The Anatomy of a Cover Up

Ralph Topping, who is a member of the SFA’s Professional Gaming Board, would have us believe that there is no collusion between the two governing bodies in Scottish football. Let’s be quite clear on this point: they are a concert party working together to avoid title stripping. I would go further and contend that during Regan’s cosy chat with Dave King he invited the career criminal to be the third prong of their trident.
Regan introduced the concept of ‘vested interests’ in a letter to the secretary of the Celtic Supporters Association. The money spent on a QC – or was it Rod McKenzie moonlighting from the SPFL – was well spent. Let’s have no more talk of Sporting Integrity. Let’s isolate Celtic and portray them as acting in their own vested interests. Regan has supped with the devil. If you believe as I do that he was corrupt before in awarding Rangers a UEFA licence in 2011, watch now for how King’s tail will wag the dog.
Topping patronisingly suggested that it was better in the old days when the folly of youthful exuberance would be tempered with some sage counsel from those longer in the tooth:
Pipe down Laddie. Title stripping is for the birds. Stop drinking on an empty head.”

I was in my local on Friday. As I can best recall, the advice from the local oracle was:
Nail these self-serving corrupt Rangers-facing jobsworths to the cross.”
On balance I prefer the second option.
An interim meeting, by conference call, was arranged by the SPL on the 28th February 2013 to discuss the findings of the LNS commission. Topping believes that they can defend their consensus not to appeal to the SFA. Despite he himself asserting that a £250,000 fine did not fit the crime, within three hours his mind was changed. The SFA did not want the title-stripping buck passed to them. This had to be spiked. I have no doubt whatsoever that Regan played an active part in this sporting integrity veto.
Let’s take a detailed look at the consensus through the prism of eight confidential e-mails. I will use bold typeface for the original text. Every word will be reproduced verbatim, except where explicitly stated when I cut to the chase:
1. From: Iain Blair Sent: 28 February 2013 16:06 To: Ralph Topping; Neil Doncaster; Eric Riley; Duncan Fraser; Stephen Thompson; Michael Johnston Cc: Michele Shields

Subject: From Rod McKenzie – Right of Appeal

“Gentlemen Please see below advice from Rod. Best wishes Iain. I was asked for advice regarding the scope for an appeal by the SPL against the decision of the Rangers EBT Commission. The relevant provisions are to be found in SPL Rules G8, G9 and G10. G8 provides:

“Any Club or person who or which is the subject of an adverse determination by the Board or a Commission may, unless the Rules expressly state otherwise and provided the SFA articles provide for a right of appeal to the SFA, appeal against such determination in accordance with the SFA articles.Accordingly, if there was any part of the decision of the Commission which could be regarded as adverse as a determination so far as The SPL Limited is concerned, then an argument could be made that it would be competent to appeal against such an adverse determination Any appeal must, in terms of paragraph 15.2.1.1 of the SFA Judicial Panel Protocol be made to the Secretary of the SFA in writing by Notice of Appeal within five Working Days on the date of communication of the decision. Accordingly, SPL Limited acting through its Board, would have until close of business on 7 March to lodge with the Secretary of the SFA at Note of Appeal against whichever adverse determinations were sought to be appealed against. I would caution that it is very likely that if an appeal was submitted against any decision which was regarded as adverse to The SPL Limited that the right of The SPL Limited to appeal against a decision of its own Commission could be challenged. This might well be dealt with as a preliminary issue by the SFA Appellate Tribunal, assuming of course Rangers OldCo was to seek to respond to the appeal. I have not sought in this note to give any advice on the prospects of success in any appeal, because I would need to know what determination(s) were considered to be adverse to The SPL Limited in the Commission’s decision before giving advice on the prospects of succeeding in an appeal against such determination(s) having regard to the available grounds.”

Rod McKenzie
Partner
Harper Macleod LLP

JJ: Rod McKenzie establishes that the SPL can appeal and must do so before close of business on 7th March.

2. From: Iain Blair [mailto:IainBlair@scotprem.com] Sent: 07 March 2013 10:38 To: Ralph Topping; Neil Doncaster; Eric Riley; Duncan Fraser; Stephen Thompson; Michael Johnston Cc: Michele Shields; Rod McKenzie Subject: Commission

Gentlemen, please see below for your consideration and response as necessary. Best wishes

Dear Board member,

You will recall that last week I circulated a note from Rod McKenzie, setting out his advice in relation to whether it would be possible under that relevant Rules and Articles for an appeal to be taken to the SFA by the SPL against the decision of the Independent Commission. You will also recall that any SPL right of appeal to the SFA which might exist lapses today. One Board member has suggested, rather than simply let the right of appeal lapse, that the SPL Board should make a positive decision whether or not to exercise any right of appeal to the SFA. We are conscious that a number of Board members have already expressed a view that a line should now be drawn under this issue. But, in the interests of good order, it would seem sensible to make a recorded Board decision either way. Could you therefore please confirm by email by 2pm today whether you do or do not wish the SPL to appeal against the decision of the Independent Commission? If any Board member does wish to appeal it is essential that the email identifies what part of the Commission judgement is to be appealed against because any appeal notice which might be lodged must be submitted today and must specify in detail precisely what is appealed against and on what grounds. Anything not specified in the notice of appeal cannot later be argued in the appeal without leave of the appeal tribunal and only on good cause shown.”

Kind regards,

Iain Blair,

Company Secretary

 

JJ: So at 10.38 in the morning members are given 3 hours and 22 minutes to formulate their grounds for appeal. A cynic would suggest that the default position of letting this option pass has been predetermined and that Doncaster and Blair are just paying lip service to other board members.

3. From: Michael Johnston Sent: 07 March 2013 10:43 To: Iain Blair; Ralph Topping; Neil Doncaster; Eric Riley; Duncan Fraser; Stephen Thompson Cc: Michele Shields; Rod McKenzie Subject: Re: Commission

Thanks Iain.

In my view, we should NOT appeal.

Regards, Michael.

 

JJ: Did we expect any more from Kilmarnock, the only club to abstain in the SPL’s decision not to accept Charles Green’s basket of assets to be fast tracked into the SPL?It only took Johnston 5 minutes to respond. If the CSA decide to withdraw the Green Pound from clubs in which Sporting Integrity is suborned by a commercial imperative, Kilmarnock should be first on their list.

4. From: Stephen Thompson Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 10:43 AM GMT Standard Time To: Iain Blair Cc: Ralph Topping; Neil Doncaster; Eric Riley; Duncan Fraser; Michael Johnston; Michele Shields; Rod McKenzie

Subject: Re: Commission

Iain,

I think my position is well known as I was “cornered” by the press at Hampden on Monday at the Scottish Cup draw. I do not wish to appeal the decision that has been made and I personally wish to ‘draw a line under this’ and move on .

Thanks,

Stephen

JJ: I was under the impression that Thompson had resigned with immediate effect from the SPL board in November 2012. He was marked absent from the interim meeting on the 28th February 2013. I have reverted to my source on this point.

5. From: Michael Johnston Sent: 07 March 2013 15:28 To: Iain Blair; Ralph Topping; Neil Doncaster; Eric Riley; Duncan Fraser; Stephen Thompson Cc: Michele Shields; Rod McKenzie Subject:

Re: Commission

I’m in Italy at present so my reply must be brief.

Having read Ralph’s email of 15.49 today, I can appreciate his concerns but my view (and vote) remains against lodging an appeal.

I can elaborate upon why at the next Board meeting.

Regards,

Michael.

JJ: Johnston reverts to the board to reinforce his position, and disingenuously offers to elaborate after the appeal window has closed.

