Gerrymandering SPL with flawed resolutions


Resolutions to be voted on at the 30 April meeting are proposals from the Scottish Premier League executive (Neil Doncaster).  They have nothing to do with the Gang of 10 nor are they a Duff and Phelps/Rangers conspiracy.  The resolutions are not set in tablets of stone and have no authority in their own right.  The League has form in voting down executive resolutions, in particular overthrowing plans for a 10 team league last year, so, in theory, the votes could go for or against.

Neil Doncaster, being as thorough as he is, has almost certainly shared his plan with the man along the corridor at Hamden, SFA chief exec, Stewart Regan.  He is also likely to have taken guidance from the Uefa executive, specifically CEO David Taylor, formerly of this parish.  It would be unnecessarily lax to leave legislative loose ends before embarking on such a radical plan, so forget about any intervention by the SFA (cough) or Uefa.

Putting preconceived notions aside (if I can), the resolutions are flawed.

Asking for 8 clubs to vote for a Newco to be allowed into the league, but requiring 11 to vote for a financial penalty to be imposed for an Insolvency Transfer, is beyond ridiculous.  The former provision – the gift of continuity to a defaulter – is easy to achieve.  The latter – the punishment for defaulting – is unnecessarily difficult.  Duff and Phelps will need the support of only one club – let’s say Dunfermline, who are brogue-to-brogue with them anyway and due to relegation will not be affected by the financial penalty, will vote with them.  Why would Doncaster put such a high bar on setting financial penalties?

Arbitrary voting thresholds smack of gerrymandering. Can anyone explain this in any other way?

There will now be a period of debate between clubs; Celtic will oppose any provision for a Newco to enter the league.  Duff and Phelps will be in the opposite corner.  You can expect to hear wailing and gnashing from Rangers (IA) along the same ridiculous lines they have used ahead of the SFA hearings into the behaviour of the club in advance of, and after, Craig Whyte’s purchase of the club.  On that occasion, Duff and Phelps argued that the actions of Rangers’ new owner, or the failure of the old board to conduct their business correctly, should not lead to a penalty on the club.

It doesn’t matter how lax or severe the proposed penalties, Duff and Phelps will oppose them.  Anything lessening of the penalty is worth money to the proposed new buyers of Rangers, so let’s view everything Duff and Phelps say in pound notes.

Rangers have unpaid bills potentially running up to £134mm that’s medicine, operations, road repairs and Help for Heroes.  Allowing them to ditch their history and start afresh, where owners profit by securing a floating charge over the stadium, where fans can continue to be provided with a team in the league, creates an unprecedented moral hazard.  It rewards irresponsibility and would create a queue of clubs ready to do the same.

And on the point of ditching their history… I openly mock anyone who uses phrases like Hybrid Liquidation.  You don’t get Hybrid Liquidation, Partial Liquidation or Liquidation Lite.  You cannot buy or sell history, as Duff and Phelps tried (and failed, I think) to convince Rangers fans.  Liquidation would mean Rangers Football Club, established in 1873 (or 1872 as they now claim), incorporated in 1899, is finished.

Just pay your bills and do us all a favour.

Click Here for Comments >

About Author

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 18

  1. Paddy Gallagher on

    Michael Collins: We have a weapon more powerful… than any in the whole arsenal of the British Empire! That weapon… is our refusal!

  2. conzaloni on 11 April, 2012 at 20:40 said:



    If it’s a boycott then Celtic FC would need to take the lead on this.



    If it’s some sort of collective protest then I’d agree forums such as this in conjunction with those of other SPL clubs would be a great way to establish the genuine level of support.

  3. If the Huns are allowed to keep their name and history while dumping 135M in debt, including 18 pounds in Tax debt for every man, woman and child in the Scotland, and come out clean and debt free on the other side, with almost no punishment, the game is a bogey.

  4. The Token Tim on




    what did you get out of having a go at Ed Ursus?



    That was more like the actions of those across the south side towards a “Timposter”, than normal CQN attitude.






  5. row z \o/ (O) whatever part of my club is dependent on rangers I am willing to lose! on




    To be clear. This rule change and the Duff and Duffer sleight of coy will see the debts passed to a subsidiary coy, the oldco not die but be taken over in liquidation and get the SPL slot.



    You don’t get oldco dead in this model!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



    Duff and Duffer have already outlined how this is achieved.







