Thanks BB, something just came from memory bank.
Cairnsybhoy79
Well-known member
How can the board be sanctioned? dont get that mate educate me HH
Cairnsybhoy79
Well-known member
Exactly we've always been fighting an uphill battle fae day one of our club we've been treated shockingly thru the years second class club they treated us like.... hated us winning all they trophies so try n keep us down other ways and now we have something concrete to go for these bastards our board want to not rock the boat fuck the boat the fans have been wanting something done and our board are going to ignore us am so pissed aff way board put the fans first we want justice and it all exposed for the corruption it was ffs!!!!!
michael duffy
Well-known member
Courtesy of the levellers
There's a law for the rich and a law for the poor
And a law for Dirty Davey
His body's gone but his soul lives on
Here's to you Dirty Davey
It's a kick in the head and a prison bed
And you tell me it's the law
Corrupt, corrupt from the bottom to the top
And you tell me it's the law
Corrupt, corrupt from the bottom to the top
And you tell me it's the law
Corrupt, corrupt from the bottom to the top
And you tell me it's the law
Corrupt, corrupt from the bottom to the top
And you tell me it's the law
There's a law for the rich and a law for the poor
And a law for Dirty Davey
His body's gone but his soul lives on
Here's to you Dirty Davey
It's a kick in the head and a prison bed
And you tell me it's the law
Corrupt, corrupt from the bottom to the top
And you tell me it's the law
Corrupt, corrupt from the bottom to the top
And you tell me it's the law
Corrupt, corrupt from the bottom to the top
And you tell me it's the law
Corrupt, corrupt from the bottom to the top
And you tell me it's the law
michael duffy
Well-known member
Ye know somethin, when yer betrayed by your own, ah bit of your soul dies,we, as supporters, those now deceased,god bless em'. us auldies, the the young team,we all know we're hated, every phuqer in scotland want's tae see us fall,we know what smsm,hun pundit's, even so called Celtic men are all about,turn every story about Celtic into a negative,well where's this new PR/Media company we've hired,what the phuq are they doin, any chance of gettin ahead of the game, as for the agm, that's a backslappin gig for the board no dissent will be tolerated, so the fan's, us,get the mushroom treatment again,ach well,nothin new there!
K
kelly
Guest
THat was an 1872 petition so file under made up pish , the only ebt at the club was as others pointed out juinho and he arrived with it , Brian Quinn dealt with that straight awayI am reading a bit now Kelly about Eric Reilly and Peter Lawwell and by the looks of things Eric Reilly did not resign from the SFA both he and Lawwell were removed from the SFA by a petition which had 522 supporters,,does this make sense to you.
I will read on a bit and see if I understand what is happening,but from what I have read so far it was not onlt sevco who were involved in the Big Tax Case..
It say,s here...
For the benefit of all concerned it is imperative that Stewart Regan and his SFA compatriots are seen to apply the same rule of thum for all clubs within its association/leagues ..
Whilst the SFA sat in judgement of the Rangers Big Tax Case BTC it has now become apparent that particular members of that board had infact themselves and their clubs operated such schemes so as to avoid the payment of significantly large sums of tax.
This placed those clubs at a distinct advantage over other clubs..
This goes on forever Kelly but the bottom line for us and the reason Lawwell does not want to open a can of worms is damning to us..
Of more significant concern is that the SFA board that sat in judgement of Rangers FC and it use of tax avoidance schemes included board members of Celtic FC.
It has now been widley reported and also acknowledgedthat Celtic FC also utilized various tax avoidance schemes in payment of their staff.
This now brings into question the integrity of Scottish football the honesty and fairness of Stewart Regan and his cohorts and rights to redress the ills of our football association and its ability to apply fairly rules that should be applicable for all and not just the selected one,s targeted by association.
Will Stewart Regan and the SFA now seek to ensure that board members such as Peter Lawwell and Eric Reilly are removed from the SFA immediately and a full enquiry carried out on what schemes of tax avoidance were operated by Scottish football clubs and more importantly Celtic FC who sat in judgement of Rangers FC whilst themselves using schemes to assist the avoidance of tax on players ,manager and director salaries.
I n the name of integrity it is imperitive that Stewart Regan is now seen to act otherwise there should also be a call for his resignation for neglect whilst he was/is in charge at the scottish football association.
Failure to act will result in a campaign to ensure that the government and HMRC are made fully aware and that further actions to remove said board members will ensue..
HH.
Imatim
Well-known member
More info from BRTH via CQN
BROGAN ROGAN TREVINO AND HOGAN on 28TH OCTOBER 2019 10:22 PM
CELTIC MAC on 28TH OCTOBER 2019 5:28 PM
You raise a good point – It was indeed RFC who took the preliminary point before the Judicial Panel and that in itself is an interesting story.