6. From: Ralph Topping Sent: 07 March 2013 14:49 To: Iain Blair; Neil Doncaster; Duncan Fraser; Stephen Thompson; Eric Riley Cc: Rod McKenzie

Subject: Appeal to SFA

STRICTLY PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

Gents

I understand that Iain has spoken with most people from the Board about the appeal process and having spoken with Rod I have his advice that in a nutshell we have to appeal today and be clear as to the grounds of appeal . I also understand that Eric is overseas on holiday but for the understandable reason of time zone difference is uncomfortable with the timescale being asked of him. As things currently stand Duncan , Michael , Stephen and Neil are in favour of no appeal being made. In the circumstances , given this is as important a subject as I think the SPL Board has discussed in my time as Chair I want to make my own position clear and not hide behind arithmetic as I could do ! I believe the proportionality of Lord Nimmo Smith’s determination is questionable. A fine of £250,000 for an enterprise of Rangers Oldco’s size and turnover and indeed strong leadership position in Scottish football on the evidence led as to the scale of the undeclared payments is not proportionate. I am also uncomfortable with Lord NS’s view that whilst the SPL Board wanted no sanction ruled out we seem to have led no evidence or made no statement in the course of the consideration by LNS on competitive advantage Ranger’s Oldco enjoyed which effectively ruled LNS from considering it. My question therefore to all Board Members is this : are you happy that in not appealing you are effectively saying that competitive disadvantage to all SPL clubs is immaterial and that you are happy with the scale of the fine? My question to Rod is having not led evidence on Sporting disadvantage is this ruled out as a ground of appeal ? I remain uneasy on both counts but accept that recovering monies from Oldco is unlikely no matter the quantum. The outcome in my view is still not proportionate. I would have liked more time to discuss this in person but as I am advised we don’t have it if you could confirm that you are not for turning I would be grateful . Sorry to ask but I feel I must given the importance of this matter .

Ralph

JJ: This is the key document, the smoking gun. We have the confirmation that four board members are opposed to an appeal being lodged. Topping puts it to McKenzie:

“that no evidence was led to the Commission by Harper McLeod, and no statement was made, on the competitive advantage Rangers Oldco enjoyed which effectively ruled LNS from considering it.”

So not only was the scope changed to exclude the illegal DOS/VSS antecedent of EBT, no evidence was led on competitive advantage. A cynic could argue that Doncaster and Regan subverted the LNS commission.

7. From: Rod Mckenzie Sent: 07 March 2013 15:53 To: Ralph Topping Cc: Iain Blair; Neil Doncaster; Duncan Fraser; Stephen Thompson; Eric Riley; Nikky Wales

Subject: RE: Appeal to SFA

Importance: High

Ralph

Dealing firstly with the level of fine. In accordance with my instructions I did not suggest a fine to the Commission as a sanction far less the level of fine it ought to impose. Levels of fine are an example of a matter which is very much for the decision maker and it will be given a wide margin of appreciation in determining what is appropriate. One decision maker might have said 250K and another 500K. That, in the absence of any established precedent, which there is not, does not mean that either level is unreasonable. Given that the SL specifically said that the sanction if any was a matter for the Commission I cannot see that we would be likely to succeed in arguing on appeal that the level of fine is too low. On competitive advantage in the competition a distinction has to be made between competitive advantage from using EBTs and competitive advantage from not disclosing EBT details to the SFA/SPL. Rangers were not charged with breach of the SPL Rules by using EBTs. There is no such Rule prohibiting their use. They were charged with and convicted of using EBTs and not disclosing such use as required by SPL and SFA Rules. The FTT held after 20 odd days of evidence and submissions that Rangers had used EBTs in a manner which did not give rise to a PAYE liability. There was never any doubt but that the use of EBTs gave a competitive advantage over other Clubs which did not use them but the FTT decided Rangers were entitled to use them as they did from a tax perspective without additional tax liability. There was never the slightest suggestion made by anyone that the SPL should attempt to argue that the decision of the FTT on this should be reversed by the Commission. It was never part of the role of the Commission to determine the correct tax treatment of the EBTs. The Commission was always about, even before the FTT decision was issued, whether Rangers had breached SPL Rules by not disclosing the use of EBTs and the details of the amounts etc for each of the Players. The Commission decided that it made no difference in terms of competitive advantage whether the details of the EBTs were disclosed in terms of the SPL Rules. It found that whether there was disclosure to the SPL did not in itself effect where the competitive advantage lay. It found, in effect, that the advantage form the use of the EBTs was the same whether they were disclosed to the SPL or not. The conclusion of the Commission on sanction was that not disclosing the EBT details to the SPL/SFA did not of itself give Rangers any competitive advantage. It would have had the same competitive advantage even if full details had been disclosed. By not appealing to the SFA the SPL is not saying that competitive advantage is immaterial. It is material to sanction in a disclosure case if a competitive advantage was secured from non disclosure which the Commission held there was not. Since the decision came out I have not seen anything to establish that Rangers secured a competitive advantage by non-disclosure or any evidence which could have been led to establish such an advantage. I am sorry that this note is a little ‘scrappy’ but I have been in a meeting today and have had very little time to produce it. I can answer any further points either by email or on Monday.