  6. miki67 on 11 April, 2012 at 20:47 said:




    What do you get out of calling me a p***k?


    Gutless wonder.






    My post was in reference to your post about a man that you have never met. A man who has on several occasions over the last couple of days had to endure outright hostility on here, yet you choose to refer to him as a ‘fud’.



    What was that you said about gutless??

  7. Paddy Gallagher on

    miki67 on 11 April, 2012 at 20:47 said:


    RE Hamiltontim:


    Never met you mate and haven’t read back so I have no preconceived ideas of who is right or indeed who is wrong. What I can tell you is I have had the pleasure of meeting Hamiltontim, and he is a top guy!

  8. jorges barnet on




    I sense there are attempts here once more to tell us to sit at the back of the bus, not eat at the food counter and any other analogy you would like to pick. Essentially these gentlemen are trying to put us in our place. Disgraceful.



    I take your point about suggestions like these being voted out in the past but there is a lot of self interest involved here, think the other clubs (not all of them though) will want to have newco back in the spl.



    I don’t know what our club’s options are but I think we have to exercise every option open to us otherwise we should just turn up and ask the ref what does he want the score to be.



    Totally disgusted with Scotland just now from Mr Salmond and Ms Robison lobbying hector to let them off, to the press refusing to say organisations should pay their taxes all the way to trying to let them off with their transgessions virtually unpunished this country stinks of corruption.

  9. Paddy G



    Cheque is in the post (not a ragers cheque!!)






    Boycott will only work if Celtic refuse the complete allocation.

  10. NatKnow - "We welcome the paper-chase..." on

    Anyone else notice the irony of the BBC website headline : “‘New’ Rangers could face penalty”?



    If Willie Collum’s the referee they’ll get three, surely?

  11. Paddy Gallagher on

    In the night before battle, the troops engage in confrontation, in the morn of battle they regroup.


    The enemy ain’t in here, wise up and keep the Celtic pound in the Celtic pocket.










    jimtim on 2 April, 2012 at 20:35 said:



    No matter the outcome of the rangers saga. Scottish football will forever be the laughing stock of sport. Scottish football will be as far as im concerned dead . This pitiful country and its bigoted organisations ,have aided and supported a football club who have been proven to have broken the rules of the game in this country and many other countries governed by EUFA . Every loophole has been sought to help this football club to continue to survive , when in any other sport on the planet cheats and rule breakers would be dealt with according to the prescribed penalty for said crimes and wrong doing . Never again will the governing body of scottish football ,be looked at as a fair and honourable organisation . They will do the three monkeys . hear no evil, see no evil , and speak no evil . They will allow them back in to the top league . they will impose menial sanctions on them so as not to hinder them too much . And their phoenix type rise will be helped along by the honest mistake. Never again can we celts feel that we have a chance of an even playing field , what has gone on here is not about scottish football its about ONE clubs survival , their club . We have all witnessed the uneven hand of the governors of scottish football when dealing with our club . We all witnessed our manager being the ONLY one punished at the infamous shame game , we all witnessed farrygate, dougiegate , dallasgate . bougherra,s hands on to a ref ., spit the dogs assualt on our physio . And thats just last season, we can recall events many many years before that, as some of the old yins on here will testify too . Scottish football has been allowed to become a joke .In no other sport would this saga been allowed to go on. But every sanctioned delay breathes new hope into them , allow,s them more time to cover their work . and in the meantime the hacks continue to tell us its all to do about nothing . Its a pity we have no option than to stay in this cesspit ,but its a bigger pity we have to do it under the governance of the sfa



    hail hail






  13. hamiltontim on 11 April, 2012 at 20:53 said:




    fair enough. accept my apologies if you feel offended. i am just very angry at anything rankers related right now.


    can we draw a line under this and move on to what’s actually going on?

  14. !!Bada Bing!! on

    Paul 67-Given Salmond’s interference with HMRC,do you think he is involved in The Hustle we are now witnessing?

  15. Does this mean that it is NOT a done deal that THEY will neccesarily get away with all the cheating???



    head is spinning after reading the last blog as i couldn’t figure out whether i should be shocked by the OPENLY BLATANT changing of the rules to allow the cheats back in with a small slap on the wrist. or shocked with myself for thinking anything else would happen!!!!

  16. miki67 on 11 April, 2012 at 21:00 said:



    The reaction I’d expect from a Tim, fair play to you buddy.



    My apologies to you.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 18