So pin back yer lugholes and consider the following:
1. Having conducted an investigation into the UEFA licence grant etc, and having decided that there was evidence which pointed to both SFA and UEFA rules breaches and so the SFA decided they now had no option but to bring charges.
2. But who do they charge? The Company formerly known as Rangers PLC in liquidation? The current company? Who?
Well, having peddled the continuation myth they decided to charge …….. “Rangers Football Club” – whoever that may be.
3. Needless to say the charges feel to be defended by the company which currently runs “Rangers Football Club” and as we understand things they may have decided to whip out a mythical agreement which might just say that the new company which runs Rangers Football Club can’t be liable for the transgressions of the old company which used to run Rangers Football Club.
4. So, when the Judicial Panel meet to consider the charges, RFC take a preliminary point which says the SFA can’t prosecute this case and at the same time appoint those who determine the case because the SFA were party to an agreement which might form the basis of a legal defence to these charges.
In essence, when these charges are considered it could be the case that the SFA might just be the prosecutor, witness, expert witness and the ultimate judge who determines what punishment should be handed out in the event of a guilty verdict.
Clearly that cannot be allowed in law and so it was argued that the entire matter should be referred to the Court of Arbitration for sport.
The Judicial panel agreed — any competent legal judge would have reached the same conclusion.
5. And so we now await the SFA implementing the verdict of the judicial panel by referring the whole matter to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
Of course, the nature and detail of the preliminary point considered by the judicial panel – including the terms of the mythical agreement — would also be before the Court of Arbitration for sport and that court can stop and consider what the mythical agreement says, what it was meant to say and the court can examine its very purpose when interpreting its provisions.
For some reason I suspect that this makes some people nervous and explains the 16 month delay we have seen so far.
As I said earlier – if the entire matter had been referred to CAS 6 years ago there would have been cheering.
So, I have no trouble at all with the fact that it was RFC who formally moved that the charges be referred to CAS – in fact it was a great idea.
But the SFA seem to be nervous about doing it and so they should be encouraged.
As shareholders in Celtic PLC we have asked Celtic to encourage them.
Celtic say they have done this but can’t get support from within the SFA as they are only one voice – which is true.
So the resolution asks Celtic to take the matter away from the SFA and refer it to UEFA who invited Celtic to do just that.
Celtic say that the SFA are still the right body to deal with this and presumably the board still believe that the SFA will take the matter to CAS despite the long delay.
I hope the board are correct – but we have our doubts.
In the event of the SFA not acting we think we may have a legal remedy through the courts, but it is only correct that we should formally ask Celtic to refer the matter to UEFA or the Police if that is appropriate.
The board have a different view which is fair enough.
Thus far we have been right in just about all we have said and the charges and the judicial panel ruling completely vindicates the initial reasoning behind the resolution. Indeed the preliminary argument presented by RFC helped prove the point.
It is important that as many shareholders support the Resolution as possible as that would be good but if the board ultimately vote against it and defeat the resolution it doesn’t end anything and merely means that we may be forced to go down a different route which we have already discussed at some length.
Father Jack
Celtic were not a signatory to the 5 way agreement but we are aware from certain e-mails and minutes that a former Celtic Director was present when a version of the then draft agreement was circulated.
I doubt the content of the agreement will come as a surprise to our board — although it should be noted that its terms seem to have been completely forgotten by the former CEO and Corporate Compliance officer of the SFA and as a result they have walked face first into an almighty mess of their own making.
BROGAN ROGAN TREVINO AND HOGAN on 28TH OCTOBER 2019 10:22 PM
CELTIC MAC on 28TH OCTOBER 2019 5:28 PM
You raise a good point – It was indeed RFC who took the preliminary point before the Judicial Panel and that in itself is an interesting story.
So pin back yer lugholes and consider the following:
1. Having conducted an investigation into the UEFA licence grant etc, and having decided that there was evidence which pointed to both SFA and UEFA rules breaches and so the SFA decided they now had no option but to bring charges.
2. But who do they charge? The Company formerly known as Rangers PLC in liquidation? The current company? Who?
Well, having peddled the continuation myth they decided to charge …….. “Rangers Football Club” – whoever that may be.
3. Needless to say the charges feel to be defended by the company which currently runs “Rangers Football Club” and as we understand things they may have decided to whip out a mythical agreement which might just say that the new company which runs Rangers Football Club can’t be liable for the transgressions of the old company which used to run Rangers Football Club.
4. So, when the Judicial Panel meet to consider the charges, RFC take a preliminary point which says the SFA can’t prosecute this case and at the same time appoint those who determine the case because the SFA were party to an agreement which might form the basis of a legal defence to these charges.
In essence, when these charges are considered it could be the case that the SFA might just be the prosecutor, witness, expert witness and the ultimate judge who determines what punishment should be handed out in the event of a guilty verdict.
