Rangers are Rocking; Scottys Financial insight inside.

[Chief]

14 minutes ago, Parklife said:

Rejika are a damn fine side. Aberdeen's victory over them was impressive. As was our victory over Groningen. 

They aren't fine sides though are they? 

They were good results for Aberdeen because by comparison they are around or above Aberdeen's usual level, it doesn't make them world beaters though. 

[thplinth]

Rangers revved up the game in Scotland using illegal funds. They red lined it for years and the damage is still with us.This caused Celtic to follow as best they could and leave the rest of the clubs in their wake. This really killed the competitiveness of our league and ultimately its interest and marketability and value for TV rights etc. We missed the Sky boat as our game was and is boring and two dimensional. At best a two horse race every damn year. In the 80's things were looking like breaking out., our league and england's were not so far apart financially and then along came Murray and Souness and they bludgeoned the league to death with financial doping. It has never recovered. The SFA and the SPL are 100% complicit. 

[DaveyDenoon]

It is of course completely irrelevant just how much of an advantage Rangers actually enjoyed.  Would they have won all or some of those trophies anyway without the EBTs? If so, which ones?  All completely irrelevant questions.

When an athlete is find guilty of doping he/she is stripped of all titles/medals won when they were found to have cheated. ALL of them (and incurs a lengthy ban in addition by the way). Nobody asks if they would still have won anyway without doping. They are stripped of them all, no ifs and no buts.

Rangers cheated. They were effectively also doping - in a financial sense. Quantification of any advantage is neither here nor there. They cheated.  There surely now cannot be anyone who does not accept that Rangers are guilty of financial doping during the period in question? Instead of paying tax due on players' remuneration they sought to avoid doing so by use of a scheme that has now been ruled to have been subject to tax by the club - tax that was not paid with the club keeping the money to spend on more players instead.  It therefore has to follow that Rangers were able to attract players they were unlikely to have been able to attract had they paid in full the tax they have now been legally shown to have been due to pay. This undoubtedly put them at an advantage over the other clubs and however that advantage accrued, or indeed whether it ever actually accrued or not, is not relevant. Whether those other clubs could have won these trophies instead is equally not relevant.  The only conclusion possible now is that Rangers oldco cheated and won 14 trophies whilst they were cheating, not necessarily because they were cheating.

That undeniably being the case, there is little argument to be made in favour of Rangers not being stripped of these trophies. There cannot logically be any other outcome. Sadly logic and the weak spineless idiots running (attempting to run) our game don't necessarily go hand in hand.

If Rangers are allowed to keep those titles then our game is worth nothing as a sporting entity. Cheating will be condoned and the clear message given that there are, and will be, no consequences for those who engage in such cheating. It will be a sad day indeed.

[Parklife]

14 minutes ago, Chief said:

They aren't fine sides though are they? 

They were good results for Aberdeen because by comparison they are around or above Aberdeen's usual level, it doesn't make them world beaters though. 

Beat Feyenoord and Standard liege and drew with Sevilla in the EL group stages the year before we horsed them. 

[theweestevie]

7 minutes ago, thplinth said:

Rangers revved up the game in Scotland using illegal funds. They red lined it for years and the damage is still with us.This caused Celtic to follow as best they could and leave the rest of the clubs in their wake. This really killed the competitiveness of our league and ultimately its interest and marketability and value for TV rights etc. We missed the Sky boat as our game was and is boring and two dimensional. At best a two horse race every damn year. In the 80's things were looking like breaking out., our league and england's were not so far apart financially and then along came Murray and Souness and they bludgeoned the league to death with financial doping. It has never recovered. The SFA and the SPL are 100% complicit. 

Don't think you can really blame Souness for the EBTs since he had left Rangers for almost a decade before Rangers started using them...

[Parklife]

9 minutes ago, DaveyDenoon said:

It is of course completely irrelevant just how much of an advantage Rangers actually enjoyed.  Would they have won all or some of those trophies anyway without the EBTs? If so, which ones?  All completely irrelevant questions.

When an athlete is find guilty of doping he/she is stripped of all titles/medals won when they were found to have cheated. ALL of them (and incurs a lengthy ban in addition by the way). Nobody asks if they would still have won anyway without doping. They are stripped of them all, no ifs and no buts.

Rangers cheated. They were effectively also doping - in a financial sense. Quantification of any advantage is neither here nor there. They cheated.  There surely now cannot be anyone who does not accept that Rangers are guilty of financial doping during the period in question? Instead of paying tax due on players' remuneration they sought to avoid doing so by use of a scheme that has now been ruled to have been subject to tax by the club - tax that was not paid with the club keeping the money to spend on more players instead.  It therefore has to follow that Rangers were able to attract players they were unlikely to have been able to attract had they paid in full the tax they have now been legally shown to have been due to pay. This undoubtedly put them at an advantage over the other clubs and however that advantage accrued, or indeed whether it ever actually accrued or not, is not relevant. Whether those other clubs could have won these trophies instead is equally not relevant.  The only conclusion possible now is that Rangers oldco cheated and won 14 trophies whilst they were cheating, not necessarily because they were cheating.

