Homer Thompson Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 That's the thing about liquidation, everything (& I mean EVERYTHING) goes down the gurgler with the club that's went bust. Debts, double contracts, outstanding disrepute cases, the lot. Even THEIR HISTORY. That's why this new company can't be allowed to adopt the name they're trying to claim. They are a completely new entity, that can't be chased for previous misdemeanours. Thats true, but the oldco hasnt been liquidated yet. The assets have been transferred to the newco and the newco will apply to transfer the SPL/SFA membership over before the oldco is liquidated. Again, a transfer of membership means continuation of the football entity Some folk don't get it, Rangers are no more, like Third Lanark/Airdrieonians & Gretna before them they cannot "go down" to ANY of the SFL divisions. They have gone bust! Forby them having resigned their place in the SFL, the only way a club from the SPL can access the SFL is by relegation, & last seasons recipient was Dunfermline. Should Glasgow 2012 fail to gain access to the SPL, they will have to APPLY to gain access to the SFL. In doing so they will have to take their chance against the likes of Spartans, Cove Rangers & Gala Fairydean. That's not taking into account getting a license from the governing body, the SFA. This, though, I would agree with. If they are punted out of the SPL theres no mechanism for automatic entry to the SFL, at any level. You would have to think, though, that any newco would win the application process 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gus2 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 What is clear is that a legal challange could be mounted by the SFL a club or clubs if the SPL instate TRFc straight back into the SPL there by blocking promotion from the SFL Div 1 down to SFL Div 3. - 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 That's the thing about liquidation, everything (& I mean EVERYTHING) goes down the gurgler with the club that's went bust. Debts, double contracts, outstanding disrepute cases, the lot. Even THEIR HISTORY. That's why this new company can't be allowed to adopt the name they're trying to claim. They are a completely new entity, that can't be chased for previous misdemeanours. Some folk don't get it, Rangers are no more, like Third Lanark/Airdrieonians & Gretna before them they cannot "go down" to ANY of the SFL divisions. They have gone bust! Forby them having resigned their place in the SFL, the only way a club from the SPL can access the SFL is by relegation, & last seasons recipient was Dunfermline. Should Glasgow 2012 fail to gain access to the SPL, they will have to APPLY to gain access to the SFL. In doing so they will have to take their chance against the likes of Spartans, Cove Rangers & Gala Fairydean. That's not taking into account getting a license from the governing body, the SFA. That's the problem t'Rangers face because of the actions of their predecessor. Lots was discussed about previous liquidations having not led to the demise of the liquidated clubs, of clubs keeping their histories but those examples had been untested in the arena into which Rangers forced the play, those examples are now irrelevant. Rangers forced Scottish football into the courts and invoked a whole new set of rules upon the game. The law of the land must now be considered before every decision is made. If t'Rangers are admitted into the SPL how many claims would that open up? Dunfermline or Dundee for the place currently taken by the soon to be dead Rangers, who now have no stadium to play in? Spartans and Cove for the vacant spot which should rightfully appear in the SFL? In the eyes of the law the oldco are dead, in the eyes of the law t'Rangers are a new entity, they have never existed before. Sure the Green Brigade could give assurances that they will accept what sanctions are placed upon them but they cannot give assurances that one of the t'Rangers supporters groups will not pay for a QC to fight the case on their behalf. If t'Rangers get into the SPL how many other clubs are going to jump on the band wagon? Will Kilmarnock be next? There has been talk of 5 or 6 SPL clubs being on the brink, go into voluntary liquidation, sell the assets to another company and hey presto all your past overspending disappears and the transfer market available to them doubles in size. Rangers have well and truly stuffed it up for t'Rangers and every other club that goes newco. Let them in and the game in this country's game is fvcked don't and they will take a handful of others with them. I think that is an acceptable risk. No to newco. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/18459762 The Scottish Premier League's investigation into possible dual contracts at Rangers has been put on hold. Scotland's top flight is seeking clarity over the new company's responsibilities for previous misdemeanours. To me, that looks like the SPL have found them guilty of dual contracts, but hope TRFC are found to be a new club, this way they cant take any actions against them. or if they do, its against a dead club. A cop out IMO 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 What is clear is that a legal challange could be mounted by the SFL a club or clubs if the SPL instate TRFc straight back into the SPL there by blocking promotion from the SFL Div 1 down to SFL Div 3. - What?? Promotion and relegation has already happened. Dunfermline are down - Ross County are up. If the SPL chose to transfer the share from oldco to newco, why on earth would the SFL be able to mount a legal challenge?? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fife Saint Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 They're all passing round the pistol, none of them willing to pull the trigger. T'Rangers will have to wallow in a pool of their own shite for another month or so. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnstoun Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 the new h*ns it is then, or maybe call them the mini's If they're no longer currants they'll have to be the pasts. The SPL need to ask if newco can provide a guarantee that it can fulfil it's fixtures next season. Livingston were asked for a bond of about £600k to cover the eventuality that they couldn't. Given the financial armageddon that follows the loss of Rangers to the SPL a bond of £60 million would do. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squirrelhumper Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 To me, that looks like the SPL have found them guilty of dual contracts, but hope TRFC are found to be a new club, this way they cant take any actions against them. or if they do, its against a dead club. A cop out IMO Surely as they still hold Spl share, you can stlll punish them? Same way SFA can stlll hammer them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MFC_East_Stand_Al Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Mr Green has gone to great lengths to remind us repeatedly that the Newco only applies to Rangers the Company not Rangers the football team, so therefore any Footballing related punishments (from the footballing authorities) must by that reasoning be applied to Rangers the football team. (whichever division they find themselves in) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 How about the Triffids, instead of T'Rangers or TRFC..? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Connolly Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 They're all passing round the pistol, none of them willing to pull the trigger. Pass it here then. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim McLean's Ghost Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 1339784270[/url]' post='6339836']I dont see why conditions are necessary at all. A transfer means the continuation of the football entity. Again, I disagree. The SPL might be investigating dual contracts, but the players registration is, ultimately, with the SFA. If the oldco is found guilty of dual contracts then the SFA would be well within their rights to punish the newco, presuming of course that the SFA membership is transferred. This is something that has confused me. Is submitting all contracts to the SFA an SFA rule or an SPL rule or both. If it is an SFA rule Why are the SFA not in charge of the investigation. If we are wiping out trophies surely the SPL ca only deal with league titles. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Mr Green has gone to great lengths to remind us repeatedly that the Newco only applies to Rangers the Company not Rangers the football team, so therefore any Footballing related punishments (from the footballing authorities) must by that reasoning be applied to Rangers the football team. (whichever division they find themselves in) Mr Green is as mistaken on this as he was on TUPE regulations. The good thing is he gives t'Rangers fans hope and watching them fall down is so much fun. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 This is something that has confused me. Is submitting all contracts to the SFA an SFA rule or an SPL rule or both. If it is an SFA rule Why are the SFA not in charge of the investigation. If we are wiping out trophies surely the SPL ca only deal with league titles. I think, but Im not sure, that the SPL are investigating as that then leaves the SFA open to hear any appeal. As far as contracts go, they have to be registered with both the SFL and SFA, for league teams. Presumably, the SPL is the same? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 interesting tweet non SPL the rangers IMO 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Mr Green is as mistaken on this as he was on TUPE regulations. The good thing is he gives t'Rangers fans hope and watching them fall down is so much fun. Would you not rather they were the same club? If the newco genuinely is a newco, in footballing terms, (which it isnt, but lets pretend) and the SPL clubs vote them back in, then thats it, other than whatever slap on the wrist conditions are applied to the transfer. No disrepute charges, no dual contract investigation. Is that really a good thing? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustyarabnuts Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 This is something that has confused me. Is submitting all contracts to the SFA an SFA rule or an SPL rule or both. If it is an SFA rule Why are the SFA not in charge of the investigation. If we are wiping out trophies surely the SPL ca only deal with league titles. boy this is confusing 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim McLean's Ghost Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 1339785398[/url]' post='6339883']Mr Green has gone to great lengths to remind us repeatedly that the Newco only applies to Rangers the Company not Rangers the football team, so therefore any Footballing related punishments (from the footballing authorities) must by that reasoning be applied to Rangers the football team. (whichever division they find themselves in) The SFA are the only relevant football authority. The SPL isn't a football authority it is a trade group. As such the SFA can punish a football club, the SPL can only punish companies that own football clubs. Usually a merely pedantic difference but in this case it is a big one since the football club is being separated from the company. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MFC_East_Stand_Al Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 The SFA are the only relevant football authority. The SPL isn't a football authority it is a trade group. As such the SFA can punish a football club, the SPL can only punish companies that own football clubs. Usually a merely pedantic difference but in this case it is a big one since the football club is being separated from the company. So should the SFA by some miracle retain the Balls they grew and suspend/expel Rangers that would apply to New Rangers? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macshimmy Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Unfortunately they are still Rangers or 'The Rangers Football Club' as it officially is. Yon lass who was on the ITV "downfall" program last night said they can't use that after they are wound up, she said it was permitted in the interim as a "trading style" No, I don't claim to understand that either. Liking "Triggers new broom" FC 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.