Rangers News

by The Galveston Giant Sun Aug 14, 2011 1:36 pm

First topic message reminder :

Updates on Rangers Transfer news.

by Gordy Fri May 18, 2012 4:56 am

I have very little sympathy for Rangers if I must be honest. They seem to be using the fact they are the biggest/secong biggest club in Scotland and the "too big and important" argument to avoid punishment. Its bemusing that they feel entitled to appeal punishment despite years of cheating the system and other teams.

Interesting point on McCoist. Its obviously been a difficult season under which to manage and no investment available for the squad. But has this disguised inadequecies as a manager? Im not sure. He still finished second despite the deduction so for me the jury is still out.

by The Special Juan Fri May 18, 2012 5:05 am

Toys, pram: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18108973

This is why a lot of people want Rangers gone.

by Gordy Fri May 18, 2012 5:22 am

TSC wrote:Toys, pram: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18108973

This is why a lot of people want Rangers gone.

Thst really is shocking! And these are supposed to be fans! There has long been a stigma over fans of both of the Old Firm for sectarian reasons. Rangers in particular appear to constantly be involved in some kind of trouble, not to mention the incident in Manchester. I have no sympathy for them and this further casts a poor reflection on their club. Trying to harm other clubs and their own national side because they were punished for breaking the rules and being financially irregular? Very disappointing and will gain them no sympathy anywhere else.

by JAS Sun May 20, 2012 6:18 am

SugarRayRussell (PBK) wrote:Rangers appeal against their transfer embargo and £160,000 fine. I thought GG would have put this up. He might have done himself in by now though!

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/rangers-rocked-after-ban-appeal-fails.17619105

IMO this is spot on they haven't paid for players in their squad. They can renew players contracts and sign under 18s. McCoist said it hurts the club but the club have cheated and that has hurt other teams so fat Sally will just need to sulk. He's lucky he's got a job anyway even before admin Celtic had turned the tide and they were out of 3 cups.

In what way exactly has the way in which Rangers have allegedly cheated directly affected other clubs??? Lets have a wee recap shall we? Of all the supposed wrongdoings I suspect that what people see as the worst one is paying EBT's to players with an "alleged" under the table contract. Yeah that must seriously have affected other clubs.... I mean if Rangers hadn't offered for example Ronald de Boer £40k a week plus discretionary bonuses which may have topped him up to £45k a week I'm sure the likes of St Mirren or Hibs could have offered him a fully legal £44k a week right? Seriously have a think before spouting holier than thou nonsense about Rangers cheating prowess and please try not to be influenced by jealosy.

Well done the Jambos by the way, lets hope the players collect their win bonuses before the end of the year and that they pay the appropriate taxes on them...unless of course Mad Vlad has created an EBT and not written it into players contracts Wink

If you're not following or don't understand the tongue in cheek comment then you are in no position to have a holier than thou pop at Rangers!!

by RinoGattuso Sun May 20, 2012 6:46 pm

Gordy wrote:Rangers in particular appear to constantly be involved in some kind of trouble,

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

by SugarRayRussell (PBK) Tue May 22, 2012 6:32 pm

JAS wrote:
SugarRayRussell (PBK) wrote:Rangers appeal against their transfer embargo and £160,000 fine. I thought GG would have put this up. He might have done himself in by now though!

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/rangers-rocked-after-ban-appeal-fails.17619105

IMO this is spot on they haven't paid for players in their squad. They can renew players contracts and sign under 18s. McCoist said it hurts the club but the club have cheated and that has hurt other teams so fat Sally will just need to sulk. He's lucky he's got a job anyway even before admin Celtic had turned the tide and they were out of 3 cups.

In what way exactly has the way in which Rangers have allegedly cheated directly affected other clubs??? Lets have a wee recap shall we? Of all the supposed wrongdoings I suspect that what people see as the worst one is paying EBT's to players with an "alleged" under the table contract. Yeah that must seriously have affected other clubs.... I mean if Rangers hadn't offered for example Ronald de Boer £40k a week plus discretionary bonuses which may have topped him up to £45k a week I'm sure the likes of St Mirren or Hibs could have offered him a fully legal £44k a week right? Seriously have a think before spouting holier than thou nonsense about Rangers cheating prowess and please try not to be influenced by jealosy.

