Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[HibeeJibee]

If Sky came out and said the deal would remain the same and they would still be interested in the rights to the SPL, then how many chairmen would vote against Rangers coming back in?

This is the biggest fact that needs resolved in the whole scenario IMO. I don't expect it to be released into the public domain but once SPL chairmen know how much Sky-ESPN would pay for Rangers-less SPL, they'll be making a pragmatic decision based on discernible scenarios.

I would be fine with a new Rangers coming back into the Third Division, but for them to jump straight to the SPL ahead of teams (like mine)

If it's wrong for Rangers to 're-enter' SPL, it's equally wrong for them to re-enter the national league structure, surely?

It's easy for SFL1 club fans to decry Rangers entering above them, yet be perfectly happy for them to enter below them. It's also rather hypocritical.

[pollymac]

Good post. Although I disagree about the team staying together for 10years.

I would actually commend Celtic on the change to their transfer policy to where they buy young players with potential with a view to selling on in 2-4years to a bigger league. Porto, Ajax, PSV, Benfica et al have been doing this for years.

Theoretically they could, they would have three or four mid-30s, but those in that group (Ledley, Brown, Mulgrew, K Wilson) appear to be guys with very little 'weight' issues as it were.

But no, you are correct, someone will snaffle the likes of Kayal, Izzaguire, Ledley, Matthews, Wanyama etc.

Was surprised none of the first three left last summer.

[hamish_ict]

I don't think we've heard from Mad Vlad as he's busy taking notes.

Make some cash for Vlad - check.

Wipe out debt - check.

Club stays in SPL - check.

Vlad gets to walk away - check.

[7-2]

"Blue Knights" (which is as fucking pathetic a name for a consortium as I've seen anywhere)

The Red Knights were going to buy out Man Utd from the Glazers. Once again it's just Scotland copying England.

[Geefoxer]

For anyone who's interested, here's the interview with Paul Murray done on talkSport this morning.

Keys & Gray & Paul Murray

At 4:50, he says that in the court of public opinion, which he says in some ways is the most important court (), Craig Whyte should be nowhere near Ibrox. Wonder if he'd agree with the Court of Public Opinion that says Rangers should be, once this is finished, nowhere near the SPL, or indeed the SFL?

I know that it is never going to happen, but just once, I'd like to see the reaction from Rangers fans and indeed other clubs fans if one of these "Blue Knights" (which is as fucking pathetic a name for a consortium as I've seen anywhere) were to come out and say that they've fucking cheated, lied and deceived for the last god knows how long, and that if the punishment is demotion from the SPL to who knows where, then they'll take it on the chin?

So what the Blue Knights (or Black Orcs) want is to step into a situation where they get to stay in the SPL, either as Rangers or Mordor FC. They want to play in Europe next season and have no debts because all the creditors have been shafted via the CVA. As a taxpayer, the thought that they can just carry on is sickening and I hope that the SPL have the balls to do something about it.

Edited March 7, 2012 by Geefoxer

[vikingTON]

In the short term certainly. A couple of seasons down the line, I'm not so convinced they'll be turning up in the same numbers.

Celtic don't need 50,000 people at home to the likes of Inverness though. Nor do they really the TV money, as their financial position is strong. They'll still get gloryhunters turning up for success to get by on reduced but still very good crowds by the usual standards of Scottish football. 60,000 sellouts have been the exception, not the norm in the past 50 years.

If Rangers 1690 were stopped from getting back in, they would start, presumably, in the Third Division, assuring Celtic three seasons effectively guaranteed in the Champions League 'easy' path to the group stages. While they wouldn't get in every season, the prospect of money to dwarf a TV deal, say, every two seasons instead of the current one in four, has to be factored in. Even if Rangers get straight back up in three years they won't be in a position to challenge immediately. If a NewCo goes straight back in, debt-free, Celtic will have to maintain spending and quite probably increase it over five to ten years, with no guarantee of success.

Edited March 7, 2012 by vikingTON

[pollymac]

This is the biggest fact that needs resolved in the whole scenario IMO. I don't expect it to be released into the public domain but once SPL chairmen know how much Sky-ESPN would pay for Rangers-less SPL, they'll be making a pragmatic decision based on discernible scenarios.

If it's wrong for Rangers to 're-enter' SPL, it's equally wrong for them to re-enter the national league structure, surely?

It's easy for SFL1 club fans to decry Rangers entering above them, yet be perfectly happy for them to enter below them. It's also rather hypocritical.

It is indeed.

Were I to start up a club this very afternoon, surely my side would have as much right to a place in the SFL? Not to mention the numerous clubs that have been trying for bloody years to get in.

[MarreZ]

I really wish Neil Doncaster would go for a holiday in India, i hear its lovely this time of year.

[Colin M]

If it's wrong for Rangers to 're-enter' SPL, it's equally wrong for them to re-enter the national league structure, surely?

It's easy for SFL1 club fans to decry Rangers entering above them, yet be perfectly happy for them to enter below them. It's also rather hypocritical.

Eh? That makes no sense from a competitive sporting point of view.

Assuming new Rangers are seen to be a continuation of current Rangers, the bottom of the national league structure seems exactly where they should enter (to many if not most observers).

If they are to enter at all, the bottom is the logical place for it to be.

[HibeeJibee]

I've been saying something along these lines too. The bigot brothers cream off so much of the income we get that the drop to most clubs won't lead to the long term doom and gloom scenario that is spouted by the short sighted. Scottish football will die with the OF, not without them.

See: http://www.pieandbovril.com/forum/index.php/topic/167655-rangers-now-in-administration/page__view__findpost__p__6034662

Celtic aren't going anywhere, and Rangers don't cream-off as much as we like to believe.

Note - whether it's a price-worth-paying is a different discussion.

[Double Jack D]

This is the biggest fact that needs resolved in the whole scenario IMO. I don't expect it to be released into the public domain but once SPL chairmen know how much Sky-ESPN would pay for Rangers-less SPL, they'll be making a pragmatic decision based on discernible scenarios.

If it's wrong for Rangers to 're-enter' SPL, it's equally wrong for them to re-enter the national league structure, surely?

It's easy for SFL1 club fans to decry Rangers entering above them, yet be perfectly happy for them to enter below them. It's also rather hypocritical.

I wouldn't be happy with it. They should apply and have their application judged like everyone elses for Joining Div 3.

It makes no odds to me or my football club if Scottish Football was Rangers-less. I'm of the opinion that, medium to long term, things would actually improve for the Rovers without them!

[vikingTON]

If it's wrong for Rangers to 're-enter' SPL, it's equally wrong for them to re-enter the national league structure, surely?

It's easy for SFL1 club fans to decry Rangers entering above them, yet be perfectly happy for them to enter below them. It's also rather hypocritical.

If it's a straightforward majority vote then SFL1 clubs won't hold the decisive bloc: it will be Second and Third Division village teams, who will see it as the biggest pay-day since Morton left the seaside leagues.

I would love it, Keegan-style, if Rangers somehow lost a vote into the SFL, but the village teams will show absolutely no integrity. I'm also not sure if any non-league side would have a popular bid? Spartans haven't been winning many friends.

Edited March 7, 2012 by vikingTON

[Sherrif John Bunnell]

If F.C. 1690 Rangers have to re-apply for SFL membership, surely they would have a much stronger application than the likes of Cove, Spartans etc? Assuming the NewCo would have the support of the majority of the former Rangers support as well as still having the use of Ibrox.

The prospect of NewCo Rangers having to bide their time in the Juniors or EoS league is pretty hillarious though.

[vikingTON]

Celtic aren't going anywhere, and Rangers don't cream-off as much as we like to believe.

By getting rid of Rangers, the other 11 SPL teams could force a more equitable deal on Celtic. It wouldn't massively harm the Old Firm long-term but it'd be something.

[7-2]

See: http://www.pieandbov...ost__p__6034662

Celtic aren't going anywhere, and Rangers don't cream-off as much as we like to believe.

Note - whether it's a price-worth-paying is a different discussion.

This is obviously an area we shall just have to agree to disagree HJ., As for the price worth paying. We can't afford not to pay it.

[Jussy]

The SPL rules regarding this are:

Which are hellish to read, but seem to suggest that the 90% of members at a general meeting should decide, and the Board are then responsible for carrying out the transfer.

I just spent 20 minutes pissing about putting the exact same information together! Probably should have checked back here first...

So yeah, it seems the chairmen have the decision to make and Doncaster's talking shite.

[HibeeJibee]

Eh? That makes no sense from a competitive sporting point of view.

It does. Completely.

If their crime is bad enough that it's repugnant for them to 'parachute in' above Partick, it's equally repugant to 'parachute in' above (e.g.) Cove Rangers... At least Partick's mechanism of promotion isn't typically only reliant on existing SFL/SPL clubs folding through financial woes.

If a 'reformed'/'revitalised' Rangers shouldn't be permitted in SPL, they shouldn't be in SFL either.

If it's a straightforward majority vote then SFL1 clubs won't hold the decisive bloc: it will be Second and Third Division village teams, who will see it as the biggest pay-day since Morton left the seaside leagues.

I would love it, Keegan-style, if Rangers somehow lost a vote into the SFL, but the village teams will show absolutely no integrity. I'm also not sure if any non-league side would have a popular bid? Spartans haven't been winning many friends.

Oh yes, I'm very well aware that many SFL clubs would wet themselves at the prospect.

Edited March 7, 2012 by HibeeJibee

[vikingTON]

Not to mention the numerous clubs that have been trying for bloody years to get in.

They could start by relegating shite like East Stirling, but self-preservation is alive and well at the squeaky-bum end of both the SPL and SFL.

[pozbaird]

SSN just reported that the players won't agree to pay cuts unless in three months time they are once more paid at their current rate of pay. Also reported that the players don't want any staff cuts in either playing or non-playing staff.

FFS. What planet are these cnuts on? I include the inept Haudit & Daudit dynamic duo in this too.

It's so obvious now (as if it wasn't before) - Haudit and Daudit are agents of Craig Whyte, with a remit to ensure liquidation. Creditors get in line now....

[topcat(The most tip top)]

They absolutely would not be turning up in the same numbers.

Which would be great for Scottish Football as it would mean, hopefully, a much truer return to producing our own players and actually giving them a game as opposed to producing our own players then buying Rasmussen, Juarez, Kayal, Izzaguire, etc, playing them instead and loaning out the youngsters repeatedly then letting them go for free.

Depends whether they've got any ambition left to make an impact in Europe. Their rhetoric has been full of hyperbole along the lines of "More than a club" & Global Support". If they really want hooped shirts on racks next to Chelsea and Real Madrid ones in downtown Saigon or Dallas then they're going to have to keep spending the big money required to make them competitive against big European clubs

Otherwise

They currently outgun the oppositions Wage bills by about 5 to 1. If they' put their global ambitions aside the celtic board can easily afford to give a lot more of supporters money to shareholders and less to players and their agents with only a small increase risk of not winning the league.

It may be more effective to field a young, relatively cheap team playing in front of a busy Parkhead than a highly paid team in front of a packed Parkhead.