Rangers booted out of top Scottish league
Rangers have been dramatically kicked out of next season’s Scottish Premier League after rival clubs voted overwhelmingly to exclude the ailing Glasgow giants.
The soon-to-be-liquidated Ibrox club applied to rejoin the league after reforming as a new company (newco) but their request was turned down following a vote of the other clubs that make up the Scottish top-flight.
“At today’s General Meeting, SPL clubs today voted overwhelmingly to reject the application from Rangers newco to join the SPL,” an SPL statement said.
The statement came after more than five hours of talks at Hampden as Rangers’ new management clung on to the hope of staving off exclusion.
It caps a humiliating fall from grace for the most successful club in Scottish football history, who were plunged into crisis earlier this year after entering administration following a tax dispute.
It was not immediately clear where Rangers’ new incarnation will begin life next season. One option under consideration is to start in the First Division, the league below the SPL.
Rangers chief executive Charles Green reacted to Wednesday’s snub by confirming that Rangers would apply to join the Scottish Football League (SFL).
“We are deeply disappointed that our application to rejoin the SPL has been rejected overwhelmingly by the member clubs,” Green said in a statement.
“We will now proceed as we had planned from late June to apply for membership of the SFL.
“It is entirely a matter for them whether our application will be accepted or rejected and we will make no representation to any member club prior to that application being considered.
“If our application were to be accepted, Rangers will play in whichever division the SFL sees fit and we will move forward from there.”
The SPL, SFL and Scottish Football Association (SFA) are all mulling the First Division option, which would also include significant league reform and STG1 million ($A1.5 million) payment for the second tier’s television rights.
Safeguarding the multimillion-dollar commercial deals on which all of Scotland’s professional clubs rely so heavily is central to the issue, with a new TV deal worth STG80 million over five seasons reputedly dependent on the screening of four Rangers v Celtic Old Firm derbies a season.
Broadcasters are said to be prepared to go no more than one year without these showcase matches, meaning Rangers may end up in the First Division.
But clubs in the lower leagues are already speaking out against the prospect of Rangers going straight into the First Division, despite being told by the SFL that their own existence would be at risk if Rangers are forced to start in the Third Division.
The view of many lower league clubs is that Rangers should be forced to start from the bottom of the league ladder, as has happened in the past when clubs have been punished for financial mismanagement.
Weary Rangers fans meanwhile have expressed a preference for starting from scratch in the Third Division.
A poll of season-ticket holders conducted by the Rangers Fans Fighting Fund voted 75 per cent in favour of dropping down to the bottom tier.
© AFP 2013
Passionate about your football? Then sign up to The Roar's brand new daily football email, delivering Roaring articles directly to you day-in, day-out. You'll love it!
Click here to join now!
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
- Explore:
- football, Glasgow Rangers, Scottish Premier League
July 5th 2012 @ 1:32pm
nordster said | July 5th 2012 @ 1:32pm | Report comment
They ran the club poorly and should pay, or liquidate and create a new club. Either way any bailout or exemption from the rules sets a bad precedent. Relegation is fair enough as harsh as it is on the fans. Its up to people who care about these clubs to be better watchdogs over how they run in the first place.
July 5th 2012 @ 1:42pm
Ian Whitchurch said | July 5th 2012 @ 1:42pm | Report comment
Nordster,
When the television money doesnt come through because there are no Old Firm matches to sell, how many other clubs are you prepared to see fold ?
July 5th 2012 @ 1:48pm
nordster said | July 5th 2012 @ 1:48pm | Report comment
Well it would do the spl the world of good to not be so reliant on those games …they are the extreme end of the two team league scale…football leagues should be run more sustainably anyway, media deals are a nice honeypot.
It seems many european clubs think they can run up debts with no consequence ….This wont lead to any issues if its excused of course lol (end sarcasm)
Clubs, businesses whoever fold when they live beyond their means which is a very prevalent and negative trend in europe
July 5th 2012 @ 1:54pm
Ian Whitchurch said | July 5th 2012 @ 1:54pm | Report comment
Nordster,
So your answer is “all of them”.
There are *reasons* why some of us support salary caps.
July 5th 2012 @ 2:06pm
nordster said | July 5th 2012 @ 2:06pm | Report comment
No my answer is run your clubs and leagues better …people have known about these issues for a long while. Clubs dont fold ovemight. Same goes for Banks and Economies !
