hibs.net Messageboard

View Poll Results: What is your attitude to a new "Rangers" entering at Div1?

Voters
1016. You may not vote on this poll
  • Opposed - and will walk away from Scottish professional football

    537 52.85%
  • Opposed - but will continue to support the game.

    454 44.69%
  • In favour.

    25 2.46%
Page 342 of 1507 FirstFirst ... 2422923323403413423433443523924428421342 ... LastLast
Results 10,231 to 10,260 of 45185
  1. #10231
    @hibs.net private member Spike Mandela's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Alloa
    Age
    59
    Posts
    10,986
    Blog Entries
    1
    Charles Green is now officially panicking.......

    http://www.tv.rangers.co.uk/articles...254024_2796603


  2. Log in to remove the advert

  3. #10232
    @hibs.net private member semaj64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Age
    60
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by Spike Mandela View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Charles Green is now officially panicking.......

    http://www.tv.rangers.co.uk/articles...254024_2796603


    In everyone elses view it would be a disaster for Scottish Football if Rangers are allowed to get away with it Scot free. About time they just shut up shop.

  4. #10233
    @hibs.net private member Spike Mandela's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Alloa
    Age
    59
    Posts
    10,986
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by semaj64 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    In everyone elses view it would be a disaster for Scottish Football if Rangers are allowed to get away with it Scot free. About time they just shut up shop.
    It sounds like another delaying tactic and they are going to appeal the decision themselves.

    Rangers want a punishment that isn't a punishment but looks like a punishment. SFA need to nail this now and prove to Rangers that they don't dictate Scottish football. Man is here 5 minutes and telling everybody what should happen.

  5. #10234
    @hibs.net private member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Bo'ness
    Age
    38
    Posts
    2,929
    Gamer IDs

    Gamertag: Iainhfc PSN ID: Iainhfc
    there is a meeting on 14 th june at 1 pm for the cva proposals. meeting with creditors same day 10 am , thats what the letter my girlfriend got from duff n phelps duno wit it means but there you go.

  6. #10235
    @hibs.net private member CropleyWasGod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    29,985
    Quote Originally Posted by Brando7 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I believe it CW who will still own the club then maybe rent it to the Newco until such time they buy it from him, as stated his shares will not be transfered if a CVA fails to go through

    No man is going to risk getting sued £25 million on a deal he sells the club for £2 without some security
    If the CVA doesn't go through, and the property is left in the OldCo, with all the debts... that company will have to be liquidated to go toward the debt.

    Taking that further, the property will then be on the open market. CG would have to take his chances in that, but you could see a situation whereby he then owns the lot.

  7. #10236
    @hibs.net private member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    3,535
    Gamer IDs

    PSN ID: pesus-ab
    Quote Originally Posted by Spike Mandela View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    It sounds like another delaying tactic and they are going to appeal the decision themselves.

    Rangers want a punishment that isn't a punishment but looks like a punishment. SFA need to nail this now and prove to Rangers that they don't dictate Scottish football. Man is here 5 minutes and telling everybody what should happen.
    This.

    Why is it that they seem to think they can pick a punishment for themselves??

  8. #10237
    @hibs.net private member cabbageandribs1875's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    in a house in Bathgate
    Posts
    58,924
    Quote Originally Posted by stokesmessiah View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This.

    Why is it that they seem to think they can pick a punishment for themselves??

    coz they arra peepul

  9. #10238
    @hibs.net private member Spike Mandela's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Alloa
    Age
    59
    Posts
    10,986
    Blog Entries
    1
    Scots law blog response to Charles Green's ridiculous statement tonight..........

    http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.co...lly/#more-1236

  10. #10239
    @hibs.net private member Minder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    466
    Quote Originally Posted by Spike Mandela View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Charles Green is now officially panicking.......

    http://www.tv.rangers.co.uk/articles...254024_2796603
    Offering to take ban from Cup, shocking cheek.

    5 year ban from cup and 11 game SPL suspension is minimum penalty...provided life support aint removed.

  11. #10240
    @hibs.net private member Ryan91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Age
    33
    Posts
    3,234
    Quote Originally Posted by Minder View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Offering to take ban from Cup, shocking cheek.

    5 year ban from cup and 11 game SPL suspension is minimum penalty...provided life support aint removed.
    As mentioned in the Scots Law Blog, the Appealate Tribunal cannot impose a suspension or ban on Rangers competing in the cup, only ejection and one can only be ejected whilst currently participating (which of course they aren't) - besides if they did, there would likely be a massive backlash by the majority of Scottish Football supporters. The only way forward really is either termination of membership or suspension of membership for a minimum of one season. Either will most likely result in the liquidation of the club currently known as Glasgow Rangers.


























  12. #10241
    Testimonial Due WindyMiller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Swanston
    Age
    71
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by The Wee Hibby View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    As mentioned in the Scots Law Blog, the Appealate Tribunal cannot impose a suspension or ban on Rangers competing in the cup, only ejection and one can only be ejected whilst currently participating (which of course they aren't) - besides if they did, there would likely be a massive backlash by the majority of Scottish Football supporters. The only way forward really is either termination of membership or suspension of membership for a minimum of one season. Either will most likely result in the liquidation of the club currently known as Glasgow Rangers.

























    That sentence just rolls off the tongue.

  13. #10242
    Prediction League Supremo - 05/06 MB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Warriston
    Age
    66
    Posts
    7,582
    Quote Originally Posted by Minder View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Offering to take ban from Cup, shocking cheek.

    5 year ban from cup and 11 game SPL suspension is minimum penalty...provided life support aint removed.
    An 11 game ban will only anger those clubs who put money before integrity. Derhun will play say 5 home games and six away so half the SPHELL will miss out on a home gate against that lot whilst the half won't, unfair screams coming from the lot that miss out. It would therefore mean, in fairness to ALL clubs that any suspension would have to be for 22 games.

  14. #10243
    @hibs.net private member blackpoolhibs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    59,261
    Quote Originally Posted by MB62 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    An 11 game ban will only anger those clubs who put money before integrity. Derhun will play say 5 home games and six away so half the SPHELL will miss out on a home gate against that lot whilst the half won't, unfair screams coming from the lot that miss out. It would therefore mean, in fairness to ALL clubs that any suspension would have to be for 22 games.
    Only in Scotland would anyone be trying to give a team a part of season suspension?

    It has to be relegation to the bottom league, plus a suspension of signing any player for 12 months and a huge fine, minimum.

  15. #10244
    “A proper low rent guy” - Springbank 21/10/24 easty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Age
    41
    Posts
    15,810
    Gamer IDs

    PSN ID: hibee_easty
    Quote Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Only in Scotland would anyone be trying to give a team a part of season suspension?

    It has to be relegation to the bottom league, plus a suspension of signing any player for 12 months and a huge fine, minimum.
    I agree with you Blackpool, but I do still fear that the punishment will be minimal and Rangers will be the ones smiling in the end.

  16. #10245
    Quote Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Only in Scotland would anyone be trying to give a team a part of season suspension?

    It has to be relegation to the bottom league, plus a suspension of signing any player for 12 months and a huge fine, minimum.
    I agree. But if they are going to go down the route of a part season suspension, the only ways it would work would be either a 22 game suspension, or an 11 home game suspension. The 11 home game suspension would reduce their income whilst not damaging the other clubs in the SPL.

  17. #10246
    Prediction League Supremo - 05/06 MB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Warriston
    Age
    66
    Posts
    7,582
    Quote Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Only in Scotland would anyone be trying to give a team a part of season suspension?

    It has to be relegation to the bottom league, plus a suspension of signing any player for 12 months and a huge fine, minimum.
    Totally agree with you BH. Personally, I would kick them out of the league and never let them back in.

