Celtic still pressing SFA for inquiry

[RANGERRAB 3,674]

Liewell will never admit it but HMRC winning the BTC was the result he didn't want. A Rangers victory would have meant he had a get-out

 

Now the slabbering yahoo hordes are on the march & demanding all sorts of action taken after promises were made which could never be kept regardless.

 

Rangers will not be punished further over EBT's because they weren't illegal. No crime was committed & no one was arrested.

Now we're back to the 2011 UEFA licence wich I'm confident will fail too as I've mentioned earlier.

[boabie 230]

The mank backed SFSA now join the queue of spectators at the gallows. --

 

" THE Scottish Football Supporters Association have backed calls for a review into the governance of our game.

 

The move comes after the Scottish FA wrote to the SPFL confirming that it would not participate in any overview in the aftermath of the Rangers EBT case.

 

It was confirmed in July that League chiefs would impose no further sanctions on Rangers for their use of the tax scheme during Sir David Murray’s Ibrox reign.

 

That verdict was delivered after calls in some quarters for the case to be re-opened despite the outcome of the independent commission that was headed by Lord Nimmo Smith four years ago.

 

The SPFL called on their Hampden counterparts to take part in a review looking at the way the authorities have dealt with non-payment of tax, the application of their rules and the sufficiency of new regulations that have come into force.

 

And SFSA chairman Simon Barrow believes the spotlight should shine on the corridors of power at the National Stadium.

 

He said: “The Scottish game has had a governing body for 144 years and in that time its performance has never been publicly evaluated.

 

"Unlike most industries there is no watchdog, no independent evaluation or review of performance on how the game is run.

 

"There are many issues within the game that fans have real concerns about but as it stands the governance rules within the game mean that no-one outside knows if a good job is being done by the SFA and the SPFL or not.

 

“We believe it is unhelpful for the SFA to try to avoid such scrutiny at this time. We also believe that this highlights the weaknesses in the Board Structures at Hampden Park that need addressed in the future.

 

"It is our view that is essential for the SFA to reverse its decision and to start to repair some of the significant damage done to its image and reputation by being open honest and transparent to all its stakeholders.” "

 

Who'da thunk it, eh ?

[Walterbear 557]

I don't think anyone would object to a review of SFA governance so long as it is a review of their organisation, operating model, rule book, policies and procedures, commercial and financial competence, and capability, and that such a review contributed to an improvement in our game.

 

If the remit for such a review accepted the integrity of decisions previously made and accepted that Rangers has been severely punished already for past trangressions I would support it.

 

If it focuses on Rangers whilst reviewing its competence (and it can't not review some of the events and the action or inaction of the SFA) it would also have to look at other clubs and the role of the SFA in their affairs. Dundee and Hearts to name but two managed to avoid appropriate scrutiny of owners and appropriate levels of punishment (Hearts brushed £30m of debt under the carpet without the SFA saying or doing anything). A review should also look at whether the SFA is fit for purpose with its policies and sanctions and powers of scrutiny over club appointments where for example clubs knowingly employ people convicted of serious criminal offences such as child sex offences. The review should also consider the appropriate level of authority and sanction the SFA has over any club knowingly covering up sex offenders in their employment such as the allegations made against Hibs in the Mark Daly documentary. It should also consider whether owners and financial backers who are under suspicion of money laundering or tax evasion in other countries should be allowed to fund clubs and if subsequently found guilty of such offences and having financed a club then determine what level of sanction should the SFA have. Etc.

 

Bring it on.

[cooponthewing 1,139]

I don't think anyone would object to a review of SFA governance so long as it is a review of their organisation, operating model, rule book, policies and procedures, commercial and financial competence, and capability, and that such a review contributed to an improvement in our game.

 

If the remit for such a review accepted the integrity of decisions previously made and accepted that Rangers has been severely punished already for past trangressions I would support it.

 

If it focuses on Rangers whilst reviewing its competence (and it can't not review some of the events and the action or inaction of the SFA) it would also have to look at other clubs and the role of the SFA in their affairs. Dundee and Hearts to name but two managed to avoid appropriate scrutiny of owners and appropriate levels of punishment (Hearts brushed £30m of debt under the carpet without the SFA saying or doing anything). A review should also look at whether the SFA is fit for purpose with its policies and sanctions and powers of scrutiny over club appointments where for example clubs knowingly employ people convicted of serious criminal offences such as child sex offences. The review should also consider the appropriate level of authority and sanction the SFA has over any club knowingly covering up sex offenders in their employment such as the allegations made against Hibs in the Mark Daly documentary. It should also consider whether owners and financial backers who are under suspicion of money laundering or tax evasion in other countries should be allowed to fund clubs and if subsequently found guilty of such offences and having financed a club then determine what level of sanction should the SFA have. Etc.

