The Official Glasgow Rangers Thread
Discussion
These are the words of a good blogger. A Mr Bill McMurdo. I think this sums up the current attitude of the Scottish BBC and it presenters.
Now then, now then, now then…
The BBC’s Mad Men montage, which caused such a furore over the last few days, may well be prophetic after all.
However, its depiction of a silhouetted man falling to his death may not be as symbolic of Rangers manager Ally McCoist as of the Corporation itself.
This Wednesday an ITV documentary features allegations made by several women that they were raped and abused by Jimmy Savile, the late children’s TV presenter.
Some of these allegations include abuse the women claimed took place at the BBC.
That is a big story in itself; however, the real story – as reported in the Telegraph a while back – is that the BBC apparently covered up the abuse perpetrated by Savile, along with that of two other celebrities, both of whom are still alive.
The BBC programme News night was going to expose Savile last December but BBC bosses ordered the project to be binned.
Astonishingly, the decision was taken to sweep, sweep the Savile scandal in favour of two tribute shows on the Jim’ll Fix It presenter.
Apparently BBC bigwigs were afraid that the Corporation’s reputation would be tarnished if news of Savile’s sexual crimes got out – so chose to put a lid on the news and praise him instead.
It appears that corruption and duplicity are not limited to only BBC Scotland but are endemic in the entire Corporation.
To compound this woeful state of events, it will surely enrage my readers even further to consider that, if you live in the UK, you are obliged to fork out your hard-earned to fund this disgusting excuse for a media outlet with your licence fee.
Sadly, the BRITISH Broadcasting Corporation is not what it says on the tin.
After these latest accusations, a more appropriate name might be Penn State Broadcasting Corporation.
We certainly couldn’t have Sweep, Sweep Broadcasting Corporation for obvious reasons.
Of course there will be those who think my mentioning this subject is tasteless and out of order.
They are the ones that want to perpetuate the cover-ups that blight our society.
I am sure that “tasteless” and “out of order” would be mild words used by Ally McCoist’s wife and family to describe the montage of Super Ally tumbling to his death.
It’s OK for the Beeb to do tasteless but don’t question their own ethics?
Not as long as I have breath.
I note that Tam Cowan threw his bunnet into into the ring over the Mad Men scandal with a wee PR piece for his employers at Pacific Quay.
In this laughable attempt at damage-limitation, wee Tam tried to make a joke about how if he caught Ally McCoist in bed with his missus, he would insist she made him something to eat afterwards.
This tells us a great deal about Mr Thomas Cowan.
He is obviously, after a statement like that, revealing himself to be a voyeur.
This proves something I have long suspected about Tam Cowan.
Like other Motherwell supporters, he’s only here to see The Rangers…
Now then, now then, now then…
The BBC’s Mad Men montage, which caused such a furore over the last few days, may well be prophetic after all.
However, its depiction of a silhouetted man falling to his death may not be as symbolic of Rangers manager Ally McCoist as of the Corporation itself.
This Wednesday an ITV documentary features allegations made by several women that they were raped and abused by Jimmy Savile, the late children’s TV presenter.
Some of these allegations include abuse the women claimed took place at the BBC.
That is a big story in itself; however, the real story – as reported in the Telegraph a while back – is that the BBC apparently covered up the abuse perpetrated by Savile, along with that of two other celebrities, both of whom are still alive.
The BBC programme News night was going to expose Savile last December but BBC bosses ordered the project to be binned.
Astonishingly, the decision was taken to sweep, sweep the Savile scandal in favour of two tribute shows on the Jim’ll Fix It presenter.
Apparently BBC bigwigs were afraid that the Corporation’s reputation would be tarnished if news of Savile’s sexual crimes got out – so chose to put a lid on the news and praise him instead.
It appears that corruption and duplicity are not limited to only BBC Scotland but are endemic in the entire Corporation.
To compound this woeful state of events, it will surely enrage my readers even further to consider that, if you live in the UK, you are obliged to fork out your hard-earned to fund this disgusting excuse for a media outlet with your licence fee.
Sadly, the BRITISH Broadcasting Corporation is not what it says on the tin.
After these latest accusations, a more appropriate name might be Penn State Broadcasting Corporation.
We certainly couldn’t have Sweep, Sweep Broadcasting Corporation for obvious reasons.
Of course there will be those who think my mentioning this subject is tasteless and out of order.
