Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[HibeeJibee]

Personally i just want it all to end and i am sure most football supporters feel the same. I had hoped at the loss of the entire playing squad for next to nothing. Starting again at the bottom tier. Not allowed in European competition for 3 or 4 years. Given a 12 month transfer embargo and given record fines would have been enough for most people but it seems there are still those out there who don't think as a club we have suffered enough. There are people who simply want the club destroyed...Completely killed off. Is that justice? Does that punishment fit the crime?

I think people want ascertained whether you cheated - through using 2nd contracts - and if you did, what the consequences are. That's not unreasonable, either.

Clearly there are some posters on here, and an element of people at large, who want you "killed off". But then again your debts were immensly large - and since taking over Green has hardly exuded a picture of measured humility and quiet contrition, and you've splurged £££ again. It's no surprise that some people want you hammerred as they see your crimes as worthy of further hammerring and your behaviour infuriating.

Edited September 10, 2012 by HibeeJibee

[wunfellaff]

This whole enquiry has been set up in such a way that it could only have 1 final outcome. All the posturing by both sides is just that..Keep their supporters happy but it will be decided in court and that was always going to be the likely outcome.

Most Rangers supporters i know still question Charles Green and his motives but i find it strange and not a little worrying that Scottish football supporters have just sat back and watched as this witch hunt has unfolded and never once questioned the motives behind it. I am sick of reading about '£130 million debt'...'You cheated for decades'....'Your players had dual contracts'...and much more brought up time and again despite there being absolutely no basis in fact at this moment of any of that.

Personally i just want it all to end and i am sure most football supporters feel the same. I had hoped at the loss of the entire playing squad for next to nothing. Starting again at the bottom tier. Not allowed in European competition for 3 or 4 years. Given a 12 month transfer embargo and given record fines would have been enough for most people but it seems there are still those out there who don't think as a club we have suffered enough. There are people who simply want the club destroyed...Completely killed off. Is that justice? Does that punishment fit the crime?

What do you think this thread is about ?

It is to question what the hell is going on when it should have been a straight expulsion..

It is impossible to think of any other institution that would be as niaive as Rangers fans have been and continue to be.

Celtics troubles at the bunnets time was questioned and questioned at length, as have been the trials at Motherwell/Dundee/Hibs/Hearts etc. Only the People have blind Faith and fail to see both the financial horrors which were done in their baying name and the utter contempt with which the rest of Football holds them.

You could blame the players/agents/managers/directors etc, but it was the desire of the People that drove this.

Rangers/Sevco must, for the good of the Game, die.

[bennett]

Haha that's dog whistle stuff at its best, youse all read that and hear whispering of (f*nian conspiracy) between the lines, it would be hilarious if it wasn't so pathetically effective, just look at the reaction from the sevco eejits for proof

Sevco are now worse than Celtic ever were with the paranoid conspiracy crap

Halfwit on the internet say what?

Edited September 10, 2012 by bennett

[youngsy]

It would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic that the two clubs with the biggest supports in the country behave in such a fashion. I agree however the Sevco zombie alliance has now trumped the Celtic paranoia how did that happen.

So Green has taken his toys away again. What if the SPL impose a fine and in 3 years time is a condition of entry not that Charlie will worry he'll have rode into the sunset bags filled with orc gold. Charlie is only interested in getting his money plus a nice bonus if that fails then money will be made in other ways.

I don't understand that unquestioned loyalty especially given the track record and Green has previous with Sheffield United.

The nonsense of we are not in the SPL so we don't have to be apart of any investigation. So where did the information come from and if the Clone Rangers support believe that their previous club did nothing wrong would they not want to present evidence that would clear them.

First of all under sporting policy any organisation can be stripped of titles of any description,however it is not down to the club to present evidence initially to clear them,it's down to the SPL to prove that cheating of a fraudulent nature took place with the presentation of side/dual/second contracts,call them as you will. Under civil law there may well be another opinion as to whether they can be stripped though,Rangers appeal any findings against them in a court of law and the outcome may differ. However i would think that the SPL would have to produce original documetation of any side contracts to have any charge upheld,i can't imagine that they would have such.

