Ranger UEFA licence in 2011 still under consideration by SFA

Part of me wishes they actually try to punish us, as I'm sure Mr King would go fùcking mental about it and any secrecy agreement on the 5 way carve up would be out the window and we can show the world the attempts made to kill us.
 
Hot air and bluster, if they thought they could have us over they'd have done it long before now. Fvck knows they tried everything else.
 
Scotland is the only country in the world where the national football association would actively seek to facilitate the removal of one of its clubs from international competition.
 
Walters80 said:
This is the nonsense that they want to take to the CAS spending over £100,000 in legal fees in the process just on the chance that they might be able to dish out a £5000 fine at the end? And they wonder why Scottish football is skint?

No doubt the filth are working away behind the scenes on this as well.

Meanwhile over at the knewcamp someone gets jailed every few months for child abuse. The SFA certainly has it’s priorities right?
Click to expand...

It’s not about the £5k. The rats are trying to open up the opportunity to go after us for lost revenue. Shameless Scumbags the lot of them
 
UEFA don't consider anything 're rules etc back more than 5 years .

This is about the sfa and septic they approved it . It's down to them if they fucked it up septics claim is with/ against the sfa .

If rangers did not follow procedure and are found guilty it's an admin mistake small fine . Then it's up to septic to claim the sfa for loss of earnings caused by there negligent low level paper gathering.
 
Gibraltar Loyal said:
Seems to me to be a pre-emptive strike. Just waiting for something along the lines of this:-
"The SFA have decided that it will not take Rangers to CAS over the license to play in Europe as it is a historical issue. As with all historic issues a line will be drawn and we will move...."
Click to expand...

Exactly. It's a total front and cover up for the REAL crimes here over 5 decades.

It really is the Wolf in Sheep's clothing.
 
I managed to get as far as the line, "the old Rangers and the new club set up by Charles Green", what a load of shite.

Shots have been fired at their golden child (celtic - probably not the best choice of phrase given their history) and they are in full deflect mode.
 
I have never known a football club so involved with lawyers and legal small print such as Filth FC.
Whether it is winning games off the pitch through the exploitation of legal technicalities to legally hounding their rivals to compensate for failure to get the better of them on the football field, they really are a club like no other.

Yet when there are enormous crimes inside their own organisation with children being damaged through perverted physical abuse for decades suddenly every legal nicety disappears and all they can summon up is the brutal reactions of sub-humanity in all of its most deformed aspects.

Extraordinary people indeed.
 
bilkobear said:
I have never known a football club so involved with lawyers and legal small print such as Filth FC.
Whether it is winning games off the pitch through the exploitation of legal technicalities to legally hounding their rivals to compensate for failure to get the better of them on the football field, they really are a club like no other.

Yet when there are enormous crimes inside their own organisation with children being damaged through perverted physical abuse for decades suddenly every legal nicety disappears and all they can summon up is the brutal reactions of sub-humanity in all of its most deformed aspects.

Extraordinary people indeed.
Click to expand...

If ever there was a post that sums up perfectly their whole rotten ethos, it is this one.
Well said.
 
Aye-Ready said:
This is complete nonsense. The club declared it at the time. Another ridiculous scaremongering piece that aims to deflect from a bigger story over the other side of city.
Click to expand...
I hope it is nonsense, but, the club declared the EBTs every year as well in the accounts.
 
They are rats.

I haven’t got many mentally challenged mates because we don’t even discuss football because it would just be an argument. But I reckon it will get messy with them when we win 55. %^*& them all.
 
Couldn't Rangers not get legal representation and take our fight to UEFA because we're not getting anywhere fast with these cretins. They are the laughing stock of our game. We'd be better going over their heads and undermining their pathetic attempt to hamstring the club. I hope Rangers tell them in no uncertain terms where to go.
 
Last edited:
RAFBob said:
I managed to get as far as the line, "the old Rangers and the new club set up by Charles Green", what a load of shite.

Shots have been fired at their golden child (celtic - probably not the best choice of phrase given their history) and they are in full deflect mode.
Click to expand...

The 5 way agreement is actually between the SFA, SPl, SFL, Sevco, Rangers. Sevco there being the vehicle used to ensure Rangers survival. All the official sources, including the liquidators, hold this view. Anyone who interprets this differently is a Rangers hater who instantly loses all credibility.
 
Ricksen said:
The 5 way agreement is actually between the SFA, SPl, SFL, Sevco, Rangers. Sevco there being the vehicle used to ensure Rangers survival. All the official sources, including the liquidators, hold this view. Anyone who interprets this differently is a Rangers hater who instantly loses all credibility.
Click to expand...

That's why I didn't bother reading any further than that comment mate - the article might as well be written by Phil Threenames.
 
High Society said:
It’s not about the £5k. The rats are trying to open up the opportunity to go after us for lost revenue. Shameless Scumbags the lot of them
Click to expand...

We should be after them for the unfair advantage that they gained by sweeping the matter under their humongous carpet, and not paying compensation to all the victims of sexual abuse abuse over 50 years.
 
Wugs said:
drD4u4l.gif
Click to expand...
 
Craigie said:
Craig Whyte took Rangers over before the end of the 2010-2011 season. He would have been in charge at the time UEFA licences were being approved.
Click to expand...

The licence was approved in April 2011 based on submissions to the SFA by March 31st.

Rangers disclosed there was a tax liability claimed by HMRC but that they were disputing the matter. This was all they had to under UEFA rules. The SFA cannot claim that Rangers really thought differently. The fact is the matter was under dispute and therefore not immediately due.
 
