Leepylee Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Has anyone else saw this bbc sport update ? Thoughts ? http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18929983 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 In my eyes it's the same club if they transfer over the existing SFA membership, taking the sanctions in the process... I don't see how you can say they've the same membership, and carry the negative history (punishable behaviour), yet not carry the positive history (honours etc.). Others will disagree, I'm sure. Others will cite Leeds/Clachnacuddin/etc. Others still will desire no continuity whatsoever. OK and I know this will get messy,. I agree with the idea that good must transfer with bad BUT what if I had had enough money to create a new club and requested the transfer of the SFA membership to this club. Would my new club be Rangers? I should definitely hope not. Would it be down to my choice? The SFA's choice? Over to you. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GirondistNYC Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 1342819694[/url]' post='6451511']Indeed. Their continuing to use the name "Rangers" will cost them a hefty price. This has already been highlighted by Companies House via various Mainstream Media outlets, BBC, STV, SKY, numerous newspapers and by several Independent Investigative Journalists. I really don't think is true. First, the name on the shirt and in the league table is a brand, not their name for legal purposes, and Green bought the brand. If, for the avoidance of doubt, Green had acquired the assets through OldRangersWereCheatingBigots Ltd. the team could still be called Rangers for footballing purposes and play in their current strip. Second, with regards to the legal name I'm pretty sure the rule is that NewCos can't use old names in circumstances where it might be deemed misleading to the public and creditors. It's hard to argue given the unique nature of football clubs and the publicity involved that anyone can seriously argue that people will be misled in commercial terms by the current company name. When Fiorentina was reformed Italian insolvency law prevented them from purchasing the IP and thus they had to play as the Viola with a different strip, but they reverted back as soon as they could buy the intellectual property. Here, the IP was explicitly part of the deal. Barring BDO challenging the terms of the sale, they are SevCo, but the team can play as Rangers. The fact we know they died doesn't change the fact they are allowed to use the name. It's kinda like when a band suffers a messy split and the lead singer tours with a new band and releases kinda crp albums under the old name. Everyone knows its not the same, but they're allowed to do it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Diamond Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Awesome, I want a diamond swimming pool but I won't pretend it's unfair when I wake up tomorrow and it's not there. You probably need to distinguish between what you want and what it's reasonable to expect. It'll do your mental health a power of good. Why is it unreasonable to rid yourself of something that is not good.They will up and leave us in a flash if the English league accepts them,or there is an European league started.So don't try and kid yourself on that we would miss them,they certainly wouldn't miss us.If this had been any other club bar the OF that cheated HMRC for years,we would not be having this discussion.They would have been added to history of clubs that cease to exist in Scotland. Butter it up any way you want,but they have got off very lightly,everything will be the same in a few years minus their massive debts.They will only gloat at us to remind us that they were too big for us too kill off,when actually all it is,is that our FA has succumed to the temptation of greed.If SKY was not an issue they would have buried Rangers long ago.It just proves how greedy they actually are by now negotiating a 25 match tv deal to watch them in the 3rd,why the feck wasn't there a 25 match deal for the lower divisions before now. So they may be on paper the most successful side in the world,their fans may gloat on their history.......but when they remove the red,white and blue spectacles and see them as the rest of Scotland does,they will then realise that there is nothing of the last 20 years or more to be proud of Rangers FC for. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eindhovendee Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 1. We're not Scottish football chief. 2. You need to separate the horrible nature of the kunts from the issues at hand. 3. I'm pretty sure that Airdrie fans are the last people who should be taking the moral high ground here. No offence and all that. The company has gone bust. The team have dropped three divisions, lost all their decent players, will have to go a full year without signing players and have more sanctions to come but, yeah, apart from that what did the Romans ever do for us? You got a Greenie because my fingers are full of Heineken. I owe you 2 Reds. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jester Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Fair enough. I'd like to hope that you're wrong but we're just putting opinions out there. FWIW I'd say that what Airdrie subsequently got away with was far more distasteful than simply admitting them to the 3rd division so you can read that precedent either way. Rangers should have been forced to do what we had to, so it could be carried like a badge of shame for all and sundry to cast up until the end of time (In their case Christmas). They got off lightly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pull My Strings Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 You got a Greenie because my fingers are full of Heineken. I owe you 2 Reds. I appreciate your honesty. I hate it when I do that. I'm going to give you a greenie if I've any left, just to heighten your discomfiture. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fife Saint Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 So, I mentioned it earlier but what's the feeling about the dual-contract and subsequent illegal registration of players? Presumably they didn't dance around that at the meeting. What are the ramifications of that? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blanco Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Has anyone else saw this bbc sport update ? Thoughts ? http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/18929983 How the f**k can the SPL demand a share of their media rights???? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 (edited) Why is it unreasonable to rid yourself of something that is not good.They will up and leave us in a flash if the English league accepts them,or there is an European league started.So don't try and kid yourself on that we would miss them,they certainly wouldn't miss us.If this had been any other club bar the OF that cheated HMRC for years,we would not be having this discussion.They would have been added to history of clubs that cease to exist in Scotland. Butter it up any way you want,but they have got off very lightly,everything will be the same in a few years minus their massive deb I'd just like to point out that the English leagues or a fantasy European league would NOT, repeat NOT, invite a Scottish 3rd Division side to join. No disrespect to most 3rd Div teams. Edited July 20, 2012 by cyderspaceman 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shull Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Behave yourself. There was no appetite in Scottish football to completely destroy its most successful team and nor should there have been. I hate Rangers as much as the next man but it would have been vindictive in the extreme to deliberately bury them forever (as much as we might all have enjoyed that outcome). Their crimes are serious and I'm sure there's more punishment to come but I think we need to retain a little bit of perspective here. The reason we hate them (the bigotry, the arrogance, the bully boy tactics) are not related to the current situation and it would be unfair to punish them for the sin of being generally offensive and obnoxious. The last company folded. This new company are trying to keep the football team alive. They've been granted some special dispensation in order to do that but, equally, they have been told that they must also bear some special sanctions if they want to retain the link with the old club. Personally, I think the outcome is entirely fair and proportionate, certainly far more just than what could have been foisted upon us. F*ck the cnuts, they should be dead and buried. If the SFA had balls they would've banished them and Scumtic after the disgrace of the 1980 Cup final. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Itwiznaeme Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 How the f**k can the SPL demand a share of their media rights???? Probably because the SFL get a share in the SPL's media rights. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWA Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 How the f**k can the SPL demand a share of their media rights???? This is baffling. They probably want Rangers media rights to make up for them not being in the SPL. The authorities in this country are scandalous. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Itwiznaeme Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Anyone noticed the Murray statement now renders any agreement/contract he does sign with the SFA null and void .. as he will only be signing it 'under duress' (which makes a an agreement/contract illegal or unenforceable) He has stated it for and on the the record in the public domain ... What the f**k will the SFA do now at short notice ... 'just accept them signing it' ? Someone should email the SFA and ask them what they plan to do about it ... Personally I think they should now be fcuking booted out .... They will be. Goodbye Sevco/Rangers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speckled tangerine Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I really don't think is true. First, the name on the shirt and in the league table is a brand, not their name for legal purposes, and Green bought the brand. If, for the avoidance of doubt, Green had acquired the assets through OldRangersWereCheatingBigots Ltd. the team could still be called Rangers for footballing purposes and play in their current strip. Second, with regards to the legal name I'm pretty sure the rule is that NewCos can't use old names in circumstances where it might be deemed misleading to the public and creditors. It's hard to argue given the unique nature of football clubs and the publicity involved that anyone can seriously argue that people will be