SteveC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22647194 "First Division clubs may break away from the Scottish Football League to join a new structure with the 12 Scottish Premier League teams. SPL proposals for a merger with the SFL, a revised financial distribution model and more end-of-season play-offs appear unlikely to gain approval. And the top flight is prepared to institute a 22-club set-up of two tiers, leaving 20 sides in the SFL. In effect, the current First Division would become the SPL's second tier. There would be one automatic promotion/relegation exchange between this 'Championship' and the top flight in addition to play-offs involving the second-bottom side in the SPL and the second, third and fourth sides in the division below. However, there would not be play-offs between the Championship and Scotland's third tier. Currently, promotion/relegation play-offs exist between the First and Second Divisions and between Divisions Two and Three. The SFL held their AGM on Thursday and an initial show of hands reflected only 16 clubs in support of the SPL's 42-team proposals. SFL motions require the support of 22 clubs to be passed and a formal vote will take place on 10 June. Following the AGM, First Division clubs held a meeting of their own and Hamilton chairman Les Gray told the media: "We are at the end of it now and we think there is light at the end of the tunnel. "We will do what we have to do now to proceed and we in the First Division are unanimous in our views. "We have no meeting organised with the SPL but we will organise that in the coming days."" ----

Fair point, I stand (well,sit) corrected.

And one of your explanations, please - I've come to rely on them!

Thanks Stewarty, a considered reply. I guess we don't really disagree but it is just that, you may well say "I don't think this is Deloitte investigating themselves." but that is not what we will hear for evermore on BBCeltic or Radio Chlyde, nor read in the papers - far less the massed hordes of tim virtual media decriers of all things Rangers.

http://willievass.photoshelter.com/gallery/Rangers-An-Unexpected-Journey/G0000PiG9kjMGIhY/C0000sbCaiIq4raw

Who would be doing this? Everyone seems far too busy embarrassing us to actually run anything.

There is no doubt that this "was a necessary process to go through", I could not agree more. I hope you are correct in everything else you say but I just doubt it will be accepted as you portray. You talk as though we are treated normally and with justice. This is The Rangers in Scotland - rules change to our detriment in all cases and in this case people were suspicious to begin with. The headlines will be: "Deloitte find Deloitte innocent". If you claim it is an independent investigation with no conflict of interest, then they will reply that this is not what we said re Harper and McLeod.

Thanks for sharing der Berliner, and extra thanks for spelling independent without an "a" - a rare treat this century. However, who would not have guessed (and, as you say this is as yet unconfirmed) this "investigation" ever likely to bring up any other "verdict". To find otherwise would be a real blow to: The Rangers Our current owners - still unkown Our investors Our shareholders oh, and the very people carrying out the "investigation" If this really is the outcome, we all know what comes next. Internal investigations that turn up nothing are always followed by external ones. In this case, Liewell will send in harper&macleod and dungaster and rhegan = all thirsting to get revenge for f@@@ing up our death last time around.

"There was no malice in it, " so McMurdo cannot hear sniggering or he does not know the difference between a snigger and a chuckle or giggle? Does he think talk re "punching him" followed by a laugh of agreement, is not "malicious"? Bill has morphed into Leggo, or any number of the tedious folk who ruin every Rangers' forum, by nailing all his faith to one mast and never, ever caring about anything else than somehow proving themselves right to have done so. (Or in Leggo and certain posters' cases, person after person after person and always claiming they were really against SDM/Whyte/Green although all their posts were brown-nosing taken to obsessive, troll levels.) The Rangers don't bother these people - risible though it is, their "on-line credibility" (what a hoot) that matters more to them than The Rangers. Sickening, really.

Sure hope so, seems one helluva struggle to do even that; we are a rudderless multi-holed ship with no captain in a seas of scavenging sharks.

Still stuff is coming out, recent stuff too so not (all) from past police raids or BDO. Anyway, heid splitting with the last few already, I came to this and I just can't take it in - can anyone explain what it means/how it could affect us? http://www.scribd.com/doc/142959769/Sevco-Finance

I will never lie to the fans I only met him once, two weeks ago I only met him once, months ago I never met him more than twice I only met him half a dozen times blah blah blah The fans have been lied to enough, I will never do it Man Utd want us Barcelona and Real want us Aston Villa are shitty wee nobodies (I paraphrase) 19 players, five at the Euros.... I call a spade a spade, I always tell the truth I am here to meet Uefa (wrong city, no-one met him) Then I am arranging a friendly with Olympiakos I won't sign a TV deal next year I won't leave until I hear Champ League music blah de blah blah blah I will never lie....................

