gaz5

Yes, 1-0 at K Park. Also beat Spartans home and away. Huge injury list has hampered consistency in their league standing, but lots of good individual results. Also worth pointing out that 5 lads were 19 or under on the park again last night, 4 of them starting and 2 of them getting goals.

Seriously, this "expenses" line is fairly tedious. EK are spending more on their playing squad than anyone in the LL. You only have to look at the players they have and where they came from to know that. There's nothing wrong with this, they earned the right to do it through performance in the Scottish and by being a well run club even before that. They are ambitious and want to get into the SPFL and are spending the money (pretty well it seems, not as if they are bringing in poor players) to give themselves the best possible chance to do so. I don't understand why anyone has a problem with that or would feel the need to try to convince anyone that their squad is expenses based to any great degree (obviously there might be a handful). If its sustainable for the club and gets them where they want to be, fair play to them.

Unlikely. He's started his coaching career (he's early 30's now) with one of the Uni's other sides I think. Looks like he's started planning for life after playing and the Uni are supporting that. To be fair, in LL the Uni is as good a place as any to do that given their football programme. Doubt the Shire could offer anything similar.

Not a teacher (football coach) but some of the stuff that my lads (on both sides it has to be said) have in their heads is qute frankly unreal. Had one vote no, for example, as he didn't think it was fair that after a Yes if Scotland happened to raise income tax (which he was adamant Salmond and Sturgeon said they would do) it was fair for you to pay more if you worked in Scotland for an English based company. I genuinely didn't know where to start explaining the epic level of wrongness. In their defence though, that kinda crazyness is not limited to younger folks I've spoken to!

People who use "of" in place of the word "have". Really petty, but it drives me mental.

To be fair, they started trying to rip the fans off long before that wee ditty at the end of the form. £368 for a third division season ticket. Really? I think you may be taking the piss Mr Green.

By my calculations (based on last years prices and the advertised 1/3 "discount") some season ticekts will be as high as £400. Which is just unbelievable beased on the product. I'm sure there will be plenty of fans ( eedjits ) who'll be happy with that though. And you're right, it doesn't surprise me.

For those who cant get to the Clyde site: Disgusting. Clyde FC Club Statement: SFL Meeting Wed, 4th Jul 2012 12:34pm The club sent two directors to attend the meeting of the SFL clubs yesterday and they have reported back to the Board. The meeting and conversations covered the best part of 5 hours but there were only a few overarching themes. The clear message portrayed is that Scottish Football is in a very dark place indeed and there is simply no good solution to what is now a structural problem that has gone beyond a one dimensional issue of where Rangers should play next season. No matter what happens now there is going to be enormous fallout across the Scottish game. Whether some good can be extracted from the impending mess will depend entirely on the SPL clubs, guided by the currently absent leadership of the SFA. Neil Doncaster wanted only one thing from the meeting, to get a steer from the SFL clubs whether they would allow Rangers into SFL1. He talked the clubs through a detailed explanation of where the SPL clubs would lose £16m next season if Rangers were not entered to the top division of the SFL. This was delivered as a matter of fact, it was a "reality". It seems that most, if not all, major sponsors of the SPL have exit clauses if either of the 'Old Firm' are not within the SPL. The total figure was not new, but the detail behind the number and its impact on individual clubs in the SPL was set out clearly. There were challenges made regarding the flip side of saving the central income from sponsors and media, the obvious impact of loss of supporters to the game who have strongly voiced their intent. Supporter reaction has not been factored in, again there are realities, the SPL clubs are waiting on their Sky cheques in August and clearly that was more important. Nowhere in the presentation was account taken on the impact to the finances of clubs, and more importantly the relevance of the game, should supporters stay at home. The consequential impact on the SFL from the presentation was that the SFL would lose its entitlement to circa £2m per annum from the Settlement Agreement put together to compensate the SFL for the SPL breakaway, this was made very clear by Neil Doncaster. He told the clubs that if the SPL didn't have the money then they could not pay the SFL. The reality however, which was clear from the detailed figures, is that the SPL, whilst losing an enormous amount of funding, would have the cash to make payment; it is just that the SPL would not meet the legal obligation to the SFL as the cash would be used to finance the SPL teams. The undeniable statement made on behalf of the SPL is commercially understandable. The SPL would not allow £16m to flow out of their coffers, the impact would be too catastrophic for the SPL clubs to contemplate and as such the only options are that Rangers enter SFL1 or, as a less attractive backstop, a breakaway SPL2 will be formed. There is no prospect, from an SPL point of view, that SFL3 can be allowed to happen. Neil Doncaster was delivering a very unpalatable proposition and he did it clearly and effectively, hence the representatives of Clyde Football Club understood that the only thing that mattered was the impact on SPL clubs from the loss of money from media and sponsors. It was to the credit of every SFL club, and probably to the surprise of Neil Doncaster, that nobody asked him to improve on the £1m offer. The SFL clubs were given a steer for themselves by Neil Doncaster, if the SFL could not tell him how they might vote, then he would expect the SPL clubs not to vote at their meeting either. There were a few new things learned in the meeting, not least that the rules of the SFL would allow any club accepted into the SFL, by a simple majority, to be placed in any division. The rules do not state, nor imply, that they must join at the bottom tier, only custom and practice around good governance and integrity has seen teams join in the bottom tier. In addition, the attendees at the meeting were left in absolutely no doubt whatsoever by Stewart Regan that if the SPL clubs voted to allow a Newco into the SPL then it would be blocked by the SFA refusing to transfer the SFA membership. It was however caveated well enough to make it less than an absolute statement. The meeting was full of implied actions and outcomes, the use of clever language when delivering the speeches allows anyone to defend with ‘that is not what I said'. However, nobody will have left the meeting with anything other than the very clear messages being put across. Denials of the substance of the message being delivered do not assist anyone in this absolutely dreadful situation. There will be no winners. Any level of integrity for the sport will be lost by one outcome and financial collapse, we are told, will fall upon the SPL with the other. Sadly, the SFA and SPL have decided that whilst they say they are looking for a collaborative solution, they have very clearly made sure that by their own inaction that the blame will sit with the SFL - no matter what the outcome. The Board of the SFL are being put under intolerable pressure by the other bodies looking to avoid the implications of properly applying their own governance procedures. In summary, the SFA implication is that there will be no entry to the SPL. The SPL implication is that it therefore has to be SFL1 with a bit of restructure, or an SPL2 with the rest of the SFL cut adrift. There were no other options. Whilst Stewart Regan said that the SFA did not favour an SPL2, there was no equivalent abhorrence of that proposal as was attached to the proposal for a Newco in the SPL, leaving the implication that the door remains wide open for the SPL to secure their £16m with or without the SFL. The Board of the club will consider the feedback from its representatives and also the outcomes of the next few days and will keep its supporters fully appraised, but in the meantime see no reason to amend any previous comment.

