While some would argue that “all out attack on Rangers day” is every day, today’s assault on Charles Green by the press, is particularly vindictive, and reeks of the SPL Cabal calling in favours in order to discredit Green’s statement with regards to the SPL’s Kangaroo Court.
There is a shocking piece of propaganda by former SPL Chief Roger Mitchell in the Herald, who debates Green’s points with a level of finesse you would expect from a Celtic Minded blogger.
He takes Green’s points on one by one
“Claim 1 Rangers ceased to be subject to the SPL's rules when they were ejected from their league.
Fact Rangers oldco was not ejected from the SPL. The fact that Rangers went into liquidation automatically expelled them from the league. The SPL shareholders then decided not to make an exception and let them back in. Two very different things”
Rangers history and business all transferred to the new legal entity as part of the purchase and the legal agreement reached between Rangers and the football bodies when granting Rangers an SFA Licence. Rangers “oldco” were forced to transfer there SPL share to Dundee. To date, the “oldco” have not been liquidated.
Mitchell also neglects to mention that the rule changes which allowed this to happen were decided after Rangers went in to Administration.
“Claim 2 The outcome of the SPL's process will have no legal effect.
Fact What the SPL are deciding upon is whether their tournament and their trophy was assigned to the correct club in the years in question.
The SPL have every right to examine whether participants in their competition behaved within the rules. And if they find they haven't, they can apply their rule book as recourse. More Green nonsense.
I do, however, agree with him that "whatever decision they reach is a decision of the SPL". Indeed. But the SPL should be proud of that, and not hide behind the Law Lords.
The SPL are examining the conduct of the participants in their competition well before Rangers went into liquidation, in particular the conduct of the club then owned by Sir David Murray, with the club secretary role (in charge of those player registrations) held by Campbell Ogilvie (whatever happened to him?). Charles Green and Sevco have nothing to do with this. Whatsoever.”
I’m actually very surprised the above is an original piece of work by Mitchell, given that several high profile Celtic writers and bloggers have been campaigning for the removal of Campbell Ogilvie from his position. That aside, his assertion that the SPL can “assign” a trophy is bordering on ridiculous. Each trophy is won on merit, on the field.
If Rangers are judged by Lord Nimmo Smith’s panel to have broken SPL rules, then there are a number of sanctions that can be chosen, however, as Charles Green states, Rangers take issue with both the law firm chosen to investigate, their conduct through SPL and SFA negotiations with Rangers, and the attempt to charge Rangers not on the rules applicable at the time Rangers are alleged to have used EBTs improperly, but against a revised set of rules issued at a later date.
As previous Chairman and owner David Murray has stated, neither he nor any of his representatives were asked for their views on the use of EBTs by Harper MacLeod.
Reference to Campbell Ogilvie is intriguing, as he left Rangers in 2005, with EBTs in operation for 4 years of his tenure. He has previously stated he did see or sign any “second contract” for any players or staff.
It seems that Mitchell and others are implying rather unsubtly that Ogilvie is lying.
The assertion that Charles Green and “Sevco” have nothing to do with this is also misleading for two reasons.
“Sevco” do not exist. Rangers parent company are called “The Rangers Football Club limited”. Rangers the footballing entity are just known as "Rangers"
As part of discussions to award Rangers the transfer of membership from the “oldco” to the “newco” it was agreed in print that the “newco” would assume responsibility for the SPL investigation.
Mitchell, like the SPL, seems confused as to who should be punished by their Kangaroo court.
“Claim 3 The new owners purchased all the business and assets of Rangers, including titles and trophies.
Fact Green said on June 2012 that if his CVA proposal was to fail (which it did) and Rangers were to be liquidated (which they are), "the history, the tradition, everything that's great about this club is swept aside".
Therefore he admits he has not purchased titles and trophies. Sevco has no titles and trophies.
Green made the statement as a bargaining chip to achieve a CVA. In this he failed
As part of the SFA Share transfer, his fear of history being lost was quelled, as the club retained its glorious history. In any case, other clubs such as Leeds Utd who had been through a similar situation had kept their history in full, so a precedent had been set. “Sevco” do not exist.
Had the SFA Licence been rejected, there may have been legal argument to make a case for Rangers losing their history. It wasn’t rejected. Mitchell is incorrect.
“By the way, Charles, I would not provoke commentators like me to dig this up, because what you said is not what the Rangers fans want to hear now, as you now correctly realise. Let it lie, Charlie, let it lie.”
So, even one with a leaning towards Govan would argue that, under the most superficial scrutiny, Green's attack is less than robust. But sometimes you have to chuck a dog a bone. So, to be fair, Charlie is right with his complaint on the SPL's lack of consistency,”
Given that Mitchell’s “argument” is less than robust itself, and riddled with inaccuracies, then I’d suggest it’s Mitchell who should remain on the sidelines.
