Ronnie Wutherspoon

No statement from Falkirk FC yet? Maybe they're happy to be tacitly condoning discrimination and hate speech of course.

This may have been asked already so apologies if so... But, this report, all 8 pages of it, has taken 120 days? Really? Could a semi-competent myopic Accountant not have come up with it in a week, given that it's just re-stating the bleedin obvious?

I don't think AT would be asking these questions if he didn't already know the answers.... alex thomson ‏@alextomo 7m Rangers denying rumours of possible Administration. But nothing on the specifics of W and N meeting Administrators in past 48 hours. alex thomson ‏@alextomo 36m And will Rangers further deny Nash and Wallace have settled on one of them as potential Administrator? alex thomson ‏@alextomo 37m Will Rangers deny that Nash and Wallace have met 2 potential Administrators in the past 48 hours? #c4news alex thomson ‏@alextomo 43m Why is Jack Irvine contacting journos quite unsolicited tonight to deny possible imminent Admin to people who hadn't asked about it? alex thomson ‏@alextomo 44m Some more questions for Rangers tonight - questions note - not statements ? alex thomson ‏@alextomo 2h What is absolutely critical will be the crisis meeting called for tomorrow alex thomson ‏@alextomo 3h Rangers to go into Administration on Wednesday? At least one senior Glasgow accountant is saying so tonight.

Bugger. Beat me to it...

They'll be fine, they've got a huge fanbase (millions worldwide apparently) who'll step in again to save the club just like they did the last... oh wait...

I remember it fairly well, I was living in Cherrybank at the time. The residents of Halbeath Road would have been up in arms if anyone had farted too loudly; that, allied to Cllr Jim Tolley's campaign made it all the more surprising that the Council did give approval. I only mention it now because it could be significant that the Council have given permission for commercial development of the area once; has that set a precedent? I kind of agree with burty though. EEP since the seats went in, isn't a patch on the place it used to be when it had the terracing, the cage, and the low roof; personally I wouldn't really mind too much if we didn't end up playing there if it helped the club have a future.

I thought it was the collapse of Stadia Group that stopped the development of the hotel etc. at EEP, rather than any objections from residents? In fact, this would suggest that the Council did give approval for the hotel in 2000.

It was always intended to be a pre-season friendly though wasn't it? That's certainly how I'd understood it.

is it ticket money that's overdue? If so, why haven't FFC got the SFL involved? If it's not ticket money, e.g. is it money that FFC would be claiming for damage to the stadium for example, is there a danger that FFC themselves would be witholding ticket money and giving DAFC reason to get the SFL involved? It does sound like a tawdry situation on our part though, granted. ETA - a nice clear official statement would be helpful...

Happy to be shown to be incorrect.

Not really. But I'll give you a clue - it's not the exact same situation.

OK, I'll indulge you. "Creditors wouldn't be "throwing good money after bad" by putting Dunfermline into administration because they've already handed that money over, with no guarantee of getting it back. Yet another bogus claim from a discredited poster." Creditors who wanted to put us (i.e. DAFC Ltd) into Admin, would have to pay to petition the Court to appoint an Administrator. In other words, more "good money". Understand that bit? Then, how do you suppose they would get anything back out of the insolvency process? It either goes to Liquidation or a CVA. In either case, DAFC Ltd owns very little in the way of assets - it's all under the banner of GM's other companies - so (i) there's not much that could be liquidated to provide a return for those Creditors, or (ii) GM has more than 75% of the CVA-qualifying debt so he has the final say.

^^ obsessed (but we knew that already of course)

I can understand why you're thinking that, but any creditor who puts us into Admin would just be throwing good money after bad. In Admin, GM would be by far and away the largest creditor, way past the 75% mark, so it would all be done and dusted on his terms.

Well we're never going to be able to buy GM out, so in that respect the figures aren't really important. What is important, is him accepting the principle that there are people & groups of people out there, willing to invest in the club, but they're no longer willing to pour money into the black hole he's created, and the days of him exerting total control need to end. Yep, he has a lot invested in there but it's not really worth much if the shutters go up.

Same here da_no_1. It sounds like we'd agreed a repayment plan with HMRC, which is bad enough, but we're possibly close to defaulting on that? Really really a bit fckd off with our BoD right now.

You're right, it's down to the SFL Board to decide (rule 44.5). But I can't imagine they wouldn't deduct points, after all a fine and/or transfer embargo would seem a bit pointless.