 

Bring it on.

 

Great post and I share your sentiments. It's high time the light was shone on all of them. We need to be organised and get to work!

[RANGERRAB 3,674]

Great post and I share your sentiments. It's high time the light was shone on all of them. We need to be organised and get to work!

 

Why? The SFA have no interest in any further punishments

 

This is turning into a witch hunt at the SFA because title stripping failed to materialise.

 

None of this will go away until the SFA grow a pair & take action against Liewell & his vile club. If they continue to make allegations and demands against a member club then action must be taken. Suspend Liewell for starters

 

Part of me thinks Liewell is working his ticket to get out before the tsunami that is the child abuse scandal hits Scottish football with his club the most heavily involved by far. And the SFA will be unable to sit back & do nothing if more convictions result.

[Walterbear 557]

The mank backed SFSA now join the queue of spectators at the gallows. --

 

" THE Scottish Football Supporters Association have backed calls for a review into the governance of our game.

 

The move comes after the Scottish FA wrote to the SPFL confirming that it would not participate in any overview in the aftermath of the Rangers EBT case.

 

It was confirmed in July that League chiefs would impose no further sanctions on Rangers for their use of the tax scheme during Sir David Murray’s Ibrox reign.

 

That verdict was delivered after calls in some quarters for the case to be re-opened despite the outcome of the independent commission that was headed by Lord Nimmo Smith four years ago.

 

The SPFL called on their Hampden counterparts to take part in a review looking at the way the authorities have dealt with non-payment of tax, the application of their rules and the sufficiency of new regulations that have come into force.

 

And SFSA chairman Simon Barrow believes the spotlight should shine on the corridors of power at the National Stadium.

 

He said: “The Scottish game has had a governing body for 144 years and in that time its performance has never been publicly evaluated.

 

"Unlike most industries there is no watchdog, no independent evaluation or review of performance on how the game is run.

 

"There are many issues within the game that fans have real concerns about but as it stands the governance rules within the game mean that no-one outside knows if a good job is being done by the SFA and the SPFL or not.

 

“We believe it is unhelpful for the SFA to try to avoid such scrutiny at this time. We also believe that this highlights the weaknesses in the Board Structures at Hampden Park that need addressed in the future.

 

"It is our view that is essential for the SFA to reverse its decision and to start to repair some of the significant damage done to its image and reputation by being open honest and transparent to all its stakeholders.” "

 

Who'da thunk it, eh ?

 

Why? The SFA have no interest in any further punishments

 

This is turning into a witch hunt at the SFA because title stripping failed to materialise.

 

None of this will go away until the SFA grow a pair & take action against Liewell & his vile club. If they continue to make allegations and demands against a member club then action must be taken. Suspend Liewell for starters

 

Part of me thinks Liewell is working his ticket to get out before the tsunami that is the child abuse scandal hits Scottish football with his club the most heavily involved by far. And the SFA will be unable to sit back & do nothing if more convictions result.

 

The SFA are caught in the middle of their own incompetence and celtics extreme aggressive behaviour. They (SFA) have to do something and if I were in charge of Rangers I'd join the chorus for a review but insist the terms of reference and scope were much wider than the transgressions of one club. After all these organisations who want a review are surely interested in covering all bases to ensure future integrity and trust. Rangers could get on the front foot here. It would be a perfectly reasonable stance to take and if the SFA didn't take it and certain other clubs opppssed it we could then have a proper assessment of the desire of Scottish supporters groups and clubs like Celtic for accountability, integrity and reform. Let's face it the way we have been trashed over the last few years means we don't have anything more to lose.

 

Bring it on but influence the scope and remit with strong statements from the Board and an insistence to be fully involved in scoping and reviewing of the process.

Edited September 8, 2017 by Walterbear

[barca72 440]

I don't think anyone would object to a review of SFA governance so long as it is a review of their organisation, operating model, rule book, policies and procedures, commercial and financial competence, and capability, and that such a review contributed to an improvement in our game.

 

If the remit for such a review accepted the integrity of decisions previously made and accepted that Rangers has been severely punished already for past trangressions I would support it.

