Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Rangers FC lodge papers to go into administration

1122123125127128150

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,406 ✭✭✭Pompey Magnus


    Dempsey wrote: »
    http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/spl/4407410/Charles-Green-offers-an-escape-plan.html

    CHARLES GREEN has hatched a last-ditch plan to keep crisis-torn Rangers in the SPL.

    Charles Green has no shame

    Especially given his little dig at players leaving for financial gain, the only reason he is at The Rangers is because he is in it for a quick buck so he is in no position to criticise them.

    If he thought he could make a tidy profit by renaming Ibrox as The Brother Walfred Memorial Park he would have the name changed in the morning and go home to Yorkshire laughing all the way.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,164 ✭✭✭Savage Tyrant


    Seems to be some talk over on St Mirren forums that their chairman is pushing to have The Rangers parachuted straight into the SPL, Daily Record claiming at least 3 SPL chairmen were in talks last night to achieve this.

    I will NEVER set foot inside an SPL ground again, including Paradise, if that happens. I'd have a VERY hard time justifying it if Newco landed in Div 1 ... Not a hope of even considering it if they were in the SPL. Though it is the Record, So hopefully it's shít like 99.99% of what they print.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,406 ✭✭✭Pompey Magnus


    I will NEVER set foot inside an SPL ground again, including Paradise, if that happens. I'd have a VERY hard time justifying it if Newco landed in Div 1 ... Not a hope of even considering it if they were in the SPL. Though it is the Record, So hopefully it's shít like 99.99% of what they print.

    I had assumed it was shít but then I read the views of St Mirren fans after a shareholder meeting last night and they seemed very concerned at noises coming from the chairman that this might be back on.

    Any league where 2 teams out of 12 are basically exempt from relegation is just a joke and not one I would have any interest in following. If this is the outcome (I don't think it will be though) then I will probably only bother following Celtic's European games with any kind of interest.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,529 ✭✭✭✭Dempsey


    Jim Spence ‏@bbcjimspence

    Senior SPL source says Newco "Absolutely will be voted against" says Charles Green spoke to him also, but vote will still be no.

    Tweeted an hour ago. Doubt we'll have any last minute change of heart by SPL chairmen.


  • Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional North East Moderators Posts: 10,887 Mod ✭✭✭✭PauloMN


    This is just fcuking embarrassing now at this stage.

    If an SPL club can only survive by throwing the rule book out the window and voting a new club into the SPL, it's a sad indictment of the state of Scottish football.

    I still cannot fathom why there are no rules to cover this situation, or if there are rules there, why they are not being applied. Clubs should not have to be voting on these things. If a club folds and has to start again, there's only one route, and that's Division 3. That should apply whether it's Rangers, Celtic, St. Mirren or Peterhead.

    It's laughable to think we're back in pre-season training now, with kick off next month, and we still don't know what teams will be playing in what division.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,138 ✭✭✭✭chopperbyrne


    PauloMN wrote: »
    It's laughable to think we're back in pre-season training now, with kick off next month, and we still don't know what teams will be playing in what division.


    LOI says hello.


  • Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional North East Moderators Posts: 10,887 Mod ✭✭✭✭PauloMN


    Stranraer FC statement, much like Clyde's viewpoint:
    The committee of Stranraer FC met this evening to discuss the papers recently received in advance of the SFL clubs meeting. The papers indicate a number of proposals and scenarios to deal with the potential vacancy that would occur if the expulsion of an SPL club occurs this week.

    The committee unanimously agreed that the proposals are produced in haste and are unconvinced about the justification for departing from the rules and standards that the SFL represent. As a club recently faced with possible extinction and fighting our way back from financial difficulties we fully understand the position that a club could find themselves placed in and as a supporters run club, fully understand the passions of the supporters of clubs affected by such an event.

    We are not convinced at the emotive language currently being aired to describe the potential ramifications to our game should a NewCo not be given special case treatment and consider that the benefits that could be negotiated do not counter balance the damage that would be done to the credibility of the SFL as a governing body.

    We hold the stance that it is our place to act in the best long term interests of Stranraer FC and for Scottish Football as a whole and see no reason to breach the integrity of the SFL by filling a vacancy at any level other than at the lowest tier. The possibility of placing a NewCo at any other level breaches the sporting competition of our organisation and compromises the very structure of our game. There should not be a special case made for any club and we believe that the proper place for a phoenix club to restart life is at the lowest level. We believe it is right and proper than any club should have the right to apply for the resulting vacancy and we would then form a view on which club we would support for election to any vacancy based on the presentation case made by the applicants.

    Irrespective of the size, stature, history and resources of the club filling the vacancy, the opportunity exists for that club to find their way back to their natural tier in the league structure in a fair and equitable manner while being encouraged to trade and exist successfully within the means at their disposal.

    Restructuring of the league set-up and governing bodies is complex and difficult with many differing views and interests across the clubs in the spectrum. The current proposal has been compiled as a reaction to the unique and unexpected circumstances we are faced with and while there are clearly a number of ingredients that have great merit, this is too great an issue to be dealt with in this seemingly indecent haste.

