Lots to chew over in this afternoon’s statement from Duff and Phelps but this nugget grabbed my attention:
“If we proceed with an offer that is based on a sale of the business and assets, then we would expect the football club share to be transferred within a matter of weeks, with a preference of prior to the end of the current season.”
This means that unless a CVA is concluded beforehand, Duff and Phelps plan to ask the football authorities to award Rangers’ share in the SPL to a new club prior to the end of this season. This share is worth money, Duff and Phelps would be able to sell it to generate cash, so there is no harm in them asking!
The enormous problem for the league is that the Newco would not employ any footballers and the final date in the season for signing non-contracted player passed a month ago. Rangers players are employed by Rangers FC PLC and their registrations cannot be transferred to any other football club outside of a transfer window.
In the event of a liquidation (which Duff and Phelps have not accepted as a likelihood), player registrations revert to the SFA. They are not assumed by a phoenix Newco to pick the following week. There is absolutely no circumstances for a club to avoid liquidation and still manage to transfer their players to a Newco outside a transfer window.
How did they concoct such a fantasy?
This is a Fifa rule and cannot be altered by the SFA or SPL. The entire debacle has become farcical.
SPL clubs, who vote on Friday on whether to introduce a procedure which would allow a Newco to be allowed straight into the league, have the proverbial gun pointing to their heads with this statement. They must stand firm and refused to become embroiled in the mess.
The other SPL clubs and the SFA did not design this crisis at a member club and it is not their responsibility to resolve it. We will find out soon enough whether member clubs take account of the overwhelming voice of their supporters on this matter.
Pay your bills!
Buy a hard copy of CQN Magazine, issue 7, by clicking on the button below. You can read online here.
676 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- ...
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- »
McTALL on 23 April, 2012 at 22:52 said:
Dirty, yeah that would make sense, just can’t help thinking that, this is the SFA saying look we did something !!! knowing a NEWCO is inevitable and that it won’t effect a new version of the orcs.
+++++
My worry is that the share transfer enables an ‘automatic’ SFA license – I seem to recall something to that effect within the SPL rules – meaning it would indeed be a clean slate.
:-(
Should we start a fighting fund to cover agent whyte’s fines????
Bill Miller will be driving away in his big tow truck very soon
Ma big pals just heard abt the huns fines!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Foahtz9xnw8
Let’s all do the Whytie…
….hahahahahahaha….totally stupid huns….hahahahahaha!
Ha ha, cracked crest on STV – ya dancer!
Media
Disciplinary Proceedings Outcome
Monday, 23 April 2012
A Judicial Panel Tribunal convened to hear the cases against Rangers FC and Craig Whyte today concluded their findings and set out the following outcomes:
Name: Craig Whyte, Director, Rangers FC
Dates: 6th May 2011 to 6th March 2012
Disciplinary Rule(s) allegedly breached: Rules 66, 71 and 105
Outcomes:
The Tribunal found Craig Whyte guilty under Rule 66 and fined him £50,000.
The Tribunal returned a Not Proven verdict in respect of Rule 71.
The Tribunal found Craig Whyte guilty on three separate counts under Rule 105 and fined him £50,000 in respect of each breach.
The above sanctions shall be paid within 30 days, with interest of 4% per annum over the base lending rate of Bank of Scotland plc from the date of determination until paid.
Under Articles 94.1 and 95, the Tribunal expelled Craig Whyte for life from any participation in Association Football in Scotland.
Name: Rangers FC
Dates: 6th May 2011 to 6th March 2012
Disciplinary Rule(s) allegedly breached: Rules 1, 2, 14, 66, 71 and 325
Outcomes:
The Tribunal returned a verdict of Not Proven in respect of Rule 1.
The Tribunal found Rangers FC guilty in respect of Rule 2 and imposed the maximum fine of £10,000 payable within 12 months.
The Tribunal found Rangers FC guilty in respect of Rule 14 and imposed the maximum fine of £50,000 payable within 12 months
The Tribunal found Rangers FC guilty in respect of Rule 66 and imposed the maximum fine of £100,000 payable within 12 months. In addition, the Tribunal imposed a prohibition in terms of Article 94.1 and 95 of the Articles of Association, prohibiting Rangers FC for a period of 12 months from the date of determination from seeking registration with the Scottish FA of any player not currently with the club, excluding any player under the age of 18 years.
The Tribunal found Rangers FC guilty in respect of Rule 71 and imposed a censure.
The Tribunal found Rangers FC guilty of two breaches in respect of Rule 325 and imposed further censure.
Notes for Editors:
The Judicial Panel Tribunal shall issue a note of reasons in early course.