In Charlotte Square

My fear is that there is no-one who could be the one who is willing to become that owner. The despairing cries for the oft quoted "no, not for me" (always politely) McColl show what Rangers fans want - a richer than King without King's baggage (and there is still baggage, whatever we want to now claim - I say this thinking that despite that he is our only chance) but we have to face facts here - no-one has ever come forward. And they have had chance aftr chance to do so - the bloated thief S(ick)DM wanted out for years, no-one came forward. This was before the enemies starting ripping us apart and spreading BTC lies to the extent they were generally accepted as truth. No Scottish based "knights to the rescue" yet then; as for foreigners - Arabs, Chinese, Americans with money to burn....why would they in the SPL? No reason it seems. Again none have ever come forward. I fear the answer is - there is no-one that meets the bill. The nearest is Dave King and I suspect we are all praying for him and, given what we have suffered, and are suffering, his past misdemeanours and ongoing cases and that judge's laceration of his character still leave him far and away the best bet. Our old cry of "no-one likes us, we don't care" - was hugely mistaken. Our bigotted enemies turned us toxic in and with the mhedia. We should have cared.

First one of these I have heard - similarly enticed by D'Artagnan's writing to do so.

http://mixlr.com/rangerschat/showreel/ D'Artagnan appears c 8 minutes in. Only disappointment is that we didn't get his BB company at the beginning. Well spoken, sir! PS There is a little break in the recording c 17mins in....it soon picks up again.

Very kind but my typo in "cemetery" spoilt it :-(

http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-16/hearts-majority-owner-ubig-is-insolvent-bankruptcy-body-says.html Thanks - I used the insert url button but as I had copied the entire address I ended up with "double" "http"s

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22601342 Scottish Premier League clubs have rejected amendments from the Scottish Football League to the top tier's plan for restructuring the league system. And the SPL will plough ahead with its vision of the future by holding a formal vote of its 12 clubs within the next 10 days. The SFL had proposed that a greater share of funding should filter down to Second and Third Division clubs . But SPL chairman Ralph Topping said it was sticking to its own plan. That would involve a merger of the SPL and SFL to form a single league body and play-offs involving the 11th-placed club in the top-flight and three second-tier teams. Money would filter down from the SPL to First Division clubs to create a softer landing for relegated clubs in return for those in the top-flight having an increased chance of dropping to Division One. At present, only the club finishing last are relegated. â?? I'm delighted to say we went round the table today, person by person, and they were all behind the proposal â? Ralph Topping SPL chairman SFL clubs wanted some of the money going to First Division clubs to filter further down to the levels below, but that was rejected by SPL clubs. "The SPL clubs to a man, and woman, round the table want to go to 'yes' and sign off on the changes, the 42-club proposal, take it forward and are willing to commit themselves to that through written resolution, which is great news for the game," said Topping. "The last meeting was a good one. You are always concerned that something's going to change in the interim. "I'm delighted to say we went round the table today, person by person, and they were all behind the proposal." SPL clubs were also in unanimous agreement two weeks ago and St Mirren chairman Stewart Gilmour was pleased that the consensus had continued and that a short-notice vote could be arranged. The 30 SFL clubs had also been in unanimous agreement on Friday when they came up with a different model of governance and wealth distribution. Gilmour would not expand on the differences between the two proposals, but he was satisfied with the SPL discussions and believes change remains possible this summer. "I think it's the right thing for all 42 clubs," he said. "It's in the hands of the SFL clubs. We all have little issues, but we have a middle road. "We looked at the whole model and we're quite happy with what we've done. "There has been exceptionally good compromise in the SPL. "It's not exactly what the board of St Mirren would wish for, but we are more than comfortable." SFL clubs would likely be given 14 days notice of a formal vote, which would follow any SPL vote.

They are saying that they can find no evidence of the parent company's insolvency...which is "odd", considering: http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-16/hearts-majority-owner-ubig-is-insolvent-bankruptcy-body-says.html

There are a number of points being debated which depend on information that we do not have. Primarily whether or not Murray occasionally likes to get blootered or whether he has, or has not a "drink problem" (a phrase that covers a wide range of people - from most people I know to alcoholics.) Speaking as someone who does have a real drink problem, I am not going to speculate on the condition or otherwise of someone I have never met. I will say this though that the danger of heavy drinking, far less being a problem drinker, is that one is rendered incapable of keeping secrets and capable of immoderate boasting far more quickly and often than one is rendered incapable of walking. I know this to my own shame.

