Stewart Regan: SFA has nothing to fear over Rangers' disputed European license

[ian1964 10,761]

SFA Chief Executive Stewart Regan says the governing body has nothing to fear over its handling of Rangers' European licence in the 2011/12 season.

 

A group of Celtic shareholders want to know why their rivals were allowed to play in the Champions League that year despite having an outstanding tax payment.

 

Clubs participating in UEFA competitions must declare any 'overdue payables' to the taxman and give details on whether they have a commitment to repay amounts, or a dispute over any bill.

 

The Gers owed £2.8 million in tax in 2011 due to their use of Employee Benefit Trusts, but were permitted to play in Europe.

 

The Celtic shareholders - known as the "requisitioners" after attempting to force the Celtic board to address the matter at the Parkhead club's 2013 AGM - argue Gers should not have been allowed to represent Scotland in the Champions League.

 

They say by allowing them to do so, the SFA denied Celtic - who would have taken their place - millions of pounds in potential prize-money payouts.

 

They have held talks with the SFA on the matter, while another set of Hoops supporters even took the step of placing an advert in a Swiss newspaper on Wednesday as they urged UEFA to intervene.

 

But Regan has assured that the SFA followed the rules in allowing the Ibrox club to participate.

 

"There has been a reply. We've been in dialogue with Celtic Football Club on the matter," he said after today's AGM in Glasgow.

 

"My understanding is that the requisitioners have accepted that they have no issues with the granting of the licence to Rangers in 2011 .

 

"What they do have an issue with is the monitoring period immediately following that licence in March 2011.

 

"Our position on that is that we have complied with UEFA requirements in the period immediately following March 2011 and clearly if there is still an issue with the requisitioners then that's for them to take up with UEFA.

 

"We've said if they do that then we'll fully cooperate and comply with any requests for information from UEFA and we've provided details at UEFA for the requisitioners to make contact.

 

"So we believe that the matter has been communicated to those involved and they will deal with it as they see fit."

 

Asked if the SFA had anything to fear, he replied: "No."

 

Celtic secretary Michael Nicholson declined to comment as he left the SFA AGM, while UEFA have also failed to respond to questions on the matter.

 

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/sport/...opean_license/

[gisabeer 409]

Sadder by the minute.....

[onevision 1,595]

So who are the sfa answering too, septic fc or their demented shareholders?

[RANGERRAB 3,742]

So who are the sfa answering too, septic fc or their demented shareholders?

 

The SFA and the yahoos are much the same thing nowadays unfortunately

[ian1964 10,761]

Stewart Regan gives support to Hibernian chairman Rod Petrie

 

Scottish Football Association chief executive Stewart Regan has given his full support to Rod Petrie, and dismissed calls for the Hibernian chairman to be stripped of his role at the SFA.

 

Petrie has been heavily criticised for his controversial comments relating to the pitch invasion that followed Hibernian's last-minute Scottish Cup final victory over Rangers on May 21.

 

The Easter Road chief described Hibs supporters' actions as merely "over-exuberance", despite reports that a number of Rangers players and staff had been assaulted during the chaos.

 

Club 1872, a prominent Rangers supporters group, has called for Petrie to resign from his vice-presidency role at the SFA, but Regan backed his under-fire colleague over the incident.

 

"Rod is a valued vice-president of the Scottish FA," said Regan at the SFA's annual general meeting in Glasgow on Wednesday.

 

"He has worked tirelessly for Scottish football over the years and I've got no issue with Rod Petrie as a vice-president."

 

Rangers released a statement the day after the cup final, claiming that Hibernian had yet to send the Ibrox club an apology for the incident at Hampden Park.

 

However, the Easter Road club have since moved to take action against those involved in the pitch invasion, handing out a number of lifetime bans earlier this week.

 

Petrie revealed on Wednesday that there had been "communication" between the two clubs but stopped short of revealing if Rangers had received a full apology.

 

"It was wrong of the supporters to come on the pitch and things that happened after that are inexcusable," he said.

 

"It's also inexcusable for supporters to come on the pitch so we know where we stand."

 

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11792/10301438/stewart-regan-gives-support-to-hibernian-chairman-rod-petrie

[boabie 230]

So who are the sfa answering too, septic fc or their demented shareholders?

 

Septic FC want nothing to do with this nonsense - they know what side their bread is buttered on. They have sidelined the resolution before their AGM but that still didn't stop them contacting UEFA for "clarity". Muirhead, the tarred one, McHugh and assorted other obsessed bigots are driving the current rubbish. No doubt somebody is skimming off the top and the whole thing when it fails will end up being part of some grand masonic conspiracy.

The only thing keeping it all running is the fact that Ogilvie was with the SFA at the time. The deluded bastards can't even recognise that despite Liewell and his pals running the SFA at the moment it is somehow our fault that nothing is happening.

The most important point though is ; If we are not the same club and have no "history", why do they even bother ?

[Bearman 9]

Stewart Regan gives support to Hibernian chairman Rod Petrie

 

Scottish Football Association chief executive Stewart Regan has given his full support to Rod Petrie, and dismissed calls for the Hibernian chairman to be stripped of his role at the SFA.