There are reasons why some of us are becoming economic libertarians …natural reaction to the recent order of things
The jig is up and it aint just football clubs
July 5th 2012 @ 3:39pm
Australian Rules said | July 5th 2012 @ 3:39pm | Report comment
nordster, yesterday was a bad day to peddle your “A-League should abandon the salary cap” theory.
How’s Man Utd doing?
July 5th 2012 @ 4:47pm
nordster said | July 5th 2012 @ 4:47pm | Report comment
Overloaded with debt like rangers, thats why they are floating to raise funds in bermuda or wherever. Thats what many of these owners have done, borrowed against the value of the club. A one trick pony….
Nothing to do with salary caps, everything to do with Bad Economics
So it was in fact a good day to peddle those ideas, when u actually understand them
Anyone proposing a wage cap and floor system does not understand economics. It is no surprise they are peddled by player associations/ unionists and corporatists.
July 5th 2012 @ 4:53pm
Fussball ist unser leben said | July 5th 2012 @ 4:53pm | Report comment
What’s the “salary cap” got to do with ManUtd?
For FY2011, Man United has revenue of £331.3m & a massive operating profit (EBITDA) of £110.9m.
Forbes Magazine has valued Manchester United as the most valuable sporting club in the world.
So, you ask: “How’s Man Utd doing?” They’re doing very well thank you and will be looking to do even better on-field next season.
July 5th 2012 @ 4:59pm
HardcorePrawn said | July 5th 2012 @ 4:59pm | Report comment
Fussball,
I think that you might want to read the article below, Manchester United are decidedly NOT doing very well, as any of their fans, the ones that wear green and gold scarves (& not of a socceroo variety), could tell you.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jul/04/manchester-united-debt-cayman-islands
July 5th 2012 @ 4:59pm
nordster said | July 5th 2012 @ 4:59pm | Report comment
Well hes arguing the lack of a cap leads to overspending i assume which isnt even true if the club is run well …and as u say even less with man u as their numbers are not that bad. But they are vulnerable to some systemic risk as with the rest of the economy now.
Salary caps or any economic structure might try and regulate or game the system to get around it, never works in the long run.
July 5th 2012 @ 5:08pm
Fussball ist unser leben said | July 5th 2012 @ 5:08pm | Report comment
HardcorePrawn
I’ve read that article & many similar articles. The club is doing fine – which is why the operating profit is a massive £110.9m.
However, when the Glazers bought ManUnited, the majority of the purchase was via debt instruments that were secured against the club’s assets. I haven’t seen details of the arrangement but it smells bad.
The debt liability is a result of shonky deals. It has nothing to do with the way Man United operates the football club.
July 5th 2012 @ 5:29pm
HardcorePrawn said | July 5th 2012 @ 5:29pm | Report comment
Ahh, but it has everything to do with how the Glazers run Man Utd.
Of the £110.9m operating profit you’ve mentioned, half went to paying off interest on their debt alone. Whittle away the operating profit to a pre-tax profit amount and we find that they were left with “only” £29.7m. An admittedly impressive leap from previous years losses, but really not enough to buy one world class player (or even Andy Carroll). Once tax is factored into the equation they were probably left with just enough to put on a prawn sandwich spread for the board members.
It’s also worth bearing in mind that these figures came from a year when Man Utd won the league and got to the Champions League final. They managed neither this year.
Then there is still the small matter of their debt, currently standing at £423m, and continuing to grow.
The Glazers press releases often speak of the club’s 659 million followers (659 million? Really?), but how many of these are dyed-in-the-wool United fans who will continue to support them through hard times (such as those that Rangers are currently experiencing)?
And how many glory-seeking, fly-by-night fans would switch their allegiance to a more glamorous team, like their near-neighbours City?
I think we may find that the fans that the Glazers may one day need the support of are the very same that are currently protesting the family’s ownership of their club.
July 5th 2012 @ 6:10pm
nordster said | July 5th 2012 @ 6:10pm | Report comment
Wow thats one big debt servicing bill …no wonder our economies are so stuffed, its endemic across much of the private and public sectors.
July 5th 2012 @ 6:43pm
Fussball ist unser leben said | July 5th 2012 @ 6:43pm | Report comment
HardcorePrawn
I still don’t see how the “salary cap” has anything to do with the debt transferred to ManU’s balance sheet by the owners of the club.
The huge operating profit clearly indicates that, for Manchester United:
Revenue from football operation exceeds the expenses from football operations (player wages would be a major expense) by £110.9m.
The absence of “salary cap” in the EPL has nothing to do with Man United’s debt.
