Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[EuanH78]

Is it not a big risk for Doncaster to nail his colours to this particular mast right now? Arent the SPL in the midst of investigating the double contracts issue?

What of the findings on that, how would that change Rangers (new or old) situation? Try and sink it with the Old co?

I think, despite his bluster.. we have nothing to fear. Got a feeling Uefa are going to be all over this like a cheap suit before the end and Doncasters position is/ will be untenable (mind you, so is Campbell Ogilvies and he's still at the SFA)

Still cant see it happening, would be so transparently bent that anyone involved is going to go down with the Huns IMO.

[Caversham Green]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

For all the criticism of Doncaster surely what we have to look at is the law. If this whole incubator group thing is legal then surely it can't have been designed for this kind of scenario. A law that benefits the sinner and punishes the sinned is a travesty. To leave all the debt, creditors and sanctions behind in the oldco is surely tantamount to legalised fraud.

The law is an ass.

The law is designed purely for commercial purposes - however an administration is conducted the end result is that the creditors should get the best possible result and there are avenues for creditors to pursue if they feel this hasn't happened. Whether these are robust enough is debatable, but in my fairly limited practical experience of administration/liquidation everyone, including the old and new owners (but excluding the IP), feels they have been slightly cheated by the whole process. There are some who regard insolvency as a legitimate business strategy, but probably not as many as you might think.

The problem here is that there's another dimension to the process - that of sporting integrity. Competition is far more direct and tangible in football than in general commerce, so it is up to the administrators of football to negate any sporting advantage that could be accrued by overspending and subsequent insolvency, and that is where they seem to be failing miserably. For example, Rangers were strengthened and Hearts were weakened on the field by the transfer of Lee Wallace. To compensate Hearts a fee was agreed between the two clubs. We're now faced with the prospect of Wallace playing against Hearts despite the fact that they may never get the compensation for his loss, so they've been weakened twice, while Rangers have been strengthened twice. Putting aside our tribal prejudices, that's just plain wrong.

It's not the law that's an ass, it's the people who don't understand that football is primarily a sport not a business.

[WindyMiller]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Is it not a big risk for Doncaster to nail his colours to this particular mast right now? Arent the SPL in the midst of investigating the double contracts issue?

What of the findings on that, how would that change Rangers (new or old) situation? Try and sink it with the Old co?

I think, despite his bluster.. we have nothing to fear. Got a feeling Uefa are going to be all over this like a cheap suit before the end and Doncasters position is/ will be untenable (mind you, so is Campbell Ogilvies and he's still at the SFA)

Still cant see it happening, would be so transparently bent that anyone involved is going to go down with the Huns IMO.

The result of the "investigation" (the Yorkshire Ripper was found quicker), will not be completed till the NewCo is formed and in place. The "investigation" will find the Oldco guilty, but there will be nobody to punish.




p.s I bought my first ever ST 10 days ago (I attended my first Hibs' match in 1960) but will not get the chance to use it, unless we get relegated. I have no intention of showing any support for the SPL's determination to keep Rangers in the SPL.
I only hope that if sporting integrity doesn't prevail then UEFA will hold an investigation.

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The problem here is that there's another dimension to the process - that of sporting integrity. Competition is far more direct and tangible in football than in general commerce, so it is up to the administrators of football to negate any sporting advantage that could be accrued by overspending and subsequent insolvency, and that is where they seem to be failing miserably. For example, Rangers were strengthened and Hearts were weakened on the field by the transfer of Lee Wallace. To compensate Hearts a fee was agreed between the two clubs. We're now faced with the prospect of Wallace playing against Hearts despite the fact that they may never get the compensation for his loss, so they've been weakened twice, while Rangers have been strengthened twice. Putting aside our tribal prejudices, that's just plain wrong.

Completely agree with this comment, although I do find it ironic that the example you provide compares two teams who both significantly overspent their income. RFC just overspent on a bigger scale than Hearts, although I expect that Hearts' time will come...

