GirondistNYC

Apologies if this was posted earlier, but a good piece on SevCo wages by a Saints fan: http://saintinasia.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/how-are-sevco-affording-sandaza/ Worth a read

To be fair, it's a "humorous tea time email" from the Guardian and takes the piss out of everything from a "money has doomed football and fans, media and players are fools" perspective. They have been running a "stop football" campaign for a while on the grounds the game as a whole is doomed and are just as scathing about the competiveness of the EPL.

Bocanegra is pretty old at 33ish, and with Klnsmann in I think his time with the US national team is drawing to an end regardless of where he plays. I am kinda surprised that he didn't head back home immediately to MLS but now 2/3rds of the regular season here is gone so the MLS might not really help his chances on that front and a) he's lived in Europe a long time and may not want to go back quite yet and b) MLS transfer and salary cap rules are rather Byzantine and it may be difficult to shoehorn him in at this late date (I think he counts as an allocation player so certain teams would have priority in signing him). It should be noted that Keanes and Beckhams aside MLS wages are pretty crap. If he wants to stay in Europe, he's in the same situation as Goian -- both are presumed to be on pretty generous contracts which carry over (at least for a time) since they accepted TUPE. They are going to be balancing the hassle of moving versus the ignominy of getting kicked around on plastic pitches. I would hope some French club comes in for Boca with an offer that makes it an easy decision for him but given his age I'm not sure that's an absolute certainty. Taking an SPL wage in exchange for permanent hero status among the Orcs and family stability may not be crazy. It's kinda funny to me that both Goian and Bocanegra have been granted loyal soldier of Willam status on RM based on public statements that they would consider staying while not ruling anything out. In Bocanegra's case it's funny because he is reported to have negotiated a free release during the D&P wage reduction so there was absolutely no reason to NOT TUPE over, in Goians case it's funny because his public statements are thinly veiled statements that he is willing to go anywhere but has only received offers from Rumania that didn't meet his wage demands. I'll be happy if Boca leaves and Goian stays, because the latter's contract will be a heavy burden for TCFKAR and probably represent poor value. Can anyone verify if TUPE protection can terminate prior to the end of existing contracts allowing unilateral downward revision?

This. After the excellent work various sources did comparing per capita viewing figures, per capita attendance figures (as a proxy for interest levels) etc. for Scotland as opposed to countries like Norway, Greece etc. I can't help feel this is a bit of a pyrrich victory. A five year deal locks in the rather crappy status quo relative to comparable European leagues. That being said, stability is important and the negotiating position was rather horrid to be in. The devil will be in the details, like what happens if TCFKAR suffers a setback on their run up the leagues and what, if any, upwards adjustments can occur based on different events. Can't help but feel might have done better if Doncaster and Regan hadn't publicly badmouthed the league while trying to shoehorn SevCo in....

No no no. You're thinking of the Mormons. Stand up if you hate Brigham Young University football!

As someone with a longstanding affection for the Vatreni (despite the occasional awful moment involving Dado Prso and/or fascists) I rather hope you change your avatar soon so poor Croatia isn't tarred by association with your feeble banter and sad deflections. Rangers NA VRBE! Actually, that's a bit harsh mebbe. Ok, way too harsh.

But, of course, this has nothing to do with SPORTING integrity because it involved a group of individuals mal-investing their take home pay with no interface with the club, whereas in Rangers case it was an EMPLOYEE benefit trust that required Rangers to make payments to the club and the weight of evidence indicates it was directly tied to contract and attracting players. One is relevant to the pitch, the other is not. Simplified Example (EBT) Rangers and Celtic are negotiating with a player and can afford to pay him £9000 a week after regular taxes Rangers offer a combined £10000 with a portion thru EBT, outlay to Rangers is the same as if offered £9000 Player signs for Rangers. Rangers garner sporting advantage through (we think) breaking the rules for EBTs Simplified Example (player investments) Four old firm players each have £500K to invest AFTER the club has paid them properly: Player A) invests in a dubious film finance scheme for tax advantages Player B) gives the money to charity Player C) invests in Greek Sovereign Bond Funds Player D) goes the traditional route of hookers 'n blow Player (b) is a good person, © and (d) are broke and (a) is not as nice as (b) or ©. However, none of this has anything to do with either the club they play or sporting integrity. It has no direct impact on the pitch. A number of players and staff of a single club might plump for (a) and do the tax shelter because they are friends and they share the same accountants, but that could just as easily happen with the option to buy Greek bonds. The point is the CLUB isn't involved, and the club garners no advantage from this - even if, for the sake of argument, Neil and Hartson really quite liked avoiding taxes it wouldnt have influenced their career decisions as such schemes are portable and can be done at any club. If Neil Lennon etc. were bitching about all the bulletproof vests for the Forces or ambulances for the NHS the Rangers hid away through EBTs then this is relevant. If you want to make a US style "role models should be perfect" argument then it's a bit relevant. But it has absolutely nothing to do with the sporting integrity argument.

Must confess I didn't expect this, but my understanding is the shadowy figure behind the scenes is Patriarch Kirill of the Russian Orthodox Church. Legatt will be so confused.