That undeniably being the case, there is little argument to be made in favour of Rangers not being stripped of these trophies. There cannot logically be any other outcome. Sadly logic and the weak spineless idiots running (attempting to run) our game don't necessarily go hand in hand.

If Rangers are allowed to keep those titles then our game is worth nothing as a sporting entity. Cheating will be condoned and the clear message given that there are, and will be, no consequences for those who engage in such cheating. It will be a sad day indeed.

An excellent post. Agree with every word. 

[Chief]

7 minutes ago, Parklife said:

Beat Feyenoord and Standard liege and drew with Sevilla in the EL group stages the year before we horsed them. 

The Sevilla result is decent, but the other two aren't exactly heavyweights themselves, granted Feyenoord have since improved. 

[thplinth]

30 minutes ago, theweestevie said:

Don't think you can really blame Souness for the EBTs since he had left Rangers for almost a decade before Rangers started using them...

Don't blame Souness for the EBT's. But he and Murray (ok 99% Murray) were the starting point for the let's just outspend everyone strategy that ultimately led to the EBT's and RFC 1899"s demise. It was like a drug that started off slow but by the end was way out of control and you OD'd. 

Edited July 5, 2017 by thplinth

[kps022000]

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1dhAk4K4f1aaWIZScFH9QpCXx1W8a-802o60kS3BEOwI/htmlview#gid=0

 

not my work but a list of the teams that missed out due to Rangers cheating.

[Hertsscot]

47 minutes ago, DaveyDenoon said:

It is of course completely irrelevant just how much of an advantage Rangers actually enjoyed.  Would they have won all or some of those trophies anyway without the EBTs? If so, which ones?  All completely irrelevant questions.

When an athlete is find guilty of doping he/she is stripped of all titles/medals won when they were found to have cheated. ALL of them (and incurs a lengthy ban in addition by the way). Nobody asks if they would still have won anyway without doping. They are stripped of them all, no ifs and no buts.

Rangers cheated. They were effectively also doping - in a financial sense. Quantification of any advantage is neither here nor there. They cheated.  There surely now cannot be anyone who does not accept that Rangers are guilty of financial doping during the period in question? Instead of paying tax due on players' remuneration they sought to avoid doing so by use of a scheme that has now been ruled to have been subject to tax by the club - tax that was not paid with the club keeping the money to spend on more players instead.  It therefore has to follow that Rangers were able to attract players they were unlikely to have been able to attract had they paid in full the tax they have now been legally shown to have been due to pay. This undoubtedly put them at an advantage over the other clubs and however that advantage accrued, or indeed whether it ever actually accrued or not, is not relevant. Whether those other clubs could have won these trophies instead is equally not relevant.  The only conclusion possible now is that Rangers oldco cheated and won 14 trophies whilst they were cheating, not necessarily because they were cheating.

That undeniably being the case, there is little argument to be made in favour of Rangers not being stripped of these trophies. There cannot logically be any other outcome. Sadly logic and the weak spineless idiots running (attempting to run) our game don't necessarily go hand in hand.

If Rangers are allowed to keep those titles then our game is worth nothing as a sporting entity. Cheating will be condoned and the clear message given that there are, and will be, no consequences for those who engage in such cheating. It will be a sad day indeed.

I'll go back to my earlier post and again just raise the question if this had been Celtic or any other club would Rangers fans be wanting them stripped off titles and the answer is yes.  As it is it looks like Rangers will keep the titles but every other fan will regard those titles as tainted and we'll never hear the end of it.

[Scotty CTA]

They should re-pay every penny, then pay fines, and face decades worth of bans.

[Scotty CTA]

2 hours ago, Hertsscot said:

Okay, probably an unpopular opinion amongst my fellow Bears but I think that would be valid.  If the boot were on the other foot and it was Celtic benefitting from EBTs we'd probably be saying the same.  The only thing in Rangers defence is surely they (surely) would have got the best legal advice to ascertain that the EBTs were legal.  Its a bit like when celebs get done by HMRC for investing in films to get tax relief, you get advice and it turns out to be wrong - surely the people who give you that advice shoudl be accountable as well?  Is it simplistice to think "Well this is a b it borderline should we give HMRC a ring just to make sure it's legit"?

Rangers were 'untouchable' then.

I doubt they asked or even cared.

[Mark frae Crieff]

2 hours ago, Squirrelhumper said:

What a pile of sh1te. Rangers cheated. 

You may not like that, SFA may not like that but they cheated. 

They shouldn't even have been demoted. They should have had to apply to rejoin as a new club. 

I'm well aware that they cheated But my statement stands ... Due to the way they cheated it will have crippled the ways some clubs have had to run themselves, It's a pity that you say they were demoted as it was documented that they rejoined the league as Rangers FC...especially after your Chairman abstained from kicking them out of the SPL. I was delighted that they were kicked out as my team got a wee trip to Europe.  

