Court case v Coral

[CropleyWasGod]

There was an authoritative legal decision taken. They were put down to be liquidated and bits were sold off to Sevco 5088 and they produced a new football club.

What more proof does anyone need?

Glory Glory

See the Meltdown thread for my thoughts on that. :greengrin

[northstandhibby]

See the Meltdown thread for my thoughts on that. :greengrin

Please tell me its not the Club/Company red herring?

Glory Glory

[Canon Hannan]

[QUOTE=northstandhibby;4912566]There was an authoritative legal decision taken. They were put down to be liquidated and bits were sold off to Sevco 5088 and they produced a new football club.

What more proof does anyone need?

Glory Glory[/QUOTE

I am with you North stand Hibby

When a club/business is liquidated it closes the doors. Rangers and their friends are trying to muddy the waters. As a Business owner- if I was liquidated I would not be the same Company in any way shape or form. It is that simple.

[CropleyWasGod]

[QUOTE=northstandhibby;4912566]There was an authoritative legal decision taken. They were put down to be liquidated and bits were sold off to Sevco 5088 and they produced a new football club.

What more proof does anyone need?

Glory Glory[/QUOTE

I am with you North stand Hibby

When a club/business is liquidated it closes the doors. Rangers and their friends are trying to muddy the waters. As a Business owner- if I was liquidated I would not be the same Company in any way shape or form. It is that simple.

... which all helps to prove my point that the debate goes on whilst there are people with different views on the matter.

[InchHibby]

I know, and I agree. But my point is that it doesn't really matter.

It's hard to establish what exactly the crime was, but we're all sure there was one, and for that there needed to be consequences. There was serious talk of Rangers being catapulted into the First Division, even kept in the Premier League as their absence would have brought about "armageddon". Quite frankly, allowing that to happen would have brought about "armageddon" (although I guarantee no Rangers fan anywhere would agree with me on that). They might even have been allowed to disappear altogether, which would have satisfied a great many, but I don't think that really would have been reasonable either.

By the letter of the law they should probably have had to compete with Spartans and other clubs for league re-entry, and a lot of these clubs would have met the criteria ahead of a new Rangers club. But would that really have been in the best interests of anyone?

In exchange for keeping their club they had to spend a spell in the lower divisions and get taunted about being a new club. In my mind (and I'm aware that I'll be in a vast minority on this site on this subject) that was a reasonable "bigger picture" trade to get us all out of a really sorry period.

It all kind of falls down when we start scrapping about the minor details such as relegated/ liquidated, keeping trophies etc.
I think you definately will be in the minority and the reason being, you can't make up a set of rules then stretch them a little to suit any or for this matter, one particular club. If this was was the case then why not make up two sets of rules, one for those that if they got themselves in bother but it wouldn't make an ounce of difference if they were never seen again, and the stretchy one for those other clubs we think we need.
They really should have been fighting it out with the likes of Spartans to get back into the main leagues, and they should have really, lost all their history.

[silverhibee]

I think it's because football just wouldn't work if laws were down purely down to the law of the land. There (kind of) have to be special conditions when it comes to football.

Employment law would be one. I any walk of life you can hand in your notice and go to work for someone else. Football wouldn't work if clubs developed players, spent a fortune on preparing them then letting them go to work for someone else with month's notice, during a season.

Football's a contact sport. So when you enter a field of play you take a certain amount of risk, a certain amount of physical contact is accepted/ expected and you might get injured. Sometimes a line is crossed and more serious censure is required. But it is up to the players as to how far they'd want to take punishment of any offences. Duncan Ferguson served a prison sentence for a head-butt on the field of play so if you misbehave badly enough, the law of the land will get involved.


Sometimes you have to look at a bigger picture. I don't know what the 5 way agreement involved, but basically everyone in Scottish football (Rangers, Celtic, the other clubs, everyone) feel aggrieved by it. By letting details be known, everyone might feel more aggrieved. Old grievances get dug up and who knows, teams, players, fans may go on strike and stop the continuity of Scottish football. If some sort of agreement or compromise has been achieved that has allowed us to continue, surely that is a good thing?

Football is so partisan, sometimes the only logical thing to do is the illogical.

Ally McCoist and the like can go about demanding clarity if they want, but fans of Scottish football don't exactly have a good track record of being able to deal with clarity, therefore maybe the murky 5 way agreement is best remaining murky?

I can only think of one other time the law of the land (ie, the Police) have ever got involved in any incidents on the field of play regards players, old firm game many years ago where i think a couple of Rangers and a Celtic player were charged with breach of the peace, can't remember if this was before or after the Ferguson incident, since then it seems the law of the land have turned a blind eye to things that have happened during games and now just allowed the SFA to deal with assaults and BOTP incidents, a few examples could be, Lennon & McGeady fighting with each other during a game against Dunfermline, Ricksen assault on Riordan at Hampden, BOTP incidents, the Dallas old firm game at Parkhead or Lennon & McCoist at Parkhead, was the referee not also assaulted by a player during that game, why do the police not get involved anymore, it would seem that the Police don't get involved in these things anymore.