Rod McKenzie

JJ: McKenzie’s response is instructive. He asserts that the LNS commission were charged with considering disclosure and giving no consideration to any competitive advantage conferred by the use of EBT. Readers are now aware that the LNS was limited, some would say fatally compromised, from the get go.

8. From: Duncan Fraser Sent: 07 March 2013 16:26 To: Ralph Topping; Iain Blair; Neil Doncaster; Stephen Thompson; Eric Riley Cc: Rod McKenzie

Subject: RE: Appeal to SFA

Gentlemen

I wish to put on record to you all my position.

The circumstances we find ourselves in is that we have been unable to get together to discuss the outcome of the commission findings face to face, which is most unfortunate as we would all have benefitted from that. I am and never would pretend to understand the way the law works let alone pass comment. Ralph “Clapham Bus” being as far as I would go. I am at pains to point out that I, like Ralph, find the size of the fine and therefore the punishment to be disproportionate to the scale of the actions undertaken. Although the EBT Tax case has been appealed it would be fair to assume that the somewhat surprising Tax Tribunal outcome, that these undeclared payments fell out with PAYE and NIC and therefore were “legal” had an effect on the Commission. It seems that they viewed the use of the EBT as resulting in no sporting advantage that Rangers would have received if they had been declared. In which case why were they not declared? I truly struggle to understand that outcome but cannot see how that can be appealed. In summary the Tax Tribunal outcome has affected the outcome here to a huge extent. Rod’s point that we did not suggest a sanction and were clear in leaving it to the Commission rules out any appeal on the grounds of “the punishment fitting the crime”. In summary, I do not believe that the Commission came to the correct decision in terms of sporting advantage and we have no grounds for an appeal based on the punishment being too lenient or it appears sporting advantage given the narrow line they pursued. Therefore reluctantly I have to draw the conclusion that the process is at an end.

Duncan Fraser 

Chief Executive 

JJ:  I have two more e-mails from this file. One has been published in which Topping reflects the majority view and spikes an appeal. The other is a more polished version of McKenzie’s scrappy e-mail. It does not add any value.

This series of e-mails is proof positive that Rangers were not charged with the unlawful use of tax instruments to evade social taxes and to enjoy a competitive advantage.

 

 

Advertisements

28 thoughts on “The Anatomy of a Cover Up”

  1. Please do not conflate Michael Johnston with Kilmarnock FC. He has never represented Kilmarnock fans, in fact often going out of his way to antagonise them. His ‘evidence’ for abstaining in that vote was a poll that said only 36% of Killie fans said no to Newco. That was 36% of a database of mostly incorrect and lapsed mail addresses. Those 36%, I can assure you, represented almost 100% of Kilmarnock fans.

    Fortunately Mr Johnston no longer has a position of influence at Kilmarnock.

