Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FalkirkHibee

Nope.

Under the proposed structure it would be made up in the following way;

Top league of 12 teams (current SPL teams)
Middle league of 12 teams (current first division teams and the top two teams from this season's second division)
Bottom league of 18 teams (3rd-10th from this season's second division plus the current third division teams)

If anything, it's the top team in the first division from this season that should feel aggrieved by the new proposal. Under the current set up, they would be playing in the SPL next season but under the restructuring idea, they'll have yet another year trying to get promoted to the top league.

---

Other reports I've seen have said that promotion and relegation between division 1 and the premier would be as usual. They've also indicated that the final middle league position would be given to the winners of a playoff among the teams placed 2nd-5th in division 2. Have you a link to anything to back up your version?

Wouldn't the simplest solution be to postpone the league changes until 2014/5?

For one thing, it's totally crazy that we don't know at this point what the league structure will be for the coming season and the benefit would be that The Rangers would win promotion...to the 2nd division. Then Green and the other Muppets would have nothing to complain about (in regard to this issue only)

I can't see that there'd be any losers by just waiting :dunno:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FalkirkHibee

If The Rangers win the 3rd division this season then, if things stay the same, they would play in the second division next season and be another 2 years away from playing in the top division.

If the restructuring does take place then, although they will play in the bottom division next season, because there is one less league in that proposed set up, they'll still be just 2 years away from playing in the top league.

I don't see what's too difficult to understand about that.

One question I would like to ask Charles Green is this;

If The Rangers were to get special treatment and get promoted to the middle division under the restructured plan, which of the teams, that SHOULD be playing in this middle division, would drop down to the bottom division to make way for them and why should this happen?

If he can answer this for me and give a reasonable reply to this then I might change my mind.

Somehow, though, I doubt he will manage to do that.

---

He probably has thought about it.

But as far as he's concerned, they're just "wee teams" that The Rangers should just be allowed to barge out of the way.

Thats how arrogant these tossers are. I wish they would die again without any form of resurrection.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keekaboo

Wouldn't the simplest solution be to postpone the league changes until 2014/5?

For one thing, it's totally crazy that we don't know at this point what the league structure will be for the coming season and the benefit would be that The Rangers would win promotion...to the 2nd division. Then Green and the other Muppets would have nothing to complain about (in regard to this issue only)

I can't see that there'd be any losers by just waiting :dunno:

---

That's the sensible solution IMO. Clubs should know at the start of any season what they are playing towards and what division they'll be playing in next season if they end up in a promotion or relegation position. I thought there was actually a rule that restructuring needed to be agreed one clear season before it was implemented.

integrity is regarded as the honesty and truthfulness or accuracy of one's actions. Integrity can be regarded as the opposite of hypocrisy

Can Mr Green hold his hand up and say he fits that definition of integrity ?
For me his every statement screams of hypocrisy .

He is becoming a dangerous man who hopefully will be kept in check .
Question is do the ' blazers' at Hampden have the b...s do do that ?
If not Scottish football could suffer the biggest fan rebellion ever

:rules:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keekaboo

Wouldn't the simplest solution be to postpone the league changes until 2014/5?

For one thing, it's totally crazy that we don't know at this point what the league structure will be for the coming season and the benefit would be that The Rangers would win promotion...to the 2nd division. Then Green and the other Muppets would have nothing to complain about (in regard to this issue only)

I can't see that there'd be any losers by just waiting :dunno:

---

You would still have the team winning the bottom league being in exactly the same situation that Newco are in at the moment, only difference is it wouldn't be Newco and there wouldn't be the same moaning and press coverage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MB62

You would still have the team winning the bottom league being in exactly the same situation that Newco are in at the moment, only difference is it wouldn't be Newco and there wouldn't be the same moaning and press coverage.

---

That's easily dealt with.

I would give that team promotion to the second tier, which The Rangers would then be in, and announce it was for reasons of Sporting Integrity :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keekaboo

Wouldn't the simplest solution be to postpone the league changes until 2014/5?

For one thing, it's totally crazy that we don't know at this point what the league structure will be for the coming season and the benefit would be that The Rangers would win promotion...to the 2nd division. Then Green and the other Muppets would have nothing to complain about (in regard to this issue only)

I can't see that there'd be any losers by just waiting :dunno:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caversham Green

That's the sensible solution IMO. Clubs should know at the start of any season what they are playing towards and what division they'll be playing in next season if they end up in a promotion or relegation position. I thought there was actually a rule that restructuring needed to be agreed one clear season before it was implemented.

---

Unfortunately not - the league sponsorship's end this season and the rush is there is the need for one unified 'product' to sell to a main sponsor (and TV)....can you imagine the loss in value of trying to sell the lame duck we have for one year knowing its all bout to change. There is so little money in the game that many clubs could not afford a season on greatly reduced central incomes....so there is an imperative to get reconstruction done and the new 'product' sold
- with the play offs seen as a real TV draw for additional income....

Talking of 'integrity', I am keen to see what James Traynor Esquire's take on the situation is :agree:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibsbollah

Talking of 'integrity', I am keen to see what James Traynor Esquire's take on the situation is :agree:

---

i think its fair to assume that traynor helped charlie with his recent press release.

