Fans For Judicial Review

The sense of fear on the sixth floor of Hampden is palpable. Instructing solicitors , senior counsel and senior junior counsel have been retained. I would envisage two objectives for our learned friends:

1. A review of the LNS commission

1.1 Scope.

1.2 Evidence led.

1.3 Rationale for conclusions and recommendations.

2. The provision of legislative levers to effect change and address shortcomings in current regulations.


Let’s be quite clear and unequivocal on the role of Neil Doncaster in the cover up of the systemic cheating of a member club. His recent performances on television have been contradictory. In defending the inertia of the SPFL he asserted that there was no provision in current or previous SPL/SPFL regulations to deal with tax evasion.

The SFA have an audit committee which reviews all the remuneration packages of employees and directors of member clubs. Rangers did not disclose the unlawful EBT arrangements nor the side contracts. They also lied to HMRC about the existence of side contracts.

If there was nothing to hide why not reveal their ‘legitimate‘ tax avoidance regimen? The reason that they chose to lie was that the side letters invalidated the EBT tax efficiency and crossed the line into tax evasion. As Hugh Adam stated they knew they were cheating but pushed on regardless; all the way to accruing 17 tainted titles.

I exclusively revealed on our site the correspondence apropos the decision by the SPL not to appeal the findings of the LNS commission. In this correspondence we discovered that no evidence was led to LNS’ team on Rangers use of EBT. The scope had been limited to registration irregularities. The rules state that every game played by Rangers with illegally registered players – with no disclosure being made on the actual remuneration arrangements in their contracts – should result in a 0-3 reverse. All games played from season 1999/2000 to 2010/2011 inclusive should have had this regulation applied. Rangers would have been relegated in 2000. The SFA’s sandy Bryson led evidence to the LNS commission panel,  which incredibly included his Chief Executive, that the players were ‘imperfectly registered but eligible.’

The fix was in. We knew it then and now with the weight of the Inner House ruling and The Supreme Court upholding their ruling, the assertions by LNS that Rangers use of EBT was legitimate, and conferred no competitive advantage, are unsound.

My exclusive revelations exposes Doncaster’s lie, made yesterday, that LNS considered EBT. How could LNS come to any conclusions on EBT when no evidence was led by Harper Macleod?

One can but conclude that Stewart Regan added a few words to give the impression of due consideration.

The penalties that are available to the SFA for breaches of registration regulations include having one’s licence revoked. The fine of a mere £250,000 for eleven seasons of systemic cheating is unconscionable.

Which leads us to Doncaster’s next lie. If we had come down in the last shower we would believe that the new board of the SPFL effected measures in their first meeting to create the regulations that would penalise the non collection of social taxes. Where are these regulations Mr. Doncaster? Are you as I suspect lying through your back teeth again?

If David Murray chose to acquire Hearts and do it all over again there is nothing the SPFL could do to stop him.

We then had to endure the advice of senior counsel which was used as fig leaf to hide their exposure. One could instruct senior counsel to assert that the moon was made of cheese. At £800 per hour plus VAT he would create a cogent argument and cite an episode of The Klangers as his case precedent.

The judicial review might not strip titles but should it strip Doncaster and Regan from office we will be forever indebted to those who stood up for sporting integrity.


14 thoughts on “Fans For Judicial Review”

  1. Just one contribution today. Thank you Persevered. The Haters will be cock a hoop. They’ll need something to cheer now that Celtic have earned the right to play in the group stages of UEFA tournaments.

  2. JJ, I am right up for this, e-banking card and reader at the ready, but many like me are asking when the breakthrough into the MSM cabal – Scottish or English – coming.
    Not a word in the print media on the issue since 5 July when they were forced to report the facts on the Supreme Court decision.
    Your site and Phil’s have done so much to get the story out there, but the fact that each individual organisation is ignoring the money to be made from being the first to break cover is just baffling.
    This can’t be down to fatboy jim, there’s something else we’re not seeing.
    One of the comments in Phil’s Black Knight piece said “With Mr Whyte found not guilty of all the charges made against him then he’s completely free to pen his own version of events at Ibrox which will be a sure fire best seller”.
    What’s holding him back?
    Please keep going JJ, you will be a legend.

