Juninho – Lies, Damned Lies and the Media

[boss 1,941]

When the SPL are in a hole it can actually be quite amusing, as well as disturbing, to watch them keep digging.

Today’s quotes from an SPL ‘spokesman’ (utter coward for not putting his name to it) is an example of deflection at its best - a denial of a different question to that which is pertinent.

“In the case of Celtic’s EBT for Juninho he wasn’t paid while he was kicking a ball for Celtic. He received payment after he’d finished playing for the club.”

When Juninho actually received the payment is irrelevant – it’s when Celtic made that payment which is the issue. Did Celtic make a payment to an EBT while Juninho was under contract?

Here are some facts. Juninho signed a two year contract on 25 August 2004. He lasted eight months and left on 5 April 2005. He was obviously due money for the remainder of his contract and, it appears, that amount was agreed at £765,000.

Celtic made that payment to Juninho as part of the agreement for him to leave. The payment was a condition of the contract being cancelled – no payment, no cancelled contract. Which came first, the payment or the cancelled contract?

Are we expected to believe that on 5 April 2005, Juninho woke up, ripped up his contract, and said to Celtic: “See that £765,000 you owe me, just send it on later when you get a minute”? It is inconceivable that the payment was not made prior to the contract being cancelled.

In any event, the £765,000 payment would have to be accounted for in Celtic’s books on 5 April 2005. If accounts were drawn up to that day, the £765,000 payment would be there, whether credited to bank or to accruals.

CQN, that rabid voice of the boardroom, discloses that in 2008 Celtic advised HMRC about the payment and HMRC’s view was that it was income and therefore tax was due to be paid (and some sort of deal was done). It could only be income if it was contractual. If it was paid into an EBT outside of contract, it would not have been income or taxable.

It is also of note that the SPL rule does not make, and never has made, any comment about when a payment is made. It is the fact of the payment that is important, not when that payment is made.

Returning to the SPL spokesman with the shovel, it is perfectly true to say that Juninho “wasn’t paid while he was kicking a ball for Celtic” and that he “received payment after he’d finished playing for the club”.

But that is not the question. Why the alleged Celtic-supporting Iain Blair didn’t ask the right question at the time, or indeed now, I’m struggling to get my head around. Well, actually, I’m not. If it looks like a cover-up and smells like a cover-up ... it's probably just the SPL acting with "sporting integrity".

The media are fed a line from the SPL/SFA/Celtic (*delete as appropriate) and they can’t jump quick enough to exonerate their team and keep Lawwell happy. Which all goes to show just what a bunch of cowards or bigots, or both, the media in this country are.

[77amurai 258]

I'm usually the one saying that I won't let paranoia take over, but you're absolutely spot on. "if it looks like a cover-up and smells like a cover-up".........

As for the media, they just go the way the wind blows. They know Charlie won't kiss their arse and butter their bread so they swing the other way. When this all comes back to bite the SPL on it's arse I guarantee they'll attempt to swing back to our side.

But we won't forget.

[bluenose1975 1,287]

When the SPL are in a hole it can actually be quite amusing, as well as disturbing, to watch them keep digging.

i hope charles green is all over this shit, the double standards and obvious corruption are just mind numbing, maybe its time the fans hit the streets once again to make the point that wee bit more acutely for all and sundry.....FUCK THE SFA / SPL.......fucking monkeys the lot of them

[bluenose1975 1,287]

I'm usually the one saying that I won't let paranoia take over, but you're absolutely spot on. "if it looks like a cover-up and smells like a cover-up".........

As for the media, they just go the way the wind blows. They know Charlie won't kiss their arse and butter their bread so they swing the other way. When this all comes back to bite the SPL on it's arse I guarantee they'll attempt to swing back to our side.

But we won't forget.

Paranoia??? nothing paranoid about what the boss has said, its all 100% factual bud

[boss 1,941]

It should also be noted that even if Celtic did in fact only agree to the payment as a condition of cancelling the contract and the payment was physically made after Juninho left, that still amounts to an alteration to the contract with Juninho and was caught by the SPL rule to report. They are stuffed either way.

[77amurai 258]

Paranoia??? nothing paranoid about what the boss has said, its all 100% factual bud

read my post again.

[nachothelegend 1,932]

To quote one of the Liers , its now a big can of worms.

[nelsonRFC82 305]

Quite right, it is an utter nonsense of an excuse.

He was quite obviously paid as part of his severance for the contract he signed. That contract had been registered with the SPL/SFA. This payment, directly related to that contract, was not declared to the SPL/SFA.

To think you still get mind-numbingly stupid Scottish football fans calling us the establishment club and thinking we have been let off by SPL/SFA...I despair at times.

