Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by millarco

This might be a daft question but how do the creditors benefit from today's transfer ruling? If Duff and Phelps are solely acting in their interests, I can't see how fighting the decision (running up further billable hours I assume) will make any difference to the return they receive? The only thing I can think of is it being a condition of the takeover. Unless I'm understanding the Duff and Phelps role wrong.

---

I can only infer that Green may have stated that the deal would be off if the transfer ban was not lifted. Otherwise there is no justification for the actions by the administrators.

I would guess that many of the Rangers players will be able to 'walk' when the window opens later this week. If the team are to remain competitive, then they will have to be persuaded to stay by offering more cash.

A Rangers team filled with youth players and journeymen pros is not likely to prosper even in the very weak SPL. The crowds will fall off and rebuilding will be set back for years as the glory hunters departed leaving only the knuckle-draggers and a genuine supporters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Not a daft question at all.

If the Green bid were to fall apart tomorrow, then the admins might want to find another buyer. A club that "can" buy players is going to be more attractive than one that can't.

All pretty academic, of course, but I suppose they have to be seen to provide for all eventualities.

The above, of course, would be their justification. The cynic might say it's got F all to do with the creditors, and more to do with saving the club.

---

Cheers. Would probably count myself in the latter camp, though I think Duff and Phelps probably underestimated the scrutiny they'd be under in their role. Wonder if HMRC had been able to block the appointment at the very start whether things would have been any different, under a Big 4 administrator for example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by millarco

This might be a daft question but how do the creditors benefit from today's transfer ruling? If Duff and Phelps are solely acting in their interests, I can't see how fighting the decision (running up further billable hours I assume) will make any difference to the return they receive? The only thing I can think of is it being a condition of the takeover. Unless I'm understanding the Duff and Phelps role wrong.

---

Iv been thinking the timing of all this over myself , Theyv nearly made a CVA proposal and won a case so they can buy players all on the same day, surely the creditors will be slightly annoyed that there planning on spending more before Theyv settled the previous spending?

It's more bizarre by the day

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by millarco

Cheers. Would probably count myself in the latter camp, though I think Duff and Phelps probably underestimated the scrutiny they'd be under in their role. Wonder if HMRC had been able to block the appointment at the very start whether things would have been any different, under a Big 4 administrator for example.

---

At their very first press conference, Paul Clark did acknowledge that they would be subject to the most intensive public scrutiny.

No sheet, Sherlock....

As for your last sentence, I am duty bound to spit at, and resist, any efforts by the Big 4 to do anything. :greengrin

there will be Rangers players packing their bags as we speak...in the short term this decision had added more uncertainty to the situation as who knows when SFA will arrange another hearing (unless they just say :na na: to CoS judge)...and what the outcome will be with more Dudlines being passed by the day...

Agent X .....'I'm a Rangers Player...Get me out of here!!!'

Not long till the windows open and the summer fun cranks up a notch or 2 :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

At their very first press conference, Paul Clark did acknowledge that they would be subject to the most intensive public scrutiny.

No sheet, Sherlock....

As for your last sentence, I am duty bound to spit at, and resist, any efforts by the Big 4 to do anything. :greengrin

---

:greengrin

'Significant' Fifa story soon.

https://twitter.com/rburgessbbc/stat...02153017868288

Might be the statement mentioned by STV earlier.

I am probably way off here, but is it possible that some folks at the SFA are actually hoping that FIFA come in heavy-handed and make the decision that they don´t have the guts to make, so that after the huns implode, they can point at FIFA and say, it wisnae us, it wis them?

Been thinking about the poor level of offer again. Surely the administrators could start selling off players as assets just now (well after 1 June). I know they wouldn't get full market value but if the rumours of cut price deals of say £1m for Bocanegra, Naismith, Whittaker etc they would raise a lot more than £5m. Can the creditors not insist on a yard sale to raise funds? Just returning to the original job for the admins- look after the creditors interests. Yes it would make Rangers less attractive for a buyer but would probably raise a lot more in funds for HMRC et al.

Would a creditor be able to sue Duff and Duffer for not acting in their interests?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by down-the-slope

...in the short term this decision had added more uncertainty to the situation as who knows when SFA will arrange another hearing

---

My take is that if they organise another hearing then they are accepting the court decision .. if they accept the court decision they are breaching their own (and FIFA's) rules. Surely they have to simply ignore the court decision, inform Rangers that this is what they are doing and STRONGLY recommend that they do the same. IF Rangers try to breach the embargo then they'll have the full weight of the SFA, UEFA and FIFA bearing down on them and the outcome wont be pretty.