Hearts have avoided immediate relegation after the Scottish Premier League decided the club's financial problems had not breached its rules before the end of the season. The club's parent company, UBIG, requested last week to be declared insolvent in a Lithuanian court. It led to fears that Hearts would face an 18-point penalty and relegation. But the SPL board concluded that it could not say whether insolvency had occurred as defined by its rules. Following talks between the six board members at Hampden, a league statement read: "The SPL board met today to consider reports from Lithuania in respect of Ukio Banko Investicine Grupe (UBIG). â?? This is the SPL's rules with regarding insolvency - rules that were put in last summer and rules that moved from insolvency events effecting just the league member club but also the parent of that member club â? Stewart Regan Scottish FA chief executive "The board are not satisfied on the basis of information currently available to it that an insolvency event as defined by SPL rules occurred in respect of UBIG during 2012-13." Rangers' financial meltdown last season led to its new owners being denied entry to the SPL and starting life again in Division Three. Dunfermline Athletic were deducted 15 points by the Scottish Football League - and were relegated from Division One on Sunday - after going into administration. And, ahead of the Hearts decision, Scottish FA chief executive Stewart Regan admitted that the Tynecastle club's problems were more bad news for the nation's football. "It is damaging because Hearts are a big club," he said. "It's another example where finance is getting in the way of the game making progress . "And, again, the people you feel sorry for are the fans at the end of the line who are desperate just to watch their team and watch good football." Regan did not think the Scottish FA would become involved in Hearts' problems at this stage, but warned that the Edinburgh club could now pay the penalty for the difficulties faced by its parent company in Lithuania. "This is an SPL matter," he said. "This is the SPL's rules with regarding insolvency - rules that were put in last summer and rules that moved from insolvency events affecting just the league member club but also the parent of that member club. "They are completely different from the Scottish FA's own rules on insolvency events. "If they don't like that decision, whatever decision it might be, clearly they can make a case to the Scottish FA. "But, as far as we are concerned, this is a league matter and the league will decide the rules by which it operates. "With the clock ticking towards fixtures being published and so on, I think any decision will have to be made quickly." The SPL board that made the decision is made up of chairman Ralph Topping, chief executive Neil Doncaster, Celtic director Eric Riley, Dundee United chairman Stephen Thompson, Aberdeen chief executive Duncan Fraser and Kilmarnock chairman Michael Johnston.

Hearts have avoided immediate relegation after the Scottish Premier League decided the club's financial problems had not breached its rules before the end of the season. The club's parent company, UBIG, requested last week to be declared insolvent in a Lithuanian court. It led to fears that Hearts would face an 18-point penalty and relegation. But the SPL board concluded that it could not say whether insolvency had occurred as defined by its rules. Following talks between the six board members at Hampden, a league statement read: "The SPL board met today to consider reports from Lithuania in respect of Ukio Banko Investicine Grupe (UBIG). â?? This is the SPL's rules with regarding insolvency - rules that were put in last summer and rules that moved from insolvency events effecting just the league member club but also the parent of that member club â? Stewart Regan Scottish FA chief executive "The board are not satisfied on the basis of information currently available to it that an insolvency event as defined by SPL rules occurred in respect of UBIG during 2012-13." Rangers' financial meltdown last season led to its new owners being denied entry to the SPL and starting life again in Division Three. Dunfermline Athletic were deducted 15 points by the Scottish Football League - and were relegated from Division One on Sunday - after going into administration. And, ahead of the Hearts decision, Scottish FA chief executive Stewart Regan admitted that the Tynecastle club's problems were more bad news for the nation's football. "It is damaging because Hearts are a big club," he said. "It's another example where finance is getting in the way of the game making progress . "And, again, the people you feel sorry for are the fans at the end of the line who are desperate just to watch their team and watch good football." Regan did not think the Scottish FA would become involved in Hearts' problems at this stage, but warned that the Edinburgh club could now pay the penalty for the difficulties faced by its parent company in Lithuania. "This is an SPL matter," he said. "This is the SPL's rules with regarding insolvency - rules that were put in last summer and rules that moved from insolvency events affecting just the league member club but also the parent of that member club. "They are completely different from the Scottish FA's own rules on insolvency events. "If they don't like that decision, whatever decision it might be, clearly they can make a case to the Scottish FA. "But, as far as we are concerned, this is a league matter and the league will decide the rules by which it operates. "With the clock ticking towards fixtures being published and so on, I think any decision will have to be made quickly." The SPL board that made the decision is made up of chairman Ralph Topping, chief executive Neil Doncaster, Celtic director Eric Riley, Dundee United chairman Stephen Thompson, Aberdeen chief executive Duncan Fraser and Kilmarnock chairman Michael Johnston.

Pretty much that, Papa - the only thing left to add "and is somehow, inexplicably) bitter and paranoid about it to boot, the boot..." Timz on newspaper comment sites have been quoting it as sign of "corruption" and "favouring Rangers" (not that they think we exist of course). They are beyond stupid, it is worrying folk like that are free to walk the street far less vote.

the videos supposedly supporting this claim are here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2wW-pUJSLg&feature http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxnotGJocEo&feature there is something very odd with the sound on part one - doctored, out of sync?