Thetownend.com

25% => Other Football Stuff => Topic started by: Freddies Ferret on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 11:17:07



Title: Rangers
Post by: Freddies Ferret on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 11:17:07
Looks like the end is close for Rangers FC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18407309


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Batch on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 11:26:28
BristolCityTastic.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Barry Scott on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 11:27:00
I'm surprised no one's called in Andronikou yet. He'd solve all their problems, find loads of potential investors (provided the fans and trusts keep their meddling mouths shut) and maybe make the cover of, Hello!


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Berniman on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 11:45:20
Andronikou follows me on Twitter for some reason?


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Power to people on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 11:48:49
Andronikou follows me on Twitter for some reason?

I think that is a fake account

Rangers should be made to start again as a new club from the bottom of the scottish leagues - I would not mind betting though due to the amount of tv coverage etc they get they are allowed special dispensation to start again in the SPL


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Chubbs on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 12:21:45
good, about time


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Jimmy Glass is an Alien on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 12:23:34
If they were to form a new club, would that effectivly mean all players with them are free agents as the contracts are held by the old company or would they TUPE'd across?


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: tans on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 12:25:30
good, about time

This.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: otanswell on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 12:42:58
I hope the SPL vote them out to teach them a lesson.
Let them play Stenhousemuir for a few years


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: DMR on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 12:56:59
They won't go pop will they, it just doesn't happen at biggish clubs, look at Pompey.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Chubbs on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 13:14:04
they've been hanging by that thread for too long, time to go rangers.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Batch on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 13:18:11
We all know newco will buy all of oldco, then the SPL won't vote them out because they'd almost certainly be shooting themselves in the foot.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Ginginho on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 13:37:52
I hope they get bought by a cowboy and rebranded as The Glasgow Wranglers.

That would make me larf.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: janaage on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 17:11:11
Looks like the end is close for Rangers FC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18407309

Good about time, would love to see them demoted, but it won't happen.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 17:24:59
If they were to form a new club, would that effectivly mean all players with them are free agents as the contracts are held by the old company or would they TUPE'd across?

All players under contract will likely be sold before liquidation, as they are assets. Those left will have the option to TUPE or walk away.

Today is a good day.  :)


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: tans on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 17:25:57
Good about time, would love to see them demoted, but it won't happen.

They should swap leagues with East Stirling.

As you say, they are worth too much to the SPL to be demoted.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: janaage on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 17:30:27
I'm in the minority but I think it'd be great for Scottish football if Rangers go under and are demoted. Should be very good for Aberdeen, Dundee Utd, Motherwell, Hibs and the Gorgie bastards.

Rangers would hopefully turn to a bit of youth and probably end up stronger for the experience and in the meantime some of the other clubs may be able to take advantage of their absence.



Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: walcot red on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 17:34:19
I'm in the minority but I think it'd be great for Scottish football if Rangers go under and are demoted. Should be very good for Aberdeen, Dundee Utd, Motherwell, Hibs and the Gorgie bastards.

Rangers would hopefully turn to a bit of youth and probably end up stronger for the experience and in the meantime some of the other clubs may be able to take advantage of their absence.



It would make the SPL more interesting


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: janaage on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 17:36:00
It would make the SPL more interesting

Anything would make the SPL more interesting at the moment. Even a player strike.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: tans on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 17:36:39
I'm in the minority but I think it'd be great for Scottish football if Rangers go under and are demoted. Should be very good for Aberdeen, Dundee Utd, Motherwell, Hibs and the Gorgie bastards.

Rangers would hopefully turn to a bit of youth and probably end up stronger for the experience and in the meantime some of the other clubs may be able to take advantage of their absence.



Agree with that.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: DRS on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 17:45:33
May be being thick but how exactly would it make it more interesting? Celtic will just piss it,less quality players will join celtic and just make the standard worse.I am sure some players join other scottish teams knowing they will be playing these teams aswell.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Posh Red on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 17:53:57
I'm sure the TV companies would be happy to see Rangers out of the SPL, after all they hardly ever show Rangers games on TV do they.  I mean, it's not like Sky pay the SFA just for the old firm games or anything.

The only way it would be good for the non old firm teams is if Celtic went as well, then the rest of the clubs could play each other in a competitive league without having to pay stupid wages.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 17:57:51
Thought this was always the likely scenario. Their debts to HMRC are just too big, and ever since HMRC had their preferencial creditor status away from them, they have always voted against a CVA. Also by going into liquidation, there has to be an investigation into the companies failure and it'll probably be mostly Murray's fault, even though Whyte has obviously not come out smelling of roses. Of course the outcome of the case to see if Rangers owe another £50m in tax still hasn't been announced.

