SPL NewCo Rules Situation

[CaleyD]

Given the amount of discussion around the proposed SPL rules changes and the fact they would allow a NewCo to automatically remain in the SPL, I thought I'd try a poll to try and engage where the strength of feeling lies on this matter among forum users.

Whilst the situation has obviously arisen from the Rangers situation I think discussion should be focused on the idea of it being any club so as to avoid the old "you're only saying that because it's XYZ FC".

[Libero]

Racking up tens or even hundreds of millions of pounds of debt with no intention of ever paying it back boils down to cheating and if clubs are able to get away with it by setting up a newco then it defeats the whole purpose of having a league competition in the first place. If the current club who are being linked with a newco are allowed to do so then i sincerely hope that there are severe implications for them. If there arent then i strongly think i would lose any urge to follow my team in a sham league. Given the choice i would rather watch my team in the Highland League than in an SPL that condones cheating

The SPL is one of the most uncompetitive leagues in the world given that there were/are only two clubs capable of winning it, if it were to allow clubs to win leagues/cups based on cheating the tax system then it would make us even more of a laughing stock than we currently are at the moment!

[Joonya]

I already avoid home games when the 'only two teams capable of winning it' are in town, but for a different reason.

The SPL Split adds a more pointless aspect to proceedings, and is perhaps already 'cheating' it's member teams by paying less to a team in 7th despite having gained more points than the team in 6th, 5th or even 4th...

It wouldn't surprise me if any NewCo was welcomed into the SPL, but I would certainly avoid any match involving said team.

I'll still follow ICT and support my team though. No amount of cheating/tax dodging from the SPL and other member teams can stop me from doing that!!

[+Gringo]

I wonder what would have happened had it not been one the 'two teams capable of winning it' that was involved in the financial scams/tax dodging/cheating. I strongly believe we'd see that side being bannished altogether from the SPL with no change of rules to assist them back in...no question about it.

[Huisdean]

Don't think there is an option in the poll for me to vote. I would continue to support and watch ICT no matter what but feel that if any club, be it Rangers or whoever, if they go into liquidation should be demoted from the league and have to start again as a newco. Looks like it ain't going to happen though.

[Tug]

sorry but no option there for me

i will more than likely maintain the status quo...i dont particularly like it but i enjoy watching football and cant say i would feel strongly enough to boycott games for eg.

[ICTRoughi]

I feel that it's wrong for the SPL to allow Rangers as a NewCo direct access into the SPL, I mean Gretna got liquidated they weren't allowed back in to the SPL. God knows where the NewCo Gretna 2008 are at the present moment.

I can understand if they're wanting to protect the TV deal but end of the day the SPL are allowing Tax invasion to happen. I have to agree with the Rangers fans though that the timing of this rule is stupid, Why couldn't they have made it years ago, with Gretna back in 2008 or Motherwell when they went into admin

Edited April 12, 2012 by ICTRoughi

[+bughtmaster]

A new team i.e. NewCo should start in the lowest division and work its way up to the SPL just like ICT and our neighbours and many other clubs have done.

There is no fairer option or is there any good reason to allow anything other than that. In fact should not a new team entering Scottish football be subject to election first by the SFA and should not the SFA be bound as a matter of principle to ensure guarantees from any new club that they abide by the rules and regulations within the organisation of the leagues therein?

Any NewCo FC should be made to prove their worthyness by results and by their conduct in terms of playing and management before getting near the SPL.

There is an excellent chance here to show the world that Scotland will not tolerate management cheats and skullduggery by Directors and schemeing unscrupulous owners.

Tough on the fans and followers yes but cheating on a huge scale cannot and should not go unpunished and any self respecting fan or follower will / should accept this, especially if their NewCo can attain new heights by playing fair.

As for me I'm ghoing to carry on watching football and especially ICT's progress.

[+DoofersDad]

No option for me. I wouldn't go to a Rangers match and allow any of my hard earned money to go into their theiving hands. An option would be to give the money I would have paid for a ticket to ICT so that we don't cut off our noses to spite our faces. We could turn up at the ground and have a dignified protest bearing placards of schools and hospitals not built because of the money Rangers have stolen from the taxpayers of this country.