Well done the Jambos by the way, lets hope the players collect their win bonuses before the end of the year and that they pay the appropriate taxes on them...unless of course Mad Vlad has created an EBT and not written it into players contracts If you're not following or don't understand the tongue in cheek comment then you are in no position to have a holier than thou pop at Rangers!!

Using the EBTs gave Rangers an advantage over Celtic and thats a fact. They won 2 very close titles in that time getting inot the Champions league off the back of one of those wins. Still no one got cheated have a word with yourself.

by super_realist Wed May 23, 2012 9:52 pm

Gordy wrote:I have very little sympathy for Rangers if I must be honest. They seem to be using the fact they are the biggest/secong biggest club in Scotland and the "too big and important" argument to avoid punishment. Its bemusing that they feel entitled to appeal punishment despite years of cheating the system and other teams.

Interesting point on McCoist. Its obviously been a difficult season under which to manage and no investment available for the squad. But has this disguised inadequecies as a manager? Im not sure. He still finished second despite the deduction so for me the jury is still out.

Great point.
Saying Rangers or Celtic are big clubs is like saying Eintracht Frankfurt or Gothenburg are still big clubs. Back in the day when European football was small time, perhaps they were, now they are just another Rosenburg or Brondby, albeit with childish, immature and bigoted fans.

Lets just let the Scottish Premier League die, it is to football, what 99p Stores are to big retail. Perhaps that wretched corner in Western SCotland will grow up a bit if they don't have two stupid football clubs to bicker about.

by Guest Thu May 24, 2012 4:51 am

Conflict of interest concerns over Duff & Phelps Rangers role
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-18179264

by super_realist Thu May 24, 2012 5:44 am

Anyone watching the BBC programme about the rangers debacle? Looks like pretty damning stuff.

by Doon the Water Fri May 25, 2012 5:45 am

It was pretty jaw dropping stuff SR
They all seemed to have thier noses in the trough inc SDM.

How they still allow Duff and Fluffs to operate with one of there directors 'advising' Whyte on the takeover is staggering and a pretty poor observation of the legal system when it comes to administration.

The whole lot of them seem to be corupt [except the fans] [[well most of them!]]

by Doon the Water Fri May 25, 2012 5:53 am

Oh by the way ''''well done the Jambos''''.

I watched the final in a nice wee guest house on South Uist overlooking the re-discovered Tom Morris course at Askernish.

The following night I watched the European cup with a guy from Munich who was desperately wanting Chealski to win as he was an 1869 supporter.
I wanted Bayern to win as I don't like Chealski. It was a kind of sureal experience!!
A few Lagavullans were enjoyed in the process.

by The Special Juan Fri May 25, 2012 6:24 am

I noticed the administrators are corrupt for Rangers. This thing keeps getting better and better.

by Ayrshirebhoy Fri May 25, 2012 8:21 am

Watched that programme this morning. Some shocking stuff in it. I always remembered people wondering why Whyte was so keen to bring duff and phelps in. Think the admins could be in some trouble too.

by Ayrshirebhoy Fri May 25, 2012 8:28 am

And what about souness getting 30k put in his account then he buys tugay at Blackburn? Shocked

by JAS Sat May 26, 2012 8:13 am

Doon the Water wrote:Oh by the way ''''well done the Jambos''''.

I watched the final in a nice wee guest house on South Uist overlooking the re-discovered Tom Morris course at Askernish.

The following night I watched the European cup with a guy from Munich who was desperately wanting Chealski to win as he was an 1869 supporter.
I wanted Bayern to win as I don't like Chealski. It was a kind of sureal experience!!
A few Lagavullans were enjoyed in the process.

lol surreal indeed Doon Wink

What did you think of Askernish? (I'm assuming you had a go at it)

by Doon the Water Sat May 26, 2012 5:17 pm

Hi Jas

I did not take the clubs, good decision as it was very windy and cold for the first few days, being Scotland it suddenly changed to fantastic for the last 4 days.
I did walk round Askernish and had a good blether with the captain/owner and his son.
It is an amazing piece of land. You could build about a dozen golf courses on the machir of South Uist. You dont really need to design them, I have never seen such a stretch of wonderful golfing land.
The course is very like the setting for Machrie on Islay, very pure and natural. Condition was a bit raw, lots of daisies on the fairways so a red ball was a good idea. They obviously graze the land but there was no sign of sheep or cattle.
Greens, again just so natural there is a fair bit of work needed to get them up to a decent standard but, my goodness they did look like fun.
The nine holer on Harris looked fairly good, it would be difficult to concentrate on the golf with the views you get there.
I think that the guys running it have thier heads screwed on. I did point out the mistakes that Machrie had made. You simply will not get many visitors in that geographical area.