[JeMeSouviens]

The same club argument isn't really of that much interest to me. My own view is they are a new club but I'm happy enough for them to claim continuity.
However it was interesting to hear the the SPFL lawyer in court yesterday saying that it was only in Scotland where there would be a case for claiming it's the same club. He admitted FIFA and UEFA would not see them as the same club but that the SFA took a different view. Strangely though, as a member of FIFA and UEFA they are supposed to follow all their rules.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What he didn't say (not explicitly anyway) was that prior to the Old Hun meltdown and armageddon fiasco, the SFA, SPL, SFL all had exactly the same view as FIFA and UEFA. They rewrote their own rules purely to attempt to get any form of continuity Huns into the league to limit financial damage. Hence the ethereal club separated from its legal entity. In short - madey up pish. :rolleyes:

[Smartie]

I can only think of one other time the law of the land (ie, the Police) have ever got involved in any incidents on the field of play regards players, old firm game many years ago where i think a couple of Rangers and a Celtic player were charged with breach of the peace, can't remember if this was before or after the Ferguson incident, since then it seems the law of the land have turned a blind eye to things that have happened during games and now just allowed the SFA to deal with assaults and BOTP incidents, a few examples could be, Lennon & McGeady fighting with each other during a game against Dunfermline, Ricksen assault on Riordan at Hampden, BOTP incidents, the Dallas old firm game at Parkhead or Lennon & McCoist at Parkhead, was the referee not also assaulted by a player during that game, why do the police not get involved anymore, it would seem that the Police don't get involved in these things anymore.

I think it's often because somebody needs to make a complaint.

Hugh Dallas probably decided that his life wouldn't be worth living if he pursued that one.

Fisticuffs happen in the street reasonably often but if nobody makes a complaint then the police can't get involved - they'll only get involved if someone wants them to.

I'm sure there have been episodes down South when complaints have been brought by members of the crowd disapproving of actions (I seem to remember lip-reading racist language but I can't be sure).

There's a lot of stuff that goes on in the crowd that you wouldn't get away with if you tried it in the street. A foul-mouthed rant directed at a footballer in a football stadium is seen as fair game whereas if you went into someone's place of work and tried it, you'd quickly find yourself in trouble. What's the difference between abusing a footballer and a bus driver?



There's another side to it of course, and that would probably belong in another side of this forum. My mate who is in the police is constantly moaning about how their hands are tied by lack of funds. I don't think the police have the manpower, the desire or the interest to pursue half of what they would like to any more.

Unless it happened on the Hampden pitch on the 21st May 2016 of course.

[McD]

I can only think of one other time the law of the land (ie, the Police) have ever got involved in any incidents on the field of play regards players, old firm game many years ago where i think a couple of Rangers and a Celtic player were charged with breach of the peace, can't remember if this was before or after the Ferguson incident, since then it seems the law of the land have turned a blind eye to things that have happened during games and now just allowed the SFA to deal with assaults and BOTP incidents, a few examples could be, Lennon & McGeady fighting with each other during a game against Dunfermline, Ricksen assault on Riordan at Hampden, BOTP incidents, the Dallas old firm game at Parkhead or Lennon & McCoist at Parkhead, was the referee not also assaulted by a player during that game, why do the police not get involved anymore, it would seem that the Police don't get involved in these things anymore.


Was that graham roberts, frank macavennie and terry butcher (I think)?

Late 80s OF game (possibly a cup tie) where Roberts took over in goal from Chris woods and was conducting the rangers fans in singing their songs?

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

I promised myself that I'd only talk about Hibs and football in here and not get sucked into anything about 'Gers. I failed but I'll avoid such nonsense in the future

Is this The BITC?

[tamig]

Was that graham roberts, frank macavennie and terry butcher (I think)?

Late 80s OF game (possibly a cup tie) where Roberts took over in goal from Chris woods and was conducting the rangers fans in singing their songs?
It was indeed. All four - including Woods - ended up in court and two were convicted of Breach.

[Skol]

Shame the Ethiopian lad that finished 2nd in todays Dubai Marathon isnt a football player, wouldve been a great name for a The Rangers signing.

Mule Wasihun

[pacorosssco]

If you really feel that then why bother following us or Scottish football? The least you want/ expect is a fair fight.

Rod Petrie will represent us very strongly at SPFL/ SFA level. There is a great deal of "non OF" representation at high level in Scottish football right now.

Yes, I wish people like Regan and Doncaster would be a bit more proactive at drumming up interest in Scottish football outwith the OF and I thought that Barry Hearn made great points about furthering our game. Instead of catering to an existing, imo diminishing market I think we should be far more daring and try to open up new ones.

We'll always be an underdog against the OF but that doesn't mean it isn't fair. They'll win more against us than us against them, but our wins will always taste sweeter. There is no better feeling (in my opinion) than going to Glasgow and coming out with a win, and I'll always want to see Hibs test themselves against bigger and better teams and try to grow.

I'm not interested in going into games with an unfair disadvantage to go with the fair disadvantage, which is what happened all too often in this grim period.