July 5th 2012 @ 7:30pm
Colin N said | July 5th 2012 @ 7:30pm | Report comment
Interesting thing about United since the Glazer’s took over is that their turnover has significantly increased, so they’re obviously very good businessmen.
I just dont understand why they acquired the club like they did.
July 5th 2012 @ 7:36pm
MV Dave said | July 5th 2012 @ 7:36pm | Report comment
Colin N
They took the gain without having to take the risks. The debt was all put back on the club? My question still is why this was allowed to happen?
July 5th 2012 @ 7:48pm
nordster said | July 5th 2012 @ 7:48pm | Report comment
Its how much of the economy is sustained Mvdave, debt debt debt …the answers to these trends are there if people want to look. Austrian and recently stockholm economics. Read End the Fed by ron paul, will open your eyes to why the economy gets flooded with credit in the first place. Quantitative easing and operation twist are all just euphemisms for debasing a currency effectively. Thats how civilisations can fall.
The glazers are doing better maybe at trying to monetise their global support base. The method they used to buy the club though is very common, nothing dodgy about it in the context of the wider economy,
July 5th 2012 @ 7:59pm
Australian Rules said | July 5th 2012 @ 7:59pm | Report comment
Fussball quote:
“So, you ask: “How’s Man Utd doing?” They’re doing very well thank you and will be looking to do even better on-field next season.”
Now THERE’S a man who can dodge an issue beautifully (via the ‘on-field’ comment) before plunging his head back into the sand.
July 5th 2012 @ 8:01pm
MV Dave said | July 5th 2012 @ 8:01pm | Report comment
Yep nordster l guess so. The Glaziers are fortunate (or excellent judges) to have control of the most profitable club on the planet…hopefully they won’t stuff it up like Rangers have been.
It’s hard to understand how a club with 45,000 ave attendances and millions of fans globally can be so screwed.
July 5th 2012 @ 8:21pm
MV Dave said | July 5th 2012 @ 8:21pm | Report comment
AR
ManUtd currently have $400m in sponsorships being paid out now and in the coming few years. They have around 60,000 season ticket holders (paying upwards of $500 each) and fill the 75,000 capacity Old Trafford 25 to 30 times per season. They earnt around $100m from the EPL tv deal last season and a further $80-90m from UCL participation.The tv rights deal will double in 2 years.
They were credited with being the most valuable sports team on the planet by Forbes Magazine (US) this year.
I reckon they’re doing ok as a club even though their American owners have dumped this debt on them.
July 5th 2012 @ 8:26pm
HardcorePrawn said | July 5th 2012 @ 8:26pm | Report comment
Fussball,
I never said that United’s problems had anything to do the lack of a salary cap. My responses have been to your “doing very well, thank you” comments regarding united’s status. They are doing anything but “very well”.
United do have a huge amount of income (for now), but it is getting swallowed up by repayments on interest on the Glazers’ debt. It is estimated that the Glazers’ debt has cost the club over £500m so far, and still it grows.
Fussball, I take it that you’re a United supporter? If so, rather than accepting the Glazers’ PR guff, you might want to take a look at what’s being said and done by the loyal fans who attend Old Trafford, because what is happening with United’s finances is of a real concern to them. And if you are a United fan, it should be of concern to you too.
July 5th 2012 @ 8:44pm
MV Dave said | July 5th 2012 @ 8:44pm | Report comment
A reasonable take on ManUs current situation;
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jul/04/manchester-united-fans-concern?CMP=twt_gu
July 6th 2012 @ 6:19pm
Ian Whitchurch said | July 6th 2012 @ 6:19pm | Report comment
Man U are a different situation.
Essentially you had a corporate raider buy the company and then had the company borrow a whole lot of money to pay him back for the costs of taking them over.
The owner is now proceeding to suck loose cash out of the company, and it isnt investing in new plant and material.
July 7th 2012 @ 9:44am
nordster said | July 7th 2012 @ 9:44am | Report comment
Yes its absurd isnt it but thats how so much of the economy runs. That is a broad system wide failing tho not to do with the absence of a cap. That was my point to AR. Saddling an entity with debt is surely a bad way to kick off any acquisition yet its become so widespread. Shame for the fans of any club that goes downhill as a result.