[wunfellaff]

The SFA did investigate him and his backers and gave them a full bill of health, it was part and parcel of getting membership.

Clown.

Halfwit on the internet say what?

The SFA have also been satisfied by information on Sevco's shareholders and business plan.

http://www.dailymail...membership.html

They were satisfied by the information is NOT an investigation. That was carried out by D+P.

[Bairnforever1992]

All i have to say is ha fucking ha!

[WhiteRoseKillie]

Whether a smaller club with less turnover than Rangers would have been investigated to the same level is not the point of club continuation being recognised or not by the football authorities. The fact is that clubs throughout Europe that have went through the same procedure as Rangers have had the club continuity recognised by the relevant football authorities,in whatever country the club concerned is domiciled in and by UEFA,an organisation that Rangers are a member club of and as a member club are entitled to the same recognition as any other club in this position.

The same outcome would have applied to any club if the transference of the relevant FA Membership had taken place before the old company was formally liquidated,if the new company had applied for transference of membership from the old company that is. Also i don't fail to admit to any scenario as regards income from our fanbase to other SFL clubs or indeed to the three ruling bodies,i'm well aware of the income the travelling support can bring to the game,something which has been demonstrated this season.

And have you a list of such clubs, perchance? Just that I can't remember any other clubs cheating in quite so many ways simultaneously, then being allowed to carry on as if nothing had happened.

Seriously, I'd like to know.

Middlesbrough,Charlton,SCC Napoli,AFC Fiorentina,Racing Club De Strasbourg,five clubs that have all went through the same procedure as Rangers in that the old company was liquidated,assets bought by new company and full recognition of the historical timeline of each club recognised by the relevant FAs and UEFA. Absolutely nothing to do with allegations of cheating applies to the historical timeline. The transference of the relevant FA Membership is what matters,so as this recognition applies to these clubs it also applies to Rangers under UEFA membership The precedents have been set long ago.

See, there's where your argument falls to pieces. The liquidators haven't landed at ibrox yet, although they're circling for final approach. So, not the same timeline, or even remotely the same circumstances, and you know it. Meanwhile Charlie Boy continues to lead you on with promises of a return to the top (which would be the SPL you hate), a new start with a new club, retaining all the trophies gained by rangers, not having any responsibility for rangers' cheating and best of all, telling you all you're debt-free when the club has to pay him back the money he used to buy the club. No fucking wonder you're all confused. The next few weeks'll have you all sectioned.

Oh, BTW, can you name one thing all your examples have in common that rangers don't?

clue: they weren't called Glasgow rangers, now, were they?

[zurcher]

This whole enquiry has been set up in such a way that it could only have 1 final outcome. All the posturing by both sides is just that..Keep their supporters happy but it will be decided in court and that was always going to be the likely outcome.

Most Rangers supporters i know still question Charles Green and his motives but i find it strange and not a little worrying that Scottish football supporters have just sat back and watched as this witch hunt has unfolded and never once questioned the motives behind it. I am sick of reading about '£130 million debt'...'You cheated for decades'....'Your players had dual contracts'...and much more brought up time and again despite there being absolutely no basis in fact at this moment of any of that.

Personally i just want it all to end and i am sure most football supporters feel the same. I had hoped at the loss of the entire playing squad for next to nothing. Starting again at the bottom tier. Not allowed in European competition for 3 or 4 years. Given a 12 month transfer embargo and given record fines would have been enough for most people but it seems there are still those out there who don't think as a club we have suffered enough. There are people who simply want the club destroyed...Completely killed off. Is that justice? Does that punishment fit the crime?

None of these are actual punishments though, much as they might feel that way to you. Take them one at a time:

1. The loss of the playing squad - this is just a consequence of the liquidation and newco formation, employees are within their rights not to accept the transfer of their contracts. Nobody took the players away.

2. Starting at the bottom tier - again, not a punishment, the rules were bent to allow a new company into the league. Always going to hapen due to the size of the fanbase, but starting at the bottom would be standard procedure for anyone else in the same position.

