Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[Florentine_Pogen]

Tedi, as you well know, I am someone who wants to see Ibrox demolished and the turf salted.

Bingo, you're quite the poet.

[Monkey Tennis]

The SFA rules state 'reserves its discretion' his return to the board has already been proposed before at last years AGM, I found this from the Herald

Fair enough. You know that the moment 'discretion' and 'fit and proper criteria' are mentioned, that doors will be held open for anyone who fancies walking through.

[Magoo9uk]

I explained the wording at the time, Vicky, and afterwards. And you know it. Pathetic that you would continue to pull this up again and again and again. Almost as bad as Magoo and his Cancer schtick.

Your sexuality matters not a fúck to me. Your continual throwing in witty ripostes and "advice" about traditional relationships is equally inappropriate, and your willingness to embrace 1970's campery when you feel like it sits badly with your hair-trigger bleating - -normally when a grown-up debate has left you, yet again, with a well-spanked arse.

I tend to bring it up when you have the temerity to comment on the morals and decency of others.Apologies if you find it uncomfortable to be reminded of the mask slipping.In vino veritas,eh?

[aofjays]

I remember I once argued that the SFA had failed in their duty and that the 'fit and proper' person test was an absolute failure, my suggestion was met with much wailing and gnashing of teeth on this thread, how dare a Rangers fan blame the SFA for anything eh...

Yes, and it was explained to you then that rangers cheating a test doesn't make it a bad test - it makes rangers cheats.

[Stag Nation]

Is that how it works? I thought even just being on the board not long before admin was enough to prevent someone getting involved so soon, regardless of how complicit or otherwise he/she might have been in events.

Almost. The SFA's Article 10 lists "has been a director of a club in membership of any National Association which has undergone an insolvency event within the five year period preceding the said insolvency event" as a "relevant fact", but "reserves its discretion as to whether or not such a person is fit and proper"

So that's all right.

Edited October 17, 2014 by Stag Nation

[Magoo9uk]

Provide a serious answer if at all possible ...

Two cliques of people in a workplace that socialise after work on Friday night. A new bloke, a known homosexual joins the company, he plays rugby, enjoys football, loves beer and is great craic on a night out.

Group A: (The Teuchters) : They invite him out and he becomes a firm regular of the group, the group is raucous and banterous and everyone has their nicknames (whether deemed by society to be offensive or not) and he gives as good as he gets and everyone gets along ..

Group B: Treat him very the utmost respect during the office hours, would never dream of calling him by an 'offensive word'. However unless they are forced to do so by attending a "company xmas do" they would never dream of socialising with the guy and they politely make limited small talk and to all and intent purposes; shun his company.

Which group are the homophobes and bigots ... ?

A or B ?

Is the answer ?people who use the phrase

"A known Homosexual"?

[aofjays]

you need to take into consideration that on here by being a rangers supporter means you are automatically wrong until you can prove otherwise.

quiet true but with an easy example being it was too late for the sfa to claim craig whyte was an unfit and proper person to run a football club, the torpedo was already in the water by the time they looked into his previous dealings prompted by a tv documentary ffs, the sfa messed up bad there even worse if they really turned a blind eye. i'm sure they didn't bother looking to close and then gambled on whyte saving the club after all there was no way rangers the cash cow could be forced into administration or even worse it just cant be possible.

never ever heard the sfa ever taking responsibility for their part in the debacle, but then that would be admitting incompetence.

The test is done by the club. The club lied. That's why no-one at the SFA has taken responsibility. They were not responsible.

It's bloody hilarious when rangers fan trot this keich out, can you imagine the reaction if the SFA had blocked him? The teddy bear rage would be off the radar.

[aofjays]

did they ignore it?

i seem to remember most of them left the club in the following months, jumped or pushed.

i'm sure none of them had any say in who david murray intended to sell the club to either.

Telling someone (press sfa etc) rangers were lying about his fitness would have done nothing in your eyes? Even if it came from someone like Grieg?

