Kyle Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Not an official statement, but Arbroath had a supporters club meeting the night, and a member of the board was there. http://boards.footym...60503#p33023144 Whew! That's great news! I've always had a soft spot for Arbroath, especially last season with so many ex Saintees in the squad. Glad that can continue unabashed! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 (edited) What happened to their traditional bigot-fest with Linfield? EDIT: Always held conveniently around marching season. Edited July 11, 2012 by Gaz 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulo Sergio Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 I've said it before but surely if Rangers want to keep their tainted history then they need to pay the £100+million they owe the taxman and other creditors? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lofarl Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Has this been posted? http://www.scotsman.com/sport/a-16-team-spl-would-mean-163-20m-loss-says-neil-doncaster-1-1668828 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAFC Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Leacving aside those double bookings, has someone pointed-out to them that the 1st round of the Ramsden's Cup is on 28 July???? They'll probably just be given the trophy, wouldn't want to upset Sky. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Swedgin Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 What happened to their traditional bigot-fest with Linfield? EDIT: Always held conveniently around marching season. Linfield on Champions League duty! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Linfield on Champions League duty! Blimey. Just think, in a few weeks Linfield will have played more Champions League games than your team has. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wug Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 I'd also like clarity on this from one of the weirdo die hards, if possible: Can anyone confirm if an amendment to either proposal (1) or (2) has been lodged before Friday`s vote? If they get a majority vote on proposal (1) as it stands then I think cockwomble and the gang have won the day. Proposal (1) that SFL members agree to admit Sevco as an assoc member and agree to permit Rangers to play in the league during the coming season. On the basis that this will be done sequentially and assuming they get the required 50% of the votes they move on to ...... Proposal (2) that the SFL members direct their board to provide thet Rangers play in SFL3 in the coming season unless the board shall have reached agreement with the SPL and FA regarding inducements whereupon the board shall be authorised to provide for Rangers to play in SFL1. As it stands I don`t see that they can fail to vote for proposal (2) if they pass proposal (1). No matter how I read it, it still turns out the same way. They can either refuse them league entry or they go into SFL.1. Can anyone reasonably expect a majority for refusing them entry into the SFL? If this vote goes ahead unamended then it`s a done deal. Cockwomble wins, sevco in SFL1 and my club only has vague promises of reconstruction by way of consolation. Either proposal (1) is amended to make it clear that only SFL3 is an option or proposal (2) is amended to take the decision out of the hands of the SFL board and put in the hands of the individual clubs to be passed on a majority vote. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xbl Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 That's great news! I've always had a soft spot for Arbroath, especially last season with so many ex Saintees in the squad. Glad that can continue unabashed! I bet you're not half as glad as I am! The fact that we are not bowing down has raised my hopes somewhat that they won't get away with this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punk_dfc Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Blimey. Just think, in a few weeks Linfield will have played more Champions League games than your team has. To be fair his profile says he's a "Rangers" fan. Doesn't necessarily mean he supports Sevco. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 To be fair his profile says he's a "Rangers" fan. Doesn't necessarily mean he supports Sevco. Hmm - fair point. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz FFC Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Ok next question.... I read that Rangers could replace players who left under the terms of the ban, is that true? Probably 1 for HJ. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chazza1910 Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 The Big tax case cannot be pinned on Sevco - they are a completely new company that happens to own the assets of the old one. It is however still ongoing, though things very quiet. Channel 4 News Alex Thompson has been chasing HMRC and Ministry of Justice but getting nowhere. They'll lose the BTC. Told that months ago. I'm sure that's what's influenced events so far, the fact that Rangers are so guilty of so many crimes that not even the SFA could turn a blind eye to it. Forget any semblance of recognition of their guilt by Doncaster. He is away with the fairies and it is only down to to the SPL chairmen that the SPL has kept some dignity. Doncaster has been so overwhelmed by events that he can barely keep upright. He's gone. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Has this been posted? http://www.scotsman.com/sport/a-16-team-spl-would-mean-163-20m-loss-says-neil-doncaster-1-1668828 So Doncaster is proposing a solution that will lose us, he claims, £20 million each year to avoid a situation that, he claims, will cost us £16 million each year. Like Doncaster I also have an MBA but I now think that it has been devalued. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Ok next question.... I read that Rangers could replace players who left under the terms of the ban, is that true? Probably 1 for HJ. Under the terms of the signing ban the can only sign under 18s and resign (extend the contracts of) existing players. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 (edited) Ok next question.... I read that Rangers could replace players who left under the terms of the ban, is that true? Probably 1 for HJ. Original embargo, unless it was more detailed than was summarised, permits them to register U18s and players already at the club. Playing in SFL they could also use triallists. Don't think they could for example replace 'like-for-like' those refusing TUPE. Although the way things are going, who knows, quite frankly. Edited July 11, 2012 by HibeeJibee 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz FFC Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Under the terms of the signing ban the can only sign under 18s and resign (extend the contracts of) existing players. Is that definite GD? I'm positive i read they could replace players who left, sadly that's quite a lot of "replacements" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin_Nevis Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 I bet you're not half as glad as I am! The fact that we are not bowing down has raised my hopes somewhat that they won't get away with this. The whole thing's verging on comedy. We've had the SPL/SFA try everything in the book to bully the SFL into accepting these c***s into the First, and now it turns out that the great bribe is going to be a Committee meeting sometime in November, which may or may not vote through a proposal which Neil Doncaster told all and sundry would cost Scottish football £20million (when he was trying to force through the 10 club SPL) a few months back. I actually hope the SPL/SFA/Mediawhores keep up these same tactics because all they're going to achieve is a massive "GIRFUY" from pissed off SFL clubs. I would alove it if the meeting went something like: Doncaster/Regan: We strongly propose that.... SFL: Shut the f**k up. Here's what's happening. You give us cast iron guarantees of reconstruction and distribution of income immediately. Failure to do so will result in Sevco not being admitted at any level in the SFL. Doncaster/Regan: But but but we'll bring in SPL 2 and you'll be fu... SFL: Shut the f**k up. You can have Sevco or no Sevco. Give us what we want, NOW, or we'll fucking ruin you. Doncaster/Regan: We'll withhold the Settlement monies... SFL: No, you fucking won't. Because we'll sue your sorry, quivering arses and you'll be monumentally fucked, possibly insolvent and your clubs will be fucking begging to be part of the SFL again. SFL: Anything else? No? Well sign here and f**k off with your tails between your legs. Pure fantasy of course, but it would be absolutely terrific. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz FFC Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Original embargo, unless it was more detailed than was summarised, permits them to register U18s and players already at the club. Playing in SFL they could also use triallists. Don't think they could for example replace 'like-for-like' those refusing TUPE. Although the way things are going, who knows, quite frankly. From memory with Dundee they can use 3 trialists and at 4 games each maximum. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 I would alove it if the meeting went something like: Doncaster/Regan: We strongly propose that.... SFL: Shut the f**k up. Here's what's happening. You give us cast iron guarantees of reconstruction and distribution of income immediately. Failure to do so will result in Sevco not being admitted at any level in the SFL. Doncaster/Regan: But but but we'll bring in SPL 2 and you'll be fu... SFL: Shut the f**k up. You can have Sevco or no Sevco. Give us what we want, NOW, or we'll fucking ruin you. Doncaster/Regan: We'll withhold the Settlement monies... SFL: No, you fucking won't. Because we'll sue your sorry, quivering arses and you'll be monumentally fucked, possibly insolvent and your clubs will be fucking begging to be part of the SFL again. SFL: Anything else? No? Well sign here and f**k off with your tails between your legs. Pure fantasy of course, but it would be absolutely terrific. I lol'd . Brechin's AGM was tonight. Any indication which way views swung and who decides (committee?)? 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.