Count Mongo del Fantastico Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Did the Daily Record just copy The Scotsman article? Presumably at least one of the journos had a recording device when Regan was speaking? If the journos made up the quotes then presumably the SFA will be taking legal action? I think Radio Scotland played a recording of Reagan this morning before Yorkston was on. I wasn't paying attention at the time though so missed most of it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scary Bear Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Apparently Regan was misquoted and the 'social unrest' only applied to the scenario if Rangers stopped existing altogether. WTF does he think would happen, Loyalist paramilitaries on the streets of Larkhall? Been and gone. Either way, coming out with that when you're the SFA Chief Exec is resignation time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scary Bear Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 I think Radio Scotland played a recording of Reagan this morning before Yorkston was on. I wasn't paying attention at the time though so missed most of it. They did, but I missed it too. Will be interesting to hear what he did say. Hopefully the unedited version. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
t1t3h Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 (edited) Did The Scotsman article not disappear for a short time last night? Presumably the SFA were quickly on the phone saying he was miss quoted so they changed it. Edited July 5, 2012 by t1t3h 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ankles Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Time to bin this thread ,to discuss "them " only perpetuates the myth that they're still around and have some relevance . They're gone ,time to move on to the coming seasons events. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedgecutter Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 You see this 16 million figure "lost to Scottish football", does that include Sevco's income taking their sponsorship and potential gate losses into consideration? What's the actual figure to clubs outwith the OF? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scary Bear Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Can Admin move this thread to the Div 3 forum now? Division 1 Forum according to Regan. Possibly a new SPL2 Forum. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingrodent Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Regan just told Good Morning Scotland that "There is no viable alternative" to Rangers playing in the first division next year. Does that phrase sound familiar to anyone? I'm sure that "There is no alternative" has some form of political pedigree. Certainly, it's been employed to defend the corruption of high finance - there is no alternative to multi-million pound bonus culture; there is no alternative to allowing the super-wealthy to pay tax at a fraction of the rate that the rest of us do. Any attempts to force the richest among us to abide by the same rules that the British public do will ruin the entire nation. There is no alternative to allowing the press to cheat, lie and steal; no alternative to cracking down on heavy industry and leaving the population to the tender mercies of the markets; no alternative to ripping up the rulebook to allow the wealthiest clubs to survive at everybody else's expense; no alternatives at all, no matter how blatant the corruption of most of our institutions becomes. Call me a Commie if you will, but you don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to work out exactly cui is bonofitting from all of these scams, and who's getting the shaft. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big G... Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 In his interview on Radio Scotland, and in that article in The Scotsman, Regan keeps referring to them as "Rangers". Does he not get it that " Rangers" are no more? "Rangers" are dead. "Rangers" are liquidated ( or almost). This is for the application of a new club into the Football league, and as such should be treatred that way. They should never be referred to as "Rangers" especially by those in position's such as Regans. His comments show him up to be the absolute fud that he is, and has been reading too many Cockwomble books. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozam76 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 They did, but I missed it too. Will be interesting to hear what he did say. Hopefully the unedited version. I caught what must have been the last minute or so, and he mentioned at least twice that "Rangers in the first division was the only viable option", and that he would be trying to convince the SFL clubs of this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highland Dogma Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Did The Scotsman article not disappear for a short time last night? Presumably the SFA were quickly on the phone saying he was miss quoted so they changed it. I bet they did !! Tbf the sociall unrest bit isnt even the most outrageous part of the article...its regan openly admitting that he intends to fix the league if the sfl clubs wont comply with cheating and putting newco in 2 divisions higher than they should be entering the league. My optimistic side says that at every juncture so far fan power has won out and thwarted whatever corrupt plans the authorities have come up with, and hopefully this will be no different. I also think the sfa with holding the oldco player registrations is disgusting. Hope the players lawyers tear the sfa a new arse. Whem this saga finally comes to an end the sfa needs to be torn apart and rebuilt with proper professionals in charge. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northsea80 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 The figure in reality won't be anything near 16 million! That's a worst case scenario all sponsors withdraw support and there's no money there to replace them! I imagine deals can and will be re negotiated. Whoever came up with these figures must also be feeding John Brown his info, apparently for last seasons league win Celtic got over 2 'mulllyin poun' Should they win it this coming season it will only be Two hundred thousand! I don't understand why he wasn't challenged on those figures while on the radio. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyB Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Anything on Club 12 yet? If not, are we going to see the SPL hold the position vacant until the SFL decide what to do with Newco? The SPL won't give a shit about who Club 12 is as it will not be Newco this season and I don't think they will be in a hurry to name Club 12. Perhaps if the SFL don't put Newco in SFL1 then is there a scenario where Newco sit out for a year and the SPL complete the season with a vacancy? Wouldn't put it past them as a last ditch attempt to protect their finances. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Regan just told Good Morning Scotland that "There is no viable alternative" to Rangers playing in the first division next year. Does that phrase sound familiar to anyone? I'm sure that "There is no alternative" has some form of political pedigree. The Tories, just before they drive the country back into recession. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsimButtHitsASix Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 In his interview on Radio Scotland, and in that article in The Scotsman, Regan keeps referring to them as "Rangers". Does he not get it that " Rangers" are no more? "Rangers" are dead. "Rangers" are liquidated ( or almost). This is for the application of a new club into the Football league, and as such should be treatred that way. They should never be referred to as "Rangers" especially by those in position's such as Regans. His comments show him up to be the absolute fud that he is, and has been reading too many Cockwomble books. You tell 'em Bankies man! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedgecutter Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Apparently Regan was misquoted and the 'social unrest' only applied to the scenario if Rangers stopped existing altogether. WTF does he think would happen, Loyalist paramilitaries on the streets of Larkhall? Mass suicides from the Kingston and Erskine bridges bringing Glasgow traffic chaos, Orcs beating up little kids to feel big when they don't have the 'personal' success and high standing which they usually get attaching themselves to a large club, mass increases in drug-taking to get their Saturday afternoon high, chronic NHS psychologist shortages when 50,000 fans jam their GP's lines after a mental breakdown which in turn cuts important treatment to other more needy patients resulting in deaths nationwide. Absolute social breakdown. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Heid Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 I remain totally bemused that people allow personal prejudice to rule their minds. Surely the whole issue is the future of the Scottish Game and the implications that any decision will have. There are supporters from clubs who have contributed very little to the game in Scotland for years trying to take the moral high ground. Which I find really quite amusing but also very sad at the same time. Clyde issuing statements on integrity - a team who build and ruin careers on a regularly basis as they struggle to survive. A team who decanted from their own locality to relocate to the middle of knowhere and regularly have issues over unpaid bills to the council. So realistically their own finances and future are also decidedly ropey. (Sorry this was not an anti Clyde post - more an example of double standards) Livingston - bankrolled by West Lothian Council for years and up and down like a yo-yo with limited crowd appeal. Dundee - in and out of administration Motherwell - been in administration East Stirling - no park or heritage after they left Falkirk for Stenhousmuir. In real terms they are just a name taking up space and contributing very little. Falkirk - consistently sell players to avoid turning promise into promotion. A little investment and they could have been back into the SPL. But they are run as a First Division team as their benchmark. Clydebank - allowed to die so Airdrie could live on in their place. Not much of a hullabaloo when that happened as only affected two smaller teams. Spartans - a very well run club with a fanbase of 10. They have a junior and senior team and as a club they develop a lot of players and introduce them to the game of football. But bringing them into the SFL at the expense of Rangers would not enhance or bring anything new or better to the future of Scottish Football. Spartans may have