Jump to content

Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!


Recommended Posts

Another statement from Clyde re: voting intentions this morning

The proposals to change the league structure, its governance and distribution model are indeed for the good of the game. What is not for the good of the game are the circumstances in which it has been proposed. It is only on the table for short-term financial reasons. Neil Doncaster told the SFL clubs that the SPL would not allow Rangers to join the Third Division as the loss of £16m would not be countenanced, he is also on record as having said that a 16 team league would cost £20m, therefore we can hardly have confidence that the focus on finance will allow these proposals to come to life.

What is also not for the good of the game is 30 clubs being asked to vote knowing that a vote for Resolution 1 has a very high chance of being ignored by the SFA attempting to avoid any suggestion of what they perceive to be a dereliction of their duty. Such statements undermine basic democracy. Equally, voting blind to admit an organisation who has no membership of the SFA at a time when there is no vacancy in the SFL is not for the good of the game. Almost everything about this long run process is not for the good of the game.

It would not be for the good of the game to compound the problems of a club by refusing entry to the SFL for Rangers Football Club. We will therefore take that leap of faith and vote in favour of Resolution 1 despite not a single word of reasoning having been provided to support the Resolution.

On the basis that short-term financial drivers have not been for the good of the game in the past, then we will not support Resolution 2. It has unfortunately enmeshed positive change for the game with a proposal to admit Sevco Scotland Ltd to the First Division for the purposes of shoring up the short-term financial model which has to date failed The Game.

The interests of the game will be served by decisions being made genuinely for the long-term benefit of the whole of Scottish Football, and not short term benefit for a few clubs.

Our decision has at times had to defy logic and question our own short term interests as others focus on theirs. Given that the SPL and SFA have signalled a clear intention to act against any decision that might result in Sevco Scotland Ltd being admitted to the Third Division, then the limited logic left in this process points to them as believing they have the monopoly of wisdom on what is good for the game. We can expect that, no matter what the SFL clubs decide, Sevco Scotland will not be playing in the Third Division in the coming season. How more short-termism can be for the good of the game really does defy logic.

When the dust settles on this affair, it would be good to think that we can all get back to watching football. Sadly, no matter how it turns out today, some will not return to our game

http://www.clydefc.co.uk/statement2.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone else smelling a rat here?

Is it just possible that this 11th hour development has been introduced in order to lend a degree of legitimacy to a proposal to delay the vote? Dundee could reasonably claim that they haven't been afforded sufficient opportunity to consider the resolutions prior to the vote. Perhaps I'm getting carried away on a wave of cynicism, but I wouldn't put anything past these characters.

This was the first thing I thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

STV Sport@STVSport Charles Green says it is time for 'vilification and persecution' to end http://bit.ly/NeZFVK

Expand Collapse

For once I actually agree with most of what he says. Once they are in the 3rd and the SPL follow through with their promise of league reconstruction,, FFS lets just get on with the new season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stranraer & Dunfermline - Div 3

Airdrie - maybe Div 1

Dundee - ?

Jim Ballantyne isn't voting,he is leaving this to Ann Marie Ballantyne....the noise from the fans is that she said she will be be voting in the best interests of Airdrie,and that we wont be disappointed in her vote.

So looks like we will be voting them to SFL3 also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well lets see, if they stick to them:

Currently stating that a majority required for resolution 1 - Not the case, Change to Rule 5 regarding constitution of the league requires use of rule 60 and therefore needs 75% (if Sevco are admitted without Dun* resigning first)

Resolution 2 - new rule so simple majority required.

Resolution 3 - Requires implementation of Rule 12 - 66% needed.

Also the SFL have already stated that there is a "leap of faith". Please direct me to the rule regarding this in http://www.scottishfootballleague.com/docs/SFL_Constitution_and_Rules.pdf

There is no change to rule 5. It simply says there will be three divisions of 10. It says nothing about how they are constituted. There is nothing in the rules to prevent any club being voted in to division one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So there's 31 clubs voting today? - the 30 that were already in the SFL, plus Dunfermline who were relegated at the end of last season?

Or am I spectacularly stoopid this morning?

No - Dunfermline swapped places with Ross County.

The only space atm is in the SPL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what has been placed in the hot little hands of the SFL clubs but there is a fair amount of information about the company now running Rangers even from Companies House plus public statements.

Well, how about we start with information regarding the various legal issues to be resolved, and whether Sevco Scotland validly hold the 'Rangers FC' SPL share? There is also little information, never mind legal commitments with the ongoing financing of Sevco Scotland.

Let's not pretend it's all straightforward. That said, a practical approach is required, and that might mean taking a decision on limited information. It's all going to be another balls-up if Sevco are admitted to the SFL, and then HMRC decides that all the tax debts transfer too (which is a possibility, the likelihood of which I can't say without more information).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So there's 31 clubs voting today? - the 30 that were already in the SFL, plus Dunfermline who were relegated at the end of last season?

Or am I spectacularly stoopid this morning?

Ross County are not voting as they have been promoted in place of Dunfermline. The settlement agreement only provides for a single promotion/relegation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So there's 31 clubs voting today? - the 30 that were already in the SFL, plus Dunfermline who were relegated at the end of last season?

Or am I spectacularly stoopid this morning?

You're forgetting that Ross County got promoted. So it's plus-one, minus-one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...