I have drawn attention to punishments meted out to clubs in the English system before. Clubs like Aldershot, Newport, Halifax all had to reform under a slightly different name and start out several tiers below where they were when they went into liquidation. But there is a big, big difference here. These clubs went into liquidation basically because the product the business was producing was not good enough to maintain the club and they simply failed. Rangers have not failed. Over the years that they have been accumulating their financial time bomb they have been a successful club winning several domestic titles and playing regularly (if briefly ) in Europe. Rather than fail financially, they have systematically abused the financial system and witheld money from the taxman in order to try and buy even greater success. They deserve no sympathy and no mercy from anyone.

I can understand the view that other clubs don't want to press for harsher penalties because it could be seen as turkies voting for Christmas but I don't really accept that. Firstly, the rules introduced should be be able to distinguish between clubs which fall on hard times because their legitimate business plan simply fails, and a club which goes into liquidation because they are deliberately avoiding paying money they owe to others in order to buy success.

Secondly, it is not just the taxpayer Rangers have cheated, it is the fans, players and staff of honest clubs who may have enjoyed success if Rangers had not been so strong on the playing front.

Thirdly, whilst accepting that other clubs may be a little financially worse off if Rangers were banished to East Stirling, it would give honest teams the chance of some success and a taste of European football - surely it is worth a little bit of loss of OF income for that opportunity.

Finally, why should the threat of severe sanctions be seen as a problem for other teams? As long as they manage their finances in a sound manner they should never get into that position. And knowing what the sanctions are, it will mean that all clubs know that all the other clubs will be forced to be financially prudent and we will have a more level playing field.

It really is time for anyone with any moral fibre in Scottish football to put their heads above the parapet and speak up for bringing a bit of integrety into this issue and to call for any club emerging out of the Ibrox fiasco to be evicted from the SPL and to be required to apply to the SFL where they should be allowed to apply for entry if and when a vacancy arose. Of course, it is not going to happen. Money is far more important than morality to those who run the game in this country and we will be back with the old firm domination of the Scottish game if not next season then certainly the season after. Those who are allowing this to happen should be hanging their heads in shame.

[Gabby]

Thirdly, whilst accepting that other clubs may be a little financially worse off if Rangers were banished to East Stirling,

It's a little more than a little financially worse off. It would mean a reduction in turnover of at least 25% - 30%.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you whole-heartedly, I am only suggesting that the price would be very high,.

[Tichy_Blacks_Back]

Guess the best/worst that may be achieved would be a season in a lower league - FC Rangers - SFL 1st Division Champions 2012/13. They would at least be able to say they have achieved something that Celtic haven't yet....oh and the Ramsdens Cup Final - oh the irony of that double. But alas it will not be....

But no would still go to an ICT game

Edited April 13, 2012 by Tichy_Blacks_Back

[old caley girl]

I feel that it's wrong for the SPL to allow Rangers as a NewCo direct access into the SPL, I mean Gretna got liquidated they weren't allowed back in to the SPL. God knows where the NewCo Gretna 2008 are at the present moment.

I can understand if they're wanting to protect the TV deal but end of the day the SPL are allowing Tax invasion to happen. I have to agree with the Rangers fans though that the timing of this rule is stupid, Why couldn't they have made it years ago, with Gretna back in 2008 or Motherwell when they went into admin

Think the point is that this rule is being brought in as a way of keeping Rangers in the SPL. The SPL are in a difficult place and they know it! Gretna were never going to need to reapply to the SPL due to their circumstances and Motherwell were the first to do this (I think) and nobody really thought through what was going to happen in the future. Rangers are being treated differently because of the tv deal etc but think the SPL think this shows justice is being seen to have taken place. Dont think many are going to buy it myself but there you go. For sporting integrity it would be better if Rangers took their punishment and dropped down the leagues for a few years but we all know it aint gonna happen. Also I think the administrators are using this as an excuse not to name their preferred bidder as they are not really happy with what is on the table so the timing means they can blame someone else ie the SPL allowing them more time to work things out. (also earning them further money).

I do think that if normal service is resummed too soon a lot of folk will give up watching SPL football but as someone has already said most of us will continue to support ICT as our team.

[+bughtmaster]

excellent article and comments on the Jim Spence blog, relating to this topic, on the bbc sport (Sottish version] site.

Well worth a read

[PaderbornCaley]

I'll still go to games. I generally only go to away games (missed 2 games in 2 seasons) and attend 4 or 5 home games per season.

However, I shall never attend Snake Mountain again. I'm happy to attend any other stadium but if Newco Rangers get straight back in, I shall just pretend they're not there!