July 7th 2012 @ 10:28am
jbinnie said | July 7th 2012 @ 10:28am | Report comment
Nordster – Using your logic we should also include the EPL,LaLiga and ,if we went back a few years we could also add Serie A and the Bundesliga where the “money clubs have “ruled supreme” for years.So if you had taken all of these teams out of their leagues and formed a European Super League,as was suggested a few years ago what then would have happened to the lesser clubs??????Can you imagine the TV deal that would be made if a league made up of the 2 Manchesters,Spurs, Arsenal & Liverpool,the 2 Milans Juventus, Roma &Napoli,.Real and Barca,Munich & Dortmund,Ajax & Feyenoord (that’s 16 and there are a few good teams still missing) were that competition to come to fruition. A forward or backward step for the rest????Your thoughts please. jb
July 7th 2012 @ 10:37am
nordster said | July 7th 2012 @ 10:37am | Report comment
I think you’re misinterpreting my logic or i just didnt explain it very well
Not in favour of the euro super league at all. A major backward step. The thing i dont like about that concept is its just a cartel by the currently large clubs to cement their dominant market positions. The Beauty of european football is the structural embrace of the free market. Any team from anywhere can progress all the way, in theory anyhow. Over the course of decades though the system is very fluid and healthier for it.
A super league would be replicating the american and australian trend of closed shop sporting leagues. A weird reversal of broader economic trends. Though id argue not even the supposedly capitalist america is all that capitalist in a truer sense. More of a state/corporate oligopoly.
July 5th 2012 @ 3:12pm
HardcorePrawn said | July 5th 2012 @ 3:12pm | Report comment
It’s a sad fact but the SPL does need Rangers. Without them they lose a vast number of TV viewers from around the world, they are one of the biggest and best supported clubs there is. Would viewers still be tuning in to watch what will effectively be a Rangers youth team take on Peterhead, or an SPL where every team (other than the one in green and white hoops) are vying for second place?
Rangers will probably bounce back to the Scottish Premier League in a few years. Their massive support will ensure that they’ll ride through any enforced relegation and financial strife. In the meantime, the smaller Premier League teams, now faced with playing only one of Glasgow’s 2 giants will find it difficult financially. I’ve no doubt that in 5 or 6 years time Rangers will be competing for the second placed spot in the SPL (Celtic, without the financial constraints that Rangers have, will probably dominate the SPL for the next decade or so), but Scottish football could be a much poorer place by then. For a league that already struggles, the removal of Rangers and the departure of most of their squad to other countries (Celtic aside, no other SPL team could afford the wages) could see a great many long-standing teams go to the wall. They’ll have less fans in the stands, less TV viewers, fewer sponsors (its no secret that sponsors of Spanish teams stipulate that they must have a certain amount of televised games against Real & Barca), and on it goes.
For someone who grew up watching the BBC’s Final Score every Saturday afternoon and loving the romanticised names of the Scottish league teams (Queen of the South, Hamilton Academicals, Partick Thistle) this could be the start of quite a sad and tumultuous period for Scottish football.
July 5th 2012 @ 7:27pm
Bondy said | July 5th 2012 @ 7:27pm | Report comment
Hardcore, your probably right there,it might’n be that good in Scotland in a few years time regarding Pro Football ,with Rugby’s presence there as well it could boost their profile even more than they have now.
I havent read anything as dyer as that for a while ,we are the craziest sport arent we. If there was one disappointment that would be that this story and circumstances wont get much oxygen in Australia in the media or sports administrations.
Van Persie’s leaving Arsenal ,thats made my day.
July 6th 2012 @ 9:47am
jbinnie said | July 6th 2012 @ 9:47am | Report comment
Hardcore &Bondy- I’m afraid the sad and tumultuos period in Scottish football is not ” coming” it has been with us for some years now and has gone on unchecked for at least 30 years. Why 30 years you may ask?. Going back that far we had 2 Scottish players Law and Baxter playing in a World team against England in a celebration match,every major team in the EPL had at least 3 or 4 Scots in their teams Bremner,Lorimer,and the Greys at Leeds,Buchan,Law,McQueen ,Crerand& Morgan at Utd,,Yeats,StJohn,at Anfield,Brown, Mackay and White at Spurs to name just a few.How many Scots are playing in those teams today?,very few.Why has this happened you may ask?,there are many varied reasons of course,modern lifestyle being one of the foremost arguments,but other countries,like Germany, have continued to produce world class players since 1950 onwards up till today.
