Bluedell 5,408 Posted September 12, 2012 Author Share Posted September 12, 2012 So presumably the SPL would have no idea what was in any player's contracts and that information could not be disclosed by the SFA to the SPL under the Data Protection Act 1998? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,578 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Sports law expert says Charles Green can't stop SPL from stripping Rangers of titles A TOP sports law expert says the Ibrox chief executive will struggle to mount a legal fightback if faced with being stripped of trophies. CHARLES GREEN says the SPL independent commission probe into EBTs is a Mickey Mouse event and that no-one will be taking Rangers’ titles away. But a top sports law expert last night told Record Sport the Ibrox chief executive will struggle to mount a legal fightback if faced with being stripped of trophies. The initial meeting of the commission set up to investigate the company that formerly ran Rangers began yesterday at Hampden and will continue today. Representatives of the Ibrox club were not in attendance after newco chief executive Green argued the SPL has no jurisdiction, following Rangers’ demotion to the Irn-Bru Third Division. Green has threatened legal action if attempts are made to strip titles, but the English-based law expert, who wished to remain anonymous, said: “I don’t see on what basis he’d have to do that. “He would have a difficulty establishing that his new company has standing to do that, or that there was a legal interest it had that was being infringed. “I think it is within the SPL’s powers and I don’t see a clear legal route for him to take. “Mr Green is technically right that there is no jurisdiction over the current activities of his company as they are a member of the SFL and not the SPL. “But it’s entirely within the SPLs rights of jurisdictions to decide who are or were their champions based on their rules.If its rules were broken, they can derecognise. “Even if it was oldco Rangers, there would be a difficulty in establishing some sort of legal right to be recognised as official champions, particularly where fundamental rules have been broken. “In general sport, if someone is found guilty of a doping offence retrospectively, they lose their titles. For example, Lance Armstrong in cycling, or Marion Jones in athletics. “Jones never failed a drugs test in her life, yet it was found seven years later she had been found guilty of taking drugs and she was stripped of her medals. “This is fair. In principle, why should a proven ‘cheat’ retain medals or titles? “Sports governing bodies get their power because participants sign up. That is a contract between the SPL and the members, and between each of them with the other, to conduct the competition on a certain basis. “It is true that, if you are not a member of a sporting organisation, you are not subject to its rules. “To that extent, Mr Green is correct that the SPL is not the current governing body of the club, the SFL and SFA are. “That, however, might be a bit different if you have been a member at the time of rule breaches, which oldco Rangers was. If wrongdoing is proven, it could be seen to have breached its contract with the other clubs and with the SPL. “Where it gets more difficult for him is that, while he is not a member now, newco Rangers are likely to be one day again. “In a similar way to Rangers having to take on board certain conditions for SFA membership, it is not inconceivable that something similar could happen for an SPL share to again be transferred to the club if they become champions of the SFL.” Green is livid at the process and defended his decision to boycott when he said: “This has nothing to do with me. “My consortium bought these titles, we bought the assets, we bought the stadium. We bought them, we paid for them and no-one is taking them. “I’ve not got time to waste with Mickey Mouse events. This should have been done when the SPL had jurisdiction, and they didn’t do it. “You are allowed to have an EBT, you have to disclose it, and there is a raft of information that when these EBTs were being used they were disclosed. “They were in the accounts, it’s public knowledge, Rangers were a public company, you can go on the internet and see the disclosures.” Green also claims “more than two” SPL clubs have used EBTs, while he has also admitted the Ibrox side may not seek re-entry to the top flight should they be successful in progressing to and winning the First Division. He said: “Unless the SPL welcome us with open arms why would we go back there?” http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-could-lose-titles-expert-1320450 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ergatrude 0 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Green also claims “more than two” SPL clubs have used EBTs, while he has also admitted the Ibrox side may not seek re-entry to the top flight should they be successful in progressing to and winning the First Division. He said: “Unless the SPL welcome us with open arms why would we go back there?” I honestly believe that when we are in a position to be back in the top league, it won't be the SPL in it's current form anymore. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Found Guilty by fact or found guilty because they want it that way? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,408 Posted September 12, 2012 Author Share Posted September 12, 2012 I wonder why they had to go to someone in England, given that any legal case would be under Scots' law? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 I wonder why they had to go to someone in England, given that any legal case would be under Scots' law? Coz someone in Englandshire is less likely to be ware of all the facts, and would therefore base there assumptions/conclusions on the information presented to them by the person asking the questions. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUDE 0 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 I honestly believe that when we are in a position to be back in the top league, it won't be the SPL in it's current form anymore. One could only hope so. It can only get better after all. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,434 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 ... and it was clear that analogies would be drawn to Lance Armstrong et al. Only that we did not cheat or doped or match-fixed or the like. I for one would rather have someone from Rangers would be present at this hearing, if only in private or unofficially. Just to see how it actually goes on. I wouldn't want exclusives dripping out of Scrote McLaughlin's twitter account as genuine sources. As it stands, if this McKenzie bigot can run the show unopposed and the threesome just nod in acceptance, well well ... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,408 Posted September 12, 2012 Author Share Posted September 12, 2012 I for one would rather have someone from Rangers would be present at this hearing, I'm sure that there are pros and cons in respect of which approach would be best. It's really only with hindsight that we are able to judge what was best, and perhaps not even then, but Green seems to have agreed a plan of action with his advisors and I'm certainly happy that we are telling them to shove it from the off. I guess one of the important questions to think about is whether our presence would impact on the final outcome or whether it has already been decided? If you believe that it's already been decided then not going gives us more wriggle room later on. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 ... and it was clear that analogies would be drawn to Lance Armstrong et al. Only that we did not cheat or doped or match-fixed or the like. Don't think Armstrong was ever found to have cheated - never failed a drugs test. Is it not the case that he's simply sick of refuting the allegations, and given up defending them. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.