The governing body are placed in a no win scenario, they must keep Celtic and the rest of the clubs happy. Make no mistake this lot are inept every word and movement will be scrutinised by clubs, media and fans. perhaps to eradicate in theory that there is any bias towards any of the old firm clubs, the death of Rangers will/may help if there are any agenda's at all. I strongly believe if Celtic where in this scenario we would be singing from the same hymm sheet. My opinion is that they believe they must learn to crawl again and take the massive hit in loosing Rangers in order to truly govern and take Scottish Football forward. Yes Rangers have over spent we are guilty of ambition and having a dream or two, but lets not forget something, we the fans put pressure on our clubs to spend spend spend and demand success. The thing that stinks with me is that hundreds of clubs around the world are guilty of over spending in the 10's and 100's of millions, and don't have the following, the stadium and a derby match like ours. we are guilty of punching above our weight in a league a washed with pennies. How can Scottish football move forward?. It can't and it won't now. I read a report recently that Spanish clubs owe something in the region of just over a billion euro's and the Spanish government have offered to help out, The Germans went bonkers and as we speak there is a political row over this. We can't compete with that. We can't compete with lifestyle that exists in the UK and the phishy climate that we live in. We were doomed from the get go. Our best chance if we silently under a new co buy a smaller club in the English league and use our following to take us up the scales and sell all our assets in Scotland and get out once and for all and we will happily glance at the people who let us down. I'd be supportive of this idea if that could be done, i would not support a new co in the 3rd division of Scottish football forget it what's the point. In the meantime bears and bearettes keep your heads up.
p,s the game yesterday That was the most miserable, boring derby I've watched for a long time.
Don't like united, but don't want city to win the league as they epitomise everything that is wrong with modern day football. Over inflating both the transfer fee and wages markets. Makes a mockery out of a level playing field. before i finish, What was Robbie Keane on at Celtic and who was funding that? that's right not from the Celtic coffers straight from big tashy's pocket.
My Views on current affairs
posted on 1/5/12
coop
If you believe Rangers have already been punished to the full extent of the SFA & SPL's abilities, you need to have a word with yourself mate, you really do.
posted on 1/5/12
DC1 - paying all debt means that! I am TOTALLY against a CVA. IF HMRC win the tax case then we are liquidated! As for Newco its a newco and therefore has no liability for debts.
posted on 1/5/12
Super Ally
You dont really make much sense mate to be honest.
You are TOTALLY against a CVA as the WHOLE debt is not being repaid if the club goes down that route.....but you are open to a Newco because it would have no debt liability.
A CVA is a voluntary agreement made by the companies we owe....that means THEY are telling us the debt they are owed will be written off if we pay X amount instead of the whole sum....the decision lies with them not us.
Liquidation would literrally mean the companies we owe get next to nothing, yet a newco Rangers would be able to start up, debt free, and build itself back up again.
I understand the moral point you are trying to make here, but surely paying something back instead of nothing is at least an option and not TOTALLY unnacceptable??.
If a CVA can be agreed, I'm all for it, becasue the decison being made on our debts would be taken by those we owe, not us ourselves, and we would be debt free after it also, it is the law of the land so its acceptable enough for me.
If you owed a matea fiver and he took a pint off you instead....would that be TOTALLY unacceptable for you???
posted on 1/5/12
Stevie - short of expelling or suspending Rangers, then yes, the SFA are done.
As to the SPL, they do not have rules in place beyond the 10pts per season, hence the scramble to come up with new ones, specifically targeted at Rangers (15pts or 1/3 of previous year's total - variable penalties for the same "crime"?)
posted on 1/5/12
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 1/5/12
"short of expelling or suspending Rangers, then yes, the SFA are done."
That in itself is exactly what I am talking about mate.......they could turf us out for breaking their rules, keeping us in is absolutely not the maximum punishment!!
As for the SPL.....actually read the thing mate
"Minimum of 15 points deducted from any club entering administration".....yes that is a harsher punishment than what is already in place.
"10-point penalty for two seasons for any club that TRANSFERS ITS SHARE IN THE SPL TO A NEW COMPANY".....this would only happen if Rangers had to new co
"75% reduction in payments to ANY CLUB RELAUNCHED AS A NEW COMPANY for a period of three seasons"....again, a new co
"Requirement for clubs to pay players on time and to report any failure to pay wages".....more than Rangers involved with this one, namely Hearts
"Requirement for clubs to report any failure to pay PAYE/NIC"...which is a right and proper thing to do
"Player registration embargo imposed on any club failing to pay PAYE/NIC"......which again, is a correct thing to do, PAYE and NIC is not something ANYONE can pick and choose when to pay and when not to, I cant do that, my work cant, neither should a football club be able to.
So basically, the worst of the "sanctions" being imposed by the SPL, ie the 10 point penalty for two seasons and the 75% reduction in payments....only applies to a new co taking Rangers place in the SPL.
The key point here is that the SPL are virtually allowing a completely new company to enter in Scottish Football at SPL level in the first place!!!
If Rangers need to new co, they should have to reapply at the bottom level, what the SPL are doing is making it possible for Rangers to skip all that and stay i the top teir, but suffer points deductions and a drop in payments as a result.
A $hitload of bears need to understand how an why the majority of this is being done.......to keep Rangers in the league, in the top teir!
I dont want special treatment, EITHER WAY....but I'm not going to sit and barack the SPL/SFA for being TOO HARSH when they are virtually breaking their backs to keep us where we are in the first place and jeopardising sporting integrity to do so...how the hell is that being TOO HARSH????
If Rangers can agree a CVA, the worst outcome from the SPL will be a 15 point deducion instead of 10 points if we are still in admin....thats it.
If we new co, we will have less money but still be getting something and likely more than we would get i the third division....and we would have massive points deductions but still be playing in the top league in this country.
IT could be a helluva lot worse....we could be punished far far far more harshly.
We could be compeltely denied access again to the SFL/SFA/SPL, told where to go and COMPLETELY wound up like Third Lanark. with the stadiu beig knocked down and turned into flats....people need to remember this!!
posted on 1/5/12
Bout time we got round to makin enquiries to the SFL then
posted on 1/5/12
It is a 15pt deduction OR 1/3 pts of previous season, so for us that would mean a minimum 22 pt / maximum 25pts.
This would put us in / around relegation battle, when combined with the 12 month transfer embargo, and mean the SPL would get cash for Rangers being there, but chance of us falling into Div 1.
You final paragraph has ZERO chance of happening. No other club which has been wound up had a viable support like Rangers, worldwide. This alone means the club, in some format will continue.
posted on 1/5/12
Stevie, sage words mate. I don't mean to patronise when I say that either.
posted on 1/5/12
"This would put us in / around relegation battle, when combined with the 12 month transfer embargo, and mean the SPL would get cash for Rangers being there, but chance of us falling into Div 1."
Yes....or we could be in the third division
"You final paragraph has ZERO chance of happening. No other club which has been wound up had a viable support like Rangers, worldwide. This alone means the club, in some format will continue."
The club in some form will continue, of that there is no doubt......but the club also needs a league to play in!!
Just because there is no chance of us being turfed out, it shouldnt mean we get arrogant and rest on the laurels of the fact that if it wasnt for such a high dependancy on Rangers helping generate money, we would be heading straight for the third division, if they were even willing to take us back in after we broke the rules