Someone asked earlier what I'd be doing with season ticket money. It will be sent to Raith Rovers Football club.

Looks like they have different sytems for different people then. I'm looking at mine now and dont see that. And I would never, ever give them permission or details to auto renew (for the same reason I never signed up for teh continious credit scheme).

This would have been my 27th year as a ST holder and thats never been the process for me. I get my renewal letter and have to actively do the renewal before the closing date. If I do nothing, its effectively canceled. They have no way to take my money. Moot point for me to be fair. Going to Ibrox hasn't been a pleasant experience for me for years, I only kept it up because it was one of the few things I did with my Dad since I was a boy (as it turns out, he's only kept it up for the same reason). I could just about handle sitting for 90 minutes and watching the football, putting all the other bawbaggery that goes with going to Ibrox aside (with the "Quintessentially British" pish and all the generally Neanderthal ways of your average vociferous Rangers fan). But finding out that the club has been cheating for nearly the entire time I have been watching them coupled with the fact that the club I watched all those years is now dead (I don't buy the continuation nonsense. They're dead, new club, new everything) I wouldn't have renewed in any case. And before anyone clever jumps in: I can think for myself, so you're bloody right I can walk away and I never at and stage jumped on that moronic bandwagon!

Eh, Naw, they were not. Season tickets don't auto renew. Never have. And anyone who willingly signed up for one and handed over any cash is a fucking buffoon.

Looking back at the CVA proposal for a second, I have a question for one of the more knowledgeable legal types: If the Creditors (Mainly HMRC and Ticketus) reject the CVA and as a result Green buys all the assets for the agreed £5.5m, transfers to newco thus liquidating the current company BEFORE the outcome of the BTC is known, what happens to the case? Is it just dropped by the wayside, or is it still possible for a verdict to be rendered even though the defendant is dead? The reason I ask is: The inclusion in the CVA of the BTC monies due to HMRC seems crazy to me. If, as has been confirmed, Haudit and Daudit are in daily chat with HMRC then surely both parties would know already if this was an acceptable inclusion or not. We know, through what we keep being told, HMRC see this as a "test case" in the UK and that there are a lot of other clubs, mainly in England and who will be due far more money, in a similar position. Could HMRC, in the case of Rangers and in the best interest of the tax payer, be more interested in setting a legal precedent with which to pursue the EBT scam as a whole, than the actual money they will get from Rangers specifically? Would accepting a CVA, on the premise that Rangers (in whatever guise) do not appeal what surely must be a guilty verdict and hold up any plans to pursue other clubs, be a possibility? I'm not sure I've worded any of that well, but you'll get the jist of what I'm getting at. Could just be a wild conspiricay running away with me though, especially if the answer to my initial question is yes, the courts can still render precedent creating verdict n if the defendant no longer exists.

Think you might be too early with some of them, case is from 2001 onwards I reckon The one I've been told, by a pretty reliable source, is Marvin Andrews. Apparently he was asked outright and being some sort of ordained minister who doesn't lie, he said "Yep, I got paid like that". Personally, I think thats too funny to be true, so probably wont be. But if it turned out we were paying players of big Marv's caliber through the back door it must run fairly deep. Think I'm one of the few Rangers fans who thinks we've got off lightly so far. Personally, if we die and come back as a newco in the SPL next season, I'll be spending more time down at Dunipace as the gig is clearly up.