Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[Paisley Hibby]

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

I don't follow how newco would end up in SFL 3 if the SFL clubs vote 'no' to resolution 2

Resolution 2 starts:

'(ii) That the Scottish Football League Members direct the Board of Management of The Scottish Football League (the “Board”) to provide that Rangers F.C. shall play in the Third Division of the Scottish Football League during Season 2012/13..............'

So a 'no' to resolution 2 means that SFL Clubs are effectively voting against newco going to SFL3. There is nothing in any of the resolutions stating what will happen to newco if the SFL Clubs vote yes to resolution 1 and no to resolution 2. If the SFL Board have the autonomy to put newco into any SFL Division they see fit (as has been reported elsewhere) then I don't see an automatic route to SFL Div 3 if there is a no vote to resolution 2.

Hopefully I'm missing something

You're not missing anything. Resolutions 1 and 2 have been carefully crafted by an evil lawyer and are intended to be misleading. The only way this can be fixed is for the clubs to propose an amendment to Resolution 1 before voting. It should be amended so that it says that Sevco are to be admitted to the SFL at Division 3. Resolution 2 can then be safely binned. However, I don't know if the rules for an SFL Special General Meeting allow amendments to be made at the meeting. If they do not then the clubs either have to go along with this evil plan or vote not to allow the huns into the SFL at all. That's been the plan all along because Longmuir, Regan and Donkey think that there's no way the clubs will do that.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

So if it's a no, no, they are playing nowhere? Or does it go to another vote if someone else applies, ie spartans or gala?

If R1 is a No...there is no need for R2

[Orourke73]

Aye, sorry. What I really meant though, are newco the only team applying and if so that seems a bit unfair on the likes of Gala, spartans or any other club with 3 years accounts who could have applied for the vacant spot.

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

If R1 is a No...there is no need for R2

[Kaiser1962]

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

Oops, sorry.

Seriously though Janice, does the SFA comment not sound like a hefty fudge to you? I don't recall failure to submit accounts being one of the charges and in any case the sentence hasn't been served and it doesn't look like it will be.

And what is it that can't be transferred from one legal entity to another? I thought it was SFA memership, but I've rather lost track a bit.

UEFA club licence.

[greenginger]

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/332109

Concessions now being offered by Chuckie Green.

" Let us sign players for the rest of July then we will agree to a signing ban. "

You could not make it up !

[SteveHFC]

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/spl/4422381/The-true-cost-of-Rangers-relegation.html

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scot...-cert-now.html

[cabbageandribs1875]

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

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/332109

Concessions now being offered by Chuckie Green.

" Let us sign players for the rest of July then we will agree to a signing ban. "

You could not make it up !

he really IS coming the k*** now

[Haymaker]

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

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/spl/4422381/The-true-cost-of-Rangers-relegation.html

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scot...-cert-now.html

Oh ffs!

[1875godsgift]

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

I've fired off a few emails to various addresses. Latest one went to SFL clubs, SPL clubs, Both organisations, the Media and a few SPL fan clubs (grouped below).


[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected]




cc:

[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],

[email protected],
[email protected],

[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],


[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected]

Admins, ya pricks, any chance of a sticky on this? I think it's important our voices should be heard.

Thanks to DChibs for doing all the groundwork

[AmericanHib]

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

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/spl/4422381/The-true-cost-of-Rangers-relegation.html

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scot...-cert-now.html

I love the last two lines in the first story.

"The vote to save our game will be one that places shamed Rangers into the First Division. Anything else and we can stand outside the crime scene tape and count the bodies."

Wow!

[matty_f]

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

Oh ffs!

It doesn't mention that the vast majority of that loss will impact Celtc and Sevco the most. Most of the SPL sides only see a fraction of that money anyway.

[matty_f]

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

he really IS coming the k*** now

that's just ludicrous.