Got to prepare my stall for my grandson's school Fete. It is only a wee skool [56 pupils] but they are quite enthusiastic.
Two years ago one of the pilot dads dropped in with his rescue helicopter, last year another army reservist dad came with his Tank. Not sure what we are getting this year.

by The Special Juan Wed May 30, 2012 1:19 am

"Judge Lord Glennie rules that a transfer embargo imposed on Rangers by the Scottish Football Association was unlawful, following a hearing at the Court of Session in Edinburgh."

Well that's fair(!) I wonder how it's unlawful.

by Ayrshirebhoy Wed May 30, 2012 1:55 am

All they need now is money to buy players. Tbh I never saw the point in fighting that.

by The Galveston Giant Wed May 30, 2012 3:01 am

So has it been lifted?

by Doon the Water Wed May 30, 2012 3:03 am

I suppose the SFA lawyers will appeal and then it will be 2015.

by The Special Juan Wed May 30, 2012 3:09 am

The club that owes money to other clubs for transfer fees and is in administration is allowed to buy more players even though it has "no money". Good 'ain.

by GSC Wed May 30, 2012 3:13 am

The ban hasn't been lifted, its been referred back to the SFA.

The SFA and FIFA will no doubt take a dim view of Rangers going through courts

by SugarRayRussell (PBK) Wed May 30, 2012 6:43 am

It would be a disgraceful decision if this is overturned. It makes a mockery of the transfer market. If a club can't pay the balance for transfer fees they owe there is no way they should be allowed to sign more players regardless of who leaves in the summer or the team they can put on the park next season.

McCoist said there is a lot of young talent at Murray Park so what's the problem?

by The Special Juan Wed May 30, 2012 6:48 am

Whatever happened to John Fleck?

by SugarRayRussell (PBK) Wed May 30, 2012 6:56 am

The Scottish Wayne Rooney was a hype job. He never looked a player.

by Doon the Water Wed May 30, 2012 7:24 am

It seems the only other options that the SFA could legally have taken was to expel Rangers fron the League the SFA Cup or both.

by The Galveston Giant Wed May 30, 2012 10:18 pm

Going to be interesting to see what the SFA do now, not good. I'm sure Fleck went to Sheffield Utd.

by Gordy Thu May 31, 2012 1:37 am

Have Rangers, by contesting the decision and getting overturned inadvertadly shot themselves in the foot? It seems the SFA could now take more drastic action.

I think the way Rangers and their supporters have acted since all this financial irregularities have come to light has been poor and not reflected well on them. Talk of boycotting matches and even their own National sideI think is disgraceful. The image is they are presenting is that they dont deserve any punishment and if they go, then they will try to take everyone down with them. Shocking attitude to have as its clear the club has been rotten to its core for some time.

They would have been best served putting their heads down, accepting the punishment they deserve and getting on with things. By challenging the ruling they have lost any goodwill they might have had and I would not be surprised if firmer action was now taken against them. Expelling them from the league is an option. To quote a senior official at the SFA on Rangers importance:

"If you look after the sport the money will follow you, if you look after the money you'll kill the sport.''

I couldnt agree more.

by Doon the Water Thu May 31, 2012 5:39 am

Who contested the SFA ruling?
I believe it was the administrators.
Really shocking decision which showed a level of arrogance that 'Rangers were bigger than the SFA'

As Gordy said , a bit of heads down and humble pie would have been more adventageous. I for one thought that they were getting away very lightly.
Now I am just angry and if they dissapeared from Scottish football I would not really care.

No person or team is bigger than the sport, many have tried and many have failed.

by RDuncan8 Thu May 31, 2012 4:36 pm

Just die already!

If SFA don't hammer them, then FIFA are going to screw us all - National teams, SPL teams, SFL teams.

Ban them SFA!

by The Special Juan Thu May 31, 2012 7:56 pm

Ah, he went down South? He disappeared (and the only trace of him is at the top of the Scottish Gossip column on the BBC website as a newspaper has the headline "Thank Fleck for that"). Promised much, delievered little it seems.

Rangers have been really disgraceful during this process. Frankly, I've never liked them, but I sincerely hope the SFA throw everything at them now. We're stuffed anyway: With Rangers FIFA will end us, without them we might have a chance but probably not.

by SugarRayRussell (PBK) Fri Jun 01, 2012 4:49 am

I've never felt that relegating Rangers was the correct decision it puts to many of the smaller clubs in real danger of going out of business. However if Rangers shameful behaviour in taking the SFA to court has any sort of ramifications for any other clubs or the national team the should be expelled from the SPL and not allowed into the SFL.

A bit of remorse would be nice. We have had nothing but bleating and moaning from their fans and managers. They need to remember they are the cheats and put all the other clubs in this position no one did this to them.

by RDuncan8 Fri Jun 01, 2012 6:21 am

SugarRayRussell (PBK) wrote:I've never felt that relegating Rangers was the correct decision it puts to many of the smaller clubs in real danger of going out of business.

If other clubs fall too, then so be it (my club included). Clubs shouldn't be reliant on another team to be successful. If the clubs are relying on Rangers, what happens when they get relegated. I guess Dunfermline will be folding soon then.

by SugarRayRussell (PBK) Fri Jun 01, 2012 6:31 am

RDuncan8 wrote:
SugarRayRussell (PBK) wrote:I've never felt that relegating Rangers was the correct decision it puts to many of the smaller clubs in real danger of going out of business.

If other clubs fall too, then so be it (my club included). Clubs shouldn't be reliant on another team to be successful. If the clubs are relying on Rangers, what happens when they get relegated. I guess Dunfermline will be folding soon then.

Relegation is one thing clubs budget for that.

What team do you support mate? I take it from the post it isn't one of the Old Firm.

When the Setanta deal went bust a few clubs almost went under. I wouldn't like to see the end of the more established clubs like Dundee Utd, Hearts or Aberdeen but that is the situation we would be in if Sky walked away.

by The Special Juan Fri Jun 01, 2012 7:12 am

I think the SPL need to punt Rangers and take it from there. As I wrote earlier, they're stuffed either way. Rangers either take the whole of Scottish Football with them or it recovers slowly. Let's not forget the SFL has survived on it's own for ages now without TV money (just about).

What I do want to know is who pays Rangers court fees? Or does that get lumped on top of the debt?

by SugarRayRussell (PBK) Fri Jun 01, 2012 8:13 am

Not got a clue about the legal fees.

Stewart Regan was just on Newsnight Scotland and said he has no idea who the other members of Charles Green consortium are. Its beyond belief that after everything that has went on with Craig White a consortium of 15-20 people can buy a club and the men who run the game here don't know who they are.

by RDuncan8 Fri Jun 01, 2012 4:03 pm

SugarRayRussell (PBK) wrote:
RDuncan8 wrote:
SugarRayRussell (PBK) wrote:I've never felt that relegating Rangers was the correct decision it puts to many of the smaller clubs in real danger of going out of business.

If other clubs fall too, then so be it (my club included). Clubs shouldn't be reliant on another team to be successful. If the clubs are relying on Rangers, what happens when they get relegated. I guess Dunfermline will be folding soon then.

Relegation is one thing clubs budget for that.

What team do you support mate? I take it from the post it isn't one of the Old Firm.

When the Setanta deal went bust a few clubs almost went under. I wouldn't like to see the end of the more established clubs like Dundee Utd, Hearts or Aberdeen but that is the situation we would be in if Sky walked away.

So then surely that means they can budget for a lesser tv deal seeing as the SFL doesnt have one?? Sky won't walk away, we will get less but a bigger share for everyone (ex OF). More viewers watch Scottish football standard games than standard Spanish games.

by SugarRayRussell (PBK) Sat Jun 02, 2012 8:10 pm

RDuncan8 wrote:
SugarRayRussell (PBK) wrote:
RDuncan8 wrote:
SugarRayRussell (PBK) wrote:I've never felt that relegating Rangers was the correct decision it puts to many of the smaller clubs in real danger of going out of business.

If other clubs fall too, then so be it (my club included). Clubs shouldn't be reliant on another team to be successful. If the clubs are relying on Rangers, what happens when they get relegated. I guess Dunfermline will be folding soon then.

Relegation is one thing clubs budget for that.

