduct to be looked as a general rule, as happened with Rangers." The behaviour of the board in the three years prior to the operating company going into administration in February 2012 was already being looked at by the Insolvency Service's Investigations and Enforcement Directorate. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/ex-rangers-owner-craig-whyte-being-3992415 Ex-Rangers owner Craig Whyte was being chased by the taxman for £3.74m BEFORE he started his catastrophic reign at Ibrox 07:30, 5 August 2014 Updated 07:39, 5 August 2014 By Keith Jackson HMRC had instructed debt enforcers to chase Whyte with a bill for almost £4million and threaten him with bankruptcy in May 2011 - the same month that he bought Rangers. If you read both articles it shows you Whyte's history and why HMRC wanted him. Rangers were just collateral damage in their chase of Whyte, and this chase is independent of the BTC. HMRC needed the deeper investigative powers of the Liquidation laws to nail Whyte. If the ISIED was already probing previous boards why would HMRC require deeper investigative power? The only thing I don't understand is why they allowed Whyte to miss so many PAYE payments, other than ( without the BTC claim, but including the STC ) it put them in a strong position to control the CVA vote. I remember reading another article, and I can't find it, where HMRC thought that liquidation was a good thing for Rangers as a company because it would allow them to emerge debt-free and go forward from there to grow strong. ( looking at it through an accountant's eye ) He may not have known about the horrors that were to come from the SPL and SFA. No doubt we can look at the evidence that will be produced in the upcoming court cases and decide if we still need a public enquiry.

According to Tom Miller, the next game is against Dumbarton with Peter Lovenkrands.

If we look at these stories published at the times they happened, we see that McCoist did not demand a huge salary but rather his salary was in fact TUPE'd over after liquidation ... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2443297/Rangers-boss-Ally-McCoist-set-agree-400-000-wage-cut.html'>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2443297/Rangers-boss-Ally-McCoist-set-agree-400-000-wage-cut.html However, McCoist’s salary was predetermined when the old company was liquidated last year by virtue of Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations (TUPE). This means that he automatically reverted to the sum he earned in his first season in management when Rangers were an SPL club. He voluntarily agreed a wage cut with Mather, even although his original rolling contract was still in effect. ... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2443297/Rangers-boss-Ally-McCoist-set-agree-400-000-wage-cut.html Published: 23:25 GMT, 3 October 2013 Sportsmail understands McCoist will see his pay drop to just over £400,000 once talks with Mather are concluded, with the wage bill of the management team falling from £1.2m to around £700,000. Just before McCoist resigns, these were the directors ... The three Rangers International Football Club directors - Somers, Derek Llambias and James Easdale - and Sandy Easdale, the chairman of The Rangers Football Club board. After he resigns, this is the boards statement to the Stock Exchange. We can see that on resignation his original contract triggers a clause requiring his original salary to be paid while he works his notice. ... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/11293747/Ally-McCoist-resigns-as-Rangers-manager-but-salary-goes-up-to-750000-a-year.html By Telegraph Sport 7:26AM GMT 15 Dec 2014 Ally McCoist's time as Rangers manager appears to be up after the club told the Stock Exchange he had resigned. Three days after reports first surfaced that McCoist had offered his resignation, a statement on Monday morning confirmed he had tendered it. A 12-month notice period has now been triggered, with the club saying they will now hold talks with their record scorer. In the meantime, the 52-year-old's wage, according to the statement, is increased to £750,000 per year. The statement read: "The company announces that Alastair McCoist, manager of the first team squad, has resigned. His service contract dated December 28, 2010, which was subsequently amended, has a 12-month notice period ("Notice Period"). "The directors will hold discussions with Mr McCoist to seek an amicable solution in the best interests of the company, and expect to be in a position to make a further announcement before the end of the week. During the notice period, Mr McCoist's salary will increase significantly to GBP750,000 per annum." http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/ally-mccoist-reasons-behind-rangers-4842819 Q: Your salary reverts back to £750,00. What do you think about it being made public? A: I worked for nothing for months. I decided to take a 45 per cent cut, I then took a 40 per cent cut. I’m not saying: “Give Ally a big pat on the back” but there’s a wee bit more to it than meets the eye. Other factors should be taken into account as well. Q: The board say they’re working towards an “amicable solution” with you. What does that mean? A: The amicable agreement is that I’m going to work my 12 months. I understand people thinking standards might drop among players when they know a manager is leaving but I can assure the supporters we won’t allow that to happen. We need to reassure people that standards at our club will be as high as possible. I guess, when the directors probably could not get McCoist to drop back to his reduced salary they dumped him and installed McDowall. Don't forget that there was a lot of acrimony flying around at this time. Also, T3Bs had offered a package of £6.5M and been turned down. LLambias had instigated layoffs to staff that McCoist had accepted a reduced salary to help keep them in jobs. Maybe McCoist had just had enough of these guys and decided that he was going to get his share before there was none left. King bought his shares at the turn of the year and the EGM was in March. Why he did not agree a settlement with King before now, I have no idea.