~~~ Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 So what exactly has happened to Rangers the last 3 weeks? I don't know the ins and outs of administration, but nothing seems to have happened. They have went into administration in name only, been docked 10 points, with nothing actually heppening, no cost cutting etc. They have also been rotten on the park 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim McLean's Ghost Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 This is becoming like a Scottish Cup draw (if you support a pish team like me). Getting all excited about the big online announcement in case the big one comes out but deep down you know fine well that it'll probably be the usual mediocre shite. More like a league cup draw because they keep on promising it will be on a certain date/time then changing it on a whim. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Did anyone catch these Regan comments elsewhere? It seems like the sort of thing he should have being saying very publicly but it passed me by if they were published before today's Evening Times article: Same interview (I assume: some of the quotes are almost verbatim) was in the Scotsman on Saturday. I must say that, unless Rangers are going down the pan anyway, I'd be flabergasted if they expelled them from football!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimH Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I see from the BBC website that the "structured cuts" is purely a "month-long proposal". What's this about ? Put things off until after the 16th to see if there are any genuine buyers for the club? Allow the top earners time to get fixed up at another club? Again Duff and Phelps actinhg in a way that is totally different from any previos administration process. Whose in charge? Them? The players? Someone else? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BinoBalls Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 What defines a 'football club' is its membership of footballing organisations. The memberships will be possessed by a limited company or Plc (in the case of pro clubs) but: they can be transferred between companies. This will have happened several times for most pro clubs, as the game developed, they were restructured, etc. etc. etc. "Leeds Utd" transfered their memberships from one company to another in 2007. But 'the football club' isn't considered to have been founded in 2007, with only honours won since 2007, and so forth. A membership of footballing organisations continued unaffected. The EFL didn't suddenly have a vacancy. EDIT: I might own, lets say, a teapot. I could put that teapot in a box. I could move it to another box, but it's still the same teapot. Why were Airdrie unable to move their teapot to another box? And are Rangers more likely to be like Leeds or Airdrie? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welldaft Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Not too bothered what happens to the currant buns in the mid to long term.. What I am hoping for is: Not out of Admin by 31st March - potential for MFC or St J/DDee/Hearts to play in champions league qualifier. It also means unexpected European bonus for the team that finishes 5th and possibly even 6th. Further points deduction - a distinct possibility given the disrepute that they have brought to the SPL/SFA for tax avoidance and possible multiple contracts. Still do not believe they wont finish second, even with whatever squad is left. More points deducted could mean a potential increase of £900k for the team in 2nd spot....not to be sniffed at. So whilst Duff & Duffer take a marathon to make one youth player redundant, these are at the top of my wish list 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Why were Airdrie unable to move their teapot to another box? And are Rangers more likely to be like Leeds or Airdrie? Airdrie United didn't/couldn't move their teapot to another box - I'm not entirely sure why. They bought a teapot called Clydebank, moved it to another box, and repainted it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 The first priority for Duffman will be that there's enough cash to pay their fees. With supposedly 8 staff working on it at hourly rates of between £100 and £600 inc VAT, that could amount to half a million a month. I foresee swingeing cuts this afternoon.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Airdrie United didn't/couldn't move their teapot to another box - I'm not entirely sure why. They bought a teapot called Clydebank, moved it to another box, and repainted it. Airdrieonians teapot was smashed to smithereens by a bloke called minty. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin M Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 (edited) What defines a 'football club' is its membership of footballing organisations. The memberships will be possessed by a limited company or Plc (in the case of pro clubs) but: they can be transferred between companies. This will have happened several times for most pro clubs, as the game developed, they were restructured, etc. etc. etc. "Leeds Utd" transfered their memberships from one company to another in 2007. But 'the football club' isn't considered to have been founded in 2007, with only honours won since 2007, and so forth. A membership of footballing organisations continued unaffected. The EFL didn't suddenly have a vacancy. EDIT: I might own, lets say, a teapot. I could put that teapot in a box. I could move it to another box, but it's still the same teapot. It potentially costs us 2/18 home games (i.e. over 10%) and it creates an unfair schedule, playing everyone 3x. I think that's a very loose definition and despite the "precedent" of Leeds United, I don't think it is accurate. It might be accurate in terms of perception, the football club as a concept, but in strictly legal terms I think that the football club IS the business/organization and if that business is liquidated, the football club ceases to exist. I think the idea of being defined by membership, particularly in this scenario, is merely there to avoid the reality of the situation and to circumvent what "should" happen. What happened with Leeds United was wrong. That it happened should not, in my opinion, mean that it can and should be applied in other scenarios. Edited March 5, 2012 by Colin M 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceblink Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Airdrie United didn't/couldn't move their teapot to another box - I'm not entirely sure why. Because their name was not Glasgow Rangers? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin M Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 This will have happened several times for most pro clubs, as the game developed, they were restructured, etc. etc. etc. This part though.... is this widely true in terms of brand new companies taking on the mantle of old? Restructuring a club/company/organization is not the same as starting a new company and taking on the mantle of one that went under. I don't think it is accurate to bracket this scenario with "restructuring" a club - they are different things entirely IMO. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightswoodBear Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Because their name was not Glasgow Rangers? Neither's ours 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Neither's ours At the minute 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green&White Zebra Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 The more I think about it, the more I think that Duff and Phelps are basically protecting their own reputation by deferring or at least share the responsibility of difficult decisions. They've attempted to co-opt Ally McCoist into the decision process on redundancies, but he's taken a fit of pique and will not give them any leeway. Making a decision is genuinely not easy since recent history shows that administrators can get a very rough time of it from the fans. When it comes down to it Duff and Phelps are going to get their money and they do not need to stick their necks out for Rangers. But in the end, they are being no help to the club at time. And come to think of it, nor is McCoist. In pragmatic terms, this is about severing a limb to save the body, so what happens if no one is courageous enough to make a decision ? I had to laugh at comments allegedly from Paul Murray pleading for no player redundancies to save the new owners from having to recruit a new squad. With a reduced cost base, I would have thought that rebuilding the squad is exactly what I'd want to do if I was going to take over ! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingscot Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 So the administrators were at the SPL meeting at Hampden and ruled out liquidation? yet they haven't cut any staff at all. Seriously what is going on with the administration process. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SodjesSixteenIncher Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Nicked from Bebo 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaltcoatsSaint Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 This topic is getting very boring. It started getting pretty borring with all the Jelly and Ice Cream stuff and then got worse with the popcorn nonsense. I for one really hope Rangers go bust and end up at the bottom. The thing is I have mates who are supporters of both of them - and very decent guys, but I will say that the Celtic fans are coming out the worse. The Rangers fans that I mix with are being very decent in the whole but the Celtic fans are just full of gloating and I find that sad. Anyway my two teams wear the famous black and white - St Mirren (as I was born in Elderslie) and The Winton coz I lived in Ardossan for most of my life - and they wear the same colours !!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted March 5, 2012 Author Share Posted March 5, 2012 St Mirren have a teapot, St Johnstone have a teapot, Celtic have a teapot... everyone has a teapot, including Rangers. The difference is that everyone else bought their tea bags, while for over a decade, Rangers stole them out of Tesco without paying. Now, if I went into Tesco and stole tea bags for ten years - here's what would happen. Tesco would ban me from their stores - they would not simply re-admit me if all I did was change my name from pozbaird to pozbaird fae' Paisley 2013. Secondly, they'd say 'you owe us ten year's worth of teabag money, ya' thievin' gypsy'. They would not shake my hand and accept my offer of 10p in the packet. They'd take away my Tesco Clubcard membership - and if I tried to transfer it to Asda for three years, before popping back up in my local Tesco, I'd be chased. Simples. Now, if I'm missing something, I apologise. Two sugars and milk please. 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.