Jump to content

What the SPL will owe..


Recommended Posts

...if they try and strip our titles.

The SPL argument (as well know) goes like this. "You's shower a bastards at Rangers paid players through EBT's and didnt declare it to us and because of the evidence that the BBC (that no one has seen or been published) showed us the players you registered with us were technically ineligable so we are going to nullify all the games you played with them in the team and strip you of the titles that you won under false pretenses".

However because of the games Rangers won with these players they either won or finished 2nd (barring one hiccup) they were allowed to compete, signed off by the SPL no less, in european competition. So doing a little investigation of my own I decided to see just how much the SPL would be liable for just Champions League games on their own.

2001/2002

2nd Qualifying Round:

Maribor 0 - 3 Rangers

Rangers 3 - 1 Maribor

Rangers who according to the SPL had a team full of ineligable players knocked Maribor out of the CL in the 2nd round qualifiers, denying them the chance of competing for the group stage. Loss of earning for Maribor I'd reckon at least 1-2 million.

2003/2004

3rd Qualifying Round:

Rangers 1 - 1 Kobenhavn

Kobenhavn 1 - 2 Rangers

Group Stages (not a good year for us)

Rangers 2 - 1 Stuttgart

Panithanikos 1 - 1 Ranges

Rangers knocked Copenhagen out of the CL in the 3rd round, denying the chance at 15 million pounds worth of earnings from the CL group stages. We beat Stuttgart, that's £750,000 right there. We drew with Panithinikos so they receieved £500,000 instead of £750,000 for a win.

So in total between £15-25 million.

2005/2006

3rd Qualifying Round:

Anorthosis 1 - 2 Rangers

Rangers 2 - Anorthosis 0

Group Stages:

Rangers 3 - 2 Porto

Rangers 0 - 0 Petzralka

Petzralka 2 - 2 Rangers

Porto 1 - 1 Rangers

Rangers 1 - 1 Inter

(Rangers qualify for last 16)

So again Anorthosis lose out on a 15 million pound jackpot. Our results against Porto and Petzralka both deny them of winning money plus we denied them the chance of going through to the last 16. So in total I'd reckon all in around 25-30 million pounds.

2007/2008

2nd Round

Rangers 2 - 0 Zeta

Zeta 0 - 1 Rangers

3rd Round

Rangers 1 - 0 Crvena Zvezda

Crvena Zvezda 0 - 0 Crvena Zvezda

Group Stages:

Rangers 2 - 1 Stuttgart

Lyon 0 - 3 Rangers

Rangers 0 - 0 Barca

So we denied both Zeta and Crvena Zvezda the opportunity at reaching the group stages. 1.5 million for our wins against Stuttgart and Lyon.

Total 15-25 million.

2009/2010

Group Stages:

Stuttgart 1 - 1 Rangers

Unirea Urziceni 1 - 1 Rangers

On this occasion we potentially denied Unirea Urziceni 2nd place in the group.

Total 1-3 million.

2010/2011

Manu U 0 - 0 Rangers

Rangers 1 - 0 Buraspor

Rangers 1 - 0 Valencia

Buraspor 1 - 1 Rangers

On this occasion prize money. Total maybe 1-2 million.

So if Rangers were ineligable to play, and the buck stops with the SPL on this, they hold the responibility of signing off on what teams enter europe. Then in compensation to all the teams we played you'd be looking at between £75-100 million pounds.

This is just Champions League not even the uefa/europa league that we also took part in and how many teams did we deny the chance at 3rd place to parachute into the Uefa/Europa league? Not to mention our amazing cup run when we reached the final.

Another bear on here told me to "man up and fight tooth and nail" to retain our history. Well if the SPL/SFA try to take our titles I will be writing to every team and the league they are in telling them to file against the SPL for compensation because according to the SPL we had no right being there in the first place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just me or are you suggesting that the money we made from Europe should be repaid by the SFA. How the f*** does that work? stop making bullets for other people o fire.

The SPL are responsible for administering its own rules. If they strip us of our titles it means the allowed an ineligable club to play in europe for the past 10 seasons. Look at last years debacle with Sion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only a little, it was very moorish.

Do you not think the SPL would be liable for damages? They are the ones who sign the bit of paper every season to say who will represent them in european competition, the buck stops with them.

No, if your logic was correct then it would be the SFA liable for damages because they are the 1's who approve their Member Club's participation in Europe.

However, if it turns out our previous regime's acted negligently or fraudulently in their running of the Club which in turn lead to dual contracts being in place, the only people responsible are the Club and we are the 1's who could be sued for damages.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, if your logic was correct then it would be the SFA liable for damages because they are the 1's who approve their Member Club's participation in Europe.

However, if it turns out our previous regime's acted negligently or fraudulently in their running of the Club which in turn lead to dual contracts being in place, the only people responsible are the Club and we are the 1's who could be sued for damages.

So if the NHS come out tomorrow and announce they've struck off a doctor because actually he never had a medical degree but no one bothered to check and he's been practicing medicine for the past ten years. Who do you sue, the doctor or the NHS?

