Charles Green, like Whyte and Duff & Phelps before him, is asking for admittance to the SPL on the basis that Rangers FC is a distinct entity from its legal identity. While this theory has been strongly advocated by SPL chief executive, Neil Doncaster, by necessity, if you claim the football benefits of being ‘Rangers’, specifically player registrations, you also inherit Rangers penalties.
Although Rangers clearly won their challenge to Lord Carloway’s 12-month ban on player registration at the Court of Session last month when Lord Glennie referred the matter back to the SFA Appellate Panel, as the full ramification of the decision became clear to Green, who then had an irrevocable contract to buy Rangers or its assets, he floated the idea that he might appeal.
The SFA, correctly, decided not to instruct the Appellate Panel until the 21 day period when an appeal can be raised, which elapses today, has passed, just in case Green tells Lord Glennie he’s got it all wrong.
All this has been terribly confusing, not to mention expensive, for Scottish football, but with yesterday’s news that Rangers have a prima facie case to answer for subverting Scottish football for over a decade, the obstacles before Green are clearly insurmountable. There is reason to believe we can quickly reach some clarity.
The SFA must, without delay, convene the Appellate Panel to consider Lord Glennie’s instructions and apply an appropriate penalty on the various legal and ethereal bodies which claim to be ‘Rangers’. If the Appellate Panel suspend or expel what is left of the football club from the SFA, as must surely be expected, all questions about fan pressure, morals and votes become moot.
In this case, history will record the folly of Green’s appeal to civil law as the act which finally killed off any chance of ‘Rangers’ surviving, conveniently letting the SPL off the hook, while Green would be obliged to dispose of the stadium for a modest return to those capable of forming a genuinely new football club at some point in the future.
1,163 Comments- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- ...
- 31
- »
(thumbsup)
CFC
COYBIG
Gordon Cowfield Smith treats these silly puns with udder contempt.
Shootiein…
Hits the post!!
philvis
You depicable cheat, you only beat me because I was still laughing at your final post on the last article. GGGRRRR
Top 10!? YES!
Top 20?
topkat on 19 June, 2012 at 11:32 said:
No worries, sally will demand to know the names of those who voted no….
Paul67
Below just posted on hun official site. No mention of appeal.
RANGERS have submitted their application to register their SPL share to the club’s new company and it will be considered by the top flight’s 12 member clubs at 10am on Wednesday, July 4.
A minimum of 14 days needs to pass from the point of the application being received before any such meeting can take place.
Given the SPL were given documentation by the Light Blues earlier today, they have now confirmed when the vote will take place.
Gers would need at least a two thirds majority in their favour to retain their place amongst the Scottish game’s elite.
SPL secretary Iain Blair said: “Following the failure of Rangers FC to exit administration via a CVA, we have received an application to register the transfer of their SPL share to a newco.
“Should it be rejected, then another club may be invited to join the SPL for season 2012/13.”
The SPL has also intimated it feels the club has a case to answer regarding alleged EBT payments and it will apply disciplinary charges once the club’s status is clarified.
The ole CQN cow patter is ledge end dairy.
kitalba – I just wish he would have it dry-cleaned.
A true Yorkshireman waits till it rains. (thumbsup)
hamiltontim – It’s not cheating, it’s winmanship. ;) (thumbsup)
Happy Tuesday all.
The gift that keeps on giving. Still hilarious that the fighting fund not only helped dig the grave but hammered a few extra nails in the coffin.
Money well spent me thinks.
HH from a bleedin’ hot KY.
http://db.tt/hY9lwwG8
Paul67
What’s your predictions?
I wish that prediction plays out. There are other ways for the situation to unfold, right?
Crucial July 4 Vote For SPL
Why clubs should vote No to Sevco.
Anyone else find it bizarre FPLG has not had one thing to say about all of this. Not like him to keep his fat mouth shut.
Have the chances of Green buying over a first division club just increased?
BSR -I can’t believe it’s not bampottery.
philvisreturns on 19 June, 2012 at 11:59 said:
So you think Mr Green will fit right in at The Rangers then?
Aipple on 19 June, 2012 at 12:06 said:
Happy Tuesday all.
HH from a bleedin’ hot KY.