Well not pretty for them that is ... I'm sure the rest of us will enjoy it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jgl07

I can only infer that Green may have stated that the deal would be off if the transfer ban was not lifted. Otherwise there is no justification for the actions by the administrators.

I would guess that many of the Rangers players will be able to 'walk' when the window opens later this week. If the team are to remain competitive, then they will have to be persuaded to stay by offering more cash.

A Rangers team filled with youth players and journeymen pros is not likely to prosper even in the very weak SPL. The crowds will fall off and rebuilding will be set back for years as the glory hunters departed leaving only the knuckle-draggers and a genuine supporters.

---

That was my thought. They should have to operate at a sustainable level, even if that means cutting right back and not being competitive at the top of the league. The lack of humility shown by the club and the clamour by the powers that be to maintain the status quo suggest that won't happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matty_Jack04

Iv been thinking the timing of all this over myself , Theyv nearly made a CVA proposal and won a case so they can buy players all on the same day, surely the creditors will be slightly annoyed that there planning on spending more before Theyv settled the previous spending?

It's more bizarre by the day

---

And plenty more to come I'm sure. Any wagers on how many pages this thread gets to before dying out?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PatHead

Been thinking about the poor level of offer again. Surely the administrators could start selling off players as assets just now (well after 1 June). I know they wouldn't get full market value but if the rumours of cut price deals of say £1m for Bocanegra, Naismith, Whittaker etc they would raise a lot more than £5m.

---

The Green offer will be based on the players remaining.
If they sell the players then the Green offer will be withdrawn.
If the Green offer is withdrawn then liquidation might be the only option left. I'm not sure the timescale will allow another buyer to come in, Green could be the last throw of the dice from a creditors perspective (HMRC excluded).

This is getting ridiculous, nobody seems to be able to punish Rangers for ANYTHING.

This year could be Rangers greatest year ever and the year the rest of us finally realise we might as well pack up and go and play golf on a weekend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PatHead

Been thinking about the poor level of offer again. Surely the administrators could start selling off players as assets just now (well after 1 June). I know they wouldn't get full market value but if the rumours of cut price deals of say £1m for Bocanegra, Naismith, Whittaker etc they would raise a lot more than £5m. Can the creditors not insist on a yard sale to raise funds? Just returning to the original job for the admins- look after the creditors interests. Yes it would make Rangers less attractive for a buyer but would probably raise a lot more in funds for HMRC et al.

---

Why would anyone pay a transfer fee for a player who can probably declare themselves a free agent? All of the top players appear to have deferred(*) 75% of their wages for the past two months or so. Now they appear to being offered 5 pence in the pound (?) on the wages deferred.

Is that not breach of contract?

* I assume that the balance of the wages were deferred rather than conceded by the players concerned. I would guess that many will have insisted on a 'walk away' option in return for the wage reduction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PatHead

Been thinking about the poor level of offer again. Surely the administrators could start selling off players as assets just now (well after 1 June). I know they wouldn't get full market value but if the rumours of cut price deals of say £1m for Bocanegra, Naismith, Whittaker etc they would raise a lot more than £5m. Can the creditors not insist on a yard sale to raise funds? Just returning to the original job for the admins- look after the creditors interests. Yes it would make Rangers less attractive for a buyer but would probably raise a lot more in funds for HMRC et al.

Would a creditor be able to sue Duff and Duffer for not acting in their interests?

---

West brom wanted Naismith and offered 2million which somehow got rejected, the creditors could surely make more off the assets than what green has put on the table

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caversham Green

I've been thinking the same thing, although I was wondering if they were just looking for someone else to pull the trigger. To raise this action without being aware of the regulations was an act of gross negligence, if they were aware of them they are challenging the authority of the SFA and UEFA. Totally destructive either way.

---

I am one for conspiracy theories but, in this case, I go for the incompetence theory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Green Goblin

I am probably way off here, but is it possible that some folks at the SFA are actually hoping that FIFA come in heavy-handed and make the decision that they don´t have the guts to make, so that after the huns implode, they can point at FIFA and say, it wisnae us, it wis them?

---

This is exactly what I'm thinking, and thank god FIFA have the balls to do something....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by green glory

'Significant' Fifa story soon.

https://twitter.com/rburgessbbc/stat...02153017868288

Might be the statement mentioned by STV earlier.

---

Think it may be this.......


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18232533

FIFA and UEFA couldn't care less-they will do nothing.

