Celt*c Assisting Well and Thistle!

H

HiHi Bear

Well-Known Member
They advanced/loaned 300K to sphl which was used to give advances/loans to Well and Thistle.
This is very unusual and should be clarified.
Is the board allowed to supply funds to member clubs without the consent of all the members?
Did the other clubs know about this?
Did the recipients know celt*c were involved?
Could there be any possibility of bribery here?
I'm sure there are many more aspects to this !
 
HiHi Bear said:
They advanced/loaned 300K to sphl which was used to give advances/loans to Well and Thistle.
This is very unusual and should be clarified.

Is the board allowed to supply funds to member clubs without the consent of all the members?yes

Did the other clubs know about this? Probably

Did the recipients know celt*c were involved? More than likely

Could there be any possibility of bribery here? 100%

I'm sure there are many more aspects to this !
Click to expand...
 
A down payment on future compliance, small potatoes (pun intended) for them but a big deal I’d assume for the recipients.

It stinks to high heaven but as with every scenario with these slimey characters it’s hard to prove blatant corruption stemming from the cesspit, once again the SPFL are the middle man interestingly.

As an aside it just shows you the power of the blue pound and without digressing into the boycott debate, it certainly wouldn’t do us any harm to target certain teams with restricted allocation uptake.

I’m sure Celtic will differ payments due to cover any shortfall in their budget forecast.
 
I can imagine Liewell telling Doncaster in a Marlon Brando accent, "I'll make them an offer they can't refuse". Don Liewell right enough.
 
That's got to be illegal, bribery at it's best, these clubs could and probably would have been relegated that season without that cash.
 
Alex Venters said:
They 'deferred' payment of £300,000 they were due which allowed the corrupt SPFL to advance Motherwell & Thistle £150,000.

Questions need to be asked.
Click to expand...

Whilst nothing untoward might have happened subsequent to this Celtic were placed in a position where they could influence these clubs at a later date or time of their chosing. That just isn't good governance in any way shape or form.
 
RWL12 said:
When you borrow you pay interest.

Did it happen here?

Celtc loan £300k to SPFL, SPFL pay £350k or whatever back?
Click to expand...
They didn't , as far as I'm aware, borrow.
It was a case of kind hearted Celtic doing the cash strapped SPFL a favour. As Doncaster himself stated,Celtic's "gesture" meant there was no negative impact on the SPFL cash flow.
Of course; in reality, when Don Corlelawwell does you a favour, you better be ready to "do him a service" when called upon. Unless of course it was granted on his daughter's wedding day!
 
Think this happened in 2017; doesn’t relate to what’s happening now. Pretty certain it won’t be mentioned in our evidence on Thursday
 
Alex Venters said:
They didn't , as far as I'm aware, borrow.
It was a case of kind hearted Celtic doing the cash strapped SPFL a favour. As Doncaster himself stated,Celtic's "gesture" meant there was no negative impact on the SPFL cash flow.
Of course; in reality, when Don Corlelawwell does you a favour, you better be ready to "do him a service" when called upon. Unless of course it was granted on his daughter's wedding day!
Click to expand...

where did the negative balance come from?
 
2 clubs applied for loans after the coronavirus outbreak & football was stopped as confirmed by Doncaster
But Doncaster tried to justify having to credit rate 42 clubs as a way of justifying his proposal as other options weren't practical into he timescale they had
Why credit rate 42, if only 2 clubs applied for a loan?
What he also didn't explain was how their applications for loans were dealt with or whether they were actually even considered.
He only stated they didnt need them after agreeing to his proposal & getting their money.
Why did they have to vote for the proposal to get the money they wanted?
Why were other clubs not offered to defer their share of monies to help these 2 clubs as per the Motherwell/Thistle deal?

You would think Doncaster needed them to vote for his proposal so blanked their loan request & also didnt give them the same treatment As Motherwell & Thistle, why do you think that would be.
 
So let's get this straight.
They can't afford to pay their staff so they utilise the furlough scheme initiated by a government they claim to hate, however, they have reserves to help other teams?
UK Government should claim back every dime the 19th Century Terrorist bastards sponged off the scheme
 
THEGOVANFRONT said:
2 clubs applied for loans after the coronavirus outbreak & football was stopped as confirmed by Doncaster
But Doncaster tried to justify having to credit rate 42 clubs as a way of justifying his proposal as other options weren't practical into he timescale they had
Why credit rate 42, if only 2 clubs applied for a loan?
What he also didn't explain was how their applications for loans were dealt with or whether they were actually even considered.
He only stated they didnt need them after agreeing to his proposal & getting their money.
Why did they have to vote for the proposal to get the money they wanted?
Why were other clubs not offered to defer their share of monies to help these 2 clubs as per the Motherwell/Thistle deal?

You would think Doncaster needed them to vote for his proposal so blanked their loan request & also didnt give them the same treatment As Motherwell & Thistle, why do you think that would be.
Click to expand...

It was a team voting no I believe he told to hang fire and see what happens before taking out their advance.
 
RenfrewBear72 said:
So let's get this straight.
They can't afford to pay their staff so they utilise the furlough scheme initiated by a government they claim to hate, however, they have reserves to help other teams?
UK Government should claim back every dime the 19th Century Terrorist bastards sponged off the scheme
Click to expand...

This was from accounts submitted in 2017 I believe.
 
Who approached Celtic for the money? Was it Thistle, Motherwell or the SPFL? How did Celtic know that other clubs required this advance? Has this, or similar, happened before?
In the absence of satisfactory answers, this can only be construed as bribery and corruption.
 
Harrogate Bluenose said:
If you cannot take on the company, I believe you can sue the CEO for Maladministration.
Click to expand...
You can’t.
Maladministration is the actions of a government body which can be seen as causing an injustice. The law in the United Kingdom says Ombudsmen must investigate maladministration.

it’s a specific term in the UK for wrong doing of public orgs. A quick search on google will highlight that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top