I never like to wish anyone to lose their job, but I'll make an exception in Forsyth's case. Truly wretched journalist, just as bad as Traynor etc. but with the cloak (tattered as it may be in the current era) of writing for a proper broadsheet. He was one of the irst, if not the first, to reveal the names of the panel after Ally's rant and has in general been about as objective and informative as Russia Today's coverage of an Ukrainian election throughout the saga. Get thee to a hunnery, Roddy.

Went to check on the penalty and ended up on the Wkipedia page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ally_McCoist, which has some.... Interesting facts: "Alistair Murdoch "Ally" McCoist, (/məˈkɔɪst/; 24 September 1962) is a Bell End. He is the manager of 'The Newco'."

The latter three didn't object to the transfer under TUPE and thus they are clearly entitled to fees for them - however, the fees would be capped by whatever was negotiated with D&P during the wage reduction negotiations. It has, however, been widely reported (including in the OrcSphere) that Bocanegra's release clause is ZERO, which makes all of the SevCo fans worship of "Captain America" for his loyalty hilarious. He can look like a good guy, play the market for a lucrative free and if worst comes to worst stay on his current contract terms. Edu is rumored to be going for £300K. I will be very, very happy though if Bedoya, Bocanegra and Edu all leave sharpish as while I seen little evidence of the American presence in Rangers leading to any embrace of the club by the MLS soccerball types I'd prefer if that wasn't an issue at all. P.S. Greens actions with regard to TUPE and the player transfers is a good example of how maintaing a legal position that is facially ridiculous but not absolutely groundless so that people pay you to go away occasionally works. I'm not sure Rangers fans should take to much comfort from this as in my experience people who are willing to play legal hardball to this degree are not people you want to rely on overmuch. Pretty clear evidence he'll sell his granny (or Murray Park) with little thought for the tender feelings of the supporters.

[facepalm GIF]

More like Guns N' Roses, except with return to the SPL standing in for the release of "Chinese Democracy". Both, after ll, we're confidently assumed to only require three years....

throwing the phrase "duress" into a PR statement is not the same thing as real duress, let alone the type required to invalidate a legal agreement.

I really don't think is true. First, the name on the shirt and in the league table is a brand, not their name for legal purposes, and Green bought the brand. If, for the avoidance of doubt, Green had acquired the assets through OldRangersWereCheatingBigots Ltd. the team could still be called Rangers for footballing purposes and play in their current strip. Second, with regards to the legal name I'm pretty sure the rule is that NewCos can't use old names in circumstances where it might be deemed misleading to the public and creditors. It's hard to argue given the unique nature of football clubs and the publicity involved that anyone can seriously argue that people will be misled in commercial terms by the current company name. When Fiorentina was reformed Italian insolvency law prevented them from purchasing the IP and thus they had to play as the Viola with a different strip, but they reverted back as soon as they could buy the intellectual property. Here, the IP was explicitly part of the deal. Barring BDO challenging the terms of the sale, they are SevCo, but the team can play as Rangers. The fact we know they died doesn't change the fact they are allowed to use the name. It's kinda like when a band suffers a messy split and the lead singer tours with a new band and releases kinda crp albums under the old name. Everyone knows its not the same, but they're allowed to do it.

Green bought the intellectual property of OldCo, which clearly includes the strip, the badge, etc. barring a challenge by BDO as liquidator of the terms of sale or a (as I understand it unlikely) legal argument that using the marks is misleading, they can thus call themselves "Rangers" and wear the shirts. The history bit is trickier. The Bears will argue that the club was separate from the OldCo, was purchased by NewCo and has continued. Everyone was else will argue liquidation killed the history and the club was not distinct from the legal entity. The SFA license and SFL/SPL share is separate from, but related to, both the legal corporate form and the metaphysical and legally indistinct concept of "the club" the Bears rely on. By dropping Rangers to the Third rather than making them apply the SFL acknowledged some continuity between OldCo and NewCo, making sanctions possible but also bolstering the Orcs "club not company" line. As a practical matter, regardless of what happened Bears were going to claim the history (see Juventus and the disputed titles) and the rest of the world would see, at best, an asterix over it. If, as expected, the SPL inquiry ends up stripping titles then pub quiz questions involving titles won are going to turn into brawls in the years ahead.

C'mon guys, a little perspective here. People were panicking that they would sneak back into the SPL not too long ago. Then it looked that they would be jammed into the first... Didn't happen. After the court of sessions the disrepute charge was going to turn into a mere cup ban - again, didn't happen. If you all were told in February that Rangers would be playing in the Third with only a month in which to build a squad using an SPL focused scouting team to identify SFL players to be acquired with very shaky finances before a two window transfer ban kicked in you wouldn't have believed it. I certainly wouldn't have. They may very well die off the pitch due to running costs and Investor problems. They may very well struggle on the pitch. Regardless, their liquidation and comprehensive humiliation is a fact and won't change.