They are the ones that want to perpetuate the cover-ups that blight our society.
I am sure that “tasteless” and “out of order” would be mild words used by Ally McCoist’s wife and family to describe the montage of Super Ally tumbling to his death.
It’s OK for the Beeb to do tasteless but don’t question their own ethics?
Not as long as I have breath.
I note that Tam Cowan threw his bunnet into into the ring over the Mad Men scandal with a wee PR piece for his employers at Pacific Quay.
In this laughable attempt at damage-limitation, wee Tam tried to make a joke about how if he caught Ally McCoist in bed with his missus, he would insist she made him something to eat afterwards.
This tells us a great deal about Mr Thomas Cowan.
He is obviously, after a statement like that, revealing himself to be a voyeur.
This proves something I have long suspected about Tam Cowan.
Like other Motherwell supporters, he’s only here to see The Rangers…
oh youve got me bang to rights there, i always look for the sevco result before looking for the dons one..
its a forum, people are allowed to post on any thread they want. if you dont like it there are numerous sevco specific forums like RangersMedia where you can continue to stick your head in the sand and ignore the impending doom that Green is leading you to..
its a forum, people are allowed to post on any thread they want. if you dont like it there are numerous sevco specific forums like RangersMedia where you can continue to stick your head in the sand and ignore the impending doom that Green is leading you to..
chrisj_abz said:
oh youve got me bang to rights there, i always look for the sevco result before looking for the dons one..
its a forum, people are allowed to post on any thread they want. if you dont like it there are numerous sevco specific forums like RangersMedia where you can continue to stick your head in the sand and ignore the impending doom that Green is leading you to..
but you are all Soooooo obsessed with us. Look on the sheep lovers pages.....No Gers fans. But on EVERY rangers thread the obsessed are there, lurking, looking, listening, commenting. Quite sad and pathetic really. its a forum, people are allowed to post on any thread they want. if you dont like it there are numerous sevco specific forums like RangersMedia where you can continue to stick your head in the sand and ignore the impending doom that Green is leading you to..
doogz said:
What's with the whole "Sevco" thing.
Is it as simple as simple people having a dig at Rangers because they think it's funny?
We all know that's not what they're called.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18509619Is it as simple as simple people having a dig at Rangers because they think it's funny?
We all know that's not what they're called.
Will be interesting to see what they will eventually be called.
Sevco will have to do for now until it's decided
doogz said:
Well it's not really relevant, that's not what they're called. So, is it a cheap dig, or because that what you thought they were called? Or both?
It's not a difficult question. I just wondered what it was all about.
You know fine well what it's about, banter.It's not a difficult question. I just wondered what it was all about.
The shame for them is that they have no come back. They are indeed the people.
^^^A Light Shone In The Night
September 29, 2012 · by billmcmurdo
Those who have seen the latest Batman movie - The Dark Knight Rises - will be aware of its relevance to the situation in both Scottish football and Scottish society in general at this present time.
The story is about how Gotham City has become corrupt at every level and how Batman, whose name and honour have been falsely besmirched, fights back against the endemic corruption and defeats the evil cabal running the city.
It is a dark and brutal tale and highlights how weakness and compromise can open the door to greater evils in society.
The film is a powerful metaphor mirroring what is taking place in Scotland right now as we see corruption in its many forms with the bitter agenda shown by many toward Rangers Football Club.
Bruce Wayne, who is the real person behind Batman, is a man born to privilege, wealth and power but has all these stripped from him before he earns the right to champion the people of Gotham and take back the city from the corrupt cabal that holds it in its iron grasp.
Rangers – the so-called establishment club of Scotland – has also been shorn of prestige, power and financial honour in recent times.
Like Batman, Rangers faces a corrupt group intent on the club’s destruction as a competitive force, while hijacking the club’s financial pulling power.
In the movie, the criminals running Gotham wanted Bruce Wayne shackled so that they could harness the power of his assets, including a powerful fusion reactor.
Anyone see the parallels?
When it comes down to it, the story of The Dark Knight Rises is based on the timeless battle of good versus evil – just like many a good Western.
Supporters of The Rangers Football Club are convinced that right is on their side in the battle they find themselves in at this present time.
When you read the comments of Rangers’ enemies on fan forums and other places, it is not hard for anyone to work out who are the good guys and who are the villains in the situation.
Whether or not you like it – and some don’t, even among Rangers fans – what is happening in Scottish football is a reflection of what is happening at a much broader level within Scottish society, as the country is increasingly polarised.
In The Dark Knight Rises the good guys versus bad guys face-off in Gotham eventually descended into a civil war scenario. People who didn’t want to fight eventually had no option if they wanted to retake their city from corruption.
As the campaign of abuse mounts up on Rangers, even the most timid of souls in the Rangers camp is realising that if they don’t make a stand, the haters will trample on the club incessantly.
It was heartening to see Rangers ban the BBC from Ibrox after the vile montage of manager Ally McCoist plunging to his death was aired by that discredited media outlet before Wednesday’s game against Motherwell.
Charles Green and Ally Mccoist himself are showing more and more that they are up for a scrap with Rangers-haters at any level.
The strong leadership shown by these two is helping to galvanise the Rangers support into a fearsome force which is very unwise to mess with.
Rangers fans are finding they have enormous clout when they unite as one. This power must be wielded appropriately and responsibly, however.
To use a phrase from another superhero movie, with great power comes great responsibility.
One more parallel between Batman and The Rangers will no doubt thrill the hearts of many Rangers fans.
This concerns the iconic image of a bat shone into the night sky, summoning Batman and letting him know he needs to fight the bad guys one more time.
Just when evil seems to be about to win the day…
Just when corruption is at its worst…
Just when all hope seems to be lost…
A light shone in the night.
September 29, 2012 · by billmcmurdo
Those who have seen the latest Batman movie - The Dark Knight Rises - will be aware of its relevance to the situation in both Scottish football and Scottish society in general at this present time.
The story is about how Gotham City has become corrupt at every level and how Batman, whose name and honour have been falsely besmirched, fights back against the endemic corruption and defeats the evil cabal running the city.
It is a dark and brutal tale and highlights how weakness and compromise can open the door to greater evils in society.
The film is a powerful metaphor mirroring what is taking place in Scotland right now as we see corruption in its many forms with the bitter agenda shown by many toward Rangers Football Club.
Bruce Wayne, who is the real person behind Batman, is a man born to privilege, wealth and power but has all these stripped from him before he earns the right to champion the people of Gotham and take back the city from the corrupt cabal that holds it in its iron grasp.
Rangers – the so-called establishment club of Scotland – has also been shorn of prestige, power and financial honour in recent times.
Like Batman, Rangers faces a corrupt group intent on the club’s destruction as a competitive force, while hijacking the club’s financial pulling power.
In the movie, the criminals running Gotham wanted Bruce Wayne shackled so that they could harness the power of his assets, including a powerful fusion reactor.
Anyone see the parallels?
When it comes down to it, the story of The Dark Knight Rises is based on the timeless battle of good versus evil – just like many a good Western.
Supporters of The Rangers Football Club are convinced that right is on their side in the battle they find themselves in at this present time.
When you read the comments of Rangers’ enemies on fan forums and other places, it is not hard for anyone to work out who are the good guys and who are the villains in the situation.
Whether or not you like it – and some don’t, even among Rangers fans – what is happening in Scottish football is a reflection of what is happening at a much broader level within Scottish society, as the country is increasingly polarised.
In The Dark Knight Rises the good guys versus bad guys face-off in Gotham eventually descended into a civil war scenario. People who didn’t want to fight eventually had no option if they wanted to retake their city from corruption.
As the campaign of abuse mounts up on Rangers, even the most timid of souls in the Rangers camp is realising that if they don’t make a stand, the haters will trample on the club incessantly.
It was heartening to see Rangers ban the BBC from Ibrox after the vile montage of manager Ally McCoist plunging to his death was aired by that discredited media outlet before Wednesday’s game against Motherwell.
Charles Green and Ally Mccoist himself are showing more and more that they are up for a scrap with Rangers-haters at any level.
The strong leadership shown by these two is helping to galvanise the Rangers support into a fearsome force which is very unwise to mess with.
Rangers fans are finding they have enormous clout when they unite as one. This power must be wielded appropriately and responsibly, however.
To use a phrase from another superhero movie, with great power comes great responsibility.
One more parallel between Batman and The Rangers will no doubt thrill the hearts of many Rangers fans.
This concerns the iconic image of a bat shone into the night sky, summoning Batman and letting him know he needs to fight the bad guys one more time.