Clearly that cannot be allowed in law and so it was argued that the entire matter should be referred to the Court of Arbitration for sport.
The Judicial panel agreed — any competent legal judge would have reached the same conclusion.
5. And so we now await the SFA implementing the verdict of the judicial panel by referring the whole matter to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
Of course, the nature and detail of the preliminary point considered by the judicial panel – including the terms of the mythical agreement — would also be before the Court of Arbitration for sport and that court can stop and consider what the mythical agreement says, what it was meant to say and the court can examine its very purpose when interpreting its provisions.
For some reason I suspect that this makes some people nervous and explains the 16 month delay we have seen so far.
As I said earlier – if the entire matter had been referred to CAS 6 years ago there would have been cheering.
So, I have no trouble at all with the fact that it was RFC who formally moved that the charges be referred to CAS – in fact it was a great idea.
But the SFA seem to be nervous about doing it and so they should be encouraged.
As shareholders in Celtic PLC we have asked Celtic to encourage them.
Celtic say they have done this but can’t get support from within the SFA as they are only one voice – which is true.
So the resolution asks Celtic to take the matter away from the SFA and refer it to UEFA who invited Celtic to do just that.
Celtic say that the SFA are still the right body to deal with this and presumably the board still believe that the SFA will take the matter to CAS despite the long delay.
I hope the board are correct – but we have our doubts.
In the event of the SFA not acting we think we may have a legal remedy through the courts, but it is only correct that we should formally ask Celtic to refer the matter to UEFA or the Police if that is appropriate.
The board have a different view which is fair enough.
Thus far we have been right in just about all we have said and the charges and the judicial panel ruling completely vindicates the initial reasoning behind the resolution. Indeed the preliminary argument presented by RFC helped prove the point.
It is important that as many shareholders support the Resolution as possible as that would be good but if the board ultimately vote against it and defeat the resolution it doesn’t end anything and merely means that we may be forced to go down a different route which we have already discussed at some length.
Father Jack
Celtic were not a signatory to the 5 way agreement but we are aware from certain e-mails and minutes that a former Celtic Director was present when a version of the then draft agreement was circulated.
I doubt the content of the agreement will come as a surprise to our board — although it should be noted that its terms seem to have been completely forgotten by the former CEO and Corporate Compliance officer of the SFA and as a result they have walked face first into an almighty mess of their own making.
Imatim
Well-known member
Resolution 12 Archive from Auldheid on KDS for anyone that’s interested
kerrydalestreet.co.uk
Kerrydale Street-Resolution12 Archive.
An archive of all exchanges concerning the granting and monitoring of the UEFA Licence in 2011 has been created at https://www.res12.uk It is a long r
Imatim
Well-known member
The custodians of our Club either have integrity or they don’t
videocelts.com
What secrets are preventing Lawwell from taking Resolution 12 to UEFA for a decision?
In early 2012 Peter Lawwell told BBC Scotland that Celtic had a stand-alone strategy. His and the club’s actions ever since have suggested that the Old Firm is central to their business model.
videocelts.com
michael duffy
Well-known member
Res 12-have we been betrayed, short answer, YES!!!!
That's Video Celts, E-Tims, The Celtic Star and The Celtic Blog all speaking up over the last week on Celtic's disgraceful disregard for the support's views on the issues surrounding Res 12.
fergusslayedtheblues
Well-known member
Who would be shocked to find out ragers 1872 and the SFA cheated ,what shocks me is I now believe that my own club were involved as well
Imatim
Well-known member
K
kelly
Guest
Could it be that the largest investor may see a long protracted case ( which is RES 12 ) against the governing bodies, would hinder the chance of selling up and moving on quickly
Did Fergus really come over for the half time draw
Imatim
Well-known member
Imatim
Well-known member
A further update on Res 12 from BRTH via CQN- A long read in 2 parts from a man who has been one of the main driving forces of Res 12...
BROGAN ROGAN TREVINO AND HOGAN on 28TH OCTOBER 2019 3:08 PM
Afternoon All.
On Res 12.
First of all, can I be very plain in my words.
Some recent articles on Res 12 in certain blogs are, to be frank, a complete crock of shit!
Is that plain enough language?
They are written without either research or contact or discussion or any inside knowledge.
They are green and white bullshit.
About a fortnight ago I sent out the following tweet;
@BroganRoganTrev
Jeezo, there are some Celtic related clickbait sites that are truly rank rotten. The articles don’t even make any sense. I won’t name the one I just read for a moment but it is utter tosh. Advertising driven drivel with headlines & stories which don’t match & say nothing. AVOID!