misled in commercial terms by the current company name. When Fiorentina was reformed Italian insolvency law prevented them from purchasing the IP and thus they had to play as the Viola with a different strip, but they reverted back as soon as they could buy the intellectual property. Here, the IP was explicitly part of the deal. Barring BDO challenging the terms of the sale, they are SevCo, but the team can play as Rangers. The fact we know they died doesn't change the fact they are allowed to use the name. It's kinda like when a band suffers a messy split and the lead singer tours with a new band and releases kinda crp albums under the old name. Everyone knows its not the same, but they're allowed to do it. so, are we saying rangers are the equivalent of 'beady eye'? Or after a few defeats with bairns and big lee more like 'bonehead's oasis' at butlins @ bognor in ten years time....with no other original members left (a bit like the **** front line soon)!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 F*ck the cnuts, they should be dead and buried. If the SFA had balls they would've banished them and Scumtic after the disgrace of the 1980 Cup final. But then you would never have had your big pay day in '86 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Diamond Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 FWIW I'd say that what Airdrie subsequently got away with was far more distasteful than simply admitting them to the 3rd division so you can read that precedent either way. For your information,Airdrie at that point didn't exist.Jim Ballantyne placed a bid in for an about to be liquidated company,and was the highest bidder.They then renamed Clydebank to Airdrie United.Technically we are still Clydebank as has been pointed out by others.So i fail to see how this is classed as more distasteful than a club that cheated and ran up huge debts,including tax fraud for up to 20 years or more,has been allowed to continue as a newco with the oldco history,wiped out almost all the debt,had a slap on the wrist by being placed in the 3rd,but allowed to now build a team that could take them all the way back up again. It may be me,but i fail to see how were the worse of the 2 scenarios. Airdrie United were never to be allowed into SFL for reasons that seem to have been forgotten for Ranger.We were rejected in favour of Gretna,as newco should have been for Spartans. Bigger companies have went to the wall without ever cheating anyone,let alone the taxman,but somehow the powers that be have eased a cheat and fraud back into our game.Only now they will be a little better off long term. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GirondistNYC Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 1342823418[/url]' post='6451665']Anyone noticed the Murray statement now renders any agreement/contract he does sign with the SFA null and void .. as he will only be signing it 'under duress' (which makes a an agreement/contract illegal or unenforceable) He has stated it for and on the the record in the public domain ... What the f**k will the SFA do now at short notice ... 'just accept them signing it' ? Someone should email the SFA and ask them what they plan to do about it ... Personally I think they should now be fcuking booted out .... Edit: and ask the Spartans to apply ... throwing the phrase "duress" into a PR statement is not the same thing as real duress, let alone the type required to invalidate a legal agreement. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GirondistNYC Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 1342823621[/url]' post='6451675']so, are we saying rangers are the equivalent of 'beady eye'? Or after a few defeats with bairns and big lee more like 'bonehead's oasis' at butlins @ bognor in ten years time....with no other original members left (a bit like the **** front line soon)!! More like Guns N' Roses, except with return to the SPL standing in for the release of "Chinese Democracy". Both, after ll, we're confidently assumed to only require three years.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djchapsticks Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Meanwhile, over on OrcMedia: What's the budget?Rangers on a good CL year would have taken in up to £60M, without a good European run, perhaps £35Mish. Now in the depths of SFL3? I guess perhaps £20M? You could buy any player in Scotland outside the usual Old Firm scenario with that - the question is would they come. I think Rangers should stash the cash in preparation for SPL football again. The problem is that if the Sky/SPL debacle does pan out to be bad for those clubs, we could be back in the SPL for 2013-2014 but unable to sign anyone until Jan 2014? I think they need sign up a few up to £5000 per week players, that is a wage bill of about £2.5M for 10 decent players which is 13% of revenues - a lot better than the 40+% we were shelling out on player wages in the SPL. So sign up 10 good SPL level players and let them see us through to the top flight again. It's basically a balance between ensuring a hassle free rise up the leagues but also preparing the war chest on the top flight return. In that light, a few game changers like Rudi Skacel is not unreasonable - if Ally can persuade them. I'd take any of:Michael Stewart Kevin Kyle Craig Beattie Ian Black Gary Teale Rory McCalister Please, please, please do. 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.