Jussy Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Gwan yersel Yorkston. I think we know where vlad will stand, hopefully the rest of them have some balls and do rangers over. And it looks like they're all set to get up in arms about it on rangers media, superb! http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=212967 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceblink Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Raman's reporting that: "Dunfermline chairman John Yorkston wouldn't be in favour of 'newco' to apply to SPL. if club is liquidated, it should go to SFL" Well at least we know where one chairman stands now, whatever his reasons. Hopefully more will speak out at some point. Edit: My link to the story. Brilliant - so are Rangers fans still going to turn up at the Pars Saints game? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 SPL rules allow for the member share of a liquidated club to be transferred to another company, providing 90% of clubs agree on possible sanctions and the league’s board then approve the sale. Is this correct? I can't see 90% of clubs agreeing to a set of sanctions (would only take Romanov and A.N. Other kicking up a fuss). This would then presumably mean the SPL board couldnt vote them through? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaffenThinMint Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 As someone said (maybe even on here). It's all good mouthing off about 'Scottish football needs us' as this point in time when the shit has well and truly hit the fan. It wasn't so long ago, not even 2 years, that the attitude was 'f**k Scottish football, we're going to England, you shite are holding us back' and they were desperate to leave us bottom feeders behind.But now that they are in total peril, they are all of a sudden regular Florence Nightingales, genuinely concerned about how Scottish football will cope without them? Do me a favour, you don't think that you are so fucking transparent that anyone with half a brain can't see through it? Any journalist with a set of gonads would be quick to seize upon this fact, but they have to toe the party line, really. They have had such an easy ride through all of this and yet they genuinely think they are being given the sharp end of the stick by the press. I don't think they do think genuinely that they're getting a hard time off the press. It's simply the spoilt brat mentality that no one is allowed to criticise them they believe to be the absolute right of "the people" in "The Big Hoose". Their wee ego trip of reflected glory to mask their f**ked up lives is all starting to fall apart, reality is closing in, and their only defence left is to bawl like Caramero "Eeets an eeejustice!" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jussy Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Is this correct? I can't see 90% of clubs agreeing to a set of sanctions (would only take Romanov and A.N. Other kicking up a fuss). This would then presumably mean the SPL board couldnt vote them through? That's how I take it. So if Yorkston and Romanov stick to their guns then it's cheerio regardless of what any other chairman has to say about it 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordieBoy80 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Raman's reporting that: "Dunfermline chairman John Yorkston wouldn't be in favour of 'newco' to apply to SPL. if club is liquidated, it should go to SFL" Well at least we know where one chairman stands now, whatever his reasons. Hopefully more will speak out at some point. Edit: My link to the story. And it looks like they're all set to get up in arms about it on rangers media, superb! http://forum.rangers...howtopic=212967 Pleasing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jussy Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Except they haven't actually gone nuts about it on rangers media, they're behaving quite reasonably by and large. Surely someone will shortly come along and accuse them of being "Timposters" and it'll all kick off. Now worried I've spent too much time on rm lately. Still, Yorkston's statements are pleasing in their own right. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdTheDuck Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I wan't a quote from Vlad, preferably one with Jungle Book references 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordieBoy80 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Except they haven't actually gone nuts about it on rangers media, they're behaving quite reasonably by and large. Surely someone will shortly come along and accuse them of being "Timposters" and it'll all kick off. Now worried I've spent too much time on rm lately. Not yet, but the topic is sure to get a few riled. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sergie's no1 fan Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Remember if Dunfermline go down there is a good chance it will finish them off. If Rangers go bust of course he is going to want them to start from the bottom. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted March 5, 2012 Author Share Posted March 5, 2012 That's how I take it. So if Yorkston and Romanov stick to their guns then it's cheerio regardless of what any other chairman has to say about it Isn't it the case though that the SPL chairmen don't vote on this - it's only the six-man SPL board? Still - as we already know, there's a groundswell of opinion amongst supporters of every other club, that Rangers need to face the problems of their own making head-on, and absolutely no special treatment to grease a passage straight back to the SPL should be entertained. If that sentiment is spreading to some SPL chairmen, and continues to grow, it appears difficult to see how the SPL board could vote to save Rangers sorry ass' - by means that simply wouldn't be entertained if it were any other club. Like everything though, with the exception of Russell & Smith leaving, Matt McKay leaving, and Cousin not arriving - it's all speculation, conjecture, gossip, and lots of other words that mean 'we don't know what might or might not actually happen here'. We need Haudit & Daudit to get the ball rolling, to get some sort of clearer idea where it's heading. I thought the big thing about them was that they were going to communicate, and provide answers. Seems that the waters are even murkier than before. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jussy Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I had thought it was up to the board as well, but the article certainly suggests that it only reaches that stage should 90% of clubs agree to other sanctions. So the clubs don't explicitly get to vote yes or no to the transfer, but voting no to sanctions obviously has much the same effect. That said, STV may have made that up and I don't have the time to go searching through the rules right now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted March 5, 2012 Author Share Posted March 5, 2012 I had thought it was up to the board as well, but the article certainly suggests that it only reaches that stage should 90% of clubs agree to other sanctions. So the clubs don't explicitly get to vote yes or no to the transfer, but voting no to sanctions obviously has much the same effect. That said, STV may have made that up and I don't have the time to go searching through the rules right now. Another thing no-one is actually sure of!? Keeps the gossip-o-meter ticking over until we're actually told something new.... Maybe some of the regulars on Rangers Media have their finger on the pulse and will give us an insight to what actually happens.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hipster Dufus Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Remember if Dunfermline go down there is a good chance it will finish them off. I wouldn't be so sure. We are a yo-yo club no doubt, but the losses are trending in the right way and we'd be going from poor SPL crowds to decent 1st Division crowds (Raith, F*lkirk x 4 for example). I just wish that everyone could use this period in Scottish football to get a 34/38 game 18/20 team League. Might have more excitement akin to Cup football and less visits to the same places for all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin M Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Grant Russell who writes for STV online is generally on the money with "the rules". This has obviously been the subject of some speculation though and it had previously been reported that it was a matter for the SPL board. I think it should be open to all members to decide, although my own views on what should happen if there is a newco are pretty clear 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Except they haven't actually gone nuts about it on rangers media, they're behaving quite reasonably by and large. Surely someone will shortly come along and accuse them of being "Timposters" and it'll all kick off. Now worried I've spent too much time on rm lately. Still, Yorkston's statements are pleasing in their own right. That thread is disappointingly realistic. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jussy Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Grant Russell who writes for STV online is generally on the money with "the rules" Oh I really hope he's right with this one then! If so, and we've already identified our two chairmen, I still want to hear what the rest of them have to say to it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SodjesSixteenIncher Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Why would a Rangers in SD3 avoid penalty? Down to the third and let the 3rd div clubs vote for their point sanctions I say. That RM thread about The Sun article is brilliant. "There's no way McGregor wouldn't take a pay-cut. He's Rangers fru and fru!!!" Idiots 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 (edited) Scotsman has been adamant for weeks that it's an SPL Board decision, although by the sounds of it, that's technically-speaking correct... the clubs could decide on sanctions such as to make it academic anyway. However, I love how Yorkston says NewCo Rangers shouldn't be allowed into SPL... "it should go into SFL". Why should that be any different? What about Spartans, Cove etc.? And if them surviving is unfair on SPL clubs, how's it not unfair on SFL3 too? (Also Hipster - the thought of an 18/20-team SPL is absolutely horrific. It'd be a competitive and financial wilderness, and a relegation nightmare). Edited March 5, 2012 by HibeeJibee 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted March 5, 2012 Author Share Posted March 5, 2012 Oh I really hope he's right with this one then! If so, and we've already identified our two chairmen, I still want to hear what the rest of them have to say to it. No doubt if we're involved it'll be a confusing message. The chairman and his consortium are still working on a takeover deal, and they could either still be the main players at SMP, or out the door, having done a fantastic shift over the last decade. If our views on the 10 team SPL were anything to go by, we will be sending out mixed messages at best. If St Mirren and Motherwell are both on the path to some sort of community ownership, and it isn't as clear cut as being down to the views of Mr Gilmour or Mr Boyle - could be interesting. My hunch? We'll vote for whatever keeps Sky TV onside. 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.