GovanAllan 0 Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 I guess we have briought the game into disrepute by not paying creditors. Not sure what else we have done. does anyone have any ideas? All clubs that go into administration do so because they can't pay their creditors but no other club has been charged. Have Hearts ever been brought up on charges for continually not paying their players on time, not that I have heard off. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,349 Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Have Hearts ever been brought up on charges for continually not paying their players on time, not that I have heard off. No. It's obviously victimisation but when you break it down the crime does not fit the punishment. The punishment is longer than the period that we were not paying some of our bills. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,271 Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 What I can't see is that the SFA can call a transfer ban on us for the relevant points. There is nothing in the rule that suggests they can. Is this a new law then? Much like Lafferty's Law back in 2009 (or the like)? Will the ban be lifted once we pay all creditors and come out of admin? Can we draw similarities with the Sion case and their subsequent UEFA fiasco? So far, the SFA have simply told us what rules were used for what charge and the fine. They have not given any explanation how that fine comes abouit though. As in: is there anything in the SFA rulebook that explains their decision? Or tells us that they have the power to do this because of our shortcomings? Or can they - the relevant body - just whip up a punishment on the day ... as they see fit? BTW, if anyone has been guilty of bringing the game into disrepute, it is the Lurgan Bigot, and so far, he's been hit with a massive 2-game ban. I won't hold my breath here ... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Cheers Frankie, another question then: If Rangers were found 'not proven' that we'd complied with rule 1, how can we have been found guilty of rule 2 which is ensuring our 'officials, Team Staff and players act in accordance with Rule 1'. So they say they can't prove that rule 1's been broken, but have fined the club £10k for our staff not complying with the same rule??? Exactly the question I asked in another thread last night. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ascender 352 Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 I thought all of these are unrelated to administration though? This is all because of the way Whyte has run the club since he took it over rather than a direct result of us going in to administration and like Frankie says, the rules are worded such that there's massive room for interpretation. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigy 0 Posted April 24, 2012 Author Share Posted April 24, 2012 Exactly the question I asked in another thread last night. It's only makes up £10k of the fine, but it makes absolutely no sense and shows what a shambolic process the SFA have ran. It'd be like being up in court for handling stolen goods, and the court ruling that they couldn't prove that the goods were stolen, but finding you guilty of handling goods anyway. It wouldn't happen and makes no sense whatsoever. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Trains Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Exactly the question I asked in another thread last night. My reading of it is that the club wasn't guilty of breaching rule 1 - but Craig Whyte was. Which means the club has to be found guilty of breaching rule because we didn't ensure CW himself didn't break rule 1. Very harsh when you consider that in essence CW was the club during that time frame. Who in the club could have stopped him behaving like he did? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,173 Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 My reading of it is that the club wasn't guilty of breaching rule 1 - but Craig Whyte was. Which means the club has to be found guilty of breaching rule because we didn't ensure CW himself didn't break rule 1. Very harsh when you consider that in essence CW was the club during that time frame. Who in the club could have stopped him behaving like he did? Fair comment. Essentially our club has been run into the ground by two people - SDM and Craig Whyte. These are the people who should be punished - not the Rangers support who contribute massively to Scottish football. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Fair comment. Essentially our club has been run into the ground by two people - SDM and Craig Whyte. These are the people who should be punished - not the Rangers support who contribute massively to Scottish football. But there also has to be accountability on the club Frankie. Otherwise all that happens is the club gets run into the ground, the owner "sells" it to someone else, allowing the powers that be to punish that selling owner whilst the club are not sanctioned.... and it just continues to go round in circles. We DO need to be punished as a club, I just disagree with the brevity of the punishment. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Trains Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Fair comment. Essentially our club has been run into the ground by two people - SDM and Craig Whyte. These are the people who should be punished - not the Rangers support who contribute massively to Scottish football. Indeed, but as a PLC there should have been checks and balances in place. What were other board members doing during the Murray reign? And what were GS, AR and others doing over the last 9 months? Silly question really, because we all know exactly what they were doing, lapping up the acclaim and raking in the ££s. I suspect when this plays out we'll have a list a mile long of people to blame - yet we're the ones who'll suffer Its heartbreaking really. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.