[aofjays]

It was not Rangers who designed the test, it was the SFA.

The SFA designed a test to block unscrupulous owners taking charge of football clubs, by their very nature anyone who is not 'fit and proper' is going to lie about it, basically the SFA asked CW, 'hey Craig, are you a decent bloke', can we trust you?, CW 'of course you can'

The SFA test is flawed and not fit for purpose.

I really hope you're just trolling and don't actually believe that. Rangers not fulfilling their obligations and lying is the sfa's fault? If you believe that you need proper help.

[Florentine_Pogen]

In the context of football club ownership, the concept of being a 'Fit & Proper Person' in Scotland is surely the biggest oxymoron going.

We have an SFA, a judiciary and an executive who have either supported or wilfully ignored the fact that bigotry, hatred, sectarianism, violence and intolerance is / was the foundation for the 'rivalry' between the 2 biggest clubs in the land.

Scottish football (possibly another oxymoron) is a fucking joke.

It will remain so as long as venal douchebags such as Regan, Doncaster and Ogilvie are in charge.

ETA - Just found this article which I saved from the Scotsmam website before it was pulled....I know it's old history but just a reminder of the 'quality' of the blazerati at Hampden.....

By STEPHEN HALLIDAY
Published on Wednesday 4 July 2012 21:26

SCOTTISH Football Association chief executive Stewart Regan has issued a startling warning of "social unrest" in Scotland if newco Rangers are denied entry to the First Division of the Scottish Football League following the emphatic rejection today of their application to retain top-flight football at Ibrox.

Regan's remarkable comment came as he insisted admission to the First Division is now the only viable option if Scottish football wishes to avoid what he described as a "slow, lingering death".

The Scottish Premier League turned down Charles Green's bid to have Rangers' existing share in the organisation transferred to his newco for next season, with ten of the member clubs voting against the application. It is understood Green cast the only vote in favour, while Kilmarnock chairman Michael Johnston is believed to have abstained.

The SPL will now await the outcome of an SFL meeting next week when that organisation's 30 clubs will vote on a proposal to accept newco Rangers into the First Division in the new season ahead of an amalgamation of the league governing bodies from 2013-14.

There is considerable opposition and resistance to the plan among SFL clubs and their supporters with many believing Rangers should have to apply for entry to the Third Division in the wake of their spectacular financial collapse.

But Regan bluntly asserted that Scottish football simply cannot afford to have Rangers outwith the top two tiers of the league structure, with his argument not confined to the commercial impact their absence would have.

"Without Rangers, there is social unrest and a big problem for Scottish society," claimed Regan. "They have a huge fan base and to contemplate the situation where those fans don't have a team to support, where those fans are effectively left without a game to follow, I just think that could lead to all sorts of issues, all sorts of problems for the game.

"Tribalism in football is really important. It is part of the game. People follow their clubs with pride, it is passed down from generation to generation. There are thousands of Rangers fans whose fathers and parents and grandfathers have been Rangers fans. You can't contemplate a situation without that and if Rangers weren't to exist that could have real dire consequences.

"There is a lot of emotion around this subject because Rangers are a huge institution in Scottish football history and they are where they are. Their fans have been hurt, they don't know what's happening. There hasn't been a great deal of leadership at the club and there hasn't been a huge amount of communication from the football authorities.

"The SPL have now decided that Rangers won't be coming back into the SPL. From our perspective it's important we set out the landscape because there is only one solution for the game now.

"The only solution for the game now is that Rangers come into the Scottish Football League and they come into it in the First Division. If Rangers were to go anywhere other than the First Division, then there would something in the region of £15.7 million worth of losses to the game.

"For the bigger clubs at the top of the league, that's half their annual distributions. For clubs at the bottom it is basically wiping out their entire distributions, for some of the smaller clubs it's a huge proportion of their annual turnover.