It'll also be interesting to see what the SFA/SPL do, as the fixtures are due out on Monday. They'll probably have to delay the publication of them.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: janaage on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 18:09:25
May be being thick but how exactly would it make it more interesting? Celtic will just piss it,less quality players will join celtic and just make the standard worse.I am sure some players join other scottish teams knowing they will be playing these teams aswell.

Well I'm hoping, and it is just a hope, that Celtic may have to cut their cloth accordingly, perhaps not straight away but in a year or two. The Edinburgh clubs (and others) may attract more investment due to a CL spot now being up for grabs.

If tv money dries up, as it could do for a while, then this will mean that Ctic will join the rest of the have nots, pushing them towered youth and not 5th rate foreigners.

Just a dream, but it's closer to reality without the Hun.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: jonny72 on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 18:31:07
The Edinburgh clubs (and others) may attract more investment due to a CL spot now being up for grabs.

There is only one CL spot up for grabs in Scotland next season, as they've fallen down the UEFA rankings.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 19:17:11

It'll also be interesting to see what the SFA/SPL do, as the fixtures are due out on Monday. They'll probably have to delay the publication of them.
They'll publish a set with Rangers and a set with 'Team x'.

Although technically they should set them with Dundee and 'Team X', as the normal procedure in the case of a club being liquidated would mean they'd lose their SPL status, an extra team from each division is promoted and a space opens up in the SFL D3. That won't happen.

There's also some interesting chat about UEFA licences. Not for playing in Europe, but to play in the SPL, clubs require a UEFA license for 3 years previous, similar to the european situation, which cannot be transferred between companies. Promoted teams from D1 bypass this using an "extraordinary procedure". Press haven't picked up on this, so it's either bollocks or the Scottish press is indeed, a steaming pile of pish. The latter has already been proven.

See here:
Quote
From the Scottish Football Association rules on Club Licensing (specifically  Part 3, Section 03 – The Club as Licence Applicant and the UEFA Licence). Emphasis ours.

"3.1.1 The Licence Applicant may only be a football club, that is the legal entity fully responsible for the football team participating in national and international competitions and which is the legal entity member of the Scottish Football Association (Full or Associate Member). The licence applicant is responsible for the fulfillment of the club licensing criteria. This membership must have been in place at the start of the licence season for a minimum period of three consecutive years.

[...]

3.3.1 UEFA Licence Awards for Scottish Premier League Clubs (SPL)
A Licence cannot be transferred from one legal entity to another."

NB: "UEFA Licence" does not denote a licence to compete in UEFA competitions, which are governed by an entirely different set of criteria. As the SFA website explains:

"National Club Licensing applies to Scottish FA member clubs and UEFA Club Licensing applies to Scottish Premier League clubs."

In other words, to play in the SPL you must have a UEFA Club Licence, regardless of whether you actually compete in UEFA competitions or not. (SFL clubs, who in normal circumstances wouldn't be expected to qualify for European tournaments, are dealt with separately via an "extraordinary procedure" in the event that they do.)

So, should Rangers FC be subject to liquidation and then reborn as a "newco", the new company would NOT be eligible for the licence required to play in the SPL, for at least three years. Furthermore, it is plainly and explicitly forbidden under SFA rules for such a licence to be transferred from one legal entity (Rangers FC) to another (New Rangers FC 2012). Well, that's that all sorted out, then. As you were.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Notts red on Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 21:40:55
" Let the people sing "


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Wednesday, June 13, 2012, 21:42:25
Couple of good reads here regarding Rangers....

http://www.twohundredpercent.net/?p=19040#more-19040

http://www.twohundredpercent.net/?p=19285#more-19285


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Thursday, June 14, 2012, 08:32:10
Fat Sally looks to be off today.
" Let the people sing "
Only from the advised songbook now.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Friday, June 15, 2012, 09:12:25
This week on Dream Team...

Club has been liquidised and transferred over to 'The Rangers Football Club', £100m+ of assets sold for £5.5m. That'll be the administrators doing the best deal for the creditors... ::) Expect some lawsuits and investigations against Duff and Phelps in the near future.

Walter Smith wants to buy the club (vulture picking the bones of a carcass) with the backing of a car dealer.

Gattuso has turned his back on them to sign for Sion.