[Haymaker]

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

It doesn't mention that the vast majority of that loss will impact Celtc and Sevco the most. Most of the SPL sides only see a fraction of that money anyway.

Very true.

[weecounty hibby]

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

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/spl/4422381/The-true-cost-of-Rangers-relegation.html

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scot...-cert-now.html

This is the build up to the vote starting. Be prepared for some end of the world type journalism in the days ahead. Embarrassing and they are a disgrace to their profession.

[Spike Mandela]

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

http://www.clydefc.co.uk/news/2012/07/10/4139/


Clyde FC's latest statement picking holes in Friday's proposal, and laying it out in plain English for all to see.

If the people who are in charge at Clyde had been in charge at Rangers the last 20 years they wouldn't now be Sevco. Craig Burley take note.

[Moulin Yarns]

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

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/spl/4422381/The-true-cost-of-Rangers-relegation.html

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scot...-cert-now.html

The solution to the second 'story' is to allow Sevco Huns to die, and not replace them so the SPL has 11 teams, and they play each other twice at home and twice away, no need for the split making a 40 game season. It also doesn't impact on the SFL fixtures. That also gives a full season to get a proper solution and allow the clubs like Spartans a chance to get a presentation for joining the league prepared, all for the end of the season.

[McSwanky]

Something I don't understand... If all these prophecies of financial Armageddon are accurate, how come our club (one of the most financially aware clubs in the SPL) are still signing players?

I'm sick and tired of these scare stories in the red tops, what a load of selective, one-sided, self preserving drivel.

[IWasThere2016]

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

Something I don't understand... If all these prophecies of financial Armageddon are accurate, how come our club (one of the most financially aware clubs in the SPL) are still signing players?

I'm sick and tired of these scare stories in the red tops, what a load of selective, one-sided, self preserving drivel.

It is because no one believes Donkeycaster and Regan

We all know they're making it up as they go along ..

[IWasThere2016]

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

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/spl/4422381/The-true-cost-of-Rangers-relegation.html

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scot...-cert-now.html

What a load of sh I te! No quotes, no balance, just wind and pish!

WHAT ABOUT THE COST OF THE FANS WALKING AWAY?!?!

[Cabbage East]

Best line of that article..."This is neither scaremongering or rumours..."

You couldn't make this stuff up

[RyeSloan]

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

Best line of that article..."This is neither scaremongering or rumours..."

You couldn't make this stuff up

Well they clearly did!! Along with the headline about Rangers being "Relegated"...they really really don't get it do they!?!

[swazzie]

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

Aye, sorry. What I really meant though, are newco the only team applying and if so that seems a bit unfair on the likes of Gala, spartans or any other club with 3 years accounts who could have applied for the vacant spot.

So, for my simple brain, resolutionwise, as currently drafted:-

a) if clubs vote NO to resolution 1, the matter ends and Sevco do not get into the SFL anywhere and there is no resolution 2
b) if clubs vote YES to resolution 1, Sevco will be placed into the SFL and we move to resolution 2
c) if clubs vote NO to resolution 2, Sevco are in Division 3
d) if clubs vote YES to resolution 2, the SFL have the discretion to put them in Division 1

And in all cases it is a straight majority vote

Is that all right?

[CropleyWasGod]

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

So, for my simple brain, resolutionwise, as currently drafted:-

a) if clubs vote NO to resolution 1, the matter ends and Sevco do not get into the SFL anywhere and there is no resolution 2
b) if clubs vote YES to resolution 1, Sevco will be placed into the SFL and we move to resolution 2
c) if clubs vote NO to resolution 2, Sevco are in Division 3
d) if clubs vote YES to resolution 2, the SFL have the discretion to put them in Division 1

And in all cases it is a straight majority vote

Is that all right?

That's my understanding. On (d), the clubs are effectively giving the SFL Board the power to negotiate a deal which suits them, in return for putting Seb in D1.