Green's "offer"is actually a loan to Rangers repayable with interest.If the creditors fall for this one they deserve to lose their money.They should insist that players are sold to raise funds and cut wages.

So what does Craigy get from ths CVA ? I find it hard to believe that he is walking away with just £2.

Is he part of the consortium ? Retaining ownership of Ibrox to rent to the consortium ? Just waiting for the inevitable liquidation ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Green Goblin

I am probably way off here, but is it possible that some folks at the SFA are actually hoping that FIFA come in heavy-handed and make the decision that they don´t have the guts to make, so that after the huns implode, they can point at FIFA and say, it wisnae us, it wis them?

---

:agree:You're not way off at all. That's my take on the situation, and if you were in the SFA's shoes wouldn't you be working towards this ? They are in a dammed if they do, dammed if they don't predicament. A FIFA/UEFA bail-out is just what this situation needs.

Why are duff and duffer not being paid 8 p in the pound, surely they are owed money from.Rangers too.
The whole thing stinks and the SFA should throw the book at them, give them the worst punishment legally possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Green Goblin

I am probably way off here, but is it possible that some folks at the SFA are actually hoping that FIFA come in heavy-handed and make the decision that they don´t have the guts to make, so that after the huns implode, they can point at FIFA and say, it wisnae us, it wis them?

---

This is the one, I reckon. The SFA are hoping it gets taken out their hands because they don't have the spine to do it themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hibs7

Why are duff and duffer not being paid 8 p in the pound, surely they are owed money from.Rangers too.
The whole thing stinks and the SFA should throw the book at them, give them the worst punishment legally possible.

---

Administrators are paid in full, otherwise nobody would ever to the job. Whether they've earned their £3m+ is a different matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by millarco

Administrators are paid in full, otherwise nobody would ever to the job. Whether they've earned their £3m+ is a different matter.

---

Can you see any of the creditors accepting 9p in the £, when Duff and Duffer are taking over £5.5M themselves? I'm almost convinced that Whyte will be trousering a few quid from that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by millarco

Administrators are paid in full, otherwise nobody would ever to the job. Whether they've earned their £3m+ is a different matter.

---

They're actually getting over £5.5 million, more than the offer they've made to the creditors!!

its all a sham ... them swines will end up still in the spl....

the sfa/spl/sfl are bending over backwards to ensure that they will

the judiciary will back them up, other spl clubs will support them

its all a total stick on i think

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Derek Dougan

Can you see any of the creditors accepting 9p in the £, when Duff and Duffer are taking over £5.5M themselves? I'm almost convinced that Whyte will be trousering a few quid from that.

---

As a matter of principal every publicly funded creditor (Ambulance Service; Royal Mail; Strathclyde Police and others) should reject this CVA and announce that they are rejecting it on the grounds that Rangers in 'allegedly' being involved in tax evasion have denied, by their actions much needed funds for these very publicly funded bodies. I am loathing the cheating and conniving more and more and just wish they would disappear for ever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strummbo

its all a sham ... them swines will end up still in the spl....

the sfa/spl/sfl are bending over backwards to ensure that they will

the judiciary will back them up, other spl clubs will support them

its all a total stick on i think

---

I'm hanging my coat on FIFA or UEFA doing the job right, as like you i have no faith in those cowards and corrupt pricks in charge at the SPL/SFA anymore.

This is the crossroads imo for football in our country, if they get this wrong they might have the huns back, but imo they will lose a huge amount of non old firm fans.

bh... i dont think folk would stop goin, i will keep going as will others

could't not support my team because of the opposition. that would be crazy

tis a crossroads though yer right there

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Derek Dougan

Can you see any of the creditors accepting 9p in the £, when Duff and Duffer are taking over £5.5M themselves? I'm almost convinced that Whyte will be trousering a few quid from that.

---

I hope not, but they might see it as the only way of recovering anything (and potentially guaranteeing future income). Will all come down to HMRC/Ticketus anyway.

Enjoyed the invitation to supporter debenture holders, presenting the option "to surrender their Benefits in exchange for a distribution via the CVA". Wonder how many of the Bears will surrender...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strummbo

bh... i dont think folk would stop goin, i will keep going as will others

could't not support my team because of the opposition. that would be crazy

tis a crossroads though yer right there

---

Wrong. I feel strongly enough that it's not about supporting this team or that, it's about paying good money into a morally bankrupt, corrupt game where all chips are stacked against non OF teams. Hibs strategy of living within our means has brought us tediously dull teams and gains us no benefit whatsoever in the short or long term.

My overriding feeling is 'what is the point?'. I am a season ticket holder but if Rangers aren't dealt with in a fashion I consider suitable I will walk away and take the hit this year. Scottish football would be pointless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strummbo

bh... i dont think folk would stop goin, i will keep going as will others

could't not support my team because of the opposition. that would be crazy

tis a crossroads though yer right there

---

I think you might be surprised, I'd go to the derby games probably, God knows why though?

Apart from that, I won't bother. I won't be boycotting hibs, I'd just be finished with the game as it is bent.

my uncle took out 2 debentures at ibrox. i wasnt pleased, but he said that the idea of having 'dominic' on the plate on the chair was too good to miss. fair enough i thought

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs

I think you might be surprised, I'd go to the derby games probably, God knows why though?

Apart from that, I won't bother. I won't be boycotting hibs, I'd just be finished with the game as it is bent.

---

This. And I bet you could substitute "hibs" there for many other teams in Scotland and you'd have the opinion of many fans that the powers-that-be don't really believe will walk away. I think if they decide to call that bluff, they're going to get an awful shock.

Just trying to catch up a bit ....

Can someone do a quick summary as to why FIFA / UEFA may act as per Sion? Weren't they (Sion) in the wrong? (I know RFC aren't particularly looking good), but RFC have gone to court who have said an action against them was wrong. As much as I don't like them, surely they have 'the law' on their side, so I don't really get why FIFA / UEFA would object. What if the sanction was totally unreasonable (e.g. play all their matches on one leg) wouldn't they be right to go to court?

Also, hasn't Green via the CVA made his offer now? Is it retractable? What if Ticketus and HMRC said yes tomorrow?

Lastly, is Green's offer a loan? Isn't that a bit dodgy in itself? I thought he had 20 or so multi millionaires to pump money in. Surely they would get their investment back and then some.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StevieC

The Green offer will be based on the players remaining.
If they sell the players then the Green offer will be withdrawn.
If the Green offer is withdrawn then liquidation might be the only option left. I'm not sure the timescale will allow another buyer to come in, Green could be the last throw of the dice from a creditors perspective (HMRC excluded).

---

The point I'm making though is that Green's offer is pathetic. If players were sold they could raise say £15m and pay more to the creditors with liquidation than Green is offering. Rangers continuation should not be a consideration for admins if they are not continuing to make payments in future.

Teams owed money are only getting 9 pence in the pound. Why??? If they can't pay it then they should die. If they are to stay as a club then why should other teams suffer?

I always worried that the sanction was a made up one because the panel thought that a fine was not enough and a suspension was too much. I think the currants may have shot themselves in the foot here as the only course I can see the panel taking is now suspension. If there is nothing available in the middle then suspension it has to be ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Newry Hibs

Just trying to catch up a bit ....

Can someone do a quick summary as to why FIFA / UEFA may act as per Sion? Weren't they (Sion) in the wrong? (I know RFC aren't particularly looking good), but RFC have gone to court who have said an action against them was wrong. As much as I don't like them, surely they have 'the law' on their side, so I don't really get why FIFA / UEFA would object. What if the sanction was totally unreasonable (e.g. play all their matches on one leg) wouldn't they be right to go to court?

---

Basically, from what I understand, its irrelevant whether Rangers are right or not, no team is allowed under FIFA rules to take their Association to "Ordinary Court".

Heres the rule

http://i46.tinypic.com/6sct20.jpg

I was surprised by today's news as I felt that the presence of Lord Carloway on the SFA panel was meant to ensure that the proceedings would be conducted in a way that would ensure that this kind of legal challenge would be dismissed. I expect the next step to be an SFA appeal against today's court verdict.

It seems that the court did not reject the SFA's right to punish Rangers, just the particular sanction chosen. A one year suspension would have been legal. That would also now scupper the cva without Hector having to lift a finger as Green's offer is conditional on Rangers being in the usual competitions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strummbo

bh... i dont think folk would stop goin, i will keep going as will others

could't not support my team because of the opposition. that would be crazy

tis a crossroads though yer right there

---

Going to ER will always be an option. Going anywhere else, won't be an option. Ibrox and Rugby park are already out for me and I'm sure more will follow as we find out who votes for a rangers newco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GordonHFC

I always worried that the sanction was a made up one because the panel thought that a fine was not enough and a suspension was too much. I think the currants may have shot themselves in the foot here as the only course I can see the panel taking is now suspension. If there is nothing available in the middle then suspension it has to be ?