Mitchell who was the first CEO of the SPL following the transfer of ownership from a company owned by current Celtic and SPL board member Eric Reilly, and the Administrator who oversaw the rejection of a very generous SKY deal, was a failure to Scottish Football, and has no credibility whatsoever.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/scotland/2495351.stm
He goes on:
“Green states: "The SPL took part in discussions regarding the new company's league status, where 'the EBT issue' would be dealt with as part of a package of sanctions which would be implemented in return for membership.
"We do not accept that people who are willing to come to an agreement on such matters then have a right to instigate a full-blown inquisition when matters do not unfold as they thought they would."
Sadly this falls into the general shambles of the management of the affair by the SFA/SPL. I made my own view clear on the leadership of both bodies in the summer. But I cannot see how the credibility of the current process on a simple point of law over false registration of players with Employee Benefit Trusts (being handled by independent top QCs) can be derailed by claims that the prosecutor behaved incoherently months earlier.”
Green actually makes no reference to the now widely accepted event where Rod McKenzie of Harper MacLeod ranted and raved in anger at Green and stated clearly that “you bastards cheated for 11 years”
Green is clearly referring to the SPL board. Rod McKenzie didn’t instigate an inquisition, unless he is running the SPL.
Mitchell slating the leadership of both the SFA and SPL is hypocritical in the extreme.
While it is widely accepted that the SPL and the SFA have indeed been weak and prone to making rules up as they go along, they would not have had to do so had Mitchell put in place a tight infrastructure to handle and prevent such occurrences.
“Good debating point, Charles, but it's not enough. Instead, all of us who love the game and who hold true sporting values in our hearts have a simple question: Did Rangers oldco gain unfair advantage by registering players on a basis where their full employment conditions were not declared to the SPL/SFA?”
This myth is clearly debunked by Green, and has also been debunked by former Chairmen Alastair Johnston on the RST site, and by David Murray.
For the avoidance of doubt, it is absolutely clear that the practice of EBTs, when used, were completely legal, and Rangers (and Murray) still assert that not only did Rangers comply with the SPL rules as set out when the EBTs were in use, but that other SPL members did not.
While many have attacked Green today, he appeared to be holding back
Again, for the avoidance of doubt, I should state that while the contractual agreements and payments employed by at least one other SPL side require to be investigated, all clubs were offered an amnesty by the SFA with regards to their payment practices.
None have declared any such non contractual payment
http://williampoole.wordpress.com/2012/06/04/celtic-employees-tax-avoidance/
http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/301167-scottish-fa-ask-clubs-to-declare-non-contractual-payments/
IN the interests of consistency, clubs who are found to have both exploited such loopholes, failed to declare them in annual accounts submissions, and also failed to declare their activity in the SFA Amnesty, should receive more punishment than Rangers, should Rangers be found “guilty”
These clubs have to be investigated first for that to happen.
There is enough evidence to instigate an investigation, so what’s stopping them?
Mitchell continues:
“In my mind the answer is undoubtedly 'yes'. But let's not forget the lessons of Versailles: bloodlust rebounds.
The SPL enquiry punishment doesn't arouse great passion in me. And it shouldn't either for Celtic fans. For them I'd argue the victory is in the fact that their greatest rival died.
The 125-year long struggle ended with the collapse of the adversary. The war was won. Achilles vanquished Hector.
In closing, from Mark Anthony onwards history tells us that well-crafted oratory can influence the mob.”
The choice of prose above is very reminiscent of at least one contributor to the Rangers Tax Case blog, aswell as Rangers hating activists Phil Mac Giolla Bhain and Kieron Brady.
Mitchell goes on
“While Charles Green is no great speaker or statesman, I must admit, he is no dummy. And there is no doubt that his audience is the mob, whose money and favour he needs in order to exit the Rangers investment project with a financial return.
Stoking up hatred has always energised "the base", another example of which we saw in the Republican convention in these days.”
Green protecting his club and his investment is only natural and professional. If reacting to hate filled agendas is “stoking up hatred”, then I for one am glad that Mitchell is not a judge.
“Well done, Charles. Initial Public Offering of shares here we come.
For Scottish football, the days of enlightenment around the Tommy Burns funeral are long gone, and I fear the worst.”
Enlightenment? Don’t make me laugh.
Using the Tommy Burns funeral to ingratiate himself with the Celtic support, is as low a tactic I have seen when attacking Rangers.
I could go further than this but I don’t think it’s appropriate that I sink to Mitchell’s level.
“Roger” clearly thinks the Herald readership are gullible dummys.
He should be left in no doubt that the public, and Green, are far more switched on than he ever was during his ill fated tenure in charge of the SPL.
Bill.
No comments:
Post a Comment