A day later I said the following on the same platform:
Brogan Rogan Trevino
@BroganRoganTrev
According to a Judicial Panel, the rules, laws and regulations of @UEFA are not enforceable in Scotland by
@ScottishFA who are the designated Licensing body appointed by @UEFA. It is also questionable whether the @ScottishFA can legally enforce its own rules in certain respects.
8:22 AM · Oct 18, 2019·Twitter Web App
So having gotten that out of my system can I just say that any blog which proclaims or opines about legal action suing the board of Celtic PLC must have been going to different meetings than those I have been attending and with different people to those who have driven Res 12 from the get go.
All such articles are CRAP!
Now there is nothing wrong with any blogger or contributor opining on what they think should be done, could be done, might be done or whatever as that is perfectly valid but some of the misinformation being put out by so called Celtic fans in search of a few advertising clicks leaves me cold.
LET ME BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT SOMETHING.
All this chat about Golden bullets, Silver Bullets, and all that stuff is so out of date and behind the times that it is clear that the writers do not understand what has happened.
Fact: At the 2013 AGM the board of Celtic PLC were asked by resolutioners to take this matter to UEFA because the resolutioners felt that the SFA was compromised and we did not trust them to do the write thing which was to investigate what were then suspected rule breaches.
FACT: Celtic FC didn’t agree with that course of action and initially were for voting against the resolution because they felt it wasn’t necessary because they were already making enquiries of the SFA on the same issue — and so they were. Basically they argued that there was no need for a resolution requesting the board to do something that they were already doing.
FACT: Both Celtic and the Resolutioners were asking roughly the same questions but Celtic wanted to stick with the SFA while the Resolutioners had no faith in that organisation and wanted to go to UEFA.
FACT: Having discussed the situation, both parties agreed to continue the resolution so that further questions could be asked of the SFA by Celtic, and at the same time the Resolutioners started to formally make enquiries of UEFA through legal channels.
FACT: At the outset, the SFA didn’t want to know about any of this and vigorously defended their licensing processes and maintained that everything was tickety boo – or should that be tickety blue? However, over the course of the following months and years this then changed – subtly in some respects, materially and dramatically in others.
FACT: After a lot of correspondence and many meetings with various parties, including Celtic, and after hearing certain evidence become public at the Craig Whyte Trial – the SFA, despite Celtic and the SPFL calling for a wider inquiry, decided to conduct their own narrower investigation and eventually they brought disciplinary charges based on the evidence now freely available to them.
NOTE; THE SFA BROUGHT CHARGES WHEN THEIR ORIGINAL POSITION WAS THAT THEY WERE NOT INTERESTED AND THERE WAS NOTHING TO SEE.
So what changed, who was instrumental in bringing about that change, and how did they do it?
I will leave that question hanging in the air and anyone reading this can decide for themselves.
Remember we wanted to take the matter to UEFA and the board wanted to keep the matter with the SFA.
Where we stand today is that those charges are in limbo because of a ruling which says that the SFA cannot legally prosecute and consider those charges, and that the entire matter be referred to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
Remember in 2013 we wanted the matter referred to UEFA while Celtic were in favour of leaving things with the SFA, who we maintained were not a competent body as they were compromised.
There is an argument to say we were both right. The SFA were eventually left with no option but to bring charges, but a judicial panel agreed that they were, and always had been, compromised and so could not see those charges through to a conclusion.
Had anyone said back in 2013 that charges would be brought and would be considered and dealt with by the Court of Arbitration for Sport there would have been universal cheering from the Res 12 benches!
The issue now is that the SFA have sat on their backside and procrastinated for the best part of 18 months and so the resolutioners think they can no longer be trusted and so want Celtic to refer the matter to UEFA or indeed the City of London Police – and I will come back to them in a minute.
The board continue to have faith in the SFA and maintain that a direct approach to UEFA is not in the best interests of the club.
We are as yet to hear their detailed reasons why they hold that view.
However, no one is saying, at the minute at least, that the charges should not proceed, should be abandoned and that nothing should be done – at least not that I am aware of.
We do believe that the board could have taken the UEFA route before now, and we are very much aware of the reports from Celtic that no one else in Scottish Football is the least bit interested in this whole scenario.
Not one other club is apparently concerned that the SFA cannot prosecute their own charges or seek enforcement of their own rules within their own jurisdiction.
That is just astonishing.
BROGAN ROGAN TREVINO AND HOGAN on 28TH OCTOBER 2019 3:08 PM
Afternoon All.
On Res 12.
First of all, can I be very plain in my words.
Some recent articles on Res 12 in certain blogs are, to be frank, a complete crock of shit!
Is that plain enough language?
They are written without either research or contact or discussion or any inside knowledge.
They are green and white bullshit.
About a fortnight ago I sent out the following tweet;
@BroganRoganTrev
Jeezo, there are some Celtic related clickbait sites that are truly rank rotten. The articles don’t even make any sense. I won’t name the one I just read for a moment but it is utter tosh. Advertising driven drivel with headlines & stories which don’t match & say nothing. AVOID!
