Monkey Tennis Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 37 E Club Financial Arrangements Insolvency E1 Subject to Rule E5 , where a Club suffers or is subject to an Insolvency Event that Club shall be deducted 15 points in the League . E2 Where an Insolvency Event occurs during a Season, the 15 points deduction shall be applied immediately to take effect in the current Season. E3 Where an Insolvency Event occurs during the Close Season the 15 points deduction shall apply in respect of the immediately following Season, such that the relevant Club starts that immediately following Season in the relevant Division on minus 15 points. E4 Where an Insolvency Event or in the event that such Insolvency Event is part of anInsolvency Process that process, continues and/or is subsisting during a second orlater Season then, for each such second or later Season, during the whole or part of which such Insolvency Event or Insolvency Process is continuing and/or subsisting, the Club concerned shall be deducted 15 points and shall start each such second or later Season in the relevant Division on minus 15 points. E5 Where a Club, whether owned and operated by the same or a different Member, suffers or is subject to an Insolvency Event which results in a deduction of points interms of these Rules and within 5 years of the date of such Insolvency Event suffers or is subject to a further Insolvency Event which is not part of the same Insolvency Process as the Insolvency Event then suffered, the points deduction applicable in terms of Rules E1 in respect of that second or further Insolvency Event, shall be 25 points with the 15 points in Rules E2 and E3 being 25 Points Glad we got here. It confirms what I thought was the case. If Rangers enter admin again, it'll cost them 25 points. The wording means that any old club/new club debate is also an irrelevance. I'm pretty sure that admin, followed soon by liquidation ( as happened last time) would be treated as the one event and carry only one penalty in this respect. The idea of admitting a new club would operate as before though with clubs voting, would it not? Albeit, all 41at once this time, under the same umbrella. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 It's amazing how many bears are berating Ashley for not pumping in another million so thatcher can hold onto McLeod. In their position it's really fair if any club to offer a million quid for any Rangers player. They should just be thankful to get a wage of the monthly bills Which bears are wanting Ashley to pump in money? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenolly Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Glad we got here. It confirms what I thought was the case. If Rangers enter admin again, it'll cost them 25 points. The wording means that any old club/new club debate is also an irrelevance. I'm pretty sure that admin, followed soon by liquidation ( as happened last time) would be treated as the one event and carry only one penalty in this respect. The idea of admitting a new club would operate as before though with clubs voting, would it not? Albeit, all 41at once this time, under the same umbrella. That would put Rangers on 10 points, 40 behind hearts with 18 games (54 point to play) and 16 behind the new 4th place Falkirk, add to that the squad getting sold off and they will be fighting relegation rather than promotion 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p&b is a disgrace Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Bears on the RM Lewis Macleod thread 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the 67 Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Which bears are wanting Ashley to pump in money? Maybe you should have clicked on the link posted earlier and seen for yourself....instead of acting like a dick. Or do you need spoon fed and people to talk you through everything. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Glad we got here. It confirms what I thought was the case. If Rangers enter admin again, it'll cost them 25 points. The wording means that any old club/new club debate is also an irrelevance. I'm pretty sure that admin, followed soon by liquidation ( as happened last time) would be treated as the one event and carry only one penalty in this respect. The idea of admitting a new club would operate as before though with clubs voting, would it not? Albeit, all 41at once this time, under the same umbrella. Are you talking about rule e5? It cab be taken a couple ways in regards to whether a club is the same club or not IMO depending on how you read it. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Maybe you should have clicked on the link posted earlier and seen for yourself....instead of acting like a dick. Or do you need spoon fed and people to talk you through everything. Calm down dear, remember your blood pressure. -3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sting777 Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Maybe you should have clicked on the link posted earlier and seen for yourself....instead of acting like a dick. Or do you need spoon fed and people to talk you through everything. The only links he does are the ones you do in the frying pan. Appears to be totally incapable of hitting a link...lol 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelegendthatis Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 (edited) Would the limitations go as far as property ownership such as the land on where the football stadium sits, the stadium, all the other buildings, etc?. He would have little influence in running the club to the authorities than say a landlord renting his property out to a company. Or so it could appear. If certain assets are held as security against loans is there a time limit on that?. Ashley can't have any more shares against loans to the club so it has to be something else. That already works all over the place. Falkirk play at stadium owned by