7-2 Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 7-2s original point, as I read it, was that Rangers should disappear completely. I disagree. If it was United I would expect, and probably get, every sanction including kicked out the SPL. I wouldn't object to this. However as a fan I would want a club that could start at the bottom and work its way slowly back up. We cannot bang on about sporting integrity then treat Rangers newco differently. Again, in his original and subsequent posts 7-2 brought in the bigottry issue. That's not what we're dealing with here. If we think the SFA/SPL should address that issue then that's fine but it's a seperate matter. My point is indeed about them disappearing completely because that is what they have done. I'm not killing them, they've done that themselves. I just don't think we should them resuscitate them. That's where the difference lies. it's the only way to save Scottish football in the long term. For the current situation, you are quite right, the bigotry issue isn't being dealt with. It should actually have been dealt with numerous times over the decades but of course wasn't. However, if we are talking about a club applying to join the Scottish league set up then it should come into the equation. Just as owners pass a fit and proper test so should any applicant club and their supporters. For that reason alone they are not fit and proper to be sent all around Scotland as representatives of the 'SPL brand' nor represent Scotland. The oldco/newco supporter argument wouldn't wash either...pun not intended but I wish it had been...as without the oldco supporters the newco would have no supporters and therefore no income and business plan therefore unsuitable as a league football side. Just kill 'em off! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florentine_Pogen Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Stonker.....that's the way they are planning to do it!!! Give it max profile and really rub their noses in it, just when the Cockwomble, Wee Chico, The Fatted Lamb and the Berrs get all moist at the thought, along come the SFA and turn a fire hose flamethrower on their genitals. Ahem............ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjc Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Rangers Megastore @RangersStorebears the expected unsponsored shirts have arrived early & there are around 100 available in the megastore,this will be the last delivery last ever delivery eh ?! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Did the graphic contain season 2001 - 2009? The graphic showed the runners in competitions from 1989 - 2011. That includes seasons 2001 - 2009 in my book. There is your post,season in the singular,obviously a type error on your part so for my sarcasm i apologise. However the graphic is a nonsense in that this investigation is covering the EBT years,2001-2009,nothing to do with any other season up until that point,whereas the poster was trying to infer that clubs from 1988 up until 2011 suffered from cheating by the club. Which as i said is a nonsense. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macshimmy Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 you make a good point but choose to ignore the obvious....... Yes it is a New Company and the Old Company will soon cease to exist but: Rangers Newco seek to retain the Oldco history, SFA Membership & SPL share whilst dumping all the bad debt & the due punishments for their ill gotten gains over the years............I'd say its (The) Rangers who want their cake and eat it. Tom English on the webchat the now seemed to be pretty sure the football authorities see Sevco5088 as the same club. seems kind of bizarre to me, but it does mean they have to pay for their crimes against football, if not against society in general. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Walter Smiths consortium to withdraw interest. Thanks for your concern Mr Smith -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DXBBud Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 (edited) you make a good point but choose to ignore the obvious....... Yes it is a New Company and the Old Company will soon cease to exist but: Rangers Newco seek to retain the Oldco history, SFA Membership & SPL share whilst dumping all the bad debt & the due punishments for their ill gotten gains over the years............I'd say its (The) Rangers who want their cake and eat it. I take your point SJC, but my point is that by allowing the Newco to cling to the hope that they can retain use of the name and the history while entering the SPL as Club12, the SFA/SPL can then say OK on the condition that Newco faces up to the debt and sanctions, which they are trying strenuously to avoid - thus forcing them to agree to re-emerge somewhere (SFL3/SPL2 or whatever) other than the SPL minus sanctions and debt Edited June 19, 2012 by DXBBud 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monrovianmonk Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Alasdair Lamont @BBCAlLamontWalter Smith consortium withdrawing bid to allow Green and co to get on with it "We don't do walking away" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Leitch Loyal Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Is IRANGERS their new name? Nah. Club 12/7. (Nicked from The Herald. Thanks Ken*) *This is not a Dundonian expression. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 There is your post,season in the singular,obviously a type error on your part so for my sarcasm i apologise. However the graphic is a nonsense in that this investigation is covering the EBT years,2001-2009,nothing to do with any other season up until that point,whereas the poster was trying to infer that clubs from 1988 up until 2011 suffered from cheating by the club. Which as i said is a nonsense. Craig Whyte operated Rangers on a different basis to every other team. Chiefly by not paying tax. The cheating didn't stop in 2009, and I don't know if it's fair to separate the issues. It amounts to a decade of. cheating other clubs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 (edited) That sounds great. Make it so. So once the SPL decide yes or no, it's the SFA who will decide any punishment which follows? As I posted earlier, the RTC blog is suggesting that the SFA transfer will happen automatically, if the SPL agree to the transfer, as they will, in effect, be the same club. If this is the case, then I dont see how anyone could argue that the punishments from the disrepute hearing and dual contracts wouldnt also follow. There is your post,season in the singular,obviously a type error on your part so for my sarcasm i apologise. However the graphic is a nonsense in that this investigation is covering the EBT years,2001-2009,nothing to do with any other season up until that point,whereas the poster was trying to infer that clubs from 1988 up until 2011 suffered from cheating by the club. Which as i said is a nonsense. This STV article seems to think its 1998 Edited June 19, 2012 by Mr X 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Buddie Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 I had got to thinking that when all this is put to bed, The New Rangers have finally been put in their place (wherever) and the new season kicks off, there would be little else of interest. But....Hector has his shotgun out and will be aiming his sites on a few with ex-Ibrox connections, and every time there's a court case, the Ibrox faithful will be reminded (by us, of course) of the depth of their manipulation of the beautiful game. This is going to run for years and years. Will this thread carry on to record the Borgiastic machinations of the Downfall of the House of Ibrox? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soulfulsaint Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 (edited) For the first time I am hearing Club12 being described as something other than Rangers. Northsound News are stating if the SPL vote goes against Rangers on 4th July Club12 are likely to be Dundee. It's a small start but hopefully more and more the MSM will recognise that Club12 on the fixture lists is not any specific team. Spot on - I think the fixtures can be interpreted in various ways. Take a look at the Xmas and New Year Fixtures. They suit Dundee, Dundee Utd and St Johnstone equally - if not more - than Sevco Rangers. Many people have looked at the Boxing Day fixtures and imagined the tradional old firm fixture and then screamed 'conspiracy'. But take a look at the New Year fixtures. If Club 12 is Dundee then its every bit as credible with derbies for - Dundee Utd v Aberdeen, Dundee v Aberdeen and St Johnstone v Dundee. Wednesday December 26, 2012 Club 12 v Celtic Dundee United v St Johnstone Hibernian v Ross County Inverness CT v St Mirren Kilmarnock v Hearts Motherwell v Aberdeen Saturday December 29, 2012 Club 12 v Aberdeen Dundee United v St Mirren Hibernian v Celtic Motherwell v Kilmarnock Ross County v Hearts St Johnstone v Inverness CT Wednesday January 2, 2013 Aberdeen v Dundee United Celtic v Motherwell Hearts v Hibernian Ross County v Inverness CT St Johnstone v Club 12 St Mirren v Kilmarnock Edited June 19, 2012 by soulfulsaint 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montague Withnail Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 (edited) How about I (Can't Believe it's Not) Rangers? or 'Utterly Bigotry' Edited June 19, 2012 by Montague Withnail 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjc Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 This seems to me to be completely unethical. I find it hard to believe anyone would accept this. I'm increasingly of the mind that a yes vote will be the death knell of Scottish football. It took a while for it to click for me, but a yes vote will be scandalous unless accompanied with draconian punishment. I, along with a fair few posters on this thread have said from the very start that I'll be done with the game as a whole in this Country if this issue(s) is merely swept under the carpet to conveniently maintain the status quo. My stance isn't just because its Rangers however I suspect the matter would have swiftly been dealt with if it had been any other team in Scotland bar one other. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Araminta Moonbeam QC Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 So the Cardigan Consortium ride off into the sunset....who knew? Chas G really is the only game in town.....unlucky. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florentine_Pogen Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Alasdair Lamont @BBCAlLamont Walter Smith consortium withdrawing bid to allow Green and co to get on with it If that is true, a couple of things spring immediately to mind 1) McColl and park have realised how much cash it will take to resurrect this corpse. 2) McColl and Park realise how tarnished the whole thing is and don't want this impinging on their core businesses. 3) McColl and Park realise that Sir Cardigan is "heavily conflicted" re. EBT's. 4) Campbell Ogilvie has tipped off the Cardigan Consortium that the game is a bogey and the SFA are going to release the hounds. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alimci Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 (edited) Walter Smiths consortium to withdraw interest. Thanks for your concern Mr Smith So Wat the hell was all that about? This is almost more bizarre than suddenly appearing to start with. If that is true, a couple of things spring immediately to mind 1) McColl and park have realised how much cash it will take to resurrect this corpse. 2) McColl and Park realise how tarnished the whole thing is and don't want this impinging on their core businesses. 3) McColl and Park realise that Sir Cardigan is "heavily conflicted" re. EBT's. 4) Campbell Ogilvie has tipped off the Cardigan Consortium that the game is a bogey and the SFA are going to release the hounds. Surely points 1-3 were fairly obvious? Edited June 19, 2012 by alimci 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jambo-rocker Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doulikefish Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 smiths out must be serious shit about ebts 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.