    1. Well you guys (the 100%) know what needs to be done in order to address the situation J&C !

      JJ – apologies – the F&F payment option not currently available to me

    2. I have to agree here,Michael Johnston almost ruined Kilmarnock FC, alienated both the fan base and investors who could have taken the club forward,he managed to sack Kenny Shiels(who gave us wins over Celtic and Rangers in Glasgow as well as a Scottish League Cup Final win) because he felt the wee fellah was too outspoken towards the SFA, he side-whacked him for finishing 9th in the league, hiding behind a small clause in the contract that stated he could be fired for finishing 9th!! Most clubs in the usual relegation battle would not be too unhappy with a 9th spot. The rank and file Kilmarnock fans loath and despise this guy, when he abstained there was a lot of anger amongst the fans but being the lawyer he is Johnston manipulated the figures to suit his own agenda, he may have “elaborated”on his reasons at that next Board meeting but he never “elaborated”as to why to his own club’s supporters.This email shows him for the snake he really is.

      Yours in Sport
      Gaun the Killie

  2. Regan and Doncaster could be hiding Hitler, Himmler, Goerring, Hess, Speer etc in a cupboard at Hampden and the Scottish MSM wouldn’t bother to report it. To be honest I’m surprised they haven’t blamed Brexit for all of Ranger’s / Sevco’s woes, it seems to work for most other bad news…!

  3. JJ , I don’t think the titles will ever be stripped. Keep up the good work and donation sent. Ref no 3778-0533-3854-xxxx
    The whole saga is totally corrupt. Stay safe.

  4. To the creditors, shareholders and fans of Scottish football we do not give a fuck what you think about us or your game and how it is run. Your opinions and quest for justice is only dealt with if we feel we cannot escape from it. However we will lie and cheat until we cannot but we will never accept we are wrong.
    We do not care how much the creditors of one of our member clubs were screwed for and we could not give a jot how many shareholders lost their money or fans were conned in a rigged game who cares, not us.
    We at the SFA are interested only in the money coming in to our coffers and are not interested in you the mugs. As you will be aware we have a vested interest in one of our major clubs and as such they have been given carte blanche over the rest, we do have two major clubs but the other is used to offset against the other to make money and basically in this Scotland we care not for their perceived religious affiliation but they are crucial in our scheme. Even if they are a club open to all. We like to create barriers as this appeals to the mugs and we allow it as it means money from all angles to us, we fine clubs when it suits and we annoy to upset and create arguments favourable to us, remember Armageddon we do use fear as well.
    You will be aware however that you no matter who you are, you will not be allowed to compete if you owe money to other clubs all football debts must be squared as this is in our interest, should we lose clubs through this malpractice it is us that lose in the long run, creditors and others we do not give a fuck for.
    So what if we bent our rules to accommodate one club and give a preference these rules are ours and a set of rules is to give the impression that all is above board, do you not get it, our rules are our rules, modified and changed to be broke by us only.
    An indepedent commission is independent of outsiders we are the indepedent to investigate outr rules still not getting it, oh dear there is money in this tank alright.
    Who gives a fuck about tax, to be honest everyone wants to fuck them, even though we have shitty EUFA rules we all do it and just bend the rules by not declaring the facts or truth.
    When shit hits the fan we deflect, regroup and lie and sweep, sweep, until nothing is left and continue on our merry corrupt way. It has always been this way with us and we will ensure it remains in place.
    Occasionally we may lose the odd combatant (Rest In Profit is our motto , Jim Farry we will avenge the bunnet) but he will be rewarded and will not take it to heart as he knows he will be with us in private functions just not in public.
    So to all you arseholes out there looking for integrity get a life this is our baw and our rules apply, we will not be told to clean up our act by you, we will corrupt the game if it suits us, and we will lie cheat and steal from you at every turn and basically you can do fuck all, we hope.
    Yours
    SFA in sport we trust

      1. And your totally honest friends at UEFA,what’s that? Our second most powerful guy got arrested for alleged corruption this morning?No comment! However,as for that bad boy Griffiths…..

  5. A terrific attention to detail and what an audit trail of grubby cover ups.

    The fans of Scottish clubs have been well and truly ‘duped’.

    I do wish that your forensic pieces made it to the Scottish media. I am aware that this is a ‘must read’ site for many of them (they use some of your lines) but not one of them has the courage to cross that line marked ‘the truth starts here’.

