Huistrinho

AFAIK it wasn't a "temporary licence", it was a full license conditional on the oldco SPL share being transferred to Dundee (which has now been done). There's no problem with them employing players (as any other business) in the meantime. I'm not sure if this has prevented them registering players before today, however the SFL trialist rules make this a non-issue when it comes to actually fielding them in games.

Circulation figures for the Daily Record (and by implication, his job). Surely that's been clear for months?

You can indeed ask; RangersMedia would be the place to do so. Here you're just helping this thread degenerate into circlejerk central.

Great. There's never going to be a better time to try and stamp it out. I've long been in favour of a points deduction system for bad crowd behaviour. Has anyone in the game or media ever mooted the idea?

Armageddon is a lot prettier than I expected...

On your first point, if you're looking to buy a business it would be really stupid to add any more money to the CVA pot than the minimum necessary to either A) secure a CVA, or B) get the administrators to agree to your backup plan (or "real" plan) to secure the assets. On your second point, you are 100% correct. I'm amazed that the only person to make the leap into "Investigative Scottish Football Journalist" throughout this whole debacle has been an English war correspondent with no prior familiarity with the Scottish game. Worse, there's been no attempt by the MSM to up their game in response, and often an air of "you're not from around these parts...". You might add Mark Daly as an exception, but his second documentary was padded out with so much suggestion, implication, and bad narrative that he went down in my estimation. Even the Scottish pundits who come out with some credit, such as English, Cosgrove, and Spence, do so only because they were expressing "true" public opinion, not because of any investigative breakthroughs of their own. There's certainly a gap in the market waiting to be filled by someone with the necessary journalistic talents.

You do realise this isn't a BBC run website, right? You might have better luck contacting them directly.

IMO, there will be an agreement that any punishment will not direct affect Sevco (financial or suspension). I'm quite sure title stripping will still be on the cards.

How do you come to that conclusion? It says they'll proceed after the verdict on the big tax case has been delivered.

The Spartans

You do realise that's what we were already talking about, don't you? It's as it should be (and there's a good argument that it's higher than it should be). You're not going to find any complaining here

Haha, I've already made my thoughts on this perfectly clear over the past 1000 pages or so. However, I suggest you take your issue up with the BBC directly Edit: missing words.

That's the company name. The old company was "The Rangers Football Club PLC", the new one will be "The Rangers Football Club Ltd." I'm sure the team will come to be known just as "Rangers" as before.

Haha!, I can't imagine the emails they're about to receive for that one. Clearly somebody in the office taking the piss - I don't expect it to last very long.

By that logic you've just written off Hibs' Scottish cup win, however I don't see people reminding you of that via the medium of song every weekend. Time will pass, people will forget, and nobody will care to listen to those who complain otherwise whether you like it or not. Such is life.

I was wondering how long it would take for someone to bite on that

I don't think you're far off the money. I expect media rights are also playing a larger component in this than we might think. Arguably, the SFL have the strongest hand in this, as they're no worse off without Rangers. Every other player stands to lose. Ally's posturing does himself or the club no credit whatsoever.

Bloody Sun..

Quite seriously, I would love to do a documentary on this in 20 years time to see if you're right. I'm sure it would yield some fascinating insights into the homeowners

If you've looked at my post history, you'll notice that even I as a Rangers supporter am not convinced of Sevco's claim to be Rangers. And unless you've got A) a time machine hidden away to provide the back page of the Sun from 2032 to refute my position, or B) an opinion of your own to share with the class, I hesitate only slightly before asking "What's your point caller?" Edit: Ach, you deleted the post I was replying to

Regardless of any legal status, the labels of any owning companies or their trading names, this, public and footballing perception, is the most important factor. I expect that in 20 years, Scottish society will consist of two groups of people: 99% of the population who will accept and view Rangers and Sevco as the one and same thing, or have no idea anyone thinks differently. 1% of the population who will take pleasure in in pointing venomously at young children in their replica shirts while shouting "Rangers are DEAD! You support SEVCO! You've never won anything!"

Well, if no agreement is reached I think it is only right that Rangers are removed from the cup, and Brechin given a bye into the next round (of course, both clubs may have a different view for financial reasons). As for the league, a couple of postponements wouldn't be the end of the world, and I fully expect something to be agreed eventually - having no Rangers at all is the worst outcome from the point of view of all the parties involved. In the unlikely event that no agreement can be reached I would say that a 9 team league is much more likely than looking for a late replacement, which would have a knock on effect to the league from which the replacement is sourced.

Hear, hear - I think we all are. This thread spawned an awful lot of pages today for a 5 month old news story that hasn't moved at all in the past 24 hours. I think you're right about Friday: it's as much the 'deadline to end all deadlines' as every other deadline before it has been. It would be nice to think everything can be resolved in the next 96 hours though.

That's a slight stretch of the truth - it's not like whoever agreed to the fixture at the Kelty Hearts end of things was living in a bubble. If we run with the assumption that Green does actually want to play football next season, then it would have seemed a fair assumption at the point where this fixture was arranged that Sevco would have a license to play football 4 days before the season kick off. As it turns out, the assumption was faulty. However the people from both clubs who arranged the fixture are at fault here. Nobody else, and certainly not the SFA.

Come now, there isn't a single poster on this board that believes this, so why would Kennedy? Clearly he's coming back in because he thinks (wisely) that it's not secure and, as you say, he wants to make money off of Rangers in the long run (which is fine). I'm quite sure he'll want to put his Rangers constitution idea back in place: little more than a supporter-friendly way of saying "must be run for profit at all times".