[kumnio]

11 minutes ago, kps022000 said:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1dhAk4K4f1aaWIZScFH9QpCXx1W8a-802o60kS3BEOwI/htmlview#gid=0

 

not my work but a list of the teams that missed out due to Rangers cheating.

Whoever done that really needs to get a life.

[DaveyDenoon]

9 minutes ago, Hertsscot said:

I'll go back to my earlier post and again just raise the question if this had been Celtic or any other club would Rangers fans be wanting them stripped off titles and the answer is yes.  As it is it looks like Rangers will keep the titles but every other fan will regard those titles as tainted and we'll never hear the end of it.

Absolutely they would. And rightly so as the exact same arguments would apply. Titles won by any club whilst cheating MUST be stripped from the record. The integrity of our game demands no less.

It would probably do Rangers good for this to happen, and for them to accept it, as it would allow a line to be drawn under the whole sorry mess then we can all move on.

I don't however accept any argument that the runners up should be retrospectively awarded anything. The 14 titles/trophies should simply remain unwon in my view.

Edited July 5, 2017 by DaveyDenoon

[Scotty CTA]

6 minutes ago, kumnio said:

Whoever done that really needs to get a life.

Very dedicated... The Simon Wiesenthal of Scottish Football. 

[kps022000]

18 minutes ago, kumnio said:

Whoever done that really needs to get a life.

Or become a paralegal.

[macy37]

32 minutes ago, DaveyDenoon said:

Absolutely they would. And rightly so as the exact same arguments would apply. Titles won by any club whilst cheating MUST be stripped from the record. The integrity of our game demands no less.

It would probably do Rangers good for this to happen, and for them to accept it, as it would allow a line to be drawn under the whole sorry mess then we can all move on.

I don't however accept any argument that the runners up should be retrospectively awarded anything. The 14 titles/trophies should simply remain unwon in my view.

It wouldn't do any good though would it, really?

It should happen and all 14 remain not won however it would cause ww3 and that is exactly why the authorities will shat it.

[Dalgety Bay TA]

Rangers bought players on wages they couldn't normally afford to pay but could get them by giving the players EBTs, thus avoiding the tax element of those wages. 

Playing Devils Advocate here, how much difference is there between that and any other club signing players and paying them wages they also can't afford and running up large debts in doing so? 

Is every club who is in debt not effectively cheating by paying more than they can afford?

[Scotty CTA]

It's not illegal to be in debt.

It is however illegal to evade paying tax that is due.

[Chief]

58 minutes ago, Dalgety Bay TA said:

Rangers bought players on wages they couldn't normally afford to pay but could get them by giving the players EBTs, thus avoiding the tax element of those wages. 

Playing Devils Advocate here, how much difference is there between that and any other club signing players and paying them wages they also can't afford and running up large debts in doing so? 

Is every club who is in debt not effectively cheating by paying more than they can afford?

That relative thought had crossed my mind as I was thinking from the angle of, there have been more than one club in Scotland fairly recently that have been in administration more than once. 

[ironbrew]

1 hour ago, Dalgety Bay TA said:

Rangers bought players on wages they couldn't normally afford to pay but could get them by giving the players EBTs, thus avoiding the tax element of those wages. 

Playing Devils Advocate here, how much difference is there between that and any other club signing players and paying them wages they also can't afford and running up large debts in doing so? 

Is every club who is in debt not effectively cheating by paying more than they can afford?

What other clubs went into admin after winning trophies while clearly overspending? Hearts and Gretna (if you include runners up medals, can`t remember their exact  league success) would be obvious ones if trophies are to be struck off records but there may be more.

[phart]

1 hour ago, Dalgety Bay TA said:

Rangers bought players on wages they couldn't normally afford to pay but could get them by giving the players EBTs, thus avoiding the tax element of those wages. 

Playing Devils Advocate here, how much difference is there between that and any other club signing players and paying them wages they also can't afford and running up large debts in doing so? 

Is every club who is in debt not effectively cheating by paying more than they can afford?

In one case funds gets withheld under "illegal" methods.

The other everything gets paid using an economic method central to capitalism.

Any effort to portray them as equivalent is doomed to fail cause in the first case millions of pounds is withheld from the public funds using an illegal method.

[phart]

32 minutes ago, Scotty CTA said:

It's not illegal to be in debt.

It is however illegal to evade paying tax that is due.

Correct

 

[Squirrelhumper]

1 hour ago, Mark frae Crieff said:

I'm well aware that they cheated But my statement stands ... Due to the way they cheated it will have crippled the ways some clubs have had to run themselves, It's a pity that you say they were demoted as it was documented that they rejoined the league as Rangers FC...especially after your Chairman abstained from kicking them out of the SPL. I was delighted that they were kicked out as my team got a wee trip to Europe.  

Thankfully that chairman has at long last been hunted from RP.