    Stranraer FC support the opening of a vacancy in the lowest tier given the options available at present and remain open to the continuing challenge of working towards a better future for all involved in Scottish Football.

    http://www.stranraerfc.org/

    ...and Stirling Albion's poll results:
    The outcome of the Supporters’ Trust Poll with regards to the options the Club have been asked to consider in advance of tomorrow’s SFL Meeting at Hampden is as follows:-

    Rangers/Newco:

    Option 1 - to SFL3 – 68%

    Option 2 - to SFL1 – 16%

    Option 3 - to be terminated or suspended – 16%

    The Club Executive accepts this as a clear steer from the membership for Option 1 and that is the stance that I will take forward into the SFL meeting. The stance will include the proviso that, in accordance with SFL rules, the Rangers/Newco will have to apply for election rather than be accorded automatic admission as the option, as currently worded, would imply.

    It should be remembered that there will be no formal vote and I would hope that the meeting will be as much about providing substantially more detail to the headline document currently available and answering questions from the floor, as it is about member Clubs expressing opinion.

    A joint Club / Trust Executive Board Meeting will take place on Wednesday evening when I will fully update those in attendance with the information emanating from the SFL meeting to allow for further meaningful discussion to take place.

    Whilst I acknowledge that these are extremely difficult times for Scottish Football as a whole, the Club Executive will remain focussed solely on continuing to act in the best interests of SAFC and will not be drawn into debate or comment on matters that are not our direct responsibility.

    Further updates will be posted as soon as appropriate.

    J Stuart Brown

    Operations Director

    Edit: For the avoidance of doubt, please note that the wording of the three options is not that of SAFC but is word for word that used by the SFL in their documentation to member Clubs. There are five options in total but two of them are not relevant to SFL Clubs but lie within the scope of the SPL.

    http://www.stirlingalbionfc.co.uk/news


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,623 ✭✭✭lubo_moravcik




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,623 ✭✭✭lubo_moravcik




  • Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional North East Moderators Posts: 10,887 Mod ✭✭✭✭PauloMN


    And now the apology:
    http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/football-news/article/2830556

    Really, you're right, Green does have no shame! :o Cringeworthy stab at a last ditch attempt to get other clubs onside. :o


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,529 ✭✭✭✭Dempsey


    Jim Spence ‏@bbcjimspence

    Neil Doncaster about to start presentation to SFL.
    Jim Spence ‏@bbcjimspence

    Neil Doncaster tells sfl that Sky, Espn and sport 5 deals at threat as contracts require RFC in spl in 2013/14 value 17.35 mill

    Hopefully Doncaster explains why he didnt seek to have that clause removed from the contract


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,529 ✭✭✭✭Dempsey


    http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/109094-raith-director-we-are-being-bullied-and-lied-to-over-rangers-situation/
    Raith Rovers director Turnbull Hutton says clubs in the Scottish Football League are being “lied to, bullied and threatened” by the Scottish FA and Scottish Premier League in a “corrupt” move to aid Rangers.

    I'm glad that the SFL clubs can smell the bull**** a mile off


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,529 ✭✭✭✭Dempsey


    Jim Spence ‏@bbcjimspence

    SFA ch exec Stewart Regan now addressing the SFL meeting
    Jim Spence ‏@bbcjimspence

    Sfa will not allow rfc newco into spl says Stewart Regan

    Why didnt Regan say this the day liquidation was announced?

    Himself & Doncaster are not the right people to take Scottish Football forward


  • Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional North East Moderators Posts: 10,887 Mod ✭✭✭✭PauloMN


    Dempsey wrote: »
    Why didnt Regan say this the day liquidation was announced?

    Himself & Doncaster are not the right people to take Scottish Football forward

    Exactly my point all along. If they can say this now, why were they putting it to a vote in the first place? They are making this stuff up as they go along it seems.
    Jim Spence ‏@bbcjimspence
    Up to 6 SPL clubs at risk according to Stewart Regan. Sounds like option being presented is first division or nothing

    The way they are handling this is a complete joke. More bully boy tactics. If the Sky deal falls apart because Newco are told to go to Div 3, then so be it. We cannot have a league bending rules just because of Sky, or the inability of other clubs to function without one of the Glasgow clubs.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,529 ✭✭✭✭Dempsey


    SPL rules allow new clubs to apply (which is a joke), Sevco applied for Rangers SPL licence so a vote was called. The SFA & SPL hoped that the clubs would allow them back in with punishments. The SFA would have added relegation on top of what the SPL clubs decided. That didnt happen and now they are panicking. SFL clubs are being bullied by the SFA, SPL & SFL to get what they originally wanted and to avoid their incompetence (i.e. allowing clauses into TV deals, allowing clubs to be financially dependant on Celtic/Rangers) being shown very clearly to everyone.

    I wouldnt say making it up as they go along but they are trying to influence the outcome. They are corrupt, plain and simple and this is what needs to happen at Hampden...



    :pac:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,226 ✭✭✭✭Jelle1880


    Is Regan Loyd ? :pac:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,961 ✭✭✭Coillte_Bhoy




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,961 ✭✭✭Coillte_Bhoy




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,961 ✭✭✭Coillte_Bhoy


    ffs cant embed the video.:mad:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kE2XFEo6Zqw&feature=youtu.be

    Raith chairman pulls no punches


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,779 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,867 ✭✭✭UglyBolloxFace


    Airdrie United will abstain from any vote on the future of a Rangers newco in the Scottish Football League, according to their chairman Jim Ballantyne.

    As far as I know, an abstained vote is considered as a NO for counting purposes on acceptance of a peoposal is it not?

    :confused: Put it this way - in the recent Fiscal Treaty, if someone wrote "big hairy mickey" on their ballot paper instead of stating a preference, or better yet if that person never went to the polling station to vote, that 'vote' would have no bearing on the results (i.e. would not be counted).

    So why would you think a club abstaining from this vote would have their vote counted as a No?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,779 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    :confused: Put it this way - in the recent Fiscal Treaty, if someone wrote "big hairy mickey" on their ballot paper instead of stating a preference, or better yet if that person never went to the polling station to vote, that 'vote' would have no bearing on the results (i.e. would not be counted).

    So why would you think a club abstaining from this vote would have their vote counted as a No?

    Anything not counted as a yes will be a no. A certain percentage of yes votes are needed to pass something, not a certain number of no votes to stop it.

    If they need, for example, a two thirds majority, and one third don't vote, they are effectively saying no because everyone else then has to say yes.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,747 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    It has been confirmed that the SFL clubs will vote on Sevco going into Div 1 next Thursday, 12th July. A 50% Yes is needed to allow Sevco. That is 15 Yes and 15 No will carry the vote for the Yes


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,164 ✭✭✭Savage Tyrant


    :confused: Put it this way - in the recent Fiscal Treaty, if someone wrote "big hairy mickey" on their ballot paper instead of stating a preference, or better yet if that person never went to the polling station to vote, that 'vote' would have no bearing on the results (i.e. would not be counted).

    So why would you think a club abstaining from this vote would have their vote counted as a No?

    I'm not even sure if the SFL clubs get to vote and what the outcome needs to be... But regarding the SPL vote that requires an 8-4 majority to pass, I believe I read that a club abstaining would essentially be a no in the fact that it couldn't be considered a yes.
    If there is an absolute number of votes (12) and a 8-4 majority needed to pass a motion, then an abstained vote may as well have been a No, as it doesn't change the % needed to pass the motion and certainly can't be counted as a yes.
    I know it's not an actual NO vote, but it would be a defacto one surely?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,529 ✭✭✭✭Dempsey


    RE: Abstentions
    Grant Russell ‏@STVGrant

    SFL rules don't state how abstentions are dealt with in need for majority vote, as they are supposed to be forbidden.

    There are more holes in Scottish Football rules than a sieve!
    It has been confirmed that the SFL clubs will vote on Sevco going into Div 1 next Thursday, 12th July. A 50% Yes is needed to allow Sevco. That is 15 Yes and 15 No will carry the vote for the Yes

    Its a simple majority vote required, thats 50%+1. 50% would not get Sevco anywhere.

    EDIT
    Motherwell FC ‏@MotherwellFC

    Yes to Newco: 119 (18%) No to Newco: 542 (82%) Votes not returned: 247

    Motherwell's vote is in


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,747 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    In that case, Sevco need 16 clubs to say Yes


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,224 ✭✭✭✭SantryRed


    Why would any of the Division 3 or 2 clubs vote Yes? They're screwing themselves out of two big gates for a season.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,220 ✭✭✭the realpigiron


    SantryRed wrote: »
    Why would any of the Division 3 or 2 clubs vote Yes? They're screwing themselves out of two big gates for a season.

    Good point. The only option is for the new club to start in div 3. Interesting comments from the Raith Rovers chairman in that linked video earlier.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 404 ✭✭delos


    Dempsey wrote: »
    You still dont explain how SPL clubs are more to blame if SFL clubs vote Sevco into Div1. SPL clubs didnt make up the rules of the SFL, SPL clubs arent telling Sevco how to go about their business, SPL clubs aren't telling the SPL or SFL to influence SFL club vote. Your rant is well wide of the mark.

    I'd take the view that the SPL clubs are responsible for the creation of the SPL monster and I'd be very surprised if they don't influence the way it behaves.

    Anyway, this is going round in circles so how about I leave the SPL clubs alone and you lay off the SFL fans? :)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 404 ✭✭delos


    Good point. The only option is for the new club to start in div 3. Interesting comments from the Raith Rovers chairman in that linked video earlier.

    Strictly speaking the only option is for the new club to apply for the vacancy in the SFL along with Spartans, Cover Rangers and Gala Fairydean. All three of these clubs have the prerequisite books in order and without joking are more likely to be in a position to play in the 3rd Division as nobody will be able to challenge their entry in a court. That's why they are throwing in the restructuring as it makes it easier to ignore the rule book. Hopefully the SFL clubs will see that the restructuring will come anyway sooner or later.


Advertisement