 

If it focuses on Rangers whilst reviewing its competence (and it can't not review some of the events and the action or inaction of the SFA) it would also have to look at other clubs and the role of the SFA in their affairs. Dundee and Hearts to name but two managed to avoid appropriate scrutiny of owners and appropriate levels of punishment (Hearts brushed £30m of debt under the carpet without the SFA saying or doing anything). A review should also look at whether the SFA is fit for purpose with its policies and sanctions and powers of scrutiny over club appointments where for example clubs knowingly employ people convicted of serious criminal offences such as child sex offences. The review should also consider the appropriate level of authority and sanction the SFA has over any club knowingly covering up sex offenders in their employment such as the allegations made against Hibs in the Mark Daly documentary. It should also consider whether owners and financial backers who are under suspicion of money laundering or tax evasion in other countries should be allowed to fund clubs and if subsequently found guilty of such offences and having financed a club then determine what level of sanction should the SFA have. Etc.

 

Bring it on.

 

How be we get the SFA to investigate CFC for state aid aberrations?

Read this article. Reid's insider information is all over it ...

 

https://footballtaxhavens.wordpress.com/2017/02/09/district-valuer-condemns-glasgow-city-council-concessions-with-celtic-in-february-2007/

[Gonzo79 15,294]

I'd be happy to see titles stripped, so long as any other club who were involved in utilising tax loopholes or say, re-employing people who have previously been sacked for extremely unsavoury and illegal activities were subject to the same procedures.

 

By my calculations, we'd be further ahead of the perennial victims than we are now.

Edited September 8, 2017 by Gonzo79

[Walterbear 557]

The mank backed SFSA now join the queue of spectators at the gallows. --

 

" THE Scottish Football Supporters Association have backed calls for a review into the governance of our game.

 

The move comes after the Scottish FA wrote to the SPFL confirming that it would not participate in any overview in the aftermath of the Rangers EBT case.

 

It was confirmed in July that League chiefs would impose no further sanctions on Rangers for their use of the tax scheme during Sir David Murray’s Ibrox reign.

 

That verdict was delivered after calls in some quarters for the case to be re-opened despite the outcome of the independent commission that was headed by Lord Nimmo Smith four years ago.

 

The SPFL called on their Hampden counterparts to take part in a review looking at the way the authorities have dealt with non-payment of tax, the application of their rules and the sufficiency of new regulations that have come into force.

 

And SFSA chairman Simon Barrow believes the spotlight should shine on the corridors of power at the National Stadium.

 

He said: “The Scottish game has had a governing body for 144 years and in that time its performance has never been publicly evaluated.

 

"Unlike most industries there is no watchdog, no independent evaluation or review of performance on how the game is run.

 

"There are many issues within the game that fans have real concerns about but as it stands the governance rules within the game mean that no-one outside knows if a good job is being done by the SFA and the SPFL or not.

 

“We believe it is unhelpful for the SFA to try to avoid such scrutiny at this time. We also believe that this highlights the weaknesses in the Board Structures at Hampden Park that need addressed in the future.

 

"It is our view that is essential for the SFA to reverse its decision and to start to repair some of the significant damage done to its image and reputation by being open honest and transparent to all its stakeholders.” "

 

Who'da thunk it, eh ?

 

How be we get the SFA to investigate CFC for state aid aberrations?

Read this article. Reid's insider information is all over it ...

 

https://footballtaxhavens.wordpress.com/2017/02/09/district-valuer-condemns-glasgow-city-council-concessions-with-celtic-in-february-2007/

 

I think you have to revamp the SFA governance and scope for sanctions. Whether 'state aid' was part of that would be up for discussion.

 

One thing they cannot do is insist on further retrospective penalties against Rangers by retrospective rule change and retrospective changes in policies and standards or rectify historical administrative incompetence in the case of Rangers, whilst at the same time not look at a greater scope of misdemeanours to fall within the power of the SFA sanctioning and not also applying retrospective powers to that increase in scope. Otherwise it does just become a continuation of the witch hunt of one club and does not address the sporting integrity of football in Scotland and a desire for improved administration. Rangers could start to take the initiative.

Edited September 8, 2017 by Walterbear

[craig 5,199]

Would any increase in scope include the "sporting integrity" of finishing the season on schedule because one team has a post-season tour of Japan to make, one which still hasn't happened a full 9 years later ??