Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

16-06-2012, 06:44 PM
jonty

Quote:

Originally Posted by H18SVG

This is the problem faced by Rangers, the SPL and the SFA.
There is a real danger that this is turning into a 'we all hate Rangers so lets kill them off' while hiding behind the sporting integrity banner.
In two other threads I've asked what the crimes are that Rangers have committed and what punishments are available for these crimes, not what people want to see happen to them. I've not seen a reply to either yet.
If the SPL members have to vote on a new company entering the SPL under the circumstances that Rangers find themselves in now, and, there is no precedent set for such a set of circumstances then it has to be based on why they should not be allowed in.
This seems to be what is being said in as much as each case will be looked at on its own merit.

If Rangers are allowed to re enter the SPL it will either be with cripling sanctions or with acceptance that they will be liable for the crimes of GRFC.
If the allegations on double contracts and misuse of EBT's are proven to be correct then the outcome is likely to be expulsion from the SPL.

This does not have a 'happy ever after' endline.

your questions regarding the crimes committed have been answered, so I don't need to repeat them.
my post isn't a which hunt, and it's not hiding behind sporting integrity. It's about doing the right thing, and playing by the rules - pure and simple.

If the new owners want the history of the club then that's all well and good - but have to accept the good with the bad.
16-06-2012, 07:20 PM
Eyrie

Quote:

Originally Posted by jc1

The players had a contract with Glasgow Rangers, a company which doesn't exist anymore, therefore their contracts are now null and void. Yes they can offer the same contracts but these players will now be free agents and can move when ever they like.

On the other hand, all the normal background employees at Huns RIP will have the right to transfer over to New Huns on the same conditions which will create a problem as, unless they are in the SPL , they won't be able to afford to pay all the admin staff, cleaners, groundstaff, youth coaches etc. Very few jobs out there at the moment, so those background employees on normal wages would be daft not to move over, even if only to secure redundancy payments.
16-06-2012, 07:27 PM
CropleyWasGod

Quote:

Originally Posted by jc1

The players had a contract with Glasgow Rangers, a company which doesn't exist anymore, therefore their contracts are now null and void. Yes they can offer the same contracts but these players will now be free agents and can move when ever they like.

1. the old company does still exist.

2. the employments can be transferred. The players are not free agents.
16-06-2012, 07:31 PM
jgl07

Quote:

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

1. the old company does still exist.

2. the employments can be transferred. The players are not free agents.

The contracts do transfer on the same terms but as it followed an insolvency event, the employees have to right to opt out.

They can become free agents if they wish.
16-06-2012, 07:33 PM
CropleyWasGod

Quote:

Originally Posted by jgl07

The contracts do transfer on the same terms but as it followed an insolvency event, the employees have to right to opt out.

They can become free agents if they wish.

Yes, I agree. The default position is transfer, which is what I was disagreeing with the previous poster on. At present, they are not "free agents".

On that point, have the SPFA said anything?
16-06-2012, 07:35 PM
Bighoose

On twitter...
Tom English ‏@TomEnglishSport
Malcolm Murray in the Sunday papers talking about SPL clubs having a "suicide pact" if they keep Rangers out. Not one for mincing his words

Newco. New Chairman. Same old pi$h.
16-06-2012, 07:37 PM
Part/Time Supporter

Quote:

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Yes, I agree. The default position is transfer, which is what I was disagreeing with the previous poster on. At present, they are not "free agents".

On that point, have the SPFA said anything?

http://pfascotland.co.uk/2012/news/p...tupe-position/
16-06-2012, 07:41 PM
jgl07

Quote:

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Yes, I agree. The default position is transfer, which is what I was disagreeing with the previous poster on. At present, they are not "free agents".

On that point, have the SPFA said anything?

They have certainly put out a statement that confirms the players rights to opt out. They clearly consulted employment lawyers.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18446597
16-06-2012, 07:42 PM
CropleyWasGod

Quote:

Originally Posted by Part/Time Supporter

http://pfascotland.co.uk/2012/news/p...tupe-position/

Cheers for that.

So no fait accompli yet. The players won't be sure they want to move until they know what League they're in. Seems sensible to me.