[jonty]

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

The solution to the second 'story' is to allow Sevco Huns to die, and not replace them so the SPL has 11 teams, and they play each other twice at home and twice away, no need for the split making a 40 game season. It also doesn't impact on the SFL fixtures. That also gives a full season to get a proper solution and allow the clubs like Spartans a chance to get a presentation for joining the league prepared, all for the end of the season.

because thats far too sensible.

[joe breezy]

For the accountants...

Duff & Phelps report

http://www.rangers.co.uk/staticFiles...~177826,00.pdf

[StevieC]

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

a) if clubs vote NO to resolution 1, the matter ends and Sevco do not get into the SFL anywhere and there is no resolution 2
b) if clubs vote YES to resolution 1, Sevco will be placed into the SFL and we move to resolution 2
c) if clubs vote NO to resolution 2, Sevco are in Division 3
d) if clubs vote YES to resolution 2, the SFL have the discretion to put them in Division 1
Is that all right?

Unfortunately, part (c) is not so cut and dried. If they vote no to resolution (ii) it is then removed from the equation and you are left with the YES vote for resolution (i). Resolution (i) does not stipulate Div. 3 so Rangers could (with a bit of rule bending) be placed anywhere in the SFL.

[Jim44]

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

So, for my simple brain, resolutionwise, as currently drafted:-

a) if clubs vote NO to resolution 1, the matter ends and Sevco do not get into the SFL anywhere and there is no resolution 2
b) if clubs vote YES to resolution 1, Sevco will be placed into the SFL and we move to resolution 2
c) if clubs vote NO to resolution 2, Sevco are in Division 3
d) if clubs vote YES to resolution 2, the SFL have the discretion to put them in Division 1

And in all cases it is a straight majority vote

Is that all right?

This seems correct to me. As they are unlikely to vote NO to Resolution 1, why waste time and oxygen on the other stuff as they going to end up in Div 1.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

Unfortunately, part (c) is not so cut and dried. If they vote no to resolution (ii) it is then removed from the equation and you are left with the YES vote for resolution (i). Resolution (i) does not stipulate Div. 3 so Rangers could (with a bit of rule bending) be placed anywhere in the SFL.

No they can't, Stevie. The rule is there. The Board have no power to put them anywhere they want. If the clubs vote no to R2, and the Board try to ignore the rule, there will be an unholy row.

[down-the-slope]

Observation - I have noticed that the % of those opposed to Div1 for NewCo but will continue to support the game has been steadily increasing.

I'm in that camp but wondering why more recent voters are increasingly taking that option?

[Suburban Hibby]

I see the ever reliable Daily Mail is claiming an exclusive


SPL to announce 16-team top-flight league to come into play by 2015
By Brian Marjoribanks
PUBLISHED: 00:48, 11 July 2012 | UPDATED: 00:49, 11 July 2012

..The SPL are set to promise to set up a 16-team top flight within three years in return for newco Rangers being parachuted into next season's First Division.
The plan, which will be discussed at an SFL board meeting at Hampden on Wednesday, represents a last-gasp bid by the league to safeguard its lucrative television deals in the wake of the Ibrox club's collapse.



Sportsmail understands the proposal would see a move from the current four divisions to three by 2015, but with no play-offs planned between the top and second tiers.
While not certain to be voted through in what promises to be a fractious meeting of all 30 SFL members on Friday, the deal is being perceived in SPL circles as a breakthrough for lower-league clubs who are seeking radical reform of the Scottish game as the price for allowing newco Rangers to drop just one league.
The proposed solution is also being seen as a bid to stave off a total implosion of the Scottish game after SFA chief executive Stewart Regan warned of 'a slow, lingering death' if the Ibrox club were banished to the Third Division - thereby threatening existing TV deals with Sky and ESPN.