Just when evil seems to be about to win the day…
Just when corruption is at its worst…
Just when all hope seems to be lost…
A light shone in the night.
The Bumbling Buffoon is back !
Just when you think Graham Spiers has disappeared for good, he comes back infrequently to remind people that the standard of journalism in Scotland has reached rock bottom
I used to think that newspaper editors, and Radio controllers should be some of the most streetwise and incisive individuals around. You’d think that years of journalism and reporting from the streets would instil a common sense that would set them apart. Wrong.
Latterly I’ve come to the conclusion that they are living in a timewarp and so far removed from reality that they have completely lost perspective.
After all, Graham Spiers still seems to pop up in Scottish broadsheets and on the airwaves, despite a toxic reputation that he cannot understand a game of football, cannot get a scoop, and has the reverse midas touch anywhere he writes.
After months of offering very very little in terms of relevance, Spiers has jumped in to full rant mode at Rangers with regards to Charles Green’s pertinent observations of the SFA and SPL agendas against Rangers.
While Spiers likes to play the bumbling fool when it suits him, he also displays that narcisism that high profile journalists posess, and assumes a position of superiority, even when he is completely off the mark.
Right from the off, Spiers gets it completely wrong, and perhaps I should show just how wrong he actually is
“I am still trying to get my head around the senselessness of Charles Green and Rangers FC refusing to have any truck with the SPL’s investigation conducted by Lord Nimmo Smith into the alleged EBTs misdemeanours at the club.”
Firstly, the SPL’s investigation has already been carried out, and was carried out by Celtic’s law firm Harper Macleod, and more specifically Rod Mckenzie
Nimmo Smith is chairing an “independent” panel to sit on that evidence
“Nimmo Smith has been widely quoted in the past few days, but one plea he made that has virtually gone unnoticed was that anyone associated with Oldco or Newco Rangers, who believe they have a plea of mitigation to make about the club, should come forward and speak to the commission.”
David Murray stated several weeks ago that no one from the SPL, Harper MacLeod had not contacted him, nor anyone else from the “oldco”
Nimmo-Smith should be contacting Murray directly, rather than implying an open invite through the media for Murray attend a tribunal where the evidence has already been compiled without his input.
Expecting Murray to take part in such an arrangement is absolutely ridiculous.
In any case, Murray. like Alastair Johnston and Green, is very clear that no tribunal should be taking place until after the HMRC FTT appeal is decided
“What are Rangers so scared of? Why did the club obfuscate in passing on relevant documentation? What is there to hide?”
Murray’s position should be explained above.
Green’s position is explained in various statements.
Green’s statements are clear. The SPL are working to a pre-determined agenda which compromises the integrity of the tribunal.
While Rangers have stated that they do not question Nimmo Smith’s impartiality, and that he has been put in a difficult position by the SPL board, my belief is that he too is working to a pre-determined agenda, and that his request for input is meaningless, unless he formalises it.
Essentially, if he genuinely wished a credible and fair hearing for Rangers, he would throw out the slanted evidence of Rod McKenzie and the SPL, and tell them to start again once the FTT has been decided, with a directive to interview all stakeholders.
He hasn’t, which means he either has no intention of seeking all the relevant evidence, or is not being allowed to by the SPL board
His terminology in comparing Rangers alleged actions with match fixing would suggest the former.
“If Rangers are innocent of an alleged dual-contracts scam – and they may well be – then why does the club not step forward and argue its case?”
Because they have been through the process with HMRC and the FTT and await the judgement. The SPL kangaroo court should not be taking place until after any such judgement is issued
My understanding is that the case isn’t as cut and dried as many are making out. If it was it would have been finalised a long time ago.
At one stage, with a week to go before the commission’s preliminary hearing of September 11, Green and Newco Rangers were prepared to go and talk to Nimmo Smith. But, with a day to go, they swiftly changed their mind.
Interesting. Perhaps Green found something out about the panel that was not too his liking?
Why did it take from Sep 11 to Sep 26 for this to come to light ?
To quote Nimmo Smith verbatim from his preparatory notes on the Rangers hearings to be held in November: “Oldco and Rangers FC will continue to have the right to appear and be represented at the hearings and make submissions as they see fit.”
