Spain Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 (edited) Are we certain of when the panel will sit again now? We were originally all led to believe it would be tomorrow, but it later came out that was purely due to it being the earliest possible date they could reconvene. Did Regan not say in the last couple of days though something nice and vague along the lines of "as soon as they are available"? Edited June 7, 2012 by Spain 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 (edited) I thought that the SFA had to apply a sanction that was on their approved list, that's why they went to court. Is a cup ban in wahtever form on the list? And on the subject of renaming the training ground, how about "Lumley Park", cos it's one thing that DM didn't completely f*ck? What about 'Car Park'? It could be used as part of a Park & Ride scheme; quite popular in Glasgow. Edited June 7, 2012 by Granny Danger 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Are we certain of when the panel will sit again now? We were originally all led to believe it would be tomorrow, but it later came out that was purely due to it being the earliest possible date they could reconvene. Did Regan not say in the last couple of days though something nice and vague along the lines of "as soon as they are available"? I hope that Regan leaves the calling of the panel until the last possible minute, it will torture the Rangers fans and wreak havoc with Green's attempts to claw together investors in time to get the funds in place should a CVA be accepted. "The fear of suffering is worse than suffering itself"-Paulo Coelho 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claymores Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 (edited) Are we certain of when the panel will sit again now? We were originally all led to believe it would be tomorrow, but it later came out that was purely due to it being the earliest possible date they could reconvene. Did Regan not say in the last couple of days though something nice and vague along the lines of "as soon as they are available"? There was a comment in the press yesterday that the Appellate Tribunal would not meet until after the 21 days after the CofS decision (the appeal period). In many ways this makes sense. If the Appellate Trib. came up with something else the Ranjurs didn't like, it is not inconceivable that the scums would go to appeal that Lord Glennie had referred the matter to Appellates instead of the original Tribunal. Edited June 7, 2012 by Claymores 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Buddie Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I wonder who that could be Albion Rovers? No, from my lofty wee Ivory Tower in Airdrie, the buzz I get on them is a slightly "Italian" persuasion. Airdrie? More likely givne Mr Ballantyne's recent high profile travels. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrugalNory Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Yes a cup ban is one of the available sanctions but both the appellate and the original panel disregarded it as far too lenient a punishment for the heinous actions committed against the good name of the game. And Suspension was deemed to harsh. And there ain't nothing in the middle apparently (which is why they then made one up that DID supposedly fit the crime). So cup ban it'll be I reckon. I could be wrong but I really can't see them effectively pushing the button on Rangers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray_of_licht Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 (edited) The BTC and Dual Contracts are the real issue here. And with each passing day I'm growing ever doubtful Rangers have (as expected) lost. Its taking so long for them to make a judgement and there must be reason. This isn't open and shut and Rangers must have some kind of semi robust counter argument NOT in the public domain. We'd surely know the result by now otherwise? The Herald spoke to a couple of tax "experts" and one of them said waiting this long isn't unusual. He'd had a case last year that finished in January and the result wasn't issued until August. ETA link to the article http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/sport/football/whos-afraid-of-the-big-bad-tax-case.17792991 Edited June 7, 2012 by ray_of_licht 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 (edited) And Suspension was deemed to harsh. And there ain't nothing in the middle apparently (which is why they then made one up that DID supposedly fit the crime). So cup ban it'll be I reckon. I could be wrong but I really can't see them effectively pushing the button on Rangers. It's all speculation and the tribunal could go either way but if Claymores is right and the SFA are waiting until the 21 days for possible appeals to the CoS is up then the spectre of expulsion/suspension will be hanging over Rangers well passed the CVA voting. See my last post as to why this is important. A very very tactical move by the SFA if it proves to be true. "The fear of suffering is worse than suffering itself"-Paulo Coelho Edited June 7, 2012 by stonedsailor 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnethead Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I thought that the SFA had to apply a sanction that was on their approved list, that's why they went to court. Is a cup ban in wahtever form on the list? And on the subject of renaming the training ground, how about "Lumley Park", cos it's one thing that DM didn't completely f*ck? The options for punishment are ; a fine ; expelled from the Scottish Cup ; suspension or expulsion. They've already had the fine so it's down to three options, expulsion from the cup isn't really a punishment at all, the cup doesn't start until the new year and imo far to lenient even to consider. Realistically it's suspension or expulsion. What has to be remembered is that this disciplinary process is for only the original offences, not anything that's still to come and therefore it would be in the interests of all concerned just to end this farce ASAP, it's gotten to the ridiculous stage now. Not ending it on Friday would only serve to drag the inevitable on and on. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrugalNory Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 If that does happen then people will be seeing defeat where there is victory, just as No8 is peddling victory where there is defeat. Rangers are an absolute laughing stock, people have been bleeding them dry for two decades, there is another conman about to take his cut and the Rangers fans are going to roll over stick their arses in the air and take their pumping again. From the 14th of February to now things have gotten better and better, no-one could have imagined this amount of humiliation back then. Enjoy anything that comes, it's a bonus. Whatever form Rangers end up in it will be weaker than before. But I suspect still strong enough to finish second on a regular basis, going by their season book sales alone they will still have a bigger playing budget than any other non OF team in the league. (assuming the fans keep buying them) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glensburgh Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Airdrie? More likely givne Mr Ballantyne's recent high profile travels. It wisnae him, but good try. As for it being us, quite possibly, but unlikely to happen after rules were changed post 2002. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrugalNory Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 The Herald spoke to a couple of tax "experts" and one of them said waiting this long isn't unusual. He'd had a case last year that finished in January and the result want issued until August. Fair enough, I have limited knowledge on these matters. Its just striking me as quite odd that something that seems so (apparently) heavily weighted towards one decision is taking so long. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claymores Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 (edited) It's all speculation and the tribunal could go either way but if Claymores is right and the SFA are waiting until the 21 days for possible appeals to the CoS is up then the spectre of expulsion/suspension will be hanging over Rangers well passed the CVA voting. See my last post as to why this is important. A very very tactical move by the SFA if it proves to be true. "The fear of suffering is worse than suffering itself"-Paulo Coelho I agree - it is more 'succulent' if they just wait. If CVA fails, Green and his backers ain't gonna be in a rush to put money towards the newco when there is a potential their SPL licence will be gone. 'Other' potential buyers likewise. It's a nice torture for the scums !!!! EDIT: What I should have said above is that backers will be reluctant so long as the threat of SFA suspension/expulsion remains. So no rush for the Appellater Trib. to reconvene. Let the buggers sweat. Edited June 7, 2012 by Claymores 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Whatever form Rangers end up in it will be weaker than before. But I suspect still strong enough to finish second on a regular basis, going by their season book sales alone they will still have a bigger playing budget than any other non OF team in the league. (assuming the fans keep buying them) None of that matters, they are a laughing stock, they have been recently and will be for a very long time the butt of all sorts of jokes. They have been seen as cheats and liars and now their reputation is irrevocably tarnished or 'tainted' if you like to use last month's buzz words. From trying to sell themselves as 'the most successful club in the world' they have gained the reputation as frauds and charlatans. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Scotland doesn't have the football creditors rule. Doesnt matter. That just makes it a legal requirement. Not paying your footballing debts is something UEFA and FIFA frown upon. As has already been covered on here, Dundee made arrangements to pay their footballing debt in full outwith the CVA. I think the CVA will be rejected and Rangers liquidated. Which leads onto a few questions: 1. Will anyone come along who is willing to set up 'Rangers 2012'? That must have been Greene's plan all along, though. 2. Will Rangers2012 will be allowed into the SPL? 3. Will any such membership come at a cost to Rangers 2012? The sins of the fathers, if you like. 4. Will the SFA/SPL continue to look into Old Rangers EBT and tax shennanigans after they've died, with a view to voiding any of their trophies? I think the answers are 1. Greene 2. Depends on how quickly they can get things set up 3. No and 4. No. I'm just comforting myself with the fact that 100 plus years of history will have been washed won the plughole, no matter what the fans sing. Again, its been covered on here a number of times, but if 2 is yes - as part of a transfer of share from oldco to newco - then the answers to 3 and 4, by definition, become yes too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyWellFan Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I can feel them slowly rotting Death should happen soon I hope 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Buddie Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 It wisnae him, but good try. As for it being us, quite possibly, but unlikely to happen after rules were changed post 2002. TBH, I took the OP with a large pinch of salt, anyway. As you say, post 2002, I think the attitude towards "franchise relocation" as in AU and MK Dons has hardened. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I agree - it is more 'succulent' if they just wait. If CVA fails, Green and his backers ain't gonna be in a rush to put money towards the newco when there is a potential their SPL licence will be gone. 'Other' potential buyers likewise. It's a nice torture for the scums !!!! I take it you mean SFA licence? It's an horrendous and befitting torture at the moment, the SFA membership is in doubt putting their CVA at great risk, should the CVA fail then their SPL position is at risk due to the vote last week by the SPL chairmen not to sanction a set punishment for 'insolvency transfer events' and removing the SPL board's power to vote on newcos and giving it to the chairmen of member clubs. Do you want to invest in a share of my car? The engine's fvcked the bodywork is tarnished but it's got a great little ashtray. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ankles Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 You gotta love the good old Rangers fans. Walking about in work just now, chests sticking out,declaring how everything is ok,how their gonna be back good as new, how they fucked the SFA in the courts. Nobody fucks wae The Rangers etc.Blah! Blah! Blah! Even now their arrogance is only outdone by their failure to comprehend that their fucked one way or another. Talking about re -naming Murray Park and going to Germany pre season. WTF Its not happening ya fucktards 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claymores Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I take it you mean SFA licence? It's an horrendous and befitting torture at the moment, the SFA membership is in doubt putting their CVA at great risk, should the CVA fail then their SPL position is at risk due to the vote last week by the SPL chairmen not to sanction a set punishment for 'insolvency transfer events' and removing the SPL board's power to vote on newcos and giving it to the chairmen of member clubs. Do you want to invest in a share of my car? The engine's fvcked the bodywork is tarnished but it's got a great little ashtray. Yes, sorry, I meant that backers would be reluctant to progress so long as there is a threat of suspension or expulsion from the SFA (typed SPL by accident) So no rush for the Appellate Tribunal to meet again as far as I'm concerned - let the buggers sweat!!!! 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.