Falkirk Council. Livingston same with WLC and many others (In both cases they have either totally ignored the rental demands or complained publicly about them). http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/livingston/8152805.stm When Hibs were in trouble Tom Farmer took over the ground and stadium (if I remember right) and Hibs FC was left to run the football side with Farmer putting proper business management in place (Rod Petrie was the Llambias of the time). So if Ashley owned all the assets of the club, the SFA would find it hard to complain as they are clearly not worried about the other clubs who split assets from fc. Loans will have a time limit but no reason why not rearrange as it get close to the due date just like you would if you were remortgaging your house. Edited December 30, 2014 by thelegendthatis 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the 67 Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Calm down dear, remember your blood pressure. Blood pressure is fine thanks. You on the other hand bring absolutely nothing to any thread. You really are a pointless strange little man/woman Vicky. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelegendthatis Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 The only links he does are the ones you do in the frying pan. Appears to be totally incapable of hitting a link...lol Ignoring the links allows the distraction to last longer. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 A new club would suffer a 15 point penalty An existing club who had already been through a previous insolvency issue would suffer a 25 point penalty, that is why they say 'Where a Club, whether owned and operated by the same or a different Member' they clearly state here that the member is the operator of the club and that member is also the owner of the club. Sorry Mhonkhey but if you are pushing for 25 points then you are arguing that club and company are separate which is clearly how the SFA see things, it very much does decide the old club new club debate. It decides nothing, you poor desperate wee bear. All it does is back up what MT, YT and others have tried (Lord, how we've tried) to explain to you on many occasions. The SFA, whose rulebook you quote, bought into the continuation myth for their own purposes - whether Brother Campbell pulled the strings or not, they want their Bigotfest back, and sharpish - so all your wee quote does there is show that they're now trapped into being consistent. Evidently the governing body is as surprised at your new club's ability to screw everything up as the rest of us. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeeHectorPar Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Are you talking about rule e5? It cab be taken a couple ways in regards to whether a club is the same club or not IMO depending on how you read it. 'Where a Club, whether owned and operated by the same or a different Member, suffers or is subject to an Insolvency Event" Pretty clear from this. The SPFL aren't concerned with who owns the membership; it is the club which takes part in the sporting events and Rangers were allowed to skip all the stages involved with a new club as they were considered to be the existing club, only the holding company changed. Owning companies can't get sporting penalties such as points deductions, only clubs can. Not the same club = no history, apart from your two lowly league titles. You can't have it all ways. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 'Desperate wee bear' 'Lord, how we have tried' 'Brother Campbell' 'Bigotfest' Is it any wonder nobody ever tries to debate anything with you when all you ever do is resort to this nonsense? it is no wonder at all however why they just resort in kind, now away you go WKR. Nerve. Touched. Damn, I've still got it! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEADOWXI Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Must be time to shut the life support off now surely.think about the electric bill. If they are on a card meter for their leccy will the Dumbarton game keep the lights on...??? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 No nerves touched at all, I am just being polite and telling you why nobody tries to debate with you, I also pointed out why every discussion you do get involves ends the same way. Evidently your definition of "polite" is just one more indication of how ra peepul are different from the rest of us.... -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 I genuinely believe I am a nice, polite person...I will however treat arseholes like arseholes, I hope this explains why I tend to respond to you like I do. So, just to be clear - you were being polite by insulting me? Because if you don't like someone the definition of "polite" changes according to your perception of that person? Yet another indication... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 If Rangers are the same club Administration would be they're THIRD insolvency event. 1.Admin under whyte 2.Liquidation. They got 15 points for the 1st but I dont recall Rangers being docked points for their 2nd insolvency event, Liquidation? Why was that?...If they survived liquidation then surely they should have been docked 25 points. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Why would a football club that had been rejected admission to the SPL and then had to start again from the bottom tier of the Scottish League be deducted points?. Because the myth is ,its the same club so why no points deduction for liquidation? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 The rules everyone is discussing did not exist when the oldco entered administration, nor did they exist when the club passed to new owners nor when the oldco went into liquidation. The would still be a deduction for an insolvency event under the old rules , so why none for being liquidated? 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.