[Caversham Green]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Completely agree with this comment, although I do find it ironic that the example you provide compares two teams who both significantly overspent their income. RFC just overspent on a bigger scale than Hearts, although I expect that Hearts' time will come...

Very true, but Hearts haven't actually defaulted on any payments yet - they were late in paying their players and the SPL acted quickly enough once the complaint was made. I also think the SPL response was about right in that instance, although some would argue that it was weak.

Thankfully UEFA are going some way to recognise sporting integrity, but as always Scotland is about a decade behind them.

[scoopyboy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Very true, but Hearts haven't actually defaulted on any payments yet - they were late in paying their players and the SPL acted quickly enough once the complaint was made. I also think the SPL response was about right in that instance, although some would argue that it was weak.

Thankfully UEFA are going some way to recognise sporting integrity, but as always Scotland is about a decade behind them.

An interesting one regarding Lee Wallace.

I have stated to a Hearts fan recently that Rangers haven't defaulted on Lee Wallace in the slightest as they are paid up to date and the next money isn't due until July.

However he argued that is not the case as he stated that all monies due become immeadiate as soon as a company goes into administration.

What is your take on it CG?

[jgl07]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

An interesting one regarding Lee Wallace.

I have stated to a Hearts fan recently that Rangers haven't defaulted on Lee Wallace in the slightest as they are paid up to date and the next money isn't due until July.

However he argued that is not the case as he stated that all monies due become immediate as soon as a company goes into administration.

He is quite correct.

If Hearts wait until July there will be no Rangers to claim their money from.

[Caversham Green]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

An interesting one regarding Lee Wallace.

I have stated to a Hearts fan recently that Rangers haven't defaulted on Lee Wallace in the slightest as they are paid up to date and the next money isn't due until July.

However he argued that is not the case as he stated that all monies due become immeadiate as soon as a company goes into administration.

What is your take on it CG?

The yam is right, in legal terms the debt crystallised when they went into administration, because it's unlikely that they would exit administration and then pay it in full. They haven't actually defaulted yet, but entering administration is an admission that they can't and won't pay the debt in full. That's bad enough in business terms, but it seems so much worse to me that he will be directly opposing them in the future - or they will have sold him without passing on any of the proceeds to him.

[Onion]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The yam is right, in legal terms the debt crystallised when they went into administration, because it's unlikely that they would exit administration and then pay it in full. They haven't actually defaulted yet, but entering administration is an admission that they can't and won't pay the debt in full. That's bad enough in business terms, but it seems so much worse to me that he will be directly opposing them in the future - or they will have sold him without passing on any of the proceeds to him.

There will be so many twists and turns between now and the resolution of the Hun's problems that the SPL & SFA are simply damned if they do damned if they don't. On the one hand they are being castigated by the Huns for killing their club with sanctions and 'not helping them'... on the other they must be fully aware that non-OF fans and clubs will only tollerate any more crap from the penniless Huns and their aplogists. Whichever way this turns out, the SPL & SFA are going to upset a lot of people and it may even kill the game in Scotland. It would be no bad thing if UEFA were to step in to help sort out the Huns sorry mess as 1. it would get the SPL & SFA out of having to make the decisions they clearly don't want to, 2. any decision would have to be respected (like a foreign referee) and 3. would help the SFA & SPL retain some form of relationship with their members post Hun.

In fact, I'd go as far to say that the SFA & SPL position is untenable at this point. They cannot win and risk being fatally damaged by the outcome. I would be amazed if they haven't had the good sense to pick up the phone to UEFA ... but then again, this is the SFA/SPL we're talking about.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

An interesting one regarding Lee Wallace.

I have stated to a Hearts fan recently that Rangers haven't defaulted on Lee Wallace in the slightest as they are paid up to date and the next money isn't due until July.

However he argued that is not the case as he stated that all monies due become immeadiate as soon as a company goes into administration.

