Rangers FC On Field Gossip & Rumour Thread 2017 Mod Note in OP(Updated 14/08)

Jelle1880 · 12-09-2012 12:12PM

There's discussing, and there's ranting.

But hey, if the shoe fits.

Dempsey · 12-09-2012 12:27PM

Jelle1880 wrote: »

There's discussing, and there's ranting.

But hey, if the shoe fits.

Green is claiming things that flies in the face of what actually happened. He's also claiming that more than 2 clubs have used EBT's. We all know that Celtic had one, Rangers had dozens, who is the others especially since all clubs were asked for full disclosure.

Its hard to ignore Green when he's making unsubstantiated claims, contradicting himself and generally talking ****e. When it was any other chairman/owner in Scottish Football, it is brought up and none of this obsessed tripe is mentioned. Ye seem to trot out the obsessed line when ye dont want to discuss something that could reflect badly on your club. Its pathetic really.

What do you make of Johnstons comments? Ogilvie has a conflict of interest in this investigation yet he wants the SFA involved. Surely Ogilvie would have to be gone from the SFA before they could be involved. Im surprised that the media havent picked up on his agenda.

Jelle1880 · 12-09-2012 12:50PM

I only use the 'obsessed' thing with 2 or 3 posters on here, make of that what you want.

lubo_moravcik · 12-09-2012 01:13PM

Roger Mitchell in the Herald Scotland
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/does-green-actually-buy-this-stuff-lets-take-a-look-does-green-actually-buy-this-stuff-lets-take-a-look.18857922

I truly hope by the time that this is read, someone officially representing the SPL will have done likewise. I ask myself, does Green actually buy this stuff? Let's take a look:

Claim 1 Rangers ceased to be subject to the SPL's rules when they were ejected from their league.

Fact Rangers oldco was not ejected from the SPL. The fact that Rangers went into liquidation automatically expelled them from the league. The SPL shareholders then decided not to make an exception and let them back in. Two very different things.

Claim 2 The outcome of the SPL's process will have no legal effect.

Fact What the SPL are deciding upon is whether their tournament and their trophy was assigned to the correct club in the years in question.

The SPL have every right to examine whether participants in their competition behaved within the rules. And if they find they haven't, they can apply their rule book as recourse. More Green nonsense.

I do, however, agree with him that "whatever decision they reach is a decision of the SPL". Indeed. But the SPL should be proud of that, and not hide behind the Law Lords.

The SPL are examining the conduct of the participants in their competition well before Rangers went into liquidation, in particular the conduct of the club then owned by Sir David Murray, with the club secretary role (in charge of those player registrations) held by Campbell Ogilvie (whatever happened to him?). Charles Green and Sevco have nothing to do with this. Whatsoever.

Claim 3 The new owners purchased all the business and assets of Rangers, including titles and trophies.

Fact Green said on June 2012 that if his CVA proposal was to fail (which it did) and Rangers were to be liquidated (which they are), "the history, the tradition, everything that's great about this club is swept aside".

Therefore he admits he has not purchased titles and trophies. Sevco has no titles and trophies.

By the way, Charles, I would not provoke commentators like me to dig this up, because what you said is not what the Rangers fans want to hear now, as you now correctly realise. Let it lie, Charlie, let it lie.

So, even one with a leaning towards Govan would argue that, under the most superficial scrutiny, Green's attack is less than robust. But sometimes you have to chuck a dog a bone. So, to be fair, Charlie is right with his complaint on the SPL's lack of consistency,

Green states: "The SPL took part in discussions regarding the new company's league status, where 'the EBT issue' would be dealt with as part of a package of sanctions which would be implemented in return for membership.

"We do not accept that people who are willing to come to an agreement on such matters then have a right to instigate a full-blown inquisition when matters do not unfold as they thought they would."

Sadly this falls into the general shambles of the management of the affair by the SFA/SPL. I made my own view clear on the leadership of both bodies in the summer. But I cannot see how the credibility of the current process on a simple point of law over false registration of players with Employee Benefit Trusts (being handled by independent top QCs) can be derailed by claims that the prosecutor behaved incoherently months earlier.