What team do you support mate? I take it from the post it isn't one of the Old Firm.

When the Setanta deal went bust a few clubs almost went under. I wouldn't like to see the end of the more established clubs like Dundee Utd, Hearts or Aberdeen but that is the situation we would be in if Sky walked away.

So then surely that means they can budget for a lesser tv deal seeing as the SFL doesnt have one?? Sky won't walk away, we will get less but a bigger share for everyone (ex OF). More viewers watch Scottish football standard games than standard Spanish games.

The shortfall in TV went Setanta went bust almost put a few out of business another one might be too much for them to cope with. On the other hand its their own faults for running up the debts they have.

by The Special Juan Sun Jun 03, 2012 8:21 pm

To be fair, there are very few clubs without debt anywhere in the world.

by SugarRayRussell (PBK) Sun Jun 03, 2012 8:59 pm

Yes their is but these clubs haven't looked after themselves apart from the odd exception like HIbs. St Mirren just got lucky if the Supermarket hadn't wanted the ground the old Love Street was on they would be struggling

No one made them spend the money. It's pretty simple if you don't have it don't spend it. Debt that is manageable is one thing but the level of debt some SPL clubs have is ridiculous.

Celtic have always looked after the books and got stick for it at times. Not even £8m debt. That's manageable debt we could sell a player and wipe it out.

by The Special Juan Sun Jun 03, 2012 10:21 pm

Very true, purely depends on the size of the club whether the debt is manageable or not. What doesn't help is Rangers not being able to pay the money back. Even £10k is a lot of money to smaller clubs.

by The Galveston Giant Tue Jun 05, 2012 5:22 am

Will the SPL survive without Rangers?

While some say the SPL would collapse without the Ibrox club, our analysis suggests the financial implications might not be so dire

THE cost of Rangers being lost from the Scottish Premier League could average out at only £375,000 to the non-Old Firm clubs next season. Detailed analysis conducted by Scotland on Sunday demonstrates that top-flight sides need not be facing catastrophe if five of them were to vote against admitting a newco Rangers into the set-up – the sporting integrity dilemma that will be faced if prospective Ibrox owner Charles Green cannot obtain a company voluntary arrangement (CVA).

Under our calculations, a total of £5.76 million would be wiped from revenues if the Rangers brand and their support were removed from the SPL financial equation. Celtic, though, would take the hit for almost half of this loss. That is because it is inconceivable the other clubs would not take the opportunity to change the voting structure if Rangers were out of the picture. Currently, the big two effectively have a veto. If that disappeared, so too could the present distribution model. In our projections, the top two SPL places would claim just over 20 per cent of centralised broadcast and sponsorship deals. At present that figure is 32 per cent.

It is possible that revenue reductions for clubs in an SPL without Rangers may be even be lower than our projections. Essentially, we have presented worst-case scenarios for the squeezes on television deals and attendances.

The SPL claim that the Old Firm account for 85 per cent of their earnings. We have therefore hacked 42 per cent off all centralised revenues in calculating what the loss of Rangers might mean to other clubs. Yet, no one knows if Sky and ESPN, or indeed other sponsors, would, or could, demand such heftily renegotiated terms. Especially since a Deloitte report last week put the worth of the Old Firm to Scottish football at 67 per cent. Moreover, we have arrived at our attendance totals by replacing clubs’ gates for Rangers games with their lowest crowd of last season. We have not factored in the fact that increases would follow greater competition among clubs for higher league placings and European slots. Indeed, aside from Celtic, some followers of SPL clubs might be more likely to buy season tickets because they weren’t going to be treated to visits by Rangers.

The picture that forms from this research is of a Scottish top flight that need not be entirely dependent on Rangers, or Celtic for that matter. Certainly, the loss of any revenue would bring serious challenges for clubs whose lack of liquidity has some commentators claiming any downturn in revenue could send them over the edge. However, the same thing was said when Setanta went bust four years ago. Then the doom-mongers said three clubs would be driven into administration as a result of £250,000 holes in their budgets. Only one club has since suffered an insolvency event... and in 2009 Rangers weren’t one of the sides being tipped for financial Armageddon.

It is insulting to maintain, as the more melodramatic do, that the SPL would be turned into the League of Ireland without the Old Firm brand. The sell-out, vibrant occasion the all-Edinburgh Scottish Cup final delivered surely obliterated that notion.