A few pages further on in his notes, and applying his desire to have all evidence and all voices considered in this saga, Nimmo Smith adds: “We [hope] that Oldco, Newco and any other person claiming an interest and wishing to appear will give intimation to that effect. We wish to emphasise that the doors remain open to Oldco and Newco to appear and be represented…”
Never mind Charles Green’s antics, what about Sir David Murray? Given Nimmo Smith and his commission’s desire to establish clear blue water between itself and the SPL, what can possibly stop Murray from coming forward to give his side of the story?
Nimmo Smith chose his words carefully in terms of testimony about EBTs: “…any other person claiming an interest…”
In this Rangers saga, I can think of no viable person who suits those words more than Murray, the man who set the Ibrox club on the fateful course of EBTs in the first place.
As stated above, Murray has never been formally invited to contribute to the investigation, and his focus has to be in fighting his case against HMRC, not a kangaroo court set up by Rangers’ enemies.
Murray avows that Rangers are innocent. He claims this is a stitch-up by people – whoever the heck they might be – to damage Rangers. Murray says the EBTs, the famed “legal loophole” to paying taxes, were used properly and legitimately.
I severely doubt Murray’s interpretation on this but, more than that, I want him to be given his chance to come before the commission to protest his and Rangers’ innocence.
Can someone provide a single valid reason why Murray would not to come before – or present evidence to – Nimmo Smith?
Not to? What does that mean?
The Commission is flawed for a number of reasons, from the choice of lawyers, to the lack of will to talk to Murray, and the commission being set up before the FTT final judgement, which suggests an assumption that Rangers are guilty.
There is absolutely no reason why either Murray or Green should treat the tribunal or those who commissioned it with anything other than contempt.
The SPL and SFA have been flawed in their handling of the Rangers case – everyone can see it. But the SPL is trying to make up for that by ensuring that its claim that Rangers FC warrants an investigation will be a claim carried out with the utmost impartiality and clarity.
Such a claim is not only inaccurate and misleading, it is laughable for many of the reasons I have stated above
You have to be a conspiracy theorist of fantasist proportions to somehow believe that Nimmo Smith and his two QCs, Nicholas Stewart and Charles Flint, are “agenda-driven” or “biased” in any way. This commission will once and for all cut through the cant and farrago of this case and reach a judgement on all its available evidence.
This is also not true. Neither Green nor Murray have questioned the impartiality of any of these men, but have questioned the agenda of the SPL board, and the SPL lawyers Harper MacLeod.
Perhaps the tribunal will be the next step,
Nimmo Smith, Stewart and Flint, apart from their renown in judicial matters, appear to have impeccable credentials. This is a costly exercise for the SPL, but it is worth it. Personally, I will very happily embrace this commission’s guilty or innocent verdict on Rangers, for those very reasons.
I’d suggest that Nimmo Smith may shortly find his credibility shattered, unless he throws this case out. The credibility of all three is at risk.
In the EBTs/dual contracts controversy, Rangers face two imminent announcements: the tribunal on the so-called “big tax case” and then the Nimmo Smith hearing. The two are subtly linked: one is about EBTs and alleged tax evasion, the other is about player contracts and disclosure.
This story, with its claim and counter-claim, is more complex than anyone could imagine. Rangers could win one case and lose the other, or win or lose both.
My own hunch, given what I’ve been told, is that Rangers have been in the wrong. But far more able scrutineers than me might find otherwise
Your own “hunch” is worthless, as you have not seen the evidence. On the basis of the above, you are clueless.
It is clear that Rangers believe the second to be worthless, and they’d be right, as they are believed to have both a strong case for themselves, and strong evidence to suggest that other SPL clubs have undertaken arrangements which have not been declared in any way shape or form to the SPL, while there is public documentary evidence of Rangers declaring their EBTs to the SPL and SFA.
Charles Green is not for letting this go either. If it would be wise for anyone to see sense and back down it would be the morally bankrupt SPL, before they become the financially bankrupt, (and former) SPL.
While it would be no surprise to see the SPL as a collective take one last ditch blind suicide attempt to kill Rangers, given their actions to date, the more influential members of the SPL could be intent on taking the SPL to the point of no return.
With falling crowds, and the Sky deal ready to die, it may be that the SPL members who care more about the future of their own club will step up and take action to stop the SPL bullies killing the game in Scotland.
I’d suggest if they don’t, their clubs will die and will never return.