  3. The momentum for title stripping is growing daily like the rise of Corbyn. Hopefully it will do better than Jeremy and actually get rid of the incumbents. They were the people

  4. JJ, I wrote this prior to the announcement driven by the enormity of scale and my thoughts on why it can never be properly dealt with or why real justice isn’t achievable.

    The whole episode is so huge that the authorities are terrified of the consequences should a successful campaign bring about justice. They could not possibly control the narrative or any outcomes. Where would it end? What would it ultimately mean? No one could begin to predict where it would go! Every game deemed to end 0 – 3 has an unending series of knock-on effects with endless ifs and buts. You get the idea, Falkirk should have won the Scottish Cup, qualified for Europe – what might have been Etc.

    Then you have the social/moral dilemma! Unpaid taxes, failure to deliver for shareholders up and down the country. Illegality on every imaginable level, immorality no one could ever excuse or make amends for. I don’t believe that this can be dealt with appropriately for so many reasons – legal, financial, social, historical, consequences and yes! Fear.

    Personally, I do not wish to see individuals hounded to the point of bankruptcy, or beyond for these matters but can these be ignored whilst attempting to achieve justice which HAS to be seen to happen? I do want the whole sordid matter brought to an end by recognising what went on, the history books to record the facts ad peace to break out for the greater good of Scottish Football into the future where my sons and their sons can follow the game with pride and confidence that the same things are never able to happen again.

    I do want to see the offenders named and shamed, I would like to see the trophies won under a shadow marked in the history books as just that. If though, that is considered unlikely, impossible even, then I want the sham of continuation called out for what it is and the SPFL to declare that for all to see. Then, we can “move on”.

  5. JJ I would still like Celtic to follow up their previous statement in saying if they’ve had a response from SPFL .

  6. It seems that the momentum is growing for a Judicial review, what a fantastic opportunity for the Panjandrum Brothers Doncaster and Regans curruption to be laid bare if it comes to pass! If it is correct that the instruction from Hampden is that every other club is to stay silent and have the situation painted as a Celtic Rangers rivalry thing then it just shows to what new depths the Governing bodies of Scottish football will stoop and the Chairmen of Aberdeen and Hearts should be ashamed of themselves. And still the Scottish Mainstream Media observe their blackout of all things currupt with no mention of the current situation and the tainted titles, their obedience is absolute and they are indeed model loyalists to the cause.
    How good would it be to see a Supporter Led initiative that boycotts the League Cup, The Scottish Home draws cup and sees what happens when sponsors and gate receipts are targetted with opposition and the withdrawal of their taken for granted revenue

  7. JJ.
    Great stuff yet again.
    When I read your posts I do get the feeling that momentum could be building towards justice. And I really enjoy that feeling. I spent a heck of a lot lot of time and money watching what was really a pile of rigged shite for years. Rangers made Lance Armstrong look like Mary Poppins.
    Justice has to happen. Unlike the bloated leagues elsewhere Scottish Football truly relies on their customers cash. If folk choose to boycott various clubs and/or competitions it will only be effective if the boycott is massive and I don’t think it would be. Celtic have a lot of fan power if they boycotted away games but many fans won’t want to hurt their own clubs. Maybe I’m wrong? The legal route is crucial and I’ve already told DST (Dons Supporters Trust) I would contribute to this if the opportunity arose.
    I hope that folk who read and contribute to your site appreciate the difference in stance between Milne and the actual Aberdeen support?
    As a club Aberdeen were chronically bad during the cheating years so have little to gain from stripping but have been as vocal as more than most teams fans.
    I won’t be able to take our game seriously until the right thing is done. You are leading the way and deserve every support.
    I have no ill will towards any rangers fan or player. Their fans now are just silly. But Reagan, Doncaster, BFDJ, Smith, most of the SMSM and any other f*****g liar make me want to spew.

  8. On the question of justifying a JR this conversation originally from CQN might be of interest

    Original Point on 2nd August 2017 10:29 am

    Different Counsel can reach different conclusions depending on- what information has been provided to them; what they have been asked to consider, and there own interpretation of the law/ precedent.
    The opinion will remain privileged unless privilege is waived.

