Tonsilitis

This thread should be dumped in the third division forum in the interests of sporting integrity!!! It's only being left here to pander to the rich kids of the SPL. A thread about any other club in similar circumstances would have been relegated without another thought We need to mobilise if it's not and organise a boycott of Pie and Bovril. Who is this guy Div anyway? If its not moved we should all walk away from Scottish football for good!

As a Greenockian, I regret to agree that Inverclyde is and always has been an outpost of the Old Firm bile. As a Morton fan, it has sickened me over the years to see double the number who attend Cappielow disappear to Ibrox or Parkhead every week. Also, it also tends to follow the IQ correlation made in previous posts. As a boy, we still had the qualifying exam with those who passed going to a senior secondary and those who did not going to a junior secondary. Both the proddy and catholic high schools produced a majority of Morton fans whilst the reverse was true of the junior highs. I would add that its not exclusively an IQ thing. I am a chartered accountant and once worked for a firm in Glasgow who had only one catholic and she was an accident because her school name did not begin with "Saint". Later in life, I was managing partner in a much larger firm and we took over a firm that incorporated the earlier firm. After merger and over a weekend, we refurbished the reception area, including putting down a bottle green carpet. On Monday morning an ex partner ( and former Rangers director) of my old firm opened the door and turned around, announcing that he could not walk on the carpet as it would hurt his feet!

You could be right!

Morton were represented by their chief executive, Gillian Donaldson as Douglas Rae is on holiday. I can tell you that there is no way Morton voted in favour of D1. Do not read anything into there being nothing on our website - we have the worst site in Scottish football and they traditionally take weeks to publish anything!

I am sorry Huistrinho but this just does not wash. I don't know much about the history up to 1920 but I do know that this is was a club which commercially and unashamedly exploited bigotry. I'm a fairly old chap (and went to school who's name does not begin with 'Saint') but its less than a generation ago that Rangers signed their first catholic. The club remained all its days focal point for disgusting bigots and I have no doubt whatsoever that Sevco/Newco will be the same. You continue to support them despite these connotations which in my eyes means your morals are dubious even if you are not sectarian yourself. It just means you are prepared to put up with it. How many of the P & B fans who have posted on this board about walking away from Scottish football if accommodations are made from Rangers do you think would be able to ignore what goes on at Ibrox if sporting integrity upsets them so much? Bigotry and sectarianism is ten times worse. Rangers represent what is absolutely worst about Scottish society - bigotry, 'we ur ra peeple', glory hunters - you name it. If you can't see that, you are thick. If you can see it and don't walk away, that's worse!!

Morton believe that Proposal ii) has not got a snowball's chance of going through unaltered.

My reading of para 4.2.2 of the SPL rules suggests that the settlement figure ranks equally with the SPL running costs. In practice they will have paid wages etc. on an ongoing basis and so the settlement payment in practice comes after running costs. Facts are though, its payable before a bean is due to the SPL clubs.

There was a time when I wanted three teams in Scotland to lose - St Mirren, Rangers and Celtic in that order. Now St Mirren don't matter in that sense to me any more and I would actively support them against the old firm and even grudgingly admire them doing well. Does that make me a bad person?

That is not what the circular calling the meeting says. Its says: NOTICE OF SPECIAL GENERAL MEETING – SCOTTISH FOOTBALL LEAGUE Notice is hereby given that a Special General Meeting of The Scottish Football League will be held within the Bell/Baird Suite on the fifth floor of Hampden Park, Glasgow on Friday, 13th July, 2012 at 11.00 a.m. for the purpose of considering and, if thought fit, approving the following proposals:- Then lists the three proposals. By any interpretation that's three separate votes.

50:50 between 1) and 2) but with 3) being the underlying, unspoken theme!

From a Morton fan. Is Reid any good guys?

It's only a prohibited name if there is a director of the NewCo who had also been a director of the oldco. If anyone is interested, it's Sec216 of the insolvency act 1986

A number of consequences of liquidation: 1) All players are effectively free agents. You cannot be forced to transfer to Newco 2) I cannot see why the liquidator will be bound by a deal concluded by the administrators five minutes before the liquidator is appointed. It may be though that BDO have had a look at the deal and will let it stand but then again, why would they when all the money is to pay Duff and Phelps? 3) S216 of the Insolvency Act says that Newco cannot have a name so similar as to suggest a relationship with the old company without the leave of the court. In practical terms, the liquidator may be prepared to sell the name or alternatively, it might be in the deal already done. One way or another, the leave of the court will be required There is also grave doubt about Greens ability to fund Newco and I would expect that the football authorities will require similar guarantees from Newco about being able to fulfil their fixtures as they wanted from Livingston and Gretna. Like those two clubs they are unlikely to get them and so Rangers should suffer the same fate - relegation to the third division. Its all good news probably for Dundee but maybe Dunfermline plus I would have thought that the losing play off finalist from the lower leagues will now step up.

