6pm i heard it was on, mind they didnt issue findings till 10pm last time.. I however think this will be delayed till after the cup final to aviod possible march again they were planning for satQuote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
Printable View
6pm i heard it was on, mind they didnt issue findings till 10pm last time.. I however think this will be delayed till after the cup final to aviod possible march again they were planning for satQuote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brando7
You ever get that feeling we have to plan every ****** thing around Rangers instead off telling them what to do ,hopefully they will be getting well telt this evening.
A few posts up the page a bit you will see that I posted on this. There is no thinking a deferral will be made. BBC reported it will take several days to reach a decision.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brando7
good comment from the 'Tic "Quick News" site
-----------------------------------
The Battered Bunnet on 16 May, 2012 at 20:47 said:
At a ‘virtual’ Creditors’ Meeting on 20th April, Duff and Phelps, the Adminstrators of Fubar FC, asked the Creditors of the Company to vote on a series of Resolutions, such that with Creditors would authorise the Administrators to take certain actions on behalf of the Creditors.
Each Resolution required 50% of the total value of the Creditors to vote in favour in order that the Administrators be so authorised.
One of the key Resolutions asked the Creditors to authorise the Admininstrators to sell the assets of Fubar FC in whole or in part without further reference to the Creditors. I have pasted the relevant text below:
17.1.4 That the Joint Administrators can explore any and all options available to realise the assets of the Company without recourse to creditors. The Joint Administrators be authorised to conclude a sale of the whole, or part of the business, property and assets of the Company without having to obtain the sanction of the Company.s creditors at further creditors meetings, upon such terms as the Joint Administrators deem fit and they be authorised to liaise with all relevant parties, bodies or organisations which they deem relevant for achieving that purpose.
The Insolvency Act requires the Administrators to report the outcome of the votes at the Creditors’ Meeting to be notified to the Court and Companies House “as soon as reasonably practicable”.
To date Companies House is showing no such notification, and depsite being in front of Lord Hodge at Court last week, no information on the outcome of this critical meeting was presented. As I write, we do not know whether the Administrators have been authorised to sell the business and/or assets of Fubar FC.
This of course is all very well and good technically, but there is a rather practical aspect to it: According to press statements given in recent days, Charles Green is ‘irrevocably’ obliged to purchase the whole of the business and assets of Fubar FC in the event that the Creditors fail to accept his CVA proposal.
Unless the Creditors have voted in favour of resolution 17.1.4, the Administrators are not authorised to execute this ‘irrevocable’ obligation.
The whole matter of course can be easily clarified if only a witting journalist would ask the Administrators for confirmation that the Creditors approved the relevant resolution that thereby gives them the necessary authority to close the deal with Green.
Over to Scotland’s Media on that one.
One does though wonder what other matters the Administrators are required to deliver against without which the irrevocable agreement with Mr Green is somewhat ..eh, revocable.
----------------------------------------------------------
linky ... http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/?p=...omment-1426008
As Vyvian says " I'm completely bl00dy sick of this"
:greengrin
rangers appeal rejected: not what i expected.
i thought the hierarchy would crumble....
Chris McLaughlin @BBCchrismclaug
#Rangers appeal rejected by #SFA
GET IN :top marksQuote:
Originally Posted by Magnum Hibee
Ewen Murray -
In summary, SFA say punishment handed to Rangers was proportionate to crime and note contracts of existing players can still be extended
Having seen the findings of the report, any other decision would have been farcical.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brando7
It's a start!. :aok:
Brilliant stuff
1. It was competent for Disciplinary Tribunal to impose the additional
sanction of prohibiting registrations of any new players of 18 years or
older for a period of 12 months.
2. The Disciplinary Tribunal was correct to determine that the conduct
involved - especially the deliberate non-payment of very large sums,
estimated in excess of £13m of tax in the form of PAYE, NIC and VAT -
was attributable to the club as a member of the Scottish FA.
