‘For The Intellectually Challenged’

Yesterday was quite a challenging day for me, I had much personal and professional issues which were requiring of my fullest attention.

I did however manage to squeeze in a shortened tour of one of my favourite blog pages, ‘Random Thoughts Re Scots Law’ by the esteemed Paul McConville.

Whilst surveying Paul’s latest article, ‘The Corporate Entity is NOT Rangers Football Club, Unless Mr Green Tries To Sell Shares In It?’, I was forced due to time constraints to skim read over it. Even at that it was a damn fine read and contained a very reasoned, very articulate and as-per Paul’s usual, thorough approach, a very logical and detailed analysis of the subject matter.

http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/09/08/the-corporate-entity-is-not-rangers-football-club-unless-mr-green-tries-to-sell-shares-in-it/

I did however find myself drawn this evening to re-visit the article in order to fully appreciate its intricacies and to allow my thoughts a fuller level of provocation than my quick glance over yesterday could ever have permitted.

I, once more, found myself captivated by the ease at which Paul repeatedly breaks down a complex subject matter all the whilst dissecting it and expanding upon the legal ramifications or the legal complexities of it all. Yet Paul somehow makes the complexity of his thought far more palatable to his readers than any legal text-book ever could, he utilises his expertise in law and combines it with his enviable ability to communicate on a level more akin to most readers level of comprehension…he repeatedly breaks text down, phrase by phrase and the if the devil really is in the detail, then Paul makes damn sure to enlighten his readers to the otherwise covert intricacies therein.

Still though some people seem to struggle in comprehension of his very literal explanation…Paul will rarely if ever deviate from his serious and concise explanation and go on the kind of whimsical world tour that I more often choose to indulge upon.

For those people, a further drop in the required intellectual criteria must be found.

I say that, half as much in a tongue in cheek manner as I do truly mean it…so please calm down if you are one of the many readers of a McConville blog who may have wrestled with your comprehension of the subject matter or with the specific articles delivery.

My intended target for ridicule is not the average man who has on occasions struggled to connect with an issue of great complexity…it is the hard of thinking, the lazy or perhaps closed-minded individuals, the intellectually challenged.

Oh come on, the knuckle dragging, union jack flying, brain-dead, moronic and absurdly ignorant amongst the Rangers support. The kind of Rangers faithful who ‘conveniently’ choose to misinterpret even the clearest of terminologies and definitions…the kind of person who believes that liquidation is but another way of exiting administration with a company’s head held high and their status as a going-concern having been fully preserved.

For those intellectually challenged, I have another method of description as to what Paul was trying, and largely succeeding, to explain yesterday.

I will act as the intellectual, or lack thereof, buffer…I hope this is clear enough for them should you ever wish to explain the corporate structure of the newco to a ‘taken in’, wilfully fooled, prospective Sevco share-holder.

Paul quite clearly pointed out that Charles Green, if he chooses to list the newco on the stock-market, stands to generate quite a substantial level of funds…funds that belong to the corporate entity, which is not as Rangers fans keep telling us, their beloved Rangers Football Club.

The corporate entity, i.e. Charles Green and, in my words not Paul’s, Craig Whyte, stand to own the assets they purchased from the soon to be liquidated ‘holding company’ once owned lock, stock and barrel by Sir David ‘Moonbeams’ Murray…even in event of a sale of the separate, as defined by Rangers fans, footballing entity.

Rangers fans have indeed, and in very large numbers, subscribed to the theory that the football club and the corporate side are mutual friends, work partners but not co-dependant bodies.

Paul, quite cunningly, used the Russian doll analogy to describe their belief of a differential between same.

Still however, some people don’t or perhaps point-blank refuse to accept that Uefa laws, Companies House registration and standard corporate practice does not fully, or even to any degree, support their assertion that Rangers are the very same club.

I have decided that for myself Paul’s explanation is entirely correct and I would not choose to simplify most of the detail in his articles findings. His musings are by and largely as transferable in understanding as I could ever express them to a layman…all except one.

You see I think Rangers fans are so desperate to maintain their bond, their affiliation and their devotion to a club that they have chosen to be complicitly fooled and to buy into the theory that a transfer of SFA membership constitutes a tangible and full-proof legal acknowledgement of RANGERS and SEVCO being one of the same.

That is understandable, I and most Celtic fans who are being entirely honest with themselves, would recognise that we too would choose to favour any explanation, to seize upon any link and to create if necessary a fictional bond with a corporate identity if of course it ‘preserved’ our clubs history.

I don’t subscribe to a newco being able to purchase a history by merging, or more accurately ‘morphing’ into another altogether unrelated club or company. Take Clydebank for example…their share of SFA membership was purchased by Airdrie United, who of course we all know are emotionally connected with the now defunct and utterly consigned to history ‘Airdrie F.C.’…so if you were one of the Clydebank fans, is it feasible to say that Airdrie United in 1990, twelve years before their inception had actually reached a Scottish Cup semi-final.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clydebank_F.C.

Or perhaps East Stirlingshire can claim to be playing in the Scottish First Division right at this very moment, yes they have a position in Scottish Division Three along side Sevco, Rangers or whatever they are, but due to a year-long merger in 1964-1965, East Stirlingshire jointly became Clydebank FC…if East Stirlingshire fans were glory hunters, I’m sure they’d be convinced of their ‘real’ position in Division One.

Anyway, I digress.

The main issue that I see to show the hypocritical nature of the Rangers support is this controversial, and I must be totally honest, regrettable analogy, which has nothing at all to do with football;

In the early 16th century, Martin Luther, a Germanic monk and professor of theology looked to use his position of influence to reform the teachings of Roman Catholicism.

Martin Luther had no designs on dividing the faith, he merely wanted to dispense of certain liturgical notions of which he thought were not fit for purpose.

Later on in that century, a reformation swept across Europe, a division of the Roman Catholic faith, created by protesting Catholics, namely Protestantism was born.

Now apart from the very fact I am using this by way of comparison, I have no desire to further debate the theology behind the reformation and I am not in any way shape or form ridiculing anyone’s religion when I say, that by virtue of Rangers fans very casual form of acceptance that history is so utterly transferable, so factual, and so undeniable, I wonder how many of the ‘intellectually challenged bigots’ amongst their support would be willing to be told by ourselves and by every other clubs fans…that they are a ‘Catholic club’.

I am a diehard Celtic fan, I do not however subscribe to us being a ‘Catholic club’, or them being a ‘Protestant Club’…that is a nonsense, an absolute fallacy. A completely unhealthy one at that.

How many of the ‘knuckle-draggers’ would however take kindly to their staunch Protestant and deeply held bigoted beliefs and traditions being traced back to another moment in time and their entire ‘perceived’ existence being thrown into question.

After all, the silly side to their support were always proud to sing out loudly “up to our knees in Fenian blood” and they did so with the intent of being derogatory to Catholic persons.

Were they indeed being derogatory to themselves, well no not really, you see ‘Fenian’ refers to people of Irish Catholic descent and we all know just how anti-Irish this Germanic bunch of Catholics are…oops sorry ‘Protesting Catholics’.

Next time you want to explain just why a history cannot be taken as fact and the finer details ignored, just try asking a staunch, proud Presbyterian, Rangers fan if he wants to come with you and to take Holy Communion at St Mary’s R.C.

After the expletives, he, or she, will no doubt communicate in a reasonable manner just how offence your invitation is to their theological beliefs…at that point just point out how utterly undeniable the transfer of history actually is. Tell them that their religion is not real and that they are desperately misguided fools who know not what they preach.

After a massive strop has ensued and presuming they have not resorted to sectarian driven acts of violence, then perhaps you can calm them down and describe just how identical that particular transfer of history is, to Rangers/Sevco’s.

