Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

***StevieC*** · 30-06-2012 08:10 PM

Originally Posted by steakbake

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

Amen to that. Once/if this all gets sorted out, Ogilvie, Doncaster and Regan should consider their positions. As administrators, they've proved themselves inept.

At the moment I might be willing to give Reagan the benefit of the doubt, as he has seemed reasonable in some of his previous interviews.

**Cocaine&Caviar** · 30-06-2012 08:19 PM

So are they signing Cousin or what?

**GreenCastle** · 30-06-2012 08:29 PM

Originally Posted by weecounty hibby

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

They are both subsidiaries of the parent company Bigots Inc. They have the same identity (The Old Firm) the same sponsor (Tennants) and have done for years, same business strategy (leave Scotland) and the same vile type of cretins who inhabit their stadiums. Why would Celtic want to see Rangers fold as their future financial stability relies on them even more so than most other Scottish clubs.

People forget that the Old Firm (can you still call them that if Rangers are dead?) have always wanted to leave Scotland and make no secret of it. Then they claim they are doing their part for Scottish football in Europe etc.

Both of them are as bad as each other

***Biggie*** · 30-06-2012 08:32 PM

Yeah I must admit I was hoping the clubs would keep schtum until the vote...that way we would see where celtc's loyalties lie. I fear they will say that the other clubs have decided, and as such no need for a vote anymore.
I have no doubt celtc supporters will say NO, but I think celtc's board would say yes, but fear the backlash of their support.
Desperately hope they all vote and we see the breakdown.

**goosefat** · 30-06-2012 08:43 PM

Originally Posted by NJ Hibee

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

People forget that the Old Firm (can you still call them that if Rangers are dead?) have always wanted to leave Scotland and make no secret of it. Then they claim they are doing their part for Scottish football in Europe etc.

Both of them are as bad as each other

Yup. Different cheeks of the same spotty botty.

**21.05.2016** · 30-06-2012 08:43 PM

Totally agree with what someone mentioned above, celtic must have been banking on the thought that the other SPL clubs would vote "YES" so they could come out with a NO to please their supporters but know that their vote didn't make a difference. Celtic board are a bit frightened now I reckon because if they vote YES, the supporters will be up in arms yet they need rangers. I reckon though that because the other clubs have assured rangers will not get SPL status, without celtic making clear what their option is, celtic will vote NO aswel as it now doesn't matter, their vote, whichever way will make no difference.

***One Day Soon*** · 30-06-2012 09:17 PM

Originally Posted by Desperate Dan

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

I agree about it being scandalous but if doncaster is out there on his own agenda with this then I'd like tae ken why we've heard nothing from the SPL chairmen after the issue of that outrageous document came tae light and why he hasnae been brought tae book by the people he's supposed tae be working for. If the SPL clubs have nae involvement in this then then I'd like tae hear that (otherwise the suspicion remains) and they should get that **** tae **** out the door.

In total agreement with this DD. It looks very like either a lone gunman is responsible or there is a wider conspiracy. Whichever it is, those involved have not just shown appalling misjudgment, they are in my view acting actively against the interests of the Scottish game. They need to go.

***Jim44*** · 30-06-2012 09:19 PM

A 'no' from Celtic will solve Celtic's short term problem, that of appeasing their own fans but will highlight the longer term problem of upsetting their special relationship with the huns. A yes vote will cause short term problems with their fans (nothing that the conniving Lawwell can't handle, however) but will maintain their bond with their ugly sister, facilitating the re-marriage after the forthcoming enforced separation. They could vote either way (I have a sneaking suspicion they will vote yes) but one thing is certain ....... they won't bother one tiny bit how their vote is received by the other clubs.

***Eyrie*** · 30-06-2012 09:43 PM

Sellick will vote "no" to appease their fans. Voting "yes" will achieve nothing at this stage beyond annoying their own fans.

However once they know who the long term owners of New Huns are, they'll have a cosy little chat to smooth this over with the sweetener of offering to help New Huns get back to where Rangers RIP used to be.

***Seveno*** · 30-06-2012 09:45 PM

Originally Posted by Caversham Green

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

Having given this some thought, it wouldn't surprise me if it emerged that the author of the document was Mr Charles Green.

I got the impression from the news reports that it was circulated by the SFL, but no-one seems to have actually put their name to it and that is very unusual - normally there would be a covering letter or foreword signed by the president/CEO/secretary or someone. It also doesn't read like a document produced by a committee like the SFL or other boards, nor does it look like it was produced by a solicitor like Doncaster or an accountant like Petrie.

What it reads like is a prospectus for a dodgy invesment 'opportunity' and I believe that is Green's stock in trade. He has also shown complete contempt towards the intelligence of anyone that isn't wearing his socks and this document is basically an insult to the reader's intelligence. Green also appears to be very, very stupid and appears to think he can gat away with blatant lies.

If it wasn't actually sent out by Charley, I'm becoming convinced that he was the author.

I think that's a good shout. It certainly fits with the mix of lies and garbage that spills out of his mouth every time he opens it. I wouldn't put it passed Rod to have agreed to it going out in the full knowledge of the reaction that it would provoke.

***Eyrie*** · 30-06-2012 09:49 PM

I'd be a lot happier with a brief statement from Hibs confirming that Petrie met with Green on behalf of the SFA and not the club, and that we are not in favour of the proposal.

Right now either Petrie has lied to us about sporting integrity, or he's hiding behind the SFL clubs who have spoken out against Sevco 5088 joining Division One. Neither is acceptable.

***Seveno*** · 30-06-2012 09:51 PM

Originally Posted by One Day Soon

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

In total agreement with this DD. It looks very like either a lone gunman is responsible or there is a wider conspiracy. Whichever it is, those involved have not just shown appalling misjudgment, they are in my view acting actively against the interests of the Scottish game. They need to go.

Apparently, it was marked with a stamp 'Texas Book Depository' so I'd go for the lone gunman theory.

***CropleyWasGod*** · 30-06-2012 09:52 PM

Originally Posted by Eyrie

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

I'd be a lot happier with a brief statement from Hibs confirming that Petrie met with Green on behalf of the SFA and not the club, and that we are not in favour of the proposal.

Right now either Petrie has lied to us about sporting integrity, or he's hiding behind the SFL clubs who have spoken out against Sevco 5088 joining Division One. Neither is acceptable.

There is, of course, the possibility that the alleged meeting didn't take place.

**Paisley Hibby** · 30-06-2012 10:01 PM

Just had a look at Stirling Albion website and they have a link to the document issued by SFL which they are asking their members to comment on. Content is as already seen and in powerpoint format - tacky. It seems quite clear to me that this is an SFL document because it sets out what SFL is being asked to do and then sets out the conditions under which the SFL would agree to Rangers in SFL Division 1 (subject to the clubs agreeing). Here's a link http://www.safctrust.org.uk/wp-conte...our_Future.pdf

***Seveno*** · 30-06-2012 10:02 PM

Well that's Andy Murray won again. If he doesn't win Wimbledon, that's me finished with fitba.

***marinello59*** · 30-06-2012 10:05 PM

Originally Posted by Seveno

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

Well that's Andy Murray won again. If he doesn't win Wimbledon, that's me finished with fitba.

**DH1875** · 30-06-2012 10:07 PM

Originally Posted by The_Exile

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

Remember Celtic have got shareholders to appease. They'll vote for whatever provides them with a better return. Or they could prove they are spineless by abstaining.

They are going to vote no. I'm not saying it's how they'd like the vote to go but as it's already a given that rangers won't be getting back in, it would be suicidal for them not to. Would have been interesting to see what they'd have done if we only had 4 clubs voting no.

***marinello59*** · 30-06-2012 10:09 PM

There is nothing astonishing about their silence. Despite what their fans think Celtic are the definition of an 'establishment' club.

**steakbake** · 30-06-2012 10:13 PM

I think they wanted to wait so their vote wasn't seen as decisive.

**IWasThere2016** · 30-06-2012 10:13 PM

Originally Posted by Big Frank

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

Without appearing rude, isn't it the case that you don't actually turn up to watch Hibernian? -but you will attend when we visit Tannadice - (not a dig at not turning up by the way - each to their own) - the point I'm making is that insufficient punishment to rangers being unacceptabel to you makes absolutely not a jot of difference to Hibernian FC?

Sorry SMAXXA

I think you got the sequence of my posts wrong. FTR, I'll be at Tanna if Rangers are suitably punished and there's integrity in the game - otherwise I won't be there (or ER).

**JohnStephens91** · 30-06-2012 10:18 PM

When are UEFA and FIFA going to step in and tell the heads of the SFA and SPL to get the **** away from Scottish football as they are corrupt and incompetent?

**bighairyfaeleith** · 30-06-2012 10:19 PM

Originally Posted by Seveno

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

Well that's Andy Murray won again. If he doesn't win Wimbledon, that's me finished with fitba.

Quality

Sent from my GT-I9001 using Tapatalk 2

**whiskyhibby** · 30-06-2012 10:22 PM

Originally Posted by TQM

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

I think you got the sequence of my post wrong. FTR, I'll be at Tanna if Rangers are suitably punished and there's integrity in the game - otherwise I won't be there (or ER).

Sorry don't get your argument.....Rod has already stated that Hibs will not vote for Newco in the SPL, and that it's for the SFL to determine what happens to Newco, why would you punish the club you support and love? If the vote from the SFL clubs goes for Rangers in the 1st division when Hibs have no influence on this decision?

**~~ronaldo7~~** · 30-06-2012 10:25 PM

There's not a team called Glasgow Rangers, no not one, and their never will be one

**JohnStephens91** · 30-06-2012 10:28 PM

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

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

There's not a team called Glasgow Rangers, no not one, and their never will be one

There never was, they were Rangers, now they are The Rangers, so any other team can actually start themselves up as Glasgow Rangers. God help them if they do though it would be a fate worse than death.

**~~Hibercelona~~** · 30-06-2012 10:29 PM

Originally Posted by Salt & Sauzee

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

When are UEFA and FIFA going to step in and tell the heads of the SFA and SPL to get the **** away from Scottish football as they are corrupt and incompetent?

They wont. Because unfortunately, so are UEFA and FIFA.

**IWasThere2016** · 30-06-2012 10:33 PM

Originally Posted by whiskyhibby

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

Sorry don't get your argument.....Rod has already stated that Hibs will not vote for Newco in the SPL, and that it's for the SFL to determine what happens to Newco, why would you punish the club you support and love? If the vote from the SFL clubs goes for Rangers in the 1st division when Hibs have no influence on this decision?

That will depend where the idea came from

and besides I hope the SFL sides have the sense to see the offer is a shallow bribe.

Unless the Huns are suitably and equitably punished the Scottish game will be gubbed.

**JohnStephens91** · 30-06-2012 10:34 PM

Originally Posted by wee_hibee

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

They wont. Because unfortunately, so are UEFA and FIFA.

Alex Thomson seems to think a UEFA investigation is forthcoming. Remember Italian football was dealt with and no club was left untouched, I wait in hope.

**~~ronaldo7~~** · 30-06-2012 10:36 PM

Originally Posted by Salt & Sauzee

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

There never was, they were Rangers, now they are The Rangers, so any other team can actually start themselves up as Glasgow Rangers. God help them if they do though it would be a fate worse than death.

I think I said their never was a team called Glasgow Rangers