Both Rangers FC and Craig Whyte have a right of appeal against findings of guilt and any sanction imposed, within three days of receipt of note of reasons.
Explanatory Notes:
Rule 1 (b): All members shall:
(b) be subject to and comply with the Articles and any statutes, regulations, directives, codes, decisions and International Match Calendar promulgated by the Board, the Professional Game Board, the Non Professional Game Board, the Judicial Panel, a Committee or sub-committee, FIFA, UEFA or the Court of Arbitration for Sport;
Rule 2: Each member shall procure that its officials, its Team Staff and its players act in accordance with Rule 1.
Rule 14 (g): Full membership or associate membership may be suspended or terminated, or a fine may be issued, in any of the following circumstances:-
(g) where a full member or an associate member suffers or is subject to an insolvency event.
Rule 66: No recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player, referee, or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall bring the game into disrepute.
Rule 71: A recognised football body, club, official, Team Official, other member of Team Staff, player or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall, at all times, act in the best interests of Association Football and shall not act in any manner which is improper.
Rule 105: Any Party who is subject to a Direction from a Tribunal must follow that Direction as so Directed by the Tribunal. Any Party who fails to do so, may be found to be in breach of this rule.
Rule 325: Failing to pay to [Dundee United FC] on the day of the match monies due under Rule 46 c (3) and e of the Scottish FA Cup Competition Rules; being [Dundee United’s] share of receipts for the match; and by failing to pay to the Scottish FA within three days monies due under Rule 46 c (1) of the Scottish FA’s Cup Competition Rules; being the Scottish FA’s levy on admission charges for the above match.
Article 94.1: The Judicial Panel shall have the power to fine, suspend, or expel or in relevant cases to eject from the Challenge Cup Competition or apply such other sanction as is provided for in the Judicial Panel Protocol any recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player, referee or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA who, in its opinion, in any way brings the game in to disrepute or is likely to bring the game into disrepute or on any other grounds it considers sufficient and of which, subject to the rights of appeal, it shall be the sole judge.
Article 95: The Judicial Panel shall have jurisdiction subject to the terms of the Judicial Panel Protocol to deal with any alleged infringement of any provision of these Articles. A recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player, referee or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA if found to have infringed the Articles shall be liable to censure or to a fine or to a suspension or to an expulsion or to ejection from the Challenge Cup competition, to any combination of these penalties, or such other penalty, condition or sanction as the Judicial Panel considers appropriate, including such other sanctions as are contained within the Judicial Panel Protocol in order to deal justly with the case in question.
<< Back
Scottish Cup
RSS Feed
Disciplinary Proceed…Mon, 23 Apr 2012
A Judicial Panel Tribunal convened to hear the cases against Rangers FC and Craig Whyte today concluded their fi … Read More…
Celtic win Scottish …Mon, 23 Apr 2012
Scottish FA Youth Cup Final Celtic 8-0 Queen of the South Hampden Park, Glasgow F.Twardzik '2; J. Irvine '29; … Read More…
Mix of experience an…Mon, 23 Apr 2012
Vauxhall Under-21 International Challenge Match Scotland v Italy Wednesday 25 April 2012, kick-off 7 pm Easter … Read More…
Emirates Junior Cup …Mon, 23 Apr 2012
The Final of the Emirates Junior Cup between Auchinleck Talbot and Shotts Bon Accord will be played at The Bra … Read More…
Scotland players the…Mon, 23 Apr 2012
Scotland women internationals were the star attraction at a girls’ festival run by Gairtcairn Football Academy rec … Read More…
sparkleghirl on 23 April, 2012 at 22:56 said:
Can these fines be taken out of the prize money the SPL is due to advance them to tide them over until the end of the season?
I may never see the answer to this. it’s way past my bedtime.
+++++
No, but they can be taken from any moneys due to der Orkenkind from the SFA, although I understand that one of the charges today relates to the fact that Renegers are actually owe them money from their SC tie v Dundee Utd (SFA get 5% of the gate receipts).
Cracked crest????
shady on 23 April, 2012 at 22:51 said:
I’m no techie unfortunately. Can barely log in and post here.
If someone could set up a pledge website it would be fantastic! The idea of cameras capturing Celtic fans presenting one of those novelty sized cheques to Craig at Castle Grant would be a lovely wee end to this farce.
We were founded on charitable principles after all ;-)
Maybe Alex Thomson could do a feature on it after his piece on Rangers fans coughing up for Davie Weir’s whiskey decanter!
Read the judgement, but can someone kindly remind me what was the basis of this investigation against the huns was.
What exactly have they been found guilty of to put it another way.
