Chazza1910 Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 So after all the guff in the media and some pathetic attempts at humour (Cockwomble? FFS?) on here among some genuinely amusing posts, am I correct in saying that this week is the real deal? Thursday, June 14 for CVA decision. Followed swiftly by liquidation, Green pulling out, newco being rejected. Fixtures are out a week tomorrow, so something's gotta happen. Plus the SFA appellate meets to hand out a new punishment to Rangers, but that would be a week on Tuesday at least. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 @frankieboyle: Incredible to watch the Red Road flats go down. Great work, surely this firm must now be top of the list for the Ibrox job. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drooper Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 So after all the guff in the media and some pathetic attempts at humour (Cockwomble? FFS?) on here among some genuinely amusing posts, am I correct in saying that this week is the real deal? Thursday, June 14 for CVA decision. Followed swiftly by liquidation, Green pulling out, newco being rejected. Fixtures are out a week tomorrow, so something's gotta happen. Plus the SFA appellate meets to hand out a new punishment to Rangers, but that would be a week on Tuesday at least. Wankpipkins 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 dunno if this has been posted up before http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/football/spl/rangers/2012/05/26/rangers-crisis-shows-we-were-right-to-turn-down-david-murray-says-ex-ayr-united-director-86908-23874031/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 I must be missing something here! I have not reported anyone! Am I being spoofed? You might think of yourself as a whistleblower acting for the good of the community, we know the truth- GRASS 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustyarabnuts Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Wankpipkins fannyclanger 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 dunno if this has been posted up before http://www.dailyreco...86908-23874031/ Sounds familiar “I can’t remember specifically how much was offered but it certainly wasn’t a million and, most crucially, there would be an obligation for the club to pay that money back to Murray in time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wokcomble Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Is this the D'amico we're talking about - just google it, seems to be plenty. Think Scotland would have had enough of Italian 'agents' after the Livingston fiasco. On 19 December 2008 he (D'amico) was suspended for 1 year by FIGC along with C.Pasqualin (9 months),[5][6] by violating article 1 of Codice di Giustizia Sportiva and article 3 of agent regulation.[7] He represented Cesare Natali to negotiate with club but also represented Udinese Calcio to sign the player, thus conflict of interests. The ban was shorten by the Tribunale Nazionale di Arbitrato per lo Sport of CONI on 21 October 2009.[8] However he still worked as the agent in the transfer of Marco Malagò and Vincenzo Italiano despite suspended, thus violated article 1 of CGS again and also breached the article 10. At that time, the company also used a un-registered agent Alessandro D'Amico to broke the transfer of Paolo Sammarco to Udinese and Matteo Scapini to Pro Belvedere Vercelli. Andrea was suspended again for 2 months 20 days, fined €20,000 and Alessandro inhibition for 6 months. Surely the Gattuso story isn't just a cover up for D'amacio being one of the Green Gang 'investors' !? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz FFC Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Is Tom English correct in saying RFCIA have a signing embargo because they are in admin and, if the CVA is accepted, the ban will be lifted? I thought the embargo was due to non payment of taxes (WTC), regardless of whether they were in admin or not. The transfer embargo was what the court said wasn't a legal punishment due to it not being on the list of punishments. They will now be punished by an item from the list which includes suspension, expulsion or a Scot cup ban. Rangers might back down and accept the embargo. Highly unlikely but Green himself said he wasn't happy D&P did this. As it stands once Rangers come out of administration they can sign players again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Sounds familiar david murray is a man of many disguises IMO 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCR Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 (edited) The transfer embargo was what the court said wasn't a legal punishment due to it not being on the list of punishments. They will now be punished by an item from the list which includes suspension, expulsion or a Scot cup ban. Rangers might back down and accept the embargo. Highly unlikely but Green himself said he wasn't happy D&P did this. As it stands once Rangers come out of administration they can sign players again. So, say the CVA is accepted and the club is bought on Thursday - Rangers could buy players, before standing down and having the transfer embargo reinstated? When is the decision on the new punishment? Edited June 10, 2012 by RCR 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7-2 Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 It's little surprise that the situation with the corrupt 'global brand' that is Rangers gets minimal coverage outwith Scotland given that Rangers is a diddy club in diddy little Scotland in the overall scheme of things. Apart from anything, UEFA has much more important things to deal with in Poland and Ukraine at the moment. Anyway, they've already fobbed off the Scottish corruption issue and if anything arises the SFA can always leave a message on their voicemail and UEFA will get back to them when they've a spare moment. However, if voting had turned out differently a few years ago, the current European Championships would this very minute be taking part in diddy little Scotland and it wouldn't be so easy for UEFA to have swept Rangers corruption under their carpet. The succulent lamb brigade would have been trying to highjack every press conference with 'how can you let Scottish fitba die' material and the blue scum would have been out in force protesting at every opportunity. 