They will, by then no doubt calmly and reasonably, point out that the SFA transfer of membership is the crux of their reason…at that point strap on your body armour and your protective helmet, or be ready to seriously physically restrain their angry arses and  remind them that what they learn in the Presbyterian faith is a diluted version of Catholicism. Tell them their fore-fathers were either to convinced of Catholic merit or too damn lazy and unimaginative to create an entirely new religion and by virtue of transferring some 39 of the 46 Catholic scriptures the argument is fatally flawed.

Then if you dare you can remind them that the New Testament in both faiths, are identically taught…tell them they are just lazy Catholics and that they transferred the Catholic faith and therefore its history by using 39 of the 46 Catholic Old Testament scriptures.

If that isn’t a layman enough example of quite why history cannot be so conveniently traded regardless of the will and beliefs of others, then I don’t know what is.

Perhaps if still talking to you, you could then try to explain why a Rangers fan who buys shares in The Rangers, is actually buying shares in Sevco and that he owns a small piece of an absolutely new company, nothing at all to do with his football club.

If doing so however, stand back, their intellectually challenged head may just explode!!

 

Hail Hail

@brianbhoy07

 

Comments

  1. Well put Brianbhoy ,i’ll give it a try ,but i fear all i’ll get in reply is …………. ”Naw ,right ,um………. ..We arra peeeeepul right !!!!!! . GuaRANTeed

    1. Thanks Dhougal,
      Listen if you happen to get as sensible and as reasoned a retort as that, please do let me know. :-p
      HH

  2. Well put Brianbhoy ,i’ll give it a try ,but i fear all i’ll get in reply is …………. ”Naw ,right ,um………. ..We arra peeeeepul right !!!!!! . GuaRANTeed

    1. Thanks Dhougal,
      Listen if you happen to get as sensible and as reasoned a retort as that, please do let me know. :-p
      HH

  3. They keep using other clubs like leeds, charlton., plymouth, Boro as examples of clubs liquidated but retaining history… its funny all i can find is all clubs they cite have exited admin with either a cva, note of credit, or deal done with HMRC … maybe they dont see teh difference .. but here it is CVA was rejected… liquidators are appointed … death is impending… sevco has bought a land and have formed a newco, newclub to trade as TRFC.
    Being overly obsessed i will have to go lie down…. wish they were in somne way obsessed with paying their obligations as they are at claiming the dead still lives… was a mere induced coma…

    1. Haha Yeah buddy, it is absolutely clear that, by virtue of the newco’s spending capability, they had no intention of being able to do the best possible deal by the creditors.
      The new club should be living on a shoe-string budget and well within their means, alas no, they are choosing to be overly-flamoyant and extravagant as ever before.
      The details of a liquidation are as yet unkown, people including Mr Green seem utterly unaware of HMRC’s watch and brief and their thoroughness of investigation via BDO…the formal liquidation may yet take a very dramatic turn.
      Reference Leeds, seen as how you mentioned them…check for yourself and you will find that HMRC invested a lot of time time, effort and money to legal unravel complex transactions and to pursue the matter via legal recourse…could Rangers or even now Sevco/The Rangers be subject of such a litigious period?!…watch this space!!

      HH

  4. They keep using other clubs like leeds, charlton., plymouth, Boro as examples of clubs liquidated but retaining history… its funny all i can find is all clubs they cite have exited admin with either a cva, note of credit, or deal done with HMRC … maybe they dont see teh difference .. but here it is CVA was rejected… liquidators are appointed … death is impending… sevco has bought a land and have formed a newco, newclub to trade as TRFC.
    Being overly obsessed i will have to go lie down…. wish they were in somne way obsessed with paying their obligations as they are at claiming the dead still lives… was a mere induced coma…

    1. Haha Yeah buddy, it is absolutely clear that, by virtue of the newco’s spending capability, they had no intention of being able to do the best possible deal by the creditors.
      The new club should be living on a shoe-string budget and well within their means, alas no, they are choosing to be overly-flamoyant and extravagant as ever before.
      The details of a liquidation are as yet unkown, people including Mr Green seem utterly unaware of HMRC’s watch and brief and their thoroughness of investigation via BDO…the formal liquidation may yet take a very dramatic turn.
      Reference Leeds, seen as how you mentioned them…check for yourself and you will find that HMRC invested a lot of time time, effort and money to legal unravel complex transactions and to pursue the matter via legal recourse…could Rangers or even now Sevco/The Rangers be subject of such a litigious period?!…watch this space!!