What is your take on it CG?

Was there not some offer from Rangers to Hearts to pay something like £500,000 as full payment early, just before they went into administration? Or maybe it was the other way round, Hearts said give us £500,000 now and we'll call it quits? Whichever it was, it is quite funny now, that Hearts won't get anywhere near that amount. Or so it seems

[PatHead]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Was there not some offer from Rangers to Hearts to pay something like £500,000 as full payment early, just before they went into administration? Or maybe it was the other way round, Hearts said give us £500,000 now and we'll call it quits? Whichever it was, it is quite funny now, that Hearts won't get anywhere near that amount. Or so it seems

Thought it was Herts that asked Rangers for the deal. Obviously saw what was coming

[Caversham Green]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There will be so many twists and turns between now and the resolution of the Hun's problems that the SPL & SFA are simply damned if they do damned if they don't. On the one hand they are being castigated by the Huns for killing their club with sanctions and 'not helping them'... on the other they must be fully aware that non-OF fans and clubs will only tollerate any more crap from the penniless Huns and their aplogists. Whichever way this turns out, the SPL & SFA are going to upset a lot of people and it may even kill the game in Scotland. It would be no bad thing if UEFA were to step in to help sort out the Huns sorry mess as 1. it would get the SPL & SFA out of having to make the decisions they clearly don't want to, 2. any decision would have to be respected (like a foreign referee) and 3. would help the SFA & SPL retain some form of relationship with their members post Hun.

In fact, I'd go as far to say that the SFA & SPL position is untenable at this point. They cannot win and risk being fatally damaged by the outcome. I would be amazed if they haven't had the good sense to pick up the phone to UEFA ... but then again, this is the SFA/SPL we're talking about.

The frustrating thing for me is that the 'right' thing to do is clear and obvious, and the legal mechanism for doing it is already in place. It just needs leadership, competence and sheer guts to carry it out and the SPL as a body is showing that it has none of those things. I agree that they and the SFA are in a difficult position, but that's how they earn their corn and if they find it impossible they must indeed make way for UEFA to make the decision. The feeling right now is that the whole thing is being engineered towards RFC escaping the consequences of their actions while the other clubs suffer purely because RFC are making all the noise.

If Scottish football is really as dependent on a strong Rangers as many would have us believe then Scottish football is in a very bad way. Now is a perfect time to start changing that but as always, the powers that be seem to be intent on pepetuating the illness. Whether that is through cowardice or corruption is up for debate but the wrong decisions now could make the illness terminal. Like many others on this and other non-OF forums I believe that the game would actually benefit rather than suffer from a weakened Rangers at least in the long term but whether I'm right or wrong is irrelevant, they MUST act without fear or favour (to quote Mr Regan).

[Killiehibbie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The yam is right, in legal terms the debt crystallised when they went into administration, because it's unlikely that they would exit administration and then pay it in full. They haven't actually defaulted yet, but entering administration is an admission that they can't and won't pay the debt in full. That's bad enough in business terms, but it seems so much worse to me that he will be directly opposing them in the future - or they will have sold him without passing on any of the proceeds to him.

Wallace should be re-sold to a club who can pay and hearts get what they are owed.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Wallace should be re-sold to a club who can pay and hearts get what they are owed.

In an alternate universe, that of course would be the correct solution. However, business is not always "correct", and football, it seems, even less so.

Maybe it's time that there was some sort of "reservation of title" clause in player transfers?

[Killiehibbie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

In an alternate universe, that of course would be the correct solution. However, business is not always "correct", and football, it seems, even less so.

Maybe it's time that there was some sort of "reservation of title" clause in player transfers?

The right of repossession until all of the agreed transfer fee is paid in full.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The right of repossession until all of the agreed transfer fee is paid in full.

Agreed.

However, in this case that would present us with a problem. HMFC would have to repay what has been paid already.......

[Leithenhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

In an alternate universe, that of course would be the correct solution. However, business is not always "correct", and football, it seems, even less so.

Maybe it's time that there was some sort of "reservation of title" clause in player transfers?

Perhaps, "full payment within 7 days" or the deals off

[Killiehibbie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Agreed.

However, in this case that would present us with a problem. HMFC would have to repay what has been paid already.......

That goes down as rental fees, sort of like an HP agreement then handing goods back

[jodjam]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Perhaps, "full payment within 7 days" or the deals off

Sounds like a plan. We could return some of our duffers after one bad game

[Caversham Green]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Agreed.

However, in this case that would present us with a problem. HMFC would have to repay what has been paid already.......

It would also mean Wallace having to accept whatever terms HoMFC were willing/able to offer. I would suggest suspension of the player and the right of transfer to any club willing to pay the balance to HoMFC and equal or better the terms he's on at Rangers. If there's a bidding war RFC(IA) get the profit for distribution to other creditors.

[PatHead]

Funny how the English press can see what is happening without Rangers coloured glasses. They state the honourable thing to happen. I do however wonder if they would be quite so honourable if this was one of the big English clubs such as Chelsea/Man Utd/ Arsenal.

Yesterday's Guardian had a great article which included references to Warrington/Cheshire's survey.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/b...?newsfeed=true

[cabbageandribs1875]

Ralph topping has apparently resigned from the SFA


SPL chairman Ralph Topping has resigned his SFA board commitments due to pressure of work. The 60-year-old, who is chief executive of bookmakers William Hill, will continue in his non-executive role with the SPL which he has held since 2009.

[EuanH78]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The frustrating thing for me is that the 'right' thing to do is clear and obvious, and the legal mechanism for doing it is already in place. It just needs leadership, competence and sheer guts to carry it out and the SPL as a body is showing that it has none of those things. I agree that they and the SFA are in a difficult position, but that's how they earn their corn and if they find it impossible they must indeed make way for UEFA to make the decision. The feeling right now is that the whole thing is being engineered towards RFC escaping the consequences of their actions while the other clubs suffer purely because RFC are making all the noise.

If Scottish football is really as dependent on a strong Rangers as many would have us believe then Scottish football is in a very bad way. Now is a perfect time to start changing that but as always, the powers that be seem to be intent on pepetuating the illness. Whether that is through cowardice or corruption is up for debate but the wrong decisions now could make the illness terminal. Like many others on this and other non-OF forums I believe that the game would actually benefit rather than suffer from a weakened Rangers at least in the long term but whether I'm right or wrong is irrelevant, they MUST act without fear or favour (to quote Mr Regan).

I just sent this email to the SFA, SPL and any club email address's I could find (funnily enough the SPL one bounced - anyone got a contact address) I'm taking the claim for Toppings resignation

Dear Sir/ Madam,

Hopefully this email will find itself to the most appropriate person from each of the address's listed above.

I, for my troubles am a lifelong Hibs supporter. My Father, originally from London came to study in Edinburgh and became a Hibs supporter and season ticket holder for nearly 45 years until his death. In my time, I have seen Hibs win two league cups. I can proudly say I was present at both occasions with him. I have never expected Hibs to consistently challenge for honours every season, I am aware that the financial gulf between Rangers and Celtic and the rest would make this an unrealistic expectation, I do, however continue to support my club as many other fans of other clubs choose to do so.

Recently, Rangers have went into administration - despite all the talk of new ownership etc.. it seems likely to those who can see things with some clarity that liquidation and NewCo would be the most obvious solution (no pun intended) to this clubs crisis.

This is the reason I write to you all now. You may have noticed that the board of Hibs is not listed as part of this email. I have already had correspondence from them in the first instance and would be re-treading old ground with them to include them again.