    I read Spiers on Saturday. Goodness me, he is a dull and lazy writer. He commented, briefly, on the debate with regard to title stripping. This colossus of journalism went on to say that he now finds the debate somewhat boring but does recognise that the titles are ‘tainted’. What? He has ignored the greatest scandal in Scottish sporting history which involves the governing bodies, and he finds that BORING?

    Pitiful.

    (Incidentally, in a previous comment, I referred to top quality English journalists who would be all over this story. People like Henry Winter, Paul Hayward, Martin Samuel and Jim White. For the record, and in case you thought I was losing my marbles, the Jim White whom I referred to is NOT the Sky Sports reporter who takes wine with Dave King. No, the Jim White whom I mentioned is a proper journalist and writes insightful and amusing pieces for The Times.)

  6. Another wonderful piece JJ. What else needs to be provided for UEFA and FIFA to take up this case of atrocious governance. Or is this how it will forever be? The lack of a statement from Doncaster is worrying as I truly believe that they think there is nothing to do here. Their blind obedience to the “establishment club” is sickening. I comment on your many insights and writings with a bewildered group of friends down here in England and they ask just one thing. How the fuck can this be allowed to continue!!

    A boycott of some description or a declaration from interested parties to form a break away league has never seemed more appropriate.

  7. What incredible detail! Investigative journalism at its best. Congratulations.

    Small donation made Paypal conf (with edit) yyT39109LD563xxxxx

  8. The smoking gun indeed, underhand collusion between officials charged with the running of our national game. Shameless, utterly shameless

  9. Citizen journalists have been the vanguard of revealing what really happens at mismanaged football clubs and within sporting bodies run for the benefit of a minority. The SMSM have proved themselves unworthy of the description journalist in failing to publicise the failings of football. Anything for a quiet life I suppose.

    We have reached the tipping point when individual clubs need to stand up and be counted by holding their governing bodies and the corrupt individuals therein to account. To be fair to CFC they appear to be taking a stand on the issue. Those is charge at other clubs are behaving like the three ‘wise’ monkeys. Do they imagine the governing bodies would take such a lenient attitude if it was their club that had cheated? Or is the ‘blue pound’ too valuable, a healthy balance sheet being more prized than the chance of winning trophies as a number of clubs have done since 2012? The club known as Rangers are on the ropes and the rules of business predicate putting the boot in to disadvantage a competitor, especially one that has been found to be a serial cheat.

    One would hope that politicians would providing community leadership and demanding change. The fact they are invisible proves how useless they actually are. One would have thought that the exposure of an organisation that cheated the taxpayer by failing to pay taxes would be a matter of public record. Not in Scotland.

  10. ID 3FB06687CA820xxxx

    Sent from my integrit-e account.

    Excellent work on. You have now put enough information in the public domain to expose these rats as the corrupt cabal that they are. If I was in a position of power and authority at Celtic I would be making it publicly known that my finger was on the legal button and issue a 30 day notice to the Spfl to execute a proper independent enquiry or else. I would also copy all info to CAS and demand an inquiry. Stay safe.

  11. Looks like the committee were feeding their pet reporter’s a line every week hoping this is going to go away. A Strange decision on behalf of spfl member’s and Peter lawwells dabs must be all over this also

  12. An excellent article, laying bare the lip service paid by the SFA and the SPFL, both of which combined must be the most self serving Self Preservation Society in the whole of the world to the largest sporting scandal in modern times. There is a succinct and straightforward strategy adopted here. The Laptop Loyal Media and the governing bodies and the lapdog clubs who betray their own supporters by acquiescing and taking the path of least resistance as they themselves lay bare their blatant coveting of the Blue Bigoted Pound.
    Anywhere else in the world this would simply not be tolerated.