I feel that in that simple statement there is much to be examined and laid bare.For years Scottish Football has been run by individuals from those “quaintly named football clubs” that you mention and it is in that system of management that may be found the basis of Scotland’s fall from grace jb
July 5th 2012 @ 5:19pm
MV Dave said | July 5th 2012 @ 5:19pm | Report comment
Amazing situation and what a humiliation for the millions of Rangers fans around the world. From what l have read even the Scottish League clubs are planning to vote against the Rangers newco’s automatic promotion to the First Division. By rights they are correct but l have a feeling common sense will win out and the Rangers Newco will start in Div 1. Of course they could always apply to enter the English Championship!! (yep a whole new article)
July 5th 2012 @ 6:03pm
mokicat said | July 5th 2012 @ 6:03pm | Report comment
Any new entity should not be able to trade with the name ‘Rangers’ That entity has been liquidated and a new club shouldn’t be able to bootstrap on the legacy of the ‘Rangers’ brand. How about Glasgow East or is it Glasgow west?
July 5th 2012 @ 8:36pm
gawa said | July 5th 2012 @ 8:36pm | Report comment
Rangers football club is a seperate entity to the business. A common mistake made by people with a dislike for Rangers FC.
The company/ business has changed names and structure several times over the last century whereas the football team has remained.
Please keep tabloid type anti Rangers FC sentiments off this site.
July 5th 2012 @ 6:24pm
Midfielder said | July 5th 2012 @ 6:24pm | Report comment
The good thing about this is if you are poorly managed you go broke and go down divisions… not out of existence but from the top league… RL over the years could have done with a few of their clubs being forced to be better managed as I guess the AFL …
This is football … as for Man U if their owners cannot pay their debts then they may go as well but that is the point of football … remember back in the 80′s they two where playing in Division 2 … stay on top of the pack or be sent down..
July 5th 2012 @ 6:34pm
MV Dave said | July 5th 2012 @ 6:34pm | Report comment
It was 1974-75 that United were in the 2nd Div Mid…l remember it well, a Dennis Law (playing against his old club and for Man City) back heeler sent them down. They average 48,000 in the 2nd division after averaging 43,000 the season they were relegated.
July 5th 2012 @ 7:22pm
jamesb said | July 5th 2012 @ 7:22pm | Report comment
its a sad day seeing Rangers getting kicked out of SPL
I find it amazing how Rangers are in this dire finacial position, where surely you would think that the tv deals cater around rangers and celtic.
July 5th 2012 @ 8:33pm
Ian Whitchurch said | July 5th 2012 @ 8:33pm | Report comment
JamesB,
Theres a Williamson played called ‘The Club’ that tells the story.
Basically, the plan is we spend a whole lot of money on players and so on, and then the club has on field success, which leads to more fans through the turnstiles, more sponsors, more TV money and so on. Its a great plan. It cant fail.
In the case of Rangers, it wasnt just about success in Scotland – the plan was also to regularly play Champions League.
Sports clubs have to be actively prevented from spending themselves to death.
July 5th 2012 @ 9:50pm
nordster said | July 5th 2012 @ 9:50pm | Report comment
Or the management of any entity should be prudent enough to not spend themselves to death.
Thats basic business logic, no salary cap required Ian
(bad management happens with or without cap measures)
July 6th 2012 @ 6:16pm
Ian Whitchurch said | July 6th 2012 @ 6:16pm | Report comment
Nordster,
When it happens to team after team, in code after code, I think you need to look at the structural factors.
And that factor is that no-one cares if you come a prudent fourth or fifth.
July 7th 2012 @ 9:52am
nordster said | July 7th 2012 @ 9:52am | Report comment
Can i quote some hayek at u …equality is important, but forcing equality cant be done. Or forcing good business sense. Some parameters in a football economy could be good.
A salary floor in particular though forces too high a spending burden. And when u abolish that, well it undermines the concept of a cap as equalisation measure. To restrain wage growth it could have some benefit. But then u penalise sustainable ambition .say if melbourne victory one day can drum up the means to have a serious crack at asia. Well they should be free to do so.
So for me when it happens time after time …i think the structural factors that need addressing is not the need for more regulation but less.
There is an intellectual underpinning to where im coming from, just so u know im not talking (completely) out my backside
I used to buy into the argument that open or free markets were somewhat responsible for our broader economic malaise. Then i realised we’ve never really had them. The economic liberalism argument has done a real number on this marxist leaning kid!
July 5th 2012 @ 10:35pm
thinker said | July 5th 2012 @ 10:35pm | Report comment
After what they did to Spirit, Thank god they are dead
July 5th 2012 @ 11:36pm
Bondy said | July 5th 2012 @ 11:36pm | Report comment
This is a fairly damning accusation from prominent fellow shareholders accusing Arsenal major owner Kronke of selling top players to buy down $$ .