    We do not know what body(ies) is(are) the subject of a potential JR- whether it is a JR of the SFA/SPL or the LNS commission.
    However basic principles dictate that the findings of LNS could be quashed if, for example, same considered irrelevant or incorrect material or knowingly ignored relevant material. Similarly if the decision was one reached which no reasonable tribunal could have reached based on the evidence sane may be liable to JR.
    I think based on the SPFL response to a journo regarding the inclusion or exclusion of the wee tax case in the LNS Commission, that a matter considered irrelevant and so not properly examined was excluded. It was not just the lawfulness of the ebts that was left out but the omission of actual dishonesty, that was obvious from Rangers accepting, on QC advice , that RFC were liable to pay the tax owed under the DOS (wtc) scheme, the situation where they lied to HMRC about holding side letters for two players whilst at the same time (in Apr 2005 ) having 16 players on the books and another 13 who had left, all with side letters at the time of enquiry.
    In the very act of passing the buck to the SPL to investigate the SFA avoided any charge under
    Article 5
    5. Obligations and Duties of Members
    5.1 All members shall:-
    (a) observe the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship in accordance with the rules of fair play
    (b) be subject to and shall comply with:-
    (i) these Articles;
    (ii) the Judicial Panel Protocol;
    (iii) the Challenge Cup Competition Rules;
    (iv) the Registration Procedures;
    (v) International Match Calendar;
    (vi) Club Licensing Procedures; and
    (vii) any statutes, regulations, directives, codes, decisions promulgated by the Board, the Professional Game Board, the Non-Professional Game Board, the Judicial Panel, a Committee or sub-committee, FIFA, UEFA or the Court of Arbitration for Sport;
    (c) recognise and submit to the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport as specified in the relevant provisions of the FIFA Statutes and the UEFA Statutes;
    (d) respect the Laws of the Game;
    (e) refrain from engaging in any activity, practice or conduct which would constitute an offence under sections 1, 2 or 6 of the Bribery Act 2010; and
    (f) behave towards the Scottish FA and other members with the utmost good faith.
    Specifically a) and particularly f).
    It has always bemused me why the Judicial Panel charged CW of bringing the game into disrepute for a number of reasons including non payment of PAYE and VAT but not non payment and failure to meet his undertaking to pay the wtc bill.
    Further in the JP charge sheet Art 5.1 a gets a mention amongst a list but 5.1.a)and f) do not appear in the actual charges themselves.
    What this means is that CW was found guilty by the JP but Rangers as a club and SFA member have never been charged with breaches of 5.1a and f.
    What the wtc shows is evidence of dishonesty, but it is but one example of which Res12 evidence is so full there is even a map of dishonesty which would suggest to a criminal court that there was
    ” previous” (as in behaviour.)
    It is because dishonesty is denied, in fact LNS says there was no question of dishonesty, personal or corporate, regarding registration, in spite of it never been asked, that the attempts to put the matter to bed (which is what LNS appears to be an attempt at, have failed. The proper charge has been avoided but then again how could you allow any club with office bearers carrying that reputation into Scottish football, certainly without proper controls on it?
    Ooops they just did.
    The SFA or SPL would arguably be liable to JR if they deliberately stymied LNS or were procedurally incorrect in establishing LNS or acted wholly unreasonably.
    See my first comment. Although it was an SPL Commission that was no excuse to avoid SFA Articles. Indeed in recent interviews that has been the SPFL defence – as in that was not our job.
    I should also add that the JR court would also look to whether any alternative remedy was open to the Applicant. I don’t know if UEFA or FIFA or CAS may have been approached.
    It was my view from the off that the SFA should have been the commissioners (it was their registration witness that swung things) and CAS the court of appeal.

    I don’t know why they pay thousands for lawyers – we just made the case fur nuthin!

    Additional.The Court of Appeal should be the natural appellants on any review by the SPFL/SFA. They are recognised as such in SFA Articles. UEFA could provide an independent chair to any enquiry to observe if their Licensing Provisions were applied in the 5 Way and LNS Commission.

  9. JJ, monthly recurring made today. Keep up the good work and be safe. Cheers. Ref. 17L7528702907xxxx

    JJ: Cheers.

  10. I am amazed at the media scandal to ignore and suppress discussion of the consequences of the definitive ruling of the Supreme Court that the old Rangers broke the registration rules of the SFA. This ruling cannot be challenged. The rules have to be followed no matter if a few egos are hurt. 0-3 results for every match involving a cheat has to be the result. That would mean Rangers being put at the bottom of each affected league table with an asterisk to explain why they were not demoted.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s