The Rangers EBT money was announced in their annual report every year without fail. The SPL/SFA have a weight of responsibility to administer their own rules.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The SFA would be rightly accused of negligence since the payments from the club into the EBT were in the accounts that we submitted to the SFA every year.

On another note, every season and every trophy awarded to any club after the 2001-2002 season would be void. A 3-0 defeat in every match of the 2001-2002 season would have seen us relegated instead of St Johnstone. That means the wrong teams were in the wrong leagues. The following season Motherwell were saved from relegation because Falkirk's ground didn't meet specification. It is more than likely that a relegated Rangers would have won the first division that season so Motherwell in theoy benefitted from the SFA's negligence on EBT's. The whole thing throws up so many variables that we would have to lose a decade of SPL history.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You think the SPL would hold themselves liable for that and not go after Rangers?

I think you are missing the point on EBT's being mentioned in the accounts.

Any wrong doing directed towards the oldco would be pointless as it will be liquidated very soon.

If you are one of the teams mentioned above who do you go after? The shell of the oldco who couldn't even pay you if you did win or the SFA? When you sue someone you go for the someone with the most money.

Another aspect we are forgetting is that I doubt uefa will be non too chuffed that an ineligable team took part in their tournament for the past 10 years. They'd be as likely to ban all scottish clubs from europe like they did with the English clubs.

If we want to save Rangers titles this is how we do it. The SFA and SPL won't leave themselves open to this sort of shit storm.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this was meant with good intentions, but if they get hold of this...

Then I'd hope they'd shit themselves. Green isn't going to take any responsibility for the oldco so I wouldn't worry about that. Bears on here have already said "What about all the coefficient points we earned during the period". This is the same thing essentially.

If this breaks the media, the SFA and SPL will have no option but to back down on Rangers titles.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because we mentioned using the EBT scheme in our accounts doesn't necessarily absolve us of any wrong doing in SPL eyes or make the SFA culpable in UEFA eyes.

Payments to directors or other non playing staff through EBT scheme may not break any rules and these were the payments that were shown in the accounts.

If the SPL prove contractual payments were made to playing staff and this wasn't mentioned in the accounts then that does break the rules and its the club that will be held accountable by SPL, SFA and UEFA.

I don't know what sanctions are available to the SPL should this go against us, there may be a whole raft of different sanctions or there might be one. Maybe stripping titles is worst case scenario.

I hope we never find out and the SPL say we have no case to answer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because we mentioned using the EBT scheme in our accounts doesn't necessarily absolve us of any wrong doing in SPL eyes or make the SFA culpable in UEFA eyes.

Payments to directors or other non playing staff through EBT scheme may not break any rules and these were the payments that were shown in the accounts.

If the SPL prove contractual payments were made to playing staff and this wasn't mentioned in the accounts then that does break the rules and its the club that will be held accountable by SPL, SFA and UEFA.

I don't know what sanctions are available to the SPL should this go against us, there may be a whole raft of different sanctions or there might be one. Maybe stripping titles is worst case scenario.

I hope we never find out and the SPL say we have no case to answer.

I would absolutely love if someone (ANYONE) could explain to me why the side letter / dual contract issue is something that seems to be akin to a crime demanding title-stripping punishments.

The argument that not paying taxes on EBT's gave us more money to spend on other players, therefore gaining an advantage, and all that is pretty much true, but that is not something that is against the rules.

What is against the rules is sending a player a letter to tell him that we are going to do it. Therefore, we should be stripped of titles for the sake of some correspondence?

The rule on dual contracts exist to avoid players being owned by two different bodies at the same time, and to avoid a conflict of interest that could therefore exist, it does not exist to stop clubs paying bonuses. If we had rules that tried to ban discretionary bonuses then every club chairman who slipped his players a few notes after a good cup win would be getting their clubs hauled over the goals. And the story of how Jack Steedman gave Davie Cooper a payment from the Clydebank social club would be viewed as a horrific admission of guilt.

Everyone needs to see this for what it is, we may have not paid as much tax as we should (or as the players should) but that is between us and HMRC, we also may have told players we would give them benefits through a separate scheme, is the second one a crime worthy of the abuse we are receiving?

Link to post
Share on other sites

He could have a point ....

Also GDS saying transfer embargo works both ways, if you can't buy, you can't sell.

Is it a transfer embargo or registration embargo?

The SFA cannot dictate who you can and can't sign - they can only dictate who you can register.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like most people have missed the point of the OP. The point is that the SPL could open themselves up to charges of negligence and be forced to pay compensation to European teams if we are stripped of titles.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So if the NHS come out tomorrow and announce they've struck off a doctor because actually he never had a medical degree but no one bothered to check and he's been practicing medicine for the past ten years. Who do you sue, the doctor or the NHS?

The Rangers EBT money was announced in their annual report every year without fail. The SPL/SFA have a weight of responsibility to administer their own rules.

jeez, it's not about the EBT's, it's about the dual contracts you dimwit

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha Dimwit! The SFA and SPL will open themselves to millions of pounds worth of compensation from european teams because they insist in stripping us of titles.

Yes I'm the dimwit.

sorry mate, had a bit too much of the falling down juice when I called you a dimwit, no need for that.

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

    No upcoming events found
×
×
  • Create New...