---

Easiest solution is for SFA to tell Rangers to withdraw their appeal. If they fail to do so expulsion will follow as it is only option open to SFA with Fifa on their case. Green will withdraw his pathetic offer and liquidation will follow. I do think Rangers have shot themselves in the foot with this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bajillions

Basically, from what I understand, its irrelevant whether Rangers are right or not, no team is allowed under FIFA rules to take their Association to "Ordinary Court".

---

OK. Thanks. Look forward to some FIFA action. How funny will it be that basically RFC kill themselves, though as ever I think bugger all will happen to them.

Interesting...

Quote:

---

Prior to the court's decision, the world governing body Fifa said: "Fifa will ask the member association (SFA) to take action so that the club withdraws its request from the ordinary courts.
"Fifa will closely monitor the situation so that the issue is resolved as fast as possible."

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottB

Interesting...

---

Looks to me like FIFA is giving the SFA a last chance to man up and slap Rangers with a suitable punishment or FIFA will have to step and hit everyone with a punishment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bajillions

Looks to me like FIFA is giving the SFA a last chance to man up and slap Rangers with a suitable punishment or FIFA will have to step and hit everyone with a punishment.

---

How about:

Banning Celtic, Motherwell, Hearts, Dundee United, and St Johnstone from Europe next season.

Banning Scotland from the World Cup Qualifiers.

That should do for starters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bajillions

Looks to me like FIFA is giving the SFA a last chance to man up and slap Rangers with a suitable punishment or FIFA will have to step and hit everyone with a punishment.

---

FIFA/UEFA are rife for being taken to almost every court in every land because of the way football is set up and conducts its business. They (FIFA) cant allow it to happen or the whole system will crumble and, as has already been seen in Switzerland, they dont usually mess about.

As others have said this may well be the get out the SFA have been looking/waiting for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GordonHFC

I always worried that the sanction was a made up one because the panel thought that a fine was not enough and a suspension was too much. I think the currants may have shot themselves in the foot here as the only course I can see the panel taking is now suspension. If there is nothing available in the middle then suspension it has to be ?

---

Kicking them out of the Scottish Cup is the only sanction left. Big deal. Suspension or expulsion won't even be a consideration for Donkeyhead and the other Hun sympathisers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim44

Kicking them out of the Scottish Cup is the only sanction left. Big deal. Suspension or expulsion won't even be a consideration for Donkeyhead and the other Hun sympathisers.

---

Surely EUFA/FIFA wouldn't let them get away with that? :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jgl07

How about:

Banning Celtic, Motherwell, Hearts, Dundee United, and St Johnstone from Europe next season.

Banning Scotland from the World Cup Qualifiers.

That should do for starters.

---

This is what the Swiss FA where threatened with, they (uefa) must step in soon and sort out this sorry mess. :agree:

Time to wrap it up me thinks .... :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HibbyRod

Surely EUFA/FIFA wouldn't let them get away with that? :confused:

---

Nope, the key with Scion was that FIFA insisted that they had to be punished in a way that was appropriate to their crime. If the SFA are 'forced' to go soft because of a civil court action, FIFA will demand more or kick the whole of Scottish football out into the wilderness...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spike Mandela

Wrong. I feel strongly enough that it's not about supporting this team or that, it's about paying good money into a morally bankrupt, corrupt game where all chips are stacked against non OF teams. Hibs strategy of living within our means has brought us tediously dull teams and gains us no benefit whatsoever in the short or long term.

My overriding feeling is 'what is the point?'. I am a season ticket holder but if Rangers aren't dealt with in a fashion I consider suitable I will walk away and take the hit this year. Scottish football would be pointless.

---

And there are thousands who think exactly the same way :agree: Paying good money to watch a corrupt sport is just plain daft.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottB

Nope, the key with Scion was that FIFA insisted that they had to be punished in a way that was appropriate to their crime. If the SFA are 'forced' to go soft because of a civil court action, FIFA will demand more or kick the whole of Scottish football out into the wilderness...

---

They won't have to kick us very far then.

Just heard on the radio, but no link yet.....

"BBC Scotland understands" that there is increased "animosity towards Rangers" because of the Court action.

Encouraging :agree:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Just heard on the radio, but no link yet.....

"BBC Scotland understands" that there is increased "animosity towards Rangers" because of the Court action.

Encouraging :agree:

---

From?? Getting excited here lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by green glory

From?? Getting excited here lol.

---

Other clubs, apparently.....

