Jump to content

What should the punishment be in the event of Administration?


What should the punishment be?  

150 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 156
  • Created
  • Last Reply

If I understand correctly, in England the league can postpone point deductions for going into administration until the following season if the deduction doesn't affect promotion/safety/relegation. Same could apply here - let them up but start them on -25 next season.

If they're so keen to point out that they're a continuation of the old Rangers then that should apply to things like this as well as nice things like trophies. It's their second admin event - the same punishment as Dundee as a minimum.

Still, I'm sure that the Queens board will be on hand to help vote through something lenient should the situation ever come to pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the rules state that if a club goes into an insolvency process they should be docked 15 points or 25 points if they have had another insolvency event within the past 5 years.

What isn't clear is if insolvency events carry over from the SPL and SFL. The SPFL rule book seems to me to say they don't.

"Where a Club, whether owned and operated by the same or a different Member, suffers or is subject to an Insolvency Event which results in a deduction of points in terms of these Rules and within 5 years of the date of such Insolvency Event suffers or is subject to a further Insolvency Event which is not part of the same Insolvency Process as the Insolvency Event then suffered, the points deduction applicable in terms of Rules E1 in respect of that second or further Insolvency Event, shall be 25 points with the 15 points in Rules E2 and E3 being 25 Points."

And 15/25 points are deducted every season where the insolvency even persists.

If they went into admin, ditched a heap of players they might well still win league 1 with a 15 point penalty and exit before the end of the season. Although this has a whiff of prepack CVAs that we're talked about the first time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Where a Club, whether owned and operated by the same or a different Member...

You just know that line was written with Sevco in mind.

Not so much that they thought they would suffer a(nother) "insolvency event", but the whole "owned and operated by the same or a different member" shite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, but because they're claiming to be the same club, they should be subject to the usual sanctions.

The QC has a new challenger for the forums legal beagle spot lol

I'm afraid that won't wash (a bit like the green and greys). In the event of admin we'll become a brand new club, our green and grey chums have already gave us 101 arguments to back that up....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This horrid football club should be utterly stamped into the dirt, before being collectively pished on by everyone else involved in Scottish football.

However, that's probably not an available punishment.

f**k them into the Lowland League.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The QC has a new challenger for the forums legal beagle spot lol

I'm afraid that won't wash (a bit like the green and greys). In the event of admin we'll become a brand new club, our green and grey chums have already gave us 101 arguments to back that up....

Aye whatever Benny and still spamming the threads are we ?.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aye whatever Benny and still spamming the threads are we ?.

Whats your legal opinion on the new club vs same club argument?

You must have posted a few thousand posts on the subject by now...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whats your legal opinion on the new club vs same club argument?

You must have posted a few thousand posts on the subject by now...

Well surely to fcuk with a few thousand posts on the subject you'd think you would know my position on yer new club :1eye .

Benny just put down the bottle and log off and go to bed in the cellar at the B&B ffs :rolleyes: .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be a bit cheeky if SPL becoming SPFL effectively gave everyone a blank slate for a repeat insolvency for 5yrs?

(And Rangers - if regarded as the same club - sufferred one while in SPL of course).

A points deduction in terms of these rules - seems to indicate that it is giving a clean slate. If the rules were to be a continuation then I would expect Dunfermline to have been deducted 15 points for still being in administration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both entrenched sides are presented with a problem here.

Those who insist that Rangers are exactly the same must accept the penalty for a second event.

Those who insist the old Rangers are dead and gone forever, must accept a punishment that would see this as a first offence.

The reality is it's not quite either. Any sanction should be tailored to fit the circumstances and be designed to hurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The QC has a new challenger for the forums legal beagle spot lol

No idea who "The QC" is.

But I know you're a fucking zombie who will soon be supporting The The Rangers in the Glasgow and District Saturday Morning League Division 2.

Yes, yes, I know...the Glasgow and District Saturday Morning League Premier Division needs a strong Rangers. But deal with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No idea who "The QC" is.

But I know you're a fucking zombie who will soon be supporting The The Rangers in the Glasgow and District Saturday Morning League Division 2.

Yes, yes, I know...the Glasgow and District Saturday Morning League Premier Division needs a strong Rangers. But deal with it.

The QC is Hellbhoy. It's one of a number of acronyms bestowed upon him by Bennett; each time he (Hellbhoy) offers an opinion on something, Bennet makes up a name for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I'd be happy with them getting 10 points, as long as the powers-that-be make it clear that the rationale is that that is the standard sanction for a new club. Then the The Rangers would have to get rid of anything which smacked of continuation - the five pretends stars, the 1872 on the back of their shirts, their club crest etc.

If they want to be seen as a continuation club, and the SPFL back down on this, then they should be docked enough points to make it impossible for them to be promoted, have a transfer embargo placed upon them, a wage limit for their players imposed on them, and scrutiny from the SPFL to ensure that future business plans make it impossible for the clump any to make a loss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Each time Bennett wants to give an opinion he makes a new name up for himself. :lol:

Better be careful with accusations like that - using an alias? Wee bennett will be straight to the Mods to challenge any accusation of that kind of sleekit behavi.....Oh. Right. Move along, etc.

:lol::lol::lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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