———————————————–
Do you just have the jelly without the ice cream? :-))
As one SPL chairman said to me last week. The SPL will survive with or without Rangers.
What might kill SPL is the indecision around Rangers.
Let’s get this one dotted one way or the other.. Soon.
All misdemeanors considered in a one-er single penalty.
Folk might then buy season tickets etc.
Whatever their fate. I don’t think it affects Celtic’s destiny to dominate Scottish football for the foreseeable future.
Someone please give me a simple answer to my friend, not a Rangers or Celtic supporter, as to why Rangers should be punished, in his words “why punish the fans, it wasn’t their fault, it was people in management”
Finally back in Scotland and I almost seemed to have missed the fun, but I think this is the big one. 21/6/12 could be the palindromic date and not 12/6/12 after all!
ASonOfDan on 19 June, 2012 at 12:08 said:
Anyone else find it bizarre FPLG has not had one thing to say about all of this. Not like him to keep his fat mouth shut.
—————————–
He’s eating.
On 4 July Dungcaster should present an assessment report indicating that sevco 5088 does not meet the entrance criteria for SPL membership. That is clear.
Whether he does so is clearly debateable and of concern.
Let’s assume he doesn’t.
The proposal here is not sevco 5088 applying for an UNALLOCATED or NEW share it is applying for an EXISTING share to be TRANSFERRED to it.
That share is held by RFC (IL) PLC. This body (on life support but comatose and brain dead) still currently holds the share and will NOT be actually liquidated until the SPL consider a vote on TRANSFER of it’s share. It has to be kept alive in this state because if there were to be a power cut and the body died, the share would not be eligible for TRANSFER it would have to be RETURNED to the owner (the SPL).
sevco would then have to apply to be ALLOCATED a share rather than have it TRANSFERRED.
So sevco 5088 want the share TRANSFERRED.
That would suggest that the SHARE REMAINS ALIVE AND ACTIVE WITHOUT INTERRUPTION.
So what does a share mean? Simply it is a share of the SPL business. Let’s assume that the shares are NEUTRAL. That is, that they do not imbue any title, name, legal entity or standing other than a 1/12th stake in the business of the SPL.
The SHARE is not a CLUB. This is important in this scenario because sevco 5088 wants everyone to believe not only that it is a CLUB but that it is THE CLUB.
So, what makes a CLUB and is that more or less inportant than having a 1/12 SHARE of the SPL?
A CLUB must have a ground, players, an appropriate set of governance documents (I suspect sevco 5088 governance says nothing about football at this point) and amongst other things 3 years of financially audited accounts.
Let’s assume that the SPL set aside the test of a CLUB and allocate a SHARE in their business to sevco 5088 on 4 July, under a share TRANSFER consideration. The SPL can then apply any CONDITIONS it wants to on sevco 5088 as part of that acceptance to TRANSFER the share.
This would mean that sevco 5088 owned a ground, a training ground, probably some players and a share in the SPL (even though it is not eligible to hold such). Let’s also assume that they have received some unspecified CONDITIONS to go with this which they have accepted.
The ball then passed from Dungcaster to RayBans at the SFA. This is because (allegedly) membership (a SHARE) of the SPL confers automatic membership of the SFA. But Tweet rayBans has a problem. He knows that sevco 5088 under the rules should fail the test for both SPL and SFA membership. Does he confirm that he MUST accept this or does he confirm that the SPL has operated ULTRA VIRES in allocating the SHARE? Oh dear tweeter………. what a mess!
However, back to the main point. Because the SHARE TRANSFERS, the SPL can attach ANY CONDITIONS (note not PUNISHMENTS) to that transfer process that it seees fit.
In terms of PUNISHMENT, only oldco can be PUNISHED, because only oldco done the CRIME.
So if a CONDITIONAL SPL SHARE TRANSFER were accepted by sevco 5088 does that confer that it has INHERITED RANGERS as a football CLUB?
The logical answer to this is no. Rangers Football Club 1872-2012 will then die (be LIQUIDATED) after the SPL SHARE is transferred out of its control and (temporary) ownership.
