Guest Post by Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan
Good Evening,
Last night, I found myself sitting at home when an e-mail arrived from the administrator of these pages suggesting that I write a guest article for all to consider. At that precise moment my television was full of the efforts of James T Kirk attempting to escape the Wrath of Khan, who blames old James T for all his ills and troubles including what he sees as his ridiculous and malicious banishment to a distant star in the middle of nowhere— amongst other things. He seeks vengeance, causes mayhem, and refuses to recognise the rule of law.
It may seem strange, but there is much to be learned from The Wrath of Khan. For example, in the midst of the action Admiral James T acknowledges that when he first faces what is at the time an unknown adversary, in most unusual and unknown circumstances, he ignores rules and regulation and as a result “gets caught with his pants down.”
That is the consequence of ignoring rules and regulation more often than not—even for the good guys.
This is also the movie where we are introduced to the Kobayashi Maru—the supposedly impossible test in which members of star fleet are asked to rescue a stricken ship and its crew without sacrificing themselves, their starship and all members of their crew. The test is meant to be impossible to solve as it cannot be achieved—unless you change the rules of the game!
Captain’s log: Star date 2012; This is the voyage of the Starship Scottish Fitba—and we’re lost!
How can it come to be, that as we approach September 2012 the world of Scottish Football is in such a state of flux and disarray with an unbelievable amount of uncertainty and doubt about fundamental matters and principles, after months when we have seen the spiralling demise of one of our country’s biggest football clubs and the threatened disintegration of the entire system of football administration in Scotland as a result?
Surely after all that has happened in these past months the administrators would have learned to not only play by the rules, but be seen to be playing by the rules, insisting on the rules, and reinforcing the principles and platforms that those rules are based on?
Rangers PLC has ceased to be a part of Scottish football and the failure to deal with that simple fact, even more than the demise of what was regarded as an institution, is baffling in the extreme. The simple fact of the matter is this: There are rules and laws —regulations if you like —which were pre written to deal with such an event. Apply the rules and everyone knows where they stand— ignore the rules and, as James T Kirk points out, you get caught with your pants down!
So far, the rules have been half implemented half ignored. Rangers were automatically deducted points for going into Administration and properly so. They were convicted, by a properly convened independent panel, of various rule breaches, and duly sentenced as a result—again properly so. Thereafter, the company was consigned to Liquidation because it could not pay its debts- with the result that it loses its SPL share and the right to participate in football altogether— and with the further result that it left a trail of unpaid debts to creditors, including football clubs, which ran to millions of pounds.
Further, let’s be clear, The SPL and the SFL only exist with the consent of the SFA. The SFA are the ultimate governing body in Scottish Football, with the two league associations merely management tools to achieve what is supposed to be the efficient management of the game in compliance with the pre agreed rules, procedures and principles that are meant to govern football and football administration. If you wish to play under this system, then you have to accept the very same rules procedures and principles, and there should be no contracting in or out of either membership, or the laws of the game.
Yet when Rangers went into Administration, and stared liquidation in the face, The Administrators, and subsequently everyone from Bill Miller through to Charles Green stated publicly that they, together with the SFA and all of Scottish Football, were facing the Kobayashi Maru whereby maintaining the rules and the principles of the game whilst at the same time saving Rangers FC could not be achieved!
The rules had to be ignored for the sake of expediency cried some press members. Whilst principles are all well and good, you can’t apply them if it means the death of Rangers—Rangers are too big — cried others. If you apply the principles and the rules you will kill Rangers—and yourselves—said some.
It would appear that when it came to Rangers and their wellbeing, some took the view that principles were not quite so important and that, no matter what, Rangers FC had to be saved—- and there it was—the impossible task— The Kobayashi Maru!
I wonder if those who spouted that argument looked at The SFA website in any detail? Because there it states specifically that the SFA wants its coaches to educate all its young players, trainee managers and future coaches to “ Honour the game-respect your opponent- play to the rules–value sportsmanship–redefine winning- not just focusing on match results and league positions- and to help produce positive, respectful, and confident people with useful life skills“. Presumably those life skills include playing by the rules, valuing integrity, behaving with honour and respecting the position of others and so on.
Yes—It is hard to believe—but all of those phrases are direct quotes from the Scottish Football Association webpages—they are the words of the SFA themselves. How could they be seen to abandon such principles—especially when they so publicly proclaim them?
What a choice then for the SFA—abandon your principles—or lose an institution—The Kobayashi Moru! You just can’t win!
Except, Green & Co—and I include sections of the media in that phrase—clean forgot who was sitting the Kobayashi Moru test. The SFA were never faced with the test—if anything it was their rules that posed the test for whoever wanted to try and save Rangers. In the end, nobody was willing to attempt that task under the existing rules. No one was prepared to come along and pay the debts and so save the club—and at that stage it was Rangers and Rangers alone who faced the Kobayashi Moru.
Green, by way of his Servco company, then sought admission into the footballing world at a time and under circumstances which the rules dictated must result in failure. He had no accounts, no history in the game, effectively no players and nothing that would suggest that he could meet the criteria of the pre agreed rules for entry into the SFA.
It was at this juncture that the footballing executives made the error of ignoring the rules and principles that govern our game—the ones that the SFA espouse on their own website. They tried to shoe in Green against all the rules, with the result that supporters, fans, and club chairman voted them down and left them with their pants firmly glued to their ankles in Kirk speak.
The SFA, at the instigation of the member clubs from all leagues, then played the Kirk role in attempting to solve The Ibrox Kobayashi Moru by changing those rules with the agreement of the majority, so that Mr Green and his cohorts could gain membership, by effectively agreeing to allow Green’s Servco to obtain membership of the SFA on a conditional basis— with one of those conditions being that Mr Green’s company will pay ALL outstanding football debts—and make no mistake Captain Green accepted that he would play by those rules as otherwise he faced oblivion.
Here is what Green said as published on the SFA website following the signing of the 5 man agreement:
“The agreement signed today allows Rangers to be granted membership by the SFA and finally enables the Club to move forward.
“The Board, the Manager and senior executives have been working tirelessly over the last few weeks to secure the future of the Club and today is the start of that process.
“The Board has had to take some very difficult decisions to gain SFA membership, including accepting the delayed transfer ban and paying outstanding financial penalties. But we are now able to get back to playing football and plan for the new season, starting this Sunday with our match against Brechin.”
The website also reported that Servco had been granted conditional membership with one of the conditions being – “Sevco Scotland Ltd has agreed to settle all outstanding football debts to other members of the Scottish FA plus clubs under the jurisdiction of other Football Associations.”
You will note that nowhere does it state that the SFA or the SPL will pay any of the footballing debts out of any money supposedly due to the second place team in season 2011/2012 as Charles Green appears to claim – and besides it is obvious to everyone that Servco did not participate in the league during that season and so cannot be entitled to any such payment as they were not Registered with the league nor had membership of the SFA or SPL.