  13. Ref: 9WX3170630434XXXX

    JJ,

    Excellent work yet again. Your evidence is compelling and highlights two camps within the office bearers of our game. Those who manipulate their colleagues and those too thick to see when they’re being played like a fiddle. Topping shows slight evidence of a conscience while Duncan Fraser finally speaks out some thirty four minutes before the deadline; each a token effort in the event that these emails ever become public. They are all complicit in the end as they either stood by and allowed the corruption from the SFA, the SFL (now SPFL) and the compromised LNS commission to cock the whole thing up or they were in the other camp and engineered it all.
    The £250,000 fine for industrial scale cheating and evading £48,000,000 of tax payments is akin to a young driver not paying the £3,000 annual insurance on his hotrod car only to be caught and brought to heel. If Lord Nimmo Smith was on the bench and using his same steadfast calculator, he would have fined the driver £15 for their misdemeanour. That’s some deterrent!
    I trust Celtic FC are making use of their communications team to gauge the fans’ feelings as it’s now time for them to garner support from their colleagues to ensure a new administration is put in place that will ensure the fans’ trust in our sport.
    I have been trying to think of one positive change that has happened to Scottish football in the past twenty years that could be attributed to our game’s leaders – if anyone can think of one, please let me know as I’ve struck out! From our youth football structure (which I know only too well as I coach at that level) to our senior game and international side, there has been a steady decline that shows no signs of stopping. Time to bite the bullet and bin the fatcats. Their idea of change is to ensure every club has a registered first aider or they’re not allowed to register in their league. The first aid course comprises of using defibrilators and CPR, hardly what we’re likely to come up against with teenagers but it ticks the SFA’s box!
    I would welcome a corporate audit carried out by our neighbours from the south while Regan, Doncaster, Ogilvie, Bryson, Topping and the rest of the rogues are made to answer for their decisions, or lack of, during this whole disgraceful period. How many millions of pounds have been spent on this cabal who I wouldn’t trust to run a Sunday league without cocking it up.
    Am I correct in saying that you mentioned quite recently that you would be happy to be a focal point for funds to be raised to organise a judicial review provided the money was kept in a solicitor’s escrow account? I believe that is the only way we are going to see justice actually done and a new slate which will allow everyone to move forward with some renewed trust.
    Keep up the sterling job and stay safe

  14. Any club who do the right thing, stick their head above the parapet and demand the obvious sporting justice of all the EBT era trophies being voided, know they would be in for a world of pain. Witness the hassles that Dundee United and Raith Rovers had to put up with.
    ‘Keep our heads down chaps – it will blow over eventually ‘ is the tactic used to get an easy life – rather than challenge the Ibrox Monster and the mob-rule storm troopers.

    1082-8982-8993-xxxx

  15. Spot on JJ. The question now is where do we go? I for one will not abandon my club ( I remain a season ticket holder) however, I will no longer buy tickets for league cup, Scottish cup or any match at hampden. I plan also to write to the spfl and sfa outlining my concerns and requesting that they repay my season ticket costs from 1999-2012 (including the Celtic wins) as I was paying to watch a rigged game. I expect not to get a reply of any kind. Keep pushing!

  16. I left a comment but not shown????
    I would have thought that someone who has donated to you would have had their comment published????

    1. I have asked everyone to quote a confirmation number. I will not spend my time on comments by freeloaders. Please repost your comment with a number and you’ll be good to go.

  17. You have produced evidence of a massive attempted cover up. That was the past and cannot be changed. What can be changed is the future. What happens this week, this month. The cover up attempt has to be disclosed and some other agency has to reveal the truth. This could be Judicial Review (using an English Judge of course) or UEFA. It appears that only Celtic have an appetite to seek justice. The next move is up to Lawwell. I predict it will be seismic.

  18. Ralphy- yer teas oot- mammys calling,

    You dont need an unnamed QC, fake or otherwise, to put an asterisk at the EBT Trophies won with an explanation of THE TRUTH beside them, Billy Nimmo’s fine words which now HAVE to read There WAS an Unfair Sporting Advantage used to win this trophy by the named winner, or if you dont like that , there sure as h be loadsa fine Arbroath Solicitors happy to pen a few lines.

    Obviously The Gutter that Scotlands Sporting journalists clearly are need to now drop the fairly from their won on the pitch reporting of the EBT trophies AND could one of them squeeze their lemons and venture to explain if ‘ the won on the pitch’ line prevails how were they not ‘lost on the pitch’ to a team ‘ cheating’.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s