ambitions of grandeur and SFL etc but if they were being realistic they have nothing really to offer anyone in Scottish Football at a higher level than present. The vast majority of major investment/sponsorship in Scottish Football comes from the demand to see Rangers and Celtic and/or any combination of these 2 against whoever. Sponsors want a return from their investment and that means exposure to TV/SKY/ESPN etc. SFA - have spent more time trying to appease UEFA/FIFA and look good in their eyes. The majority of posters continue to wallow in the demise of another club - and forget to look at the impact that this may have on their own club and Scottish Football in general. Scottish Football needs to unite in moving forward for the survival of our game. Solutions are required and the talking needs to stop. Henry McLeish was appointed and paid loadsa money to help improve the game and that has as usual produced no outcomes. -19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highland Dogma Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 I caught what must have been the last minute or so, and he mentioned at least twice that "Rangers in the first division was the only viable option", and that he would be trying to convince the SFL clubs of this. Yes only viable option for newco ! Scottish football will carry on perfectly well without the thuggery intimidation sectarianism bigotry cheating and financial doping. Clubs will start to live within their means again and the games will be a more pleasant thing to attend. The only entity which will not survive newco in sfl3...is newco ! Regan must go ! It isnt the job of the sfa to save one individual club, and certainly not at the expense of the integrity of the entire sport in scotland. It was down to newco and oldco to save themselves no one else. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broccoli Dog Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 I remain totally bemused that people allow personal prejudice to rule their minds. Surely the whole issue is the future of the Scottish Game and the implications that any decision will have. There are supporters from clubs who have contributed very little to the game in Scotland for years trying to take the moral high ground. Which I find really quite amusing but also very sad at the same time. Clyde issuing statements on integrity - a team who build and ruin careers on a regularly basis as they struggle to survive. A team who decanted from their own locality to relocate to the middle of knowhere and regularly have issues over unpaid bills to the council. So realistically their own finances and future are also decidedly ropey. (Sorry this was not an anti Clyde post - more an example of double standards) Livingston - bankrolled by West Lothian Council for years and up and down like a yo-yo with limited crowd appeal. Dundee - in and out of administration Motherwell - been in administration East Stirling - no park or heritage after they left Falkirk for Stenhousmuir. In real terms they are just a name taking up space and contributing very little. Falkirk - consistently sell players to avoid turning promise into promotion. A little investment and they could have been back into the SPL. But they are run as a First Division team as their benchmark. Clydebank - allowed to die so Airdrie could live on in their place. Not much of a hullabaloo when that happened as only affected two smaller teams. Spartans - a very well run club with a fanbase of 10. They have a junior and senior team and as a club they develop a lot of players and introduce them to the game of football. But bringing them into the SFL at the expense of Rangers would not enhance or bring anything new or better to the future of Scottish Football. Spartans may have ambitions of grandeur and SFL etc but if they were being realistic they have nothing really to offer anyone in Scottish Football at a higher level than present. The vast majority of major investment/sponsorship in Scottish Football comes from the demand to see Rangers and Celtic and/or any combination of these 2 against whoever. Sponsors want a return from their investment and that means exposure to TV/SKY/ESPN etc. SFA - have spent more time trying to appease UEFA/FIFA and look good in their eyes. The majority of posters continue to wallow in the demise of another club - and forget to look at the impact that this may have on their own club and Scottish Football in general. Scottish Football needs to unite in moving forward for the survival of our game. Solutions are required and the talking needs to stop. Henry McLeish was appointed and paid loadsa money to help improve the game and that has as usual produced no outcomes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spain Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 (edited) I caught what must have been the last minute or so, and he mentioned at least twice that "Rangers in the first division was the only viable option", and that he would be trying to convince the SFL clubs of this. The question is, should Regan be trying to convince anyone of anything? Is that his job? I don't think so. I think his job should be to present the cold, hard facts and let them all decide from there, not to try and get them round to his way of thinking. He is supposed to be representing the clubs, not the other way around. Edited July 5, 2012 by Spain 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.