      HH

  5. A nice attempt, Brian, but like all analogies, this Catholic/Protestant one breaks down fairly rapidly. I too sometimes struggle with some of Paul McConville’s more detailed analyses, but his Russian Doll analogy can surely be understood, albeit reluctantly, by even the most intellectually-challenged amongst the Sevcovians.

    By the way, I know your doing all this for a laugh but, as a Celtic supporter of some thirty years, and of the Reformed branch of the Christian faith, and without here going in to too much detail, can I humbly suggest that you do a little more research into the history of the early church (the book of Acts), the Emperor Constantine, the breakaway Eastern Orthodox church, the Medieval church, the Reformation, etc. and the reasons behind the Apocrypha being dropped from the reformed canon of Scripture.

    Please leave the revision of history to those who want to learn nothing from it.

    YNWA

    1. Zaccur mate, I did say that I aimed to act as an intellectual buffer, I had no desire to complicate matters…rest assured though, the analogy stands.

      By the admittance that I am absolutely correct about the volume of old testament scriptures being used and the fact that the new testament is identically utilised by the Protestant faith, this would easily constitute somewhat a transfer of substantial historical connection.

      I have of course ‘simplified’ matters and spared detail but the point is that, as I clearly stated in the article, I had no desire to embark on a convoluted discussion on matters of Theological importance.

      The basic premise is that some persons refuse to accept a simply and accurate explanation of Sevco/Rangers predicament…by simplification of a subject they profess to understand, it is clear that they are being entirely selective and hypocritical in regard their beliefs.

      I too have much of the reformed branch of Christians within my family, I did suggest my analogy was not fully descriptive of such a large portion of history, it is however completely undeniable that the Protestant faith is one of Catholic tradition and of massively shared values…I am more than happy to expand on a theological discussion via another format. My ‘research’ or as I like to refer to it, ‘my previously held knowledge via education and studious intrigue’ stands up, fit to it’s limited purpose for this article.

      I am however very glad to know that a mind as expansive as yours has joined in with my humble blog…always welcome a readers input and it is not necessary to agree with my every word.

      Thanks for reading. HH

        1. I’m a little short on inspiration presently…I’ll give it some thought. Previously used ‘Yahoo answers’…there’s always a matter of Theological importance on there.

          “What separates us as believers in Christ is much less than what unites us.” (Pope John XXIII)

  6. A nice attempt, Brian, but like all analogies, this Catholic/Protestant one breaks down fairly rapidly. I too sometimes struggle with some of Paul McConville’s more detailed analyses, but his Russian Doll analogy can surely be understood, albeit reluctantly, by even the most intellectually-challenged amongst the Sevcovians.

    By the way, I know your doing all this for a laugh but, as a Celtic supporter of some thirty years, and of the Reformed branch of the Christian faith, and without here going in to too much detail, can I humbly suggest that you do a little more research into the history of the early church (the book of Acts), the Emperor Constantine, the breakaway Eastern Orthodox church, the Medieval church, the Reformation, etc. and the reasons behind the Apocrypha being dropped from the reformed canon of Scripture.

    Please leave the revision of history to those who want to learn nothing from it.

    YNWA

    1. Zaccur mate, I did say that I aimed to act as an intellectual buffer, I had no desire to complicate matters…rest assured though, the analogy stands.

      By the admittance that I am absolutely correct about the volume of old testament scriptures being used and the fact that the new testament is identically utilised by the Protestant faith, this would easily constitute somewhat a transfer of substantial historical connection.

      I have of course ‘simplified’ matters and spared detail but the point is that, as I clearly stated in the article, I had no desire to embark on a convoluted discussion on matters of Theological importance.

      The basic premise is that some persons refuse to accept a simply and accurate explanation of Sevco/Rangers predicament…by simplification of a subject they profess to understand, it is clear that they are being entirely selective and hypocritical in regard their beliefs.