A day later I said the following on the same platform:
Brogan Rogan Trevino
@BroganRoganTrev
According to a Judicial Panel, the rules, laws and regulations of @UEFA are not enforceable in Scotland by
@ScottishFA who are the designated Licensing body appointed by @UEFA. It is also questionable whether the @ScottishFA can legally enforce its own rules in certain respects.
8:22 AM · Oct 18, 2019·Twitter Web App
So having gotten that out of my system can I just say that any blog which proclaims or opines about legal action suing the board of Celtic PLC must have been going to different meetings than those I have been attending and with different people to those who have driven Res 12 from the get go.
All such articles are CRAP!
Now there is nothing wrong with any blogger or contributor opining on what they think should be done, could be done, might be done or whatever as that is perfectly valid but some of the misinformation being put out by so called Celtic fans in search of a few advertising clicks leaves me cold.
LET ME BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT SOMETHING.
All this chat about Golden bullets, Silver Bullets, and all that stuff is so out of date and behind the times that it is clear that the writers do not understand what has happened.
Fact: At the 2013 AGM the board of Celtic PLC were asked by resolutioners to take this matter to UEFA because the resolutioners felt that the SFA was compromised and we did not trust them to do the write thing which was to investigate what were then suspected rule breaches.
FACT: Celtic FC didn’t agree with that course of action and initially were for voting against the resolution because they felt it wasn’t necessary because they were already making enquiries of the SFA on the same issue — and so they were. Basically they argued that there was no need for a resolution requesting the board to do something that they were already doing.
FACT: Both Celtic and the Resolutioners were asking roughly the same questions but Celtic wanted to stick with the SFA while the Resolutioners had no faith in that organisation and wanted to go to UEFA.
FACT: Having discussed the situation, both parties agreed to continue the resolution so that further questions could be asked of the SFA by Celtic, and at the same time the Resolutioners started to formally make enquiries of UEFA through legal channels.
FACT: At the outset, the SFA didn’t want to know about any of this and vigorously defended their licensing processes and maintained that everything was tickety boo – or should that be tickety blue? However, over the course of the following months and years this then changed – subtly in some respects, materially and dramatically in others.
FACT: After a lot of correspondence and many meetings with various parties, including Celtic, and after hearing certain evidence become public at the Craig Whyte Trial – the SFA, despite Celtic and the SPFL calling for a wider inquiry, decided to conduct their own narrower investigation and eventually they brought disciplinary charges based on the evidence now freely available to them.
NOTE; THE SFA BROUGHT CHARGES WHEN THEIR ORIGINAL POSITION WAS THAT THEY WERE NOT INTERESTED AND THERE WAS NOTHING TO SEE.
So what changed, who was instrumental in bringing about that change, and how did they do it?
I will leave that question hanging in the air and anyone reading this can decide for themselves.
Remember we wanted to take the matter to UEFA and the board wanted to keep the matter with the SFA.
Where we stand today is that those charges are in limbo because of a ruling which says that the SFA cannot legally prosecute and consider those charges, and that the entire matter be referred to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
Remember in 2013 we wanted the matter referred to UEFA while Celtic were in favour of leaving things with the SFA, who we maintained were not a competent body as they were compromised.
There is an argument to say we were both right. The SFA were eventually left with no option but to bring charges, but a judicial panel agreed that they were, and always had been, compromised and so could not see those charges through to a conclusion.
Had anyone said back in 2013 that charges would be brought and would be considered and dealt with by the Court of Arbitration for Sport there would have been universal cheering from the Res 12 benches!
The issue now is that the SFA have sat on their backside and procrastinated for the best part of 18 months and so the resolutioners think they can no longer be trusted and so want Celtic to refer the matter to UEFA or indeed the City of London Police – and I will come back to them in a minute.
The board continue to have faith in the SFA and maintain that a direct approach to UEFA is not in the best interests of the club.
We are as yet to hear their detailed reasons why they hold that view.
However, no one is saying, at the minute at least, that the charges should not proceed, should be abandoned and that nothing should be done – at least not that I am aware of.
We do believe that the board could have taken the UEFA route before now, and we are very much aware of the reports from Celtic that no one else in Scottish Football is the least bit interested in this whole scenario.
Not one other club is apparently concerned that the SFA cannot prosecute their own charges or seek enforcement of their own rules within their own jurisdiction.
That is just astonishing.
Imatim
Well-known member
Part 2
There are apparently reasons for that stance but that is for another day as this is not the issue at the moment.
So, the resolution clearly calls upon Celtic to take certain action, and Celtic disagree on that course of action because they maintain that there is another route to follow via the SFA (Remember at the start of this the SFA wanted to take no action and stated there was nothing to see but have moved from that stance dramatically).