David Murry complains to the police about leaked information

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21852392

Poor Rangers, trying to make out they have been the victims in all this HMRC shambles.

As Bazza Anderson would say 'its all too complex'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macca70

David Murry complains to the police about leaked information

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21852392

Poor Rangers, trying to make out they have been the victims in all this HMRC shambles.

As Bazza Anderson would say 'its all too complex'

---

I have to sympathise with SDM on this particular point.

Confidentiality is at the heart of the relationship between HMRC and the taxpayer and, in this situation, it was breached. Important information was put into the public domain in advance of legal proceedings and that could have had a prejudicial influence on the outcome of those proceedings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

I have to sympathise with SDM on this particular point.

Confidentiality is at the heart of the relationship between HMRC and the taxpayer and, in this situation, it was breached. Important information was put into the public domain in advance of legal proceedings and that could have had a prejudicial influence on the outcome of those proceedings.

---

Did I not read recently that HMRC intended to name and shame Companies with aggressive tax avoidance policies ?

I don't think the privacey of a companies tax affairs can be enshrined in law.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

Did I not read recently that HMRC intended to name and shame Companies with aggressive tax avoidance policies ?

I don't think the privacey of a companies tax affairs can be enshrined in law.

---

It's in the Taxpayer's Charter, which HMRC adhere to. It doesn't currently have legal backing, although I understand that moves are afoot to make it so. I think the important question, from a legal point of view, is if the Data Protection Act has been breached.

If someone in HMRC has blown the whistle, then they deserve their jotters. If it's someone in MIM/RFC or their advisers, then they will have their own confidentiality procedures, and will be subject to them.

As for the "naming and shaming", it's not about aggressive tax-avoidance. It's about tax evasion, ie breaking the law. I have no problem in law-breakers being named but, as I understand it, HMRC will only use it as a last resort.

Alloa chairman reacts to Chuckles with "mild amusement". :greengrin

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scot...-by-Wasps.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

Did I not read recently that HMRC intended to name and shame Companies with aggressive tax avoidance policies ?

I don't think the privacey of a companies tax affairs can be enshrined in law.

---

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/defaulters/index.htm :agree:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FalkirkHibee

Nope.

Under the proposed structure it would be made up in the following way;

Top league of 12 teams (current SPL teams)
Middle league of 12 teams (current first division teams and the top two teams from this season's second division)
Bottom league of 18 teams (3rd-10th from this season's second division plus the current third division teams)

If anything, it's the top team in the first division from this season that should feel aggrieved by the new proposal. Under the current set up, they would be playing in the SPL next season but under the restructuring idea, they'll have yet another year trying to get promoted to the top league.

---

The top league of 12 teams will not be the current SPL teams-it'll be 11 SPL teams plus winner of Div 1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

I have to sympathise with SDM on this particular point.

Confidentiality is at the heart of the relationship between HMRC and the taxpayer and, in this situation, it was breached. Important information was put into the public domain in advance of legal proceedings and that could have had a prejudicial influence on the outcome of those proceedings.

---

'Sympathise with SDM' - you are sailing a bit too close to the wind this time, Crops. :cb

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

Alloa chairman reacts to Chuckles with "mild amusement". :greengrin

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scot...-by-Wasps.html

---

I am rather proud to say as an adopted errrrmmm Alloa..ite that the Alloa chairman has been a stalwart of integrity through the whole Sevco process and will never be strong armed by Sevco/SPL/SFL bullies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jack Hackett

I thought they were due to win 4 comps this season :confused:

---

Still plenty time, Cheeky Charlie might yet decide to demand that the SPL and League award them 3 additional trophies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jonty

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/defaulters/index.htm :agree:

---

Those are defaulters, though, which isn't the same as avoiders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seveno

'Sympathise with SDM' - you are sailing a bit too close to the wind this time, Crops. :cb

---

Maybe I should've used the word "understand" instead. :greengrin

Nah, sod it, even the devil has some good music sometimes......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Those are defaulters, though, which isn't the same as avoiders.

---

Doesn't everyone try to avoid paying tax? :greengrin

Following on from a general downward trend since the share issue, Sevco's shares took a bit of a nosedive this morning. I wonder what's up, something nasty I hope.

http://www.lse.co.uk/SharePrice.asp?shareprice=RFC

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by green glory

Following on from a general downward trend since the share issue, Sevco's shares took a bit of a nosedive this morning. I wonder what's up, something nasty I hope.

http://www.lse.co.uk/SharePrice.asp?shareprice=RFC

---

The announcement of the date for voting for Scottish Independance...... Coincidence?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spike Mandela

The announcement of the date for voting for Scottish Independance...... Coincidence?

---

Lol maybe. What would they do without their beloved Union Jack?

A large portion of SevCo AIM stock will be locked in from the flotation, one year, expect serious drops under the offering price when these lapse. This is an entity losing £1m a month with no published accounts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby

A large portion of SevCo AIM stock will be locked in from the flotation, one year, expect serious drops under the offering price when these lapse. This is an entity losing £1m a month with no published accounts.

---

So who is selling?

http://i.minus.com/ib2caEpENwdJnK.gif

Poor attempt my Lee McCulloch to get a penalty :greengrin
Thought Ally would have him better trained :wink:

Official attendance - 125 000 with 10 000 more locked out apparently.