CaleyD

Unbelievable.....

The existing Club have received punishment...opinion will differ on whether that is seen as just or not. I also agree that any new company should not be subjected to punishment....but they should also not be allowed automatic entry to the SPL. If they want to be treated as a continuation of the existing club and argue their right to a place in the SPL, then they must accept ALL that comes with arguing that case. This idea of taking "all that's good" and just casting off the bad stuff and stuff they don't like is ludicrous. Life does not, and should not, work like that. Where's the moral compass in all this? Has society become totally bereft of the concepts of accountability? If "Rangers" want to walk away from all the bad crap then they have to walk away from everything and that includes a league membership and position which was gained by foul means. If they don't, then they have to accept accountability and punishment for what has happened. In no other business would a case of "Business not liable for the actions of it's owners/directors" be admissible, let alone argued. I honestly find it totally incredible that the SFA and/or SPL (and its member clubs) are even giving the slightest consideration to allowing a NewCo (New Club) direct entry to the countries top league. Put a cross on the calender because this could be the event that officially marks the moment the world went mad.

Until we have a single league structure rather than 1 entity with 3 divisions and 1 entity with an 'elite' single division then we leave ourselves wide open to this ..... forget Rangers for a second .. the whole structure needs to change. That would have been interesting, especially as technically there is no barrier to applying !!! First off, the SPL entry criteria do mention promotion from Division 1....so whilst I agree that a 3 body setup is a farce, there's clear qualifying criteria in place as things stand. Secondly, the SPL entry criteria also state that any new team should have applied by the end of March. As Falkirk, Dundee & Ross C*unty were the only teams to have applied by the deadline, then they should be the only ones considered for any spaces that may become available. Finally, If we "forget Rangers" then the problem takes care of itself....it is only when people view Rangers as they are now to be the same club as Rangers under a NewCo that the waters get muddied. "Forget Rangers" and the NewCo is ICT back in 1994....a new team seeking entry to the Scottish League system.

A lot of people seem to be getting caught up in the whole "retrospective punishment" issue. Bottom line, there's no rule which says that the SPL must allow a share transfer and entry to a NewCo. If you accept that a NewCo should be allowed entry at all....then surely they can't expect the retrospective benefit of a rule change that allows such a thing without facing the retrospective punishments which are attached???

For me, the sanctions matter not a jot and only serve to cloud the issue. It's not even about the NewCo being founded off the back of the demise of an existing club/business. The bottom line is that we have a system in place whereby new teams should start from the bottom an earn their place in the top league. Allowing a new team to bypass that setup for whatever reason, but especially financial reasons, makes the whole thing a farce. If you want to talk about precedents then ICT is the biggest of them all. We were a NewCo entering the league setup and we had to start from the bottom. Could you imagine the response we would have got had we requested entry straight in to the SPL? I am an ICT fan, I will always be an ICT fan. ICT are not the Board, they are not the current decision makers...and if those people were to support the admission of a NewCo straight in to the SPL then my disappointment would be with them. I would then find myself in a position I have found myself in the past whereby I have to decide if my disappointment at the people running the club outweighs my desire to attend games and all the other stuff that is a part of my being a supporter. I honestly have no idea where my feelings would sit on that as I appreciate that Club Boards probably face one of the hardest decisions they've ever had to make. Sell out and ensure their club books balance a little easier for a few seasons until they can hand over the reins (nobody wants to risk failure on their watch), or take a stand and face the hard work that comes with having the courage of your convictions. My biggest fear is the damage that would be done to board/fan relations. We've had situations in the past which have done damage there, situations which we have never fully recovered from. It's taken years to reverse some of the feelings in that regard, but IMO real progress has been made in the past couple of years. The above is a scenario that has been played out at every club at some point in time to varying extents, but I dread to think what the league would become if it was a scenario played out at the majority of clubs at the same time and to the potential extent which is being indicated by fans views. There's a very real possibility that if the SPL allow a NewCo to walk straight in to the league then TV, Sponsorship, Sanctions etc could be the least of their worries. We could end up with a league full of teams which would, quite literally, pull themselves apart. Clubs exist because of the fans, not despite them. Not something that can always be said of those who ru(i)n the game in Scotland.

I think a lot of that was cleared up by the Administrators report Alex....all previous claims/deals etc have/had expired. No doubting that there's still a lot of question marks over a lot of things though....not least the floating charge that nobody seems to have made much comment on lately. The fact that a floating charge exists/existed for in excess of £18 Million is further evidence that Assets are worth way in excess of what is being offered.

Of course there's value in the company assets. The land that TCS sits on is worth more than what is being offered up for the Rangers CVA, and I would imagine Ibrox and Murray Park are worth substantially more than that, especially when you consider the value there is, as I understand it, on the freehold and TCS land value is based on leasehold. Why else would businessmen with no previous attachment to the club be crawling out of the woodwork to invest money in the place? As you correctly point out, the football business is not self sustaining....so there's no money to be made there. If these are just rich Rangers fans looking to throw money at the club, then why wait until the club is in the state it is? Why have they not been investing over the years to prevent the problems arising in the first place?

Of course the NewCo won't be ready for the new season. So long as they can keep the existing company alive (all be it on Life Support) then the SPL have no means by which to further punish or remove them. Get the new season started and then look to request a transfer of the SPL share and there's less chance of a refusal due to the disruption it would cause. As I have said already, what the SPL MUST do if that is the case is seek (financial) guarantees that the club can fulfil the season ahead prior to it kicking off. Since reports seem to suggest that having Rangers in the league is worth between £700k & £1 Million to each of the other clubs then I would say putting about £9 Million on deposit with the SPL would suffice.

This has comfortable win for Hearts written all over it....which probably means Hibs will win it!!!

Yup, I've had to take a fortnight off just to recover from thinking about that amount of physical activity

Don't forget the 36 goals!!!

With 3 training sessions a day and none of the team allowed to leave before 5:30pm, I think Gavin may disagree

Getting lost on the way home from St Mirren match

I think the Hearts bombshell will come with a mighty bang. Mad Vlad has remained surprisingly tight lipped over the whole Rangers fiasco and I can't for the life of me work out why. You never can tell with him, but you get the feeling that he's waiting for the final outcome and precedents to be set before he makes his move. After all, if a Rangers Newco were allowed straight back into the SPL then that effectively gives him free reign to wind up Hearts, set up a new team in a new location and walk off with all the current assets with nobody able to do a thing about it. On the other hand, if Rangers do find themselves out of the SPL then he might seize on the opportunity to throw a bit more money at Hearts in an attempt to challenge for a top two position.

What always surprises me with these things is that the new buyers can sit there and say "We've got a pot of £20+ Million" yet when it comes to coughing up to Creditors there's only a fraction of that offered. If I was a Creditor I would be playing hard ball and not accepting anything like 3p in the £ and demanding the come good with a bit more of the war chest for them before the embark on paying players over the odds. At the very least they should be paying out full whack on the value of the companies assets.

I'm not sure that the CAS or FIFA (I believe it goes to them at next level as opposed to UEFA) can increase the punishment. I believe they only have the power to reduce the punishment (if it is being appealed on the grounds of being too harsh) or if, as Rangers are claiming, the punishment was not open to them then it they would pass it back to the SFA and ask them to review it and issue a punishment that is within their remit....at that point the SFA could decide that the only option available to them which applies sufficient punishment is suspension or expulsion. So yeah, it could very well turn out to be a case of "Careful what you wish for". The biggest problem for Rangers is that they do not have the time to mess around with such appeals. If Rangers plan is to appeal so that the decision is set aside until it can be heard, then I think they are in for a bit of a shock. I believe that unlike other appeals, an appeal to the CAS does not set aside the standing decision whilst in hearing or waiting to be heard. The other option, and the one I think Rangers will follow (for speeds sake if nothing else), will be to take it to the Civil Courts....but again, I believe the only decision they would get there is one on whether or not the Transfer Embargo falls within the Associations rules....if not, it then goes back to the SFA and again they face a "Careful what you wish for" scenario. Whatever way they play it, there's not a court or appeals panel/process in the world that is going to say "Rangers should not be punished". If I was a betting man, I would wager that Green & Co will come to the above realisation sooner or later and walk away before they have to cough up the millions.

This season has been a long, hard, frustrating slog and I don't recall any other season (even relegation season) where I was so glad it was over. Outside of a couple of teams you can never predict who is going to do what....and for one of those next season is a total unknown at this stage!!! For next year, I'm just hoping that we get a chance to see what we can do without the bad luck and injuries which contributed to this seasons woes. I'll be a lot more confident if/when we add someone who is a little more proficient in front of the net in order to boost our goal tally. I believe that A. Shinnie can contribute, but we can't risk pinning our hopes on a single player.

Pinned this topic so TBB or Mods can keep the list in the opening post up to date as info comes through.

Who said Tokely is being offered less money? We only know that he wants an improved offer.

Seems to be a lot of assumption that the reason for whatever deal being offered is to force him out the door. Could it be that the club are actually looking for a way to keep him here instead? If he's not being viewed as a potential regular starter, then the club need to value him on the basis of whatever contribution they think he would make next season. Maybe he (Tokely) isn't overly concerned with the money aspect, but the hint that he may no longer be viewed as a regular starter is what is bothering him? I know only too well (wee wave for Tokelys sh*t stirring mates) that he has no doubts in his own fitness/ability for next season....but it's not himself, me or anyone else on here that he needs to convince, it's the guy who decides the contracts.

Is that better or worse than trying to find reasons to stick the boot in???

Glad the SFA had the nads to stick by the original decision. The biggest fear for Rangers now, especially if they complete a CVA (which makes less sense with each passing day) is that if they've been handed a 12 month player transfer suspension for 10 months of not paying taxes etc, then what are they going to be handed for over a decade of doing the same if/when they lose the appeal on the Big Tax Case!!! The SPL should now be asking the question "Can Rangers give guarantees that they can fulfil all fixtures next season?" and doing as was done by the SFL with Livingston and asking for a financial commitment by way of a large deposit from the new buyers. A sum equivalent to away receipts for all their games plus the cost of whatever financial penalties may be suffered from TV income should they fail to complete the season should just about cover it.

Cool....who's the charity?

Since the demise of the reserve league I've not had the opportunity to see many of them play competitive matches so I can't comment on player ability or the merits of giving them extended contracts, but I often wonder if the backlash to these events is more intense than you see at other clubs because so many of these young lads are known to us personally. That's not to say I don't think they should be signed longer...I actually think cutting players lose so readily before they reach early 20's is a risky business as they often haven;t fully developed physically or emotionally and it's more of a lottery than it should be. I think that when you look at it fully you end up back at the wider problem with the setup in Scottish Football which doesn't promote or allow clubs/managers the means to bring more players through from U19/20 level to the first team squad.

They would probably stand to get more from Liquidation....especially if the Duff & Phelps valuation of assets is accurate and given the pittance the company is being sold for.. Even if a CVA is agreed, it's not a given that the assets could be moved out to protect them from any fall-out from the Big Tax Case (which is what I suspect might happen if the CVA route is succesful). HMRC could, given the state of the business and the likelihood of a second insolvency event, seek to have the assets of the company frozen the minute it exits administration.