We disagree.
In the interim, the resolutioners have discussed at length possible strategies to follow in the event that the SFA do nothing and continue to sit on their hands, or declare that they are not taking the charges further despite bringing them in the first place.
These would be steps which are wholly separate to any potential action taken by the Celtic Board.
What the Celtic Board would do in the event of the SFA doing nothing is a matter of speculation and we could only react when that happens.
However, independent shareholder action is a possibility –BUT IT WOULD NOT BE AGAINST THE CELTIC BOARD AND ANYONE WHO FLOATS THAT NOTION OR SUGGESTS THAT IS THE ROUTE BEING FOLLOWED BY THE RESOLUTIONERS DOES THE CELTIC SUPPORT A HUGE DISSERVICE AND DOES NOTHING OTHER THAN POTENTIALLY MISLEAD CELTIC FANS ALTOGETHER.
IT IS UTTER BALDERDASH AS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A DIFFERENT AND MUCH WIDER REACHING LEGAL STRATEGY ALTOGETHER.
By the way the reference to the City of London Police is there because that police force have a previous involvement in recovering records and information which might be germane and because it is that police force who generally looks into crimes involving listed companies.
Personally, my recent experience of various police forces is that they are under pressure in relation to resources and that they are reluctant to seriously look at financial crimes of this type and prefer to use their resources elsewhere. The city of London Police is no different.
That position is not one I agree with nor does it lessen the need for financial crime to be investigated but that is the facts of life in the UK in 2019.
There is pressure to provide more resources for this type of investigation but again that is for another day and another forum.
So, there you have it. We disagree with the Celtic board on their faith in the SFA.
We are not out to topple the board, undermine what it does right, nor comment on other areas where we, as individuals, think they might do better, or what it should do in the future about this or that.
Words like betrayed, stabbed in the back, treason, etc etc are click bait tactics to get readers to click on certain sites just to get the advertising revenue up for the site owners. They have nothing to do with Res 12, its goals, the way the resolutioners conduct themselves, or is a window into what legal steps might be available in the future.
There is no revolution or uprising or whatever.
There are clear expressions of opinion and sometimes those opinions differ and have to be expressed frankly and plainly.
In all dealings with Celtic, the SFA, UEFA or whoever there are quiet, professional, forceful, and consistent opinions, advice and discussions which seek to do nothing more than have the original facts and circumstances properly raised, aired and considered by the appropriate and competent bodies.
Nothing more, nothing less.
Anyone who says different talks through a whole in their Elkie Brooks.
As for being played by the Celtic Board in some way I would ask in what way?
Remember, since the original resolution, the SFA changed their tune, charges were brought and all the SFA executives who may have originally resisted our representations have left their post!
A judicial ruling has said that the SFA were and are compromised and that the entire matter should go to the Court of Arbitration for Sport – namely away from the SFA.
To me, that sounds kinda like what we set out to achieve – all that has to happen now is that the judicial panel ruling is followed through and is implemented.
The SFA can do that of their own accord or they can be forced to by UEFA.
Celtic should ask the SFA to jump or they should ask UEFA to push them.
Right now we are going for the shove option.
But hey — all good things comes to those who wait and who occasionally give others a nudge in the right direction.
There are apparently reasons for that stance but that is for another day as this is not the issue at the moment.
So, the resolution clearly calls upon Celtic to take certain action, and Celtic disagree on that course of action because they maintain that there is another route to follow via the SFA (Remember at the start of this the SFA wanted to take no action and stated there was nothing to see but have moved from that stance dramatically).
We disagree.
In the interim, the resolutioners have discussed at length possible strategies to follow in the event that the SFA do nothing and continue to sit on their hands, or declare that they are not taking the charges further despite bringing them in the first place.
These would be steps which are wholly separate to any potential action taken by the Celtic Board.
What the Celtic Board would do in the event of the SFA doing nothing is a matter of speculation and we could only react when that happens.
However, independent shareholder action is a possibility –BUT IT WOULD NOT BE AGAINST THE CELTIC BOARD AND ANYONE WHO FLOATS THAT NOTION OR SUGGESTS THAT IS THE ROUTE BEING FOLLOWED BY THE RESOLUTIONERS DOES THE CELTIC SUPPORT A HUGE DISSERVICE AND DOES NOTHING OTHER THAN POTENTIALLY MISLEAD CELTIC FANS ALTOGETHER.
IT IS UTTER BALDERDASH AS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A DIFFERENT AND MUCH WIDER REACHING LEGAL STRATEGY ALTOGETHER.
By the way the reference to the City of London Police is there because that police force have a previous involvement in recovering records and information which might be germane and because it is that police force who generally looks into crimes involving listed companies.