Good debating point, Charles, but it's not enough. Instead, all of us who love the game and who hold true sporting values in our hearts have a simple question: Did Rangers oldco gain unfair advantage by registering players on a basis where their full employment conditions were not declared to the SPL/SFA?

In my mind the answer is undoubtedly 'yes'. But let's not forget the lessons of Versailles: bloodlust rebounds.

The SPL enquiry punishment doesn't arouse great passion in me. And it shouldn't either for Celtic fans. For them I'd argue the victory is in the fact that their greatest rival died.

The 125-year long struggle ended with the collapse of the adversary. The war was won. Achilles vanquished Hector.

In closing, from Mark Anthony onwards history tells us that well-crafted oratory can influence the mob.

While Charles Green is no great speaker or statesman, I must admit, he is no dummy. And there is no doubt that his audience is the mob, whose money and favour he needs in order to exit the Rangers investment project with a financial return.

Stoking up hatred has always energised "the base", another example of which we saw in the Republican convention in these days.

Well done, Charles. Initial Public Offering of shares here we come.

For Scottish football, the days of enlightenment around the Tommy Burns funeral are long gone, and I fear the worst.

Any thoughts on this? or just more bullsh!t??

Dempsey · 12-09-2012 01:26PM

Green always said that his strategy was to exit Sevco after a fans share flotation. Although it seems that he's trying to get it done quicker than he 1st said.

lubo_moravcik · 12-09-2012 01:37PM

BBC Scotland has learned that a verdict on the First Tier Tax tribunal between Rangers and HM Revenue & Customs is expected in October.
In 2010, the previous owners of Rangers contested an unpaid tax relating to the use of Employee Benefit Trusts, believed to be in the region on £49m.
The club entered administration in February 2012 over a separate tax issue and applied for insolvency in July.
The Scottish Courts Service said an announcement will be made next month.

Jelle1880 · 12-09-2012 01:52PM

The same Roger Mitchell who ****ed the SPL by holding Sky ransom, and then going with Setanta ? :pac:

Dempsey · 12-09-2012 02:07PM

Jelle1880 wrote: »

The same Roger Mitchell who ****ed the SPL by holding Sky ransom, and then going with Setanta ? :pac:

9 SPL clubs voted to take the Setanta contract.

Jelle1880 · 12-09-2012 02:14PM

No, he tried to play hardball with Sky and lost.

Sky were raking in the money from all sides and everybody could have made a deal like that.

Dempsey · 12-09-2012 02:39PM

Jelle1880 wrote: »

No, he tried to play hardball with Sky and lost.

Sky were raking in the money from all sides and everybody could have made a deal like that.

Sky had an offer on the table, 9 clubs voted for Setanta over Sky

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/c/celtic/8154830.stm

John Reid wrote:

Last year's decision to reject the Sky bid and opt for Setanta - arrived at against the strong opposition of Celtic, Rangers and Aberdeen - has proved to be the disastrous misjudgement we indicated it might be, with Setanta now in administration

Jelle1880 · 12-09-2012 03:00PM

Dempsey wrote: »

Sky had an offer on the table, 9 clubs voted for Setanta over Sky

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/c/celtic/8154830.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/scotland/2495351.stm

Mitchell had already rejected a new Sky TV deal in December 2001 to embark on this ambitious project

He was convinced that the venture would attract enough subscribers to make the projected revenue more than the satellite broadcaster's deal.

But the need to harness more than a third of the entire number of satellite subscribers in Scotland appeared unfeasible.
And in the end, with Sky out of the picture, the SPL were left with a deal with BBC Scotland and Setanta, worth a third of the original satellite company's offer.

There was no 'Either Sky, or Setanta'.

This are two different deals, the Setanta deal I'm talking about was in 2002, your article seems to be about the renewal in 2008.

Dempsey · 12-09-2012 04:09PM

But we didnt go with Setanta that time that you stated earlier, the SPL signed a 2 year deal with the BBC when the Sky deal collapsed. The SPL's 1st deal with Setanta didnt happen until Q1 of 2004.

