Rangers

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think this is the least of their worries Stuart, they need a licence to play regardless of who owns them.

Would not disagree with that, the license is certainly the most important thing right now. However a different face at the negotiating table could make a difference. Although to be fair to Charles Green i don't think he has been the main problem
 
Would not disagree with that, the license is certainly the most important thing right now. However a different face at the negotiating table could make a difference. Although to be fair to Charles Green i don't think he has been the main problem

The problem more than anything is the willingness to keep history in tact and tie into "old" Rangers, for that to happen there is always going to be sanctions.

Ally McCoist interview was shocking, punished enough? Give me a break, the punishment they got was 10 point deduction for administration, the european ban is because they went bust FFS, when you go bust you have no business.
 
After all this time they still don't get it.

Rangers are finished as a football club their history is dead.
The new club, whatever they wish to call it, is what it says on the label A NEW CLUB.
The NEW CLUB have been very lucky to have been given a place in D3.
 
Great piece in today's Telegraph...


“It is important to remember we have already had a 10-point deduction from the SPL, lost our Champions League place for finishing second last season, had a £160,000 fine, been refused entry to the SPL, been relegated to Division 3 and lost the majority of our first team squad. Yet still the governing body has chosen to impose further sanctions.”

Of course, the 10-point penalty, like the exile from European competition, are not punishments: they merely represent the consequences of falling into administration.Similarly, newco Rangers have not been penalised by beginning life in the Third Division: indeed, no other completely new club would have been allowed to enter the bottom tier.

“I can also assure every Rangers fan I will not be accepting any talk of stripping the Club of titles. That is something we will never accept and everyone at the Club shares this view.”

The idea that people found guilty of wrongdoing – and if the SPL's investigations proves that Rangers were improperly registering players over a period of 11 years it would be considered a major offence – should decide on the sentence they receive is a novel one.
 
I used to have a bit of time for Ally,even for a Hun he always came across well but he has gone way way down in my estimation lately.

I would be embarrassed to have him in charge of my team right now yet the Huns still think he is a Lord which swing it right back to the total arrogance many of them are still showing.

Kennedy back in I see....hope Green asks for plenty of cash then backs out last minute.
 
Last edited:
Hearing from my source that they will 'work round the licensing issue' to ensure that the Huns can perform on Sunday.

If this is true it sums up how bloody sickening the corruption within the Scottish game is.

He has been pretty much spot on so far but I hope he is incorrect this time,they either give them it by Friday or they don't....end of.

Truly putrid if correct.
 
bbc news 00.48 quote sexual abuse by a coach in US school football team could result in the team being stripped [ sorry ] of any trophys that were won during that period ; any bells ringing ask the boy s from brazil era thats putrid. better a hun than a perve. im ready for flack but not at the back
Sorry Troon, we should ignore it I know, but I'm quoting for posterity so that we can see what a horrible bunch Rangers FC were, and how well rid of them we are.
 
Interesting.....very interesting!

What with the ongoing issue of SPL wanting "Rangers" media rights (although "Rangers" don't have media rights, the SFL do), here's an interesting thing.

"In the debate over whether the SPL buys the broadcast rights to SFL games featuring Rangers, we’ve just spotted a rather interesting quirk. Sevco Scotland Limited was accepted to the SFL as an Associate Member, and will not be eligible for full Member status for four years. Rule 19 of the SFL Constitution says:

“An Associate Member shall have no financial interest in the assets of the League and shall not be accorded any voting rights.”

We assume “the assets of the League” include its media rights. (Indeed, as far as we can see those would be pretty much the only assets jointly owned by the League.) Rule 19 would seem to suggest that if the SFL does want to sell “Rangers” games to the SPL – or indeed to anyone else – not only will the newco not be entitled to a vote on the matter, but it won’t be entitled to any of the money either.
We haven’t seen anyone else mention this. It seems quite significant."

http://wingsland.pod...e-just-noticed/
 
From the Daily Record


Newco Rangers have been granted only associate membership of the SFL. As a result, under Rule 19 of the SFL’s constitution, they aren’t entitled to a share of the sale of those rights – even though it’s their involvement which has produced a bidding war.

The rule states: “An Associate Member shall have no financial interest in the assets of the League and shall not be accorded any voting rights.”

However, SFL chief executive David Longmuir hinted last night a compromise may be reached which will allow the club to gain a much-needed cash injection from the transaction.

He said: “We will work in a collaborative fashion to operate in the best interests of the League.”
 
Absolutely amazed (and not a little disappointed) to see Ian Black set to sign for Rangers. Fantastic player at Tynecastle last season and very surprised at what must be considered to be an enormous lack of ambition on his part. :(
 
Absolutely amazed (and not a little disappointed) to see Ian Black set to sign for Rangers. Fantastic player at Tynecastle last season and very surprised at what must be considered to be an enormous lack of ambition on his part. :(

After not being paid over Christmas for about 3 months and having to work as painter, maybe Blacks' ambition is now just to earn a decent stable wage

Still in the wrong place then!!! :rofl:
 
Part of the reason for Black not being paid was Rangers failure to pay up on the Wallace transfer money.

Agree he is a good player. A bit headstrong but just the sort of player Rangers need for 3 years to climb the lower leagues.
 
Part of the reason for Black not being paid was Rangers failure to pay up on the Wallace transfer money.

How???

Rangers fell behind on the Wallace payments in the close season when the second payment was due. The third and final payment was due in July 2013. Hearts put an offer to Rangers last Christmas, when they were struggling to pay their players, in that if Rangers paid in full they would get a discount of £100k. If Rangers had paid the money, I imagine Black would have got paid but Rangers were under no obligation to pay any money at this time and therefore surely cannot be blamed for Hearts being unable to pay their players wages.
 
Last edited:
I see it reported that sevco have offered dean shiels a four year deal worth 7k a week. For the third division? Tell me how paying stupid money on footballers worked out for them the last time? Anybody want to guess at how long before we see another "insolvency event" at ibrokes?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top