      I too have much of the reformed branch of Christians within my family, I did suggest my analogy was not fully descriptive of such a large portion of history, it is however completely undeniable that the Protestant faith is one of Catholic tradition and of massively shared values…I am more than happy to expand on a theological discussion via another format. My ‘research’ or as I like to refer to it, ‘my previously held knowledge via education and studious intrigue’ stands up, fit to it’s limited purpose for this article.

      I am however very glad to know that a mind as expansive as yours has joined in with my humble blog…always welcome a readers input and it is not necessary to agree with my every word.

      Thanks for reading. HH

        1. I’m a little short on inspiration presently…I’ll give it some thought. Previously used ‘Yahoo answers’…there’s always a matter of Theological importance on there.

          “What separates us as believers in Christ is much less than what unites us.” (Pope John XXIII)

  7. Thanks very much for the mention! I don’t try to be confusing, but it seems to come naturally to me!

    The interesting thing about the whole Rangers saga is that, from the legal perspective, we have had employment law, TUPE, administration, liquidation, gratuitous alienations, unfair preferences, tax law, form over substance and vice-versa, judicial review, defamation, title to sue …

    You could write a whole law syllabus from this alone!

    What is fun is picking up on an issue and seeing where I end up with it. It is common to have an initial view on an issue but, by the time I have gone through it in detail and looked at sources and precedents, come to a different conclusion from that I would have predicted at the start.

    Mind you, the risk is that the piece, like this comment, gets longer and longer!

    Anyway, thank you again for the mention and thanks for your very interesting post above too.

    Paul

    1. Paul, just keep doing what you do best, keep up the great work…I always enjoy reading your blog.

      Yeah, this Rangers-gate really has tested out just about every conceivable area of the law…perhaps something new may be written in law one day as result of this whole damnable affair. Maybe we’ll even have stated case being recorded and named after the FTT’s findings at this rate…’HMRC V RFC/The Rangers/Sevco Scotland/Sevco 5088 or Whoever & Whatever The Fuck They Wanna Be (This Week) ltd co.’

      Of course it may very well be a posthumously declared outcome.

      Ah well I’ll do you, your sanity and your previously enjoyed level of intellect a great favour and expand upon my whimsical reply no futher…my stupidity may be infectious!

      Still at least I’ve not mentioned ‘Piegate’ huh Mick! 😉

      Cheers Paul

  8. Thanks very much for the mention! I don’t try to be confusing, but it seems to come naturally to me!

    The interesting thing about the whole Rangers saga is that, from the legal perspective, we have had employment law, TUPE, administration, liquidation, gratuitous alienations, unfair preferences, tax law, form over substance and vice-versa, judicial review, defamation, title to sue …

    You could write a whole law syllabus from this alone!

    What is fun is picking up on an issue and seeing where I end up with it. It is common to have an initial view on an issue but, by the time I have gone through it in detail and looked at sources and precedents, come to a different conclusion from that I would have predicted at the start.

    Mind you, the risk is that the piece, like this comment, gets longer and longer!

    Anyway, thank you again for the mention and thanks for your very interesting post above too.

    Paul

    1. Paul, just keep doing what you do best, keep up the great work…I always enjoy reading your blog.

      Yeah, this Rangers-gate really has tested out just about every conceivable area of the law…perhaps something new may be written in law one day as result of this whole damnable affair. Maybe we’ll even have stated case being recorded and named after the FTT’s findings at this rate…’HMRC V RFC/The Rangers/Sevco Scotland/Sevco 5088 or Whoever & Whatever The Fuck They Wanna Be (This Week) ltd co.’

      Of course it may very well be a posthumously declared outcome.

      Ah well I’ll do you, your sanity and your previously enjoyed level of intellect a great favour and expand upon my whimsical reply no futher…my stupidity may be infectious!

      Still at least I’ve not mentioned ‘Piegate’ huh Mick! 😉

      Cheers Paul

Leave a Reply

Your e-mail address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.