BUT if sevco 5088 want to adopt the trade name of Rangers, it’s colours badges and styles, unless the SPL PRECLUDE this in their CONDITIONS, I cannot see why they cannot and will not put on the mask and assert that that is who they are.
Just because the madman thinks he’s Napoleon doesn’t make him so……but if people believe or accept that he is, then he will be TREATED as such.
This is why the TRANSFER issue is so important and so vital to the charade.
A failure to achieve TRANSFER means that sevco 5088 would have to seek entry to football through an APPLICATION. An APPLICATION does not guarantee entry to either the SPL or the SFL, requires more time and effort and carries greater unceratinty for sevco 5088.
So let’s ensure that RFC (IL) is properly INVESTIGATED and PUNISHED.
Let’s ensure that an SPL SHARE currently held by RFC (IL) is NOT TRANSFERRED to sevco 5088.
Let’s ensure that both the SPL and the SFA APPLY THEIR OWN RULES appropriately and indicate to sevco 5088 that, when it has run a football CLUB for a time that allows for 3 years audited accounts to be presented, an application may then be VALID.
We have of course a whole range of players attempting to provide a solution that UNDERMINES, AVOIDS and COMPROMISES the rule book predicated on the IDEA that opening IBROX, wearing BLUE and shouting WE ARE THE PEEPIL somehow makes you a football CLUB.
HH
Gordon_J – Now I’ve used the phrase ‘squaring the circle’ several times in past discussions. And that is exactly what is being attempted here.
Goats, aprons, trouser legs, funny handshakes, and sodomy. (thumbsup)
mon the Lord Carloway.
Paul67 how likely to suspend them do you think the AT is?
Doc is Neil Lennon – Yes, he may be Walter Smith’s long lost brother. (thumbsup)
DBBIA
Udderly Butterly cow herdly Orcs
Surely the bares will step forward and put money into their club? I mean look how successful they were before in putting money in.
14 Dec 2004
Rangers have taken a significant step towards eradicating their debts by raising £51 million through a rights issue which has strengthened David Murray’s hold on the club.
Accounts for the year ending June 30 2004 revealed that debt had spiralled to a record £73.9 million, despite cost-cutting measures.
Murray announced his intention to raise up to £57 million through the rights issue when he returned as executive chairman in September, following a two-year absence from the day-to-day running of the club.
He also said that up to £50 million would be underwritten by his own company while existing shareholders would be able to match their shares, one for one.
Yesterday, Murray’s shareholding stood at 91.8 per cent after it was announced that £51,430,995 had been raised through the issue of 100p shares.
ASonOfDan, I don’t expect them to further provoke the matter.
Hamiltontim, predict it will all be over and done with before the 4 July vote, but don’t hold me to that.
Adam, the fans are not being punished, it’s the club who pay fines and are not allowed to sign players etc.
The Idiot, it would help everyone, so it’s likely.
I think Green’s plan is quite rudimentary. No real concern for football. Purely an asset stripping venture.
He could probably sell tomorrow for a £2million profit.
Alternatively wait a year and pick up more…
ASonOfDan on 19 June, 2012 at 12:05 said:
“Gers would need at least a two thirds majority in their favour to retain their place amongst the Scottish game’s elite”.Again with the ‘retain’. They have nothing to retain. This is rippin’ ma knittin’.
Paul67,
Scottish cup ban will be the outcome IMO.
Darn it Paul. You did it again. I made 3 posts at end of last article not knowing you had moved on.
Have seen one or two posters asking if we will find out how each club chairman voted. In my opinion, if new club are not allowed into the SPL, we shouldn’t get too hung up on how each club voted. Let’s move on knowing that a lot of Scottish football fans are fair minded people and brought pressure to bear on their clubs to do the right thing. They’re obviously not all mini huns and if the vote goes as expected – no to new club – we should try to do our best to ensure that the SPL is a success. We should forget about boycotts against any of the remaining clubs.
Just my opinion.
Paul
The SFA would certainly regain some credibility if they convened El Cee and the Appellates ASAP.
Hoopefully, they have been on standby and are waiting to take center stage.
Thursday 21st, the first day of summer would be ideal.
Ole Elbows allegedly completely misunderstood the ‘bring your kid to work day’, campaign when he turned up at Ibrokes with a small goat.