Kowalski Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 I'd imagine there have been "developments" at the huns which has led to this being postponed. A lot of people are touting liquidation for them within the next 48 hours, if true it makes sense holding off just now. Was wondering this myself BB. Although if its straight forward liquidation, with no new penalties from the SPL, then they are going to have to go ahead and vote on their fair play proposals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrant Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 The liquidation rumour mill has been in overdrive today right enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgow sheep Posted May 1, 2012 Author Share Posted May 1, 2012 From P&B from Rangers media so almost certainly pish, but.... "A journo I know reckons the meeting ended up in complete anarchy this morning with 5 teams flatly refusing to vote for any sanctions over and above those already in place or that would see us ejected from the spl. The teams he said who baulked and threatened to abstain at the issue of any new sanctions and you may or may not like this are St Mirren Hearts celtic Dunfermline and Inverness." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kowalski Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 So basically, fuck the survey, we're just going to welcome them back in? http://sport.stv.tv/football/scottish-premier/rangers/305540-neil-doncaster-hints-that-any-rangers-newco-could-join-the-spl/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter This cunt should be hounded back south of the border. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrant Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Letting them back in after seeing (very clearly) the thoughts of all fans is a massive kick in the balls for all us long suffering fans that have endured Scottish Fitba for the last 2 decades. Fuck it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maverick sheep Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 SPL chief executive Neil Doncaster has revealed that the broadcasting deal struck with SKY and ESPN has not yet been signed and could collapse if Rangers don't remain in the top flight. (Daily Record) what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrant Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 SPL chief executive Neil Doncaster has revealed that the broadcasting deal struck with SKY and ESPN has not yet been signed and could collapse if Rangers don't remain in the top flight. (Daily Record) what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgow sheep Posted May 1, 2012 Author Share Posted May 1, 2012 SPL chief executive Neil Doncaster has revealed that the broadcasting deal struck with SKY and ESPN has not yet been signed and could collapse if Rangers don't remain in the top flight. (Daily Record) what? I think I read somewhere that this would be an extension to a contract that runs till 2014 anyway?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baggy89 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 I thought it had already been confirmed by someone from SKY that the deal was not dependent on the huns being in the SPL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penfold Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Correct, although I'm sure any extension or new contract would be impacted by Rangers not being in the SPL - just not to the end-of-the-world extent that Doncaster trys so hard to put across with all of his half-comments. He also blatantly lies about the English clubs coming out of Administration as newcos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penfold Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Doncaster added: "In Scotland we have never had a newco at any time but in England, whenever a club goes into administration, a newco is the natural consequence. "So the likes of Crystal Palace recently and Plymouth in the last few years took their points deduction for going into administration but in terms of coming out the newco was the preferred route. CRYSTAL Palace took a huge step towards exiting administration this morning when the club's creditors voted overwhelmingly in favour of a company voluntary arrangement (CVA). http://www.thisiscroydontoday.co.uk/Palace-creditors-vote-favour-CVA/story-11359699-detail/story.html ADMINISTRATORS AT PLYMOUTH ARGYLE have prevailed in pushing through a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) at the club. A CVA entails an organisation repaying a percentage of debt over a contracted period of time, but requires 75% or more of creditors (by value) to vote in its favour. The administrators at Plymouth were able to obtain 82% of creditors to approve it. http://www.accountancyage.com/aa/news/2068912/plymouth-cva-approved Took me what, 2 mins to find that? Really wish some of the Scottish "journalists" would look into some of these comments before just re-posting them in articles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgowdon Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 I thought it had already been confirmed by someone from SKY that the deal was not dependent on the huns being in the SPL. I believe it's not dependant on four OF games which are not entirely the same thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baggy89 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 http://www.thisiscroydontoday.co.uk/Palace-creditors-vote-favour-CVA/story-11359699-detail/story.html http://www.accountancyage.com/aa/news/2068912/plymouth-cva-approved Took me what, 2 mins to find that? Really wish some of the Scottish "journalists" would look into some of these comments before just re-posting them in articles. The only two clubs in the English leagues that I can think of that are "Newco's" are Aldershot and Accrington Stanley. Both restarted at the bottom of the pyramid. Christ, Rushden were kicked out of the BSP (possibly closest to the SPL in the English leagues in terms of corruption) for... The club were expelled from the Conference National on 11 June 2011. This decision was made due to their unstable financial position, meaning they could not guarantee being able to complete all their fixtures in the 2011–12 season. The club faced a winding up petition on behalf of HMRC in the week commencing 13 June 2011, with reported debts of £750,000. A subsequent move to enter the Southern Football League was unsuccessful. The club entered administration on 7 July 2011. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baggy89 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 What actually happens in similar situations to the Huns in England Swindon Town.. but the club later admitted 36 charges of breaching league rules, 35 due to illegal payments made to players, and were relegated to the Third Division — giving Sunderland promotion to the First Division and Tranmere Rovers to the Second Division. The scandal saw then chairman Brian Hillier being given a six-month prison sentence and chief accountant Vince Farrar being put on probation. Chesterfield The following year, Chesterfield were deducted nine points for financial irregularities after Brown attempted to avoid paying Chester City the fee agreed by the FA for Luke Beckett. Amid mounting evidence of fraud, he relinquished control of the club in March 2001 and ownership passed to a hastily organised fans' group, the Chesterfield Football Supporters Society. Massive debts run up by Brown forced the club into administration, but the team still secured the division's final automatic promotion place. (Brown was later sentenced to four years in prison following a Serious Fraud Office investigation that led to charges including false accounting, furnishing false information and theft) Bournemouth and Rovrum.. Bournemouth will play in League Two in the new season after agreeing to the Football League's conditions. The club had to accept a 17 point deduction and agree not to appeal against the decision. The Football League ruled that as the club has been unable to agree a Company Voluntary Arrangement they had not met their terms for exiting administration. Chief executive Alastair Saverimutto told BBC Radio Solent: "We're delighted to be able to move forward." He added: "The initial announcement from the Football League was negative, and took us by surprise a little. But the latest news came as a great relief really I suppose. "This announcement has put us where we want to be, and now we can move forward and take this club to the next level." In a statement explaining the penalty, the Football League said it was "prepared to exercise its absolute discretion under the 'exceptional circumstances' provisions of its insolvency policy." The Cherries, who will start their season at home to Gillingham on Saturday, are the second club to be handed a 17-point penalty in as many days. Rotherham accepted a deal essentially the same as Bournemouth's, though theirs included an extra caveat that they must return to the town within four years. The club were forced to leave Millmoor, their home for more than 100 years, and play games at the Don Valley Stadium in Sheffield from the start of 2008/09. Luton... The Hatters had already been deducted 10 points by the Football Association after being found guilty of misconduct for paying agents via a third party. And the company which will take over the club has now been told it must accept a further 20-point deduction in order to be allowed in the League. The penalty came after Luton failed to satisfy the League's insolvency rules. The combined 30-point deduction is the biggest in Football League history, giving Luton an extraordinarily difficult task in trying to avoid relegation for the third season in a row. Bookmakers have already made them 10-1 on favourites to drop down to the Blue Square Premier League. But the club is appealing against the FA's 10-point deduction for financial irregularities in regard to its dealings with agents, with the case set to be heard next week. The 20-point additional penalty related to the club's inability to agree a Company Voluntary Agreement (CVA) to exit administration, with the Football League pointing out that this is the third time in 10 years that Luton have been in such a position. The Football League board also imposed the condition that Luton Town 2020 (LT2020), the new holding company, must pay any unsecured creditors 16p in the pound and asked it to forego any right of appeal. LT2020 director Stephen Browne said the club was still being punished for the mistakes of the previous regime in charge at Kenilworth Road. "We have tried to do everything openly and honestly and we placed our faith in the footballing authorities," said Browne, whose consortium is still in talks with the administrator. "Obviously the very clear message from both the FA and the Football League is that doing such a thing is a total waste of time. "Once again the faithful supporters are left high and dry and once again a policy of honesty is not recognised at all by the footballing authorities who claim they want to clean up the game." But Football League chairman Brian Mawhinney said the board had little option but to take a strong line with Luton. "The board's primary responsibility is to protect the integrity of their competitions," said Mahwinney. "This often means making difficult decisions which require balancing the interests of fans, the club's creditors and the other teams in the League. "We will continue to take that responsibility very seriously." Browne said that the consortium, fronted by BBC presenter Nick Owen, would not give up despite the points deduction representing a serious setback. "We will continue the fight by sticking to our principles of openness and honesty," he said. "People who should, in theory at least, be protecting supporters will not bring us down. "It's not a laughing matter any more, but even so we will continue to ensure that Luton have a solid and sustainable future, despite what the Football