How humiliating is it though, that our own FA has been asked to take a proper decision and manage the situation by the international body?

If this now goes from the SFA back to FIFA, surely Doncaster has to lose his job? He's clearly well out of his depth that he can't make the decisions that are blindingly obvious to anyone looking on.

That's before we even get to the blatant collusion by some sections of the media.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Newry Hibs

Just trying to catch up a bit ....

Can someone do a quick summary as to why FIFA / UEFA may act as per Sion? Weren't they (Sion) in the wrong? (I know RFC aren't particularly looking good), but RFC have gone to court who have said an action against them was wrong. As much as I don't like them, surely they have 'the law' on their side, so I don't really get why FIFA / UEFA would object. What if the sanction was totally unreasonable (e.g. play all their matches on one leg) wouldn't they be right to go to court?

Also, hasn't Green via the CVA made his offer now? Is it retractable? What if Ticketus and HMRC said yes tomorrow?

Lastly, is Green's offer a loan? Isn't that a bit dodgy in itself? I thought he had 20 or so multi millionaires to pump money in. Surely they would get their investment back and then some.

---

If clubs were to resort to the courts to resolve issues arising in the game, there would be complete carnage, in fact there would be no game - just a series of court cases - esp given the amount of money at stake in the English Leagues and Europe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Other clubs, apparently.....

---

Even the Queen's probably getting pissed off with them by now lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Newry Hibs

Just trying to catch up a bit ....

Can someone do a quick summary as to why FIFA / UEFA may act as per Sion? Weren't they (Sion) in the wrong? (I know RFC aren't particularly looking good), but RFC have gone to court who have said an action against them was wrong. As much as I don't like them, surely they have 'the law' on their side, so I don't really get why FIFA / UEFA would object. What if the sanction was totally unreasonable (e.g. play all their matches on one leg) wouldn't they be right to go to court?

Also, hasn't Green via the CVA made his offer now? Is it retractable? What if Ticketus and HMRC said yes tomorrow?

Lastly, is Green's offer a loan? Isn't that a bit dodgy in itself? I thought he had 20 or so multi millionaires to pump money in. Surely they would get their investment back and then some.

---

This might clear a few things up for u

http://wingsland.podgamer.com/rangers-cva-at-a-glance/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steakbake

How humiliating is it though, that our own FA has been asked to take a proper decision and manage the situation by the international body?

If this now goes from the SFA back to FIFA, surely Doncaster has to lose his job? He's clearly well out of his depth that he can't make the decisions that are blindingly obvious to anyone looking on.

That's before we even get to the blatant collusion by some sections of the media.

---

Doncaster works for the SPL. Regan is in charge at the SFA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Newry Hibs

As much as I don't like them, surely they have 'the law' on their side, so I don't really get why FIFA / UEFA would object. What if the sanction was totally unreasonable (e.g. play all their matches on one leg) wouldn't they be right to go to court?

---

Would only be outrageous if they made Rangers play with eleven left-footers.

Quite liking your suggested punishment, though that dive that people do now for penalties - where the attacker leaves his trailing foot against the defender and simultaneously brown-trouts himself forward - would become tricky.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steakbake

How humiliating is it though, that our own FA has been asked to take a proper decision and manage the situation by the international body?

If this now goes from the SFA back to FIFA, surely Doncaster has to lose his job? He's clearly well out of his depth that he can't make the decisions that are blindingly obvious to anyone looking on.

That's before we even get to the blatant collusion by some sections of the media.

---

The irony is that it went to court because the Huns thought the punishment was too HARSH :greengrin

I always thought FIFA/UEFA would step in when it was clear that the SFA/SPL were just forgiving all RFC's transgressions. In saying that, it wasn't exactly the SFA who imposed the penalty.

So, when can we expect Ally and the crazy minority to demand to know the names of the faceless FIFA officials who are calling for proper punishment :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beefster

Doncaster works for the SPL. Regan is in charge at the SFA.

---

Doncaster is central to the mishandling of the situation. Isn't the management of the country's premier league answerable to the SFA because of the way the situation has been pursued? Business interests over sporting integrity? Or does it not work like that? Genuine question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottB

Nope, the key with Scion was that FIFA insisted that they had to be punished in a way that was appropriate to their crime. If the SFA are 'forced' to go soft because of a civil court action, FIFA will demand more or kick the whole of Scottish football out into the wilderness...

---

We have already been there for a few years now! :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim44

Kicking them out of the Scottish Cup is the only sanction left. Big deal. Suspension or expulsion won't even be a consideration for Donkeyhead and the other Hun sympathisers.