Marstonbear said:
Part of the rules for Europa League 18/19 are below, obvs things may have changed since 2011. Reads to me that any licence would be granted by SFA
To be eligible to participate in the competition, clubs must: a. have qualified for the competition on sporting merit;
I – General Provisions 11
b. fill in the official entry documents (i.e. all documents containing the information deemed necessary by the UEFA administration for ascertaining compliance with the admission criteria), which must reach the UEFA administration by 1 June 2018 (for administrative purposes, the UEFA administration may request the entry documents at an earlier date to be communicated by circular letter; in such a case, the club’s association must confirm to the UEFA administration in writing by 1 June 2018 that the club fulfils all admission criteria set out in Paragraph 4.01); c. have obtained a licence issued by the competent national body in accordance with the UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations and be included in the list of licensing decisions to be submitted by this body to the UEFA administration by the given deadline; d. comply with the rules aimed at ensuring the integrity of the competition as defined in Article 5; e. confirm in writing that they themselves, as well as their players and officials, comply with the IFAB Laws of the Game promulgated by the International Football Association Board (IFAB) and agree to respect the statutes (including the principles of fair play as defined therein), regulations, directives and decisions of UEFA; f. confirm in writing that they themselves, as well as their players and officials, agree to recognise the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Lausanne, Switzerland, as defined in the relevant provisions of the UEFA Statutes and agree that any proceedings before the CAS concerning admission to, participation in or exclusion from the competition will be held in an expedited manner in accordance with the CAS Code of Sports-related Arbitration and with the directions issued by the CAS, including for provisional or super-provisional measures, to the explicit exclusion of any state court; g. not have been directly and/or indirectly involved, since the entry into force of Article 50(3) of the UEFA Statutes, i.e. 27 April 2007, in any activity aimed at arranging or influencing the outcome of a match at national or international level and confirm this to the UEFA administration in writing. h. inform UEFA about any and all proceedings before disciplinary bodies or state courts implicating the club or its officials in any activity aimed at arranging or influencing the outcome of a match at national or international level, whether or not the club or its officials have been acquitted. 4.02 If, on the basis of all the factual circumstances and information available to UEFA, UEFA concludes to its comfortable satisfaction that a club has been directly and/or indirectly involved, since the entry into force of Article 50(3) of the UEFA Statutes, i.e. 27 April 2007, in any activity aimed at arranging or influencing the outcome of a match at national or international level, UEFA will declare such club ineligible to participate in the competition. Such ineligibility is effective only for one football season. When taking its decision, UEFA can rely on, but is not bound by, a decision of a national or international sporting body, arbitral tribunal or state court. UEFA can refrain from declaring a club ineligible to participate in the competition if UEFA is comfortably satisfied that the impact of a decision taken in
12 I – General Provisions
connection with the same factual circumstances by a national or international sporting body, arbitral tribunal or state court has already had the effect of preventing that club from participating in a UEFA club competition. 4.03 In addition to the administrative measure of declaring a club ineligible as provided for in Paragraph 4.02, the UEFA Organs for the Administration of Justice
Click to expand...

From memory, at the end of March in the year involved it has to be certified by the club that there are no outstanding taxes etc as at 31st December the year before. As at 31/12, the smaller tax case was still under appeal, so it was correct to certify that there were no outstanding taxes.

There were then dates in June and September where the Club essentially self certifies to the SFA that there has been no change in the position. The SFA then rely on that re the licensing.

By the end of June there was no longer an appeal of the wee tax case, but Whyte was trying to get an agreement with HMRC.

Supposedly the information given by the club at the June date was inaccurate as it suggested there was either already an agreement or the debt was still under appeal, neither of which was correct.

I don’t think what was actually submitted by the club has ever been made public, so it could have been accurately dealt with.

It was Whyte in charge at the time though...
 
Last edited:
Issue with tax payments your hung, drawn and quartered, abuse children no that's fine they where probably asking for it. The very football association that should be fighting for European places for its clubs tried and is still trying to damage one of its member clubs why the board still remains silent attack after attack are the clubs lawyers advising them not to question the reasons or are they working on a case to take to uefa?
 
Lawwell adviced his cronies to chase us for their "potentially lost CL money", so he has more in his pocket to pay the abuse victims ...
 
Walters80 said:
This is the nonsense that they want to take to the CAS spending over £100,000 in legal fees in the process just on the chance that they might be able to dish out a £5000 fine at the end? And they wonder why Scottish football is skint?

No doubt the filth are working away behind the scenes on this as well.

Meanwhile over at the knewcamp someone gets jailed every few months for child abuse. The SFA certainly has it’s priorities right?
Click to expand...
I believe point deduction and taking away our Euro place can also be used as a punishment so I wouldn't put it past them to do it. Celtic will use every means to get to 10 in a row. As UEFA can ban teams from Europe if there is a conflict I believe look for for them taking action when Celtic are beaten in Europe.
 
Dave570 said:
I believe point deduction and taking away our Euro place can also be used as a punishment so I wouldn't put it past them to do it. Celtic will use every means to get to 10 in a row. As UEFA can ban teams from Europe if there is a conflict I believe look for for them taking action when Celtic are beaten in Europe.
Click to expand...
But could UEFA not flag up a conflict of interests as far as Lawwell is concerned and throw it out before it gathers any momentum. Surely they're not so blind as to see the game they're trying to play,if not,Rangers should bring it up.
 
It doesn't matter what the sfa will or won't do. It doesn't matter what the media are trying to do to protect #CelticKnew. It doesn't matter what every Rangers hating scumbag think or try to do to Rangers. What every #CelticKnew board, and their fan's, man woman and child to this day are trying to deny, eclipses anything we have meant to have done wrong, which we didn't. They will have to live with the shame forever
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top