der Berliner

In the wake of today's statement by the manager, how do we evaluate the Scottish Sun's earlier claim: ... ?

And the SFA/SPL is not half-way through this, as they are still investigating the EBT stuff. You wonder whether they find something different than before (i.e. what was known all along) and contrary to HMRC. UEFA is the port of call.

I do hope - no matter what actually happened - all parties involved act with the dignity that befits our club.

What I can't see is that the SFA can call a transfer ban on us for the relevant points. There is nothing in the rule that suggests they can. Is this a new law then? Much like Lafferty's Law back in 2009 (or the like)? Will the ban be lifted once we pay all creditors and come out of admin? Can we draw similarities with the Sion case and their subsequent UEFA fiasco? So far, the SFA have simply told us what rules were used for what charge and the fine. They have not given any explanation how that fine comes abouit though. As in: is there anything in the SFA rulebook that explains their decision? Or tells us that they have the power to do this because of our shortcomings? Or can they - the relevant body - just whip up a punishment on the day ... as they see fit? BTW, if anyone has been guilty of bringing the game into disrepute, it is the Lurgan Bigot, and so far, he's been hit with a massive 2-game ban. I won't hold my breath here ...

As I said, have we actually ever seen somesuch being dealt to a team not in administration? And if so, what for? Methinks Mo'll was barred from signing people while under administration, but beyond it ... ? Highly questionable behaviour. And unless the EBT stuff can't be explained and is being legally sound, they may add a few points deductions too, as has been muted first on the Timboards months ago. They gave them the ideas, if you ask me. While we are at it, if I see the treatment we receive and what TLB does week in week out - bringing the game into disrepute - the judgements is poles apart.

You can sign freebies all year long.

Just read the statement ... and perhaps I missed it, but I can' see anything in the paragraphs mentioned for the transfer embargo to see why this is a possible and/or applicable punishment. Am I right in saying that this would be a first in Scottish football for a club that is not in administration? BTW, people should tell UEFA about this, since it is apparent that the SFA did not help one of its members in the times of distress, but actually punishes it even further in its most vulnerable period. Not to mention that those who decide at the SFA HQs are closely linked to Rangers' main rival and greatest dislikers, so fair punishment is not being handed out.

They really tell us that McCoist ordered Lafferty to play through injury and he cancelled the man's operations? When the season's gone and Mo'll held at arms lengths anyway? McCoist? Someone's just tango-f*cked the Scottish Sun very gently ...

On what basis / precedence is the ban handed out? This whole stuff does not include any possible sanctions on the EBT use, which is still unclear, right? STV chaps say via twitter that existing contracts with players can be extended. (Not that they have aclue, but anyways.)

Why would we shoot the messenger*, this looks to be complete rubbish by someone who tries in vein to tango us. (D&P said that there is money at least till end of May, you know.) *Drawing and quartering with hot irons has much more appeal to the masses ...

Well, I'll wait for another 12odd hours ...

We and host of minor clubs will probably fall foul here, including Timothy with their 20m debt in the bad of their two companies. But rest assured, the big guns in Europe with 100s of million in the red will go unscathed. (Milan, for examply, posted a 90m loss in 2011, as German teletext reported yesterday.)

Just out of interest ... this RST-twitterer, who is this? Does s/he speaks for the RST, has s/he the backing with any comments made? Regarding the analysis ... whiel it is fair to check out his buisiness, where does it state what personal wealth he's got? There is a broad campaigning in the Scottish press against the Miller bid, which is clearly aimed to rally the Bluenoses under a Scottish/British flag against some vile US-liquidator. You hardly get an objective opinion by an independent business observer, mostly it is uneducated sports press or fan babble. Just take Keith Jackson's hysteria headline about "final bids" or "going bust" next week. Utter rubbish and conjecture, but the legions quickly converted into hordes screaming at all bidders and the admins to finally get the finger out. This does not help one single bit here, only gets unexpected attention levels to each and every word dropped by our tustworthy informants in the press, not least on twitter. There is no reason to breath any sigh of relief here, far from it. But people should look at the real (!) facts out there: ... the admins said yesterday, and I repeated this time and again. And then - despite all the panic being raised from certain quarters, you look at other Scottish clubs that have suffered administration and e.g. check out how many points they have been deducted while being in administration. To actually have a precedence. And while it is fine to throw up new horror scenarios of possible (!) sanction by the SFA / SPL, nothing has been decided just yet and if it is being decided, no-one can tell when it is coming into effect. Don't get me wrong here. Nothing is fine and we are hip deep in the steamy stuff. But that's essentially it and we shouldn't let the press telling us otherwise.

The point is that while the Italians did that for Fiorentina as you described, sending Rangers into the wilderness or make them toothless will wreck the whole of the SPL, no matter how much bluster comes from the would-be giants of the New Firm and the Hooped Horrors beyond the river Clyde. The SPL will end up being a second Welsh League ...

According to the Scottish Sun (who give Miller some naughty and unsubstantiated flak along the way) ... So essentially they are back in the running ... IF the admins can deal with Whyte and/or have his shares handy.

The Link to the statement above. As I said in the other thread: if the admins can - legally - only accept a bid that is unconditional, people should ask questions to the bidders concerned about these conditions. They should harass Ticketus, the judges, and the SPL et al.

There are apparently some misconceptions about the word liquidation here. Rangers as a club will only end if they are wound up completely, just as Third Lanark was. That will not happen. If anything, the company behind it will cease to exist (be liquidated), after its assets have been transfered to a "newco" or something alike. And BTW, if you do need some sort of encouragement, look at Fiorentina. Far stranger things have happened than e.g. what Miller proposes. And no, nothing of this looks good and rosy.

IMHO, Miller would not have come forward with his ideas had he not been advised about their possibility. Kennedy, if he's not all just bluster, should simply submit his new bid in writing and be done with it. Generally ... can the admins actually ask for anything but an unconditional bid if they want to sell the club to a new owner? Just asking.

Well, some are smarter than others, but most people are simply running about scared and crying foul at each and everyone with every single bit of negative news that comes out of the printer. I doubt that many have real insight into how this all works, the variables and guidelines, legal stuff and all. And even less have privy to any insight knowledge of the deals or the admins' work. That's all I am saying. The press milks the occasion to the core and the broad masses have long since pressed the panic buttons through the table. On a sidenote, granted, you've kept a low voice indeed!

If they need cash to keep us going, they could have arranged another friendly, no matter against whom. The Bears would have come and paid the entrance fee. But really, the doom-singing has reached its crescendo and we do not know anything for fact about the monetary situation. This is all conjecture and assumption put in motion by the press. It grew arms and legs in no time, as people are all too happy to accept negative info bits as fact. Add to that the open frustration shown by the bidders and you get the hysteria tangible now on all boards.

Unless BK hands his new bid in in writing ...

As I said somewhere else, we know very little about him, but all people assume he's a prime liquidator - without having any background knowledge. It looks like he's a different plan up his sleeve.

So who's left on the table should the Ng withdrawal be genuine? Bill Miller? He was a touch unspecific about "creative ways" of moving towards the future without the burden of great debts. Yet, it clearly says (direct quote!) that he favours a CVA. As of Kennedy ... all he has to do is to hand in the correct papers ... to back up his bid of yesterday then, right?

BBC article ... So what is "unconditional"?

... (there is absolutely no link et al on it, so it could have been written by anyone). On a sidenote, David Edgar just posted this on FF: