The Scottish PL discussion thread

A great win for Celtic at Hearts yesterday, coming back from behind and with this win it's another step on the way to the title.

I missed Pressley's move to Celtic over the Xmas perriod while I was away. He was up for it yesterday and is proving a useful add to the Celtic team. I was surprised to see that he was mad captain however. I didnt think that Zurawski did that well, Jarosik did quite well, good movement in what is arguably McGeady's position. A pity that Aiden didnt feature but good to see O'Dea doing well.

I see there has been a bit of discussion about Nakamura on this thread but yesterday I thought he didnt do that well imo.

As for the Brady discussion:
> Brady is youth director of Arsenal so he does have a qualified opinion

From what I've heard from Brady over last 5 years he does speak a lot of sense on many topics and can judge most players reasonably well. However, he can also let his allegiances taint his opinions, so for example, when it comes to Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool, etc, and probably Celtic as well.

Redspider

Dempsey wrote:

Desmond has earnt the Celtic's support by the dealing that he's done for the club, I for one dont have any real question marks over his honesty. Do you know of any suspect deals he's done like O'Brien has pulled, please post them. Im ignorant on it

Desmond may have conducted fair dealings with/for Celtic, and indeed be seen to be a benefactor, but elsewhere he has not been so squeaky clean. Start on page 241 of the recent Moriarity tribunal report to get some ideas of what's in the public domain. There's a lot more than that of course. What's that I hear, a dog barking on the street again!

Redspider

---

In his evidence to the Tribunal, Mr. Desmond testified that these
two payments of Stg.£100,000.00 and Stg.£25,000.00 were loans which he
made to Mr. Haughey on the strength of Mr. Haughey’s assets. The
payments were clearly not intended by Mr. Desmond to be commercial
loans, as he agreed that they were made without documentation, without
any agreement regarding interest, and without any terms governing
repayment. As far as Mr. Desmond was concerned, they were unsecured
advances, and were characterised by him as debts of honour. Mr.
Desmond accepted, that in his dealings with the Tribunal prior to attending
to give evidence, he had never suggested that these payments were in the
form of loans which he expected to be repaid by Mr. Haughey.

The Tribunal cannot accept Mr. Desmond’s evidence that these
payments were ever intended by him to be repayable by Mr. Haughey.
There was nothing evident in the conduct of either Mr. Desmond or of Mr.
Haughey which would support Mr. Desmond’s characterisation of the
payments as loans. On the contrary, all of the objective evidence available
to the Tribunal suggests otherwise, and the Tribunal is satisfied that the
payments were outright dispositions by Mr. Desmond to Mr. Haughey.
While Mr. Desmond confirmed to Mr. Haughey’s accountants, for the
purposes of dealings with the Revenue Commissioners, that the payments
made by him were loans, the Tribunal is of the view that these confirmations
were not correct, and can have been furnished for one purpose only, which
was in ease of Mr. Haughey’s position, and with a view to reducing his
potential exposure to taxation. The Tribunal believes that this is borne out
by the fact that, in negotiations with the Revenue Commissioners which
ultimately led to a settlement with Mr. Haughey and the payment of \5
million by Mr. Haughey to the Revenue Commissioners, Mr. Haughey’s
advisers themselves accepted that the two payments by Mr. Desmond
should be included for the purposes of arriving at a base figure on which
Gift Tax would be computed.

Mr. Desmond testified to the Tribunal that apart from these
payments amounting to Stg.£125,000.00, apart from the investments that
he made in companies with which Mr. Haughey was associated and apart
from the funding to the tune of £75,456.00 of the cost of refitting the
Haughey family yacht, Celtic Mist, he made no other payments to Mr.
Haughey, or to persons associated with him, within the meaning of the
Tribunal’s Terms of Reference. In particular, Mr. Desmond testified that he
made no direct payments to Mr. Haughey prior to 1994, after Mr. Haughey
had left office. While it must be said that the Tribunal has heard no evidence
to the contrary, the Tribunal cannot make a finding to that effect as neither
Mr. Haughey’s off-shore accounts, nor Mr. Desmond’s off-shore accounts
were accessible to the Tribunal for the purposes of verifying this matter.

These were not isolated payments made in an
open manner by Mr. Desmond to Mr. Haughey after Mr. Haughey ceased
to hold office as Taoiseach. On the contrary, they were shrouded in
secrecy, and they were made from one off-shore account, through a series
of off-shore accounts to what was, at least nominally, an off-shore account
at least in part held for the benefit of Mr. Haughey. They followed in the
path of an established pattern of support by Mr. Desmond of the business
ventures of Mr. Haughey’s family, and they further followed the conferring
of an indirect benefit of £75,546.00 on Mr. Haughey by Mr. Desmond
through the financing of the refit of the Haughey family yacht, Celtic Mist,
all of which occurred during Mr. Haughey’s tenure as Taoiseach.