Thinker

Wouldn't it be beautiful if, off the back of admin, an SPL team got double-relegated as we got double-promoted so we missed them?

Well, I would assume they would know what percentage they would each be purchasing before they handed over the cash. Green would either agree to the sale or he wouldn't.

Well, they could try it and then we'd know if Green will or won't allow it.

There's no real evidence one way or the other. All you can do is choose which unsubstantiated rumour you pay creedence to. For all that's worth.

It's a consortium of various groups and individuals. I guess you're suggesting they're all in cahoots which, admitttedly they might be - although there's no real evidence one way or the other. Regardless, there's nothing to stop BK or anyone else buying in and having an influence. Just not absolute control.

I thought the idea was that no-one should have out-right control. Judging by our recent history, that's a solid idea.

Zeus? I've lost track of who's where...

If Kennedy really cares about Rangers, and if this is true, the best thing he could do is tell the fans who the organ grinder is. Is organ the word-the-day today?

I would welcome a proper investigation into the dual contract issue providing there is an agreed appeal process involving the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Justice not only has to be done, it has to be seen to be done. There's so much at stake with these decisions that it's very difficult to ensure impartiality from anyone within Scottish football. The only reason the SFA could object to an appeal to the CAS is if they intend to pass a judgement which they believe would not stand up to independent assessment. As for media rights - that should be a discussion between the SFL and the SPL. Maybe the SFL will agree to waive the £2 million payment from the SPL since they're in line for a cash boost due to our presence. It's up to them though - there's no reason why the SPL should be entitled to TV money from an SFL club. The matter of our SFA membership is independent of any disciplinary investigations. For the SFA to abuse their power in this decision to demand acceptance of sanctions is corrupt. If they demand media rights then that is extortion. It's blatantly corrupt.

Yes, if those are the figures. Conversely, it's better to have 25k at 400 than 40k at 200. I'm sure everyone involved has a good grasp of basic business concepts such as this.

How much money do you think it would take to build a team that can outclass Arbroath? They get an average gate of 800. If we can do that (if there is a window of opportunity before the ban) then we can get 2 successive promotions.

Doesn't that mean we have a month and a half to sign players? If so, we can easily put together a squad which can see us through Div3 and Div2.

As far as I understand it, nobody should be docked anything for using an EBT. It's the use of dual contracts that could potentially bring about stripping of titles. If they can't prove that our players had dual contracts as part of the paperwork of the EBTs then they can't touch us under their rules, (other than by trumping up another disrepute charge or something similar). If they try to strip trophies on the basis that the players received cash non-contractually, then there are a million and one other schemes that would have to be looked into, many of which are commonly used throughout European football. Of course, if we waive our right to appeal their decision, they can hold their kangaroo court and make any baised, unfair judgement they pass stick.

On the face of it it's uncomfortable reading... then again, it's Di Stefano, so it has to be taken with a packet of salt. As long as there is some sort of investment structure in place which controls how much money goes in and the return each investor gets then it doesn't matter who the individuals / groups are particularly. Having said that I wouldn't be comfortable if, as their name suggests, Blue Pitch Holdings have any sort of hold on Ibrox.

True. I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing that investors want to make a profit, as long as they don't bleed the club. Dunno. I just find it a bit depressing that businessmen were more highly motivated to do something about our club's plight than philanthropists. Thatcherism in action. Money makes the world go round.

It's regrettable that our would-be-benefactors let the profiteers beat them to the punch.

I just hope someone followed up his post with an apology and a positive message saying we're looking forward to playing them. The club needs to hire a couple of guys to keep on top of and undo any damage these online morons do to our image.

It may be that the choice he's given is: the stripping of trophies, or the stripping of the club's right to play football.

True, but realistically, how much interest is there in Scottish football outside the Old Firm derby? Other than critical decider matches it's the only game I'd drag myself to the pub to watch. The viewing figures are out there and they don't read well for the SPL teams. Sky aren't going to completely pull the plug, but they're not going to make a charitable donation either. I'd say something like a 75% reduction is to be expected.

... or at least let us give us some evidence to back up the conspiracy claims. This isn't about convincing Barry Ferguson it's about convincing the fans. Whatever you said to him, say to us.

I'm sure they don't have to turn every result into a 3-0 defeat, but if there's even the slightest possibility of them getting away with doing it, they will. And to make matters worse the SFA are trying to force us to waive the right to challenge any judgement they make - even if it's clearly flawed. Somebody needs to get the Court of Arbitration for Sport involved in this before it's too late.

]We absolutely must not agree to waive the right to challenge the SFA's decision on this - The Court of Arbitration for Sport must be kept as an option at least. Otherwise we're going to be handed the harshest punishment ever in the history of football for something that is a long way off being the severest infringement of rules.

Guy Gisborne? He's a well known villain. Ask Robin Hood if you don't believe me.

It was deemed illegal for the SFA to impose a transfer embargo for charges of disrepute as that wasn't one of the punishments listed in their own guidelines - I don't know what their rulebook says about transfering an SFA share and what conditions they can attach to it. It's extremely under-handed of them to try to re-impose the same punishment for a different reason, but it may not be illegal this time. You might have thought that going to Div3 was punishment enough (Juventus only dropped 1 division in Italy for actual criminal activity) but I don't think they're going to let up. I fear they'll be looking at the dual-contract situation right now, with the intention of finding another excuse to heap it on.

If you have no absolute proof then why do you have little doubt...? There are gaps in Green's story, and you could fill them with Whyte... or Ticketus, or any number of other theories, some scary, some not-so-scary.