Jelle1880 · 12-09-2012 04:29PM

Ah yes, I thought that the deal with BBC and Setanta kicked in at the same time.

lubo_moravcik · 12-09-2012 04:40PM

so now we've established that sky deals never happened and that, what about these comments

Green said on June 2012 that if his CVA proposal was to fail (which it did) and Rangers were to be liquidated (which they are), "the history, the tradition, everything that's great about this club is swept aside"

Therefore he admits he has not purchased titles and trophies. Sevco has no titles and trophies.

Did Rangers oldco gain unfair advantage by registering players on a basis where their full employment conditions were not declared to the SPL/SFA???

Did they?

While Charles Green is no great speaker or statesman, I must admit, he is no dummy. And there is no doubt that his audience is the mob, whose money and favour he needs in order to exit the Rangers investment project with a financial return.

Broxi_Bear_Eire · 12-09-2012 04:42PM

lubo_moravcik wrote: »

so now we've established that sky deals never happened and that, what about these comments

Did they?

Well if Rangers are to be believed these parties did know about them through the accounts which stated them clearly.

Dempsey · 12-09-2012 04:55PM

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Well if Rangers are to be believed these parties did know about them through the accounts which stated them clearly.

Having EBT's is not the issue, neither is receiving money from them.

Broxi_Bear_Eire · 12-09-2012 04:59PM

Dempsey wrote: »

Having EBT's is not the issue, neither is receiving money from them.

The question asked was did the SPL/SFA know about them

Dempsey · 12-09-2012 05:12PM

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

The question asked was did the SPL/SFA know about them

Surely they could ask Ogilvie to check if the SFA knew?!

Anyways, D&P should have all the offending paperwork destroyed by now. What else would they be doing at this stage! :pac:

Broxi_Bear_Eire · 12-09-2012 05:25PM

Dempsey wrote: »

Surely they could ask Ogilvie to check if the SFA knew?!

Anyways, D&P should have all the offending paperwork destroyed by now. What else would they be doing at this stage! :pac:

Honest I know tic fans aren't paranoid

Dempsey · 12-09-2012 05:42PM

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Honest I know tic fans aren't paranoid

Martin Bain wouldnt be the only person handy with a shredder! :eek: :P

bobbysands81 · 13-09-2012 01:16PM

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Nine Scottish Premier League clubs, and Rangers, have received a slice of a €100m payout by UEFA for their contributions to Euro 2012.

Celtic will receive the most, €568,226 (£453,325), after having both Mikael Lustig and Georgios Samaras involved in the final tournament. Rangers meanwhile will receive the second highest payment, netting €339,623 (£270,948).

Aberdeen, Dundee United, Hearts, Inverness CT, Kilmarnock, Motherwell, Ross County and St Johnstone have also profited, as UEFA rewards clubs for releasing players to feature in both the qualifying and final stages of the European Championships.

The solidarity payments were made to 575 European clubs, in conjunction with European Club Association.

For the qualifying rounds, if a club had a player who was involved in a country's match day squad for eight matches, they will receive €5,241. For national teams which played ten qualifiers, €4,192 is paid out per player and €3,494 is being given if a nation played up to 12 qualifying matches.

For the final tournament, played in Poland and Ukraine in the summer, clubs were rewarded on a per player, per day basis. Scottish clubs received €4,530 on that basis for players who were in a Euro 2012 squad.

Michel Platini, President of UEFA, said: "I am delighted that we are able to provide clubs with financial benefits from UEFA EURO 2012 to reward their contribution to the competition.

"We witnessed a truly fantastic UEFA European Football Championship final round this summer, and I am pleased that the clubs can now also be associated with the event."

FULL LIST OF PAYMENTS TO SCOTTISH CLUBS

Aberdeen €14,675 (£11,707) Celtic €568,226 (£453,325) Dundee United €33,543 (£26,760) Rangers €339,623 (£270,948) Heart of Midlothian €76,520 (£61,046) Inverness Caledonian Thistle €20,964 (£16,724) Kilmarnock €33,543 (£26,760) Motherwell €20,964 (£16,724) Ross County €20,964 (£16,724) St Johnstone €8,386 (£6,690)

But, but, but,... you are dead

Surely that money will be going to Rangers FC(IA)?

bobbysands81 · 13-09-2012 01:17PM

Jelle1880 wrote: »

There's a chance that the SPL will keep the money to pay creditors, but that's not sure yet.

And depending on what football authorities you mean it's crystal clear, the SFL know it's still the same club

How come NewCo Rangers weren't seeded for the League Cup?

Broxi_Bear_Eire · 13-09-2012 01:25PM

bobbysands81 wrote: »

How come NewCo Rangers weren't seeded for the League Cup?

Were any division three sides that would be a big NO. Only SPL sides are seeded for it

Jelle1880 · 13-09-2012 01:25PM

See BBE's answer.

bobbysands81 · 13-09-2012 03:33PM

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

bobbysands81 wrote: »

How come NewCo Rangers weren't seeded for the League Cup?

Were any division three sides that would be a big NO. Only SPL sides are seeded for it

Jelle1880 wrote: »

See BBE's answer.

Au contraire!

An I missing something here? If "Rangers 2012" were really Rangers then surely they'd have been seeded as per the rules of the competition which are very clearly set out below.

Of course if they are to be considered a NEW CLUB by the SFL then it's quite clear that they should not be seeded.

It seems clear that the SFL view Rangers2012 as a new club as they played East Fife at home in the first round on the 7th August.

http://www.scottishfootballleague.com/football/league-cup/format/

1.      The Competition shall be contested by all Clubs of The Scottish Football League and The Scottish Premier League.

2.      In the event that five clubs qualify for UEFA Club Competitions, those five clubs will be exempt from playing in the Competition until the Third Round. In any season where fewer than five Clubs qualify for UEFA competitions the number of exempt Clubs shall remain at five and the Clubs qualifying for the UEFA Club Competitions shall be augmented by the next highest placed Club or Clubs in The Scottish Premier League at the end of the preceding season.

3.      For the First Round the thirty lowest placed clubs of The Scottish Football League and The Scottish Premier League at the end of the preceding season, which are not participating in the UEFA Club Competitions, will play a single tie on the ground of the first named club. This Round will be “seeded” and the “seeds” will be the fifteen highest placed clubs at the end of the preceding season. The fifteen winning clubs will qualify to play in the Second Round.

4.      For the Second Round, the seven lowest placed clubs of The Scottish Premier League at the end of the preceding season will be inserted into a ballot with the winners from the First Round. This Round will be “seeded” and the “seeds” will be the eleven highest placed clubs at the end of the preceding season. Those clubs will play a single tie on the ground of the first named club. The eleven winning clubs will qualify to play in the Third Round.

5.      For the Third Round, the five clubs, which are participating in the UEFA Club Competitions together with the eleven clubs qualifying from the Second Round, will then be inserted into a ballot. This Round will be “seeded” with the clubs occupying the eight highest positions at the end of the preceding season being “seeded”. These clubs will play a single tie on the ground of the first named club. The eight winning clubs will qualify to play in the Fourth Round.

Broxi_Bear_Eire · 13-09-2012 03:42PM

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Au contraire!

An I missing something here? If "Rangers 2012" were really Rangers then surely they'd have been seeded as per the rules of the competition which are very clearly set out below.

Of course if they are to be considered a NEW CLUB by the SFL then it's quite clear that they should not be seeded.

It seems clear that the SFL view Rangers2012 as a new club as they played East Fife at home in the first round on the 7th August.

http://www.scottishfootballleague.com/football/league-cup/format/

1.      The Competition shall be contested by all Clubs of The Scottish Football League and The Scottish Premier League.

2.      In the event that five clubs qualify for UEFA Club Competitions, those five clubs will be exempt from playing in the Competition until the Third Round. In any season where fewer than five Clubs qualify for UEFA competitions the number of exempt Clubs shall remain at five and the Clubs qualifying for the UEFA Club Competitions shall be augmented by the next highest placed Club or Clubs in The Scottish Premier League at the end of the preceding season.

3.      For the First Round the thirty lowest placed clubs of The Scottish Football League and The Scottish Premier League at the end of the preceding season, which are not participating in the UEFA Club Competitions, will play a single tie on the ground of the first named club. This Round will be “seeded” and the “seeds” will be the fifteen highest placed clubs at the end of the preceding season. The fifteen winning clubs will qualify to play in the Second Round.

4.      For the Second Round, the seven lowest placed clubs of The Scottish Premier League at the end of the preceding season will be inserted into a ballot with the winners from the First Round. This Round will be “seeded” and the “seeds” will be the eleven highest placed clubs at the end of the preceding season. Those clubs will play a single tie on the ground of the first named club. The eleven winning clubs will qualify to play in the Third Round.

5.      For the Third Round, the five clubs, which are participating in the UEFA Club Competitions together with the eleven clubs qualifying from the Second Round, will then be inserted into a ballot. This Round will be “seeded” with the clubs occupying the eight highest positions at the end of the preceding season being “seeded”. These clubs will play a single tie on the ground of the first named club. The eight winning clubs will qualify to play in the Fourth Round.

Yes and as we were put in div 3 we were regarded as one of the lowest place clubs.

Really why do yo care so much if we are dead or not the same club to you why the interest, Oh and as a matter of interest Regan gave an interview where he said that absolutely we were the same club
Also as we were barred from Europe due to lack of accounts we of course would not be seeded, how many times Bobby the share was transferred it was not a "new" share which it would have been if you have a problem take it up with the SPL,SFA and SFL who all recognise us as the same football club

Dempsey · 13-09-2012 03:49PM

Someone should explain things a little better to Charlie Green though, he seems to think that he can choose between being a new club and the old club when it suits his agenda.

Broxi_Bear_Eire · 13-09-2012 03:50PM

Dempsey wrote: »

Someone should explain things a little better to Charlie Green though, he seems to think that he can choose between being a new club and the old club when it suits his agenda.

No he knows the difference between the football club and the company that runs it

Dempsey · 13-09-2012 03:53PM

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

No he knows the difference between the football club and the company that runs it

Irrelevant when it comes to a league applying its own rules and amending its own decisions based on new information :P

Jelle1880 · 13-09-2012 04:24PM

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Au contraire!

An I missing something here? If "Rangers 2012" were really Rangers then surely they'd have been seeded as per the rules of the competition which are very clearly set out below.

Of course if they are to be considered a NEW CLUB by the SFL then it's quite clear that they should not be seeded.

It seems clear that the SFL view Rangers2012 as a new club as they played East Fife at home in the first round on the 7th August.

http://www.scottishfootballleague.com/football/league-cup/format/

1.      The Competition shall be contested by all Clubs of The Scottish Football League and The Scottish Premier League.

2.      In the event that five clubs qualify for UEFA Club Competitions, those five clubs will be exempt from playing in the Competition until the Third Round. In any season where fewer than five Clubs qualify for UEFA competitions the number of exempt Clubs shall remain at five and the Clubs qualifying for the UEFA Club Competitions shall be augmented by the next highest placed Club or Clubs in The Scottish Premier League at the end of the preceding season.

3.      For the First Round the thirty lowest placed clubs of The Scottish Football League and The Scottish Premier League at the end of the preceding season, which are not participating in the UEFA Club Competitions, will play a single tie on the ground of the first named club. This Round will be “seeded” and the “seeds” will be the fifteen highest placed clubs at the end of the preceding season. The fifteen winning clubs will qualify to play in the Second Round.

4.      For the Second Round, the seven lowest placed clubs of The Scottish Premier League at the end of the preceding season will be inserted into a ballot with the winners from the First Round. This Round will be “seeded” and the “seeds” will be the eleven highest placed clubs at the end of the preceding season. Those clubs will play a single tie on the ground of the first named club. The eleven winning clubs will qualify to play in the Third Round.

5.      For the Third Round, the five clubs, which are participating in the UEFA Club Competitions together with the eleven clubs qualifying from the Second Round, will then be inserted into a ballot. This Round will be “seeded” with the clubs occupying the eight highest positions at the end of the preceding season being “seeded”. These clubs will play a single tie on the ground of the first named club. The eight winning clubs will qualify to play in the Fourth Round.

How many more times do I have to post that link from the SFL website, where it CLEARLY states that it's still the same club ?

Rangers FC On Field Gossip & Rumour Thread 2017 Mod Note in OP(Updated 14/08)

Comments