3. European "ban" - again, a consequence of liquidation, UEFA don't accept newcos for three years. Nobody banned you

4. Ok, the fine and transfer ban are punishments, granted, but you've read the list of charges, you've seen the "one step short of match fixing" report, a lot of clubs would have been booted, or at least suspended in the same circumstances. But a fine of 160k to a club with Rangers' turnover should be pennies, and the transfer ban was watered down so you could still outspend everyone this summer. Even then, with a decent manager you could still have walked the third with a good youth team and done the country a long term good by blooding a generation of youngsters.

[wunfellaff]

The SFA have to carry out a "fit and proper person test" it is in their remit not D&P

Clearly stated in the "Articles of Association"

After not carrying this out in the proper manner for CW do you really think they would make this mistake twice?......wait its the SFA

It is in the Articles but they defer to the club due to the logistics . D+P carried it out on Chucky, do you disagree?

[BradHorse]

Irrelevant whether he use the word new or not. The fact is they are a new club so when he states he purchased it .. it is in fact 'purchased by a new club' whether or not Green uses the word new ...

The club is new because ..

Your new club had to apply for membership to the SPL errrm because it was a new club.

You new club was told it could not play in Europe because it cannot produce the requisite historical accounts. An old club would have no problem.

Green's quote:

In that respect Green is 100% correct but only if he is implying that the SPL are taking action against the old club.

Otherwise that statement is completely absurd ..

It's a new holding company. In fact, any time someone calls us Sevco 5088 it simply shows their ignorance.

I hate to even bother with this but for every 'it's a new club because...' there's a 'it's the old club'.

Why is this new club being punished for the actions of another?

Why was the SFA license passed over?

Why does every governing footballing body consider them the same club, surely the PnB hatemongers know more than them?

If this is a new club, why do you care about us at all?

Why do they play in the same stadium? Under the same name? With the same manager? The same trophy cabinet (not for long, hawhaw)? Same staff? Same fans? Same badge? Same colours?

Why were we allowed in the SFL at all? New clubs aren't allowed to do that.

Shit, I'm sure we could all come up with a million reasons for and against. All I know is when I watch Rangers play I feel exactly the same as I always have... It doesn't even cross my mind that it's a new club. Call me deluded if you like, but the only, and i think I mean this quite literally... The only people who consider Rangers to be a brand new club are fans of other Scottish teams who dislike Rangers. Every other football fan in the world knows it's the same club, Rangers fans know it and the heads of the game, and most actually involved with it in any way, know it.

You're all just raging 'cauae we commited financial murder and done an OJ. Rightly so, but no amount of determination will ever make Sevco 5088 an apt name (look into it) or the rest of the world agree it's a new club.

Get it up yez, frankly.

[youngsy]

Well answer me this as nobody else has...........

If a club that went into Administration last season and received a points penalty, starts the new season and that Administration is still ongoing, which it is, why did it not get a points penalty imposed at the start of the new season?

It was the club that got the penalty and you cant transfer an Administration.

New.

Club.

It's the old company The Rangers Football Club plc that operated the club that's in administration,if the cva had went through instead of liquidation then under the old company another penalty points deduction would have applied but as the club is now in new ownership under The Rangers Football Club Limited adminstration can't apply to the new company. This is the very reason why so many clubs have had continuity recognised,they are operated by a new company. Incidentally The Rangers Football Club Limited was the name of the operating company before we became a PLC in 1973,so it isn't a complete name change.

[stonedsailor]

First of all under sporting policy any organisation can be stripped of titles of any description,however it is not down to the club to present evidence initially to clear them,it's down to the SPL to prove that cheating of a fraudulent nature took place with the presentation of side/dual/second contracts,call them as you will. Under civil law there may well be another opinion as to whether they can be stripped though,Rangers appeal any findings against them in a court of law and the outcome may differ. However i would think that the SPL would have to produce original documetation of any side contracts to have any charge upheld,i can't imagine that they would have such.