3. The Disciplinary Tribunal was correct also in holding that the
maximum fine available for this breach was £100,000, and on its own was
inadequate as a punishment for this misconduct. It was therefore correct
to select an additional sanction.
4. The sanctions available included expulsion from participation in the
game and termination or suspension of membership of the Scottish FA,
which would have had a similar effect. The Appellate Tribunal observes
that serious consideration was given by the disciplinary tribunal to
imposing one of these sanctions, which would have had obvious
consequences for the survival of the club. The Disciplinary Tribunal
rejected these as too severe and this Appellate Tribunal agrees with
that conclusion.
5. Although the Appellate Tribunal has listened carefully to the
representations from Rangers FC about the practical effects of the
additional sanction, it has concluded that this sanction was
proportionate to the breach, dissuasive to others and effective in the
context of serious misconduct, bringing the game into disrepute. In
particular, the Appellate Tribunal recognises that the Disciplinary
Tribunal decision does not affect Rangers’ ability to extend the
contracts of existing professional players, including those whose
contracts will expire at the end of this season and including also those
currently on loan to other clubs. The Appellate Tribunal observes that
Rangers FC have over 40 professional players in this category.
Therefore, the Appellate Tribunal affirms the decision of the
Disciplinary Tribunal.
The worm has turned. Hopefully the SPL clubs can follow this lead.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brando7
To the huns :giruy:
Let the blue nose gnashing and wailing begin.:cbQuote:
Originally Posted by Brando7
Next question. Would this punishment still apply to a newco?
Sfa have rejected the Huns appeal
To sanctions put on them
Lol lol lol lol lol lol
Fireworks around Hampden on Saturday however. I hope Strathclyde police are up to the task and don't allow the **** to ruin the occasion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bishop Hibee
http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=220487&st=0Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Mandela
fill your boots there are a few crackers in here Haha couple of favourites being the dog from BGT has more sense and lets get lots of glamour friendlies instead of away games, Im sure Barca would love the glamour of playing 17 year olds Haha
Good. **** 'em :aok:
I know it is a celtic thing but............................
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-4s-...e_gdata_player
quite amusing
Was in "The Bears Den" earlier and there were lots of comments about how the SFA had seen the might of "The People" and would def back down now. OOOOOOOPPPPPSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS GIRFUY.
I have to assume it is tagged to the clubs licence, so a newco trying to claim it has the old clubs licence would surely inherit the punishments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Mandela
At that point the newco surely cannot try and switch over player contracts, which it couldn't do anyway, and will have to make do with a team totally composed of kids. Relegation fodder for sure.
So with these punishments in place there best option is either a brand new club applying to division 3, or buying another club and renaming it.
Its the right decision to uphold the decision but its bad timing with the final due this weekend. Surely it would have made more sense to review the appeal next week! There may be trouble ahead.............
:flag:
Looking on rangers media, there are 1 or 2 saying let's cause trouble on Saturday, but to be fair they are getting shouted down saying it could cause a riot and would play into everyone's handsQuote:
Originally Posted by Green Blood
Won't suprise me now if those Huns do go ahead with their so-called protest this sat. But a good decision by the sfa.
Aw naw. More gnashing of teeth, hair out by the roots and veiled threats of repercussions ............. and that's just Chick YoungQuote:
Originally Posted by Mikey
"See if they were going to hit us with a fine for not paying taxes? Fair enough, I can live with that, even though it stinks, as it was solely Whyte's doing.
But a transfer ban has no relation to the crime. A transfer ban should be placed if we had breached contract with a player, or if we had refused to pay a fee to another club.
It's just a ridiculously strange decision, and one we will remember when they come begging us for something in the future."
Apparently the people are not the brightest sparks in the engine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim44
I really can't see more than a handful trying anything, which won't get very far
Let's hope the moderates win the day and we don't get some tanked up huns trying to spoil our day out.Quote:
Originally Posted by CallumLaidlaw