The SPL rules variously required disclosure of all contract of service matters and all payments from a club to a player. It would now appear that these are to be rewritten to incorporate non-contractual loans from independent third parties and other non-contractual matters. Since 2001 when the EBT scheme was introduced, the amounts contributed were disclosed in the audited financial statements of the Club. These audited accounts were provided to the SFA and SPL as required. Bit of a contradiction there either the loans were from rangers or a third party.
Distinct lack of on topic replies here... Well done, does it make you feel good to mock the disabled?...
Unfortunately that seems to be the case in a lot of posters from the "inclusive" ones maybe the problem is that they're [video=youtube;xIqaIfaJ3-E]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIqaIfaJ3-E[/video]
Perhaps one of you two could point me to the Rangers fan comments calling the lying old crook out... ...or one defending him ...or anything that displays critical thought Nah, have a go at Timmy <gettinwhatyoudeserve> Not one bear has passed anything like an on topic comment. Do you believe him? Seriously?
Sorry CCS my comment was simply a personal observance on the way loads of folk on here too often resort to calling folk appelations such as; spazzies, mongs, cripples and so forth. Unfortunately it's not just the Celtic fans that do this. As for Murray at times I don't know what to believe anymore. If he is telling the truth about the dual contracts then it's not surprising that no opposition fan wants to comment as the stripping of titles is really the last taunt available. I would think though that Murray would not be insane enough to issue a statement like that if the dual contract thing actually happened.
I think the truth is in there somewhere Moses, if you read what he's saying he's using the same defence for Dual Contracts that he previously used in connection with EBTs, basically he's saying that HMRC changed the rules while his back was turned. It's nonsense, side letters either exist or they don't, if the side letters make a promise that the "Loans" do not ever have to be repaid then his argument is dead in the water. The BBC amongst other parties have intimated that they have seen some of these "Side letters", I honestly cannot see why the BBC would lie and leave themselves open to legal action.
Murray could clear the whole thing up - with regard to ebts - by showing the scheduled repayments for the loans that he refers to in his statement....
I'm amongst the worst offenders I use insults on Not606 that I'd never use in real life - I also hear patter and see stuff that most people wouldn't utter in the real world, either - I think that's largely why I use this forum - nothing's off limits and you can be as childish as you can imagine You seem to have a healthy dose of query about his statement - it's an absolute certainty that, before releasing this to the PA, that Murray had legal advice. The rules haven't changed, though - side contracts have always been against the rules - I think he's counting on being able to state that side letters constituting side contracts is a technicality. I don't believe him, for what it's worth (not surprising). He is, of course, allowed to defend himself as he's done here - but he released a statement instead of allowing people to question him - one suspects that he wouldn't come through that in a particularly good light - Murray has NEVER to my knowledge been involved in a critical interview. Several journalists in recent months are now stating that they never had access to Murray before (Spiers said yesterday and Jim Spence said on the radio last night) meaning that his cheerleaders (Young, Jackson and Jabba) regurgitated what he gave them for years.
Yup. It's a PR play. He expects (and he'll probably get) the papers to reprint what he says word for word, without any fear of criticism or any way of actually questioning him directly about the statement. In my opinion, it does not count as "news" and shouldn't be published as such.
His statement is similar to his defence for being duped and we all know how that turned out. To me it looks like both rangers and the spl are to blame. Rangers for not disclosing all there payments and the SPL for not checking the paperwork properly.