[ray 105]

[mabawsa 888]

Keep asking the questions. Keep engaging and jabbing at the right people as this is not going away. The last few days the SPL have come under pressure to explain these points.Keep at them , as the convenience and coincidence of sudden rules appears fatally flawed.

Is there further substance to other players receiving secondary payments.What about Bobo Balde who Signed a confidentiality clause. Was he ever given anything not declared to the football authorities?

[Fury 256]

When the SPL are in a hole it can actually be quite amusing, as well as disturbing, to watch them keep digging.

Today’s quotes from an SPL ‘spokesman’ (utter coward for not putting his name to it) is an example of deflection at its best - a denial of a different question to that which is pertinent.

“In the case of Celtic’s EBT for Juninho he wasn’t paid while he was kicking a ball for Celtic. He received payment after he’d finished playing for the club.”

When Juninho actually received the payment is irrelevant – it’s when Celtic made that payment which is the issue. Did Celtic make a payment to an EBT while Juninho was under contract?

Here are some facts. Juninho signed a two year contract on 25 August 2004. He lasted eight months and left on 5 April 2005. He was obviously due money for the remainder of his contract and, it appears, that amount was agreed at £765,000.

Celtic made that payment to Juninho as part of the agreement for him to leave. The payment was a condition of the contract being cancelled – no payment, no cancelled contract. Which came first, the payment or the cancelled contract?

Are we expected to believe that on 5 April 2005, Juninho woke up, ripped up his contract, and said to Celtic: “See that £765,000 you owe me, just send it on later when you get a minute”? It is inconceivable that the payment was not made prior to the contract being cancelled.

In any event, the £765,000 payment would have to be accounted for in Celtic’s books on 5 April 2005. If accounts were drawn up to that day, the £765,000 payment would be there, whether credited to bank or to accruals.

CQN, that rabid voice of the boardroom, discloses that in 2008 Celtic advised HMRC about the payment and HMRC’s view was that it was income and therefore tax was due to be paid (and some sort of deal was done). It could only be income if it was contractual. If it was paid into an EBT outside of contract, it would not have been income or taxable.

It is also of note that the SPL rule does not make, and never has made, any comment about when a payment is made. It is the fact of the payment that is important, not when that payment is made.

Returning to the SPL spokesman with the shovel, it is perfectly true to say that Juninho “wasn’t paid while he was kicking a ball for Celtic” and that he “received payment after he’d finished playing for the club”.

But that is not the question. Why the alleged Celtic-supporting Iain Blair didn’t ask the right question at the time, or indeed now, I’m struggling to get my head around. Well, actually, I’m not. If it looks like a cover-up and smells like a cover-up ... it's probably just the SPL acting with "sporting integrity".

The media are fed a line from the SPL/SFA/Celtic (*delete as appropriate) and they can’t jump quick enough to exonerate their team and keep Lawwell happy. Which all goes to show just what a bunch of cowards or bigots, or both, the media in this country are.

Spot on. Excellent stuff. Pressure needs to be kept up.

[choochooblue 342]

Keep asking the questions. Keep engaging and jabbing at the right people as this is not going away. The last few days thsese SPL have come under pressure to explain these points. Keep at them as the convenience and coincidence of sudden rules appears fatally flawed. Is there further substance to other players receiving secondary payments.What about the talk of Balde who was made. To sign a non-confidentiality clause. Was he ever given anything not declared to the football authorities?

Agree bro , we need a good honest investigative journalist to rip this cover-up apart. All we seem to be getting from the spl is ' move along now , there's nothing to see here' . Havn't read papers today....is it damning of spl ?.

[77amurai 258]

Agree bro , we need a good honest investigative journalist to rip this cover-up apart. All we seem to be getting from the spl is ' move along now , there's nothing to see here' . Havn't read papers today....is it damning of spl ?.

are they fuck, that's not their current agenda.

[eosmhdo 1,879]

The wee prick was shite for them and never kicked a ball anyway.

We should have taken over the ebt and made them play him cause we will probably get the blame for them having one anyway.

Something along the lines of 'It wiz aw Rangers idea and we copied them to be fashionable'.

We will then get a fine for the taigs having an ebt likely.

Would not surprise me in the slightest tbh

[loyalfollower 1,543]

We wont need a journo for this. You can bet your house if boss can put all this together then sure as f..k the solicitors for r.f.c can.

Wouldnt be surprised if charles or malcy had someone looking on here from time to time anyway. With everyone staying strong and uniting we'll put these vile lies to bed

[boss 1,941]

Wouldnt be surprised if charles or malcy had someone looking on here from time to time anyway.

I think that's a given. The Club is either aware of all these issues or will become aware as a result of such threads.