And the longer the uncertainty remains, the more likely they are to take an offer from someone else.

Lovely :greengrin
16-06-2012, 07:47 PM
magpie1892

Source for latest bracketed info in headline? (fixture list)
16-06-2012, 07:47 PM
CentreLine

Quote:

Originally Posted by CentreLine

On the TV post-mortem the other night the tax expert on ITV said that the name of the newco could not be Rangers anything it had to be a completely new company and that the name “The Rangers Football Club” was simply a trading name not the name of the company. A flag of convenience if you like. That being the case, do we know what the real name of the new company actually is? I am certain we might want to include it in a song after all :stirrer:

So does nobody know what the real name of the new company is?
16-06-2012, 07:48 PM
Nuitdelune

Quote:

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Yes, I agree. The default position is transfer, which is what I was disagreeing with the previous poster on. At present, they are not "free agents".

On that point, have the SPFA said anything?

TUPE was designed to stop new owners getting rid of the old staff, to protect them and make sure the new owners inherited them, their terms, length of service etc. This is the reverse situation. They cannot be forced to transfer but will have to opt out though don't know when/how they do it without reading the legislation. Odd thing is--how does Charles Green not know this
16-06-2012, 07:56 PM
CropleyWasGod

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nuitdelune

TUPE was designed to stop new owners getting rid of the old staff, to protect them and make sure the new owners inherited them, their terms, length of service etc. This is the reverse situation. They cannot be forced to transfer but will have to opt out though don't know when/how they do it without reading the legislation. Odd thing is--how does Charles Green not know this

I'm sure he does know it, and will be doing his best to get the high-value players to stay. If he IS an asset-stripper, then it would make sense to offer those players inducements to transfer, with a promise to accept the first £xm offer that is made.

2-3 situations like that, and he's made money.
16-06-2012, 08:00 PM
down-the-slope

Quote:

Originally Posted by CentreLine

So does nobody know what the real name of the new company is?

SEVCO...come on man keep up..that was about 100 pages ago :greengrin
16-06-2012, 08:03 PM
Nuitdelune

Quote:

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

I'm sure he does know it, and will be doing his best to get the high-value players to stay. If he IS an asset-stripper, then it would make sense to offer those players inducements to transfer, with a promise to accept the first £xm offer that is made.

2-3 situations like that, and he's made money.

That is true but why go on the telly making statements that are not correct, might fool the player but not the agent. I wondered whether fixed term employees/football players are different, though surely can't be so.
16-06-2012, 08:05 PM
CropleyWasGod

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nuitdelune

That is true but why go on the telly making statements that are not correct, might fool the player but not the agent. I wondered whether fixed term employees/football players are different, though surely can't be so.

Not according to the SPFA's statement.
16-06-2012, 08:09 PM
Nuitdelune

Quote:

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Not according to the SPFA's statement.

And of course must factor in that some of them would be 'feart' not to go in case they were not still with Rangers, The Rangers, Any Rangers...
16-06-2012, 08:19 PM
jgl07

Quote:

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

I'm sure he does know it, and will be doing his best to get the high-value players to stay. If he IS an asset-stripper, then it would make sense to offer those players inducements to transfer, with a promise to accept the first £xm offer that is made.

2-3 situations like that, and he's made money.

But why would a high value player who was aware that he was going to be punted ofr a profit not simply opt out and negotiate as a free agent and have the transfer sum as a signing on fee.

The players who will be keen to move are those who would have problems finding a new club, at least on their current wages.

Let's face it the likes of Naismith, Whittakar, Wallace, and McGregor are not going to play Division Three. I expect they will be away as soon as the position is more clear.

If Rangers are due to be bumped they need to pretty well clear out most of the senior staff and will be reliant on the youth team.

Until such time as Green sells out, cash will be very short as there will be next to no season ticket money forthcoming so there may be no option.
16-06-2012, 08:21 PM
jgl07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nuitdelune

That is true but why go on the telly making statements that are not correct, might fool the player but not the agent. I wondered whether fixed term employees/football players are different, though surely can't be so.

Because he is an ignorant Yorkshire buffoon?
16-06-2012, 08:36 PM
Nuitdelune

Quote:

Originally Posted by jgl07

Because he is an ignorant Yorkshire buffoon?

