Why is this guy not suspended until they investigate him?

 

http://rangerstaxcase.com/2011/04/14/campbell-ogilvie/

 

Campbell Ogilvie is already a man of quite some distinction.  However, his list of accomplishments might be about to become a bit longer.  It appears that he has sat on the board of directors of not just one SPL club entangled in highly dubious tax schemes, but two.  Heart of Midlothian FC look likely to be the next shoe to drop as football’s culture of thinking that it is above paying taxes starts to unwind.

 

Ogilvie, the current SFA Vice-President and heir apparent to George Peat’s job of President, is going to have quite the CV by the time he hangs up his pinstripes.  Not only was he a director of Rangers FC when the EBT scheme was first introduced, but he was also the company secretary.  This latter role gave him additional responsibility for ensuring statutory compliance for The Rangers Football Club plc. So while some Rangers directors, like John Greig, might have a claim that their position was symbolic, and they did not understand what was happening or what their responsibilities as a director are, it will be difficult for Mr. Ogilvie to do likewise.  As a man with substantial experience and training, he will find it difficult to claim that he did not know or understand what was happening.  (He may try anyway).

 

However, Ogilvie seems likely to find himself in the unique position of being at the center of yet another tax avoidance/evasion storm.  On leaving Rangers in 2005, Ogilvie joined the board of Heart of Midlothian FC, and in 2008 became managing director of the Edinburgh club.  A source has contacted me with the story that the Scottish Professional Footballers Association (SPFA) has made a complaint about employment practices at Hearts. This came to light when a Hearts player applied for a mortgage.  When presenting his salary advice, it was clear that he was on a rate close to the UK minimum wage. The player naively explained that he had lots of money, but that it was all paid overseas.  The SPFA would obviously have concerns that Scottish players will appear expensive in an era of 50% marginal tax rates compared to low-tax (or no-tax?) foreign players.  This raises a few questions: How many players are involved? How long have such practices been in effect? Are there players who have not been registered for tax at all in the UK? The scale of the Hearts problem is not yet fully known.  If this has been standard practice over an extended number of years, then the bills, interest, and penalties could also be of a magnitude that could put the existence of Hearts at risk unless Mr. Romanov decides to dig deep into his personal reserves.

 

Once could be just a mistake.  Twice looks very careless.

Scottish football supporters, as well as SFA member clubs, have a right to know “what did Campbell Ogilvie know, and when did he know it?”

 

It appears that one of two situations must exist: either Campbell Ogilvie knew of, and approved of, two high-risk / illegal tax strategies or he has failed in his responsibilities as a company director at two major Scottish football clubs. Does Mr. Ogilvie have a casual disregard for the law or is he just an ignorant puppet dancing on the strings of charismatic impresarios?  Either way, it would be a matter of major concern to all those with an interest in Scottish football if either is true.  If there is another explanation for why he has had such a knack of being on the wrong boards at the wrong times, then Scottish football supporters need to be told.

 

Did Ogilvie bring dubious practices to Hearts from Rangers or was he an innocent bystander at both clubs?

Did Rangers register all of their overseas players for UK tax?

 

In light of his unique experience with two of the three largest football clubs in Scotland sliding to the edge of darkness, perhaps Celtic supporters should not be so concerned about Ogilvie inheriting the job of SFA President.  Given recent statements about the need to ‘pull down the walls’ and to rebuild the SFA from the ground up, who would be better qualified to at least bring about the first part?

Fantastic listening GS! Cheers for the link, well done Spam! 

 

Certainly showed those two pricks for what they are.

Full interview with Regan by Alex Thomson:

 

http://www.channel4.com/news/we-run-football-were-not-the-police-sfa-boss

Fucking Regan!

 

http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/04/24/stewart-regan-speaks-about-rangers-appeal-and-compromises-sfa-independence-in-doing-so/

 

Stewart Regan Speaks about Rangers Appeal – and Compromises SFA Independence in Doing So?

 

A blog post in which I question what Mr Regan had to say about the appeal, and in which I wonder if he may have, through inadvertence, compromised the SFA’s role as an appellate body. Plus discussion regarding Boycott.

 

 

 

Things move fast with the Rangers story. Today Mr Regan issued a statement in relation to the disciplinary findings against Mr Whyte and Rangers. I have added some comments which are in bold.

 

——————————-

 

Stewart Regan, Scottish FA Chief Executive: “In light of last night’s outcome from the Judicial Panel Tribunal, it is important to clarify the process through which such cases are heard.

 

“The Judicial Panel Tribunal is an independent body made up of three members appointed from a list of more than 100.

 

“The implementation of the Judicial Panel process was approved unanimously by all member clubs at last year’s Annual General Meeting to bring efficiency, transparency and independence to the execution of football rules.

 

“The Scottish FA acted on the advice of our members to implement a robust disciplinary system that reflected the demands of the modern game.