[covenanter 158]

Junhnino lived in a house in Bothwell, one of a dozen built on the ground of the former clubhouse of Bothwell Castle Golf Club. This property has been utilised by several players/coaching staff over the years. As well as the Brazilian, Gordon Strachan, Ledley, Hooper, ....... etc have occupied the property. The accepted wisdom being that it is a property owned by ra Sellik.

However, the name on the title deeds and the money(over a million) paid reveal two well known characters who have spent/are enjoying resindency courtesy of Her Majesty. Could ra Sellik be continuing beneficieries of laundered drug monies?

We should be told.

[Blue and True 311]

Ok help me with this as for the first time in Rangers Media history I find myself at odds with your take on this Boss.

Clearly they owed 750k to this wee Brasil chap he wanted out and they wanted him out.

But he has a contract and I assume it was to the value of 750k or very similar.

So he collects and they pay it via EBT this either saves the Brasil chap or them a load of dosh in tax (which they later had to pay)

My point is that the 750k would have been on his contract/declared contract I guess and the SPL care little how you go about paying it.

Or am I missing something? if I am my apologies but Im jet lagged.

[boss 1,941]

My point is that the 750k would have been on his contract/declared contract I guess and the SPL care little how you go about paying it.

Or am I missing something? if I am my apologies but Im jet lagged.

You are missing the point - any amendments to the contract (which your scenario amounts to) must be reported under the SPL rule. So it was reportable whichever way you look at it.

[nelsonRFC82 305]

Ok help me with this as for the first time in Rangers Media history I find myself at odds with your take on this Boss.

Clearly they owed 750k to this wee Brasil chap he wanted out and they wanted him out.

But he has a contract and I assume it was to the value of 750k or very similar.

So he collects and they pay it via EBT this either saves the Brasil chap or them a load of dosh in tax (which they later had to pay)

My point is that the 750k would have been on his contract/declared contract I guess and the SPL care little how you go about paying it.

Or am I missing something? if I am my apologies but Im jet lagged.

For a start you would have to expand on what he contractually due. If he was contractually due £750k, then he would only expect to receive around £450k after tax. The fact they paid fully £750k to the EBT would suggest he was owed nearer £1.2m before tax.

It is this £1.2m that would have formed part of the contract lodged with SPL/SFA. Celtic instead chose to pay £750k via an EBT, this payment was not disclosed to SPL/SFA, ergo they made a payment that altered the terms of the contract lodged with SPL/SFA but did not disclose this.

[Blue and True 311]

You are missing the point - any amendments to the contract (which your scenario amounts to) must be reported under the SPL rule. So it was reportable whichever way you look at it.

OK I follow that.

It just seems that as long as they paid him an amount equal to or less than on his declared deal then advise the SPL that the contract had been cancelled then that sounds just about OK.

Pay offs on contracts must be an every day event in football and unless the guy gets a big chunk more than his deal states then I cant see it being an issue.

The fact that tax was paid on it tell us that it was a contractual payment and the contract in question was the one held by the SPL.

I think Billy Dodds alluded to a similar type of transaction for him so would assume that would also be fine with the SPL, as will a significant number of our EBT transactions.

[boss 1,941]

OK I follow that.

It just seems that as long as they paid him an amount equal to or less than on his declared deal then advise the SPL that the contract had been cancelled then that sounds just about OK.

So we're being asked to accept something "that sounds just about OK" even if it breaks the SPL rules? You're not Iain Blair, are you?

[joker69 60]

Great work again Boss.

I hope the club are aware of all the facts as I can't see how they can make any of this stick to us and not them at the same time.

We need to keep pursuing these bigots.

[boss 1,941]

We need to keep pursuing these bigots.

Agreed.

“In the case of Celtic’s EBT for Juninho he wasn’t paid while he was kicking a ball for Celtic. He received payment after he’d finished playing for the club.”

If Juninho was paid after his contract was cancelled, then why did the SPL spokesman not say so? The wording of the statement is very precise, and deliberately so. The implication is that Juninho was indeed paid prior to his contract being cancelled, and therefore there has been a prima facie breach of the SPL rules. Only in Iain Blair's green and grey world could Celtic have no case to answer.

[barcodebear 85]

I'm usually the one saying that I won't let paranoia take over, but you're absolutely spot on. "if it looks like a cover-up and smells like a cover-up".........

As for the media, they just go the way the wind blows. They know Charlie won't kiss their arse and butter their bread so they swing the other way. When this all comes back to bite the SPL on it's arse I guarantee they'll attempt to swing back to our side.

But we won't forget.

The pendulum swung one way about ten or fifteen years ago and stuck. It doesn't have to swing back in Celtc's direction it hasn't moved since then.