I was young, but aware what was happening to Hibs circa 1989 when we almost went out of existence. I am aware that Sir Tom Farmer is not a 'football' man and what his reasons for saving Hibs at that time were. I can see that he has ensured Hibs are there for generations to come. In this time I have watched our best talent leave so that we could 'balance' the books. I have heard Rod Petrie saying we can spend 1 penny less than we earn. I have also seen the complete redevelopement of Easter Road and the fruition of a training complex come to pass. Of these achievements I take great pride in the club I support. At times though I wish the product on the park was better, that we would have been able pay more in wages to keep our best players but some things cannot be and such is the path the board of Hibs has chosen to follow.

It is with great dismay I read and hear even the option that a liquidated club could somehow be 'parachuted' back into the top flight. I ask, what would be the point of following Scottish football if there are rules for some and rules for others? Football is a sport first and a business second. I direct you to UEFA's own financial fair play values number 1 of 11 quoted

"In everything that we do, football must always be the first and most important element that we take into consideration. Football is a game before being a product, a sport before being a market, a show before being a business."

I have watched the painful times with Hibs to abide by this very value before it was even mooted at UEFA level. Why then, are there even questions to be asked at this point about a club that in this tax year has negated to pay its tax liabilities that exceed the turnover of all but one other of the member clubs of the SPL just for starters?

Big Tax case as yet unruled upon. Double contract issues? I would assume that if double contracts are proven then the players involved were illegally registered with the SFA and illegitimately fielded - I would think this counts as cheating against every club that played against a player with a 'double contract'- Think about this in greater detail for a moment, players who may have had one chance in their career at a cup final winners medal, cheated. Clubs cheated out of league positions, revenue, honours, are more examples required?

This is a greater deal than simply a club being liquidated, this has been outright financial cheating for over a decade - Rangers, part of the fabric that makes up the SPL tv and sponsorship deals may very well be a fact, and money coming into Scottish football may very well be reduced, however given that Rangers financial doping created part of the product i.e. Sky's requirement for 4 Old Firm games a season. Does it not strike anyone as more than slightly incestous that this requirement for a product that has been borne out of illegal activities from a club should be of such high regard?

Sporting integrity cannot be bought. It can, however be sold. A recent fans survey showed the opinion of the fans - they are, in case you forget the life blood of all clubs. All I can do is state my case, I do not feel I would be able to support Scottish football anymore if our league has been 'rigged' and mismanagement of one club allowed to be 'whitewashed' because of their potential value.

In sport, I ask you all to consider carefully the choices you will make, this I feel is a seminal moment in Scottish football and implore you all to make the 'right' decisions.

Regards,

[calmac12000]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

IF a newco are admitted into the SPL i wont be back to another game and will find something else to do with my time and money! I wont support a club that participates in a league with no integrity. What is the point in that?

I love hibs with my heart and soul but i wont kid myself on by watching them compete in a league that is only there to serve the old firm.

Couldn't agree more, the entire concept of Scottish Football will be shown to have been predicated on a myth of fair play and sporting integrity. Furthermore what would a decision of this sort do for the financial reputation of football. if I was a small business I would not exactly be falling over myself to trade with a foootball club.

[Geo_1875]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I just sent this email to the SFA, SPL and any club email address's I could find (funnily enough the SPL one bounced - anyone got a contact address) I'm taking the claim for Toppings resignation

Dear Sir/ Madam,

Hopefully this email will find itself to the most appropriate person from each of the address's listed above.

I, for my troubles am a lifelong Hibs supporter. My Father, originally from London came to study in Edinburgh and became a Hibs supporter and season ticket holder for nearly 45 years until his death. In my time, I have seen Hibs win two league cups. I can proudly say I was present at both occasions with him. I have never expected Hibs to consistently challenge for honours every season, I am aware that the financial gulf between Rangers and Celtic and the rest would make this an unrealistic expectation, I do, however continue to support my club as many other fans of other clubs choose to do so.

Recently, Rangers have went into administration - despite all the talk of new ownership etc.. it seems likely to those who can see things with some clarity that liquidation and NewCo would be the most obvious solution (no pun intended) to this clubs crisis.

