archie guevara Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 I just spent 20 minutes pissing about putting the exact same information together! Probably should have checked back here first... So yeah, it seems the chairmen have the decision to make and Doncaster's talking shite. Unless the SPL meeting last week changed the rules, which lets face it, is not that far fetched. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drooper Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 (edited) IIRC, HMRC made an application to the court to have their choice of adminstrator appointed. This was rejected. Surely it is safe to assume that they might have cause to raise an action with the Court of Session in respect of the halfwits who are currently undertaking (pun intended) the role? The fact that HMRC haven't steamed in gives me some cause for anxiety. Is it just possible that the courage of their convictions is wavering? Even so, they are still a major creditor on the basis of the £9M PAYE etc. scenario. You'd have thought that they would be scrutinising the actions of Stan and Ollie very intensely indeed. It is time for HMRC to grow a set. Edited March 7, 2012 by Drooper 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludo*1 Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 It does. Completely. If their crime is bad enough that it's repugnant for them to 'parachute in' above Partick, it's equally repugant to 'parachute in' above (e.g.) Cove Rangers... At least Partick's mechanism of promotion isn't typically only reliant on existing SFL/SPL clubs folding through financial woes. If a 'reformed'/'revitalised' Rangers shouldn't be permitted in SPL, they shouldn't be in SFL either. I hope you're just playing devil's advocate. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 This is the biggest fact that needs resolved in the whole scenario IMO. I don't expect it to be released into the public domain but once SPL chairmen know how much Sky-ESPN would pay for Rangers-less SPL, they'll be making a pragmatic decision based on discernible scenarios. If it's wrong for Rangers to 're-enter' SPL, it's equally wrong for them to re-enter the national league structure, surely? It's easy for SFL1 club fans to decry Rangers entering above them, yet be perfectly happy for them to enter below them. It's also rather hypocritical. You're very big on hypocricy these days. There should be some punishment for ignoring rules and cheating your way to success. A suitable punishment would be being forced to apply for admission to the bottom level of professional football, and fight their way back up. It would also be highly entertaining. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 It does. Completely. If their crime is bad enough that it's repugnant for them to 'parachute in' above Partick, it's equally repugant to 'parachute in' above (e.g.) Cove Rangers... No it isn't, because rightly or wrongly, Cove Rangers aren't part of the national league structure. That starts at the Third Division: if a vacancy opens, Rangers 1690 should be eligible to apply just as Cove or Clydebank can. Imagine the unlikely event of them losing that vote though, I reckon we'd all have an ice-cream related diabetes epidemic. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Depends whether they've got any ambition left to make an impact in Europe. Their rhetoric has been full of hyperbole along the lines of "More than a club" & Global Support". If they really want hooped shirts on racks next to Chelsea and Real Madrid ones in downtown Saigon or Dallas then they're going to have to keep spending the big money required to make them competitive against big European clubs Otherwise They currently outgun the oppositions Wage bills by about 5 to 1. If they' put their global ambitions aside the celtic board can easily afford to give a lot more of supporters money to shareholders and less to players and their agents with only a small increase risk of not winning the league. It may be more effective to field a young, relatively cheap team playing in front of a busy Parkhead than a highly paid team in front of a packed Parkhead. If Celtic aren't budgeting that European appearances are going to be a rare and very added bonus, then they'll end up the same way as Rangers. I'm very confused as to their thinking... the standard of their manager and players suggests that they are scaling back their ambitions, but the sheer number of superfluous squad players from all over the globe suggests they aren't. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagfox Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Excellent former dodgy directors involved in take-over, well that should work.... Craig Whyte in take-over talks with Glasgow cabbie with strong republican and socialist sentiments, sweet. The only thing liquidating so far is my ice cream 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEADOWXI Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 (edited) SSN just reported that the players won't agree to pay cuts unless in three months time they are once more paid at their current rate of pay. Also reported that the players don't want any staff cuts in either playing or non-playing staff. FFS. What planet are these cnuts on? I include the inept Haudit & Daudit dynamic duo in this too. It's so obvious now (as if it wasn't before) - Haudit and Daudit are agents of Craig Whyte, with a remit to ensure liquidation. Creditors get in line now.... WON'T AGREE - Since when was 'hey you ya big over-priced, over-budget bam you're sacked, now beat-it' a sentence to be agreed by all parties. Edited March 7, 2012 by MEADOWXI 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin M Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 It does. Completely. If their crime is bad enough that it's repugnant for them to 'parachute in' above Partick, it's equally repugant to 'parachute in' above (e.g.) Cove Rangers... At least Partick's mechanism of promotion isn't typically only reliant on existing SFL/SPL clubs folding through financial woes. If a 'reformed'/'revitalised' Rangers shouldn't be permitted in SPL, they shouldn't be in SFL either. No, that isn't the point. Leaving aside the SPL/SFL structure, there are two things to decide: 1) Should they be allowed "back" into the league structure? If "yes" then 2) Where should they enter? Why on earth would we conclude "well we might as well let them in where they are, ie at the top of the tree"? If we're deciding to let them in, then they start at the bottom. Of course if the answer to 1) is "No" then that is fair enough. But given there IS no competitive mechanism of joining the SFL/SPL tree, then joining at the bottom is merely a matter of application. I have no argument to say that they should be voted in - but the merits of their application should be judged against the merits of every other application. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 12.50pm: Keith Wyness, former Chief Executive of Aberdeen has said he believes Rangers should be stripped of their honours if an inquiry shows that they’ve broken rules regarding payments to players. Wyness also believes that Scottish football could be stronger if Rangers do go out of business. From the Scotsman 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drooper Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 SSN just reported that the players won't agree to pay cuts unless in three months time they are once more paid at their current rate of pay. Aren't a few of these dumplings out of contract in 3 months time? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slacker Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 If it's wrong for Rangers to 're-enter' SPL, it's equally wrong for them to re-enter the national league structure, surely?It's easy for SFL1 club fans to decry Rangers entering above them, yet be perfectly happy for them to enter below them. It's also rather hypocritical. Well, no... I'm surprised you've came away with a comment like this since you normally seem to have a good grasp on these matters. Rangers going would open up a space in Scottish football's professional leagues. Well, it would open up a space in the SPL. I wouldn't want to see a new Rangers get handed that space, I would want either 2nd in First Division (Falkirk/Dundee) to get it, or Dunfermline to avoid relegation. Re-jig the rest of the leagues to make the space in the Third Division. Then clubs would apply, so for arguments sake New Rangers/Spartans/Cove Rangers etc. Clubs would obviously vote in the New Rangers, and if that were to be the case I'd be happy with that. Ergo, I'd not be happy if they strolled into the SPL but would be fine with them starting off at the bottom of the professional ladder (ie. Third Division). How is that hypocritical in any way, shape or form? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludo*1 Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 See if you had told me yesterday, I'd be agreeing with VikingTon in a debate with HJ I'd have laughed at you. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacWatt Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Unless the SPL meeting last week changed the rules, which lets face it, is not that far fetched. The SPL did indeed discuss rules changes which Doncaster said were about financial fair play in the face of the severe financial challenges being faced by several member clubs. Clubs will vote on the new rules at a general meeting, either in April or July. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherrif John Bunnell Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 12.50pm: Keith Wyness, former Chief Executive of Aberdeen has said he believes Rangers should be stripped of their honours if an inquiry shows that they've broken rules regarding payments to players. Wyness also believes that Scottish football could be stronger if Rangers do go out of business. From the Scotsman He is 100% right. It's a shame very few current club execs or chairmen have the cojones to issue statements along the same lines. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 I hope you're just playing devil's advocate. On the "keep them in SPL" thing? Completely, I'm just answering a previous posters query. If Rangers are liquidated it'd be outrageous for them to be parachuted into SPL. There's reasons why it may occur, though. You're very big on hypocricy these days. There should be some punishment for ignoring rules and cheating your way to success. A suitable punishment would be being forced to apply for admission to the bottom level of professional football, and fight their way back up. It would also be highly entertaining. Maybe I've been mis-interpreted: I'm talking about what happens if they're liquidated. A suggestion has been made that them getting 'parachuted in' to SPL by transfer of membership, is wrong... yet it'd be fine to 'parachute' into SFL3. That's illogical, IMO. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Well, it would open up a space in the SPL. I wouldn't want to see a new Rangers get handed that space, I would want either 2nd in First Division (Falkirk/Dundee) to get it, or Dunfermline to avoid relegation. Potential for a money-spinning play-off out of that, come to think of it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 No it isn't, because rightly or wrongly, Cove Rangers aren't part of the national league structure. That starts at the Third Division: if a vacancy opens, Rangers 1690 should be eligible to apply just as Cove or Clydebank can. Imagine the unlikely event of them losing that vote though, I reckon we'd all have an ice-cream related diabetes epidemic. If they come back as Cva Rangers and Cove Rangers are also on the ballot paper, mistakes could occur in the voting.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin M Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 No it isn't, because rightly or wrongly, Cove Rangers aren't part of the national league structure. That starts at the Third Division: if a vacancy opens, Rangers 1690 should be eligible to apply just as Cove or Clydebank can. Imagine the unlikely event of them losing that vote though, I reckon we'd all have an ice-cream related diabetes epidemic. Exactly. The logical conclusion of HJ's argument here is that if there is a space and I say "here, I've got 200 million quid to start a new football club, how about you let me straight into the SPL?" And they say "well that's where the space is, so sure, why not?". The notion of post civil war RFC "starting again in the 3rd" is entirely dependent on them being voted in - the assumption is that they would. If the SFL clubs wanted to say "no thanks" then great! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 A suggestion has been made that them getting 'parachuted in' to SPL by transfer of membership, is wrong... yet it'd be fine to 'parachute' into SFL3. That's illogical, IMO. It's not parachuting though: they're applying to start at the bottom of the national league setup. As a 'parachutes' go, that one is ineffective. They've crashed straight to the ground. That's the fundamental flaw in your 'logic' here. 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.