bruce778 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 (edited) Care to summarise this Bruce?Spfl board (formed by independent personnel from, amongst others, Celtic, Aberdeen and Dundee United) have now said that rangers new co is liable for a fine by the spfl re the EBT scheme that was previously given to old co. No explanation as to how this came about or the basis for the decision... Bit strange. Edited December 17, 2014 by bruce778 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairbairn Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 Spfl board (formed by independent personnel from That is indeed a summary! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce778 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 That is indeed a summary! Ha you caught me. That's the first announcement. Amount is £250k.Second one is charges by spfl against rangers re Ashley involvement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbcmfc Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 Spfl board (formed by independent personnel from, amongst others, Celtic, Aberdeen and Dundee United) have now said that rangers new co is liable for a fine by the spfl re the EBT scheme that was previously given to old co. No explanation as to how this came about or the basis for the decision... Bit strange. The timing of this is strange! Can't argue with that! Is this the first time in 2 1/2 years they've mentioned it? Maybe need some funds for the Christmas party? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maq Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 Didn't the newco agree to pay oldco football debts? I guess that would include the fine for breaking rules re EBTs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce778 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 The timing of this is strange! Can't argue with that! Is this the first time in 2 1/2 years they've mentioned it? Maybe need some funds for the Christmas party? This is the problem with having personnel from other clubs on the spfl board and that board making these decisions. You wouldn't ask the manager of McDonald's to decide if Burger King had breached food safety rules.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maq Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 You're right Bruce, it's everyone else's fault Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce778 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 You're right Bruce, it's everyone else's faultWhat a childish post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maq Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 What a childish post. What, you trying to say that it's the fault of Celtic, Aberdeen and Dundee Utd that rangers have to pay the fine they were given? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbcmfc Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 Why wait 2 1/2 years to chase this debt? It's not like it's PPI they didn't know about... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddardStark Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 its not the fault of anyone. SPFL are looking for ways to plug a financial gap.. That's up to them but they will open themselves up to counter legal action. Its a strange tactic to seek confrontation when they are talking about moving it forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maq Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 Why wait 2 1/2 years to chase this debt? It's not like it's PPI they didn't know about... Maybe they know things are going South for the club, and want to make it known they are taking the money before the club goes into admin? They're withdrawing what they are owed from rangers share of the spoils Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce778 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 What, you trying to say that it's the fault of Celtic, Aberdeen and Dundee Utd that rangers have to pay the fine they were given?I never said that. Obviously no point in engaging with you given you're incapable of reading and would rather score petty points so won't waste my energy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biffer Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 This is the problem with having personnel from other clubs on the spfl board and that board making these decisions. You wouldn't ask the manager of McDonald's to decide if Burger King had breached food safety rules.... If it's good enough for MPs and the press complaints commission.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred_Zeppelin Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 Why wait 2 1/2 years to chase this debt? It's not like it's PPI they didn't know about... Maybe they have been chasing it privatley and RFC II have been dingying it up till now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maq Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 I never said that. Obviously no point in engaging with you given you're incapable of reading and would rather score petty points so won't waste my energy. "Spfl board (formed by independent personnel from, amongst others, Celtic, Aberdeen and Dundee United) have now said that rangers new co is liable for a fine by the spfl re the EBT scheme that was previously given to old co" Inferring that all of a sudden the SPFL board (and you chose to highlight 3 particular teams - any reason you chose those 3?) are now, all of a sudden, saying that rangers have to pay the football debts of old rangers. That was the case a long time ago. But aye, don't waste your energy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbcmfc Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 Maybe they know things are going South for the club, and want to make it known they are taking the money before the club goes into admin? They're withdrawing what they are owed from rangers share of the spoils I'm not here to stick up for Rangers, but surely there have been several opportunities to withhold payments from Rangers before now? Or they could have partially withheld payments until they got back what is due? To all of a sudden 2 1/2 years down the line say, we're withholding this money from you... I don't think you can argue the timing is curious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbcmfc Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 Maybe they have been chasing it privatley and RFC II have been dingying it up till now. You could be right, but i think the SPFL make payments to clubs at certain times through the year, so why didn't they just withhold a payment or partial payments in the last 2 1/2 years? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred_Zeppelin Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 You could be right, but i think the SPFL make payments to clubs at certain times through the year, so why didn't they just withhold a payment or partial payments in the last 2 1/2 years? Maybe withholding payments is a last resort? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbcmfc Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 Maybe withholding payments is a last resort? I know if someone owed me £100 and I owed them a tenner, I wouldn't be giving them the tenner, I'd reduce their debt to £90. Perhaps that's a bit if a simplistic view of it though? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamntg Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 I blame Brechin City, Alloa, Raith Rovers and the Donc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce778 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 "Spfl board (formed by independent personnel from, amongst others, Celtic, Aberdeen and Dundee United) have now said that rangers new co is liable for a fine by the spfl re the EBT scheme that was previously given to old co" Inferring that all of a sudden the SPFL board (and you chose to highlight 3 particular teams - any reason you chose those 3?) are now, all of a sudden, saying that rangers have to pay the football debts of old rangers. That was the case a long time ago. But aye, don't waste your energy If it's always been the case why has it just been decided by the spfl board? It seems to have arisen from thin air. I highlighted those 3 teams because they are 3 of rangers competitors who are making the decision. A judge can't hear a case if there is an apprehension of bias. This is a clear case of that - not saying it's actual bias but there's obviously an issue in competitors deciding whether one another should be fined or not. I think any fair minded person would agree with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred_Zeppelin Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 If it's always been the case why has it just been decided by the spfl board? It seems to have arisen from thin air. I highlighted those 3 teams because they are 3 of rangers competitors who are making the decision. A judge can't hear a case if there is an apprehension of bias. This is a clear case of that - not saying it's actual bias but there's obviously an issue in competitors deciding whether one another should be fined or not. I think any fair minded person would agree with that. I remember when you used to be quite a rational guy. I guess 3 years of this have taken it's toll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biffer Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 I know if someone owed me £100 and I owed them a tenner, I wouldn't be giving them the tenner, I'd reduce their debt to £90. Perhaps that's a bit if a simplistic view of it though? It is if only one of the payments has a contractual timing on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce778 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 I remember when you used to be quite a rational guy. I guess 3 years of this have taken it's toll.I'm open to hearing the reasons of the spfl board. In this current information vacuum it is all a bit strange. As for the conflict of interest, I would say the exact same thing if rangers representatives were complicit in dishing out fines to other spl clubs. It's not a healthy situation for competitors to be in a position to exert decision making powers over one another because there will always be an apprehension of bias. It's a basic component of natural justice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.