Edited April 13, 2012 by CapitalCaley

[davie]

This really is a crisis of our times where a large corporate body is allowed to behave with financial recklessness and when the whole rotten structure crashes, it is bailed out by less powerful people because the consequences of failure are too horrible to contemplate. Think RBS, think Greece, think Northern Rock. In all of these cases, the institutions themselves have emerged only slightly (if at all) altered, and the people who presided over the mess have largely gone unpunished. They think it's clever that what they did was just the right side of fraud and so they celebrate that rather than be shamed by the fact that their actions have brought worry and misery to those who have suffered in their wake. If you think that's melodramatic, remember that Dunfermline couldn't pay their players when Rangers didn't honour their obligations. And yet we are led to believe that a 10 point deduction for a couple of years is enough of a punishment for this? Let's try the same with ICT then - live above our means, mortgage the family silver to the hilt, get liquidated and then see what happens. A 10 point deduction? I don't think so, we'd be thrown to the dogs because we are small enough not to be able to fight back. Unedifying but that's how bullies like Rangers behave and that's why, even now, they bleat about the injustice of a deduction for any newco and of the timing of the debate. It's all so wrong, and the media go along with it to sell their wares on the back of it. Of course they can't go to division 3 because the SPL and SFL are seperate entities - what fine chance. Tell you what Rangers, how's about the humility to say that you have acted apallingly, are sorry and you want to change by making your relationship with the rest of scottish football a more mutually beneficial one? Do that and we might reconcile ourselves to giving you the chance, but the moral compass of the SPL/ OF / Scottish media is so fecked that there is more chance of County winning the SPL next year. They will simply revert to trying to railroad us again, but the time has come to say no and I hope our Chairman will say so. No change, no chance.

[starchief]

I wonder if people would change their minds if a new question were added asking whether Rangers should start in Div. 3 even though it would mean ICT, Killie, St Johnstone and Aberdeen becoming bankrupt (I've no idea if they would but they seem clubs that could be close to the edge).

(for the record, I think the whole of Scottish football needs such a radical overhaul, I'd be inclined to close, merge and rebirth dozens of clubs for a streamlined competitive two leagies and regional leagues below that)

[CaleyD]

I guess it was a bit naive of me to expect it not to turn to a discussion on Rangers!!!

Since that's out the window, here's my first observation on reading the "boycott" headlines this morning......

Since this all begun we've been getting the "We won't follow a NewCo with no History, so whoever buys us better not put us in liquidation or it's all over". Strange now how they seem to be ok with the idea of a NewCo, so much so that they are willing to take a stand against the rest of the SPL if they dare hinder or stand in the way of it.

Confused.......dot.......com

[CaleyD]

I wonder if people would change their minds if a new question were added asking whether Rangers should start in Div. 3 even though it would mean ICT, Killie, St Johnstone and Aberdeen becoming bankrupt (I've no idea if they would but they seem clubs that could be close to the edge).

(for the record, I think the whole of Scottish football needs such a radical overhaul, I'd be inclined to close, merge and rebirth dozens of clubs for a streamlined competitive two leagies and regional leagues below that)

I deliberately avoided adding that option because there's no mechanism (other than coming last in the league) which allows for automatic acceptance of an SPL team into the SFL.

[Sorted]

I voted for the 'less likely' option but would have definitely opted for an option that said:

'Would stop visiting grounds of clubs that support immediate re entry for a newco'

In the event that ICT support immediate re entry, this leaves me with a huge dilemma........

Edited April 13, 2012 by Sorted

[Laurence]

I agree with every word people have said about this

But lets remember we live in a real world - Leeds United a very big British City were given no mercy , with a 25 point deduction and to all intents and purposes forced to play lower division football,

But having said that an accomodation will have to be found for a reborn Rangers somehow, Scottish football needs Rangers.

Maybe a fan buy out and the club run by the supporters using only gate money and Sky money would surfice and repayment of the debts to creditors repaid over say 10 years. The SPL could monitor all board meetings and check accounts on a regular basis.

But if they allow a free reign to another board with money grabbing and sucess at any cost directors, sooner or later the problem will occur again that is for sure.

[CaleyD]

Scottish football needs Rangers..

No...they don't.

I have seen absolutely no quantifiable evidence whatsoever that shows that statement to be true....it just seems to be the more that someone says it, the more they seem to believe it.

You don't keep feeding drugs to an addict just because they think they need it, and if Scottish Football needs a few years of cold turkey to realise just how bad the situation was and how they can have a better life without it, then so be it.

[Scotty]

The whole league setup, with three different governing bodies is farcical. The mere fact that we have SFL/SPL means the SPL can make up their own rules as they go along with regards to newco/oldco or anything else so long as it does not break UEFA/FIFA rules. The SFA, which is ostensibly the most important of the three will continue to rubber stamp whatever is asked of them and if there were any other way into Europe for the SPL other than being a member of the SFA which in turn is a UEFA member then the SFA would have been completely irrelevant long ago. As it stands right now, the setup kind of reminds me of Westminster Government. the SPL is the House of Commons, where the real power lies, the SFL is the House of Lords ... needed but largely ignored, and the SFA is the monarch ... important in a ceremonial fashion, but largely irrelevant in terms of calling the shots.

Personally, I dont think the whole thing will be sorted out properly until such time as we either have a single governing body or where we still have a tiered system like now with SFA/SPL/SFL but structure and rules regarding membership, financial or points penalties, and other stuff that should be handled consistently across all four division is dealt with by the SFA as the body at the top of the tree. The SPL/SFL could still stay separate so they could organise their own league rules, TV deals, sponsorships etc ... but the SFA should be the ultimate body in control of ensuring that there are some national standards in place regardless of the name of the division it happens in.

Having said that, it should be noted that Rangers have already received the standard penalty issued by the SPL ! A 10 point deduction, the same as given to Gretna and far more severe than the zero punishments meted out to Dundee and Motherwell who also went into administration whilst in the SPL. It is the SFL that have traditionally handed out demotions and far more draconian points penalties, not the SPL. Gretna and Livi were demoted by the SFL, not the SPL. Dundee were docked points by the SFL not the SPL ... so anyone using these teams as a frame of reference is comparing apples to oranges (literally).

The mutterings coming from the SPL about increasing the penalties or withholding money from teams in administration or liquidation are a good idea, but personally I dont think they should be applied to Rangers retrospectively. If passed, then it can easily be argued that any new rules were not in place when the offence occured and therefore they cannot have broken them !!!

As for how it affects me and ICT .... then it does not. I will still continue to listen to or watch ICT games, and if anything I should probably be hoping Rangers do ok out of this as the selfish part of me knows that if they go, so does any chance of seeing any SPL football on TV and financially the loss of that income would seriously impact every club. Given the precarious state of ICT finances on a yearly basis, it might even be the straw that would push us from being skint to being in serious financial shtook .... and potential administration ourselves !!!

[CaleyD]

Scotty, the rules in regards to Financial Fair Play are not some new thing that has just appeared as a result of the Rangers situation. They have been in discussion far longer than that and are needed to meet some of the new legislation that is coming in to play at UEFA level. It's just bad timing for Rangers....nothing more, nothing less.

What I will add to that is the fact that it's up to each association to interpret and apply the UEFA Financial Fair Play legislation as they see fit/necessary, and in that regard it would certainly seem like the SPL have done all they can to produce a rule set which favours Rangers situation as best it can whilst making it look as if they're not letting them off lightly, which they need to do in order to appease all those who are not "Rangers Minded" and demanding a punishment that fits the crime.

[Sorted]

In the current situation, the demise of the might Rangers on the horizon, we will all be judged by our views on what should happen to them. Anyone suggesting their 'newco' is allowed automatic entry (it cannot be re entry as the were never entrants in the first place!) to the SPL at the expense of all the other clubs who have strived for years to get there, will be viewed as being 'Rangers minded'. Anyone with the view that they deserve expulsion will be deemed 'Celtic minded'.

The media are to blame for this situation with their constant inability to differentiate the OF and yearned to be viewed equally by all. They do. Everyone hates them. They succeed in getting many of us to share their views and demonstrate our inability to separate on a regular basis. How many times have we read or hear about the Celtic situation in 1994 as a comparison to Rangers 2012? Yet, there is nothing similar to merit comparison. Celtic had debt or a much lesser magnitude which was due to being inept not corrupt. They never entered administration or left a trail of debt to businesses within and out with the game. They didn't cheat the taxman. They paid the engraved and the pie shop.

Until we have a media that can differentiate and help create a society than can judge on fact rather than suggestion we will still be bullied into co-operation at all times. We, will still label people as being one or the other because of the viewpoint they may hold.

As a socialist, republican who believes in independence, I think that any 'newco' should start at the bottom. Some will chose to think I hold this viewpoint because of my opinions. I don't. They help me form my views but ultimately it is in my desire for fair play and justice for those who play by the rules that leads me to this conclusion. I would hold the same opinion if it was any other club in this situation (although granted, I may not enjoy it quite so much!).

I'll be considered 'anti Rangers' because of my views by the likes of Chic Young and Jim Traynor. It is their problem not mine. I'm clearly on the right side this time. It's them that have the problem, not me.

The decision to be made in the next few weeks by our football authorities is, singularly, the most important made in generations. It sets the rules for all going forward and benchmarks the behaviour we are willing to tolerate in our game. More importantly it identifies the consequences for those who breach, bend, break or shatter.

FFS GET IT RIGHT!

Note: Just read Traynors latest column in the Record. Owe him an apology as he is now saying New Rangers must start in Division 3!

Edited April 13, 2012 by Sorted

[Scotty]

Scotty, the rules in regards to Financial Fair Play are not some new thing that has just appeared as a result of the Rangers situation. They have been in discussion far longer than that and are needed to meet some of the new legislation that is coming in to play at UEFA level. It's just bad timing for Rangers....nothing more, nothing less.

What I will add to that is the fact that it's up to each association to interpret and apply the UEFA Financial Fair Play legislation as they see fit/necessary, and in that regard it would certainly seem like the SPL have done all they can to produce a rule set which favours Rangers situation as best it can whilst making it look as if they're not letting them off lightly, which they need to do in order to appease all those who are not "Rangers Minded" and demanding a punishment that fits the crime.

Yes, I know. part of the moving target that is club licensing I am assuming?

Bottom line is that this is a "new" situation in the SPL and whatever happens here is setting a precedent. 5 clubs have gone into administration when members of the SPL but none have ever gone into liquidation as an SPL member .... Motherwell, Dundee, Livingston, Gretna and now Rangers all entered administration. In the first three cases there was absolutely no penalty applied. no points deduction, no financial constraints, nothing. Gretna were deducted 10 pts and by virtue of this finished dead last and were relegated. Relegation was not part of the penalty but was pretty much assured when the penalty was applied. Rangers too got a 10 point penalty - for consistency sake I would assume - but there was never a danger of relegation.

Of the 5 mentioned, Motherwell stayed in the SPL, restructured and seem to be ticking along. Dundee as we know were relegated to the SFL (on points, not as a punishment) and after going into administration a second time in 2010 got that whopping 25 point penalty that could have seen them relegated, but they managed to avoid it. Livingston and Gretna - also relegated on points - as we know were demoted to the bottom of the SFL structure by that body, not as a result of administration, but in both cases as a result of not being able to confirm they would be able to fulfill fixtures for the coming season. Livi have bounced back (somewhat) and as we know, Gretna became only the second team in recent Scottish league history to go into full blown liquidation, Airdrieonians being the other, and using slight of hand, those who wanted to see Airdrie survive promptly bought out another team in administration,Clydebank, renamed then Airdrie Utd (newco) and moved them back to Airdrie. They started in the league slot that Clydebank previously occupied (2nd division). [good trivia question that ... which new team never actually started life in the bottom league]

So onto Rangers .... they went into administration ... the penalty .... 10pt deduction. that is only fair and proper and wasnt really complained about as it has happened before. So whats the two possible outcomes? continued administration and eventually coming out of it ... or ultimately, liquidation.

If they stay in administration, they wont be eligible for Europe, and I believe another 10 point penalty will be applied at the start of season 2012/13 if they start the season still in administration ....

If they go into liquidation then there is no real precedent for that other than the Airdrieonians/Clydebank/Airdrie Utd situation .... which happened in a different organisation. Rangers (Newco) could simply buy the assets of Rangers (oldco) from the administrators and ask to start in the same league slot occupied by the oldco, just as Airdrie Utd did. Alternatively the SPL could simply make them reapply for membership and put them to the bottom of their league structure .... which would be ... the SPL !!!!

I do agree with applying more stringent safeguards, especially as it relates to finances, taxes, NI contributions, paying wages on time, etc as that always seems to be where teams start to slip down the rocky road, but in all honesty, and removing any dislike for any particular team aside, it should not be applied retrospectively. When the rules come in will we fine Hearts for their non-payments this season? no. So why should we fine Rangers if they go into liquidation prior to the rules changing. If the rules are passed and they go into liquidation after that, then no problem, those are the rules, but you cant apply new rules to an old situation regardless of the fact that they may have been "talked about" before that.