Why Rangers FC, Green or Murray would not want to go before Nimmo Smith and present their case, remains baffling.
Only if you are stupid
Just when you think Graham Spiers has disappeared for good, he comes back infrequently to remind people that the standard of journalism in Scotland has reached rock bottom
I used to think that newspaper editors, and Radio controllers should be some of the most streetwise and incisive individuals around. You’d think that years of journalism and reporting from the streets would instil a common sense that would set them apart. Wrong.
Latterly I’ve come to the conclusion that they are living in a timewarp and so far removed from reality that they have completely lost perspective.
After all, Graham Spiers still seems to pop up in Scottish broadsheets and on the airwaves, despite a toxic reputation that he cannot understand a game of football, cannot get a scoop, and has the reverse midas touch anywhere he writes.
After months of offering very very little in terms of relevance, Spiers has jumped in to full rant mode at Rangers with regards to Charles Green’s pertinent observations of the SFA and SPL agendas against Rangers.
While Spiers likes to play the bumbling fool when it suits him, he also displays that narcisism that high profile journalists posess, and assumes a position of superiority, even when he is completely off the mark.
Right from the off, Spiers gets it completely wrong, and perhaps I should show just how wrong he actually is
“I am still trying to get my head around the senselessness of Charles Green and Rangers FC refusing to have any truck with the SPL’s investigation conducted by Lord Nimmo Smith into the alleged EBTs misdemeanours at the club.”
Firstly, the SPL’s investigation has already been carried out, and was carried out by Celtic’s law firm Harper Macleod, and more specifically Rod Mckenzie
Nimmo Smith is chairing an “independent” panel to sit on that evidence
“Nimmo Smith has been widely quoted in the past few days, but one plea he made that has virtually gone unnoticed was that anyone associated with Oldco or Newco Rangers, who believe they have a plea of mitigation to make about the club, should come forward and speak to the commission.”
David Murray stated several weeks ago that no one from the SPL, Harper MacLeod had not contacted him, nor anyone else from the “oldco”
Nimmo-Smith should be contacting Murray directly, rather than implying an open invite through the media for Murray attend a tribunal where the evidence has already been compiled without his input.
Expecting Murray to take part in such an arrangement is absolutely ridiculous.
In any case, Murray. like Alastair Johnston and Green, is very clear that no tribunal should be taking place until after the HMRC FTT appeal is decided
“What are Rangers so scared of? Why did the club obfuscate in passing on relevant documentation? What is there to hide?”
Murray’s position should be explained above.
Green’s position is explained in various statements.
Green’s statements are clear. The SPL are working to a pre-determined agenda which compromises the integrity of the tribunal.
While Rangers have stated that they do not question Nimmo Smith’s impartiality, and that he has been put in a difficult position by the SPL board, my belief is that he too is working to a pre-determined agenda, and that his request for input is meaningless, unless he formalises it.
Essentially, if he genuinely wished a credible and fair hearing for Rangers, he would throw out the slanted evidence of Rod McKenzie and the SPL, and tell them to start again once the FTT has been decided, with a directive to interview all stakeholders.
He hasn’t, which means he either has no intention of seeking all the relevant evidence, or is not being allowed to by the SPL board
His terminology in comparing Rangers alleged actions with match fixing would suggest the former.
“If Rangers are innocent of an alleged dual-contracts scam – and they may well be – then why does the club not step forward and argue its case?”
Because they have been through the process with HMRC and the FTT and await the judgement. The SPL kangaroo court should not be taking place until after any such judgement is issued
My understanding is that the case isn’t as cut and dried as many are making out. If it was it would have been finalised a long time ago.
At one stage, with a week to go before the commission’s preliminary hearing of September 11, Green and Newco Rangers were prepared to go and talk to Nimmo Smith. But, with a day to go, they swiftly changed their mind.
Interesting. Perhaps Green found something out about the panel that was not too his liking?
Why did it take from Sep 11 to Sep 26 for this to come to light ?
To quote Nimmo Smith verbatim from his preparatory notes on the Rangers hearings to be held in November: “Oldco and Rangers FC will continue to have the right to appear and be represented at the hearings and make submissions as they see fit.”