:greengrin
16-06-2012, 08:55 PM
HFC 0-7

Reading the article on the Bbc website about the sfa getting involved to restructure the leagues, they say they are doing it to distribute wealth better and stop the rangers situation happening again. Seems strange that because the rangers situation was sheer greed on their part, they weren't happy spending on par with Celtic and considerably more than the rest, so distributing wealth more fairly wont stop a team insisting to spend more than they can afford. I think they are just doing it to make sure they can let rangers back into one of the leagues.
16-06-2012, 09:09 PM
Col2

I can't be the only person is sick and tired of the whole saga.

Yes Rangers are no more and they are replaced by The Rangers. This will run and run and run.

The thing that gets me in all of this and is rarely mentioned on here, by pundits, the media etc etc..... Is.....Rangers FC CAUSED this, they are FULLY ACCOUNTABLE for the mess and the disruption to the league, the other clubs, supporters and the image of Scottish Football.

Despite all this I have seen ZERO humility shown by anyone with any kind of association with RFC. David Murray, Craig Whyte, Charles Green, Ally McCoist, Sandy Jardine, Gordon Smith, Rangers Supporters Assxociations and every single rangers fan I have spoken to.

At best you get a 'I know we were in the wrong BUT *insert 101 excuse and blame of someone else*.

The irony for us is that we have run a tight ship for last 7 years or so much to the pain on the park. Now we need to rebuild our squad and I can't think anything other than Fenlons budget will be restricted by those fans including me who refuse to renew for next season while this rumbles on.

Really sad sad state of affairs when only two people who fans are giving credit to over last 4 months is Channel 4 journalist and blogger and BBC Panarama journalist.
16-06-2012, 09:14 PM
Jack

Quote:

Originally Posted by CentreLine

So does nobody know what the real name of the new company is?

Zombiehuns, for goodness sake keep up here;-)
16-06-2012, 09:28 PM
Hibby Hippy

Quote:

Originally Posted by magpie1892

Source for latest bracketed info in headline? (fixture list)

Only thing i can find is this.

http://sport.stv.tv/football/106461-...-fixture-list/
16-06-2012, 09:29 PM
Dashing Bob S

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bighoose

On twitter...
Tom English ‏@TomEnglishSport
Malcolm Murray in the Sunday papers talking about SPL clubs having a "suicide pact" if they keep Rangers out. Not one for mincing his words

Newco. New Chairman. Same old pi$h.

Which we're a lot less inclined to put up with now. So this tiresome arrogant chest-beating/threatening, might just be a gross miscalculation. I only hope that the SPL chairmen's responses are as unequivocal.
16-06-2012, 09:33 PM
iwasthere1972

Quote:

Originally Posted by CentreLine

So does nobody know what the real name of the new company is?

Rumour is that it will

Taxus Rangers
16-06-2012, 10:38 PM
HibbyRod

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nuitdelune

TUPE was designed to stop new owners getting rid of the old staff, to protect them and make sure the new owners inherited them, their terms, length of service etc. This is the reverse situation. They cannot be forced to transfer but will have to opt out though don't know when/how they do it without reading the legislation. Odd thing is--how does Charles Green not know this

Crazy really!!!
16-06-2012, 11:12 PM
Lungo--Drom

It was the Daily Telegraph I read it in. Quite a long article.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/9335076/Rangers-to-be-excluded-from-SPL-fixture-list.html

I was gonna drive up there and pee on the top but my missus wouldn't lend me her car :(

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hibby Hippy

Only thing i can find is this.

http://sport.stv.tv/football/106461-...-fixture-list/
16-06-2012, 11:17 PM
Jim44

This sums up where they all think they are at -

"The club didn't die - it simply shed itself of all sorts of debts it could never pay in one fell swoop. The club is now debt free and will probably end up playing in the SPL next year: the club is stronger now than it has been for some time."

Laughable, but, sadly, the last two statements aren't too far off the mark.
16-06-2012, 11:17 PM
blackpoolhibs

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/footbal...6908-21751069/

Which is it Walter, Scottish football will die with or without you, i'm a little confused? :confused:

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page