Rangers PLC were so registered, but if they were due any money that money would go to their Administrators. However, given that Rangers PLC were the Registered body and were convicted of offences which were described as only second to match fixing, then it follows that they should not be allowed to profit by so much as a penny in that season as a result of their rule breaking activity. Had they been expelled from the league they would have been entitled to nothing at all, and it should be remembered that it was the same Mr Green who took that situation to the Court of Session with the result that the court sent the case back to the panel with the clear instruction that such a penalty may well be appropriate and that in the circumstances the tribunal may have little alternative but to impose such a sanction.
Clearly, this is a scenario that Charles Green had to avoid. In this instance he ignored the footballing rules of not going to courts of law, and found himself with his pants down and facing the Wrath of The Court and the Kobayashi Moru whereby any technical success at the court was likely to result in certain extinction by way of expulsion from the league.
Now Captain Green seems intent on steering his starship into yet another dead end with fatal consequences. He claims that the Scottish Football debts are paid. If we ignore for the minute that he has never attempted to pay any footballing debts outwith Scotland – thus jeopradising his conditional acceptance into the SFA— his claim that it was agreed that these debts would be paid by the SPL or the SFA out of 2011/2012 prize money is derisory.
No fundamental principle of fair play, respect for opponents and attempt at honouring the game could allow for such a situation. Besides the SFA were quite clear in their statement and he has at no time demurred. From the date of the 5 man agreement onwards Captain Green undertook to pay all of the footballing debts— and if he doesn’t, then again he risks the withdrawal of his conditional membership. There is no other solution to the issue. Those are the rules he signed up to, and if you ignore the rules………….
However, this entire affair still has far to go. Where is the transparency and clarity championed by Henry Mcleish and oft promised by Stewart Regan and others? Why are the details of Green’s investors and his business plan, timescales for meeting obligations and everything else about his operation kept so secret? Given the history of those who have been in charge of Ibrox over the last twenty years, the complete failure of their administration and what is now known about their tenure there and in football generally,— and given Green’s latest public statements—, does it not occur to the SFA that the rest of Scottish football has a right to know the details of what they have been told and what Green has promised?
He has promised to clear the footballing debts and appears to be making little attempt to do that whilst his manager hails as triumphs the signing of what he sees as the best players from other teams at relatively huge expense—whilst the debts remain, and the obligations are unfulfilled.
Again that cannot be right and goes against all principles of respecting opponents and honouring the game. It is a circumstance that amounts to the antithesis of the principles espoused by the SFA and appears to be completely contrary to the mandate given to Regan and the powers that be by the clubs and fans of all divisions. Further, the current position gives the impression that Mr Green believes that he can run his company and participate in football as and how he wants, as and when he wants and under his terms and conditions.
This smacks of previous regimes that hovered around Ibrox for far too long with ultimately disastrous results particularly for Rangers fans, investors and creditors.
History cannot be allowed to repeat itself under these circumstances and the SFA must bring pressure on Green to pay the obligations that he undertook to meet within a publicly known timescale. Not only does he need to do that for the benefit of the clubs owed money—he needs to do it for the sake of the integrity of the whole of Scottish football, and he should not be allowed to build at team or field a team if he breaches the agreement. That should be the rule.
He should not be allowed to sacrifice publicly proclaimed and nationally accepted principles for the sake of his own financial expediency “for the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few—- or the one!”
Oh—and lest anyone think that it is mere trivia to link the current plight of Scottish Football with Star Trek and the Wrath of Khan, and that any such comparison is childish and of little consequence, that last quote was specifically relied upon, referred to and quoted in the Supreme Court of Texas in a decision issued on 22nd October 2010 in the case of Barbara Robinson, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of John Robinson, Deceased, Petitioner against Crown Cork & Seal Company, Inc., Individually and as Successor to Mundet Cork Corporation, Respondent— thus bringing the undoubted logic and wisdom of Mr Spock well and truly into the Law of the United States of America!
Few would argue that Spock’s logic is not a sound legal principle!
It also seems to me that perhaps Spock had some solid business advice for those who choose to ignore the rules with a view to seeking short term gain or advantage—whether that be by way of trophies, money, position or what have you—but peril their entire existence by engaging in unlawful or illegal activity. It is advice which was ignored apparently by Sir David Murray and his board and by Craig Whyte and his entire cabal. We wait to see if Charles Green will have learned the lesson that they so clearly didn’t, or whether he believes in the potential rewards of the quick fix at any cost?
Live long…….. And prosper!
Fisiani says:
August 20, 2012 at 09:40
I think many people hoped that T’Rangers would just put their hands up to the wrong doing and quietly re-build the club with new principles fit for the 21st Century.
Of course what has happened is that it appears to have hardened the old attitides and Mr Charles and Sally have just latched onto and encourged that.
The Football Authorities may yet rue the day they helped give birth to Damien.
A crucial point will be the share flotation. Given the following, this is going to be “challenging” for Claude Greengrass:-
1. 26,000 existing shareholders of Rangers (the Club, Ibrox, “we”) are wondering why their shares (christmas presents?) are worthless (According to Claude they “lost their shares”). Surely these old shares contain the real history of the original club?
2. David King is wondering what he got for his 20M pounds, and other significant contributors are wondering how they get some of theirs back.
3. CG can’t offers shares who’s value includes the assets of Ibrox, etc, without identifying the owners of those assets. Will he offer shares in the history of the new club?
Will anyone part with their hard-earned dosh for a new share issue?
Hopefully the majority of the crowd are merely “rubber neckers” viewing the car crash and will move on once the boredom factor sets in. Somehow I don’t think they are and it would be interesting to find out how many “new” followers have been attracted by the rabble rousers. I posted over a year ago on RTC that it was my belief that the fans who would remain would be of the worst variety. That would now appear to be the case.
Just another thought.
Andy Little seems to be on a wee run of form at the moment.
Is it not time that a bigger club put in an offer before the end of the transfer window?
Come on Celtic………..you know you want to 🙂
redetin says:
August 20, 2012 at 09:52
Will anyone part with their hard-earned dosh for a new share issue?
———————————————————————————————————-
As I said last night on the old RTC many people questioned how many would turn up to watch Div 3 football?
Predictions were made and so far it looks like they were well off, especailly if the season tickets have now been bought.
Yes season ticket prices have reduced but if the numbers reported are correct then there are people out their putting their money where there mouth is.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Mr Charles manages to pull this one off.
That being said we know that CW started off in a simialr vein and look how that ended up. That is why I am surprised that, yet again, the MSM are failing to ask the probing questions to monitor the situation.
It looks like a big crowd and few goals and their heads turn to mush.
Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:
August 20, 2012 at 07:07
Tic 6709 says:
August 20, 2012 at 06:52
Danish Pastry @ 6.27
Good morning from a wet and windy West Of Scotland, I’m sure it was HMRC who announced at the refusal of the CVA that BDO would be in charge of the Liquidation.(could be wrong)
—————————————————————————————————————————
Here’s a couple of links.Hope this helps: ….
——————————————————————————————-
It must be true, it says so in the papers
I listened to this programme on radio 4 yesterday afternoon about 20 years of the English Premier League and how it’s changed football beyond recognition. As a summary of modern football and how we got here I thoroughly recommend listening.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01lt2vj/microsite
Now I know this is the Scottish Football Monitor and this programme is exclusively about English Football but in a week when Hearts face Liverpool exactly a year since a 5-0 hammering from Spurs in the same competition and when Celtic are vying to get into the Champions League Group stages to try to recoup some financial reward the money invested in Neil Lennon’s playing squad I think it’s a good contrast of where Scottish Football is now and the direction it’s headed versus where English Football is now and where it’s going.
Austerity and increasing reliance on home produced players versus global expansion, massive revenue growth & massive debts.
a more traditional version of football versus the greatest televised football show on the planet ?
tomtomaswell on August 20, 2012 at 09:10
0 Rate This
I make no bones about it, Saturday’s crowd at Ibrox was impressive
Very much so, and proves what we’ve been saying all along about ticket pricing in Scottish Football. Lower the prices and attract more supporters off their armchairs
Overheard in a Knightswood Pub on Great Western Road Saturday lunchtime..let us call the patron ‘Wullie’
‘Haw Wullie, do you want tickets for Ibrox the day?’
‘Can’t afford it’
‘It’s ok, I’ve got THEM for nothing’ – is it possible Chuck and the MSM’s sell out was not all it seemed?
layman00 says:
August 20, 2012 at 10:25
tomtomaswell on August 20, 2012 at 09:10
I make no bones about it, Saturday’s crowd at Ibrox was impressive
Very much so, and proves what we’ve been saying all along about ticket pricing in Scottish Football. Lower the prices and attract more supporters off their armchairs
===========================================
An alternative viewpoint might well be to create a siege mentality, blame everyone else for your problems and pander to the lowest form of life in order to ensure survival. Charles Green must pinch himself every morning. If only every football club had fans that were so easily led 😀
redetin @ 09:52
It will be very interesting to see how Charlie spins this to the gullible hordes
Will he tell them who they will be investing in, the company or the club ?
After all, I would think every single one of the previous shareholders thought they were buying shares in the club not the company, didn’t they ?
If that was the case, the shares wouldn’t be worthless now, since according to them the club lives on under a new company
This could be interesting
Fisiani @ 9.40
The results of the nimmo enquiry will not affect newco/sevco/trfc.. only oldco which is about to be liquidated..
Danish Pastry says:
August 20, 2012 at 07:45
Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:
August 20, 2012 at 07:07
0 1 Rate This
Tic 6709 says:
August 20, 2012 at 06:52
Danish Pastry @ 6.27
——-
Cheers Torre @ Tic 6709.
Thanks for that. The STV report looks convincing, but I was searching on the BDO and HMRC sites and could find no mention.
If you check page 3310 (!) of the discussion thread on P&B you’ll see an exchange with ‘Bendarroch’. Near the bottom of the page I asked him if he’d been told by BDO that they had not been appointed. His reply is quite upfront. I’m just trying to tie this in with the line that this Mr Cohen Is waiting the wings. BDO partners Malcolm Cohen and James Stephen will be appointed joint-liquidators to the old company, although no timescale for when this will happen has been made available.
——————————————————————————————————————————–
Could it be that although BDO have been asked,and accepted the appointment(Where’s Derek when you need him.He knows all this) they have not been told when they’ll get the keys.Here’s a statement from Mr Cohen:
Cohen said: “Once BDO is formally appointed, the joint liquidators will be seeking to protect any remaining assets, maximise recoveries for the benefit of creditors, and investigate the reasons behind the failure of the company.
I’d read this as confirmation that BDO will be but are not at this time “formally appointed”.
Therefore,if you ask them if they are the RFC(IA) liquidators,the answer is officially,not at this time.They cannot be formally appointed until Lord Hodge ends the administration,I think.
From merely being ‘aware’ of Rangers FC PLC’s money worries just over 18 months ago (probably longer) to the absolute ‘certainty’ that they would be liquidated about 8 months back, I’ve quite enjoyed watching this whole situation unfold.
I’ve enjoyed the banter. I’ve been amazed at some of the revelations (although Phil & CQN seemed to always give us all a wee heads up 😉 and in general it’s been a good time for Celtic fans to have a wee gloat … although I’m quite uncomfortable rubbing it in to my ‘Rangers’ friends faces if the truth be told. Twitter has been that outlet for me 😉
But something’s changed over the past 2 weeks or so. I’m actually getting a bit frustrated/annoyed/angry about it all now.
A company ran itself into the ground, at best trading insolvent for at least 2-3 years, accumulated over £100 million worth of debt. Went into administration, failed to exit said ‘fix’ and is soon to be liquidated.
Another company has opened up shop at the same premises (new company registration number) decided that they can ‘buy’ the logo/badge and trade as an almost identical entity from the company that is no more. Can someone please explain to me why this is being allowed to happen?
If this is such an easy fix then why did Barings Bank not sell it’s name and offices to the lowest bidder (£5.5M ???) and start again debt free?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barings_Bank
“Barings Bank (1762 to 1995) was the oldest merchant bank in London[1] until its collapse in 1995 after one of the bank’s employees, Nick Leeson, lost £827 million ($1.3 billion) due to speculative investing…”
As a business owner (more than a celtic and football fan) I am absolutely disgusted at how this is panning out! Normal service resumed. The Bears are breaking, sorry making up records. The MSM have nothing but great TRFC stories alongside ‘snarling’ images of Neil lennon with a team in crisis! De Ja Vu anyone?
The precedent seems to have been set. It’s with this in mind that I make a small suggestion to all SPL teams, in fact all Scottish Football clubs. Enter administration, take the 10 point (or whatever that might get changed to) hit. Remove a massive chunk of debt and run your club based on the new ‘state of Scottish Fitba’. If indeed it’s as bad as they, not sure who ‘they’ are no though, then liquidation should be on the menu.
As you have seen. Liquidation will mean that you get to start a new company (OK with a new registration number) you buy your dead clubs IP & assets for a song, the SFA will transfer your dead share without too much grief and, given recent reports, you would only have to start in the 3rd tier. Even better is the fact that you haven’t been found to be cheating on an industrial scale so there will be no transfer embargos for you to face. Strange as it may seem you will even be allowed to pretend that the ‘history’ continues! Happy days!
Debt Free and back in the top tier, or wherever you feel comfortable, in a few years!
Or maybe will BDO look at this whole sorry situation and say
“Wait a minute you can’t do that! If we let Sevco and liquidated Rangers FC PLC do this then others might try it”?
I’m sure we’ll find out soon
The disaster of Scottish football has now become real. We have an illegitimate, yet defiant, vile and lunatic club with the ultimate persecution complex, claiming and retaining in a purified form, an ideology and history of hatred and exclusion, renvigorated and reemboldened, unrepentant and paranoid, dictating terms to a weak, corrupt and vacillating governing body.
Anyone supporting any SFA fixture through any means is – whether they like it or not – sustaining and supporting cheating and corruption. All clubs have acquiesced with the SFA. SFL and SPL to allow this to happen. All clubs are guilty.
What happens next – no-one can tell. The FTT must report. Nimmo-Smith will deliver, I suspect, a damning verdict which will ban Rangers for a long time. I do not expect the SFA to allow that to happen. The independent disciplinary tribunal may well ban CG and Sally for some considerable time for their reckless and dangerous outbursts but again I don’t expect this to be allowed either. CO is still in charge and all member clubs are complicit in this despicable charade.
Mt gut feeling is that the SEVCO venture is Octopus seeking its money back. Expect a share issue sold by the MSM to buy shares in a Rangers which does not own any concrete assets raising 12 – 15 mill which on top of the ST books will give Octopus a significant amount of their money back and with some extortionate leasing agreement with the new Rangers to use their assets in Ibrox and Murray Park, they will be quids in – at the expense of the gullible bears.
Thus we will have a club on an illegally transferred share – defying a ban on that share- walking away from a hundred million plus of debt, whose fans will have used their hard earned shekels to fund the same chancers who destroyed the original club- on an identical financial plan of running up debt to buy success it cannot afford being cheered to the echo by the BBC and MSM until they mysteriously collapse again, but as they are too big to fail we could well see the whole scenario repeated.
I am having nothing to do with it. I don’t watch any of it on TV. I am not going to games. I am hardly even bothering to check results. The game is no more as far as I am concerned. I would expect the decline of the last thirty years to be accelerated into a fairly rapid descent into bankruptcy and marginalisation within Scottish society. A sad end to the game here – brought about by RFC and their cohorts and placemen in the SFA and SPL, aided and abetted by weak, spineless club leaders who lacked the power of their convictions when push came to shove this summer.
@ troubledfan – 10.42 not so. Rangers old registration lies with the new club – it was transferred- and they have already accepted footballing liabilities of this club – albeit weakened arbitrarily and with no reference to due process – as it was the only means that could allow them “within the rules” (sic) to continue.
The punishment of Nimmo Smith’s enquiry if delivered will be on the club as registered with the SFA – that registration lies with CG’s new Rangers then they must take that punishment – should they refuse to accept it – then their registration will fall and their right to play will collapse. Of course we can expect the MSM and Sally to argue that they have been persecuted enough and that this ten years of a conspiracy to defraud and cheat to win titles and thus gain moneys rightfully due to other clubs, was in fact a crime perpetrated upon Rangers by one man!
The SFA and SPL will try and hand it on to old club – but even they will be forced to concede that that is impossible. The regstered guilty club still exists according to SFA registration and thus they must take that punishment. If the new Rangers are a new entity then their presence is illegal under the rules of association. At that point the farce will be complete.
Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:
August 20, 2012 at 10:43
2 0 Rate This
Danish Pastry says:
August 20, 2012 at 07:45
Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:
August 20, 2012 at 07:07
0 1 Rate This
Tic 6709 says:
August 20, 2012 at 06:52
Danish Pastry @ 6.27
——-
Cheers Torre @ Tic 6709
______________________
Makes sense Torre.
RTC also mentioned BDO in one of the blogs, so you kind of feel daft questioning. The Bendarroch guy on P and B seemed pretty objective on this though.
So designated, though not yet appointed?
I’ve now tried to contact Mr Cohen myself.
Cheers
Wouldn’t a public debate about whether or not RFC and RFC plc were one and the same (I know they were but many newco supporters argue otherwise) be interesting if the question was then put: If Rangers supporters believe that there IS a destinction between the club and the company then is the proposed share issue not merely an opportunity to own shares in a company run by Charles Green rather than to own a part of the football club called The Rangers FC?
Could you imagine the likes of Jabba trying to argue that oldco wasn’t the club but now newco is?
Mr Charles is fair exploiting The Rangers victim/ defiance card if the latest rumours are to be believed. I’m interested if he can manage to exploit this for 3 years or will it have a short shelf life.
“draw a spl team at home in the cup charles green is making all tickets a quid if u buy a £14 programme. U will b given a token to give at the gate to get in for a pound. Means all money goes to the club from the programme sales and spl Club get 50p for every ticket sold instead of £7.50”
Allyjambo Taxpayer @ 11:20
That’s where their whole argument that club and company are separate falls apart
The entity in which the shares are held determines whether or not they are one and the same or separate
Legally we know the answer, but they are all trying to bypass that definition to pretend Sevco = old club
The Iceman @ 11.03…
So they are the old rfc but different business.
Every day a school day on here.. thanks iceman but I prefered my misguided interpretation..
10 years only covers the big tax case issues.
Anyone heard anything about the wee tax case ?
Club v Company
The problem is simply due to the normal rules of both football and admin/liquidation not being followed. (Which takes us back to the thrust of BTRH’s post)
That has led to so many grey areas that can be exploited by both sides to suit the arguments.
Many on here want the oldco punished but does that mean that the newco should suffer the fall out?
People don’t recognise the newco as the oldco but if they come up against them in a cup game then the chants will still be the same and the new shouts of cheats and EBT related slogans will be heard loud and clear.
And while they have had to be seen to want nothing to do with them the SPL have had to, due to pressure from SKY, include T’Rangers in the TV deal so they could get the required income to help pay the SFL deal.
Instead of everyone taking their medicine and looking forward, they fudged it and we are still going to be in the same mess as before.
Does anyone know the breakdown of season ticket payment’s ,this would be crucial in the month to month running of the club as that money is not banked ,this is where it is crucial to keep cracking the ringmasters whip and get the strays into the ground on matchdays to keep the farce going ,roll up ,roll up ,this is where we are guaranteed more bile and worm eating over the next few month’s as to who hates who and why ,it would also be interesting to find out the expenses to run the home game on Saturday as I am sure that there is no reduction in charges from the police etc for a PL game as opposed to a 4th tier game ,or there should not be ,or would CG be looking for a break from the tax funded forces of the crown and if not they will also be b#g@ts ,transparency anyone.
Regarding the club v company debate.
To me the large display in white (iron) letters on the gates to Ibrox, that proclaims Rangers Football Club Ltd says it all.
That company and the club are the same entity.
I have read this blog and RTC since this whole saga/debacle/nonsense began however this is my first post. I used to be a season ticket holder at Ibrox until 3 years ago when i decided that the cries of No Surrender and the rest were ones that i no longer cared to hear and indeed endure whilst watching a football game. I have no religious beliefs/affiliation therefore listening to what at times could only be described as sectarian hatred became somewhat tedious.
That said i still support the football club and whilst they play at Ibrox they will always be Rangers to me regardless of the various blog’s/opinion/comment which would have people believe otherwise. The RTC blog i believe was balanced in respect of opinion and views however i feel this SFM has taken a rather more personal slant of perceived events and goings on. I can’t help but feel the anti anything that is/was Rangers sentiment in a majority of posts and whilst i can fully understand the the seriousness of charges against the football club and old business i do feel that the ordinary supporter is being tarred with the same brush as the perpetrators of this shambles and that to me seems totally unjust.
It was mentioned on the RTC blog not so long ago by the creator himself that the posts were becoming more like a Celtic message board and i have to say i believe this has spilled over to this site as well. The views being expressed are to an extent becoming repetitive and there is a certain whiff of vendetta in the air. I for one am looking to find out the truth of what really happened at Rangers and indeed who is truly to blame and while i feel the opinion and facts presented at RTC went some way to providing these answers i am concerned that this site is becoming more of a fanzine with posts no more intellectual than the tripe posted on the likes of Rangers Media etc.
There is no “grey area” in relation to Club v Company.
Football clubs can take a variety of legal forms – unincorporated bodies, private limited companies, PLC’s.
The one thing that they all have in common (and the name gives it away) is that a “club” is a body of people who join together for a common purpose and have members.
When a club is unincorporated, the individual members can have unlimited liability with regards to the debts – effectively there is no legal entity to take responsibility for any debts and so liability generally falls, jointly and severally, upon the members.
Most clubs with significant turnover and/or assets have incorporated as a legal entity simply to limit the liability of its members. The members in an incorporated club are its shareholders.
Although it may be in administration and is no longer operating, The Rangers Football Club PLC (the incorporated club) still exists and and has its members (shareholders),
The Rangers Football Club Ltd (formally known as Sevco Scotland) is a newly incorporated club with a different set of members (shareholders).
For an incorporated football club is incorporated Club = Company.
Sevco bought assets – including the intellectual property from Rangers. They did not buy the club. Had Sevco bought the club, they would be sitting on debts of around £130m.
For an incorporated football club, Club = Company
Regarding the club v company debate
Say Celtic shareholders put a claim of £50m against Sevco for losing out on previous Champions League/SPL monies. McCoist, Jardine & Green could be Celtic’s star witnesses confirming that Sevco is the same club that received these stolen monies from UEFA/SKY. Would this be legal?
When will the implosion take place ?
Just a small note about the Daily Record’s story today (written by Jingle Jangle, naturally) that Peter Houston will get down on his knees and beg the Chairman for a £1000 to launch an appeal against Russell’s sending off…
Now to me, the clear inference is that Dundee United are scrambling around in the dirt, looking for pennies, because the SPL’s resident cash cow has been slaughtered – not only that, but Dundee United led the way in killing that cash cow. Oh, The irony!
However, given that Dundee replaced Rangers, and that United had a full house, without the associated policing, steward and repair costs that result from a visit from everyone’s favourite travelling history lesson, then surely Dundee United are up on the deal?
I know that, due to Dundee being there, it’s probably only United that will reap the benefits (with the possible exception of St Johnstone), but I’m struggling to find any mention in the Record of the sell out crowd at Tannadice. Is it possible that it was deliberately ignored because it doesn’t fit their editorial angle? You may very well think that; I couldnt possibly comment…
What about my golf club. Am I liable for its debts if it were to go under. I. Don’t think so because the club is administered by a limited company. The situation is no different to that of the dead Rangers. They are gone, done, dusted, shuffled off this mortal coil. We all know it and no amount of bleating by the former fans of Rangers can bring them back. What they are now supporting is a new club starting from year zero which has the good fortune to have purchased the physical assets and intellectual property of the old company. They might look like Rangers (at least for now), they might smell like Rangers but they are not Rangers.
Just had a text from a mate who says the Falkirk stadium announcer has been suspended for his banter on saturday during the half time scores. Maybe a bit of support should be shown for this guy and a few emails to the club could save someones job.
Any bairns heard about this.
Stu @ 13:07
I haven’t read the piece, but I don’t think Jingle’s spin on it will be anywhere near the truth
Probably the usual, take a comment, and sensationalize it, and no doubt throw in “look at the state of the game because Sevco are not in the SPL”
Nothing that the MSM has predicted has come to pass, and every story they manufacture will always have the “we must have Sevco in the SPL” mantra somewhere within it
Poor stadium announcer at Falkirk gets suspended for calling The Rangers FC “Sevco” during the half time score announcements.
Somebody at The Rangers complained and the poor sod faces his jotters.
only in Scotland would this tragedy/farce happen.
Falkirk should have told them to go do one and let them complain via the SFL.
Sevco comments story here on STV
http://local.stv.tv/glasgow/186158-falkirk-fc-stadium-announcer-suspended-after-rangers-sevco-comment/
On stadium announcers suspension…… Sevco franchise/ the rangers/ cheats fc I could go on use your energies to pay your bills you are Scotland’s shame …… What about your fans sectarian singing at the piggery on Saturday???? Get a grip
rab says:
August 20, 2012 at 13:15
0 0
Rate This
Just had a text from a mate who says the Falkirk stadium announcer has been suspended for his banter on saturday during the half time scores. Maybe a bit of support should be shown for this guy and a few emails to the club could save someones job.
Any bairns heard about this.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Was at an SFL game the previous week and the same thing happened with no comeback so why this time ? Wouldn’t be anything to do with Pressley comments around the time the SFL chairmen were making their decision ? Mean spirited from Sevco or whatever.
By the way the crowd at my game it hilarious.
found it hilarious
Rather than writing to Falkirk, perhaps it would be more useful to write to the SFL and ask them to apologise for the incorrect information on their website.
Compare
http://www.scottishfootballleague.com/club/rangers/
with
http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/6aa154e283748b1cc16749560781042c/compdetails
Charlie Brown says:
August 20, 2012 at 13:20
That is a disgrace!!!!!
I heard this was the norm at many stadiums – am sure there is a RFFF campaign on this – shame Falkirik never told them to go get a life or words to that effect
Email sent to falkirk.
Charlie Brown says:
August 20, 2012 at 13:18
Poor stadium announcer at Falkirk gets suspended for calling The Rangers FC “Sevco” during the half time score announcements.
Somebody at The Rangers complained and the poor sod faces his jotters.
only in Scotland would this tragedy/farce happen.
Falkirk should have told them to go do one and let them complain via the SFL
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Would he have been suspended if they were not playing them in the next round of the Cup.
Do you think that if we complain about the singing of the B^gots top 10 at Ibrox someone would be suspended? What a feckin’shower of hypocrite’s.
Re the announcer at Falkirk. What does the Falkirk MD have to apologise to Rangers for? This is absurd. Are the stuffed shirts at Ibrox that sensitive they have to complain about trivia such as this? What about their off shouted mantra – no one likes us, we don’t care? Is this just another falsehood spun out of Ibrox?
Rangers (Sevco) have done far worse in recent times with their renewed vigour of sectarian singing, threats and intimidation by staff and supporters, not to mention the unpaid tax bill and unpaid creditors. Last I was aware there had been no apology for any of that, on the contrary it seems to be the MO of this mob.
The Falkirk MD should be ashamed of himself for pandering to this nonsense.
HirsutePursuit says:
August 20, 2012 at 13:30
0 0 Rate This
Rather than writing to Falkirk, perhaps it would be more useful to write to the SFL and ask them to apologise for the incorrect information on their website.
Compare
http://www.scottishfootballleague.com/club/rangers/
with
http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/6aa154e283748b1cc16749560781042c/compdetails
—————–
Funny how they got it right for Airdrie Utd
http://www.scottishfootballleague.com/club/airdrie-united/
and
http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/6aa154e283748b1cc16749560781042c/compdetails
I was in the crowd, and the banter was well received!
Perhaps Falkirk are worried because Sevco are coming to town on Tuesday (a game I’m not going anywhere near, even as A Falkirk Season ticket holder).
I will be emailing the Chairman to voice my support for the guy.
A quick and satisfactory response from laura at Falkirk. I will keep her comments private to avoid further complaints.
Phil Mac’s latest offering…. http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/police-charges-out-of-the-blue/#more-3024
tiick tock
Rab could you tell me the e-mail address to send an e-mail to Laura at Falkirk, this ‘team’ really ought to be dealt with.
Good afternoon,
I wonder if lessons are never learned.
If I were an official of The Rangers Football Club limited, I would now be hoping that the powers that be at Falkirk football club do not cause me a huge problem.
Falkirk have suspended an employee for using the term “Servco” in a half time announcement.
Technically this is wrong because of course that company has passed a resolution to change its name to The Rangers Football Club Ltd and filed the appropriate papers at Companies House.
Technically this can be undone by others with an interest in such matters– especially if it is later shown that there were common Directors with a previous company of a similar name which is now insolvent.
However, the main issue here are the employment rights of the individual concerned, because no doubt he has been suspended pending a hearing at which he can be legally represented– and no doubt part of that representation may well focus upon the legal ability of Servco to represent itself as The Rangers Football Club at this juncture– how embarrassing if this goes to an Industrial Tribunal where a legally qualified “judge” is asked to rule on this issue and finds in the negative.
Futher, the matter may well get worse because if the judge is also asked to consider whether this is a new club or just a new owner of an old club– then the direct question has been asked and answered.
As Hirsuite Pursuit has stated above– and as many others have commented— the law of clubs involves membership– with personal liability for those who are members of an unincorporated club– which is avoided by formal incorporation into a ltd company or a PLC.
If there are those who maintain that there always was, always has been and always will be a Rangers club — which is completely separate from Rangers PLC— then presumably this club has fielded teams, played games, and fully participated in Scottish Football over the last 100 years and more.
Presumably it has also employed the players ( to do otherwise would render an entire history unlawful in terms of the SFA rules as I read them ), traded and so on. In which case I look forward to all the members of this club making themselves known– as they are all jointly and severally liable for circa £130Million worth of debt.
Nobody will be more pleased forn these people ( if they are the people ) to come forward than Sir David Murray as he was presumably not the chairman of the club at all but of a separate limited company and therefore his liability would appear to have been extinguished with the support and agreement of all the club members who, by stepping forward and proclaiming their intact and ongoing history, have relieved him of a great liability and instead placed themselves in his hitherto indebted shoes.
Perhaps a website can be set up so that all members of Rangers Football Club who have membership of the original club can register their membership with full names and addresses– and in that way all debts, or an equitable share of them, can be intimated to such members together with a request for payment.
BRTH you brighten my day 🙂
This shower are all over the sole of peoples shoes.
Brenda.
post@falkirkfc.co.uk
The person dealing with the incident at Falkirk is
davidrw@falkirkfc.co.uk
Mail sent to post@falkirkfc.co.uk ,
I broached the matter of using the correct name in the apology to ensure there is no confusion over an entity playing in sfl3 and an entity that ran up debt, cheated using EBT and is now in liquidation. Also stated I am a supporter of Motherwell FC.
This needs to be raised to ensure no “normal service resumed” attitude is taken by SFL and other clubs.
BRTH
Simply out of this world,one problem too many joined up words for Jabba and co to understand.
Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
August 20, 2012 at 13:55
8 0 Rate This
And good afternoon to you too. Good points raised in your post, interesting to see the outcome of this. Its incredible that such an action be taken against someone for being accurate, and stating a fact – this guy has blown his chances of future employment with the MSM.
Just e-mailed the SFL re the Falkirk announcer….
Dear sirs,
You will probably be aware of press coverage following a complaint from The Rangers Football Club about their being called Sevco incorrectly by the stadium announcer at Falkirk FC at the weekend. As a result of that complaint, the individual has since been suspended.
I have contacted Falkirk separately in the hope that this incident does not lead to dismissal.
If the Rangers Football Club is feeling sensitive about individuals/organisations referring to them by an incorrect name, it is incumbent on me to draw to your attention the fact that your SFL website has them listed incorrectly as Rangers rather than the Rangers Football Club. I assume that is what they are insisting on being called by Falkirk. That is, after all, their legally registered name at Companies House. It might be best if you were to amend your website, as I wouldn’t like to see you be accused of any wrongdoing by one of your members.
To facilitate your amendment, I would point out that your page for another new club, Airdrie United, is a good example of how you should be presenting The Rangers Football Club. (As an ex-Bankie, I feel that ‘Formally Clydebank’ demonstrates the truth of Airdrie United’s re-emergence, just as ‘Formally Rangers Football Club’ should keep you in the clear if accused of misrepresentation).
I trust you will find this heads up useful.
I quote from Aberdeen Mad:
“Aberdeen Mad contributor ErnieErnie on why the SPL voting structure is not to be forgotten!
Early in the ‘summer of sporting integrity’ one issue dear to the hearts of us teams in the SPL was the voting rights of that body; at the time there was a recognition that, given that there would be a vote against accepting the Newco into the SPL in place of Rangers, there would be an opportunity to change the voting structure in particular the 11-1 vote.
Putting it bluntly, with one half of the dynamic duo gone it would be possible for the rest to win the vote to move away from the Old Firm’s 11-1 virtual veto on all things commercial. Well the Old Firm are no more and there is only one of them left in the SPL so how will the 11-1 vote issue pan out if, of course, anyone can or wants to do anything about it?
First, a quick look at what it’s all about. The SPL articles define three levels of resolutions and percentage of votes required to pass said resolutions. I’ve paraphrased the definitions but these are clearly laid out in ‘Articles of Association of The Scottish Premier League Limited’, available online.
1. Qualified resolutions – (90% i.e. 11 votes required to pass a resolution) covers expulsion, winding up, issue of share capital and everything covered by Section C of ‘The Rules of The Scottish Premier League’. The latter being ‘Commercial Matters’ – the money bit!
2. Special Qualified resolutions – (83% i.e. 10 votes required) covering expansion and reduction in league members and allotment of share issue.
3. Ordinary resolutions – (66% i.e. 8 votes required) covering the rest!
The key point is that two teams can block any changes to ‘Commercial Matters’ (the 11-1 vote) and the purpose of this was to give the ex-Old Firm the protection they required to enter this enterprise in the first place.
Of course to change this article would in itself require an 11-1 vote, so protecting it was considered a cast-iron guarantee prior to the old Rangers financial collapse.
As a Dons fan I have to say that it is to the eternal shame of AFC and other pretenders that they all agreed to this in the first place so we need to be clear about this, AFC and the others are not victims here. Of course the ex-Old Firm got their way and consequently called the shots and sucked up the bulk of the money but it’s all been done fully supported by the rest of the SPL.
At best we can say, however, that this enterprise has failed so at least we have a chance to make it better. If there are any doubters in the failure of the SPL set-up to date I refer you to the liquidation of the biggest (probably) team member. It doesn’t work and regardless of what form it might take in the future the first thing to do is to get rid of this restrictive veto capability.
C’est La Même Chose
Who won’t want to change it and why not? Celtic will want to keep it for the future because they will want to continue the domination of the SPL financially. In common with their old commercial partners they appear to want total domination of the relatively small pot available to the SPL even though that appears to most of us to be bad business in the interdependent world of competitive football.
At the moment they can be out voted on anything without their commercial partner on board but the rest of the teams, dubbed the ‘Rebel 10’ in March by Peter Lawwell, need to prepare for any future SPL with the ex-Old Firm re-established in all its glory.
It may be that one or more teams go along with Celtic on any opposition to changing the vote but it’s hard to see this happening without some form of side deal.
I try to remain neutral in any ‘whataboutery’ so beloved by the ex-Old Firm but can anyone see an SPL club chairman voting with Celtic as a matter of loyalty or ‘tradition’ on this? Remember the MSM expectation was that this would happen in the vote on Newco entry into the SPL and, much to the disbelief of the establishment and the MSM, no one voted for them and only one team abstained.
It’s not so easy to get these things through on a nod and a handshake these days. Prior to old Rangers liquidation the SPL ‘Rebel 10’ had planned to push through a vote on this issue and the ‘Establishment 2’ were pretty vociferous on their condemnation. To be exact it was Celtic who led the PR exercise at that time with Rangers (IA) otherwise distracted; it’s worth remembering however the ‘Rebel 10’ called on Duff & Phelps to back the change! It’s history now but a lot of us thought that getting rid of the 11-1 would be the price Rangers would end up paying to remain in the SPL but that was prior to the CVA failure and liquidation.
Duopoly Bored
Who would want to change it and how can they? The other 11 so that we move the SPL forward more equitably, it’s basically a chance to remove a duopoly veto.
Remember, for example, that the ‘Rebel 10’ in March this year were talking about changing the voting structure whilst maintaining the gate share, or non share, deal as it stands. At the time this could have been a concession to Celtic but that’s redundant now, because the vote is already 11-1 if needed, except of course that AFC and a few others will want to keep it as is.
The arithmetic shows Hearts, and probably Hibs and AFC also, would about break even on gate sharing IF there were six games a season against the ex-Old Firm. They would probably stick with it given the complications in season tickets, corporate tickets and various membership schemes for cheaper gate prices that could muddy the water.
I can’t really remember who instigated or supported the retention of home gates in Scottish football, it was before the SPL IIRC, but I can remember that AFC were all for it – not that that makes it right, just worth remembering that we reap what we sow.
I believe the ultimate aim should be to get rid of any future duopoly veto and to equal out the share of what the SPL call ‘the Net Commercial Revenues’. Currently 48% of this revenue is shared equally and the remaining 52% on a sliding scale based on league position and biased very much towards the top two places – no surprise there. A close to equal share would have a relatively small impact on Celtic, for example, but a major impact on the bottom clubs, good for the game in my opinion.
There are four general SPL meetings planned per year and the process is that resolutions are proposed for discussion and voting if required. In addition any two members can call for a general meeting and propose a resolution. I would expect two teams to do just this sometime prior to year end, to allow for drafting articles, testing and implementation; the stuff that takes a few months.
The first resolution should be to combine Qualified and Special Qualified resolution categories with a 75% or 9 votes required to pass the resolution rather than 90% and 83% as at the moment. I would also expect that the gate share issue would be maintained as is, it would take only one team to join Celtic in preferring to keep their home gates to scupper the “big picture” 75% resolution otherwise.
SPHell Silence
So why has it all gone quiet? To be fair it’s early days, the season has just kicked off and it’s been a bit of a shambles. Two weeks prior to the season start we didn’t even know who would be playing where, the TV deals were in doubt and armageddon was imminent complete with social unrest.
However, whilst we continue to look on in disbelief at the sting that is Charles Green’s punt in Scottish football, the fact that there is only one of the ex-Old Firm left in the SPL and 11 ‘rebels’, so what’s the problem? I would have expected the first rumbles of a voting structure resolution to be in the air and for Celtic to have mobilised the full PR onslaught against it complete with threats to relocate to some other league/country, creative MSM economics showing how we’re all doomed if we poke the giant and an SPL heid bummer telling us how the ‘Rebel 11’ are turning off potential sponsors.
But not a peep. Have Celtic cut a deal with one or more member clubs in some way? Hard to see how unless it’s either hard cash or other concessions. Is their a side agreement between the member clubs around the recently renegotiated TV deals? Have the SFA/SPL/SFL already agreed a new format that makes any SPL agreements null and void anyway? Do Celtic have a game theory that threatens resignation from the SPL to join the SFL thus challenging the remaining 11 to do their worst? Who knows, if only we had a fall guy who could demand clarity on this. Any ideas anyone?
Oh, and if anyone at AFC is reading, get the ball rolling please.”
Nawlite says:
August 20, 2012 at 14:27
… (As an ex-Bankie, I feel that ‘Formally Clydebank’ demonstrates the truth of Airdrie United’s re-emergence, just as ‘Formally Rangers Football Club’ should keep you in the clear if accused of misrepresentation).
——-
Nawlite: what a difference a typo makes. Suggest you change “formally” to “formerly”. 😉
Falkirk are thought to be one of the five quislings who voted for the Sevco Consortium to be admitted to SFL 1, their embarrassment over this may have influenced their repulsive actions towards the announcer.
Please speak out Falkirk fans, this is a massive self-inflicted wound by the custodians of your club.
My email to Falkirk…
Dear sirs,
I have just seen press coverage of your response to the complaint by The Rangers Football Club about your stadium announcer’s use of Sevco to describe them when announcing half time results at the weekend. You are reported as having suspended the individual and having apologised to The Rangers Football Club. I sincerely hope the next step is not to be dismissal of this individual.
In my opinion, the only error made is that your announcer has failed to keep up with the various changes made to that company’s name in recent months. Of course, the company is now to be known as The Rangers Football Club, as legally registered at Companies House and it is unfortunate that your announcer was unaware of this.
The serious point here is that many, many other individuals/organisations are continually making the same mistake and do not refer to The Rangers Football Club correctly. All the main newspapers, broadcasters and even the SFL themselves have fallen foul of the ever-changing name of this company, so I feel it would be unfair to single out your stadium announcer for harsh treatment.
I am surprised that The Rangers Football Club has not made similar compaints to all those bodies I have referenced above, who continue to refer to them as Rangers, a football club that has entered administration and is shortly to be liquidated. I would have thought them much more likely to compain about those still using that tanished name in respect of their new company than the oversight from your stadium announcer.
I hope you will consider these points when reviewing the conduct of the individual concerned.
Charlie Brown says:
August 20, 2012 at 13:18
26 0 Rate This
Poor stadium announcer at Falkirk gets suspended for calling The Rangers FC “Sevco” during the half time score announcements.
Somebody at The Rangers complained and the poor sod faces his jotters.
…………………………………………………………………
Right, I’ve changed my position. I’m calling them Sevco at every opportunity.
Charles Green on Rangers loss of history;
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0k0IkDTPQWU?feature=player_embedded&w=640&h=360%5D
…’formerly’ means – it used to be…
…’formally’ means – done or carried out in a formal manner.
yours, incurable pedant
:O)
I thought Hamilton’s actions over this were pretty shameful but, as far as I’m aware, Falkirk have never actually owned up to voting Yes to allow them into the First Division, no statement, nothing – and now this. Not a ground I will be visiting any time soon.
Some FFC fans are understandably furious (from P&B);
That is an absolute disgrace.
Firstly, there is nothing remotely offensive about what he said. Some of the Rangers fans, who weren’t even there, may not appreciate the humour but tough on them. Are these the same people who would buy a Frankie Boyle DVD and then complain about it being offensive?
Secondly have any of these mortally offended sensitive wee souls ever been on the blower to their beloved club or e-mailed their chairman to complain about the songs and chants that come from their fellow supporters. Nah, though not, so its selective then this being offended by words.
Also, on what grounds has the guy even been suspended, as I find it hard to believe there is anything in a contract which suggests he is not allowed to show a sense of humour. Hope he gets a decent employment lawyer to take the club to the cleaners.
There is quite clearly no place for enjoyment in football anymore. Fans can’t stand without a little Hitler telling them to sit down. They can’t shout because it upsets other people. Mascots are being complained about for standing in front of visiting fans with bars of soap or driving cardboard box tanks and now stadium announcers can’t call a company by the name with which they registered at Companies house.
No wonder the game is dying on its arse.
And finally I hope that the wee clipping whingeing b*****ds who complained get their comeuppance soon. Karma man.
—————————————————————————————————————-
As Off the Ball discussed on Saturday, I genuinely hate this culture of feigning offence simply to try and get somebody in trouble. Cowardly, illogical, playground mentality nonsense. ‘No one likes us, we don’t care’? 🙄 Do me a f**king favour, you obviously care deeply or you won’t be complaining to all and sundry about every perceived slight on your NEWCLUB!
Basically what I’m saying is: F**k Off Sevco Franchise. If you thought we didn’t like RFC(IA), this is going to be a lot worse.
This debate about Rangers / The Rangers / Sevco / Sevo Scotland is baffling.
During the close season we faced the very real prospect of no rangers at all.
How the heck did we end up with at least twice as many as we had previously?
What are we supposed to call them?
Nah, best not answer that.
Come on all you bloggers, let’s support this announcer at Falkirk. After all he is putting into action what we all go on about all day.
Below is a copy of email sent to Falkirk
It really saddens me th hear that Falkirk FC have suspended the only one at Falkirk who comes out of this saga with his reputation enhanced.
I always believed that Falkirk were a club with backbone, but after seeing what happened to the half-time announcer I now believe you as a club are as lilly-livered as the SFA.
Needless to say my admiration for your club has dissapeared forever and I intend to pass this email on to all my football friends.
HirsutePursuit says:
August 20, 2012 at 12:45
There is no “grey area” in relation to Club v Company.
——————————————————————————————————————-
There ‘should’ be no grey area in realtion to Club v Company. However those with the power have managed the situation in such a way that grey areas have been allowed to form.
The greyest area being that most opposing supporters will happily hurl the same insults at the newco as they threw at the oldco.
Therefore if supporters down Govan way are to bear the brunt of that then who can blame them for believing they are exactly the same club being everyone is treating them the same way regardless of what the law of the land may say.
Just saying that opposing fans can’t have it both ways.
Perhaps someone needs to work on some new chants and songs to ensure any good natured teasing is only relevant to the newco 🙂
HengistPod says: August 20, 2012 at 14:33
Re the 11-1 vote – It is my suspicion that a deal was done with another club, while RFC(IA) were still in membership of the SPL, that would ensure that any vote to change from 11-1 would be vetoed, should Celtic also wish to avoid change..
The club / person I have in mind is Kilmarnock / Michael Johnston who abstained from the vote on the newco being admitted to the SPL on 4th July. In return, I believe that Michael Johnston may well have received support from RFC(IA) and Celtic in his desire to be elected to the SPL board, which he duly achieved on 16th July.
If you look at
http://www.airdriefc.com//history.html
It says
The past cannot be forgotten…
We cannot forget the tremendous pride that a football club can give to a community – why should our 500 year old town lose the right to enjoy similar successes in future? Airdrieonians FC (1878 – 2002). Indeed, a club called “Airdrie” was playing around the time Queen’s Park pioneered the game in Scotland. From September 23, 1922, until December 5, 1925, Airdrieonians were undefeated on their own ground – a record to remember with pride.
Airdrieonians FC played in four Scottish Cup Finals, winning the cup in 1924. In 1992/3 they played Sparta Prague in The European Cup Winners Cup – losing only 3-1 on aggregate.
More recently, they won the Bells Challenge Cup in both 2000 and 2001 and again in 2008, a considerable feat for a club that, at that time, was making more news from off-the-park activities.
The list of well-known ex- Airdrieonians FC players is so impressive that it would probably take our new Airdrie United FC another 100 years to emulate – Jock Ewart, Hughie Gallacher, Willie Russell, Bob McPhail, Jimmy Crapnell (9 caps – 1928-34), Bobby Flavell, Frank Brennan, Hughie Baird (53 goals in 1954/5), Ian Macmillan, Tommy Murray, Paul Jonquin (708 appearances 1962-79), Jim Black, Drew Jarvie, Derek Whiteford, Sandy Clark, John Martin (755 appearances 1980-99), Jimmy Sandison, David Fernandez, Owen Coyle and Sandy Stewart. The list can go on and on – let’s hope the tradition can also.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Take a lesson Sevco from little Airdrie United who jettisoned the history of Clydebank and
identified their new club with the same community as Airdrie FC without claiming to be Airdrie FC
So the Sevconians have no humour and will bully any who challenge their fundamental delusion. The reason of course is that that delusion has been embraced and accepted by the authroities running the game. They ,like all fascists everywhere, will hunt down, destroy and terrorise all who speak truth against them.
Scottish football is now condemned to an eternity of bitterness and rancour. By feeding the supremacist culture of a single club and distorting all rules to allow them to survive that supremacy has been vindicated and reinforced. This will add to the bitterness of all other fans.
There may once have been some decent Rangers fans – not now! As far as every other fan in Scottish football is concerned there are no decent Rangers fans – they are a baying mob of 50000 hysterical individuals supporting a bunch of cheats. They will forever be held up to ridicule by all other fans and the Sevconians will respond with their historical reputation for viciousness and intolerance.
The decision to allow them in – unreconstructed – is the most divisive, cowardly, short sighed and foolish in the game’s history. It will lead to a vicious hostility which will never be assuaged and the continued diminishing of football as part of our culture. All of those involved are guilty of destroying the game and creating a revolting culture of recrimination and enmity which cannot be healed in any foreseeable time frame.
Regarding “history” and so on, the SFL website appears to have mistakenly included the details of a Norwegian Blue club in place of the entry for Sevco which should be there …
http://www.scottishfootballleague.com/club/rangers/
On the Falkirk PA announcer, can he not state that he was mistakenly referring to the Holding company not the football club 🙂
rab says:
August 20, 2012 at 13:15
Just had a text from a mate who says the Falkirk stadium announcer has been suspended for his banter on saturday during the half time scores. Maybe a bit of support should be shown for this guy and a few emails to the club could save someones job.
Any bairns heard about this.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It would be interesting what was actually said and based on that information what he/she was then guilty of?