SFA agm: Administrators and would-be owner face probe under new rule

The rule, which obliges clubs to investigate new prospective owners, was passed unanimously at yesterday’s SFA annual general meeting at Hampden.

Proposed by the SFA board, it was tabled as an amendment to the national governing body’s Articles of Association.

The new Article 1.1 includes a new, tighter definition of what is meant by control of a club. The new Article 10.8 defines the obligations on member clubs when there is about to be any change in ownership.

The new article states: “In the event of a change of control of any club, the board of directors or the board of management or committee (as the case may be) of such club immediately prior to the change of control shall prepare and deliver to the Scottish FA . . . at the time of or prior to the change of control a certificate signed by an authorised signatory of the outgoing board . . . confirming that they have conducted an investigation into the provenance of the person(s) who is/are prepared to take control of the club . . .

“In the event that the Board [of the SFA] is not satisfied that any such person(s) is or are fit and proper to hold a position within Association Football and determines that the outgoing board of directors . . . of the relevant club did not act with due care and attention in doing so, the club shall be deemed to be in breach of these Articles and the Judicial Panel will have jurisdiction to deal with any such breach and to impose sanctions on relation to it as prescribed within the Judicial Panel Protocol.”

Speaking after the agm, SFA chief executive Stewart Regan explained, without making explicit reference to Craig Whyte, that the change of ownership at Ibrox and subsequent events had led to agreement that the rules needed to be tightened for the good of the game.

“We have decided it would be helpful if we had greater disclosure up front as to who is going to be involved in the football club,” Regan said.

“The fit-and-proper criteria in [the previous] Article 10 rely on directors doing a self-certification and saying they gave a copy to each director and that they are satisfied that each director complies fully. The members didn’t accept that went far enough, and it’s important to go even further for more disclosure.

“It is important that club owners take more responsibility to ensure that they sell their club to an individual or individuals who act responsibly and within the rules of football. The Scottish FA governs the whole of football, and rather than spend millions of pounds on investigations into any number of prospective purchases across the game at all levels, it is important that the onus is on those involved in the sale of the club.

“We govern football. We can’t stop someone putting money into a football club. All we can do is govern football through our official return and the people who are stated directors of the football club. To go further and try to control people who put money into plcs or who have shares – we are treading into very tricky territory.”

Regan added that the SFA did not plan to take action against Rangers for their appeal to the civil authorities against the 12-month transfer ban imposed on them as a result of charges against them during Whyte’s stewardship. He insisted, however, that he remained convinced that footballing matters should remain within football.

“I think we made our feelings on that very clear to the members this morning. In my closing remarks to the members I stated that it was very disappointing to see football’s dirty washing hung out in a civil court. We have made it very clear to members that if they wish to remain members of the Scottish FA then they must abide by our rules.”

Because Rangers won their civil appeal against the transfer ban, the matter will now be referred back to an appeals panel. They can either kick Rangers out of the Scottish Cup, suspend them from SFA membership or expel them from membership. However, if Rangers decide to accept the transfer ban after all, the other three possible sanctions would not apply.

Regan also offered a staunch defence of SFA president Campbell Ogilvie, a former Rangers administrator and one of the beneficiaries of an Employee Benefit Trust. The chief executive said that Ogilvie had disclosed all relevant information to the SFA before any of it had entered the public domain, and had excused himself from any deliberations concerning Rangers which had arisen since the club was put into administration by Whyte on 14 February.

“As far as the president’s concerned, the employee benefit scheme is not an illegal scheme unless it is proved to be illegal,” explained Regan.

“Therefore, at the moment the president has no case to answer.

“He has disclosed very clearly to the board his knowledge and involvement in the scheme. So that is not something that is being pursued by the SFA board.

“At the moment the president has done what is expected of him. That is, taking himself away from any decision making involving Rangers Football Club and to disclose fully all of the facts relating to his own circumstances.

“We’ve got no issue with his position. The board have got no reason for Campbell Ogilvie not to be doing the job he’s doing.”