Fifa uefa much to blame as sfa. Big teams protected as much as possible. Killed competition levels all over europe. If china lasts uefa will cry not fair

[lapsedhibee]

If you really feel that then why bother following us or Scottish football? The least you want/ expect is a fair fight.

Rod Petrie will represent us very strongly at SPFL/ SFA level. There is a great deal of "non OF" representation at high level in Scottish football right now.

Yes, I wish people like Regan and Doncaster would be a bit more proactive at drumming up interest in Scottish football outwith the OF and I thought that Barry Hearn made great points about furthering our game. Instead of catering to an existing, imo diminishing market I think we should be far more daring and try to open up new ones.

We'll always be an underdog against the OF but that doesn't mean it isn't fair. They'll win more against us than us against them, but our wins will always taste sweeter. There is no better feeling (in my opinion) than going to Glasgow and coming out with a win, and I'll always want to see Hibs test themselves against bigger and better teams and try to grow.

I'm not interested in going into games with an unfair disadvantage to go with the fair disadvantage, which is what happened all too often in this grim period.

What in your view is the reason that the thes are never, ever taken to task by the football authorities for their fans' regular and very obvious sectarian chanting? So obvious that TV companies have to turn down the volume when it happens? Is there an equivalent misdemeanour that Hibs fans regularly get away with? Running on to the pitch once every 100+ years, for example?

[PatHead]

Had he placed the bet that 'Rangers' would not be playing in the SPL the following season we would not be having this discussion now. His bet was very ambiguous, and seemingly insightful, at the same time.

Coral could have argued there was no SPL for them to be in as it had changed to the premiership.

[PatHead]

I think you definately will be in the minority and the reason being, you can't make up a set of rules then stretch them a little to suit any or for this matter, one particular club. If this was was the case then why not make up two sets of rules, one for those that if they got themselves in bother but it wouldn't make an ounce of difference if they were never seen again, and the stretchy one for those other clubs we think we need.
They really should have been fighting it out with the likes of Spartans to get back into the main leagues, and they should have really, lost all their history.

Just like gretna who set a precedent

[Kavinho]

The bet went down intending to simply mean that a (any) rangers team would not be in the top flight. (Relegated/demoted/liquidated/shutdown)

They weren't in the top flight the following season.

Coral took the bet after a check with head office. They probably thought it was easy money, and they wouldn't be refunding the stake had rangers limped on a further season.

Its an internal error to have quoted such a high price as they weren't up on the developing situation atIbrox, and that's not the fault of the punter who was quoted odds, asked them to check and when confirmed took them in good faith..

[Smartie]

What in your view is the reason that the thes are never, ever taken to task by the football authorities for their fans' regular and very obvious sectarian chanting? So obvious that TV companies have to turn down the volume when it happens? Is there an equivalent misdemeanour that Hibs fans regularly get away with? Running on to the pitch once every 100+ years, for example?

I think it's the general feeling in the West of Scotland that sectarian chanting isn't unacceptable. "Folk songs" and "tradition" are part of their culture.

It could be stamped out at a stroke if their was sufficient will for it.

I consider it to be a cultural thing rather than a football thing.

It stinks, and I absolutely hate it but I don't think it is evidence of some sort of conspiracy.



The "Hampden pitch" business was imo evidence of the Rangers board, who are a shower of lunatics, trying to appease the more moronic elements amongst their support by putting great pressure on the press and then the authorities to be seen to do something, mainly to distract their own fans from an appalling result with footballing consequences for their club (no Europe). I should also that imo some of our fans actually crossed a line and gave them ammunition (although nothing like the extent that the media made out). Most of the Rangers fans I know were absolutely sound to me about it, grudgingly congratulated me and admitted it was all pretty special. The "FollowFollow" keyboard wallopers are the ones we're most aware of and the ones the Rangers board want to impress, so we're going to have to get used to this sort of nonsense.

Like it or not, there are a lot them that just happen to follow a different football team to us.

[CropleyWasGod]

Coral could have argued there was no SPL for them to be in as it had changed to the premiership.
That didn't change until the 2013/14 season ie the season after the "realignment "

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[jgl07]

I noted that the owners of the recently formed Bradford Bulls Rugby League team argued that no tax liabilities would be due from the former liquidated Club of the same name.

We are a completely new entity they argued:

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/jan/20/bradford-bulls-appoint-geoff-toovey-coach-andrew-chalmers-graham-lowe

[Moulin Yarns]

That didn't change until the 2013/14 season ie the season after the "realignment "

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Loving the terminology :greengrin

Any idea what the odds are on another 'realignment' :wink:

[CropleyWasGod]

Loving the terminology :greengrin

Any idea what the odds are on another 'realignment' :wink:
Hah ..

I had to think hard about the right word to use, for fear of upsetting folk 😂

Um.....there won't be another realignment. Barrie Mackay is getting selt fur £30m.

[emoji48]

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[Kavinho]

Hah ..

I had to think hard about the right word to use, for fear of upsetting folk 😂

Um.....there won't be another realignment. Barrie Mackay is getting selt fur £30m.

[emoji48]

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Maybe a realignment of what is a realistic expectation though.
One can but dream