Putting aside all the other things off the field that could doom them, I'm thinking SevCo is looking at a tough panicky transfer window. They have to assemble a team that can last a season and a half without senior reinforcement and will be looking ahead to one season in the third and hoping for the next in the second. Given that they won't be able to directly replace a player who demands a transfer or is out of contract at the end of this season, they have to think very hard about the core of the team and make tough decisions fast. Do you sell Wallace now to get a slightly depressed valuation that you can at least reinvest or risk him walking when the glories of the Third pale? Extend contracts on youngsters now? They definitely will need to assemble a core of lower league chep and cheerful warhorses, but they don't have much time to do so. I'm sure the Ibrox staff is smart and more realistic than the RM mob, but how much experience do they have in Identifying 28 year old center halves who can do the business on a cold rainy day in Berwick rather than the Euro qualifiers? Will McCoist be able to fill out an entire squad without the normal chance to build up scouting dossiers, etc. in the time available? Could be interesting.

Or, as those charming chaps from Vanguard Bears put it: http://www.vanguardbears.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=248:history-beckons-you-no12 [warning, do not read during meals]

And if his other personality wants to make a fresh start over here I'd be happy to handle the DHS paperwork pro bono.

While this was not a smart thing to post (if the events of the last 5 months have proven anything, it's that gloating triumphalism has negative consequences down the road), in the club's (as opposed to the OP's) defense it should be pointed out that this banner is matched by another one with a picture of Brother Walfrid, the date 1888, and the text "Always have been". In other words, it's referring to the 125th anniversary coming due, not implying Celtic is nailed on to win this season. Like I said, not a smart thing to post but I thought I'd point tht out.

[little boy runs to meet postman] Postman: "here you go wee man, another big stack of letters for you - 15 from you Granny Danger, 10 from that Captain Sensible, a couple of collage postcards of fitba managers smiling with the word 'pleasing' on them....." Little Boy: "more Captain Sensible fishing?" [Little Boys face forms an unmistakeable ]

Errr... A) not sure what the heck this has to do with SevCo, Scottish football or the price of fish and B) to my American based eyes, this is a classic example of to the right of the Tea Party black helicopter bam pots crap (the American far right, like the American far left, do love their "sheeple" imagery). I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you didn't know this. Batshit insane Arkansas Militia who believe Obama was born in Mecca and the UN secretly fluoridates the water to cause abortions forum for this pish.

This is pretty much what I understand has happened with a number of teams from the former East Germany that started out with a sliver of far-right support that snowballed as normal fans departed as they slid down the leagues. VFB Leipzig and currently Hansa Rostock spring to mind. The situations are distinguishable on a host of levels, but still a worrying precedent. Be interested as to what P&B ers living in Germany think. Great posts by Danish Pastry, btw. I do get a sense that the Internet, for all it's utility during this crisis, gives a distorted view of supporter attitudes. [edited to correct IPad autocorrect]

I think that attitude caused problems well beyond the Bears support. H&D's handling of the administration was messy enough to support everything from allegations of everything from incompetence to conspiracy, but my best guess is that they were blinded by raw number of supporters, the big stadium and the titles and assumed that somebody would eventually step in with money sufficient to get a CVA done*. Portsmouth was a historically underperforming club that had a very sharp operator in the form of Mandaric trying to solve their stadium problem - when he gave up the writing was on the wall and during both administrations a reasonable administrator couldn't plan for a Deus ex Machina savior. I think H&D made a hasty and disastrous decision that a firesale outside the transfer window coupled with negotiated releases with lose more money for creditors in the form of lost prize money, foregone transfer value and reduced gates than muddling through. The wage reductions they pushed through would have been a stroke of genius IF somebody had shown up with decent money in April and a CVA agreed. They were blinded by the WATP and thought the problems at Rangers were due to poor management rather than deeper issues and an investor would rapidly agree. I also think that the omnishambles of the Scottish authorities response to this whole thing was also the product of the Rangers propaganda effect. One would have hoped the SPL and SFA would have been looking seriously at all possible options and making contingency plans accordingly. In particular, they should have been susding out the economic implications of all of the possible options. The line should have been consistent fom the beginning. Instead, it seems they never seriously thought about things until very late in the game. All those charts comparing SFA per capita attendance and the relative value of the current Scottish TV rights compared to countries like Norway and Greece should have been soundbites dropped into every press conference. Instead they were dug up and publicized on football forums and the most coherent mainstream case for the value of Scottish football was made by a BBC COMEDY RADIO PROGRAM. Again hard not to think the authorities weren't given false security by the WATP line until it was too late. Of course, that looks mad in hindsight and all they accomplished was dragging the value of the Rangers brand through the mud and giving the impression that Scottish football was less attractive. Triumphlism reaped a bitter harvest, with lots of collateral damage. Sorry for the long post. * Because of the way it played out, the RTC consensus that HMRC would never agree to ANY deal was never tested so it's unlikely we'll ever know. Certainly, anyone who thought big money might toss in £40 mil or so and satisfy HMRC (together with some season book compromise with Ticketus) so as to get a CVA looks silly now it's clear the best the "establishment" could do was TBK and the Cardigans. But given the information available to them at the time H&D might not have been batshit insane.