---

I agree, they will get kicked out the Scottish Cup. Big deal. I want FIFA to step in and sort this mess out as the SFA and the SPL have had months now and achieved nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beefster

Doncaster works for the SPL. Regan is in charge at the SFA.

---

But Doncaster must bear the prime responsibility for letting the situation get to the stage it is. The SFA are in the firing line as a result.

Doncaster must go but Regan can stay as far as I am concerned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steakbake

Doncaster is central to the mishandling of the situation. Isn't the management of the country's premier league answerable to the SFA because of the way the situation has been pursued? Business interests over sporting integrity? Or does it not work like that? Genuine question.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jgl07

But Doncaster must bear the prime responsibility for letting the situation get to the stage it is. The SFA are in the firing line as a result.

Doncaster must go but Regan can stay as far as I am concerned.

---

I'm not disputing that Doncaster is a useless git. You can't blame him for the SFA messing up/being useless though - the SFA are just as responsible as the SPL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snooky

[/B]

They won't have to kick us very far then.

---

Banning us from international football would be a mercy, not a punishment!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beefster

I'm not disputing that Doncaster is a useless git. You can't blame him for the SFA messing up/being useless though - the SFA are just as responsible as the SPL.

---

Have the SFA messed up?

They at least are trying to punish Rangers until Doncaster with his bucket of whitewash.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Just heard on the radio, but no link yet.....

"BBC Scotland understands" that there is increased "animosity towards Rangers" because of the Court action.

Encouraging :agree:

---

from whom?

Its amazing how many people have no idea of the football structures and responsibilities in Scotland - now I agree that one body running it all would be best...but vested interests mean thats unlikely.

The SFA is the member of UEFA / FIFA so its they / Regan / SFA Board that has to get to grips with this aspect of the situation

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colr

from whom?

---

Other clubs, apparently

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jgl07

Have the SFA messed up?

They at least are trying to punish Rangers until Doncaster with his bucket of whitewash.

---

They have messed up if, as the judge suggests, they didn't know their own rules.

The bigger mess-up, I would suggest, is on the part of Rangers.

BBC Scotland has learned that a number of SPL clubs are extremely disappointed with the ruling.
One club chairman said there was an "increased animosity" towards Rangers after they took the case to court

Sounds like an off the record response...lets hope the CVA gets rejected as they are really peeing off the people that need to agree a NewCo....only needs 5 to take the hump and they are sunk

http://www1.skysports.com/football/n...ues-CVA-appeal

Poor poor rangers!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jgl07

Have the SFA messed up?

They at least are trying to punish Rangers until Doncaster with his bucket of whitewash.

---

I dont think the SFA have messed anything up...yet and I'm no apologist for them, they have imposed a punishment on the Huns that to be honest was actually quite leniant given the severity of the transgressions - that the Huns are too stupid to just take it on the chin and would rather incur the wrath of FIFA/ UEFA for further flagrant rule breaking is not the SFA's fault. Whether the SFA now have the cajones to follow through remains to be seen, however.

Quote:

---

""Twitter Exchange

James : I’m a Rangers fan who cares…really…go to division 3
and start again, cos we are really not wanted in the top league.

Malcolm: James, I’m a Stranraer fan – you’re not wanted in Division 3 either!""

---

Made me chuckle :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caversham Green

So, before Rangers went to the CoS their actions had taken them close to suspension/expulsion. They have now appealed at the CoS in direct contravention of the SFA and higher authorities rules, so they must have crossed the line. There is no alternative, they have to be expelled or suspended by the SFA if Scottish Football has any hope of survival.

The international authorities would jump at the chance to combine the British associations and the SFA would give them a great opportunity to do so by deferring to UEFA here. We've reached the crossroads and there's only one road we can take to survive. Rangers have succeeded in turning their own drama into everyone's crisis and it could end up realising their wish of Scottish clubs playing in English leagues. Ironically they won't be around to enjoy it because we can be sure that UEFA will not allow them to continue as a football club.

---

Could this be the intention from the very start. Bring Scottish football to the brink and finish it as a seperate entity?
Was there not a rumour some time back that Rangers, or an arm of Rangers, had purchased a Blue Chip League Club for no obvious reason? Now supposing Scottish football goes to the wall as you suggest and all clubs then came under the FA of England then there would be nothing to prevent a club playing their English league games in a Scottish stadium. Enter the Blue Chip league club suddenly able to play their games at Ibrox...............It all may sound a little far fetched but nothing about the way this administration has gone can leave anyone surprised............ Do you see where I am going with this?

