calscot

Relegation for dual contracts? Should be four OF games next season then... Won't hold my breath. BTW We've not been found guilty of this, Celtic have already pleaded guilty by paying HMRC, therefore they had a dual contract, PAYE and all.

Players are a special case when it comes to their employment and so it would be surprising if they weren't a special case when it comes to TUPE.

It will separate the customers and glory hunters from the supporters and fanatics.

Do people think Motherwell should join us in Division 3? They've been in administration twice and exited last time with a CVA at 6p in the pound (or so I read). Should Dunfermline and Dundee join us for not paying their taxes, Hearts for not paying their players, Celtic for dual contracts and bringing the game into disrepute over the referee strike, Dundee Utd for walking away from the debt to Rangers fans? Take the extreme view and the third division will be pretty much the same as the SPL.

I think the problem here is that we have to define our debts and also what it mean by walking away and how we are actually paying for it. For me, as I've explained many times, the big tax case is just not a valid debt. I accept the first year's debt but contend that if HMRC had a problem with it they should have dealt with it right then as it was done in full view, instead of allowing companies to continue for 10 years, thinking what they were doing was legitimate. If we'd been told it was naughty we would have stopped. Simple. If it wasn't for that case we'd have traded normally and paid everything that was due. But when you are unfairly pushed into a corner and threatened with what is tantamount to death, it is not surprising someone of a lower moral code comes along and acts desperately so others get caught in the collatoral damage. If you're talking morals of not paying debts you have to also look at the morals of the debts themselves. The next biggest debt was Ticketus, which although they signed a contract, it was of the payday loan kind which is highly immoral in itself and I struggle to have any sympathy for them - which goes to zero as I see how they funded CW before he bought the club as something that should be illegal. They tried to scam us and got scammed themselves. Tough titty. So for me, I only have remorse waling away from about £25m of debt - but contend that if we were treated fairly by others, that debt would have been paid. However, due to the circumstances how have we benefitted? We have no European income for at least three years, we have a lot of rebuilding of our squad to pay for, we've lost millions worth of transfer values, we've had to write off a title challenge and may have to do so for some time to come. Our credit rating is through the floor and for the club and fans, it looks like whoever buys us are taking the money back out of the club and more. That has already cost us well over £25m, so when you go back to your moral anguish - just where have we benefited? Yes we've come out of the debt crisis but you have to wonder who are ones responsible for that? There have been many players in this strange game and some have lost and some have won. The club were incidental to most of it and it has been punished the most. When you have not gained from other people's shenanigans but have already paid dearly for them, why should you be punished, punished and punished again? There is plenty of precedent in other countries to look at, and I don't recall the type of witch hunt we are having now. It saddens me that even our own start to fall for the propaganda against us. And I reserve the right to criticise it and counter it. The problem I have is that there has been plenty been said in defence of the club but you have given a straight guilty verdict while not dealing with that side of the story. Your post reads as if that defence has never been heard. It's not to wound, it's to get you to challenge your viewpoint. The likes of Lawwell have been using propaganda to spin and influence people against us, you're post was worded in a way that makes it look from the outside, at least from my point of view, that you have swallowed what he is saying without a proper challenge and seemingly without taking the counter viewpoints into account. When you bombard someone in a complex situation that they heinously guilty all the time, sometimes they start to believe it. However, it seems to me that there is much to challenge and mitigate the guilt in this case and it's sad when our own don't do so.

The OP demonstrates the whole Scottish football position of "Rangers must be punished" without much of an understanding or just ignoring the facts of what has gone on. The bit that gets me is that there are many posts on here which examine and debate the whole process and the various villains of the piece, but authors of this kind of thread don't engage with them at all, they are completely ignored and then we get a piece that looks straight out of the Lawwell party line. If you're going to write this kind of piece, you should at least take into account all sides of the situation and have some understanding of the whys and wherefores.

It seems to me that no matter what money is in the oldco bank account, if the money doesn't actually belong to the oldco then creditors shouldn't legally be able to touch it.

As far as I can see, a club can call itself anything it likes. There's no companies act for clubs. As for the business then we could go down the Rangers Athletic and Football club road...

Or perhaps we need to challenge ourselves with why we're so hated? Sometimes I just don't get it. If you take away the behaviour of the fans and deal with the club - as the other clubs should be, Rangers have been pretty reasonable over the years. We bring money to their coffers with a big away crowd, TV money and boost their attendances with the attraction of seeing top players. They raise more by selling players to us at what could be considered inflated prices - especially during the three foreigner rule. We've been respectful of clubs - postponing games when asked, moving others when necessary even though it's inconvenient for us. We're also respectful to them in the press. Our managers have generally acted with dignity. We've provided the opposition for many testimonials. We loan decent players out to other teams without asking them to break the bank. We haven't gone out of our way to shaft other clubs or to overly influence referees. We've taken all legitimate punishments (and some not so legitimate) in good grace. We raise a lot of money for charity and support armed services and emergency services. So why do they hate us? We sometimes offer less money for players than they think they are worth - but they do exactly the same to lower division teams. We want a greater share of the TV money but that is just natural. There is the 11-1 voting but that's just so that the other clubs can't just rape the OF. If there were bigger clubs from Aberdeen, Dundee and Edinburgh to remove the duopoly, it wouldn't be needed. When it comes to the club, it just seems like jealousy and unadulterated self-interest. It was interesting to note the comments from the other clubs' chairmen about the newco vote. Celtic and Dunfermline say they will vote purely in the interests of their clubs. That, to me, is disgusting - where is the sporting integrity? They are implying they will shaft Rangers if it benefits them in any way - nothing to do with morals or the good of the game. The only chairman who sounded like he had integrity and talked about the good of the game was the one from Hearts - and he is a foreigner: just shows you the mentality in our country.

