Digging The Hole Ever Deeper

Carl31Posted on12:35 pm - Aug 10, 2012

Speculation on outcomes in the event that oldco are found guilty by the independent SPL commission …
1. no action – deemed to be not practicable/ not in the best interests of the game.
2. Action in line with the practicable options of the action deemed available to the SPL. RTC has posted on the nineteen listed sanctions/punishments and deemed two as the most likely – removal of titles and/or fines imposed.
Its important to note the principle behind removal of awards/titles etc. The retrospective application of the rules occur to recognise that the achievements were not made whilst in compliance with the rules of the game (nor indeed within the spirit of the game – see an earlier post of mine). In effect, the titles never belonged to Rangers as they were not won in compliance with the rules, IMO.
In this respect, its not totally accurate to describe removal/stripping of titles as taking place – the titles were never fairly won. Correcting the history books might be a better description.
The titles never belonged to Rangers. Ben Johnson never won the 100m, it was Carl Lewis. He physically passed the line first, but he never fairly competed. Lance Armstrong never fairly competed when he used drugs to enhance his performance during that Tour de France that he finished first. Rangers were deemed at the time to have accumulated more points than opposing teams in those relevant seasons, but, again, they never fairly competed and the victories were never truly their’s.
Again, as speculation on Rangers oldco’s guilt, I would like to see the history books corrected.
Back to the possible outcomes…
1. I would see this option possibly argued as an option by a few of the SPL members, or by Rangers oldco representatives , but an unlikely outcome. The eyes of Uefa/fifa are on the SPL and SFA in this regard. Doing nothing at all isn’t an option really. If Uefa deemed it necessary to take action due to the inaction of the nation association or league, it would make Scottish Football the embarrassment of Europe. Rangers newco – and, speculatively, whoever is due to represent Scotland in Europe – could face a ban. IMO this option won’t happen. Action will be taken.
2. The practicable options explained as likely by RTC have been discussed on a number of fora. It is most notable, IMO that correcting the history books hardens support for Rangers Newco amongst their supporters but financially costs them nothing (given that nothing would occur except a straightforward correction of the history books and, in terms described above, the titles never belonged to Rangers oldco, this isn’t really a punishment). I would think this outcome the most likely.
The other likely option is a fine, but it’s a blind spot to me whether Rangers newco have agreed to abide by any financial punishment meted out in regard to Rangers oldco.
Qs: Is there a general SPL/SFA rule on how long a club has to comply with a financial penalty?
Would it be the case that any fine imposed would need to be paid by the Rangers oldco Administrators/liquidators?

More speculation…
If another/other clubs during upcoming seasons of SPL play repeat any or all of the events that Rangers oldco did, i.e. pay inflated wages undeclared to SPL, field ineligible players, enter administration, go into liquidation, what consideration is being given to the precedent now being set re the punishments/actions to take?
Chairmen of other SFA clubs will be watching closely at the precedent of running up huge debts to fund fielding ineligible players that could win them the SPL/achieve trophies (bear in mind this could be achieved without necessarily requiring any EBT arrangement) to then face a punishment which is essentially no punishment. Is the title/trophy this year worth a ten point deduction for administration next year? They would keep the title/trophy entitlement in their history but then face a period (relatively short – one/ two/three seasons?) of rebuilding. Aberdeen have gone for quite a long period trophyless – might the chairman consider it a price to pay?
With this in mind, I cant see how the SPL can leave the Rangers titles intact considering the ‘correct the history books’ argument, and the ‘sets a precedent’ argument.