Personally, my recent experience of various police forces is that they are under pressure in relation to resources and that they are reluctant to seriously look at financial crimes of this type and prefer to use their resources elsewhere. The city of London Police is no different.
That position is not one I agree with nor does it lessen the need for financial crime to be investigated but that is the facts of life in the UK in 2019.
There is pressure to provide more resources for this type of investigation but again that is for another day and another forum.
So, there you have it. We disagree with the Celtic board on their faith in the SFA.
We are not out to topple the board, undermine what it does right, nor comment on other areas where we, as individuals, think they might do better, or what it should do in the future about this or that.
Words like betrayed, stabbed in the back, treason, etc etc are click bait tactics to get readers to click on certain sites just to get the advertising revenue up for the site owners. They have nothing to do with Res 12, its goals, the way the resolutioners conduct themselves, or is a window into what legal steps might be available in the future.
There is no revolution or uprising or whatever.
There are clear expressions of opinion and sometimes those opinions differ and have to be expressed frankly and plainly.
In all dealings with Celtic, the SFA, UEFA or whoever there are quiet, professional, forceful, and consistent opinions, advice and discussions which seek to do nothing more than have the original facts and circumstances properly raised, aired and considered by the appropriate and competent bodies.
Nothing more, nothing less.
Anyone who says different talks through a whole in their Elkie Brooks.
As for being played by the Celtic Board in some way I would ask in what way?
Remember, since the original resolution, the SFA changed their tune, charges were brought and all the SFA executives who may have originally resisted our representations have left their post!
A judicial ruling has said that the SFA were and are compromised and that the entire matter should go to the Court of Arbitration for Sport – namely away from the SFA.
To me, that sounds kinda like what we set out to achieve – all that has to happen now is that the judicial panel ruling is followed through and is implemented.
The SFA can do that of their own accord or they can be forced to by UEFA.
Celtic should ask the SFA to jump or they should ask UEFA to push them.
Right now we are going for the shove option.
But hey — all good things comes to those who wait and who occasionally give others a nudge in the right direction.
michael duffy
Well-known member
Cheers Imatim,ah got excited aboot nothin! HH, hat tip for the analysis though! wee aside though,re the board/the sfa/sevco,if it look's like a shite,smell's like a shite,flushes away like a shite, it's shite! corrupt, corrupt, from the bottom to the top!
Imatim
Well-known member
........................
I’m with you Michael.
I think though that we always have to be mindful of other people’s views and draw our conclusions based on the facts.....one way or another the SFA will have to act.....this is not going away.....there may be no appetite from the other clubs to do what’s right.....but there is certainly an appetite from enough of our Support imo to see this through
the great jc
Well-known member
....good things come to those that wait......almost eight years now and still not an inch further on.
...or am I being impatient ???.....
....!!!
Despite holding all the aces, Celtic have dragged their feet on this for an age now, and as is since proven, there has been irrefutable corruption by both the deceased Rangers and the SFA, topping the Richter scale (Craig Whyte Case...Supreme court July 2017) and especially moreso having read Res 12's statement in its entirety.
I think leaving this to our board is only soft soaping them allowing for another period of further vacillation and prevarication for as long as they can get away with it.....likely hoping to continue the disgraceful tenure and cheat that was and always will be Stewart Reagan as a filthy liar and our one time SFA commander in chief.
Yet, we accept another Englishman to run and ruin our game who has even less of our best interests at heart than Reagan ever did!
There is an ill wind coming and I am convinced it will not bode well for our board.
I don't believe the Celtic hierarchy have the will to push, shove or kick this upstairs to CAS, UEFA or anyone for that matter...except maybe into the long grass.
As long as we top the league and keep winning cups they won't see the need to exert themselves and lose any body fat over it.
Personally....my missus and I go to great lengths never to miss a home game at CP, time off work, travelling from Dundee, 170 miles round trip, almost 4 hours travelling, 4 mile traffic jams, fuel and at far greater expense than just our season tickets..
....BUT, much as we both love the team and will always do no-matter what, expressly wishing for another treble and the Holy Grail of 10 iar..... I am very Very,VERY disappointed with Lawwell and the boards' stance on this.
There are countless more Celtic fans coming from much farther places than ours with far greater travel and expense yet, who like us muse the same as they too have just about had it with our overlords, their decisions and intransigence running our club.
They treat us like idiots, and just don't get it.
The club is us.....without which there is no club, directors, finance nor existence.....nothing.
Celtic owe us an explanation why they didn't push this on our behalf...and years ago, as if its ONLY their opinion that matters.... while ours and we don't!!
Hell, I'm still waiting on the SFA getting back to us and our board's request regarding clarity after the end of December '18's derby game which Beaton and co adjudicated over despite their glaucoma disabilities.
They..the SFA, treat is with disrespect every time and WE....Celtic just keep taking their crap... every time!