League do to us." Boston... The Pilgrims lost their Football League status last season, but received a further demotion at the Blue Square Premier's annual general meeting. The decision, which means a reprieve from relegation for Altrincham, results from Boston's financial problems. Blue Square Premier chief executive John Moules said: "They're in breach of certain rules, it was felt Blue Square North was the best place for them." Boston were given a 10-point deduction to compound their relegation from the Football League as they went into administration. The terms of the Company Voluntary Liquidation entered into by Boston to go into administration, are behind the club's demotion. Moules said: "The Inland Revenue put a caveat on that CVA that Boston could not pay football creditors. "That breaks Football Association, Football League and Football Conference rules and regulations. "We're giving Boston the opportunity to re-establish themselves as a leading club outside the Football League. "They believe the decision we have made is fair and just, and they are not going to appeal." "We had meetings all day on Friday with Boston United and then informed Altrincham that they were staying up." Boston's financial problems led to charges for former manager Steve Evans and ex-chairman Pat Malkinson of conspiracy to cheat the public revenue. Evans was given a one-year prison sentence, suspended for two years after admitting the offence, Malkinson was given a two-year suspended sentence after admitting a similar offence. Altrincham's relegation reprieve was their second in successive seasons. The Cheshire club finished in the relegation places in the 2005-06 season after they were deducted 18 points for fielding an ineligible player, but they were saved by Scarborough's financial problems. The decision to demote Boston into Blue Square North division - formerly the Conference North - will be contested by Worksop, who were relegated from the division into the Unibond Premier League. Worksop will argue that Boston should have been relegated from the Blue Square Premier altogether. Chairman Howard Raymond told the Non-League Paper: "The Conference rules must cover all three leagues, and we will be asking our lawyers to study this closely and will almost certainly lodge an appeal." Aldershot FC The arrival of Len Walker as manager in June 1985 sparked a brief revival in Aldershot's fortunes. Although they finished 16th in 1985-86 and re-election was a threat right up to the final few games of the season,[2] they emerged as strong promotion contenders in the 1986-87 season, finishing sixth on 70 points and occupying the final playoff place in the division. It was the first season of the Football League play-offs, which in their first two seasons operated as a promotion/relegation decider between the First/Second, Second/Third and Third/Fourth divisions before a reorganisation saw them operate solely as promotion deciders.[2] In the semi-finals, they condemned Third Division Bolton Wanderers (four times winners of the FA Cup, and First Division remembers as recently as 1980) to Fourth Division football for the first time in their history. This gave them a place in the final, against another historic side - Wolverhampton Wanderers, three times league champions, four times FA Cup winners, and twice Football League Cup winners, who had only been relegated from the top flight in 1984. Aldershot gave Wolves one of the most humiliating defeats of their history by winning 3-0 on aggregate over two legs.[4] Aldershot were predicted to go straight back down to the Fourth Division in 1987-88, but managed to avoid automatic relegation by two places and three points, finishing one point and one place ahead of the relegation play-off place.[2] However, a disastrous season in 1988-89 saw Aldershot go down in bottom place with just eight wins and 37 points all season placing them 17 points adrift of safety.[2] By this stage, a financial crisis was dawning upon the club as debts were mounting and as the 1989-90 season began, the task at Aldershot was to avoid being relegated or expelled from the Football League, rather than mount a promotion challenge. Aldershot finished 22nd in the Fourth Division that season, and were in danger of a second successive relegation right up to the end of April. However, the financial crisis was worsening and it seemed highly doubtful that Aldershot would be able to start the 1990-91 season.[2] On 31 July 1990, Aldershot were wound up in the High Court as the Official Receiver condemned them as "financially insolvent" with debts of £495,000.[5] However, the winding-up order was lifted on 7 August 1990 when 19-year-old property developer Spencer Trethewy paid £200,000 to save the club and allow them to start the new Fourth Division campaign. However, the board of directors soon realised that he didn't have the funds to keep the club running, and he was dismissed on 1 November 1990. Trethewy's shady dealings finally caught up with him in 1994 when he was convicted of fraud and received a two-year prison sentence.[6] Aldershot's problems continued as they finished the 1990-91 season second from bottom in the league. There was no relegation this season due to an expansion in the league's size to 93 clubs from the previous total of 92.[7] There was a brief respite for the club on 5 January 1991, when it held West Ham United to a surprise goalless draw in the FA Cup third round at Upton Park. The Hammers won the replay 6-1 and went on to reach the semi-finals, also winning promotion to the First Division that season.[8] Len Walker had stepped up the role of general manager in March 1991, with Brian Talbot taking over as player-manager.[9] However, Aldershot's debts were mounting and although they were able to begin the 1991-92 Fourth Division campaign, as the season wore on it looked more and more likely that the club would go under. As well as that, the problems were showing on the field as Aldershot struggled near the foot of the league. Manager Brian Talbot resigned in November 1991 to be succeeded by Ian McDonald.