7-2 Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Presumably it's a season suspension from SFA membership and ergo from being able to play in the league/cup. The doozy would be that the SPL would need another club in to make up a 12.. This is the solution to everyone's problems... Suspend them for a season Keep league at 11 clubs Being a global brand, the blue bigots can globetrot all season playing glamour friendlies to get enough money to pay their bills whilst expanding their world wide fan base. They return to play the green bigots on their 4 free league dates giving Sky their required OF fix. All other clubs get days off during the league season to arrange glamour friendlies to compensate for lack of blue bigot home fixture and also prove there's no OF bias. A debt free blue bigots re-enter the SPL the season after, everything is back to normal and Scottish football is saved. I'm going to email the cockwomble immediately... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthBank Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 (edited) Does anyone else think that by having no sanctions in writing, the SPL have left the door open for a Newco to enter the SPL scot-free? http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/18263819 What would be to stop any sanctioned Newco simply taking the SPL to court like Rangers did with the SFA? Would it have been prudent to list a whole raft of potential sanctions which the board could refer to, and pick from, in the event of a Newco wanting straight in? Apologies to anyone clicking on that link to be greeted by Doncaster's smug, smug face. Thats not my reading. They are covering themselves and will make decisions per application. Let the wee teams off lightly and punish the big cheating ones . John McBeth's statement today is great bbc including these words of wisdom ... ''Football would survive without Rangers, maybe not at the same level, and the game would may be lose some fans - but so be it,'' he said. "If you look after the sport the money will follow you, if you look after the money you'll kill the sport.'' and Stewart Gilmour was beeling after today's meeting saying that Rangers should never have taken the SFA's decision to Court. Is the tide turning? Edited May 30, 2012 by NorthBank 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weirdcal Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Presumably it's a season suspension from SFA membership and ergo from being able to play in the league/cup. The doozy would be that the SPL would need another club in to make up a 12.. Promote one from each league 3rd have 9 team league Next season =1 extra relegation spot for all leagues When they eventually fold and newco it means start at the bottom and all leagues revert back to prev rules 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 It's just stall tactic after stall tactic ain't it !. You could almost assume that between the SPL clubs and the SFA are just buying time to keep the gers basically on life support until ??? whatever. Appeals after appeals,preferred bidder after preferred bidder and so forth. I expect the CVA to be rejected only to have another improved CVA to go out ! and guess what only after the new season has started and the gers have bought season tickets.Green will then add the season ticket money and the fire sale player proceeds towards the new improved CVA.The stupid gers fans will be paying to make Green money while he takes the credit. As for the HMRC they already know that a functioning rangers will make millions in tax if properly run,so it maybe in their best interests to play out the stall tactic till the rangers have created a big enough CVA pot in the coming months. The BTC ? there's the elephant in the room with the dual contracts ...... call it mad but what if the gers get off on some kind off technicality of sorts ? inconclusive evidence and just bury it or sweep it under the carpet with a warning !. The SFA they get paid high salaries from the TV revenue don't they and if the gers go under these greedy feckers will have to take a pay cut and may not want to. But I have said all along this will run out as far as it can with any sort of stall tactic legally available to help the stricken club that effectively cheated and for what ? FCUKING MONEY !. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShedruleFTD83 Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 I was one of the few who thought it would be more severe. In the current context of Rangers' financial problems, the hardship of a 12 month embargo is negligible. The wording of the decision by the panel seemed to suggest that they wanted to hand down a punishment that was more than was available to them without going to the extreme of expulsion. It was unfortunate for them that the COS disagreed that their discretion stretched to the embargo but I don't think they've left themselves open to criticism. They made what was a reasonable judgement and I saw it as fair but on the lenient side. They made it clear that they considered expulsion and because of the intent involved I think it would have been justified. This was no oversight, it wasn't bad management, it was deliberate rule breaking. I can't agree with the officials and supporters of Rangers who take the line that it was one individual and the club is therefore not culpable. If that was the case, it would give the green(sorry) light to any club to break the rules by merely putting up a scapegoat to take the heat.........in the knowledge that there would be no particularly harsh punishment. I don't see any problem in the panel, after careful reflection, deciding that expulsion is, after all, a reasonable punishment. I don't think it's contradictory. It's a harsh punishment but a deserved punishment and it should serve as a detterent to any other club considering this type of conduct. There is a groundswell of opinion among the lifeblood of the game that Rangers' actions have had an extremely detrimental impact on scottish football and it will have a long lasting effect. There must surely be a certain amount of appeasement for the people who make this game what it is, the supporters, and if not, how can our nation's sport ever recover. A 12 month embargo was the platform for Rangers to show regret and humility by accepting their punishment gracefully or alternatively to stand up to their detractors with aggression, threats of reprisal and arrogance. They decided on the latter and we are asked to accept them back as one of our own. I am confident that this will never happen so if things go the Rangers way, they should be prepared for life in scottish football as lifetime pariahs in the eyes of the important people, the fans. Spot on. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akredz Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Can anyone tell me if H&D can obtain credit for a club in administration ? For that is what they have done, to the tune of an interest bearing 8.5 million.. NO. According to a company Finance Director that I know, once a company is in administration, they are not supposed to get anything on credit. After all, they've already proved they're incompetent at running a business, why should anyone give them even more "free" goods and services. That's the general accepted position, however H&D seem to be running the most unusual administration practice going, so who knows. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boghead ranter Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 f**k sake, don't visit for 24 hours and I'm 57 pages behind. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaspode Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 I expect the CVA to be rejected only to have another improved CVA to go out ! and guess what only after the new season has started and the gers have bought season tickets.Green will then add the season ticket money and the fire sale player proceeds towards the new improved CVA.The stupid gers fans will be paying to make Green money while he takes the credit. AFAIK Rangers cannot sell season tickets while still in administration - something to do with taking money for games that there is no guarantee will take place -if they were to do this and then go into liquidation Haudit and Daudit would be liable for refunding all the season ticket holder money and I somehow doubt they'd be up for that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alimci Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 f**k sake, don't visit for 24 hours and I'm 57 pages behind. I'm being fed by IV drip and I've had a colostomy bag fitted so I don't ever have to leave. Sorted 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florentine_Pogen Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 I'm being fed by IV drip and I've had a colostomy bag fitted so I don't ever have to leave. Sorted If being fed by IV, the colostomy bag is not required. A catheter might be. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 AFAIK Rangers cannot sell season tickets while still in administration - something to do with taking money for games that there is no guarantee will take place -if they were to do this and then go into liquidation Haudit and Daudit would be liable for refunding all the season ticket holder money and I somehow doubt they'd be up for that. OK I'll rephrase that to they will use income from each home game and revenue streams to go towards the CVA pot ! probably. Or there is pulled out of a rabbits erse a guarantee that the gers will play all games next season awaiting pending cases or whatever !. June whatever comes and the creditors ! main one being HMRC well over 50% of the CVA pot total will reject and another improved CVA will then be put out !. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Diamond Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Well new here,great site,and heres my points for what they're worth. I think Rangers fans are being a bit disillusioned about things.Why will the HMRC accept a pence in the pound deal,and be basically seen to be letting you off with it.The money although an issue is not the main factor,the money is a mere drop in the ocean to what they would be letting themselves in for if they DO NOT,and i emphasise the DO NOT punish you severely for not paying your tax. If Rangers get away with it you can assure every club,and company,will be seriously looking at doing the exact same thing.If one can get away with it they will all use the same case to also get away with.It wont therefore be Scottish football that suffers,but the already under financial pressure British economy. I honestly feel they would rather get nothing and make a big example of you,hence making sure no one else even contemplates trying the same thing in the future.Will we miss you,i would say most will say yes for the big crowd factor that the Old Firm bring to our grounds.Can we survive without you,of course we can.Its like any situation when you have less income coming in,you adjust and adapt to the situation,then move on.It wasn't that long ago you were contemplating a move to England,no thought was spared for the predicament that you were leaving other clubs in by not being here.So i fail to see why this is any different. Second point is I have always had a motto in football for a bad apple...no player is bigger than his club. Hopefully the SFA will adopt this,and not allow a club to be bigger than the ruling body. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Oaty Stoat Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 "And we go live now to SFA headquarters at Hampden Park, where the latest meeting regarding Rangers' future in the Scottish game has just got underway...." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alimci Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 If being fed by IV, the colostomy bag is not required. A catheter might be. Cheers for the tip. I'll need to check that when I take my plastic pants off. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 This was in Govan yesterday after the CoS outcome !. And this guy was not a happy bunny !. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milo Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 "And we go live now to SFA headquarters at Hampden Park, where the latest meeting regarding Rangers' future in the Scottish game has just got underway...." Excellent! But should Neil Lennon really be at the Hampden meeting? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invalid Probe Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 A reasonable person would think that the new SPL rules would be used to send a message. It is hard to imagine a more FUBAR mess than rangers prolonged administration. If they impose anything less than the strictest penalties at their discretion then it would only invite further financial cheating. That being said, a reasonable person would also expect the SPL to tell a newco rangers to GTF and apply to the third division. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Oaty Stoat Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Excellent! But should Neil Lennon really be at the Hampden meeting? If he is, the only white jacket he should be wearing is one of those fetching long-arms-round-the-back numbers. They're all wearing them this season*, dontcha know. (* - apart from the Berrz, of course, The Loony Attire Co are rumoured to be on the list of creditors...) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 NO. According to a company Finance Director that I know, once a company is in administration, they are not supposed to get anything on credit. After all, they've already proved they're incompetent at running a business, why should anyone give them even more "free" goods and services. In - ter - est - innnnnnnnnnnnnnnng, Looks like they touted for more credit, using the assets as collateral, in order to pay some debt off and their own bills. Sure you couldn't get credit with credit, think I remember a deposit on a loan agreement could not be paid by credit card, yet this could be the case here. After Mr Custard, we now approach the carousel *fraud * part of the Big Blue Circus. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambos Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 I don't get the argument that Scottish Football would miss Cheats FC. Surely crowds would increase at EVERY game as clubs realise they have a chance of finishing second, thus compensating for any loss created by the departure of Cheats FC? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.