"The same will be true for most clubs. Perhaps clubs could survive for a short period of time but it's not sustainable. Even if Rangers end up in the First Division, there is still going to be a £5 million loss of income to the SPL clubs. The game is not sustainable so there would be a slow lingering death for the game in Scotland. It would then trickle down to the SFL. From our perspective as the governing body and we cannot allow that to happen.

"If we allowed that to happen, it would simply be a dereliction of duty. Therefore, this whole decision-making process has been one of the most challenging and complex decisions that I have ever been involved in in 27 years of business as sport.

"Some clubs in the SFL are afraid of the implications of the decisions. There is the moral argument, the fear of a fans' backlash and there are financial implications to consider. But when we look at the alternative, it is not possible to think about it without thinking of the game withering on the vine. We cannot contemplate that and the message has to be that Division One for Rangers is the only show in town as far as the future of Scottish football is concerned."

Regan admits the influence of television contracts, which are largely predicated on the presence of Celtic and Rangers in the Scottish game, are the biggest single factor in his determination to ensure the Ibrox club drop no lower than the First Division. "We have had dialogue with the broadcasters," he added, "and we understand what the various stakeholders from Sky television, ESPN, Sport Five and a number of the SPL's other commercial partners are likely to do in the event Rangers are not in either of the top two tiers. It's not pretty. That's why we cannot sit back and let that happen without trying to get all parties to accept this is the only solution which can keep the game afloat.

"Without Old Firm games, the value drops, the overseas deals are almost exclusively about the Old Firm derby and that would go immediately. Then you look at the rest of the game and what it is worth. It is fair to say the broadcasters would live with a year without Rangers in the SPL, because it could be a fantastic story for them, which is why I think First Division rights will be an interest as people will want to see how this club is going to bounce back."

Regan conceded, however, that there can be no guarantee a financially weakened Rangers will climb back to the top flight at the first attempt. "If Rangers don't get promoted, then the game has got another year to suffer with the financial consequences that brings," he said. "I can't predict what will happen, because Rangers at the moment are a weakened team because of everything that has gone on.

"They are a newco at the moment, they have got very few players on their books. They are going to be entering the SFL in whatever division with a weakened team and I don't think it's by any means certain they are going to come back in the way they or their fans might like them to recover.

"It's going to be a slow recovery to get back to the football fitness they have shown in the past. So we can't look into the future and say 'what if they don't operate in a certain way?'. We can only look at building the foundations, to change the game for the better and provide an infrastructure that can bring financial certainty to the other 41 clubs."

Regan confirmed that sanctions will apply to newco Rangers in the First Division and also made it clear the formation of an SPL2 will be pursued in order to accommodate the Ibrox club if they are rejected by the SFL next week. "The SFA have to transfer Rangers' membership from oldco to newco," he said. "That can be done with any conditions attached to it that the SFA board deem fit. We would expect a newco to carry some of the sanctions which would have related to the club had it still been in the previous incarnation. The membership cannot be transferred on financial grounds alone. It has to have a degree of sporting integrity and that means sporting sanctions."

Edited October 17, 2014 by Florentine_Pogen

[aofjays]

Nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade, rather than deal with the flaws I pointed out you just accuse me of trolling and and go into typical angry aofjays 'if I insult you enough I will win type' mode.

Ah, just trolling then, thanks for clearing that up. I was worried for you.

[weirdcal]

i thought the onus was on the club for the fit and proper test?

murray conducted due dilligence on whyte and still sold to him, you'd have thought that would have flagged up any concerns.

still, it couldnt actually be the fault of Rangers then ? or The Rangers now for their current issues ?