Dearie me. Voluntary Admin, to protect us from the HMRC petition that's surely on it's way, anyone? And although GM would appear to own more than 75% of the debt (for CVA purposes), we'll still have a points penalty to look forward to. Or am I just being pessimistic?

Interesting listening. Sounds like Dodds has unwittingly plunged the knife in (again?). He's saying that RFC(IA) used the EBT to make a contractual payment - the £190k was money he was due from his contract and it was paid via the EBT.... and that's exactly what HMRC's case is?

From that statement, "We also regret that any agreement with the SFA appears not to have the support of the SPL and, as such, it still wishes to impose further sanctions on the Club for the actions of previous regimes despite already voting us out of its league. This is truly astounding to everyone at the Club who is now in charge of rebuilding Rangers from Division 3, particularly as the SPL are still trying to benefit from our media rights." How many times? Ending up in SFL3 isn't a punishment, that's what happens to any new club joining the SFL. Interesting comment about the SPL trying to benefit from their media rights though. Surely the SPL can't have anything to do with Sevco now?

Stolen from Rangerstaxcase. Don't know if it's been posted or not but thought it was worthy of an airing. It suggests that the "journalist" who wrote it, really doesn't understand anything about this whole fiasco. (Mind you, it is the Sunday Post) Ron Scott The Voice of Experience Sunday Post July1 2012 "The way the Scottish football authorities have allowed the Rangers scenario to unravel is nothing short of disgraceful. The whole sorry episode should have been nipped in the bud. Instead we're now in the situation where it's not just the survival ofRanges that's at stake, but the Scottish game itself. As the fans and clubs become hysterical about how the Light Blues should be punished, it's worth remembering the Ibrox club has done nothing unlawful. Employment Benefit Trusts are legal. That's why HMRC wants to close this particular loophole. Informed sources suggest, at worst, Rangers will receive fine, and there appears no danger of having to pay back-tax on the system Sir David Murray implemented. The SFA then decided to impose severe sanctions on Rangers after awakening to the fact that Craig Whyte was not a fit and proper person to own the club. Yet the independent Ibrox board set up to look into Whyte while he was still negotiating with Murray decided themselves that [he] wasn't fit and proper to own the club. They told the SFA that at least fifteen months ago,but the powers-that-be decided in their wisdom to take no action at that time. Now the situation is like a runaway train full of explosives that's about to be derailed and blow up the whole of Scottish football. Let's face the obvious here. Not even Celtc will be able to sustain their present level for long without Rangers. So if they end up having to make cuts, how is the rest of Scottish football going to survive? There are already whispers that other SPL clubs will be forced into administration. There is even talk of part-time football at the highest level, never mind the First Division. It's all very well to bleat on about sporting integrity. But why risk the entire future of Scottish football especially when the facts clearly show Rangers have done nothing wrong. At the end of the day, the main villan of the piece remains Whyte, with Murray a close second. It's totally wrong to run the risk of losing Rangers altogether and sending down the entire game with them. It is especially wrong when the facts show there is absolutely no need for the authoeities to treat Rangers the way they appear hell-bent on doing." (ETA put on the italics to make it clear I'm quoting the article!)

An important piece of clarification. (Sorry, it's been posted on here before but it's worth re-stating) TCFKAR have already been found guilty of cheating by Hector. What we're waiting on at the moment, is TCFKAR's appeal against that decision. The EPL teams you mention, yes they were charged with the same thing, but they accepted their wrongdoing and made an agreement with Hector about repayment of the tax.

Smaller grounds = smaller attendances and all ticket games = smaller numbers of people to be policed. Surely it would be easier to police 2000 of them attending a match at Station Park (for example) than say 7000 attending Rugby Park or ICT?

Wee site I found about TUPE transfers... Someone really needs to tell Mr Green and hopefully the PFA have the players well aware. My link Can an employee refuse to transfer under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006? The employee can inform the transferor or the transferee that he or she objects to becoming employed by the transferee, in which case the employee's contract with the transferor comes to an end.

http://www.dundeeunitedfc.co.uk/index.asp?tm=2&nid=4224&cd=2012 The Board of Directors of Dundee United are unequivocal in the belief that a form of sporting punishment must form part of the reasoning behind any decision made and, therefore, cannot vote the newco into the SPL. General sporting integrity and, more importantly, the integrity of Scottish football must also play a significant part in the decision making process. It is our belief that any form of sporting punishment must be unambiguous in the message it displays.