A few pages further on in his notes, and applying his desire to have all evidence and all voices considered in this saga, Nimmo Smith adds: “We [hope] that Oldco, Newco and any other person claiming an interest and wishing to appear will give intimation to that effect. We wish to emphasise that the doors remain open to Oldco and Newco to appear and be represented…”
Never mind Charles Green’s antics, what about Sir David Murray? Given Nimmo Smith and his commission’s desire to establish clear blue water between itself and the SPL, what can possibly stop Murray from coming forward to give his side of the story?
Nimmo Smith chose his words carefully in terms of testimony about EBTs: “…any other person claiming an interest…”
In this Rangers saga, I can think of no viable person who suits those words more than Murray, the man who set the Ibrox club on the fateful course of EBTs in the first place.
As stated above, Murray has never been formally invited to contribute to the investigation, and his focus has to be in fighting his case against HMRC, not a kangaroo court set up by Rangers’ enemies.
Murray avows that Rangers are innocent. He claims this is a stitch-up by people – whoever the heck they might be – to damage Rangers. Murray says the EBTs, the famed “legal loophole” to paying taxes, were used properly and legitimately.
I severely doubt Murray’s interpretation on this but, more than that, I want him to be given his chance to come before the commission to protest his and Rangers’ innocence.
Can someone provide a single valid reason why Murray would not to come before – or present evidence to – Nimmo Smith?
Not to? What does that mean?
The Commission is flawed for a number of reasons, from the choice of lawyers, to the lack of will to talk to Murray, and the commission being set up before the FTT final judgement, which suggests an assumption that Rangers are guilty.
There is absolutely no reason why either Murray or Green should treat the tribunal or those who commissioned it with anything other than contempt.
The SPL and SFA have been flawed in their handling of the Rangers case – everyone can see it. But the SPL is trying to make up for that by ensuring that its claim that Rangers FC warrants an investigation will be a claim carried out with the utmost impartiality and clarity.
Such a claim is not only inaccurate and misleading, it is laughable for many of the reasons I have stated above
You have to be a conspiracy theorist of fantasist proportions to somehow believe that Nimmo Smith and his two QCs, Nicholas Stewart and Charles Flint, are “agenda-driven” or “biased” in any way. This commission will once and for all cut through the cant and farrago of this case and reach a judgement on all its available evidence.
This is also not true. Neither Green nor Murray have questioned the impartiality of any of these men, but have questioned the agenda of the SPL board, and the SPL lawyers Harper MacLeod.
Perhaps the tribunal will be the next step,
Nimmo Smith, Stewart and Flint, apart from their renown in judicial matters, appear to have impeccable credentials. This is a costly exercise for the SPL, but it is worth it. Personally, I will very happily embrace this commission’s guilty or innocent verdict on Rangers, for those very reasons.
I’d suggest that Nimmo Smith may shortly find his credibility shattered, unless he throws this case out. The credibility of all three is at risk.
In the EBTs/dual contracts controversy, Rangers face two imminent announcements: the tribunal on the so-called “big tax case” and then the Nimmo Smith hearing. The two are subtly linked: one is about EBTs and alleged tax evasion, the other is about player contracts and disclosure.
This story, with its claim and counter-claim, is more complex than anyone could imagine. Rangers could win one case and lose the other, or win or lose both.
My own hunch, given what I’ve been told, is that Rangers have been in the wrong. But far more able scrutineers than me might find otherwise
Your own “hunch” is worthless, as you have not seen the evidence. On the basis of the above, you are clueless.
It is clear that Rangers believe the second to be worthless, and they’d be right, as they are believed to have both a strong case for themselves, and strong evidence to suggest that other SPL clubs have undertaken arrangements which have not been declared in any way shape or form to the SPL, while there is public documentary evidence of Rangers declaring their EBTs to the SPL and SFA.
Charles Green is not for letting this go either. If it would be wise for anyone to see sense and back down it would be the morally bankrupt SPL, before they become the financially bankrupt, (and former) SPL.
While it would be no surprise to see the SPL as a collective take one last ditch blind suicide attempt to kill Rangers, given their actions to date, the more influential members of the SPL could be intent on taking the SPL to the point of no return.
With falling crowds, and the Sky deal ready to die, it may be that the SPL members who care more about the future of their own club will step up and take action to stop the SPL bullies killing the game in Scotland.
I’d suggest if they don’t, their clubs will die and will never return.
Why Rangers FC, Green or Murray would not want to go before Nimmo Smith and present their case, remains baffling.
Only if you are stupid
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff