Poor R*ngers Theads Merged.....

[St. Sid]

I fear that Rangers will escape the type of punishment they deserve on legal technicalities due to the SFA and SPL rulebooks not being designed to cope with the level of cheating they have got away with for the last 15 years or so. The SPL meeting today clearly hopes that RFC will get their CVA approved and will move out of administration and there will be no need to vote on a newco application... and if that happens RFC start in next year's SPL as one of teh only debt free clubs in the league and may be allowed to sign players following the court of session ruling yesterday.

The SPL voted to clear out any doubt regarding the sanctions they can apply. It is no coincidence that came after the SFA got stung for conflicting rules due to listing their sanctions and trying to apply a whatever sactions are deemed fit rule. Scumgers have been tee'd up for a five wood right up the and will have no recourse in the CoS.

[St. Sid]

Well done Dr Ioannidis...the more people like him and Stewart Gilmour speak out, the stronger the resolve, of people to deliver the justice that scumgers deserve, becomes.

GIRUThum.

[whydowebother]

Newsnight tonight 11pm .....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-18287971

[whydowebother]

Also BBC report ;

SPL allow flexibility for 'glamorous and lucrative matches'

Both halves of the Old Firm will be allowed to postpone their Scottish Premier League fixtures on the weekend of 11/12 August to play friendlies.

Rangers and Celtic will both be scheduled to play at home that weekend.

Celtic have announced plans to face Spanish champions Real Madrid in the United States on 11 August.

"Any other club scheduled to play at home that weekend will also be offered the same flexibility," said a spokesperson for the league.

"The SPL Board is mindful of the benefit to Scottish football as a whole of its clubs participating in glamorous and lucrative matches against some of the world's highest-profile clubs.

"The SPL has therefore confirmed that, in line with an SPL Board decision taken in November 2011, Celtic FC and Rangers FC will be scheduled to play at home on the weekend of 11/12 August 2012.

"Both clubs will be allowed to postpone their games that weekend in order to play in friendly matches."

[bud77]

More threats placed by Ra Peepul - this time against sports lawyer Dr Gregory Ioannidis:

Dr. Gregory Ioannidis

31 May 2012

This is another example of the disgusting behaviour we have to currently put up with from the scum. I see as well al lot of them are saying they'll take a year or two's ban from the Scottish cup. That's not severe enough and when did criminals start dictating what their punishment would be. If a tranfer embargo isn't allowed and expelling them is too severe the only appropriate punishment is suspension of their SFA membership for a minimum of 1 year, that might also satisfy UEFA and FIFA.

[St. Sid]

"With our annual general meeting taking place on Wednesday 6 June, it will be appropriate to remind member clubs that by very dint of their membership of the Scottish FA, they accept and abide by the Articles of Association."

The EBT is going to be the best laugh now, if they survive that long. The SFA are the next line of appeal after the SPL hit them with the sanctions.

[delpierro]

still cannae believe that campbell ogilvie is still in his position with the SFA.

[whydowebother]

still cannae believe that campbell ogilvie is still in his position with the SFA.

The SPL & SFA have both been found wanting to say the least , 2 disfunctional , incompetent governing bodies , its a wonder they still have jobs !

I wish I shared the positive vibes of some people , who actually believe proper sanctions will be dealt.

I still feel they wil be in SPL next season with new players.

[saintnextlifetime]

The SPL & SFA have both been found wanting to say the least , 2 disfunctional , incompetent governing bodies , its a wonder they still have jobs !

I wish I shared the positive vibes of some people , who actually believe proper sanctions will be dealt.

I still feel they wil be in SPL next season with new players.

Fear not , sir, that wont happen. After they went to the COS , and upset/threatened an international Football Lawyer , their chances of SPL fitba disappeared . They are currently digging their own graves. .

[Vambo57]

Fear not , sir, that wont happen. After they went to the COS , and upset/threatened an international Football Lawyer , their chances of SPL fitba disappeared . They are currently digging their own graves. .

It's no the Big Hoose anymore... it's...

Edited June 1, 2012 by Vambo57

[St. Sid]

The big tell in this has been the change in behaviour from scumgers after the Court of Session disaster. The SPL meeting was clearly a roasting for them.....almost immediately the documents they had been failing to provide got delivered priro to the mid-June extension they had demanded. All the triumphalism displayed by D&P was replaced by a fairly humble request by Green to meet the SFA to try and undo the damage done by D&P.

Hullo! Hullo! They are the sorry boys, Hullo! Hullo! We cannae hear their noise. They're up to their knees in their own faeces. For they are f"k'd....so shiting themselves they are at the rectal bleeding stage.

F"k thum!!!!

[scottd]

The big tell in this has been the change in behaviour from scumgers after the Court of Session disaster. The SPL meeting was clearly a roasting for them.....almost immediately the documents they had been failing to provide got delivered priro to the mid-June extension they had demanded. All the triumphalism displayed by D&P was replaced by a fairly humble request by Green to meet the SFA to try and undo the damage done by D&P.

Hullo! Hullo! They are the sorry boys, Hullo! Hullo! We cannae hear their noise. They're up to their knees in their own faeces. For they are f"k'd....so shiting themselves they are at the rectal bleeding stage.

F"k thum!!!!

Quality. Any chance of recording that version?

[St. Sid]

According to The Herald, Lord Glennie's report of the Court of Session judgement states scumgers could be thrown out of Scottish football:

THE Court of Session judge who upheld Rangers' case against the Scottish Football Association has warned them they could yet face a stiffer punishment, including being thrown out of football.

Herald Sport has obtained a copy of Lord Glennie's 10-page findings after Rangers succeeded in a judicial review of the SFA's decision to hit them with a 12-month signing ban.

The case will now be considered again by the SFA's own Appellate Tribunal under Lord Carloway, at a date yet to be set.

Rangers were punished by the SFA for bringing the game into disrepute for, among other things, non-payment of PAYE and National Insurance contributions. They contested the punishment, rather than the verdict, and took the SFA to court. That action could yet have repercussions for the club and the governing body from the world ruling body, FIFA, but Lord Glennie ruled that their case was sound.

The SFA's general disciplinary rules lay out "sanctions available to the tribunal" and "scale of sanctions". On charges of bringing the game into disrepute, the only stated sanctions are a fine, suspension, expulsion from participation in the game, ejection from the Scottish Cup and termination of membership.

Lord Glennie said the decision he had to make was on whether the imposition of a 12-month transfer ban was ultra vires, in other words whether the SFA's disciplinary tribunal had the power to impose any additional sanction.

He found flaws in the SFA's protocol and said there was no point specifying certain punishments for offences if tribunal panels had the power to impose any penalty they wanted to, up to the specified maximum.

Lord Glennie said the SFA's QC at the Court of Session hearings, Aidan O'Neill, had effectively said "so what if it does not mention that", in relation to a transfer ban.

The findings said: "It is to be noted that nowhere in the list of available sanctions is there any reference to a ban for any period on registering new players.

"Mr O'Neill, on behalf of the SFA says, in effect: 'so what if it does not mention that. A fine would be ridiculously low for the conduct here complained of. Suspension or expulsion, or termination of membership, would be too harsh. There must be room, reading the rule sensibly, for something in between which is proportional and effective'. The Appellate Tribunal took a somewhat similar view.

"Their interpretation therefore appears to be this: that the tribunal can award anything which is a lesser penalty than the maximum suspension or termination of membership. I regret that I cannot accept that view. If that was the true view there would, in my opinion, be no point in identifying specific sanctions in the columns headed 'sanctions available to the tribunal'.

"It seems to me to be clear that the protocol is laying down a specific range of sanctions which the tribunal may impose, depending on upon the particular offence with which the club or other member of the SFA is charged. The tribunal cannot impose sanctions not given to it in Annex A.

"It follows that the disciplinary tribunal and the appellate tribunal were, in my view, wrong to hold that they had power to impose the additional sanction in this case. In imposing and affirming that sanction they acted ultra vires.

"The fact that I find the imposition of the additional sanctions to be ultra vires does not necessarily mean that the petitioners will escape to a lighter and ineffective punishment. That is entirely a matter for the appeal tribunal and not for this case."

Rangers, who were represented at the Court of Session by Richard Keen QC, Dean of the Faculty of Advocates, did not contest the merits of the case itself or the appropriateness of any sanction which is specified in the SFA's articles of association. Nor did the club dispute a £100,000 fine, nor the fact it had brought the game into disrepute.

[shull]

Charlie Green says it would be a disaster for Scottish Football if R*ngers were suspended or expelled.

I say, naw it f*cking widnae.

F*cking brilliant and hilarious it wid be.

[Kendo]

Charlie Green says it would be a disaster for Scottish Football if R*ngers were suspended or expelled.

I say, naw it f*cking widnae.

F*cking brilliant and hilarious it wid be.

It would be a disaster for you, half of your subject matter that you specialise in would be wiped out at a stroke.

Your beloved OF will survive as will your constant continuous drivel.

[shull]

It would be a disaster for you, half of your subject matter that you specialise in would be wiped out at a stroke.

Your beloved OF will survive as will your constant continuous drivel.

And you love it aw

[whydowebother]

So , here we are yet again, another week where the governing bodies & appeals panel will be sitting to discuss this situation.

Does anyone think there will be a final outcome this week ? Does it make any difference as it will only be appealled anyway ?

What`s your best guess as to the final outcome ?

I think Rangers will be in SPL next season , functioning as normal or as close to normal as is possible , with the least sanction applied.

[insaintee]

It would be a disaster for you, half of your subject matter that you specialise in would be wiped out at a stroke.

Your beloved OF will survive as will your constant continuous drivel.

half of your subject matter that you specialise in would be wiped out

And that would be brilliant for us

[shull]

Aye !

[bud77]

So , here we are yet again, another week where the governing bodies & appeals panel will be sitting to discuss this situation.

Does anyone think there will be a final outcome this week ? Does it make any difference as it will only be appealled anyway ?

What`s your best guess as to the final outcome ?

I think Rangers will be in SPL next season , functioning as normal or as close to normal as is possible , with the least sanction applied.

I think it will be the end of June/beginning of July before the final outcome is known.

Rongers might decide to accept the original SFA panel's verdict with the news they could face stronger sanctions and let's face it the transfer embargo would in effect be fairly meaningless anyway, they're currently in administration and can't sign any players until they exit. Without European games and EBT's and with all the carry on and investigations would they really be able to persuade players to sign for them anyway ?

I doubt the SPL chairmen would want to make a decision about a newco just now, they'd probably prefer to sit and wait and see what happens with the CVA, SFA appeal and how UEFA/FIFA react to it as well as their own investigation into dual contracts. A lot of the chairmen must be royally pissed off with them as well for going to court.

I doubt the CVA will be passed, 'there will be something between 0p and 9p in the pound' isn't much of an offer when HMRC or ticketus could go to court to try and force liquidation and the sale of ibroxe and Murray park on the open market. They might need to wait a bit longer to receive any money but it would probably be more than the cva is offering.

They might be able to survive all of the above in some form, the dual contract investigation is the one that could kill them. If found guilty they would face more SFA charges and who would bet against expulsion.

I think their best bet is a newco putting as much daylight between the 2 clubs as they can but that would mean starting from scratch and applying to the SFA for admission - but the bears won;t like that. They couldn't start a newco and cherry pick the history they want to keep and if they did without a decision in the big tax case, HMRC would argue it's a phoenix club and still liable.

[St. Sid]

There appears to be very little supports in the professional services ranks for the CVA being approved. Apparently it is one of the worst CVAs ever put forward. There are so many holes in it it is quite bizarre. The daftest bit has to be the fact that Green's unknown consortium are only offering a loan to scumgers to pay it off. The bog question is probably around deals being done outside of the CVA with the main creditors. Quite a few of the creditors are also Murray companies under the management of the banks. I can't see them signing off on a CVA that has very little chance of actually paying out any money whatsoever.

[shull]

Another arsehole

http://www.eveningti...to-sfa.17782671

And Tom Kent is a daft kunt tae

Edited June 4, 2012 by shull

[Dibbles old paperboy]

Quite a few of the creditors are also Murray companies under the management of the banks. I can't see them signing off on a CVA that has very little chance of actually paying out any money whatsoever.

However it only needs Ticketus and HMRC to accept the CVA and they have the 75% of votes required to pass the CVA... Murray's companies won't have much of a say. (I'm hoping HMRC don't do a deal)

[St. Sid]

However it only needs Ticketus and HMRC to accept the CVA and they have the 75% of votes required to pass the CVA... Murray's companies won't have much of a say. (I'm hoping HMRC don't do a deal)

It is a messy one...I am guessing that the HMRC and Ticketus have 75% of the value. Don;t forget there are a lot of TBCs in the CVA so if you are basing it on the figures available it may not just be about them. Another interesting factoid is that the CVA can be negotiated at the meeting with a director of the compnay, not the insolvency robbers. It'll be interesting to see who turfs up to do the negotiating. I would have thought that it would still need to be Whyte.

[Dibbles old paperboy]

It is a messy one...I am guessing that the HMRC and Ticketus have 75% of the value. Don;t forget there are a lot of TBCs in the CVA so if you are basing it on the figures available it may not just be about them. Another interesting factoid is that the CVA can be negotiated at the meeting with a director of the compnay, not the insolvency robbers. It'll be interesting to see who turfs up to do the negotiating. I would have thought that it would still need to be Whyte.

CVA has been drawn up on the assumption that the Big Tax Case still won't have ruled by the time the meeting takes place meaning Ticketus are the biggest creditor (roughly £27m) and HMRC are second biggest creditor (roughly £21m). If the Big Tax Case does conclude and find in HMRC's favour then HMRC will be the biggest creditor. The size of the pot for the CVA will stay the same meaning that if HMRC win the Big Tax Case before the creditors vote then they will get a bigger share of the £5m total available to all creditors.