Admin Statement on SPL rule change proposals - 11/04

[Zappa 0]

All the more reason for the administrators to accelerate rather than stall the process, it's apparent that the interests of all the prospective buyers would be served by bringing a conclusion sooner or later.

 

Do you not think that selling the club and exiting administration via a CVA before the outcome of the EBT case would have been extremely reckless on the part of D&P?

[chilledbear 16]

We entered administration under certain rules, so we should exit under the same.

 

Don't see how they can change them midway.

[Zappa 0]

We entered administration under certain rules, so we should exit under the same.

 

Don't see how they can change them midway.

 

The other clubs are simply taking advantage of the fact that we're in administration, practically on our knees as a club and don't have a Rangers man voting on our behalf at the SPL. The major aim they're working on is to have the SPL voting structure changed and they'll apparently do anything to corner Rangers while we're at our weakest and most vulnerable point in decades. All we can do is hope that Paul Clark or whoever represents us makes the right choices on behalf of the club, although protests from the fans might help our cause too if they're well organised and hard-hitting.

[forlanssister 3,061]

Do you not think that selling the club and exiting administration via a CVA before the outcome of the EBT case would have been extremely reckless on the part of D&P?

 

Who's saying the outcome won't be known before we exit administration it's not simply a case of the administrators accepting an offer and that's it.

[BlueMazza 0]

Why do some of the rules only require an 8 vote majority? I thought it was all an 11-1 required. Is this something new to push it through or has it always been in place?

I'm asking because of the furore recently about the other 10 clubs threatening to pull out because of 11-1 rule. Surely they can't change the rules for one vote?

[Zappa 0]

Who's saying the outcome won't be known before we exit administration it's not simply a case of the administrators accepting an offer and that's it.

 

No, I know that forlan. My question was more aimed at the idea of 'IF' the administrators had been quicker and had already sold the club to a new owner etc, so it was hypothetical rather than based on the here and now.

[ian1964 10,460]

We entered administration under certain rules, so we should exit under the same.

 

Don't see how they can change them midway.

 

Agreed. Any new changes to any rules would have to be put in place for future events such as what Rangers are going through just now. It must be bordering on illegal what they are trying to do?.

What about the TV deal?,are they forgetting that this deal is on the strength of Rangers being part of this deal?.

[54andcounting 0]

As Ally said last month.... "Maybe one or two are having a wee fly kick. I would suggest to them to have a right good kick now because we’re not going to be where we are for a long time."

 

Seems they are putting the boot in.

[ian1964 10,460]

They are slowing up the take over process,Liewell and his puppet are really putting the boot in. Feck it,resign from the SPL and apply to get into the third division.

[Zappa 0]

Why do some of the rules only require an 8 vote majority? I thought it was all an 11-1 required. Is this something new to push it through or has it always been in place?

I'm asking because of the furore recently about the other 10 clubs threatening to pull out because of 11-1 rule. Surely they can't change the rules for one vote?

 

Mazza, I can't remember the official terminology, but I'm absolutely positive that it's currently supposed to be an 11-1 vote on all major or extremely serious league change matters and other less serious matters are catagorized on another two levels below the top level with less majority votes needed to pass the proposals.

 

In the case of these proposals which are undoubtedly major and serious decisions, it will be very suspicious indeed if they are not treated as proposals which require an 11-1 vote. In other words, I think it would be a complete and deliberate stitch-up of Rangers if these types of rule changes are passed based on less than an 11-1 voting structure.