Last night's development came as more lower-league clubs turned their fire on Regan and his SPL counterpart, Neil Doncaster.
Morton chairman Douglas Rae accused Doncaster of 'mammoth failure' in his handling of the crisis and of having 'lost his way' during the long-running saga.
He further alleged that Regan had lied over claims the SFA would have blocked newco Rangers gaining entry to the SPL, even if top-flight clubs had not voted 10-1 against admitting them on July 4.

Clyde, meanwhile, called on the SFL to clarify exactly what is being voted for on Friday -- amid growing fears that newco Rangers will be 'railroaded' into the First Division regardless of how the voting goes.

Describing the overall situation as an 'unholy mess', Raith Rovers chairman Turnbull Hutton last night claimed Doncaster and Regan were now living on borrowed time.

He told Sportsmail: 'Their positions are becoming untenable. I don't know who will wield the axe or whether they will choose to fall on their swords, but the pair of them have presided over an unholy mess.


Under fire: SPL chief Neil Doncaster has been criticised for his handling of the situation
'Rangers went into administration in February -- it's July and people are still asking what is going to happen. The honest answer ahead of Friday's SFL meeting is I haven't a bloody clue -- and neither does anyone else.

It's an almighty shambles.' Morton counterpart Rae had earlier accused the SPL and SFA of 'bullying' and 'deceiving' SFL clubs during a meeting last week, warning of dire consequences if they did not vote Rangers into the First Division.

'Doncaster was totally unable to get his (SPL) clubs to accept the decision going forward that he wanted,' said Rae.

'Following that mammoth failure, he now expects the SFL clubs to bail him out, which would mean ignoring the views of our supporters.

'Quite frankly, Neil Doncaster seemed to many to be a man who had lost his way and is unable to get back on the right road.

'The most concerning point about Regan's presentation was he departed from truth as he became increasingly desperate to get his viewpoints accepted.


Red card: Rangers will have to play their football in the First Division
'When asked what would have happened if SPL clubs had voted newco Rangers entry to the Premier League, he stated that the SFA would block it.

'The following day, Stewart countermanded in the press what he had told the SFL meeting the previous day.

'It is extremely disappointing the chief executive of the SFA was unable to give a truthful response to SFL chairmen.'

Now Clyde are seeking changes to Friday's resolutions after claiming the clubs no longer seem to have a clear choice between sending the newco to the First or Third divisions.

The club said in a statement: 'We are being asked to make one of the most important decisions for Scottish football in a vacuum devoid of factual information, that vacuum having been filled with unhelpful rhetoric and scaremongering by the chief executives of the SFA and SPL.'

As Scottish football's civil war raged on, former SFA president George Peat last night insisted the game had 'hit a brick wall' and that he was now glad to be on the outside looking in.

Peat, who stepped down from his Hampden post last summer after four years in the job -- and having commissioned Henry McLeish's Review of Scottish Football -- said: 'I am happy to be outside of it all now. It is sad what has happened at Rangers.

'After the McLeish report came out, we were all working together on the way forward . When I left the SFA, the relationship between the SPL and the SFL was very good.


'People were looking at things from the same point of view. Nobody could foresee what was going to happen.

'I hope that what has happened at Rangers hasn't blown it all apart but, from an administration point of view, Scottish football has hit a brick wall.'

Peat admitted he had sympathy for Regan, who he insisted had a responsibility to act for the greater good of the game. 'I believe Stewart has been unfairly criticised,' he said.

'Someone has to take the lead and that's what he did. He is not going to please everybody.

'All he has done is to spell out the road the game could go down and what will happen.

'Perhaps it didn't make good reading for some but, in all of it, somebody has to explain the facts of the situation, whether they are pretty or not.

'He might have gone too far in some people's eyes but this is a situation that has far-reaching consequences.

'SFL clubs have been put in an invidious position. It is SFL clubs who are suffering and they feel they have had the problem dumped on them.

'The clubs are never all going to agree but what is important right now is that people look at what is right for the long-term future of the game.'


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...#ixzz20Iyd09lB