I think you're right on both counts.

I disagree with that. That's for customers not fans, especially not informed fans. The price of the ticket reflects the expenses of the club divided by the number of people who buy the tickets. It's not usually profit making - it's more like a club ball. If you want decent food and a decent band and a decent venue, then you need to charge a certain price that is the expenses divided by the number of people who come. The higher the quality fayre and the less people, the more you need to charge. If nobody wants to pay much and not many want to go then you'll end up in a shit venue, with a shit band and shit food. We're basically doing a whip-round for the Rangers team, not the opposition. If you don't pony up then you get what you pay for. Maybe a better example is paying a high price in your local pub for a pint as they need to do so to stay open, when some huge pub in town charges the same for more salubrious surrounds and better totty.

I can't see many people who would spend four months buying a house with all the surveys, searches and conveyancing and the stess that goes with it all, then after moving in with all the expenses that goes with it and then immediately sell for 10% more than their purchase price. If they actually want to live there, then you'd have to offer them big money; if they are in it for the investment over a few years, you'd have to cover their expenses and then make it really worth their while - probably well over half what they'd eventually seek to make.

That may be true but it doesn't make it right. It also doesn't excuse the hypocritical and venomous witch-hunt by the overly outraged mob.

There are quite a few on here who said they wouldn't follow a newco; wonder how long that will last?

Seems that way. Once again we're left with the only show in town and that is Green. It's got to be said that it's been a shoddy saga for such an illustrious club.

TB - that sounds plausible. Either that or Green is playing hard ball with the amounts he wants to let the club go for or even for a part of the action and so the consortium are saying - on you go then, we'll be there to pick up Rangers on the cheap when you run out of cash and things start to go pear shaped. Or you could make a fast buck and walk away now.

We need to sort this out. We did NOT have £100m debt wiped out. We did not gain a sporting advantage from not paying £100m of debt. If our own fans are falling for this stuff no wonder the other fans are gunning for us. We didn't pay tax due to a tax avoidance scheme to the tune of about £23m, the rest is due to HMRC coming after us retrospectively. Tax avoidance is not a crime and our club were advised it was legal and it was never hidden. I heard three external contractors here talking about their accounting and they are doing a ton of tax avoidance - one uses his company to "pay himself" just three grand a year of PAYE wage and that's pretty normal. Tax avoidance is rife and I would be shocked if there was one club who hadn't dabbled in it. If we're to be so severely punished then so do the rest of the league to some extent.

How can that be a journalist? Even without the heavily biased content, the way it is written renders it almost unreadable.

How are they going to see club 12 - as Rangers or Dundee? Swapping one for another makes a massive difference to the fixture list with regards home and away games - unless Dundee are likely to make it to the top six. Funny how they may be replacing us with a club that went into administration twice and paid off debts at 6p in the pound...

I agree, but it'll probably cost you a few grand... Just needs a bottle of Châteaux Petrus to wash it down... I think that's what Duff and Phelps have for lunch on expenses while they are administrating.

The thing is that the likes of Spence and Chico are so laughable as reporters that when they first come to the screen you kind of root for them as you actually feel sorry for them. They seem harmless and a bit of a figure of fun to be parodied. Then they get "established" and up their own arse and start spouting worthless, arrogant shit as if they are some sage, wise men who are at the top of the knowledge tree when it comes to what is right for Scottish football. They start off as a light and funny joke but then become the dark, scoffing joke.

Why would it have to be div 3? Being relegated one divsion has been used as a punishment for far worst crimes in other leagues - like match fixing. And I still don't see what our real crime is - one where the other clubs are completely without sin.

The nickel and diming for the last six months has been cringeworthy. Someone needs to just put their hand in their pocket and pay a reasonable rate to secure a long term bargain.

What the hell does he feed his kids? steak? A starter of birds nest soup followed by half a dozen deep fried white truffles stuffed with almas caviare, coated with edible gold leaf, accompanied with a large slab of Kobe fillet topped with matsutake mushrooms, and to finish, dansuke Watermelon with Knipschildt chocolates?

Can't see this happening as fixtures are based on seedlings. You can't just swap Rangers for a first division team. Also there is the police requirement that the two Glasgow clubs not play at home on the same day, but they could more easily factor that in.