Of course, SPL club owners and chairmen are going to be nervous about how the Rangers saga could resolve itself. With our projections suggesting Motherwell would lose more than £700,000, Dundee United almost £600,00 and Hearts £500,000, serious cuts would be required at these clubs. But that reflects the fact these clubs were the big winners in terms of centralised prize money earned by their high league placings this season. Individual factors come into play. United would wipe out any reductions in gate receipts at a stroke were Dundee to replace Rangers, for instance. St Johnstone, too, would also benefit from a visit from the Dark Blues.

The flip side is that some clubs would suffer little financial impact were they to reject a newco Rangers in the SPL. Hibernian chairman Rod Petrie said recently that sporting integrity cannot be obtained for any price. Easy for him to take such a principled stand, perhaps, when the cost to his club would be little over £100,000. Kilmarnock chairman Michael Johnston has voiced the opposing view, yet, with Rangers’ value to the Ayrshire club being around £200,000, it must come within the club’s budget parameters.

Dundee United chairman Stephen Thompson has spoken of his anguish over a “lose-lose” situation if the SPL clubs are forced to decide on how to treat a newco Rangers. No wonder. United fans, as with those of Celtic, Aberdeen and Motherwell principally, have threatened to turn their backs on the game if a new Rangers takes up where the old one left off. They will not countenance the Ibrox club being allowed simply to walk away from a debt to the public purse of up to £70m and walk into the SPL as opposed to applying to the Scottish Football League and working their way back up. Strong factions within the fan bases of every club feel the same.

As a result, any projected losses for top-flight clubs without a newco Rangers may not be a whole heap different from possible losses with a newco Rangers in the SPL. Instead of reduced television revenue, clubs could suffer reduced season ticket sales. And instead of being denied bumper gates from hosting Rangers, disgruntled Celtic supporters could deny them bumper gates by not attending when they entertain their club. The Scottish game could be torn apart by the Rangers newco issue on levels far beyond the financial.

It has to be hoped that is avoided and Rangers exit administration through a CVA.

If they don’t, though, then the SPL clubs might want to heed the warning issued by former president John McBeth this week. “If you look after the sport the money will follow you, if you look after the money you’ll kill the sport,” he said. When it comes to the SPL, our analysis would appear to bear him out.

http://www.scotsman.com/scotland-on-sunday/sport/will-the-spl-survive-without-rangers-1-2335890

by The Special Juan Tue Jun 05, 2012 6:10 am

Interesting article. Steven is right; no matter what happens, it's a lose-lose situation, in the short term at least. My heart says the SPL will survive and maybe even prosper, my head says it won't.

by Gordy Wed Jun 06, 2012 2:59 am

If the league cannot survive without a financially irregular, cheating and dodgy side like Rangers is it worth saving to begin with?

by Doon the Water Wed Jun 06, 2012 4:20 am

8p in the £1.
Can't see a CVA being acceptable.
I think the creditors would rather see them rot in hell.

Newco has to start in the third division as Livingston did

by The Special Juan Wed Jun 06, 2012 6:56 am

8p in the £1!!!!? Ridiculous, wasn't Portsmouth's about 80p or something? I'd rather see them rot in hell too.

3rd division? At least Hampden will be filled for Queen's Park then lol.

by SugarRayRussell (PBK) Thu Jun 07, 2012 4:29 am

Doon the Water wrote:8p in the £1.
Can't see a CVA being acceptable.
I think the creditors would rather see them rot in hell.

Newco has to start in the third division as Livingston did

Different rules as long as the SFA grant them a licence to play in their leagues then they can apply to either the SFL or the SPL. Livingston were in the SFL so were dealt with under their rules. The SPL are totally different they are 12 clubs voting on their own rules.

A new-co Rangers as long as they have the SFA licence can apply to either and would no doubt go for the SPL first. They wouldn't vote them in then relegate them so it wont happen. The SPL was born out of self interest and has kept to that stance ever since. There is no danger they will change now.

by RDuncan8 Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:19 pm

Time to start the Rangers Liquidation thread? Very Happy

HMRC to reject CVA proposal. Liquidation inevitable?

by RinoGattuso Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:44 pm

Newco it is then.

by GSC Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:25 pm

That will require approval of 7 out of 11 SPL sides or Rangers will not be in the SPL.

by Sponsored content