The DA

But the SPL will change the rules now 'to ensure this doesn't happen again, clsoing a loophole. You have all been warned.". All we can hope is that the next culprits are 1 of the OF.

What happens if the creditors decide that they could get a better return by liquidating the company and selling the assets individually? I'm sure that would come to more than £11M. Isn't that supposed to be the administrators' role? And can't those creditors object to the transfer of assets?

This whole idea of syphoning off the assets and leaving the toxic debts behind just feels wrong. It's like me watching out for a local business, let's say the RBS, and then offering to buy them, debts and all, for a fiver. I then set up RBS 2012, move all the assets over and tell the original creditors to get tae. Why are none of Rangers creditors (HMRC, Ticketus, United) objecting to this asset stripping? It just doesn't sound legal.

Newcastle

"Nasty, toxic Rangers...".

Exciting for whom?

I had this sudden image flash in front of my eyes - Whyte, Murray, Jardine, Walter and others being led away in handcuffs, sobbing like Charlie Sheen in Wall Street.

I've just been reading through the summary of that MLM Solutions live event. I know it's just one expert's opinion but it's still a bit of an eye-opener and well worth reading. One thing was mentioned in passing that made me sit up and take notice. Rangers, in playing on to the end of the season, will be awarded SPL prize money for their second place. Stop and read that again. They're being rewarded for cheating(*). Can't the SPL withhold that prize money and use it in part-payment of Rangers debts to United, Hearts, etc? (*) I know they haven't offiicially been found guilty of cheating (yet) but it does stick in my craw.

I thought the administrators' main legal responsibility was to maximise value to the creditors.

Quite. It's only a feckin football team. Attching your whole life's meaning to an ever-changing squad of players - over whose performance you've no control - strikes me as slightly moronic.

No need. The sun will dry up all the slime.

Sandy Jardine, the voice of reason. "We'll wait and see what sanctions come about, if any. And after that is done, then we will take appropriate action." Some crackers in there - "if any" jumps out at me. I wonder what Mr J considers 'appropriate action'?

Nope. Rangers are fecked as it is and the last thing Scottish football needs is more bad publicity. Just let them die quietly in a corner - no further help required.

Apologies if someone's already posted along these lines (and with a bit more info than I have) but I've been looking at the timing of a possible AVC. Right now, Rangers debts total around £60M the £55M that Haudit & Daudit published earlier plus the £4M for the Wee Tax Case. Since 75%of creditors need to agree to the terms of an AVC, I assume that HMRC plus Ticketus control that decision between them. No other sensible split of the creditors adds up to 75%. If H&D wait until the Big Tax Case decision comes in (pre-appeal), that takes the total debt up to around £135M and HMRC (£93M) just about hold the deciding votes all on their lonesome. In either case, will HMRC settle for 4p or 10p in the pound when they can wind the company up and get 50p or 60p in the pound? I can almost imagine Hector agreeing to an AVC now if he thought there was a chance of significantly more tax from Rangers in the future (jam tomorrow) but Rangers aren't going to be a financial powerhousefor years, possibly decades, to come - so that's not going to happen. They're fooked.

I'm hoping that UEFA and FIFA are paying very close attention to what might happen here.

With all the in-out-in-out-shake it all about, I've lost track of the administration position. Are Rangers actually breaking even month-on-month or are they still losing money?

Maybe I'm slower than most but I'm picking up on a gradual shift in the tone of media reporting of this circus. I think it started with Thomson's Channel 4 investigations and, while he was initially shouted down by those with a vested interest, most of those clowns are now keeping a lower profile and those without an axe to grind are starting to poke their heads above the parapet. When even their captive media won't stand up for them, I beginning to think Rangers really are fooked.

Total transparency when we know the likely results? Morons who feel their very reason for being is at stake are... unpredictable. I have to admit that I'll be happier when the note of explanation is issued and Rangers have their chance to appeal those findings. But I have no reason to suspect that the 3-man panel did anything other than interpret the SFA rules fairly.

Perhaps not a perfect analogy but close enough. The 3 were selected from the SFA 'population as a whole' and deserve a level of anonimity. If the SFA are prepared to back the decision of their members, that's all any of us needs to know, surely. Or do you think some SFA members might have an agenda?

Jeckyll and Hyde reporting from the Record again. http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4279497/SFA-sanctions-trio-on-terror-alert.html In one column, Hannah is shouting that the names of all 3 panel members should have been made public from the start (like your average jury!) while their headline screams about the effects of doing so. Idiots.

Just listended to Walter Smith speaking out on McCoist's behalf. In one breath he says that McCoist spoke in the heat of the moment and then goes on to say that there's something in what Sally said. Weasel. Absolute weasel.

I can't believe the sanctimonious, hypocritical sh1te from the Daily Record. Yesterday they published a 'Public Enememy Number 1 (2 and 3)' back page and today they're criticising the sub-normals for reacting to their bugle call. Sounds like an incitement to violence to me.

As an aside, what happens if Whyte refuses to pay his £200K fine. Do Rangers get punished further? I have to admit that, if I were him, I'd be thinking "Hmm, banned from Scottish football for life and they STILL want to fine me another £200K. What's the worst they can do to me if I refuse to pay?"

The signings embargo will have no effect anyway. Do Rangers actually believe they'll have any money left to sign anyone, let alone pay their wages? And, if here IS any money for that, why the f3ck aren't they using it to settle their debts?

Comedy shows used to be written by a single writer: Johnny Speight springs to mind. Then came comedy-writing partnerships, Galton & Simpson being my favourites. Cheers and Friends brought us the idea of comedy teams with anything up to a dozen writers involved in creating each episode. Now we have 50,000 Renagers fans penning my current sitcom favourite in real time. That's progress for you.