hellbhoy 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? You would think that wouldn't you that crowds would go up at the start of the season.But I'm thinking along the lines the SFA chiefs in charge are only thinking about their bumper salaries not being decreased by the lower SKY revenue if there ain't 4 OF games a season. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambos Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 You would think that wouldn't you that crowds would go up at the start of the season.But I'm thinking along the lines the SFA chiefs in charge are only thinking about their bumper salaries not being decreased by the lower SKY revenue if there ain't 4 OF games a season. You're prob right. Sky really need to clarify this soon. What do they need to think about? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invalid Probe Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Right, I am sure this has already been covered (probably the most used phrase on this juggernaut of a thread). It was said that Green would buy rangers assets (ibrox, murray park etc.) for 5.5m if the CVA fails. I thought the creditors would take control of the assets if the CVA was rejected and it was theirs to do with as they see fit. I know Green could buy them from the creditors but the media (cough) report it as there would be no creditor involvement. Could someone clarify this for me, please. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invalid Probe Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 My understanding is that a Fine, a Suspension or Expulsion are the possible sanctions. Why is everyone touting a Scottish Cup ban. Isn't that just swapping one wrong sanction for another? Ban also prevents them from playing in those lucrative pre-season friendlies. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
54_and_counting 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 nope its been said many times that one CVA offer is it, if its rejected then thats it, newco time 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 The SPL seem to be having problems deciding wether there were dual contracts for players and other being paid though EBTs. Here is a very short 'Idiots Guide' to assist them. 1. A contract does not need to be in writing to be a contract. Also the inability to produce contracts does not mean contracts don't exist - this is quite important as the main source of obtaining any such contracts is the body who will be punished if such contracts are produced. 2. If the amounts paid were not contractual but purely discretionary consider what that means. It means players (and their agents) agreed a financial remuneration package over which they had no control. In other words player X agrees to be paid, say, £5k a week through his normal contract, the one that is registered with the SPL. He then agrees that he will be paid a further amount through the EBT but has no say over how much that amount will be. Is there any sensible, logical people who could argue that the scenario outlined in '2' above really existed. This is not a legal matter but the burden of proof when deciding the outcome should be that used in civil law, the balance of probability. I think that it is completely improbable to imagine that players and others agreed to purely discretionary payments therefore dual contracts did exist. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
54_and_counting Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Right, I am sure this has already been covered (probably the most used phrase on this juggernaut of a thread). It was said that Green would buy rangers assets (ibrox, murray park etc.) for 5.5m if the CVA fails. I thought the creditors would take control of the assets if the CVA was rejected and it was theirs to do with as they see fit. I know Green could buy them from the creditors but the media (cough) report it as there would be no creditor involvement. Could someone clarify this for me, please. nope Green's consortium would buy the assets and the proceeds from that go to the creditors hence why a CVA is worth more to the creditors 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 nope its been said many times that one CVA offer is it, if its rejected then thats it, newco time What happens if H+D are replaced? Can new admins issue a new CVA? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLip69 Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 So were Partick Thistle thrown out the game when they took the footballing authorities to court? Partick Thistle took the league to court, not the SFA. FIFA only step in when the Football Associations are targeted and as our leagues are autonomous of the SFA, they would not be involved. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madeirabhoy Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 nope its been said many times that one CVA offer is it, if its rejected then thats it, newco time this was and is likely to be still the case, but it might depend on whats being said behind closed doors. fact is, and this isnt rangers fault but the fault of the SPL and member clubs, but its clearly a fact that the CVA offer is far lower than it would be if there was no chance of a newco being accepted into the league. the mood of the other SPL chairmen seems to be hardening if rumours are believed and you can take the vote today as being (only one possibility mind you) a sign that maybe they wouldnt vote on sanctions coz they dont want rangers newco. if that was to be the case, the cva would be an entirely different beast, with payments every year for 10 years- 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustyarabnuts Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 omg theres a cockwomble on my telly 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florentine_Pogen Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 omg theres a cockwomble on my telly Is it this one ? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPE-OxBcrsU&feature=endscreen&NR=1 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2THibs Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 nope Green's consortium would buy the assets and the proceeds from that go to the creditors hence why a CVA is worth more to the creditors Unless the creditors reckon that H&D's valuation of Ibrox and the training facility is suspiciously low, and that under a newly appointed Liquidator they would realise a higher value. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustyarabnuts Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 stewart Gilmore just been on telly he's raging "sport should be kept in sport " 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustyarabnuts Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Is it this one ? http://www.youtube.c...=endscreen&NR=1 nope only the original 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLip69 Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 I think it's about time you let your mum put you down for a nap, isn't it? FFS, JUST IGNORE THE TWAT!! This threads long enough without every second or third post been some phucking inanity from Dickbhoy. The last thirty pages could have been reduced to about 8 without this clown. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustyarabnuts Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 H&D's successors found..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 nope its been said many times that one CVA offer is it, if its rejected then thats it, newco time Are you sure about that ?. We've been told on umpteen occasions that this deadline will happen to be replaced by another haven't we ?. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drooper Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 stewart Gilmore just been on telly he's raging "sport should be kept in sport " He wasn't half - steam coming out of his ears! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P45 Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 What was the outcome of the SPL's meeting? Did their order of 11 of these come? 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.