    As for this, we couldn't survive without them, as has been said many times now by other, it has now become a case of, if we don't throw them out, we might not survive WITH them.
    I was talking to an Aberdeen supporter at the weekend and asked if she had re-newed her season ticket yet. He answer was, no danger, not until I find out what is happening with rangers, if they are allowed back in the SPL she will not be going back.
    Many other fans seem to be taking exactly the same stance.
    Scottish football is at a crossroads here.

  18. #10247
    First Team Breakthrough
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    The non-smoking section
    Age
    50
    Posts
    476
    Quote Originally Posted by easty View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I agree with you Blackpool, but I do still fear that the punishment will be minimal and Rangers will be the ones smiling in the end.

    In this instance, they might JUST get away with what seems like a lenient punishment. However, the big bomb of the dual-contracts investigation is still pending and that is the one which could easily see them kicked out of football.

  19. #10248
    @hibs.net private member blackpoolhibs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    59,261
    Quote Originally Posted by Sergio sledge View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I agree. But if they are going to go down the route of a part season suspension, the only ways it would work would be either a 22 game suspension, or an 11 home game suspension. The 11 home game suspension would reduce their income whilst not damaging the other clubs in the SPL.
    Thats the point, we shouldnt be going down any route that has part suspension in it, is this actually in the rules?

    They went to court on the basis that the years suspension of signing players was not written in the rules, well i'd bet my last penny part suspension is not there either.

    1 year minimum is i think, we wouldn't want to give them a suspension thats not in the rules.

  20. #10249
    Quote Originally Posted by Smidge View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    In this instance, they might JUST get away with what seems like a lenient punishment. However, the big bomb of the dual-contracts investigation is still pending and that is the one which could easily see them kicked out of football.
    To be fair to the SFA we're still discussing the crimes for which they thought a year's signing embargo was sufficient - and I tend to agree with them when I set aside the point that it's the despicable huns we're talking about. In the absence of a signing embargo a part season's suspension doesn't seem unreasonable. As MB points out though it would only be fair to the other clubs if it was for 22 games because of the home/away discrepancy and fairness to the other clubs should be the first concern.

    If they're found guilty of the dual contracts scam though there should be no way back for them because that is prolonged wilful cheating and has no place in any sport.

  21. #10250
    @hibs.net private member Barney McGrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    15,032
    Would any potential suspension stop them from playing any games or just league games?

    If it's just league games, then what's the chances of them lining up a series of lucrative home friendlies for every Saturday afternoon through the period of league suspension? They'd end up with even more money coming in!

  22. #10251
    Testimonial Due At The Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    on the rivet
    Posts
    1,074
    Would a possibility of Rangers having to play every home game for a season behind closed doors be an option? means that they still get to play but generate no cash whatsoever from fan revenue.
    probably the same impact as a susupension but just means that the team get a 'home' run out every 2nd week and other teams don't have a blank week to fill.
    Apart from Celtic, do many other teams take a large support to Ibrox these days?

  23. #10252
    Quote Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Thats the point, we shouldnt be going down any route that has part suspension in it, is this actually in the rules?

    They went to court on the basis that the years suspension of signing players was not written in the rules, well i'd bet my last penny part suspension is not there either.

    1 year minimum is i think, we wouldn't want to give them a suspension thats not in the rules.
    To be pendantic, it's not part suspension, it's full suspension for a set period or number of games. Suspension is certainly available and I can't see anything in the rules that prevents a suspension being for part of a season. I can't see anything that prevents a signing embargo being used as a sanction either though.

  24. #10253
    @hibs.net private member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    9,485
    Quote Originally Posted by Caversham Green View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If they're found guilty of the dual contracts scam ...
    On this one, my recollection is that the SFA "inquiry" on dual contracts started almost three months ago. And for the last few months hasn't Doncaster been saying that the inquiry is "ongoing"? And now we discover that Rangers IA / D&P didn't actually respond to the SPL request for info until last week? Who kicks off a major inquiry into wholesale cheating, and then does nothing for three months?