Árd Macha
STV fail to find a bright side – they must be fecked.
Will the transfer ban apply to newco?
The SFA have just virtually guaranteed Rangers will not only Liquidate but will not apply for the previous membership.
Meaning 3rd Division and no history.
RogueLeader on 23 April, 2012 at 23:01 said:
The SFA have just virtually guaranteed Rangers will not only Liquidate but will not apply for the previous membership.
—————-
Why? Would this apply to newco? I see it scuppers poor mad Bill’s plan, but a newco?
Duff and Phelps, joint administrators of Rangers Football Club, issued the following statement on the outcome of the SFA disciplinary hearing.
Paul Clark, joint administrator, said: “All of us working on behalf of the Club are utterly shocked and dismayed by the draconian sanctions imposed on Rangers in respect of these charges.
“It appears that on one hand the disciplinary panel accepted our central argument that responsibility for bringing the Club into disrepute lay with the actions of one individual – Craig Whyte – as is evident from the unprecedented punishment meted out to him.
“During this hearing the Club produced compelling evidence from a number of sources that following his takeover, Craig Whyte ran the Club in a thoroughly unaccountable manner, rather than adhering to a long-established and proper form of corporate governance.
“The thrust of the charges against the Club focused on non-payment of payroll taxes and evidence was produced that all such decisions in this area were taken by Craig Whyte during his tenure.
“Given this evidence, it is difficult to comprehend that the disciplinary panel has seen fit to effectively punish the Club even more heavily than Mr Whyte. As everyone knows, it has already been decided he is not a fit and proper person to run a football club and any further punishment on him will have little or no impact.
“However, for Rangers, a ban on signing players will seriously undermine the Club’s efforts to rebuild after being rendered insolvent.
“Furthermore, we do not know how bidders for the Club will react to these sanctions and what affect they will have on their proposals.
“The Club has asked for full written reasons for these decisions and intend to appeal against the findings.”
67heaven – cheers for that.
Ard macha, think it was the fit and proper person part and bringing the game into disrepute, but the more educated on here will have more info
Eintracht promoted ;-)
dirtymac \o/ on 23 April, 2012 at 22:57 said:
McTALL on 23 April, 2012 at 22:52 said:
Dirty, yeah that would make sense, just can’t help thinking that, this is the SFA saying look we did something !!! knowing a NEWCO is inevitable and that it won’t effect a new version of the orcs.
yep, i smell a lot of craig whyte!
only reason the sfa has fined them the maximum is so that when they get their 10p in the pound there will be a bit there. if they had fined them 20k instead of 160 they would only be paid 2k not 16 when the big l comes
Good job I’m retired ..I’ll never get to sleep with this huge smile on my face…..heheheh stupid huns heheheheheh
tomthelennytim on 23 April, 2012 at 22:56:
30 days to pay, he should pay immediately, after all he is a billionaire…
Keep the Faith!
Hail Hail!
Just when you think things are quietening down just a tad , THE GIFT STARTS GIVING AGAIN ,Hundom in meltdown.
HAIL HAIL
So who will be liable for the 160k fine ? D&P ?
Sparkleghirl – the ban applies to the club with Rangers’ SFA membership. If they want a NewCo and to keep their history they need this membership transferred.
If it is not transferred they lose their history.
If it is the ban goes with it PLUS any further sanctions for illegally registered players.
They would perhaps still try and get NewCo into the SPL and apply for a new SFA membership after the share transfer but it is starting to look like the will to do this is disappearing….
good evening cqn
the white Knight will really have a disturbed sleep tonight,
i dont think
I think the TannochsideBear better leave town ASAP!!!
V/P ya bass!!!
never thought i’d see the day!!!
https://twitter.com/#!/shederin/status/194545758685507584/photo/1
All I can say in light of that SFA decision is WOOOOOOOOOOOOOFFFFFFFFFFFFFTTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And…..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZ4fllJTG-w&feature=player_embedded
Rogueleader – thank you. I will go to sleep happy :)
hahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!
Why are the personal fines due within 30 days but the club fines due within 12 months?
Is it because the fines would tip them into liquidation if they were due straight away?
another question would that mean Aluko, who’s contract expires at the end of the season not be able to sign for them again??
I do hope the admins appeal, and string out the pain even further…
McTALL
No offence, but I was listening to this the other day, and I thought of you.
Well, you would, wouldn’t you?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DXjhC1t2JI
It would be a laugh if they went into the third division, that the ban still applied and they finished last.
LMAO, brilliant Ernie!!
sparkleghirl on 23 April, 2012 at 23:00 said:
Cracked crest????
+++++
Why, because we only scored 8 tonight?
Oh, I see…