Enough is enough

Avatar ByAndrak

Enough is enough

As Celtic prepare to take on one of the Champions league big boys again, a warning to the commentators and pundits.

Like most Scots, I was sad to see Celtic so comprehensively thumped by PSG and Bayern recently. But something about those nights made me angry as well.

Not the players, their effort, or even the schoolboy defending. Not the semi-ritualistic way these games are presented on TV or the ludicrous hype that is generated by the media.

I blame Celtic for their own failings and the executive branch of Scottish football for facilitating that failure. And I think it is the result of a long-term strategy that has clearly failed.

What offends me is the casual referencing of the weakness of the game and players in Scotland as a key reason why Celtic struggle against the best teams, and the implicit suggestion that if only their domestic opponents were more skillful, Celtic’s Champions League training friendlies schedule, aka the SPFL Premiership, might prepare them better for these big games.

Pat Bonner said it outright in his commentary of the Bayern game. The weakness of the SPFL is the problem. Several others made the point that Celtic defenders never get the chance to play against top strikers in their own league and are, therefore, somehow unable to cope with it when they do. Others claim that Celtic are so used to being in possession of the ball and winning games easily at home, that when they face a top-quality opponent, they are suddenly caught like a rabbit in headlights without the faintest clue what to do.

I don’t know enough about the tactics of modern football, or the language used to describe systems of play, to critique that in footballing terms, but I do have a reasonable grasp of what constitutes bullshit. And so much of what our journalists, TV commentators, and pundits say, on occasions like this, is, definitely, it.

I blame Celtic for their own failings and the executive branch of Scottish football for facilitating that failure. And I think it is the result of a long-term strategy that has clearly failed.

Here’s how I think it went. Professional football in Scotland looks like it has been organised around a single goal. To generate Scottish success in the Champions League. A good way to achieve that is to ensure that Scottish teams get plenty exposure to that league. The best way to ensure that is to make sure that the same team, or teams, gain regular entry into it. The way to make that happen is to organise the league such that it is unthinkable that any other team could win it.

How might you do that without making it obvious what your intentions are?

Well, first, you lay the financial ground. Allow teams to keep their home gate receipts. That way, clubs are kept in their place, the big two stay big, the middle six to eight, not so big, and the rest, remain almost irrelevant.

To further entrench the financial status quo, you need to ensure that income from domestic sources (particularly TV money) is kept low enough to stop any other club paying for a team above their station, but not so low that mid-sized clubs go out of business.

It is our fault because we are not brave enough. Not brave enough to stand up to the powers running our game and put a stop to this madness.

Next, you would have to ensure that the rules stay in place long enough for the plan to work. Give the two big clubs the right of veto over rule changes. The masterminds of the plan have to be kept in office for as long as possible and committee members must be carefully selected. A generous portion of executives from the big two, and a fair sprinkling of others too afraid of their own clubs going to the wall to bother about grand generation-long master-plans, should guarantee no one rocks the boat too much. Allow a rogue committee member to challenge things every now and again to make it look good for the punters, safe in the knowledge that no permanent damage can be done to the plan.

But what if something unexpected happened to one of the big clubs? That could be tricky, right? The whole plan could be put in jeopardy. On the other hand, what is there to worry about when you have ensured that the decision makers are either on message or too concerned about their own teams’ survival to get in the way of a stitch up. Sure, we lost a few years, but it’ll soon get back on track.

Journalists would get wind of this surely, or even be able to work it out for themselves, right? Well, in a profession that seems to have lost most of its towering intellects to be replaced by either agenda driven zealots or barely literate fan bloggers (like me, I suppose), we might be asking a little too much of them. In any case, the overwhelming coverage of the big two in the national media and the simple fact that promoting Celtic and Rangers sells advertising space means that they are, more or less, complicit, even if they don’t always realise it.

I hope this sounds like the ramblings of a mad conspiracy theorist, but if any of the above rings true (and it does to me), then there might just be some truth on it.

Pat Bonner and those other pundits and commentators are right of course. Celtic’s failure against the big teams is the fault of the rest of Scottish football. Our players and teams aren’t good enough. But fault is a convoluted thing. It is not our fault because we are not good enough. It is our fault because we are not brave enough. Not brave enough to stand up to the powers running our game and put a stop to this madness.

I have absolutely no evidence that there is such a master-plan, or that anyone at the SFA or SPFL has even considered any of these points or the consequences that might flow from them. I even have serious doubts that any of the current leadership have the intellectual capacity to dream up such a Machiavellian plot, let alone execute it. But one thing I do know is that Scottish football is not in a healthy place. Not even a Celtic victory tonight, even if they gave some of their CL win bonus to Kilmarnock, you know, for giving them such a good run out on Saturday, would fix it.

How glorious would it be for the other Scottish teams to be credited for Celtic’s CL victories (especially the big ones)? I imagine the words would get stuck in plenty of throats. Celtic win CL games despite Scottish Football and lose them because of it. That, in a nutshell, is where we are right now. All that is likely to change any time soon is that Rangers will join them again. Something has to change, if only because my TV won’t survive another shoe being thrown at it when some Celtic minded blowhard tells the world that my team is partly to blame for Celtic’s defence not being good enough to stop Neymar or Lewandowski.

This article was first published in the unofficial Dundee Fans Forum https://www.thedarkblues.co.uk/news/scottish-football/enough-is-enough-r542/ on 23 October 2017. Reproduced, in slightly amended form, with their kind permission.

About the author

Avatar

Andrak contributor

A Dundee fan, brought up in the city in the 70s and 80s, now lives in England. An accountant by profession and temperament. Working in international development mostly overseas (Africa & South East Asia, mostly). Currently based in Vientiane Laos. Never played football beyond Sunday League but watch as much Scottish football as possible.

718 Comments so far

LUGOSI

LUGOSIPosted on12:37 pm - Nov 18, 2017


It’s a day for retractions.
There have not been more than 500 Thumbs Down in a couple of days.
There have now been more than 600.
We have recently been lectured to by the Dignitati-Lest We Forget.
Don’t worry. We won’t.

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on2:37 pm - Nov 18, 2017


Commercial purgatory?  Presumably the fate of those expelled to the land of Etheria?

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on2:47 pm - Nov 18, 2017


Now, just to be clear.  Was the “insolvency breach” by the “holding vehicle?”

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on5:03 pm - Nov 18, 2017


If Rangers had paid back the DOS and EBT owed tax no one could claim cheating or unfair sporting advantage and everyone would have accepted the huge fine for concealment of side letters,
————–
If they had the money to do all that then there would be no need for EBT’s,DOS in the first place,but alas they had to use EBT’s DOS’s to try to match celtic. (Alex Mcleish)

View Comment

woodstein

woodsteinPosted on5:23 pm - Nov 18, 2017


On the question of cheating, a refresher
 
https://rangerstaxcase.wordpress.com/2015/11/30/the-never-ending-story/
 
“This is not a subject where people will be swayed by persuasive argument. Almost anyone who cares about these matters will already have a fully formed opinion that will now be closed to reasoning. So the arguments will continue to rage on into futile infinity.
However, anyone who can still be objective would be able to see that Rangers died by its own hand. What should have been a moderately important tussle with HMRC in 2004 festered into a calamity by the actions and inaction of those who ran the club.”
 
With acknowledgment to rangerstaxcase

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on5:44 pm - Nov 18, 2017


WOODSTEINNOVEMBER 18, 2017 at 17:23 1 0 Rate This
On the question of cheating, a refresher.
———–
An old refresher but a good one…pic above

View Comment

LUGOSI

LUGOSIPosted on5:55 pm - Nov 18, 2017


Hope today’s result at Ibrox didn’t burst anyone’s coupon.
In both senses of “coupon”.

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on5:56 pm - Nov 18, 2017


An old one from JC,this will save your fingers JC

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on6:56 pm - Nov 18, 2017


You do realise that your incessant return to the SFA having the discretion to transfer membership from one club to another really only proves that it was a different club.

The idea that it was transferred would be meaningless otherwise. 

The point of the ability to transfer membership from one club to another is to allow for things like Gretna dying, and bringing a new club in to replace them. 

Transfer

“move from one place to another.”

“an act of moving something or someone to another place, organization, team, etc.”

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on9:37 pm - Nov 18, 2017


Allyjambo, It’s not me.  Most of what he says goes over my head.  1210.  I’m still mystified about today’s Tynecastle drama.  It seems EJ was correct yesterday it has been a shambles.  As far as I’m aware at about 8pm tonight it was still not known if the game is going ahead tomorrow.  That’s going too far!  As EJ implied Ann Budge has over promised and under delivered with time scales.

Maybe it’s for the best, it’s been a bad day for most of the home teams this week end in the Premiership.

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on9:47 pm - Nov 18, 2017


JIMBONOVEMBER 18, 2017 at 21:37
————
Sunday’s Premiership match set to go ahead after Gorgie club worked round the clock to get a temporary occupation certificate but is still subject to a final 8am safety inspection.

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on10:01 pm - Nov 18, 2017


The view from the new stand and an idea of the restricted views from the corner of the stand (approx 170 seats) until the Police control box is scaled back to the floodlight pylon in January.

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on10:02 pm - Nov 18, 2017


Cheers CO.  Just checked the TV schedules it’s not on the telly.  Hard game to predict.  Maybe the new stand will get the Jambos jumping and motivate the team.  But look at Hamilton today! You never can tell for sure.

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on10:15 pm - Nov 18, 2017


Looks great EJ, and what a pitch! Now go back and take a photo of the new stand!

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on10:40 pm - Nov 18, 2017


AllyjamboNovember 18, 2017 at 19:56
‘…… Must be the most stupid thing ever said on SFM, it really must.’
________________
It is up there,Aj, in the sublimity of its stupidity with Bryson’s unutterably ridiculous ‘evidence’ on ‘ineligibility’…………
Hmmm! ….I don’t suppose that Ernest might be  Bryson? Surely no one could be that stupid?
(I am reminded , rather,of the several degrees of ignorance:
there is ‘nescience’, the simple absence of knowledge
there is ‘ignorance’, which is the absence of knowledge in someone who is capable of acquiring it
there is ‘simply vincible’ ignorance ( where someone makes some, but not enough, effort to remove his ignorance)
there is ‘crass ignorance’ ( where someone makes hardly any effort to to remove his ignorance)
there is ‘affected ignorance'( where someone wants to remain ignorant,wants NOT to know [the truth]
and there is ‘invincible ignorance’ ( where someone is so psychologically, emotionally, unable to face the truth ,that he  simply is powerless to perceive or acknowledge it)
Who knows, perhaps rather than a mark of stupidity, Ernest’s observation may be attributed to one or other of these categories?
If it is the last category, I wish him well on a personal level.
If it can be attributed to any other category, I would merely suggest that he gets a grip on reality, wises up, and stops trying to defend the indefensible.

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on10:41 pm - Nov 18, 2017


Ernst Beckermet. 
The failure to produce ratified accounts meant no licence for RFC for ONE year.
The replacement club- Tge Rangers FC was ineligible to apply for a licence for 3 years until they had been members of the SFA for 3 years. The relevant UEFA Articles are 47 for Accounts and Art12 for requiring 3 years membership.
UEFA  confirmed this last year and no amount of arguing otherwise will make it so.
In your defense the main stream media went out their way last year  along with the SFA to hide this truth from you as you will learn if you keep checking in.

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on10:43 pm - Nov 18, 2017


jimbo November 18, 2017 at 22:15
=================
Just for you Jimbo – before and after

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on10:50 pm - Nov 18, 2017


It seems a fruitless task trying to enlighten a closed mind but the SFA decision to transfer SFA membership had no impact on UEFA’S view that the club ( now in a club/company construct -TRFC/RIFC – ) were NEW and did not satisfy the requirement of Art 12 of UEFA FFP rending TRGC/RIFC ineligible to apply for 3 years.

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on10:56 pm - Nov 18, 2017


Moving on: 
I watched and thoroughly enjoyed the spectacle  that was the rugby international between Scotland and New Zealand. It was what spectating a team sport should be all about on a number of levels:
Endeavor
Refereeing
Socialability
Attitude on and off the park. 
Excitement.
It begs the question: should the folk responsible for governing rugby in Scotland not be given the job of governing football? They are miles better at it.
Thoughts?

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on12:06 am - Nov 19, 2017


Anyone remember the supposed appeal against the wee tax case AFTER it became public that £2.8m was still outstanding?
Here is the story of what that was all about and how the UEFA Licence application for 2012 was presented.
http://celticunderground.net/rangers-fc-appealing-the-wee-tax-case-in-2011-and-their-uefa-licence-application-for-201213/

View Comment

Avatar

HighlanderPosted on12:57 am - Nov 19, 2017


…… and while I remember, he still hasn’t been able to muster an explanation as to why a packed Ibrox displayed red cards and ‘NO TO LIQUIDATION’ banners back in 2012 when liquidation apparently only meant the death of a meaningless and entirely disposable company, not a precious football club and national institution!

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on1:11 am - Nov 19, 2017


I’m still waiting for the article 14 addendum re insolvent (club) transfers personally.  Can’t wait for that bit. It’ll be a doozy.

View Comment

Avatar

HirsutePursuitPosted on3:03 am - Nov 19, 2017


Sevco Scotland (trading as Rangers FC) was admitted as an associate member of the SFL on 14th July 2012.

Membership of the SFL automatically conferred SFA membership. As does membership of the SPL/SPFL.

From this date, the new club became a registered member of the SFA and had 14 days to apply to that body for associate or full membership status.

It is important to note that there was no set timescale within in the rules of the SFL for the SFA to make this decision. Consequently, there was no direct impediment to Sevco Scotland playing its games whilst its application to the SFA (for associate or full membership status) was being considered. As long as Sevco had made its application within the 14 day limit, it was compliant. Only a later refusal (to grant associate or full SFA membership status) would have revoked Sevco Scotland’s then extant SFL membership.

For emphasise, the new club held valid memberships in both the SFL and SFA from 14th July 2012.

However, without SFA board approval, Sevco Scotland could not play under the Rangers FC name as there was an existing member club of that name. The team could, of course, have taken the field as “Sevco” had it chosen to do so.

Also, whilst Rangers continued to hold its share in the SPL, Dundee could not take its place in that league. Although strictly speaking, this was not Sevco Scotland’s problem.

There was a problem. The new club did not meet the criteria for SFA associate membership status as it lacked the financial history requirements. So, to meet its SFL obligation, its only viable option was to request a transfer of the full SFA membership status held by Rangers – which it did by asking the SFA board to use its powers under Article 14.

On the 27th July 2012, the SFA board gave Sevco Scotland conditional approval for the transfer of full membership status and permission to play its first game against Brechin using the Rangers name.

Sevco Scotland (using the name “Rangers”) played its first ever game on the 29th July 2012.

Again, it is important to note that Rangers Football Club remained a member of the SPL until 3rd August 2012 when, at that time, it transferred its SPL share to Dundee. The club’s status as a full member of the SFA was then transferred to Sevco Scotland and, having relinquished its SPL share, its registered membership of the SFA also lapsed.

Sevco Scotland’s registered membership of the SFA was unaffected (being itself a consequence of an existing membership of the SFL) – but, from the 3rd August 2012, it did then receive the status of full SFA membership – as had previously been held by Rangers.

So, to make it clear…

Sevco Scotland became a member of the SFA on 14th July 2012.

Rangers remained a member of the SFA until 3rd August 2012.

For almost three weeks these clubs coexisted as member clubs of the SFA.

The SFA used its powers under Article 14 to transfer the status of full membership from one member club to another.

Many SPL and (to a lesser extent, I think) SFA statements have since obfuscated and relayed half-truths in support of the continuity myth. Neil Doncaster, in particular, has painted himself into a corner – with “the big lie” built into the commissioning of the LNS enquiry.

It was very noticeable that Rod Mckenzie, in open court, strained himself to make the distinction between the normal everyday meaning of football club and the SPL/SPFL fantasy of “Club with a capital C”. That distinction was not provided to LNS.

To be clear, LNS did not decide on the continuity or otherwise of a “Club with a capital C”. The fiction was built into the commission’s terms of reference. As an adversarial process, he was bound to accept ideas that are not disputed by the competing parties. 

Leaving aside the nonsense from the SPL, as far as I am aware, at no time has anyone at the SFA ever said that the transfer of membership status under Article 14 transforms one member club into another.

 To me the idea is simply preposterous. But then again, I’m only looking at what the regulations allow.

View Comment

Avatar

HirsutePursuitPosted on3:08 am - Nov 19, 2017


Relevant SFA Articles
“associate member” means a club or association which has been admitted as an associate member in accordance with Articles 6.3 and 6.4, and the expression “associate membership” shall be construed accordingly;

“full member” means a club or association which is a full member of the Scottish FA and the expression “full membership” shall be construed accordingly;

“member” means a full member and/or an associate member and/or a registered member of the Scottish FA, and the expression “membership” shall be construed accordingly;

6. Application and Fees

6.1 Clubs or associations undertaking to promote Association Football according to the Laws of the Game and these Articles and other rules of the Scottish FA may be admitted as registered members, associate members or full members, subject to the provisions of Articles 6.2 to 6.7 (both inclusive).

6.2 A club or association shall be admitted as a registered member automatically by reason of its being admitted as a member of an Affiliated Association or an Affiliated National Association, or in the case of a club through membership of or participation in an association, league or other combination of clubs formed in terms of Article 18 and in the case of an association by being formed in terms of Article 18, provided it is not already an associate or full member. A registered member shall not be a member of more than one Affiliated Association or more than one Affiliated National Association. A registered member may apply at any time to become an associate member.

6.3 A club or association desiring to qualify for full membership of the Scottish FA must first be admitted as an associate member. A club cannot be admitted as an associate member unless it meets, and commits to continuous compliance with, the Membership Criteria and amendments thereto as shall be promulgated by the Board from time to time in connection with the membership of the Scottish FA.

6.4 Applicants for associate membership shall use such printed forms as shall from time to time be prescribed by the Board. All applications for associate membership shall be considered and decided by the Board and the Board’s decision on the matter shall be final. Applications for associate membership shall be lodged with the Secretary and must be accompanied by a copy of the applicant’s constitution or rules and any other information concerning the applicant which the Board may require, together with a remittance for the amount of the entrance fee. The entrance fee for associate membership shall be £1,000.

6.5 A club or association accepted as an associate member shall thereafter receive from the Secretary a copy of the Memorandum and these Articles, and such other rules and regulations of the Scottish FA as the Board may from time to time direct. These publications, in particular the Memorandum and these Articles, shall be placed in a convenient place so that any official, Team Official or player of such associate member, on application, may have access thereto.

6.6 An associate member which has been an associate member for 5 complete successive years may apply at the expiry of that period to become a full member. All applications for full membership shall be considered and decided by the Board and the Board’s decision on the matter shall be final.

10.7 Each club in full membership or associate membership shall in its Official Return register its ground and playing field dimensions and no such club shall remove to another ground without first obtaining the consent of the Board. Any club in full membership or associate membership wishing to make any alteration to its name, its registered ground or its playing field dimensions must first obtain the prior written consent of the Board. No club in registered membership shall adopt in whole or in part the name of a club in full membership or associate membership without the prior written consent of the Board.

14. Prohibition on Transfer of Membership

14.1 It is not permissible for a member to transfer directly or indirectly its membership of the Scottish FA to another member or to any other entity and any such transfer or attempt to effect such a transfer is prohibited, save as otherwise provided in this Article 14. Any member desirous of transferring its membership to another entity within its own administrative group for the purpose of internal solvent reconstruction must apply to the Board for permission to effect such transfer, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Any other application for transfer of membership will be reviewed by the Board, which will have complete discretion to reject or to grant such application on such terms and conditions as the Board may think fit.

14.2 Any member which is in breach of the provisions of Article 14.1 shall, if required, indemnify the Scottish FA and its members against all losses, damages, liabilities, costs or expenses suffered or incurred by the Scottish FA and its members which result directly or indirectly from such breach, including any loss of income or profits from any undertaking, commercial liaison, sponsorship, or arrangement entered into by the Scottish FA or by any of its members.

View Comment

Avatar

HirsutePursuitPosted on3:14 am - Nov 19, 2017


Relevant SFL Articles

6. CONDITION ON MEMBERSHIPFootball clubs or associations undertaking to provide Association Football according to the Laws of the Game as settled by the International Football  Association Board and these Rules may be admitted as members of the League in accordance with the provisions of these Rules.

7. ASSOCIATE MEMBERSHIP A club or association must initially join the League as an Associate Member.

8. APPLICATION FOR MEMBERSHIP A club or association applying for Associate Membership shall complete an application form in such form as the Board shall specify from time to time, and submit same to the Chief Executive accompanied by payment of an application fee of £1,000 plus Value Added Tax at the standard rate applicable at the relevant time (or such application fee as shall be specified from time to time by a general meeting). For the avoidance of doubt, the application fee shall not be refundable in any circumstances.

9. ADMISSION AND EXPULSION The League in general meeting may upon such terms and conditions as it may think fit admit any club as an Associate Member or Member of the League and may expel any Member or Associate Member or terminate such membership or may accept the retirement of any Associate Member or Member, but subject always to Rule 126(Reversion of Transfer of Registration Rights). Upon admission as a Member or Associate Member, the club so admitted shall become bound by and be subject to these Rules and any other Rules or Bye-Laws made by the League for the time being in force.

10. ENTRANCE FEEUpon admission as an Associate Member, an entrance fee of £1,000 plus  Value Added Tax at the standard rate applicable at the date of admission shall become payable to the League and the Associate Member shall not be accorded any rights or privileges of membership until such fee is paid.

11. TRANSFER OF MEMBERSHIP CATEGORY If a Member Club finishes bottom of the Third (or lowest) Division in two successive seasons the Board may determine that the status of that Member Club be reduced to that of an Associate Member. In the event that the Member Club whose status is so reduced does not regain the status of Member Club by resolution of the Members at an Annual General Meeting or in general meeting called for that purpose before the end of the second successive season after the Board decision to reduce its status, then its membership of the League shall automatically terminate notwithstanding the provisions of Rule 12 (Notice to Resign Membership).

12. NOTICE TO RESIGN MEMBERSHIPNo Member shall resign, retire or otherwise cease to be a member of the League unless it shall have given not less than two full seasons prior written notice so to do, unless with the approval of not less than two-thirds (66%) of the votes cast at a general meeting of the League.

13. MEMBERSHIP NOT TRANSFERRABLEMembership of the League (whether full or associate) shall not be transferrable, save that (a) a Member wishing to change its legal form (whether from unincorporated association to corporate body or otherwise where the ownership and control of both bodies are or will be substantially identical); or (b) a transfer within the same administrative group for the purposes of a solvent reconstruction only; may be permitted by the Board upon prior written application for consent and giving such details of the proposed transfer as the Board may reasonably request for the purpose of considering such transfer. The Board may refuse such application or grant same upon such terms and conditions as it shall think fit.

14. INDEMNITY FOR BREACH OF RULES 12 AND 13 Any Member in breach of Rules 12 and 13 (resignation and transfer, above) shall upon demand indemnify the League and its Members and Associate Members against all losses, damages, liabilities, costs or expenses suffered or incurred by them or any of them which are directly or indirectly attributable to such breach including (without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing) any loss of income or profits from any sponsorship or other commercial agreement or arrangement entered into by the League or any of its Members or Associate Members.

15. RELEGATION FROM AND PROMOTION TO THE SCOTTISH PREMIER LEAGUE

15.1Notwithstanding any other provision in these Rules, any football club which is relegated, in terms of the Settlement Agreement between the League and The Scottish Premier League, from The Scottish Premier League, shall automatically be admitted to full membership of the League and shall in the season immediately following that relegation participate in the higher or highest Division of the League.

15.2Notwithstanding any other provision of these Rules, the membership of any football club promoted in accordance with Rule 92(Champion Clubs – Promotion and Relegation)to The Scottish Premier League (or otherwise admitted to The Scottish Premier League), in accordance with the Rules of  The Scottish Premier League, shall automatically terminate upon the admission of such club to The Scottish Premier League and such club shall not be obliged to give any notice of its cessation of membership of the League and shall be permitted to depart from the League and become a member of The Scottish Premier League (in accordance with the Rules of  The Scottish Premier League) without restriction

16. REGISTRATION WITH SFA A CONDITION OF MEMBERSHIP A Member or Associate Member who is not already a full or associate member of the Scottish Football Association must make application to become a full or associate member of the Scottish Football Association (as the case may be) within fourteen (14) days of being admitted to membership of the League failing which its membership of the League will lapse, and in the event that the application is unsuccessful, its membership will lapse upon that decision being intimated to the League.

17. TRANSFER FROM ASSOCIATE TO FULL MEMBERSHIPOn completing four successive years as an Associate Member, a club may be admitted to membership of the League by resolution of the Members and without payment of any further application fee.

18. LAPSE OF ASSOCIATE MEMBERSHIPOn the expiry of five successive years as an Associate Member, without admission as a Member, Associate Membership will automatically lapse without compensation or other payment to the Associate Member at the close of the Annual General Meeting following upon the expiry of the fifth year of Associate Membership.

19. STATUS OF ASSOCIATE MEMBERSHIP An Associate Member shall have no financial interest in the assets of the League and shall not be accorded any voting rights. An Associate Member will be entitled to notice of general meetings of the League and to attend and speak at such meetings, and shall otherwise be bound by such membership by these Rules and all other Rules and Bye-Laws made by the League and for the time being in force

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on8:17 am - Nov 19, 2017


2. Oldco sells entity to Newco.’
That’s why half the players walked away then

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on8:22 am - Nov 19, 2017


The club was sold to a NEW company, i know it was a first but LNS made it possible and Article 14.1 and SFA complete discretion did the rest.
———–The LNS case was long after CG bought the assets. So are you saying there was no club until LNS said so?
Ps. if the SFA have complete discretion why have they never stated it’s the same club and the SFA say so as we have complete discretion on it?

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on8:52 am - Nov 19, 2017


A very interesting first phone call to Radio Clyde last night where a Rangers fan named James made a very impassioned observation of the current Ibrox board. Why were the fans groups prepared to do anything to oust the previous board, but are willing to put up with this one not keeping any of its promises? 

It can go on forever as far as I’m concerned, but the more they withdraw into themselves and immerse themselves in ‘Rangersness’ the worse it will get in my view.  Of course, it does work with some as a caller came on to rebuke Hugh Keevins for having the temerity to say Rangers have debt. ‘It’s equity Hugh, okay, let’s get that clear’, which was a point that the resident financial expert Derek Johnstone wholeheartedly agreed with. I wonder how many fans of other clubs wished their club owed millions in equity to other people, with a promise to owe even more. Then again, why should those of us who are not Rangers fans really bother.  If they are willing to continually defer to a convicted tax cheat, and other board members who put their club into the abyss years ago, then hell mend them.  Would they they rather their club crashed and burned under those people, or be properly managed by people who would refrain from drowning out all dissenters with loud shouts of ‘We are the people’? How can any of them think the right people are in charge – it’s bizarre!

View Comment

sannoffymesssoitizz

sannoffymesssoitizzPosted on10:40 am - Nov 19, 2017


Ernest

Yer club’s deid mate – beat it.

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on10:58 am - Nov 19, 2017


Yes it’s a strange one Up The Hoops.  Why all this misplaced trust by the bears in their boards of directors.

I think social media put the cat among the pigeons.  Well into David Murray’s reign we knew nothing about DOS, EBTs and the largesse of the BOS.  Murray came across as a multi millionaire successful business man who was willing to do whatever was needed to keep Rangers at the top.  There was no alternative point of view from the media.

In that era there built up the now infamous ‘superiority complex’.  I don’t remember that type of thinking prior to David Murray.  Establishment club – yes – but could be beat by at least half a dozen other teams in Scotland.

The Ibrox support have struggled to come to terms with their new status.  Most were aghast at the time of administration and liquidation.  But very quickly bought into all the rubbish spouted by Charles Green, Ally McCoist and of course all the turncoats in the press, Traynor et. al.

The thought of living within their means, cutting their cloth, is anathema to them.  Admitting they are a new club and starting afresh is a non starter. So they blindly follow directors who say what they want/need to hear.

Remember the wages they were paying in the bottom tier of the SFL?  Can’t remember any protests or words of caution.  What a waste of money.  Very typical.

it will end in tears.

View Comment

Avatar

HirsutePursuitPosted on11:07 am - Nov 19, 2017


What will happen when Lord Bannatyne, as it seems he must, sets out an order that Mr King should make an offer for the shares in RIFC PLC that he and his concert party do not already own?

Will Mr King:
(a)  do walking away?
or
(b) make the offer?

If Mr King cannot or will not make the offer, is he then:
(a) likely to able or willing to continue to fund the new(ish) club on a day-to-day basis?
or
(b) likely to see a subsequent order from Lord Bannatyne that effectively freezes his assets?

If Mr King cannot or will not provide funding for day-to-day expenses, will:
(a) other “real Rangers men” step up to the plate?
or 
(b) an insolvency event for the Sevco Scotland version of Rangers be inevitable?

Would administration for TRFC and/or RIFC help either/both survive?

If costs were cut (players and staff made redundant, nonessential assets sold or mothballed) would the new club’s revenue (fans) do walking away?

There is a very real possibility (no more than that, at this stage) that the current version of Rangers will not see out this season. The closer this possibility comes to  transpiring, the more we will hear from those who rely of the myth of continuity.

For some, the continuity myth is simply an extension to an existing metaphysical imperialism. For others, it’s just about the money.

If they are needed, the stale lies will be dusted down and reused for the next production. However, I have a strong suspicion that “The Myth of Continuity II” would find an audience less willing/able to suspend its collective disbelief. It would be important to lay the groundwork early.

If I were a supporter of all things “Rangers” I too would (or at least I think I should) be feeling somewhat insecure at the moment. So, if someone really has the need to extol the myth of continuity at this stage, I assume that person was more than a little fragile.

The religious adherents of a metaphysical “Rangers” may have blind faith in its eternal existence. The rest of us saw it die in 2012.

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on11:23 am - Nov 19, 2017


Speaking about wages, I heard on the radio yesterday that in many games played in Scotland the best paid person on the pitch is the referee!  I couldn’t help but chuckle when you consider the standard of refereeing here.

View Comment

Avatar

bad capt madmanPosted on11:42 am - Nov 19, 2017


Hirsute has just nailed the name of the next & subsequent teams out of Ibrox – Metaphysical Rangers FC.
Also wonder about the timing of Ernest’s appearance and arguments – setting the scene / rehearsing arguments for the next transformation? Well done JC & Auldheid etc for your patient replies.

View Comment

Avatar

HirsutePursuitPosted on12:27 pm - Nov 19, 2017


American psychiatrist Elisabeth Kubler-Ross proposed five stages of grief that are often worked through during the grieving process. These stages include denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance. The bargaining stage may occur prior to loss as well as after loss, as an attempt to negotiate pain away.

Does this help explain the recent intervention?

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on12:43 pm - Nov 19, 2017


bad capt madmanNovember 19, 2017 at 11:42
‘…Also wonder about the timing of Ernest’s appearance and arguments – setting the scene / rehearsing arguments for the next transformation? ‘
______________
Yes, it’s been a while since a new poster suddenly appeared to try to mount a sustained effort to deny the death of Rangers Football Club of 1872.

One could think that a PR offensive is imminent. Might  Lord Bannatyne have made his  judgment and that has been privily conveyed to the parties before being publicly announced?

Might the Ibrox Board be  about to concede that RIFC plc is  insolvent and cannot continue as a ‘going concern’-and it’s every rat for itself in a scramble to leave the sinking ship with what loot it can salvage?

Probably not.
But it would be nice to see Truth being acknowledged and Nemesis paying a call.

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on1:03 pm - Nov 19, 2017


JIMBONOVEMBER 19, 2017 at 10:58 

Why all this misplaced trust by the bears in their boards of directors.

As I said in an earlier post, it can go on forever as far as I am concerned.  However, to compound things further I think young Murty wrote himself out of the running to be Manager with the result yesterday. Another win would have given them more reason to appoint him as an affordable option. Perhaps there is a solution though, as suggested by another caller to Radio Clyde. Apparently all the Directors ‘should sell up all their other business interests and put the money into the Rangers’!

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on1:36 pm - Nov 19, 2017


As I said earlier The Rangers were paying SPL wages when in the bottom tier.  Ally McCoist was getting somewhere approaching 1m per year?  I also remember reading at the time when they were on their travels to play part time teams they stayed in the top hotels in the area and used the very best coaches (buses) available in Scotland.  Things like this to give the impression they were still the top club in the land.  ‘We are as big as Celtic and bigger than everyone else’  Why?

Leaving aside that they are a new club they could at least have started afresh financially.  Put in place a budget which took into account lower season ticket revenue.  Lower sponsorship deals.  lower revenue from cup runs & Europe (nil).  Pay the wages commensurate with the league they were now in.  But they didn’t and the money from the CG share issue quickly disappeared.

Even now they could live within their means.  Can they really afford Murray Park?  Can they afford an academy that they seem to get little return on?  How did they manage before Murray Park?  Go back to that model.

The Rangers should look to Hearts, Hibs & Aberdeen’s budgets and set ups.  There is no shame in that.  In terms of transfers, wages etc. that’s where they should be aiming.  Any income above these teams because of bigger crowds should be used to pay back loans and improve/repair their stadium.

To go into a new financial year budgeting for min. £4m loan requirement is crazy.  They have no overdraft facilities or normal business banking arrangements.  They do not have a listing or a NOMAD.  There is the threat of a cold shoulder.  The possibility of a new share issue to get rid of the soft loans?  Forget it.

The lunatics took over the asylum. From David Murray onwards.

View Comment

Avatar

TrisidiumPosted on1:40 pm - Nov 19, 2017


Our recently arrived new poster has of course gone over some of the old ground (not nearly as plausibly as some of his predecessors) of the past.
I think that is useful to indulge in this kind of dialectic from time to time, if only to combat the relentless pursuit of misdirection employed by the press. Useful to establish for example that the only practical out come of LNS was that RFC broke the rules, and that all the rest is inconsequential waffle. Useful to establish once again what UEFA rules actually say – as opposed to the cherry-picking sophistry which would have us believe they say something different. Useful to have confirmed the absurdity of the notion that membership of the SFA is the ‘soul’ of the metaphysical club – since most of our clubs (though not TRFC) existed BEFORE the SFA.
Good in other words to remind ourselves from time to time of the ACTUAL truths in place here.

The ‘same club’ myth will survive of course. In the same way as Santa, the Tooth Fairy and the Loch Ness Monster do.
I have no issue with those who subscribe to any or all of these, but it would be particularly annoying to have acceptance of any or all of these imposed on me. This in effect is what happens with OC flat-earthers.
OC belief is one thing OC fascism is quite another.

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on2:43 pm - Nov 19, 2017


JIMBONOVEMBER 19, 2017 at 13:36
======================

Even if they somehow do manage to convert the loans to shares, unless they seriously cut their cloth, the need for borrowing will simply kick in again.  

As for Murray Park the question I always have is whether it was actually paid for, or the money which it cost to build was included in the £800m written off by BOS. Remember Murray transferred £50m of the debt attributed to the football club to other parts of his group, not that long after Murray Park was built. There is not much left to happen that could be a shock, but surely if their much bragged about training facility was effectively paid for by a majority state owned bank it would be a major scandal. I guess we’ll never know because no-one seems willing to look under the bonnet to establish why BOS supported them to the level they did. 

View Comment

Avatar

joes11Posted on2:44 pm - Nov 19, 2017


The Hearts v Partick Thistle game – on/off etc.
Ok, so the situation might have been handled better.
But, listening to the radio and folk’s outspoken outrage …. did I actually hear a Partick Thistle official statement that called for “an extensive review”!
An extensive review – clearly, this issue is much more important than those little matters relating to Rangers/SFA/EBTs.

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on3:13 pm - Nov 19, 2017


TRISIDIUM
NOVEMBER 19, 2017 at 13:40
====================================

I have absolutely no issue with people believing whatever they want, people believe some bizarre stuff in spite of all the evidence to the contrary. 

“A 2014 Gallup poll found that 42 per cent of Americans believe humans were created by God 10,000 years ago.”

However when they try to convince me they are correct that is a different matter. Particularly when they misrepresent facts, change their position slightly when they realise it is untenable or simply make stuff up. 

If people want to believe that the current Rangers playing at Ibrox is the same as the previous one then they are entirely within their right to do so. However, it’s probably best not to try to prove it to other people. The facts prove exactly the opposite.

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on4:58 pm - Nov 19, 2017


upthehoopsNovember 19, 2017 at 14:43
‘…but surely if their much bragged about training facility was effectively paid for by a majority state owned bank..’
______________
You can breathe a little easier,uth, when I say that such funding as was received from Sportscotland is secured against a charge on
“All and Whole the subjects known as Training Centre Youth Academy,Auchenhowie Road,Milngavie,Glasgow G42 6EJ  and registered in the Land Register of Scotland under title number DMB65871”

I think I’ve referred to that previously, in the context of querying the length of time it took Sportscotland to realise that the original award in 1998 was NOT to “The Rangers Football Club Ltd” but to ‘Rangers Football Club plc’,and eventually got worried about enforcing the charge if TRFC Ltd  went bust, the way RFC plc did.

They were taking no chances on the Courts agreeing that the charge could be enforced against a completely different legal entity from the one that got the money19

I haven’t been able to find out how much lottery dosh was received ( I think it was lottery money that was awarded via Sportscotland)

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on4:59 pm - Nov 19, 2017


One apiece

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on5:54 pm - Nov 19, 2017


Just a thought that occurred.

If Rangers employed Alex McLeish at say £20k (gross) a week he would probably be able to clear his outstanding tax bill in a couple of years. 

Provided he gave all of the money to HMRC obviously. 

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on7:10 pm - Nov 19, 2017


JOHN CLARKNOVEMBER 19, 2017 at 16:58 ______________You can breathe a little easier,uth, when I say that such funding as was received from Sportscotland is secured against a charge on“All and Whole the subjects known as Training Centre Youth Academy,Auchenhowie Road,Milngavie,Glasgow G42 6EJ  and registered in the Land Register of Scotland under title number DMB65871”

==========================

Thanks John. Given there is public interest in this facility I wonder how that sits with it being offered to every Celtic European opponent for training? Probably not much to be honest. However in my opinion it is a practice as petty and pathetic as banning players from wearing green boots.  I was glad to see the Celtic CEO response at the AGM to the shareholder who objected to Celtic using Parks of Hamilton coaches, who are of course owned by a Rangers Director.  Apart from anything else Celtic have been using that firm for decades, and believe they are the best available. Predictably though some in the media used the view of one Celtic shareholder to sneer and generalise about the priorities of the fans. Perhaps they should glance at the coach park behind the Jock Stein stand at the next home game and see how much it bothers some Celtic supporters clubs who also use Parks. 

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on8:00 pm - Nov 19, 2017


UPTHEHOOPSNOVEMBER 19, 2017 at 08:52 40 0 Rate This
A very interesting first phone call to Radio Clyde last night where a Rangers fan named James made a very impassioned observation of the current Ibrox board. Why were the fans groups prepared to do anything to oust the previous board, but are willing to put up with this one not keeping any of its promises? 
—————–
JIMBONOVEMBER 19, 2017 at 10:58 26 0 Rate This
Yes it’s a strange one Up The Hoops.  Why all this misplaced trust by the bears in their boards of directors.
—————-
Rangers boss Ally McCoist set to be handed £30m once transfer embargo is liftedRangers chief Charles Green will hand Ally McCoist up to £30m for new signings when their transfer embargo is lifted.20/12/12 
http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11781/8342844/Rangers-boss-Ally-McCoist-set-to-be-handed-30m-once-transfer-embargo-is-lifted
———
They soon seen through charles Green’s bluster,and it was all get rid of the board(but some still believe he bought a football club 140 years old).
Then came.
£50m! That’s how much King says it will take to rebuild Rangers — and he’ll put up lion’s share
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2588429/Dave-King-commit-30m-ensure-Rangers-return-Scottish-Premiership.html.
———–
So very strange indeed

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on8:11 pm - Nov 19, 2017


JOHN CLARKNOVEMBER 19, 2017 at 12:43 27 0 Rate This
bad capt madmanNovember 19, 2017 at 11:42‘…Also wonder about the timing of Ernest’s appearance and arguments – setting the scene / rehearsing arguments for the next transformation? ‘______________Yes, it’s been a while since a new poster suddenly appeared to try to mount a sustained effort to deny the death of Rangers Football Club of 1872.
One could think that a PR offensive is imminent.
——————
Anyone remember what transpired the last time at ibrox just after  a new poster suddenly appeared to try to mount a sustained effort ?

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on8:56 pm - Nov 19, 2017


Just a small question if i may.
what happened to TWM Episode 20?
I only have TWM Episode 19 showing

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on9:15 pm - Nov 19, 2017


TrisidiumNovember 19, 2017 at 13:40
‘…The ‘same club’ myth will survive of course. In the same way as Santa, the Tooth Fairy and the Loch Ness Monster do.I have no issue with those who subscribe to any or all of these’

HomunculusNovember 19, 2017 at 15:13
‘…I have absolutely no issue with people believing whatever they want, ‘
_________________
Of course, having an attitude of amused toleration of other people’s views is all very well, and commendable: but only where those views are not allowed to be translated into realities and practicalities that are damaging to us.

The very governing body of a sport facilitated the creation of the Big Lie that a shilpit,6-year-old club playing out of Ibrox stadium has a record of sporting achievement second to none.

It is a lie that strikes deep at the very heart of football as fair competition, an un-rigged sport, in which  after honourable and fair sporting competition, victors are awarded well-merited honours and titles.

It replaces that idea with a grubby, venal, ultimately self-defeating idea that ‘honours and titles’ can be bought from the record of a defunct sporting entity.

It is a patent absurdity.

And, forbye, although we may compassionately indulge the fantasy of the TRFC Ltd supporter, God bless him, whose intellect may have been permanently weakened by the hugely unbalancing emotional shock of the death of the club he used to support, the SFA Board and the Board at Ibrox can be offered no such indulgence.

Those guys (and the one gal) KNOW damn fine that they cheated us all, both by not dealing appropriately with the cheating RFC (IL) , and by allowing false claims from RIFC plc/TRFC Ltd to be something that they are not. 

And the SFA, I believe, knows that if they opened themselves to  investigation from outside ( before the shredding machine got further work to do!)  damning material would be found.

If only we had had some ICIJ-type journalists when SDM first started his spending spree of (very largely)our money!

View Comment

Avatar

bigboab1916Posted on9:52 pm - Nov 19, 2017


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mhi5PlY0s4
we got wise youre a nial in disguise oh yes you are

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on10:54 pm - Nov 19, 2017


Things look good at Hearts 
http://www.deadlinenews.co.uk/2017/11/19/gift-2-5-million-helps-hearts-post-2-3-million-profit-despite-construction-new-main-stand-turnover-rises-11-3-million-tynecastle-ann-budge-callum-paterson/?platform=hootsuite

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on11:22 pm - Nov 19, 2017


Just watching Sportscene.

The new stand at Tynecastle is looking the part, at least on TV.

Maybe Scottish football has a future after all.

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on12:38 am - Nov 20, 2017


HomunculusNovember 19, 2017 at 23:22
‘…The new stand at Tynecastle is looking the part, at least on TV.’
__________
Lord, it made my feet itch to be on that pitch, it looked so superb.And when I think of how good I was on the ash pitches in Carntyne in 19 fifty feckin 4, I wonder what my slide-rule passes  would have been like on a surface like that!21

I listened to  Sportsound (before the radio commentary on the match), and I have to say that Richard Gordon kind of disappointed me by appearing to focus on the ‘safety certificate’ delay, rather than on the really positive and celebratory aspects of a significant community and sporting occasion.

An occasion made possible only by the sheer determination of honest people to save, by honest means, their historic club from death by Liquidation, the prospect of which had been  caused by a sleazeball ‘owner’
There was another sleazeball of an owner of another club……a club to save which the very  Sports Governing body threw out the rule book and all adherence to a belief in Integrity and honesty in sport.

Which sleazeball was not at all criticised on BBC Radio Scotland at any time!

They were too feart to do that.Or, perhaps, too emotionally involved, too stuffed with succulent lamb.

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on6:52 am - Nov 20, 2017


Wow.  Selective AND circular!

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on7:18 am - Nov 20, 2017


for the last time complete discretion has never openly been said or stated by the SFA.19

View Comment

Avatar

justbecauseyoureparanoidPosted on9:08 am - Nov 20, 2017


Please stop feeding the sevco troll. 

View Comment

Avatar

smallchangePosted on10:09 am - Nov 20, 2017


Concur.
A well planned and orchestrated assault requiring mountains of paperwork and a willingness to work a shift system. Hmmm wonder where this control room is situated and who authorised its activation on this occasion.
All credit to the usual guys on here for being willing to engage in these events but how many days is it now…
Back to lurking 

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on10:28 am - Nov 20, 2017


CLUSTER ONENOVEMBER 19, 2017 at 20:00
UPTHEHOOPSNOVEMBER 19, 2017 at 08:52 40 0 Rate ThisA very interesting first phone call to Radio Clyde last night where a Rangers fan named James made a very impassioned observation of the current Ibrox board. Why were the fans groups prepared to do anything to oust the previous board, but are willing to put up with this one not keeping any of its promises? —————–JIMBONOVEMBER 19, 2017 at 10:58 26 0 Rate ThisYes it’s a strange one Up The Hoops.  Why all this misplaced trust by the bears in their boards of directors.—————-Rangers boss Ally McCoist set to be handed £30m once transfer embargo is liftedRangers chief Charles Green will hand Ally McCoist up to £30m for new signings when their transfer embargo is lifted.20/12/12 http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11781/8342844/Rangers-boss-Ally-McCoist-set-to-be-handed-30m-once-transfer-embargo-is-lifted———They soon seen through charles Green’s bluster,and it was all get rid of the board(but some still believe he bought a football club 140 years old).Then came.£50m! That’s how much King says it will take to rebuild Rangers — and he’ll put up lion’s sharehttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2588429/Dave-King-commit-30m-ensure-Rangers-return-Scottish-Premiership.html.———–So very strange indeed
_______________

Two things, I believe, are paramount in this phenomenon of unquestioning belief in Dave King and his board. A board led by a convicted criminal and serial liar.

The first is he is seen as a Real Rangers Man (whatever that might actually mean), as are the rest of his board, and so, apparently, to be trusted to never do anything that might harm ‘the club’.

The second, and this might be where Ernest comes in, along with all the other promoters of the big lie. Almost to a bear, they believe their club cannot die and they can see no reason, therefor, to ‘live within their means’. A football club that cannot die has nothing to fear from an overspending board, indeed, a board that doesn’t overspend has no right to govern such an immortal club and must be expelled from the Blue Room before too much repair work has been done.

In the normal course of life, one might expect people to live by the maxim, ‘once bitten, twice shy’, and not risk losing a second loved entity having watched the first die in very similar circumstances to what we are witnessing now. But give people who already had a superiority complex the veneer of immortality, and all they can see is the need for glory, at all cost, for, in their manipulated minds, their club is a phoenix that will rise again, no matter how often it goes down in flames. To them, insolvency has been normalized (see EB’s posts), and holds no fears. That is what Charles Green, the SFA and SPL, along with the compliant SMSM, have done – removed the fear factor of insolvency, administration and liquidation from Ibrox. It is the loss of the self preservation fear factor, that stopped early man from stepping off a cliff to see what would happen, that has been removed from the psyche of the bears. 

Put another way, an unkind way, perhaps, but zombies (the undead) don’t fear death, and will walk headlong towards obliteration to reach their goal!

Perhaps, currently, a PR guru has decided that there is a need to remind people that a ‘Club’ cannot die, and so has re-ignited the ‘same club’ argument!

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on11:27 am - Nov 20, 2017


Don’t know about anyone else but I’m getting heartily sick of all this speculation regarding the manager’s job at Ibrox.  Why can’t the media just come out en masse and say what the rest of us know?  They are skint!  They can’t afford any compo. payments.  Can’t afford a war chest in the Jan. transfer window. 

I just wish they would appoint someone, anyone!  Free up the sports pages for some other stories.  01

View Comment

Avatar

FinlochPosted on12:57 pm - Nov 20, 2017


Enough already, its now beyond tedious.

Please stop engaging with the ever decreasing circular squirrelry from our recently arrived EBster

Please also stop feeding with thumbs up or down.

View Comment

Avatar

bigboab1916Posted on1:13 pm - Nov 20, 2017


You’re forgetting something in your argument, no other club that went into administration lost any of their players why was this?
A) was it because the players are contracted and cannot walk away because the club and company have a hold on them because they came out of admin?
B) Rangers players could walk away TUPE free because the club and company could not exit administration and were liquidated and this freed the players from the contract.
C) The club you think is the same could not compete in a testimonial (and later also took the field as Sevco) as the club no longer retained a licence and Rangers were still in the leauge, why was the licence removed?
why did they have to apply for a licence yet Hearts,livingstone did not and as stated kept their players and could transfer them for returns if they wished yet the Sevco could not transfer players.
I think you are clutching at straws mate and are putting out the same pish as the MSM.

View Comment

fishnish

fishnishPosted on2:14 pm - Nov 20, 2017


“Why are you asking me questions that are irrelevant to the membership transfer? I am not denying liquidation.”
Ern…
If you’re not denying liquidation, then why belabour irrelevant, metaphysical questions about a spurious membership?

View Comment

woodstein

woodsteinPosted on2:20 pm - Nov 20, 2017


“Rangers’ dithering in managerial hunt could also see them miss out on obvious candidate Derek McInnes.”
By
Keith Jackson
06:00, 20 NOV 2017
 
“It’s an uncomfortable and unenviable position for McInnes who, in many ways, is becoming the victim of a chronic lack of cohesion at the top of the Ibrox staircase”
 
“It’s an uncomfortable and unenviable position for McInnes who, in many ways, is becoming the victim of a chronic case of meddling by newspapers like us and people like me”
 
Fixed that for you Keith10

View Comment

Avatar

Ex LudoPosted on2:57 pm - Nov 20, 2017


Ok, I’ll bite.
“Good on them because nobody in their right mind invests in Scottish football to make money,it has to be a labour of love.”
How would you describe SDM’s involvement with Scottish football Ernest?

View Comment

Avatar

bigboab1916Posted on3:05 pm - Nov 20, 2017


http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/bdo-send-rangers-bond-holders-a-cheque-for-58-for-their-1500-investment-in-club/
And should you wish to invest again we are going to do it all over again.

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on3:08 pm - Nov 20, 2017


AULDHEID,
I think Andrea Traverso’s use of the term new club/company being ineligible for 3 years was simply a poor choice of words as their position seems to be as follows. A liquidated football company falls under Article 12 via Article 46(d) and the new company that owns the club is ineligible for 3 years until it has 3 continuous years accounts,and the club has its membership interrupted for those 3 years but maintains its identity and history. In effect UEFA accepts the club transfer and there appears to be no sporting integrity contradictions.====================
If you are going to continue spouting complete and utter tripe I’m going to have to do the equivalent of a Twitter Block, however I will make one last reply.
UEFA rules cater for all sorts of football entity constructs in Europe so that UEFA have to define who an applicant can be and do so in Art 12:
1 A licence applicant may <strong>only be a football club</strong>, i.e. a legal entity fully responsible for a football team participating in national and international competitions whicheither:
a) is a registered member of a UEFA member association and/or its affiliatedleague (hereinafter: registered member); or
b) has a contractual relationship with a registered member (hereinafter: football company).
Rangers were a football club under 1(a) unless they were an applicant under 1 (b) where that relationship is covered by Article 45 &nbsp;
Article 45 &ndash; Written contract with a football company
1 If the licence applicant is a football company as defined in Article 12(1b), it must<strong>provide a written contract of assignment with a registered member.</strong>the rest of Art45 sets out what the contract must cover
2 The contract must stipulate the following, as a minimum:a) The football company must comply with the applicable statutes, regulations, directives and decisions of FIFA, UEFA, the UEFA member association and its affiliated league.b) The football company must not further assign its right to participate in a competition at national or international level.c) The right of this football company to participate in such a competition ceasesto apply if the assigning club&rsquo;s membership of the association ceases.d) If the football company is put into bankruptcy or enters liquidation, the right toapply for a licence to enter an international and/or national competition reverts to the registered member. For the sake of clarity, should the licence have already been granted to the football company, then it cannot betransferred from the football company to the registered member; only the right to apply for a licence the following season reverts to the registered member.e) The UEFA member association must be reserved the right to approve thename under which the football company participates in the national competitions.f) The football company must, at the request of the competent national arbitration tribunal or CAS, provide views, information, and documents on matters regarding the football company&rsquo;s participation in the national and/or international competition.
3 The contract of assignment and any amendment to it must be approved by theUEFA member association and/or its affiliated league.
Now whilst the new club/company TRFC/TRIFC might have such a contract (and it would be interesting to see if it was TRIFC that applied for a licence for 2017/18, who but Rangers FC could have could have applied for a licence as define by Art12 1a   prior to liquidation?
MIH?&nbsp;
No Traverso being the Head of Club Licensing did not use a poor choice of words although his response&nbsp;came as such a surprise to the addressees, (Celtic Shareholders, Celtic and the SFA who never corrected how STV portrayed &nbsp;the UEFA response), he was quite precise in describing the NEW club/company ie TRFC/TRIFC in the way that he did.
The context of that reply was UEFA could not in 2012 have sanctioned Rangers in football rule terms as a result of their liquidation (meaning Rangers no longer existed) and that they had been replaced by a club/company construct under Art 12b) (assuming a written contract exists) that was new (not the same).
Thus the club applying as defined by UEFA after 2012 was a new club falling under&nbsp;Art12 1b.
The key word here is “new” and Traverso was quite precise and consistent with Art12 in using club/company thereafter.
Enough of the rules.
Why does Art 12 exist at all? What is its aim in fair play terms? It is to stop clubs&nbsp;using administration/liquidation to dumping debt and carrying on playing in UEFA competition at the same level as previously and immediately after such a debt dumping event as if nothing untoward had happened. Yet that is what&nbsp;the SFA tried to do in Scotland &nbsp;until supporters told clubs to sling their hook because the sheer unfairness and moral hazard to the game was recognised by them.
Where Art 12 says” to facilitate its qualification on sporting merit and/or its receipt of a licence <strong>to the detriment of the integrity of a competition </strong>they are doing what Scottish football has neglected and that is protect the integrity of the game in Scotland
Frankly if the value of that stance is not seen by your club and support, it calls into question what game do you guys think you are playing because it is not sport as the majority perceive it.

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on3:12 pm - Nov 20, 2017


Mods
Can you delete my earlier reply to EB at 15.00 ? Ta

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on4:05 pm - Nov 20, 2017


JIMBO
NOVEMBER 20, 2017 at 11:27 
Don’t know about anyone else but I’m getting heartily sick of all this speculation regarding the manager’s job at Ibrox.  Why can’t the media just come out en masse and say what the rest of us know?  They are skint!  They can’t afford any compo. payments.  Can’t afford a war chest in the Jan. transfer window. 
I just wish they would appoint someone, anyone!  Free up the sports pages for some other stories.  
==============================

I’m guessing that the deadline for appointing the next TRFC manager could be the AGM ?
It is scheduled for Thursday 30th of this month.

Suppose they could even negotiate to get an out of work, experienced manager – like McLeish perhaps – on a minimal salary, but a hefty bonus if TRFC finishes the season e.g. in the top 3 ?

They get in a ‘decent’ manager now – and avoid additional cash flow strain in the short-term ?

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on4:18 pm - Nov 20, 2017


Interesting conundrum around AGM time too that I’m not convinced is entirely co-incidental.  Aberdeen at Ibrox on the 29th (ish) and then Rangers at Pittodrie on the 2nd (ish).

View Comment

woodstein

woodsteinPosted on4:33 pm - Nov 20, 2017


smallchange
November 20, 2017 at 10:09
—————————————————– 
Glad you asked
6 days (15/11/2017 – 20/11/2017) inclusive
And 38 posts approx.
 
Also can anyone tell me what an unicorporated certificate is?

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on4:37 pm - Nov 20, 2017


Auldheid,

Firstly could I take the time to thank you for your patience.  It’s certainly appreciated in reinforcing my understanding.

secondly, re the club company construct as per Article 12 (b).  Is that not more likely to be a workaround for a situation where the club (small ‘c’ Rod) is unincorporated (or whatever the various european intra-country equivalents are) such that they have to assign their right to participate to a valid trading entity?  (A bit like the Brechin? Situation that HP describes re the SPL2 farrago).  So 45d says (to me) that in the event the latter party goes squit the right to apply to compete reverts to the unincorporated national association member (but to be clear specifically only the right to apply, not the absolute right to compete).  

The point being I’m not sure if 12(b) would apply to a company:company construct like RIFC/TRFC in superseding 12(a).  I can’t see what the benefit in so doing would be but like you, the threat of so doing seems glaringly obvious.

View Comment

paddy malarkey

paddy malarkeyPosted on5:41 pm - Nov 20, 2017


Shirley some mistake in the Scottish Cup draw ? TRFC drawn away ? Again ? Wouldn’t have happened to the old club .Mibbes they’ve asked to be embarrassed somewhere else for a change .
PS  there’s somebody posting on here who is also posting elsewhere , saying that he/she is ripping the pish from all and sundry on this site , and casting aspersions at individual posters . Their acolytes don’t seem to realise that they are ripping the pish out of them as well . 
Does this remind you of anyone ? (from Wiki)
A person with a god complex may refuse to admit the possibility of their error or failure, even in the face of irrefutable evidence, intractable problems or difficult or impossible tasks. The person is also highly dogmatic in their views, meaning the person speaks of their personal opinions as though they were unquestionably correct.[1] Someone with a god complex may exhibit no regard for the conventions and demands of society, and may request special consideration or privileges.[1]
God complex is not a clinical term or diagnosable disorder and does not appear in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).
The first person to use the term god-complex was Ernest Jones (1913–51).[2] His description, at least in the contents page of Essays in Applied Psycho-Analysis, describes the god complex as belief that one is a god.[3]

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on6:34 pm - Nov 20, 2017


JIMBONOVEMBER 20, 2017 at 11:27 31 1 Rate This
Don’t know about anyone else but I’m getting heartily sick of all this speculation regarding the manager’s job at Ibrox.  Why can’t the media just come out en masse and say what the rest of us know?  They are skint!  They can’t afford any compo. payments.  Can’t afford a war chest in the Jan. transfer window. 
I just wish they would appoint someone, anyone!  Free up the sports pages for some other stories. 
———————
That would not free up the sports pages it would just add to it. Before a ball is kicked the new manager would be in line for the England job, we will be told to bask in the ticky tacky football, he will have 11 captains on the field then all the rest of the hullaballo the SMSM will put out. so for now best enjoy what you can.

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on6:58 pm - Nov 20, 2017


PADDY MALARKEYNOVEMBER 20, 2017 at 17:41
———————
PS  there’s somebody posting on here who is also posting elsewhere , saying that he/she is ripping the pish from all and sundry on this site ,
—————
If you have ripped the pish out of all and sundry,you don’t have to say to anyone,everyone knows.When you have to tell everyone you have ripped the pish that is when you have not05

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on7:14 pm - Nov 20, 2017


Smugas
I think Art12 1b could only apply to TRFC/ TRIFC if a written contract meeting the conditions in Art 45 exists.
As I tried to suggest I’m not sure that it does and I very much doubt if one existed between RFC and who? MIH?
Whilst it might cover the Brechin situation I doubt it exists just for them. What it is saying is if your are a member of the national association but have handed the running of your club to a Company to operate it (not hold it) then a written contract to do so has to exist to enable UEFA to consider an application from that company that has the authority of the club being operated.
Southampton tried the operating company trick on FA and UEFA when they were in trouble and told to take a hike.

View Comment

Comments are closed.