 

“The sanctions imposed by the Judicial Panel Tribunal last night are subject to appeal. As the Scottish FA is the appellate body, it is inappropriate to discuss the findings of this particular Tribunal at this stage. “

 

All good stuff so far. One can’t fault any of it. And Mr Regan is quite right to say that, as the SFA is the appellate body, he can’t say any more about this case.

 

“I can fully understand the fear and frustration felt by all Rangers fans throughout the most difficult period in the club’s history.

 

Wait a minute – why is he talking about the fear and frustration felt by Rangers fans. Is he not heading toward talking about the tribunal? I am sure le will move on to something else.

 

“The Scottish FA has a responsibility to all its members and must implement its rules without fear or favour.

 

“It was entirely right that the original inquiry into Rangers FC and Craig Whyte was conducted independently and chaired by the Right Honourable Lord Nimmo Smith. These findings were presented to the Judicial Panel Tribunal, who returned their verdict last night.

 

That is ok. He is back on the rails. I thought he would say something that might compromise the appeal process, but I think he stopped in time. The last thing he needs is for the SFA to be accused by Rangers or Mr Whyte of having made up its mind prior to the appeal, or to have fettered its discretion.

 

We have noted the comments of Craig Whyte, which merely reaffirm his failure to accept any responsibility for the condition the club currently finds itself in. Suffice to say, he has been selective in his use of facts. We attended a meeting at the request of Ali Russell and provided no assurances to Mr Whyte in respect of his status as a director of the club.

 

“Indeed, we have documented evidence of our raising concern over Mr Whyte’s business practices to Collyer Bristow, from October last year until the week prior to the club entering administration. Since then, I have been involved in regular discussions with the club, the administrators, Duff and Phelps, and various interested parties, along with the Board, to provide guidance, support and information. Clearly, we are responsible for governing the game and have initiated, through an Independent Inquiry, parallel disciplinary proceedings.

 

Mr Regan, you said you would not talk about this Tribunal! Now you are regaling us with evidence in the case. What if Mr Whyte chooses, despite all appearances to the contrary, to appeal? Your comments suggest a certain closed mindedness as regards Mr Whyte. Even though he has clearly annoyed you, you should not make that clear!

 

In addition, if he had passed the matter to solicitors, then is it Mr Whyte’s fault if they delay in replying? Might that be a question for an appeal? Could you have been a bit unwise Mr Regan in mentioning this at all?

 

“It is important the Scottish FA, as the governing body, works in association with the Scottish Premier League and Scottish Football League to reinvigorate the national sport.

 

“Rangers have been part of the fabric of Scottish football’s history and are integral to its future prosperity.

 

Mr Regan. Your Association is, I believe, the appellate body for this Tribunal. It is also the body which decides on membership of itself. If a newco arises from the ashes of Rangers, the SFA needs to decide if it should be admitted. Finally, if the SPL investigation into illegal payments and dual contracts ever finishes, as you have said, the SFA acts as an appellate body.

 

Standing that one of the penalties open to the SFA for punishment of Rangers is expulsion from Scottish football, is it wise to make comments about the team being integral to the future prosperity of Scottish football?

 

An impartial observer might view that as a determination by the Chief Executive of the SFA that Rangers’ importance to the future financial prosperity of Scottish football was more important than their expulsion, depending on the outcome of the remaining disciplinary matters.

 

I am sure you did not intend to fetter your discretion and that of the SFA in that way. Presumably you have been misquoted by the SFA website.

 

“The Scottish FA must act with integrity and with the best interests of the game at heart. It is with this in mind that we await any appeal from the club.”

 

Both the SFA Judicial Panel Protocol, the founding principles of which are below, and the Memorandum of Association make clear that, along with integrity and the interests of Scottish football, the SFA is obliged to follow and apply the rules, and to deal fairly with breaches thereof.

 

 

 

Perhaps it might have been wiser to stay quiet for a few days?

 

 

 

I suspect you might view this as unfair criticism, especially at the same time as you are being accused by Rangers fans of conspiring to destroy Rangers and all it stands for.

 

 

 

You might feel that you cannot win – you are accused of exhibiting bias towards Rangers and against it at the same time. The problem is that opinions in Scottish football are so polarised that “if you are not with us, you are against us”, seems to be the motto.

 

 

 

As a man with connections to Yorkshire cricket, you might find the situation here reminiscent of the various troubles Yorkshire CCC experienced in the 1970’s and 1980’s over the role of Geoffrey Boycott. There was no middle ground with Mr Boycott, and the same applies in Scotland when it comes to Rangers. (For the avoidance of doubt, I have always been a huge fan of Mr Boycott).

 

 

 

Finally, bearing in mind some of the threats being voiced by Rangers fans, I probably should not mention the word “boycott”!

I don't really have a huge problem with what Regan has said apart from:

 

“The Scottish FA must act with integrity and with the best interests of the game at heart. It is with this in mind that we await any appeal from the club.”

 

Apart from that it sounds like somebody is trying to pick holes just for the sake of it.  IMHO opinion.

Dunno how Ogilvie is able to maintain  his position given how in wi the bricks the cunt was at Ibrox.