This is the reason I write to you all now. You may have noticed that the board of Hibs is not listed as part of this email. I have already had correspondence from them in the first instance and would be re-treading old ground with them to include them again.

I was young, but aware what was happening to Hibs circa 1989 when we almost went out of existence. I am aware that Sir Tom Farmer is not a 'football' man and what his reasons for saving Hibs at that time were. I can see that he has ensured Hibs are there for generations to come. In this time I have watched our best talent leave so that we could 'balance' the books. I have heard Rod Petrie saying we can spend 1 penny less than we earn. I have also seen the complete redevelopement of Easter Road and the fruition of a training complex come to pass. Of these achievements I take great pride in the club I support. At times though I wish the product on the park was better, that we would have been able pay more in wages to keep our best players but some things cannot be and such is the path the board of Hibs has chosen to follow.

It is with great dismay I read and hear even the option that a liquidated club could somehow be 'parachuted' back into the top flight. I ask, what would be the point of following Scottish football if there are rules for some and rules for others? Football is a sport first and a business second. I direct you to UEFA's own financial fair play values number 1 of 11 quoted

"In everything that we do, football must always be the first and most important element that we take into consideration. Football is a game before being a product, a sport before being a market, a show before being a business."

I have watched the painful times with Hibs to abide by this very value before it was even mooted at UEFA level. Why then, are there even questions to be asked at this point about a club that in this tax year has negated to pay its tax liabilities that exceed the turnover of all but one other of the member clubs of the SPL just for starters?

Big Tax case as yet unruled upon. Double contract issues? I would assume that if double contracts are proven then the players involved were illegally registered with the SFA and illegitimately fielded - I would think this counts as cheating against every club that played against a player with a 'double contract'- Think about this in greater detail for a moment, players who may have had one chance in their career at a cup final winners medal, cheated. Clubs cheated out of league positions, revenue, honours, are more examples required?

This is a greater deal than simply a club being liquidated, this has been outright financial cheating for over a decade - Rangers, part of the fabric that makes up the SPL tv and sponsorship deals may very well be a fact, and money coming into Scottish football may very well be reduced, however given that Rangers financial doping created part of the product i.e. Sky's requirement for 4 Old Firm games a season. Does it not strike anyone as more than slightly incestous that this requirement for a product that has been borne out of illegal activities from a club should be of such high regard?

Sporting integrity cannot be bought. It can, however be sold. A recent fans survey showed the opinion of the fans - they are, in case you forget the life blood of all clubs. All I can do is state my case, I do not feel I would be able to support Scottish football anymore if our league has been 'rigged' and mismanagement of one club allowed to be 'whitewashed' because of their potential value.

In sport, I ask you all to consider carefully the choices you will make, this I feel is a seminal moment in Scottish football and implore you all to make the 'right' decisions.

Regards,

I considered sending something similar but decided upon the slightly shorter:

They've cheated for years, get ****ing rid.

[EuanH78]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I considered sending something similar but decided upon the slightly shorter:

They've cheated for years, get ****ing rid.

Yip, thats the jist of it

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Ralph topping has apparently resigned from the SFA


SPL chairman Ralph Topping has resigned his SFA board commitments due to pressure of work. The 60-year-old, who is chief executive of bookmakers William Hill, will continue in his non-executive role with the SPL which he has held since 2009.

Pressure of work.....

http://www.toppingandbutch.com/

[down the slope]

Super Ally thinks the preferred bidder will be a Newco !.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17907977

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Super Ally thinks the preferred bidder will be a Newco !.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17907977

But of course it will be a new company.

SuperA is showing his ignorance there, I think.

[JeMeSouviens]

Just had a quick dig into the examples cited by Doncaster: Plymouth Argyle and Crystal Palace. Both clubs exited administration via a successful CVA. So wtf is Doncaster on about? Is he just flat out, barefaced lying?