 

Petrie has been heavily criticised for his controversial comments relating to the pitch invasion that followed Hibernian's last-minute Scottish Cup final victory over Rangers on May 21.

 

The Easter Road chief described Hibs supporters' actions as merely "over-exuberance", despite reports that a number of Rangers players and staff had been assaulted during the chaos.

 

Club 1872, a prominent Rangers supporters group, has called for Petrie to resign from his vice-presidency role at the SFA, but Regan backed his under-fire colleague over the incident.

 

"Rod is a valued vice-president of the Scottish FA," said Regan at the SFA's annual general meeting in Glasgow on Wednesday.

 

"He has worked tirelessly for Scottish football over the years and I've got no issue with Rod Petrie as a vice-president."

 

Rangers released a statement the day after the cup final, claiming that Hibernian had yet to send the Ibrox club an apology for the incident at Hampden Park.

 

However, the Easter Road club have since moved to take action against those involved in the pitch invasion, handing out a number of lifetime bans earlier this week.

 

Petrie revealed on Wednesday that there had been "communication" between the two clubs but stopped short of revealing if Rangers had received a full apology.

 

"It was wrong of the supporters to come on the pitch and things that happened after that are inexcusable," he said.

 

"It's also inexcusable for supporters to come on the pitch so we know where we stand."

 

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11792/10301438/stewart-regan-gives-support-to-hibernian-chairman-rod-petrie

 

So it's "inexcusable" "over-exuberance" now??

[RANGERRAB 3,742]

How has Petrie 'worked tirelessly for Scottish football over the years' as Regan says ?

 

What has he done worthy of note ? What benefits has he brought to the game ? What are his achievements?

 

Other than being one of Liewell's nodding dogs I cant think of anything. The game is in dire straits thanks to the likes of Petrie, Thompson, Milne and of course the sleekit one from the san Giro

[ian1964 10,761]

Article 66(6) and the 30/9 Red Herring @pnot888

 

To help @pnot888 out let me make it clearer on a post that has more than 140 characters.

 

According to Article 66(6) of the UEFA rules on Financial Fair play Regulations then:

 

"If the licensee is in breach of indicator 4 as defined in Article 62(3), then it must

also prove that, as at the following 30 September, it has no overdue payables

(as specified in Annex VIII) towards employees and/or social/tax authorities that

arose prior to 30 September. Paragraphs 2 to 5 above apply accordingly. "

 

Paragraph 2 states:

 

"By the deadline and in the form communicated by the UEFA administration, the

licensee must prepare and submit a declaration confirming the absence or

EXISTENCE OF OVERDUE PAYABLES towards employees and social/tax authorities. "

 

So this confirms "overdue payables" CAN EXIST without any written agreement.

 

Paragraph 3 refers to payments to players and is irrelevant.

 

Pargraph 4 states:

 

"The following information must be given, as a minimum, in respect of each

overdue payable towards social/tax authorities, together with explanatory

comment:

a) Name of the creditor;

b) Balance overdue as at 30 June, including the due date for each overdue

element. "

 

Now I could be pedantic and point out that rule b) actually allows for a club to provide ONLY information to 30 June, but im sure it was written with the spirit of applying to 30 September. Not withstanding that, all it is actually saying here is that IF YOU STILL HAVE AN OVERDUE PAYABLE then you need to tell us how much was due(£2.8m), when it became an "overdue payable" (19th June 2011), who it was due to (HMRC) and an explanation as to the current position (money has been ringfenced pending a legal dispute. If we dont settle it, HMRC will be paid)

 

Paragraph 5 states:

 

"The declaration must be approved by management and this must be evidenced

by way of a brief statement and signature on behalf of the executive body of the

licensee. "

 

Self explanatory to me, but may be a problem for others.

 

To be clear.

 

There is NO requirement that it MUST be paid.

There is NO requirement that there must be a written agreement.

There is NO requirement other than to declare you still have money overdue, when it was due by, to whom you owe it and an explanation as to why its still overdue.

 

Dont get me wrong, if it ever went to court, then a lawyer would simply drive a bus through Aritcle 66(6) due to the wording in paragraph 4 but none of that matters because its completely immaterial.

 

Essentially what these rules said back then were. "Look we get there will be money owed. Just tell us about it and keep us updated"

 

There was absolutely no reason to lie. Where was the incentive to lie about it when the rules allowed you to declare it ? Can anyone tell me a single valid reason why you would want to lie if the £2.8m owed was completely immaterial to getting a licence.

 

Clearly all those Spanish clubs who owed £600m + to the Tax man didnt seem too phased by it. I mean the worst of them all, Athletico Madrid knocked Celtic out and won the Europa League with £140m of tax debt that season.

 

You would think if the requisitioners were going after anyone, it would be them.

 

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1soobol

 

https://twitter.com/Jas72Boyd/with_replies

[ian1964 10,761]

UEFA Licence 2011 - Time to put this to bed.

 

By TheLawMan

 

http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?/topic/295386-uefa-licence-2011-time-to-put-this-to-bed/