der Berliner

I can't lose that feeling that they want to punish us because we found out about their own shortcomings.

I would look at precedents here, like ... Motherwell, Gretna, and Dundee. Whether their people were fit & proper, how they were punished for becoming insolvent? I wouldn't be surprised if the SFA and SPl act together and get their grand deduction plan into motion, like "charging" us 1/3 of last season's points total as a penalty. (Coming to think of it, we should start loosing more games, so we only start next season at -28 or the like. Of course, any such action is beyond all reason (IMHO) and we as a support should fight them to the bone. If they want to charge Whyte here, fair enough. If they want to hamper the club as such and make competition impossible for the seasons to come (while doing nothing towards the Hooped Horros for their continuous conduct), we should go to a higher authority.

A quote snatched from FF

Yep, they all fear that Rangers disappear from Scottish football because they might get liquidated. It is essentially squeaky bums time from all 10 clubs that depend on the Old Firm to happen by two or more times a season, for the SPL and SFA to have a competition that draws some money to the game. But while the players representatives et al work their socks of to save the club that keeps Scottish football alive, they look for something to hit it even harder. What now? We have been conned by a faux-businessman. You have been conned by a faux-businessman. What could Rangers the club have done to avoid it? In this day and age of chairmen ruling the roost with no-one looking in? But leave that aside, what are they looking for? Deducting Rangers more points this season? Or, since we always make good candidates for precedents, deduct us 10 points for the next ... say 5 seasons too? Get Timothy all the wishes they want? Really, you cannot make this up, simply cannot make this up.

Here a bit more of the "latest" on this first deadline day ... ... plus ...

Well, the admins (not Rangers, btw) do what they have to. If Whyte dealt wrongly with Ticketus and their money, they should make sure that no harm is done to the club itself. I would ask more questions if they would not look at this (or anything else SDM/Whyte-ish).

The immediate problem for the club was that we weren't able to run till the end of the season. This horror scenario has been averted due to the players and management agreeing to pay-cuts. Now, while they (IMHO) sure want us out of administration sooner (hence the "deadline") rather than later, they have more time to do it. The HMRC tribunal results are due in April, so I would expect nothing to happen before that, i.e. the club changing owners. For I do not expect that anyone will take the club as it is.

Do they, though?

While there might be no statement today, here's the gist of the current situation (acc. to the Scotsman) Sir David Murray has apologised for selling Rangers to Craig Whyte, insisting he was â??duped.â?? Murray sold the Ibrox club to the Motherwell-born businessman last May, but the former owner has expressed his dismay at how Whyte has handled affairs, maintaining that he had no knowledge of Whyteâ??s intention to use a £24 million loan from Ticketus to fund his takeover. Murray also produced documents from Whyte and his lawyers supporting the sale, outlining details of £9.5 million being set aside for players and stadium developments, and £5 million of other working capital. Murray has also denied any wrongdoing during his time at the club, insisting that there were no double contracts, and every player was registered correctly with the SPL. Murrayâ??s comments come in the wake of Hugh Adam, the former Rangers director, claiming that dual contracts were paid and that the club were aware of the illegitimate payments. Meanwhile, an American investment bank has expressed definite interest in taking over the club. New York-based Fortress, who have assets totalling £27 billion, have contacted Duff and Phelps signalling their interest, which the administrators are said to be considering. Fortress join a Singapore-based consortium who are also contemplating a bid for the club, however, the Paul Murray-led Blue Knights consortium believe they are currently favourites to take over Rangers. Paul Murrayâ??s Blue Knights consortium would need around £1000 from each fan in a plan to save the club. Murray, a former director of the club admitted there was no quick fix to the situation. Brian Kennedy, owner of the Sale Sharks rugby club, has announced he will table a bid for the Ibrox club. Kennedy was quoted as saying â??My position is that if there is no better deal...then I will gladly do a deal to buy the club. If there is a better offer then I will gladly walk away.â?

There's been an article posted by one Chris Murphy of CNN today which neatly forages to all sorts of history, assumptiuons, hearsay, and facts. What is interesting is the note on other countries, usually forgotten when we speak of the current financial troubles of our club. "We" includes the Scottish press, of course. I'll post a bit of that article here, since at the bottom the discredited journalist (for whatever reason) has been picked to make a few comments about the events. A neat doomsday reminder to finish, ere Spiers' babble starts. Had to be done, hadn't it? Then again, every single article in the press needs to have this sort of strike-terror-into-the-supporters'-hearts - line somewhere. Compulsary, you would think.

Methinks the Disfunctional Reality Perception syndrome was actuall first noted and afterwards spread from the Scumhut. It is a pandemic occurance these days and various sections of the SFA, SPL, media and other clubs have become infected. Methinks some from those already suffering beyond help are running about with injection-filled syringes, looking for the stats-collectors who had the audacity to tell the world that e.g. a Celtic player is twice as unlikely to get booked as any other SPL-footballer. As an FFer once put it ... I just want AWAY from that professional victimhood, that bi-polar relationship with reality, that Celtic fan determination to be either cheepy-jovial-chappies rubbing yer face in it, or outraged opressed masses on the verge of revolution against the evil empire.

