Jump to content

Alistair Johnston speaks on the SPL charges


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

We all clearly have issues with AJ and SDM regarding their governance of RFC but my only complaint about their recent statements in defence of Rangers is the delay in the release. It would have been much better if these statements came much earlier. What I now wonder, is there a reason for them coming out so close to the HMRC EBT verdict? Have they received prior notice of the result?

Link to post
Share on other sites

That piece of work is arguably, nay easily, his best contribution to our cause. I am grateful for it a this time, and think it would be churlish to ask why he has not been so strident before, especially during his tenure largely because of the limits on any power he is alleged to have had.

Cheers, A.J.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The reality of the situation is that Sir David Murray, who was intimately involved in the architecture of these efforts to organize the business in a way to mitigate taxation which is totally legitimate and acceptable under all tenets of the law, would have signed and paid for these very same players whether or not EBT schemes were in effect or not.

Begs the question, would he then pay the tax bill in full should MIM lose the first tier tax case?

Link to post
Share on other sites

At the time of Whytes purchase of the club, I, along with lots of others bagged the shit out of AJ.

But after reading that, he certainly made a lot of salient points.

My only question of him is ------- Why has it taken so long to defend the club you claimed to have its best interests at heart.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you really think that people who have embarrassed themselves during the admin process, and, were heavily involved in events leading up to our current situation would be a positive voice? Regardless of anything else, the instant impression is that they are trying to cover their own arses

Anyone that the papers will listen to should say something.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I could be a little foggy on this but was AJ one of only a couple whom said Craig Whyte was bad news from the start, only to be telt to jog on by the masses?

Aye he thought whytey was that dodgy whytey had to sack him to get rid.

You mean this aj with more faces than a townhall clock ?

Although Johnston said the board was split on whether the Whyte deal would get over the finishing line, he added: “The board are reflective of my view which is, if we can get this thing right, it will be good.”

“I think he is a businessman who is very bright and I think he has been very strategic, historically, in how successful he has been. He has done it but keeps his cards very close to his chest. I could tell that his analysis was very enthusiastic but realistic. I would say that he is aspirational but realistic.”

http://bit.ly/U7jpJJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you really think that people who have embarrassed themselves during the admin process, and, were heavily involved in events leading up to our current situation would be a positive voice? Regardless of anything else, the instant impression is that they are trying to cover their own arses

Was at Ibrox doing some work earlier, seems that AJ's statement has not been welcomed with open arms.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That statement concerns me a little, more for what he didn't say than what he did.

Johnston had the opportunity there to deny the existence of second contracts (side letters), but he didn't and that's telling. He suggests the SFA were given all the information they asked for a couple of years ago, handed Rangers their licence to play and didn't instigate any investigation and his suggestion is that means they saw nothing wrong then so they should see nothing wrong now.

But, were they given copies of the second contracts at the time? Lets be clear, giving players money via EBT's would not in itself fall foul of SPL rules. The only way to fall foul of the player registration is by not informing the SPL of all the contracted payments to players - second contracts.

David Murray maintained, as recently as March this year, that the EBT's were not contractual and players never had second contracts therefore the SFA could not have been given evidence or information about second contracts at the time Johnstone was referring. Therefore they gave us a licence based on that information.

So crucially, if there are second contracts - side letters, that have come to light recently then the SPL are within their rights to instigate an investigation and Alistair Johnston's piece was little more than an exercise in obfuscation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I find myself agreeing with Jake on some things :)

AJ, like Murray, and the rest of the troo bloo kniggets, only speak because they want to hear themselves

An exercise in

look_at_me.gif

So did the rst clear this with Rangers or anyone in authority, or do they think they are an authority, blazer chasers apart ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

That statement concerns me a little, more for what he didn't say than what he did.

Johnston had the opportunity there to deny the existence of second contracts (side letters), but he didn't and that's telling. He suggests the SFA were given all the information they asked for a couple of years ago

But, were they given copies of the second contracts at the time?

Lots of 'if's' in your statement.

Just because he never specifically said there were not second contracts in that interview does not mean there were.

By 'suggesting' the sfa were given all information they asked for (and knowing there could be a problem with secodary contracts at that time surely they would have asked for them or information regarding them) he is denying their existence wouldn't you say?

Others, including Neil McCann and Alex McLeish have openly denied the use of any such contracts live on tv. I think you would agree that, given the intense level of scrutiny of Rangers and the issues surrounding dual contracts, such high profile men would not openly lie about such issues in this manner would you not?

On your last sentence, if they did not exist, how could anyone be given copies?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of anything else, the instant impression is that they are trying to cover their own arses

Unfortunately the response at the time to AJ's and Martin Bain's refusal to back the takeover, was "it's sour grapes".

I wasn't on here at the time, but did John Greig get pelters as well?

Oh how wonderful hindsight is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any well known Rangers supporter prepared to come out and criticise the SPL et al, in defence of Rangers, will suit me fine. Paul Murray should do the same.

Except he's not well known and his credentials as a Rangers supporter are questionable.

Happy with the statement in the OP....... glad they opted for a 'synopsis' as the full blown version would have been like War & Peace.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andy Park ‏@radioandypark

SPL independent commission have set the date for a hearing into Rangers alleged dual contracts. The hearing will commence on Tues 13th Nov.

#Rangers hearing to commence on 13th November and last until 21st November. Oldco and newcomer invited invited to appear. Bbc chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Upcoming Events

    • 28 April 2024 11:30 Until 13:30
      0  
      St Mirren v Rangers
      The SMiSA Stadium
      Scottish Premiership
      Live on Sky Sports Main Event and Sky Sports Football

×
×
  • Create New...