Archie MacPherson goes into bat for the huns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steakbake

Archie MacPherson goes into bat for the huns.

---

There it is..... swept away. Wooooooooooooooooooooooooof.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steakbake

archie macpherson goes into bat for the huns.

---

ooooofff!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CallumLaidlaw

http://www1.skysports.com/football/n...ues-CVA-appeal

Poor poor rangers!!

---

That story is first class. £8.5million in the pot, £5.5m + going to Duff and Phelps. From a debt of £135 million they are proposing £3.5million. Hilarious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BarneyK

That story is first class. £8.5million in the pot, £5.5m + going to Duff and Phelps. From a debt of £135 million they are proposing £3.5million. Hilarious.

---

if hmrc step in and preemptively liquidate, do d & p then join the. creditors?

I was just wondering if the BBC wee at the wind up when they said that if the CVA is accepted then the Huns would exit Administration on 12th JULY!!!!!!!!!!

:faint:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BarneyK

That story is first class. £8.5million in the pot, £5.5m + going to Duff and Phelps. From a debt of £135 million they are proposing £3.5million. Hilarious.

---

Can't HMRC just get a surveyor in and have Ibrox and Murray Park valued?

someone at the SFA should get their bollocks roasted for not knowing their own rules...'kin amateurs
P.S Oh aye, **** off archie

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colr

if hmrc step in and preemptively liquidate, do d & p then join the. creditors?

---

They can't do it, whilst the administration is ongoing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CentreLine

Could this be the intention from the very start. Bring Scottish football to the brink and finish it as a seperate entity?
Was there not a rumour some time back that Rangers, or an arm of Rangers, had purchased a Blue Chip League Club for no obvious reason? Now supposing Scottish football goes to the wall as you suggest and all clubs then came under the FA of England then there would be nothing to prevent a club playing their English league games in a Scottish stadium. Enter the Blue Chip league club suddenly able to play their games at Ibrox...............It all may sound a little far fetched but nothing about the way this administration has gone can leave anyone surprised............ Do you see where I am going with this?

---

Only until Independence :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spike Mandela

Can't HMRC just get a surveyor in and have Ibrox and Murray Park valued?

---

Why would they? That would cost money. All they need to do is vote against the CVA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CallumLaidlaw

http://www1.skysports.com/football/n...ues-CVA-appeal

Poor poor rangers!!

---

Let me say first of all a lot of this financial and legal stuff has me a bit confused, not my area of expertise.

How can people be asked to vote to accept a CVA when it doesn't specify what they are being asked to accept?

It's like one of these silly TV Quiz shows.

Newsnight at 11pm on BBC2 is going to be good seemingly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spike Mandela

Can't HMRC just get a surveyor in and have Ibrox and Murray Park valued?

---

Isn't Green already shouting to anyone who'll listen that they're worth £115 million or something? That is, unless it's for the benefit of creditors...then they're worthless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CallumLaidlaw

http://www1.skysports.com/football/n...ues-CVA-appeal

Poor poor rangers!!

---

No wonder Green wants a CVA. He's due £4m if his plans work out.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/footbal...6908-23877539/

My gut feeling is the SFA will go with the £100,000 fine and maybe a 3 year ban from the Scottish Cup. The same Scottish Cup many huns were wanting to boycott. Hardly a punishment. The whole farce is beginning to stink to high heaven.

Hun feature on newsnight Scotland now

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bishop Hibee

No wonder Green wants a CVA. He's due £4m if his plans work out.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/footbal...6908-23877539/

My gut feeling is the SFA will go with the £100,000 fine and maybe a 3 year ban from the Scottish Cup. The same Scottish Cup many huns were wanting to boycott. Hardly a punishment. The whole farce is beginning to stink to high heaven.

---

could Brian Kennedy step in and make a higher offer for the assets and start a bidding war?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joe breezy

Hun feature on newsnight Scotland now

---

keep us up to date.

Have UEFA or FIFA not stepped in yet to either stamp out the manky Gers or the Scottish league system yet? Surely taking the national football association to a court which isn't the Court of Arbitration for Sport is directly contravening the rules that UEFA and FIFA have. I have a funny feeling the Bluenosers will be saved by the brownosers in the the SFA/SPL with limited sanctions, or that Scottish football will be almost wiped out completely because of Rangers thinking they are above all the rules and laws of the game in Scotland.

Prof Chris Bailey in London seems to think HMRC will take the 9p in the £ offer.