Who will take this to a court of law? Duff and Phelps have washed their hands of it so Original Rangers will not pursue it and if Charles Green lays claim to those titles in civil court he provides a solid legal link between oldco and newco thus taking on liability for oldco's debts. Charles Green can posture all he likes but he cannot turn to the courts for fear of Sevco becoming Rangers in a legal sense.

[Fife Saint]

Constitution and committee of club?

[wunfellaff]

Why were we allowed in the SFL at all? New clubs aren't allowed to do that.

Existing SPL clubs aren't allowed into the SFL without relegation taking place. That was what happed to the one relegated club last season. Dunfermline

[zurcher]

Halfwit on the internet say what?

hhahahahahahahahahahahaha, brilliant, really!

[youngsy]

See, there's where your argument falls to pieces. The liquidators haven't landed at ibrox yet, although they're circling for final approach. So, not the same timeline, or even remotely the same circumstances, and you know it. Meanwhile Charlie Boy continues to lead you on with promises of a return to the top (which would be the SPL you hate), a new start with a new club, retaining all the trophies gained by rangers, not having any responsibility for rangers' cheating and best of all, telling you all you're debt-free when the club has to pay him back the money he used to buy the club. No fucking wonder you're all confused. The next few weeks'll have you all sectioned.

Oh, BTW, can you name one thing all your examples have in common that rangers don't?

clue: they weren't called Glasgow rangers, now, were they?

Sorry but you're wrong again. If the liquidation of the old company had been completed before SFA Membership transference then no argument,we would have a new club,but it wasn't so that's where your argument falls down. The continuity is preserved with the transference,whether you or anyone agrees with it or not. Incidentally all my examples have got something in common,none of the clubs were ever officially called Glasgow Rangers,including Rangers. Wrong again.

[wunfellaff]

It's the old company The Rangers Football Club plc that operated the club that's in administration,if the cva had went through instead of liquidation then under the old company another penalty points deduction would have applied but as the club is now in new ownership under The Rangers Football Club Limited adminstration can't apply to the new company. This is the very reason why so many clubs have had continuity recognised,they are operated by a new company. Incidentally The Rangers Football Club Limited was the name of the operating company before we became a PLC in 1973,so it isn't a complete name change.

Pish, if a club goes into Admin, they get a penalty. Where does it state that a club gets a penalty if a holding company goes into Admin?

Should be irrelevant though as they traded for at least 3 months whilst insolvent

[bennett]

They were satisfied by the information is NOT an investigation. That was carried out by D+P.

The SFA as part of the process for gaining SFA membership demanded detailed information over Charles Green's plans for Rangers and those backing his newco which Charles Green duly granted, Duff and Phelps had nothing to do with it, you utter utter pedantic ........

So taken in context to the post i orgianally replied to then this is correct, before you tried and failed to twist it. The SFA are satisfied with the information and as our governing body we have to put our faith in them.

Please feel free to take parts of this out of context too, you win at internet

[youngsy]

Who will take this to a court of law? Duff and Phelps have washed their hands of it so Original Rangers will not pursue it and if Charles Green lays claim to those titles in civil court he provides a solid legal link between oldco and newco thus taking on liability for oldco's debts. Charles Green can posture all he likes but he cannot turn to the courts for fear of Sevco becoming Rangers in a legal sense.

Where did i say that anyone will take this to a court of law,all i stated was that a civil court of law may offer a different opinion as to a sporting organisation. Whether the outcome is taken to civil court has yet to be determined,the SPL case has yet to be determined never mind anything else.

[bennett]

Sorry but you're wrong again. If the liquidation of the old company had been completed before SFA Membership transference then no argument,we would have a new club,but it wasn't so that's where your argument falls down. The continuity is preserved with the transference,whether you or anyone agrees with it or not. Incidentally all my examples have got something in common,none of the clubs were ever officially called Glasgow Rangers,including Rangers. Wrong again.

They understand that percectly well but they wont admit it, the problem is they set their ickle hearts on us being dead and can't deal with reality.