[Florentine_Pogen]

duty!! whistleblow and be seen as a traitor. given the word on whyte that he had wealth off the scale. (The word came from Keith Jackson did it not ? And where did he get his inside info from ? David Murray & Jack Irvine probably, who basically used The Daily Retard hacks like their own private version of Pravda.)

no one knew what craig whyte was really up to (So you're saying that Dodgy Dave Murray, the experienced stalwart of Scottish business, just sold the club to a charlatan for a single poond without doing any background checks ? Remember, Murray had made a statement where he swore he would only sell if the new owner could take the club forward and was steeped in staunchness.)not even the educated p&ds on here, problem was there was whyte's plan for rangers and then there was whytes real plan for rangers, the stuff he never mentioned until it was too late. (Then there was Charles Green's plan for Sevco and Colin Kingsnorth's plan for Sevco and The Kraydales plan for Sevco and Dave Kings plans for Sevco and Mike Ashley's plan for Sevco and Uncle Tom Cobbley and All's plan for Sevco.)

he never mentioned the ticketus loan or the fact he never intended to spend a penny of his own money on the club (So because Dave King says he's got £16m, that means he's just going to hand it over ?) when he bullshitted his way into owning the club.

and you can debate where he found that pound coin as well, probably borrowed that as well.

Sevco Fans - deserving of every ass-raping they've had since 2012.

[Florentine_Pogen]

Still unwilling to address the flaws in the obviously flawed system then, all good as long as you can continue blame Rangers I guess.

EBT's, corruption of the press, Succulent Lambists, murders, domestic violence, international football violence, bigotry, sectarianism, tax dodging, institutionalised cheating...........................................just a few of the things Sevco Rangers were / are guilty of...............................................

[Florentine_Pogen]

i don't think forced as much as convinced but then it didn't matter he was selling up and getting out.

i think there was unshakable belief in the blue pound and the supporters would rally round and pull the club out of the crisis, i'm sure that's what craig whyte thought when he borrowed from ticketus as well.

all of this was gambling the club's future on the basis of power in the blue pound.

it is also the reason for a number of other oversights or turning the blind eye from those with power and this includes the sfa.

Snuffles, I think the disability lobby have already commandeered the phrase 'Blue Pound' on behalf of disabled spending power.

Unless of course I am misreading your post and you are in fact suggesting that the disabled shall be the saviours of Sevco.

[williemillersmoustache]

Still unwilling to address the flaws in the obviously flawed system then, all good as long as you can continue blame Rangers I guess.

If the system was as robust as you claim you wanted it to be, there would be no football at theRankjurs ShellSuit Arena. You'd have been metaphorically hung from the nearest tree with a sign around the rotting corpses neck saying "Cheats".

I think we all have excellent reason to criticise and pour scorn over the SFA and SPL/SPFL over the way they have mis-handled your old and new clubs. I would assume if they robustly tell King "f**k-off, you are joking right?" then in your eyes they would be failing in their duties again?

Explain to me the differences that make Whyte someone who would fail the F&P test versus King who you want and think should pass?

[Ken Fitlike]

Still unwilling to address the flaws in the obviously flawed system then, all good as long as you can continue blame Rangers I guess.

He is 'blaming Rangers' because..............(drum roll).................. IT WAS RANGERS FAULT.

[williemillersmoustache]

you don't make it easy to reply here.

Ugh that makes me want to hurl

[Florentine_Pogen]

Ugh that makes me want to hurl

Haw, c'mon..........I'm just getting into the crayon-munching spirit of Snuffles' posts.............

[Florentine_Pogen]

Of course King will get past the test, if CW can get past it anyone can.

I get that you think the test must have been ok since it let your criminal hero in, you have already admitted than you have no real moral compass with this regard.

That does not change the fact that it is not fit for purpose of course, the test is designed to stop unscrupulous owners gaining control of football clubs, if you feel that it should stop DK then you should also agree that it should have stopped CW.

We all know that the F&PP test is an absolute crock of shit. It exists only as a 'Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free Card' for the footballing authorities when they give the OK to some guy who appears to be Persil but turns out to be a front for a gang of spivs and gangsters who then run a club into the ground due to financial mismanagement and tax dodging.