This is shocking treatment towards us from the Scottish governing body and an indictment which Celtic should be embarrassed by.
To be the biggest and most successful club in Scottish history and allowing ANY of this behaviour from Petrie, Maxwell and co, towards us says it all.
After five days of waiting, I would have marched right up the Hampden steps and broke the door down, demanding an immediate meeting, talk with answers and threatening to hold back payments, registration, and membership fees if my demands were not met....... immediately!
But, ...the continual appeasement towards everything sevco is pathetic....not for the SFA....but for Celtic.
Again.........a wholly different approach from Lawwell is what's needed.
A spine and guts would help even more, but he would have to learn to stand up from his go to position and invertebrate norm, so this might yet be an historical process.
We have more than enough evidence to bury the scum from Ibrox, irrespective if we get pulled into it, or what little misdemeanours our club may or may not have been involved in, in the past.
If Celtic have something to hide, EBT participation or whatever, it can never be as bad as what the expired and dead Rangers klub got up to, so if there is any punishment meted out to us lets take it and watch the fireworks when further misery is piled on to Scotland's youngest club.
After yesterday's yearly accounts from the Rangers, who knows, retrospective punishment just might finish them for good.
Imatim.....a good read but forgive me for not entirely sharing your optimism and faith in Lawwell and his motley crew.....once bitten twice shy.
...or am I being impatient ???.....
....!!!
Despite holding all the aces, Celtic have dragged their feet on this for an age now, and as is since proven, there has been irrefutable corruption by both the deceased Rangers and the SFA, topping the Richter scale (Craig Whyte Case...Supreme court July 2017) and especially moreso having read Res 12's statement in its entirety.
I think leaving this to our board is only soft soaping them allowing for another period of further vacillation and prevarication for as long as they can get away with it.....likely hoping to continue the disgraceful tenure and cheat that was and always will be Stewart Reagan as a filthy liar and our one time SFA commander in chief.
Yet, we accept another Englishman to run and ruin our game who has even less of our best interests at heart than Reagan ever did!
There is an ill wind coming and I am convinced it will not bode well for our board.
I don't believe the Celtic hierarchy have the will to push, shove or kick this upstairs to CAS, UEFA or anyone for that matter...except maybe into the long grass.
As long as we top the league and keep winning cups they won't see the need to exert themselves and lose any body fat over it.
Personally....my missus and I go to great lengths never to miss a home game at CP, time off work, travelling from Dundee, 170 miles round trip, almost 4 hours travelling, 4 mile traffic jams, fuel and at far greater expense than just our season tickets..
....BUT, much as we both love the team and will always do no-matter what, expressly wishing for another treble and the Holy Grail of 10 iar..... I am very Very,VERY disappointed with Lawwell and the boards' stance on this.
There are countless more Celtic fans coming from much farther places than ours with far greater travel and expense yet, who like us muse the same as they too have just about had it with our overlords, their decisions and intransigence running our club.
They treat us like idiots, and just don't get it.
The club is us.....without which there is no club, directors, finance nor existence.....nothing.
Celtic owe us an explanation why they didn't push this on our behalf...and years ago, as if its ONLY their opinion that matters.... while ours and we don't!!
Hell, I'm still waiting on the SFA getting back to us and our board's request regarding clarity after the end of December '18's derby game which Beaton and co adjudicated over despite their glaucoma disabilities.
They..the SFA, treat is with disrespect every time and WE....Celtic just keep taking their crap... every time!
This is shocking treatment towards us from the Scottish governing body and an indictment which Celtic should be embarrassed by.
To be the biggest and most successful club in Scottish history and allowing ANY of this behaviour from Petrie, Maxwell and co, towards us says it all.
After five days of waiting, I would have marched right up the Hampden steps and broke the door down, demanding an immediate meeting, talk with answers and threatening to hold back payments, registration, and membership fees if my demands were not met....... immediately!
But, ...the continual appeasement towards everything sevco is pathetic....not for the SFA....but for Celtic.
Again.........a wholly different approach from Lawwell is what's needed.
A spine and guts would help even more, but he would have to learn to stand up from his go to position and invertebrate norm, so this might yet be an historical process.
We have more than enough evidence to bury the scum from Ibrox, irrespective if we get pulled into it, or what little misdemeanours our club may or may not have been involved in, in the past.
If Celtic have something to hide, EBT participation or whatever, it can never be as bad as what the expired and dead Rangers klub got up to, so if there is any punishment meted out to us lets take it and watch the fireworks when further misery is piled on to Scotland's youngest club.
After yesterday's yearly accounts from the Rangers, who knows, retrospective punishment just might finish them for good.
Imatim.....a good read but forgive me for not entirely sharing your optimism and faith in Lawwell and his motley crew.....once bitten twice shy.