Methinks he admits that he best works alone in such circumstances, not with people who may interfere at and from various angles. If that works for him, fair enough. What we usually disregard here is that hundreds of clubs are run by chairmen with or without boards. The vast majority - when being run like this - has not "failed" (for lack of a correct word) over decades. Only when mismanagement, illness, or something other befell the hierarchy, or the club punched above their weight (for too lonmg), things become unstable.

... maybe that is the plus point of a consortium of people. One man can always work as he sees fit. The more (blue-blooded) people involved in the decision-making will see to an end that will not have Rangers getting the short straw. Anyways, that's two official bids made by now. You'd hope the admins do have the power to oust Whyte from the takeover process, or that the discredited chairman sees sense and considers a deal with any potential owner and hands over his shares.

Methinks much with regard to the big tax case a) hinges on whether we are due anything at all (and if we are, how much), and b) that we can arrange a CVA.

Express So there's our fall-back clause then.

... or maybe they are talking to interested parties? If they have something to say, they will do it. I do assume though that after having stabilized the finances, they will spend most of this week talking to potential buyers and court people.

I do think we have the nucleus of a good team. And even next season is a long way away, so who knows how many decent Aluko-style signings we can make. If we do it Harakiri-style like this term, we face a long wait indeed. But luckily enough, this is not how football works.

Well, I'm no businessman, but AFAIK, the Ticketus money makes up 60% of all SPL (?) ticket sales of these next three seasons? In that respect, Rangers (and not Whyte) were front-loaded to cover the Lloyds debt. "All" a future investor/onwer has to do now - since he does not have to live with any "real debt in our bank" - is to cover these 60% with investments of his own for these three years and afterwards, we'd be free of this front-loaded money and any outstanding bank debt. If Ticketus agrees to such a long-term deal, there would be no reason to harass Whyte for it. Strenuous for those first years, but we might be out of the woods thereafter. What the new owners would have to shoulder (and this is were the BK leave "their" money) is with the HMRC bill/-s, even though there should be money frozen in the accounts to cover a large chunk of the smaller bill.

Why do you make it a couple of seasons? We are barred from next season due to technicalities (March 31st deadline). What prevents us from playing in Europe the season after next?

I did not miss that. I would assume that while the BKs can present enough money, but making it available in a timescale given by the admins might prove difficult. As opposed to Whyte, all BKs are probably real businessmen with real companies et al to show for it. So we actually have to wait and see what the BKs can actually put on the table. Ticketus ... well, in this deal (sic!) it looks they have guaranteed access to the ticket sales, for years to come. That is virtually guaranteed income. We won't go away, so they have no reason to either, for the time being. Of course, I do assume that there is some deal in place with them, as they would probably (?) also fall under any CVA, no matter whether they belong to the bidders. What is for sure is that this lot has the money and has it available. We do lack a decent amount of info (and I reckon we will sure not get all info some would like to see) though.

I would suggest that the Ticketus involvement is mainly done because no bank will give us a decent floating facility as long as the HMRC stuff is unresolved.

Maybe there will be more transparency in days to come, Bluedell? So far, they tell us more about what they want to do and with whom than anyone else does or did.

Regarding Lennon, he's assembled a team of 30 first-teamers over three, nay four seasons. Most of them have enough quality to beat nigh anything in the SPL these days. With nigh three full squads to chose from and their greatest rivals down on their knees for long spells on and off the field, this season has been and is becoming a stroll on the park for them. At the same time, the rather alarming (T-)imidation of the referees also shows serious effects. I keep reminding people who think that the SPL is essentially about winning the four OF games - since the rest of the league "is garbage" - that winning titles in Scotland is far from easy (as the opposition usually gives 110% against us (and sometimes them)), the same holds true here. If they rack up a decent winning run, fair enough. But we shall not lose objectivity either. They have a (couple of) vastly superior team(s) to anyone in the league right now (as we all know and lamented about how much the standard has dropped) and thus their temporary dominance is hardly a surprise. All that said, from top to bottom, this Celtic team is rank rotten in the way they treat the rest of the SPL and will receive no respect whatsoever from me. And I would not invite a question about what I would wish them if they happen to be in the same shyte as we were in not so long ago.

First, I am not running about and throw dirt at any Rangers player or manager. No matter how good or bad he is or was. As for objectivity, essentially you can't debate about personal opinions here, but essentially solely facts. If you were to use them, you'd have to look at the years pre-Souness too, and matter of factly, not much farther. I started supporting roundabout 1983, the so-called "dark days". We hardly managed a top-three slot back then, won the odd league cup and had some short runs in Europe. Managers back then were John Greig and Jock Wallace. Going by the spending power Ally has had, you can probably equate them to him more than any other Rangers manager of these last two decades. Add to that the fact that he lost three to four backbone-players of the side early in the season, namely Naismith, Lafferty, Whittaker, and Jelavic. He could have done things tactically better, but the same arguments were levelled at Smith time and again ... but in the end we still managed 3IAR. Along with the injuries there was an alarming drop in form by some of the stalwarts, while those others could not rise to the challenge, a challenge that was marred by off-field troubles. These are no excuses, mind you, just stating facts. IMHO, no other manager would have fared any better under the circumstances and the personell involved. Ally's been here as a manager for less than a year. Given that and the circumstances he had to work with, I think I am quite right do ask some supporters to reign their statements about good or bad management somewhat?

While I can see your point and sure am not overly PC, I would assume that it is not healthy for a supporters board of any kind to write somesuch in this day and age.