Rangers Banter Archive May 22 2012

22 May 2012 22:49:45
to these ones talking about "Sporting Integrity"...get real.What professional sport cares more about that than money.Did somebody mention the sporting integrity of the Olympics.Whether we like it or not,money has the last word everywhere.

""Sporting Integrity"...get real.What professional sport cares more about that than money"

Ask Ben Johnson , the canadian sprinter

jimi88

Rangers have very little integrity or money. So what speaks for them ? A crackpot rabble ? I'd say money is pretty much shouting at rangers.

Try sports like hockey,baseball, football NFL CFL and much more for that is what sports are about....but it is no use trying to explain it to you or your club because as yous prove it means nothing to yous and this is why your club is at its end and why spl must do the right thing or forever be known as poor and corrupt. for most sports who have the best intentions for the game think that sporting integrity is at the top of the list or else it will lose all respect and damage that sport.....why do you think most ppl in America and Canada and most around the world talk about how "soccer" players dive and how they hate seeing and make fun of the sport because players stay down and roll around acting like they were shot.

Ah good old sporting integrity....it seemed to matter a lot more to Rangers fans when Marseille had no sporting integrity!
Without sporting integrity the competition is a farce regardless of money.

Yeah money speaks, Rangers paupers have none, but they're still mouthing off.

In sport nothing comes before sporting integrity. Rangers undermined sporting integrity for decades, and now attempting to do it again with threats of lost revenue to other clubs. Well it's minimal revenue to Rangers in Div3.

22 May 2012 22:32:53
Seriously i don't really get this cva is impossible talk, why would anyone waste time, money and effort putting together a cva bid only to be told nope their is zero chance it will work, It's far from a certainty either way.

Even Rangers tax case has admitted in his blog that a cva is worth the exact amount as liquidation of Rangers plc so whats the point?, maybe to make an example of Rangers?, but any other company or club in the same postion will just do what Rangers will do if the cva is turned down and go newco, not really any example set here.

Mate, do you not know that 90% of all Rangers haters work for the taxman and are all legal experts? Yeah they know better than experienced business men, duff and phelps etc. They know, for certain, that a CVA will not be accepted, just like they know that UEFA is to strip 'gers of 9 trophies (inc. 4 titles) just like they know that RFC owe HMRC £145 mil, just like they know that there will be no 'Gers in any form next season since half of the club's staff will be in gaol and the other half will be in a set of stocks on Glasgow Green! Just ignore the arrogant, smug, self satisfied, infantile and obsessive numpties!

@1: so we're to ignore loads of Rangers fans? ;)

22 May 2012 20:42:56
Anyone else noticed that any positive post regarding RFC is constantly sidstepped by our resident "Hoopy's"?
Given that RFC(IA) have been deducted the statutory ten points for going into administration. Then hit with the statutory and appropriate financial penalties totalling £160,000.
My question is twofold.
Why should RFC face further sanctions or penalties,when the existing legislation does not facilitate it?
Why should any club be penalised for breaking rules that did not exist prior to the event?
I would welcome responses from the resident Hoopy's in particular,as they seem more informed than the rest of us on all the legal implications involved.
Previously Optimistic Bear.

This "Hoopy" is willing to take up the challenge. We Tims have all been saying that since about 2000 Rangers gained an unfair advantage by using EBT, on Rangers Tax Case today the editor has now named an international player who got an extra £1m this way. It has been calculated that by using Employment Benefit Trusts Rangers SAVED 93pence in every £1. Thus giving them a great advantage over every other club.
On BBC tomorrow much more will come out and more people will be named, people now have documentary proof of all this. The allegations that Rangers cheated for over 10 years look likely to be proven correct. Timalloy

You could even argue the 160k was more than the current rules allow and there is no legislation for transfer embargo!

bil72

Ok i will bite, i'm a tim but as i've stated before i think i am a fair one and i dont want Rangers dead, i am not obsessed by Rangers but i am following this story intently, this is the biggest footballing business story ever.
So to the penalties thus far:
For not submitting accounts - no UEFA licence, no Europe, nothing to do with SFA/SPL
For going into admin - 10 point deduction, one season penalty for trading insolvently, ie not being able to pay your debts as they fall due, applied by SPL as per all other teams.
For bringing the game into disrepute and not paying PAYE/NIC, for not doing (it would appear) any due diligence on a new owner (yes, the rules state it is the club which must investigate and sign off the fit and proper test) and not paying debts owed to football clubs - 160k fine and one year transfer embargo put in place by an independent panel.
I think the above is not really that penal nor have Rangers been singled out for who they are but rather for what they have done and the monetary size of the issues.
Now to the new and potential sanctions. In my opinion these sanctions are indicative of a reactive culture, a ship sinks the lifeboat legislation changes, the banks fail the capital tests change, the world becomes skint and carbon reduction measures get binned. So Rangers will ditch their debt through a CVA or NewCo, this is the bank failing, the ship sinking and so reactive measures are put in place to deter this happening again.
If d+p had managed to get this sorted prior to 30th May would this have been avoided? Maybe.
The sanctions are penal no mistake and are designed to punish and deter whilst allowing Rangers to remain in the SPL. Is it really that bad? Perhaps its designed to put any club in the position they would be in if they faced up to their debts rather than either a CVA or NewCo? IE no or very few signings, reduced wage offerings and living within means.
May i also put to bed the idea that Rangers paid out the same money when using EBT's than they would have had normal salary arrangements been in place. Regardless of any other arguments, ie attracting players with larger take home pay etc there is Employers NIC. This is now paid at a rate of 13.8% on any salary above c7K. So if we can assume EBT use since 2001 and use a blended rate of 10% then a player on £1m a year, less than 20k per week, would have cost Rangers an additional £100,000 per annum.
Ok there i bited.
Thanks
Nevis

Ahhh, what the hell, I'll bite. As I said to you before companies, in this case football clubs, are forever looking for new angles, new, dare I say, loopholes, with regards players payments. Like any regulatory body they have to move with the times albeit all of us would agree the SFA/SPL won't be mistaken for Usain Bolt any time soon. So things uncovered in this sordid affair (some, only rumour to date as far as we know) two contracts, does this mean ineligible players were fielded etc? EBT's (still up in the air also) maybe aren't covered by current legislation. Does time stand still for this? Does a loophole get further exploited by there not being legislation (technically a second loophole?) Or should the powers that be say hang on, we didn't appreciate you did ALL of that and finally grow a pair and say enough is enough, you have bent, used and manipulated the guidebook and we are now throwing it at you and then some, whichever club it may be. Laws more times than not come about AFTER the event, the drink driving limit was passed in 1967, a long time after the invention of the car and alcohol. Often new laws close loopholes or are in response to a new abuse. I hope that answers your question POB

There were 5 charges against Rangers each could attract a max financial penalty of £100k. That's £500k and we only got fined £160k.
I'm sure the senior Judges and QC knew what powers they had and didnt have. Considering Livingston, I don't know why we weren't dropped to div3.

Timalloy dont talk sh*te! You have been telling us this since 2000 my arse! Try 9 months ago timalloy. All your talk is straight from that bloody website now get a life!

The argument that the panel overstepped their powers is wrong. There Is a clause giving them the right to take any action they deem appropriate. They said they could have expelled rangers but decided on leniency.

What rules did not exist before what event? Do you mean the diversion of taxes ? Rangers have been given a signing ban because they used that money to run the club. If they challenge it in court they can't win. They have signed up to the rules of the association. If they somehow get that ban overturned in court, the committee will reconvene and have no option but to expel them from the association. They will then as an employer be able to sign anyone they like but will have no opponents to play. Before the old England thing comes up, The expulsion will automatically be UEFA wide.

Po bear doesnt sound like you. you seemed to talk sense when you were on the celtic page. you on the glue tonight

@OP: would you have preferred Rangers' licence had been removed? That was an available punishment. Would that have been better than what you're constantly moaning about on here?

Well i must admit i was expecting a lot more churlish repostes than that. However, that was not the purpose of the O.P.
Nevis.. A well constructed,articulate,and succinct reply,with an added pinch of satire but at least you stepped up. Appreciated.
The original post was a genuine attempt at a debate to get people's viewpoint and perspective on this subject. There was no hidden agenda,nor was it intended as a bait dangler.
Anyone was welcome to reply,but bias has a way of contorting and twisting debates. Thanks to Ed if he contributed.
RFC..My club,deserve to be punished under the existing protocols and procedures as laid down by the SFA,and UEFA. I am certainly not advocating that they should shirk this responsibility. However i do think that a distinction should be drawn between the actions of corrupt individuals and a business as a corporate entity. Whilst accepting the points you make as being valid and given that SDM and CW were RFC during their tenure,their accountability(no pun intended) hopefully will be investigated further in a legal sense,as individuals. I'm still not sure if CW's actions in particular(with or without SDM's blessing) will be the downfall or salvation of RFC.
To punish a corporate entity,rather than it's chairmen and overseers is akin to punishing the car, whilst the drunk driver get's off scot free.
It appears to me that eminent professionals,from all walks of life are having difficulty with this sorry saga. I am totally bemused by D&P's handling of this situation,and bewildered further by the apparent inability to come to a decision by all interested parties involved with this debacle. SPL/SFA should be more transparent in their plans and intentions. Where are HMRC in this at present? It seems to me that everyone is waiting for the BTC result,before making a decision. Why is this taking so long?
Who or what organisation is the main player here? The fans need to know,Scottish football needs to know,if not for any other reason than to draw a line and move on.
P.O.B.

Read the post again guys.
I'm not advocating no punishment.
What i asked for was a debate surrounding future sanctions that may well be applied retrospectively.
There are no existing rules to cover this scenario.
What has "sniffing glue" got to do with that?
P.O.B.

@11: the car analogy is utterly ridiculous. Have you ever heard of the condept of corporate responsibility?

@13 should be 'concept', obviously.

Yes #13, i have. If you read my post properly you will recognise that.
I stated that IMO a distinction should be drawn,starting with SDM,then CW.
You don't have to agree with it,but i am entitled to hold it.
P.O.B.

22 May 2012 18:29:42
St Johnstone chairman Steve Brown has insisted that he will not vote for a “newco” Rangers to be readmitted to the Scottish Premier League without sanction.

The SPL chairmen will vote next week on changes to the league’s rules which could impose set penalties for any club that exits administration by a newco route.

Existing rules allow the SPL membership to be transferred to a “newco” if approved by the league board but any sanction is discretionary.

NewCo means loss of history.

Oh No It Doesn't (pantomime style)...Newco That's the way to do it!

Steve brown is on record on saying that st johnstone dont need rangers in the spl because they make more money from selling 1 good player a year/or manager.

basicly sell one player/or manger a year brings in more money that rangers playing at st johnstone and the tv money from sky.

*i was told this from my mate who is a rangers fan who claims it was in the paper a few weeks/months ago*

lenny

To the op, if a newco means loss of history then why the sanctions against so called newco Rangers?

Complete and utter contradiction, how can we be not the same club but be punished for the what the oldco supposedly did?

It's either newco Rangers should have it's transfer ban overturned and any fines against the club dropped as well as any proceedings in btc dropped as according to you we won't be the same club, or it's Rangers are the same club and the fines/ban/tax case stand.

Which is it cause it can't be both??

If all of these statements from people, newspapers, tv were made before or during a legal trial would the case not be thrown because any honest judgement would have been prejudiced?
Only asking?

bil72

@3.... You're correct a New company should not be punished but it must start Scottish football as a new company in the lowest league working its way up to SFL3.

@3 as you say cant have it both ways so pay your debts or start as a new co at the bottom of the leagueS ie 3rd division.

22 May 2012 14:46:35
Rangers sponsored walk led by rangers flute band...my god do you people never learn ,no one will sponsor bigots who have a band and supporters who celebrate the murder of thousands of people...yes you need to keep your history regarding football matters but religion be it Celtic or rangers has no place in football

Why is a sponsered walk held by a flute band bigoted

"bigots who have a band" Explain to me what exactly was bigoted about being led by a marching band. There was nothing secterian said,sung or shouted. Other sites may welcome your views in an attempt to have a dig at decent Rangers Supporters, so post your views elsewhere, thanks

By disagreeing you are saying that was allright? Should rangers not be distancing themselves from this kind of thing?

I think it might be to do with cultural baggage. Perhaps a nice trad jazz band, a la New Orleans or a troupe of itinerant bouzouki players leading from the front would have given a less unbalanced look to 'the walk'

Is every flute band out there bigoted? Do you know the song choice of the flute band? I doubt you do, so quit jumping to conclusions!

