Jump to content

Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!


Recommended Posts

Yes, there is hypocrisy evident on here.

However, it only mirrors that evident among those who wield power.

I know whose is more reprehensible and damaging.

It's not hypocrisy at all in my book. We want fairer voting rights, we're refused them by unfair voting rights geared to the duopoly. The unfair voting rights don't suit one half of the duopoly, fair voting rights are used. The hypocrisy here is with the SPL (I know that's our own chairmen). We, as fans, have every right to be outraged at the change in majorities when it suits the old firm to a majority share they have previously opposed vehemently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What exactly does the SPL have to do with Raith going to a hybrid part-time/full-time model?

Fucked if I know. These clubs are apparently self-sufficient and in no way reliant on the SPL handout, which only accounts for smidgen of the money distributed by the SFL. <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised you feel the need to comment when you don't know the facts of the situation.

From the SPL Articles of Association

rather than sounding like a troll, why not point out, that when you read the articles of association it states that the allotment or issue of a share requires a special qualified resolution which in turn requires an 83% vote or 10-2 majority if you prefer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Proposed rule changes for Financial Fairplay - and this proposed rule change to make a GM of clubs approve a Newco, instead of the Board - apply to everyone.

Whether or not Rangers get a vote at a GM called to consider an application from Rangers to transfer their share will depend on the wording of that second rule change.

you can word it any way you like, allotment or issue of a share is a special qualified resolution requiring a 10-2 majority.

edit; it is infact a qualified resolution reqiring a 90% vote

Edited by pansypotterthedirtyrotter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In terms of actual tangible happenings - since Feb 14:

Russell & Smith jumped ship.

Cellik & Wylde walked.

Squad agree temporary pay cuts.

Soccerball Bill announced as preferred bidder.

Is that it? I must have missed something!

£160k fine and a transfer embargo. Both subject to appeal. These are tangible events although not driven by rangers.

No evidence yet that they intend meeting their PAYE obligations or any other debts. Expect an announcement shortly though ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not hypocrisy at all in my book. We want fairer voting rights, we're refused them by unfair voting rights geared to the duopoly. The unfair voting rights don't suit one half of the duopoly, fair voting rights are used. The hypocrisy here is with the SPL (I know that's our own chairmen). We, as fans, have every right to be outraged at the change in majorities when it suits the old firm to a majority share they have previously opposed vehemently.

I think we're in agreement here.

HJ's point though was that people on here object to one voting structure being employed, then get upset when another one operates.

My point is that this is only in response to the fact that each voting structure used seems designed to ensure outcomes we don't like.

Our sense of "outrage", to use his word, is all the greater because it's impotent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CelticResearch@CelticResearchSo Jim Ballantyne Airdire Director and member of the SFA Board who will eventually decide Newco's fate turns up to see Linfield v RFC* today
CelticResearch@CelticResearch

And the SFA Director was wearing a RFFF badge to go with it. Wonder how he will vote?

CelticResearch@CelticResearch[/u]

Airdrie United Chairman Jim Ballantyne says Scottish Football needs Rangers http://bit.ly/JQwm8Q]

CelticResearch@CelticResearch

Oh by the way the Ballantyne information is from Rangers commentator Tom Millar. Check out his timeline.

:whistle

only 7,000 "loyal" fans showed up tonight for the Linfield - Rangers game, couldnt have raised that much money me thinks

craphead2.gifmervan.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we're in agreement here.

HJ's point though was that people on here object to one voting structure being employed, then get upset when another one operates.

My point is that this is only in response to the fact that each voting structure used seems designed to ensure outcomes we don't like.

Our sense of "outrage", to use his word, is all the greater because it's impotent.

Maybe the sense of outrage is that whatever system is used, it's the one that suits the old firm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:whistle

only 7,000 "loyal" fans showed up tonight for the Linfield - Rangers game, couldnt have raised that much money me thinks

craphead2.gifmervan.png

20 quid a skull......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:whistle

only 7,000 "loyal" fans showed up tonight for the Linfield - Rangers game, couldnt have raised that much money me thinks

craphead2.gifmervan.png

Celtic Research sound a sane bunch of chaps and not at all paranoid.

Why would an SFA board member have any input into and SPL matter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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