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jul/05/arsenal-investors-reproach-kroenke-van-persie?newsfeed=true …
July 6th 2012 @ 12:54am
Midfielder said | July 6th 2012 @ 12:54am | Report comment
Sky News report a dust cloud has closed UK airports.
Police have arrested the Arsenal trophy cabinet cleaner in connection with the incident.
July 6th 2012 @ 7:51am
MV Dave said | July 6th 2012 @ 7:51am | Report comment
LOL Good one Mid.
July 6th 2012 @ 9:20am
jbinnie said | July 6th 2012 @ 9:20am | Report comment
It is quite astounding to read so many comments about the financial well -being or otherwise of major clubs in the UK football scene. What is even more astounding that nowhere is there a mention of the “great survival” of Glasgow Celtic just a few short years ago in 1994.
For years the club had been run as what only could be described as a “family company” and much of the club’s surrounds ,ie.their field at Parkhead,showed the state of the clubs future planning for it could only be described as a “pre-war” dump,this despite being one of the best “supported” clubs in the UK.Then the bombshell, the club came within 8 hours of being declared bankrupt when the BofS demanded payment of debts totalling 7 million GBP.
Enter a Scots born, Canadian based ,business man ,Fergus McCann, who stood as guarantor and stated his intentions of transforming the club in 5 years.He did this by various menoeuverings in the club’s financial affairs,razed their “dump” , building a superb, modern, 60,000 seater, stadium,floated the company on the London SE,and at the time of his departure in 1999, the promised 5 years later, 63% of the club’s stock was actually in the hands of the fans for whom he had initiated an “easy” entry into share purchasing.Although there are no figures available,it is rumoured that by the time of his leaving he had converted his 7 million “guarantee” into a 132 million GBP sale of his holding in the club, which had stood at 51%.
Obviously a business man,not steeped in football history,who knew how to turn an ailng sleeping giant into a money making machine,all in 5 years.
The odd thing is that Rangers were arguably a better proposition at that time for the same type of treatment ,but somewhere along the line the “magical touch” of McCann was obviously missing. jb
July 6th 2012 @ 8:15pm
agga78 said | July 6th 2012 @ 8:15pm | Report comment
I am a Celtic man and JB is correct Celtic were gone in 1994 and by 1999 we were the best supported club in britain with 60k attenandences compared to Man Utds 55k,
On Rangers they did not go banrupt because they spent too much money like Leeds, Rangers had a scheme too pay players and staff so called tax free loans which were never going to be payed back and the Government had an investigation into these scheme’s and found they were owed 70 millon pounds in taxes from these payments, Rangers believed this scheme was above board and fought the HMRS in court and lost, thus going into administration then liquidation.
Rangers are being punished for being tax dodgers basically and I beleive they are not the only club to have done this tax scheme and others may fall in the future. Rangers did not over spend like so many clubs Leeds or Portsmouth etc they just cheated the government and now Scottish football is the big loser.
Where ever Rangers finish up, this is a opportunity for all SPL clubs to change their philosophy on how they play the game and the type of players they produce, Celtic can lead the way here and I hope we go back to the days of the quality street gang where the likes of Kenny dalglish were produced, with no competition basically for the next few years this is the time for the Academy to build a way of playing right through to the 1st team.
July 7th 2012 @ 12:19pm
nordster said | July 7th 2012 @ 12:19pm | Report comment
Wow thats fascinating didnt know bout the tax thing …anything involving Schemes i guess is just an attempt to game the system. Getting something for nothing like taking on debt in the case of man united. Kicking the can down the road till one day the road goes off a cliff….
July 7th 2012 @ 5:08pm
jbinnie said | July 7th 2012 @ 5:08pm | Report comment
Nordster – The “schemes” are actually workable but what was ignored appears to be a little known tax proviso that states in order for it to be legal, the recipient has to be domiciled in the country where his “loan” is being deposited, for at least 3 consecutive months of the year and as you know that is an almost impossible”must” for a full time professional in European football to achieve. jb
July 8th 2012 @ 9:40am
nordster said | July 8th 2012 @ 9:40am | Report comment
Haha yeah i guess so.
And its workable sure, still they are attempting to game the system …system needs busting imo …tax schemes are unnecessary if they radically reduce the tax base. What govt – anywhere – would do that tho.