[10] On 25 March 1992 Aldershot F.C. finally went out of business and were obliged to resign from the Football League. The final game played was a 2-0 defeat against Cardiff City at Ninian Park on 20 March.[11] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madbadteacher Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 I believe it's not dependant on four OF games which are not entirely the same thing. So, correct me if I'm wrong, but is Doncaster now sayig that Sky and/or ESPN can dictate who's in the SPL now? Cos that's what SPL chief executive Neil Doncaster has revealed that the broadcasting deal struck with SKY and ESPN has not yet been signed and could collapse if Rangers don't remain in the top flight. (Daily Record) sure sounds like to me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentorred Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 What will they do after next season when Rangers U18's get relagated. Or when Rangers finish in the bottom 6 and only play Celtic 3 times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrant Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 What will they do after next season when Rangers U18's get relagated. Or when Rangers finish in the bottom 6 and only play Celtic 3 times. One thing's for sure.. at least we'll finally get rid of this nonsensical split. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgow sheep Posted May 1, 2012 Author Share Posted May 1, 2012 One thing's for sure.. at least we'll finally get rid of this nonsensical split. I like the split Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penfold Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 It does bring serious questions about how impartial the SFA/SPL can be when dealing issues like the ineligible players and dual contracts. Are they now immune to any punishment? If the SFA/SPL were to fine Rangers or Celtic, like they did Hearts, what is to stop the Old Firm refusing to pay it? What are the SFA/SPL going to do? They sure as hell won't kick them out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capitalsharpie Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Letting them back in after seeing (very clearly) the thoughts of all fans is a massive kick in the balls for all us long suffering fans that have endured Scottish Fitba for the last 2 decades. Fuck it. What will they do after next season when Rangers U18's get relagated. Or when Rangers finish in the bottom 6 and only play Celtic 3 times. This is the thing tho isnt it? what if the hun got relegated through normal league competition? Would sky throw the toys out the pram an rip up the contract? Dont think so, you cannot have a tv company dictate who moves up and down the league and affect natural competition values. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maverick sheep Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 This is the thing tho isnt it? what if the hun got relegated through normal league competition? Would sky throw the toys out the pram an rip up the contract? Dont think so, you cannot have a tv company dictate who moves up and down the league and affect natural competition values. The only people apparently able to see this blindingly obvious reality are the people who don't matter; the fans. The vested interests of Scottish football's money men and the sniveling spinelessness of the media is almost unbelievable. We need to take a leaf out of the book of the middle-easterners and start burning effigies of Doncaster and the like. Bold, sensational images that can't be ignored. Because, no matter how eloquent or truthful words of protestation are, they are being so ignored it's painful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_min Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 If Rangers get away with it, can we go do it too? I recon we'd be better off if we just write off our debt instead of paying it off, turns out there's no real punishment if you do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maverick sheep Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 If Rangers get away with it, can we go do it too? I recon we'd be better off if we just write off our debt instead of paying it off, turns out there's no real punishment if you do it. You kidding? The only thing keeping Milne in control is his fear-mongering that we'd die without him underwriting the debt. So essentially, Milne should be screaming from the rooftops to have newcohunscumbigotcunts f.c. punished as severely as possible. Otherwise the debt truly is irrelevant. And he'd be a hypocrite to use it as an excuse not to invest. That's why the league are doing their utmost to come up with a 'punishment' that will have no material effect on rangers, but which would kill/cripple us or anyone else who tried the same trick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kowalski Posted May 3, 2012 Share Posted May 3, 2012 From Chris McLaughlin on Twitter: "Key points from PC interview: can't guarrantee no liquidation, Whyte won't get penny and looks like deal done to play in #SPL next season." So who did this fucking deal? Was Milne involved? We demand answers. Well I do anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgow sheep Posted May 3, 2012 Author Share Posted May 3, 2012 From Chris McLaughlin on Twitter: "Key points from PC interview: can't guarrantee no liquidation, Whyte won't get penny and looks like deal done to play in #SPL next season." So who did this fucking deal? Was Milne involved? We demand answers. Well I do anyway. Every statement there sounds absolute bollocks 1)How can they guarrentee anything without the result of the HMRC case being known? 2) How can they say Whyte won't get anything when they won't have their day in court with his dodgy lawyers till Oct? 3) How can they know this till the result of the SPL enquiry (stop sniggering at the back there) is known? bullshit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.