Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[Broccoli Dog]

We all thought that the transfer ban was a ridiculous diddy punishment originally anyway, which was only implemented in order to give the impression of hammering Rangers while at the same time being ridiculously lenient. So nothing much has really changed other than the club has successfully managed to piss off the national association that has been bending over backwards since day one to help them, plus now they've drawn the attention of FIFA/UEFA.

Pyrrhic victory if you ask me.

[DuntoiRab]

This would be a great time for whoever is sitting on the Souness / extra payments 'nuclear' a story to show their hand. Maybe then the SFA can justify expulsion more easily.

I wondered that too, but it might be better to wait till the SPL do nothing tomorrow.

[Well Well]

It's simple, the SFA have 2 choices here ;

1. Expel Rangers from the game

OR

2. Confirm, by doing nothing, that Rangers are bigger than the SFA

I honestly believe that Rangers have signed their own death warrant by their disregard for the rules in this country, anything other than expulsion sets a dangerous precedent.

100% correct. although option 2 will be the most palatable as its an ex Rangers director who benefited from EBTS at the top of the SFA.

Edited May 29, 2012 by Well Well

[Jim McLean's Ghost]

These are the sort of things that piss me off. Rangers signed up to those rules so should have had no leave to appeal. However, what we now basically have is one solicitor disagreeing with others. Whoopdeedoo. If they can't agree among themselves then a decision being right or wrong can't be made. It's only opinions and in this case more legal twats thought it was right than wrong. The whole appeals process is basically keep going until you hear what you want to hear so why cant the SFA appeal today's decision?

The problem is that would legitimise the court proceedings which the SFA should have refused to partake in.

Anyway I have a couple of other thoughts.

While Rangers had no apparent right to appeal to the CAS it definitely had no right to appeal to the CoS. I wonder why they approached the court of session instead of CAS both were outside the rules. I would assume because they felt CoS would be more likely to rule in their favour.

The judge didn't actually strike down the penalty , he just told the SFA to review it and change it. I would hope the SFA review upholds the view of the first two panels and offers the judge the option for the dispute to be resolved at CAS and that all parties would accept that as a final decision. That would be my plan if I was the SFA. Someone tweet this to Stewart Regan please.

[Claymores]

I would disagree with this a bit, although clearly the CVA is critical. The decision today means the only chance for Rangers to stay in the SPL with sanctions attached that the rest of the teams might see as sugaring the pill of Rangers playing next year is a) SPL punishment attached to double contracts decision or b) sanctions attached to permission to transfer SPL share in a New Co scenario.

1) might be problematic even if the SPL doesn't bottle it - does anybody know if the SPL rules are any better than the SFAs on explicit punishments? I think that all of the assumptions people have been making about how the SPL teams would vote were predicated on a transfer embargo. Being seen to allow Rangers to get off largely scott free would alienate supporters even more than what people were contemplating a week ago. Pressure on the SPL just increased tremendously.

I remain baffled as to why Rangers didn't put out a statement saying they were appealing to the COS solely because the CAS route was blocked and imploring FIFA for guidance at the same time. Would have strengthened their hand politically,

But you're assuming they have to Newco - looking at the way that H&D/Green have marshalled their deal (Green already having an offer of £5.3m for assets), the CVA sounds more likely:

The way they've framed it is pretty compelling irrespective of the p in £:

Estimated Funds Available for Unsecured Creditors through CVA £4,967,284

Estimated Funds Available for Unsecured Creditors through Newco £953,284

Estimated Funds Available for Unsecured Creditors through liquidation £Nil

[H_B]

This is enormously embarrassing for the SFA... really, a total and utter f**k-up.

Someone has to go for it.

[Kyle]

Probably nothing Rangers can do but the Court of Session would probably take a rather dim view of it and they carry a much bigger stick than do Rangers.

Sorry if this has been posted, but a very brief statement on the SFA website;

A Scottish FA spokesperson said:

“We are surprised by today’s verdict at the Court of Session, especially since the original sanction against Rangers FC was imposed by an independent panel chaired by a leading QC and upheld by an Appellate Tribunal chaired by a Supreme Court Judge.

“We will now consider our position with our legal advisers before making any further comment.”

[lichtie23]

Expel them!!!!!

[Claymores]

The problem is that would legitimise the court proceedings which the SFA should have refused to partake in.

Anyway I have a couple of other thoughts.

While Rangers had no apparent right to appeal to the CAS it definitely had no right to appeal to the CoS. I wonder why they approached the court of session instead of CAS both were outside the rules. I would assume because they felt CoS would be more likely to rule in their favour.

The judge didn't actually strike down the penalty , he just told the SFA to review it and change it. I would hope the SFA review upholds the view of the first two panels and offers the judge the option for the dispute to be resolved at CAS and that all parties would accept that as a final decision. That would be my plan if I was the SFA. Someone tweet this to Stewart Regan please.

This is why I'm very keen to hear Ioannidis on Newsnight Scotland tonight - I wonder if he'll put something like this forward, or just talk to the more headline grabbing (but unlikely) possibility of expulsion.

EDIT: Can never spell that bloke's name 1st attempt!

Edited May 29, 2012 by Claymores

[lichtie23]

This is enormously embarrassing for the SFA... really, a total and utter f**k-up.

Someone has to go for it.

But who?

[Paquis]

The problem is that would legitimise the court proceedings which the SFA should have refused to partake in.

Anyway I have a couple of other thoughts.

While Rangers had no apparent right to appeal to the CAS it definitely had no right to appeal to the CoS. I wonder why they approached the court of session instead of CAS both were outside the rules. I would assume because they felt CoS would be more likely to rule in their favour.

The judge didn't actually strike down the penalty , he just told the SFA to review it and change it. I would hope the SFA review upholds the view of the first two panels and offers the judge the option for the dispute to be resolved at CAS and that all parties would accept that as a final decision. That would be my plan if I was the SFA. Someone tweet this to Stewart Regan please.

In a democratic society, we all have the right to seek redress before the courts. That is not a right that any 'private association' can take away.

[ShedruleFTD83]

That is incredible, I can't see how on Earth that ruling is valid. I can only presume the judge won't need to be buying any drinks down the lodge for some time.

Indeed.

Anyone surprised?

[Well Well]

In a democratic society, we all have the right to seek redress before the courts. That is not a right that any 'private association' can take away.

However, If you agree to join that association then you agree to be bound by its rules. If you don't then you can leave not challenge the decision because it doesn't particularly suit you once you have breached said rules.

[THE KING]

The SFA will surely have no choice now but to hammer Rangers,what people are forgetting in regards to the non arbitration ruling is that Rangers AGREED to these changes when the where charged 2 years ago , but now it doesn't suit them they ignore the and go to court ,this now opens the door for every team in Scotlandvto go to civil court to challenge any decision givin against them, the next time Lennon gets fined ..go to court the next time a team is forced to play games in quick succession ..go to court ,the next time wages aren't paid on time,,,go to court the next time you feel your ticket allocation is to small ..go to court, charged with sectarian chants,,,,go to court.

Well done rangers.

[WeeHectorPar]

http://local.stv.tv/ ...pound-cva-deal/

He also confirmed they had not struck any deal for payment with the club's two biggest creditors, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) and Ticketus.

So what happened to the "nod" that HMRC supposedly gave to Green?

[Mabawsa_Ritchie]

In a democratic society, we all have the right to seek redress before the courts. That is not a right that any 'private association' can take away.

By agreeing to the SFA's Articles of Association, Rangers forfeited any recourse to the civil courts - that is the point here. However, all you have done is sealed your own fate. I, for one, can't wait to dance on your grave. :lol:

[itzdrk]

SFA "very surprised with the verdict and considering position with their legal advisors"

raman just said on stv news

[chico]

Just a thought. A room full of judges, clerks and lawyers wearing wigs deliberating in that courtroom would have looked like a Womble sitting room.

It's a conspiracy!!!

:o

[Skudbook]

1338310327[/url]' post='6284345']

I'm not contacting FIFA just yet.

Wee Sepp Blatter might be thinking:-

'Corrupt Scots?, yeah these African FA's are right, let's abolish Scottish fitba and let the English FA rule over them, Team GB's going ahead thanks to the thicko's at the BOA, so I could sweep all the shite out in a oner'

Hmm..

I posted something similar way back on page 1300 ,got ripped a new one for even throwing up the theory.

This whole debacle is like the twilight zone,nothing is as it seems.

[Jim McLean's Ghost]

Sorry if this has been posted, but a very brief statement on the SFA website;

A Scottish FA spokesperson said:

"We are surprised by today's verdict at the Court of Session, especially since the original sanction against Rangers FC was imposed by an independent panel chaired by a leading QC and upheld by an Appellate Tribunal chaired by a Supreme Court Judge.

"We will now consider our position with our legal advisers before making any further comment."

Like I said before, the Lord Glennie has essentially overturned Lord Carloway, a more senior judge, and returned the case to him to revise his verdict. I don't think he will be best pleased and I don't see him changing his opinion. Senior judges are notoriously stubborn on points of law.

With the legal expertise put into this case by the SFA I find it hard to criticise the outcome of the two tribunals even if they have essentially been nullified in court. The appeals framework should have specified CAS as an appeal of last resort cut Rangers should've accepted their punishment. Now we have a farce.