I am totally intrigued by Mr Green's share issue plans to raise £30m. Firstly, as I recall Rangers shares are suspended so he would have to get them restored to trading status. Secondly, public share issues don't just happen. There's mountains of planning and paperwork to get through - prospectuses, projections, etc, etc all of which takes a lot longer than the month Mr Green is talking about. Plus, of course, there's the cost of the exercise and professional fees will run into seven figures upfront before a penny is raised. Oh and then there's the fact that the last time, when Mr Murray tried to raise £50m from the fans, they came up with £1m and MIH's bankers had to underwrite the issue to the tune of £49m. Strikes me as a bit of a Walter Mitty character does Mr Green! Someone should also explain to him that announcing that he will have millions in the bank and be signing all sorts of new players shortly before seeking agreement to a CVA paying a couple pence in the £ is not good for the chances of getting it voted through. It will encourage creditors, especially HMRC, to say the offer is not good enough and commit some of that £30m to us or we vote against.

No!

Maybe I clicked on the button accidentally. I certainly did not mean to!

I must be missing something here! I have not reported anyone! Am I being spoofed?

Sorry? WTF are you on about? I have not voted re anything or anyone!

I fully agree but to voice such opinions makes you part of an anti catholic conspiracy according to the church hierarchy and their brainwashed flocks.

Yep! You fall into the second category of Rangers fan! You are not one of the knuckle dragging sectarian idiots who are too stupid to see how wrong their views are. You are one of the guys with enough brains to know that the sectarian (large) minority are wrong and that Rangers came to be where they were in Scottish football by blatantly promoting said sectarianism. What you have in brains, you lack in morals in associating yourself with an organisation with such a despicable history! Sad thing is that, even if Rangers die, there will still be guys like you, prepared to turn a blind eye to these idiots. The same is true of the other side of the old firm with the only difference being that their odious minority is not quite so large!

I fully understand that you get it from all sides. From a non old firm supporter's view, what we hold against you is that you openly support a club that has such baggage in terms of exploiting sectarianism to get to the size they are and which to this day has a hardcore of nutcases who openly support the IRA. Whilst I will accept that the problem and proportion of nutcases is far worse with Rangers, it is unquestionably there with Celtic also and I cannot understand why anyone who would normally claim to be against sectarianism can lend his support and allegiance to such an organisation!

The transfer ban could stand if Rangers accept it on a voluntary basis. Why would they do that? As an alternative to suspension maybe?

Putting aside other considerations such as the CVA failing, further punishments for dual contracts etc, etc, what could the SFA dream up? Would suspending them for half a season be practical? There would be an 11 team SPL for the first 20 games then Rangers are admitted on a points deduction (currently 10 but maybe should be more). That would place them in the bottom half at the split and almost certain to be relegated. Circa 25 points is the usual bottom team points total but teams have been relegated with more (Caley had 37 points) so with 16 matches and starting at -10, they would only have 38 points available max. It would mean teams in the SPL having two less games but maybe thats the price to be paid? Oh and, maybe Rangers could negotiate with the SFA to accept a signing embargo on a voluntary basis as an alternative?

The funds for a liquidation only hold water if you believe £4.5m is really all Ibrox and Murray Park are worth!

Holiday Pay, arrears of pay and pay in lieu of notice up to a limit of approx £410 a week are preferential. If it is not paid the government pays the employees and take over their preferential claim against the company. As for the CVA proposal, if I were an ordinary creditor, my may question would be why does anyone think that Ibrox, Murray Park the club's other heritable assets shown in the balance sheet at £113m are worth just £4.5m? I am sure McDermid, New St Mirren Park, The Excelsior, Almondvale and others all cost more than that by a large margin. Then as you say, what about Whyte's security? Is it invalid and if so, why? One reason that the CVA produces more for ordinary creditors is that because the heritable assets stay in the same company, as long as they keep paying the mortgage, Rangers will not have to repay the creditors with fixed securities other than as they currently fall due. Fees are ridiculous and there are severe questions about how this admin has been conducted, especially in relation to redundancies which should have been dealt with early on. I just cannot see this coming anywhere close to HMRC's requirements