THE poor souls who take on the job of forming the independent commission assessing Charles Green and Imran Ahmad's management of Rangers could save themselves time and effort by asking a single question at the start: will the club agree to the purchase and use of a lie detector kit?
Rangers are shedding staff on what looks like a cost-cutting drive but creating this independent commission means they have committed to the expense of hiring – perhaps for several weeks – legal and accountancy experts to pass judgment on their own chief executive and commercial director. Whoever is appointed will be asked to burrow into the murky, disputed relationship between Green, Ahmad and Craig Whyte and emerge with the truth. Where do they start? How much does polygraph equipment cost these days?
What a ridiculous mess Rangers are in again. On one side, Whyte, a discredited, proven liar, has made allegations of collaboration which will bring Green and Ahmad crashing down if they turn out to be true. On the other, Green, a man in the midst of a public relations disaster. Someone who admitted deception of his own while his credibility went through the shredder, and fighting to save his skin. No-one can believe a word that comes out of Whyte's mouth but when he coughs up alleged bank account details, and a document supposedly carrying Green's signature and lodged at Companies House, Rangers no longer have the option of dismissing him as a crank with an axe to grind.
Green's defence that he strung Whyte along – relax lads, I was duping him all along – is clever. But Whyte says he and his associate deposited £137,500 and £25,000 with Green and Ahmad and is waving around a document which seems to show Green signed him off as a director of takeover vehicle Sevco 5088. So exactly how sweet did Green keep him and when did their cosiness end? That's what this independent commission has to find out. God help them. Remember, too, that to get SFA membership Green told the governing body he had no connection with Whyte. And when the SFA asked if there was anything else they ought to be told in that respect, he said no.
There has been some ridicule for "Rangers investigating Rangers" and an independent commission is problematic and flawed, but how else could this be credibly examined? Green and Ahmad cannot investigate themselves and finance director Brian Stockbridge is aligned with them and, therefore, would not be seen as impartial.
Others on the board lack the expertise to know how to examine and verify Whyte's allegations. The board – the whole club, maybe – seems to be splitting into pro- and anti-Green camps. In that context, farming the whole thing out to an independent panel isn't the fudge or whitewash that some have claimed. Rangers supporters must trust in Walter Smith and the other non-executive directors aggressively pursuing their fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the club and shareholders. This is their way.
Ally McCoist's pleasure at the creation of this commission has been shared by many others within Ibrox. That is significant in itself. The board could have exonerated Green and Ahmad at that long meeting on Saturday morning – taken their word for it all, announced that the matter was closed and then bad-mouthed Whyte – but it chose not to do so.
The decision to put the matter in the hands of outsiders was a unanimous one but Green had no choice. Having been unable to talk himself out of trouble, he could not have been seen to object to any investigation into his dealings with Whyte. This is simple: if he and Ahmad have nothing to hide, they have nothing to worry about.So now the Rangers circus moves on to speculation about who will be on the commission, exactly why each of those individuals was appointed and by whom, who they will speak to and how long they will take to deliver findings.
The man making the primary accusations is detested at Rangers and appears to be seeking revenge via the courts and the media: how can they talk to Whyte or trust him? Do they instead approach The Sun which claims to be in possession of bank documents, or STV which says it has a copy of the Companies House document? Companies House itself? This independent commission has no legal weight behind it. No-one outside of Rangers is obliged to co-operate with any of its requests, which could be a problem given that verifying the authenticity of Whyte's allegations will determine whether Green and Ahmad survive.
If it's true that Green has been told to keep his mouth shut until the investigation is over, he has already been hit with the punishment which might hurt him most of all. There is one respect in which Rangers are back to where they were a year ago. How can supporters buy season-tickets when they can't trust where their money's going? The entire business plan relies on substantial annual season-ticket income but it is impossible to believe that McCoist will lend his name to a sales drive while a huge question mark hangs over Green, the man who asked him to get rid of Ian Durrant and Kenny McDowall.
In the meantime, time to recruit those panel members and buy that lie detector kit.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article