TTG

"Why is a sponsered walk held by a flute band bigoted"

if you have to ask this question, then you're clearly a bigot who sees no wrong in what an orange flute band represents

You sound like the type of guy who would take offence or at least try to justify being offended by anything pal. your post is clearly an opinion of a bigot as it seems rather than just accepting a flute band as what it is; you automatically link it to bigotry. while a majority of OF fans look to leave behind bigotry you seem intent on highlighting the issue with something inicent......get a life pal.
J1985

Is the message to the rest of society that being associated with bands etc. gives a good one for Rangers?

It was an accordian band and nothing bigoted about it no songs were sung .so every band that has accordians,flutes ,drums are bigoted in your view ..

By the way it was an accordion band not a flute band.

It wasn't an orange flute band though was it. Get over yourself!

So every gala day & fair throughout Scotland is now bigotted?

You couldn't make this up!!

bil72

Ok guys lets clear it up...what was the name of this walking band, what dates do they normally walk on, where do they normally walk from and to? What tunes do they play? What kind of uniforms do they wear?
Cheers...

Why did gazza play the flute at the celtic fans.

@12; no-one in this thread has said bands are bigoted. Read more carefully.

22 May 2012 12:42:39
Can anyone clear this up for me, Mr Neil Docater said , and I quote"You achieve a sporting advantage over other clubs by going into administration, therefore you should receive a sporting penalty for going into administration in the first place, that seems to me to be entirely logical"What sporting advantage do/did Rangers achieve when they went into administration?they were docked 10 points, and could'nt transfer / sign players; that is logical but is cetainly not a sporting advantage. Ed perhaps you could help me and perhaps others understanding this. Blueman

By going into admin rangers did not need to sell players to balance the books.By rights two or three big earners should have been sold.Would you have held on for second place and the prize money?

What he means is that clubs who go into administration and exit via a CVA gain a sporting advantage. Imagine a club brought in a load of players it knew it couldn't afford and managed to get an 11 point lead at the end of the season and went into administration. Docked 10 points, still wins the league, goes into administration and comes out with a CVA. All debt is erased and the club can go on as if nothing happened. What's to stop every team doing the same?
Your other point is wrong. Rangers cannot sign players not because they went into administration, but because they brought the game into disrepute by not playing taxes, other clubs, face painters and the supplier of Davie Weir's going away present.
Al

Your eds good but he's not that good!

Rangers couldn't sell players to balance the books after going in to admin as it was outside the transfer window.

4# in the january window some high earners should have been sold.rfc should not have traded into an admin situation

Administration legally protects you from your creditors seizing your assets and closing you down as bankrupts. Without admin HMRC could have ended you forever.

Rangers have been bankrupt for some time. They were using money from tax and creditors to pay players they couldn't afford. When they went into admin the players wages were cut to the level rangers could afford to pay. They would not have had those players if they had offered them the wages they could afford to pay. Therefore they gained a sporting advantage over other clubs. It will soon become apparent that they have been doing this sort of thing for years. Try and get with it, this is a bankruptcy not a takeover.

@they sold jelavic during the transfer window but should have sold alot more as they knew from october they were in trouble. maybe just a sign of how badly things are run

22 May 2012 12:41:56
I'm fed up with opposing fans and chairmen of spl clubs bemoaning rangers and saying they don't need us in the spl well here's an idea.if that's the case and they don't need our revenue we bring then when come to ibrox on matchday and vice versa then why not donate there share of the tv monies and gate receipts to a worthy charity.and further more why do these clubs up ticket prices when the old firm roll into town.somehow I find ur argument abut two-faced go on donate the revenue,mmm can't see that happening ehh.

That's a bit rich asking for clubs to donate money when yours can't even pay its dues.

" donate there share of the tv monies and gate receipts to a worthy charity "

As opposed to RFC , who will accept money intended for charity ? What happened to dignity ?

jimi88

A bit rich you think ehh well as i said other clubs clearly feel they dont need us so dont take our monies,and on the
Charity front if these clubs realy dont need us then show what dignity means and donate the cash from ticket sales,two wrongs as they say....or are they just hypocrites like the rest of us then.......

Jimi88. - What is your problem?
As if we don't know already,but indulge me anyway.
Oh..If you are referring to the A.C. Milan legends match,it might have benefited you to do some research,before posting absolute nonsense. The Rangers charity volunteered the donation to Rangers,in recognition of all the money raised over it's inception ten years ago.This was all above board and legal,the fans were consulted,and agreed. So the money went to where it was "Intended"
Previously O.B.

@4: wasn't it originally intended for charity? Maybe that was his point.

22 May 2012 11:28:19
Excuse me Mr Hectors fan but have you seen how crap your under 19 team is....it will be like taking candy from kids.....bring it on, its no wonder the bookies are offering 1 to 6 on us retaining the league.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Woohoooo!! Thank goodness for that! It's the making of tru champions to continue to thrive and prosper, and romp the league every year when there is zero opposition! Hilarious to think that this is a real feat in your eyes! Try 9-in-a-row when there was competition every year, or 3-in-a-row when there was competition every year and zero funding. That there is some proper achievement.

Are you one of these guys that would rather play a game of fives against a team of amateurs simply for the sake of getting an easy game?!?! Pathetic!

Ur 3 in a row squad was the most expensive in the league, 24 million not including players that were already there, i.e mcgreggor. Pleading poverty during these years doesnt wash mate sorry.

Zero-funding for 3-in-a-row? That old chestnut again...

A football teams success depends on its business administration and corporate governance as much as its performance on the pitch, which is a reflection of good financial management. Rangers have failed. There's nothing sporting about Rangers.

" zero funding "

what a ridiculous statement . ask hmrc where there dues went . ach , don't bother , i'll tell you .

to fund transfers and wages that rfc could not otherwise afford

loud and clear enough for you to understand ?

jimi88

Jimi88 can you give an example of a player bought in that 3 in a row period who was on an EBT scheme?

When will people realise that we havent had a verdict yet on big tax case yet or do they all have crystal balls,ur going on info based on what you have heard from the wonderfull press,were we guilty as charged why havent we heard outcome yet,also a football match is played between 22 players not suits in a box so,nine in a row woz won by better players end of.also had celtic not bottled it at fir park,inverness,hampden,samarass poor penalty at ibrox then you may well have won more than you did and therefore most probably wouldnt feel the need to spit the dummy out quite as often.just an idea but look into your own clubs failings before having a pop at others......

The tims are that good their manager is in discussions with all the countries competing in the Olympics football that have celtic players, to try to get them not to play. Your player pool is huge and you have all these players under 21 that are going to have a great sell on value. Use them.

@5

Yep , i probably could . Could you tell me if it was only players that had EBT's in that period ?

jimi88

@5: he didn't mention EBTs, just that the club was living beyond its means.

@6: it should be well-known that Rangers have accepted liability for £24m - it's the fines etc. they have appealed. The case you're waiting to hear the result of is called an FTT, which is an appeal. Therefore, they owe at least £24m

22 May 2012 00:31:22
Last Mark daly documentary was greeted with righteous indignation by bears, - cries of bias, boycotts and all.
Turned out over time to be 100% factual... egg all over bears faces.
Wednesday night, next Mark Daly instalment on Rangers.
Damning indictment of David Murray expected. Confirmation of dual contracts and EBT tax illegality to be presented. Proof of cheating by financial doping. Explosive revelations on the behind the scenes operation of RFC and complicity and inaction of footballing authorities. Savage indictment of scottish football as a whole.
And the reaction of bears this time will be...?

Savage indictment of scottish football as a whole.?

might be interesting if the investigation went that deep then - but lets wait and see what 'damning indictments & proof positive' come out

bil72

There reaction will be "we are the people"!!clueless lot . I for one are looking forward to it

Listen I'm a Celtic man , let's learn to seperate the crooks from the decent everyday supporter please. They don't deserve the constant sniping.

Yes, if financial irregularities are to be proved then there should be punishments. Just ensure that the people who committed the monetary problems are dealt with, namely, mr murray and his financial backers as they are responsible. Always remember he off-loaded the 'problem' for £1 [or so he hoped.] The football team should be allowed to go about their job, and that is to put a team on the park worthy to wear the jersey. The support deserve that.

I was told from a decent source theres not much about the football side of things.It is mostly covering the take over and the Lloyds bank pressure on murray to lump money into his(MIH) overdraft(750m).Seems he sacrificed rangers to get the 18m.

Hope so #5, this is what we all want to know.
I fear it will be the usual watered down version of the original. Once certain people's legal advisors have had their say.
Previously O.B.