  25. #10254
    @hibs.net private member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    9,485
    Quote Originally Posted by Barney McGrew View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If it's just league games, then what's the chances of them lining up a series of lucrative home friendlies for every Saturday afternoon through the period of league suspension?
    Who would want to play them? All the SPL and EPL and Championship clubs would be busy with their important league games. Those clubs wouldn't want to risk injury to their players by playing against a disgraced team who are serving their punishment.

  26. #10255
    @hibs.net private member Barney McGrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    15,032
    Quote Originally Posted by grunt View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Who would want to play them? All the SPL and EPL and Championship clubs would be busy with their important league games. Those clubs wouldn't want to risk injury to their players by playing against a disgraced team who are serving their punishment.
    Money talks. I'm sure they could get a few foreign teams who start their seasons later on to fly over if a few bob was thrown their way. They'd also be able to get the likes of Linfield to turn up, more legends games etc. An 11 game suspension would only take them into October anyway.

    They'd find a way. TBH, if it meant sticking two fingers up at the rest of Scottish football then they could probably have one half of their squad play they other and thousands of them would turn up.

    That's if they have enough players in their squad by then to fill two teams though

  27. #10256
    Quote Originally Posted by grunt View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    On this one, my recollection is that the SFA "inquiry" on dual contracts started almost three months ago. And for the last few months hasn't Doncaster been saying that the inquiry is "ongoing"? And now we discover that Rangers IA / D&P didn't actually respond to the SPL request for info until last week? Who kicks off a major inquiry into wholesale cheating, and then does nothing for three months?
    That should be SPL rather than SFA, although I can't really see a legitimate reason why it's not the SFA that's conducting the enquiry as I doubt whether the SPL has the power to suspend or expel them from football as a whole rather than just from their own league, and the fraudulent registering of contracts affects the whole of football.

    On top of that, I now have infinitely more faith in the SFA and Regan than I do in the SPL and Doncaster who has shown himself to be inherently dishonest and incompetent IMO. It's vital that the fans of other SPL clubs keep up the pressure on him to do the right thing or resign.

  28. #10257
    Quote Originally Posted by Barney McGrew View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Money talks. I'm sure they could get a few foreign teams who start their seasons later on to fly over if a few bob was thrown their way. They'd also be able to get the likes of Linfield to turn up, more legends games etc. An 11 game suspension would only take them into October anyway.

    They'd find a way. TBH, if it meant sticking two fingers up at the rest of Scottish football then they could probably have one half of their squad play they other and thousands of them would turn up.

    That's if they have enough players in their squad by then to fill two teams though
    I think suspension means from the whole of football rather than just te league competitions - the SFA normally provide referees etc, so I think any games staged by RFC would have to be unofficial friendlies. And of course, they don't have any money.

  29. #10258
    @hibs.net private member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    9,485
    Quote Originally Posted by Caversham Green View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    That should be SPL rather than SFA
    Yeah you're right. I checked before posting (I get so confused by these two "governing" bodies) and I changed the second reference but not the first.

  30. #10259
    @hibs.net private member bingo70's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Age
    43
    Posts
    35,662
    Quote Originally Posted by Barney McGrew View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Money talks. I'm sure they could get a few foreign teams who start their seasons later on to fly over if a few bob was thrown their way. They'd also be able to get the likes of Linfield to turn up, more legends games etc. An 11 game suspension would only take them into October anyway.

    They'd find a way. TBH, if it meant sticking two fingers up at the rest of Scottish football then they could probably have one half of their squad play they other and thousands of them would turn up.

    That's if they have enough players in their squad by then to fill two teams though
    Would they have any players? I'd have thought all first team players would be sent out on loan for the period of there suspension

  31. #10260
    @hibs.net private member CyberSauzee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    2,152
    A decent summary of what can happen in the next two weeks:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...fortnight.html

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
hibs.net ©2020 All Rights Reserved
- Mobile Leaderboard (320x50) - Leaderboard (728x90)