'LA GRAND MAISON DOIT RESTER OUVERTE JACQUES' 'NOUS SOMMES LES PEUPLE'. The media coverage outwith Scotland would surely have been raised. Cringe from that point of view. I can't decide if it's a good or bad thing for this issue that we didn't get the Euros. If UEFA liked it or not Rangers would be happening right now and it would be unavoidable. Would they have kicked the SFA's arse long ago to try and have it under control before the Euros started? Would the SFA have tried to keep it covered up longer than they've undoubtedly managed to do? Would we be more likely to see genuine 'transparency' with the worlds eyes being more or less forced to view it all close up? Best of all, the BBC might have asked 'arry his opinion of it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DuntoiRab Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 So, say the CVA is accepted and the club is bought on Thursday - Rangers could buy players, before standing down and having the transfer embargo reinstated? When is the decision on the new punishment? If Rangers come out of administration they will be able to sign new players. While in administration they cannot sign as current rules apply. This is how things stand now. Any new regs may apply to a newco. No one knows at this moment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mabawsa_Ritchie Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 So, say the CVA is accepted and the club is bought on Thursday - Rangers could buy players, before standing down and having the transfer embargo reinstated? When is the decision on the new punishment? In the (highly) unlikely event that the CVA is accepted by creditors holding at least 75% of the debt, there is still a 28-day 'cooling off' period before RFC can come out of administration. Only after then (is it really 12 July!) could they sign players.. Even that assumes that they are not suspended by the SFA which would make the signing of players this year irrelevant. Happy days! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 'LA GRAND MAISON DOIT RESTER OUVERTE JACQUES' 'NOUS SOMMES LES PEUPLE'. pas de reddition 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swampy Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Tom English puts his boot right through the Gattuso 'signing' http://m.scotsman.com/sport/football/spl/tom-english-the-fantasy-of-34-year-old-who-played-four-games-last-season-1-2347959 Sad our two biggest circulation papers don't have anyone of that quality Despite the fact he writes for the Scotsman, I do like Tom English. And this is why 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeeHectorPar Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 I'm afraid I think the £5m for the physical assets is about right. I understand it is based on Murray Park having an estimated disposal value of £4-6m, with it having restrictions on future land use (the £4-6m is basing on it's conversion to another sporting/leisure purpose), and estimating it might take 2 years to shift. A agree with Ibroke having a notional disposal value of Nil with no sitting fitba team, it being riddled with asbestos, and having a listed frontage. I forsee no great potential for conversion to housing or other commercial use in that part of Glasgow. You also have to factor-in that there would be Orcs camped-out in front of the bulldozers the day they moved-in, and any developer and their family would be sure to be subjected to abuse/presents through the post. It simply makes the land too toxic to clear-up for alternative use. Don't know if this has been replied to as my WiFi shut down for 36 hours but if Ibrox is riddled with asbestos then it should be shut down immediately and left unused until the deadly stuff can be removed. There is no question of bulldozers going in until specialist teams have removed all the suspect material. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7-2 Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 The transfer embargo was what the court said wasn't a legal punishment due to it not being on the list of punishments. They will now be punished by an item from the list which includes suspension, expulsion or a Scot cup ban. Rangers might back down and accept the embargo. Highly unlikely but Green himself said he wasn't happy D&P did this. As it stands once Rangers come out of administration they can sign players again. How can Rangers accept something they fought tooth and nail to prove wasn't legally enforceable? They've shot themselves in the foot there. Excellent. All this 'we'll accept xxxxxx punishment' does my head in. It's a flipping punishment...you have no say...you shall accept it, end of story. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Bit in today's Sunday Mail (I know) suggesting that Rangers may wait till near the end of the 21 day ruling by Glennie to appeal and that this would f**k things up further. Was in the context of reporting that the fixture list for next season will be published a week on Monday and will include Rangers in the SPL (this is correct in my thinking). Seems most likely cause for appeal is for arguing that the decision should be returned to initial panel rather than appeal tribunal. If Rangers did pull this stunt even the biggest apologists/most cowardly b*****ds amongst the SPL chairmen would surely abandon them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Bit in today's Sunday Mail (I know) suggesting that Rangers may wait till near the end of the 21 day ruling by Glennie to appeal and that this would f**k things up further. Was in the context of reporting that the fixture list for next season will be published a week on Monday and will include Rangers in the SPL (this is correct in my thinking). Seems most likely cause for appeal is for arguing that the decision should be returned to initial panel rather than appeal tribunal. If Rangers did pull this stunt even the biggest apologists/most cowardly b*****ds amongst the SPL chairmen would surely abandon them. Fvck em just shove team X in there, it makes no difference in the end if Rankers are on there and Dundee not as when we were promoted first time we were just forced to take up a fixture list designed around Partick. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.