CRO - One rule for us, one rule for them

[ian1964 10,625]

by Alan Clark | Assignments Editor

 

Much is made of football governing bodies, especially in Scotland. One half of the Glasgow giants think the SFA are institutionally biased against them, and the other half usually thinks the same.

 

Supporters of Hearts and Hibernian claim the Hampden Park boffins should be renamed the Glasgow Football Association, as all they do is cater for Rangers and Celtic.

 

All this of course is absolute nonsense.

 

Paranoid conspiracy theories aside, the Scottish Football Association have some serious questions to answer. So much went on with Rangersâ?? financial crisis last year that it is sometimes easy to forget the facts and what went on (and when it went on). A good summary of this comes from Chris Grahamâ??s chapter â??Taking On The Establishment: Rangers and the Scottish Football Authoritiesâ?? in the newly-released Follow We Will book.

 

Letâ??s take a look back. Rangers entered administration on February 14th and were deducted 10 points from the SPL, that being the rules and you didnâ??t hear many complaints about that. For experiencing an insolvency event, the SFA charged the club. Again, this has precedent and is in the rules. The SFA has a range of available punishments, including a fine, handing out a registration embargo or suspending/terminating the clubâ??s membership of the association.

 

On the 23rd of April 2012, the SFA tribunal revealed they were fining Rangers a total of £160,000, and Craig Whyte £200,000. This broke down as; a £50,000 fine for the administration event (the maximum available), £100,000 for bringing the game into disrepute (Whyte withholding PAYE/NIC payments for several months) and £10,000 for breaches of SFA rules (failure to pay Dundee United Scottish Cup money on time, which was later paid).

 

Without going into too much detail, no-one can have complaints about the Scottish Cup money fine and at first glance the same can be said for the fine aspect of the disrepute charge. It was Whyte who failed to pay the tax without people at the club knowing but as he was the owner of the club, the club had to accept punishment. However, given the fact the SFA were apparently made aware that Whyte was funding the day-to-day running of Rangers by not releasing the tax to HMRC, you do begin to wonder about the punishment handed out to Rangers, and the timing of it. There was also the infamous registration embargo attached to the £100,000 fine, preventing Rangers from signing any new players till 1st September 2013, bar under-18 players.

 

The club was still in turmoil looking for a buyer to rescue the club. The CVA route was preferred but by April the liquidation/newco idea was being talked about. Many commented at the time, quite rightly, that the timing of the fines and charges were extremely damaging for the well-being of the club and its survival hopes. The embargo particularly had a negative effect as potential buyers could easily have been put off (some were) by the notion of buying a football club without the ability to add to a squad that went on to lose over 20 players.

 

We all know that Lord Glennie, in court, ruled this punishment was unlawful but after the formation of a newco and application to transfer SFA membership, Stewart Regan and co included the embargo as part of the five-way agreement, and is why Ally McCoist has only been able to sign free agents this summer.

 

As the football association, the SFA have a duty to look after all member clubs fairly and in the eyes of the Rangers support, they didnâ??t do that last year. Fast forward to 2013 and financial problems hit home at two other Scottish clubs; Dunfermline Athletic and Hearts.

 

The Pars fell into insolvency proceedings in April, whilst the Jambos went the same eventually after much talk â?? in June. Rule 14(g) of the SFAâ??s Articles of Association covers any club who â??is subject to an insolvency eventâ?. As you read above, Rangers were fined the maximum amount possible - £50,000 â?? for the administration event. Fining a club when the business is failing and owes creditors money is absolutely insane. Neither mind whatâ??s to follow.

 

Previous administrations at Gretna, Motherwell and Livingston were not met with SFA fines, but I believe a change in the rules occurred in between Gretna and Rangersâ?? administrations, so to compare those wouldnâ??t make sense. Since the change, three clubs have entered administration; Rangers, Dunfermline and Hearts.

 

In May, the SFA revealed their verdict of Rule 14(g) for Dunfermline. They were hit with a transfer embargo for all players over the age of 21 that will run until 31st December 2013, with a fine of absolutely nothing. Today, 1st August 2013, the SFA announced their conclusion on the same rule breach at Hearts. A judicial panel imposed a ban on signing new players aged 21 and over until 1st February.

 

Overall, the punishments handed out to Dunfermline and Hearts look rather fair. They havenâ??t asked for money from clubs that, being in insolvency, clearly donâ??t have it to give out. Considering a club in administration canâ??t register new players anyway, a registration ban (particularly in Heartsâ?? case) isnâ??t exactly harsh. Hearts could still be in administration by the time the transfer window closes on August 31st, for example.

 

The underlying frustration here is the complete contradiction between the SFA sanction for Rule 14(g) to Rangers, and to Dunfermline and Hearts. Let me make this clear â?? there is not one part of me that believes fining a club for going into administration is the right thing to do. It is completely bonkers. But with not fining Dunfermline and Hearts anything at all has done is highlight just how poorly the SFA handled the Rangers situation last year.

 

The clubs under the banner of the SFA should be fairly treated, the rules applied to every club without fear or favour. Chief executive Stewart Regan should be hounded by the press to explain the clear differences in punishing Rangers, Dunfermline and Hearts for the same sole rule breach.

 

Rangersâ?? newly-appointed CEO Craig Mather recently commented saying he would watch very closely the events of how the authorities dealt with the Hearts crisis. It is quite clear to all that the rules have not been fairly applied in this case. What is the justification for fining one club the maximum fine for administration, yet not two other clubs for the very same thing?

 

No doubt many Rangers supporters will feel Mather will have to step up to the plate in this situation and ask the tough questions of the SFA. At the time of writing, Mather has just released a statement on the official website saying;

 

"Rangers Football Club notes today's verdict by the Disciplinary Tribunal who ruled that Hearts cannot register any players over the age of 21 between now and February 1, 2014. We also recall that Dunfermline were given a similar sanction in May.

 

 

 

"But in particular, Rangers are aware of the glaring differences in the sanctions imposed on three clubs who entered administration. Our club, Rangers, was hit with a £50,000 fine and given a 12 month registration embargo.

 

 

 

"While no-one at this Club wishes to see others fall on hard times, questions must be asked about these anomalies and we fully understand the rising anger among our fans. They are entitled to think there is one rule for our club and another for everyone else.

We will be seeking clarification for our fans."

 

 

One also thinks that it must surely only be a matter of time before the SFA's CEO is forced to resign. The list of embarrassments and contradictions that Regan has overseen is growing and growing.

 

The man to drive Scottish football forward? Don't make me laugh.

 

http://www.thecoplandroad.org/2013/08/one-rule-for-us-one-rule-for-them.html

[andy steel 0]

I had thought the Mather statement was a bit Lennon-like, what with its 'clarification'. But when you put it like that, it becomes if anything a little too cautious.

[ranger_syntax 4,013]

Rule 14(g) appears to offer a range of punishments. Does anyone know if there are any guidelines to go along with the rule?

 

https://twitter.com/rangersfctrust/status/316689362307932161/photo/1