The vote on letting 'The Rangers' back into the SPL is looking very, very tight. Celtic, Aberdeen, Motherwell and Dundee united are all looking likely to reject their re-entry. In the case of Motherwell, they are pushing for fan ownership, and ignoring the fans on this will just completely undermine that project. Aberdeen have a huge pledge of fans returning in the event of Rangers disappearing, and an even greater number pledging to stay away if they're let in. See also: Celtic. Dundee United have been dragged through the muck, Thompson personally has, by Rangers, and look likely to chuck them. Hearts have just been shafted over the £800k they didn't receive for the transfer of Lee Wallace, though what goes through Romanov's head is anyone's guess.

If the situation arises that they are let back into the SPL without the voting structure of the SPL being overturned (11-1 vote), SPL grounds are going to be even more of ghost towns than they are right now.

And before the "clubs can't survive without Rangers" bullshit starts, the change in voting structure allows a change in how the TV money is split, which at the minute is stupidly in favour of the OF, and as that takes 2 teams to block the change, it won't change. Add this extra money to the extra fans brought in as clubs start fighting for 2nd, really negates the 1 or 2 games a season Rangers swell the coffers.

And Monday Bandele is on trial.

[url width=900 height=111]http://i46.tinypic.com/qnpycw.jpg[/url]


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: scollenstfc on Friday, June 15, 2012, 09:24:19
Monday Bandele on trial.... things are looking up for the rangers then  :eek:


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Friday, June 15, 2012, 09:28:33
Monday Bandele on trial.... things are looking up for the rangers then  :eek:
That makes writing all that out for your benefit so worthwhile.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: scollenstfc on Friday, June 15, 2012, 09:42:10
That makes writing all that out for your benefit so worthwhile.

don't get me wrong, I'm grateful for the rest as well, beats reading 'pages of crap to get to the point' articles they have on bbc etc


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Friday, June 15, 2012, 10:18:18
Avoid scottish media on this subject. And any others related to the OF. They do their upmost to keep them happy.

There's a good blog which started on the Big Tax Case, involves a lot of detail into the goings on.

Also, Alex Thomson from C4 news is mildly entertaining on this subject. Appeared on a radio show and slated the scottish journalists to their face, accusing them of sweeping facts under the carpet and revealing only the bare minimum to avoid being seen as 'anti-Rangers'. Unfortunately for Rangers, the truth is very anti-Rangers. 


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Coca Fola on Friday, June 15, 2012, 13:01:20
This week on Dream Team...

Club has been liquidised and transferred over to 'The Rangers Football Club', £100m+ of assets sold for £5.5m. That'll be the administrators doing the best deal for the creditors... ::) Expect some lawsuits and investigations against Duff and Phelps in the near future.

Walter Smith wants to buy the club (vulture picking the bones of a carcass) with the backing of a car dealer.

Gattuso has turned his back on them to sign for Sion.

The vote on letting 'The Rangers' back into the SPL is looking very, very tight. Celtic, Aberdeen, Motherwell and Dundee united are all looking likely to reject their re-entry. In the case of Motherwell, they are pushing for fan ownership, and ignoring the fans on this will just completely undermine that project. Aberdeen have a huge pledge of fans returning in the event of Rangers disappearing, and an even greater number pledging to stay away if they're let in. See also: Celtic. Dundee United have been dragged through the muck, Thompson personally has, by Rangers, and look likely to chuck them. Hearts have just been shafted over the £800k they didn't receive for the transfer of Lee Wallace, though what goes through Romanov's head is anyone's guess.

If the situation arises that they are let back into the SPL without the voting structure of the SPL being overturned (11-1 vote), SPL grounds are going to be even more of ghost towns than they are right now.

And before the "clubs can't survive without Rangers" bullshit starts, the change in voting structure allows a change in how the TV money is split, which at the minute is stupidly in favour of the OF, and as that takes 2 teams to block the change, it won't change. Add this extra money to the extra fans brought in as clubs start fighting for 2nd, really negates the 1 or 2 games a season Rangers swell the coffers.

And Monday Bandele is on trial.

[url width=900 height=111]http://i46.tinypic.com/qnpycw.jpg[/url]

No one cares.  :thumb:


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Ardiles on Friday, June 15, 2012, 13:39:48
...except the people who do.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Friday, June 15, 2012, 15:12:52
I think fola's maw/wife/da ran off with a devilishly handsome Scotsman at some point...


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Coca Fola on Friday, June 15, 2012, 15:20:48
No I just don't care about Rangers.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: DRS on Friday, June 15, 2012, 15:39:26
Stop clicking on a thread that's titled rangers then.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: chalkies_shorts on Friday, June 15, 2012, 17:32:03
Rangers in cunts shocker


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: janaage on Friday, June 15, 2012, 17:32:42
Craig White knew.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: JanAageisGod on Friday, June 15, 2012, 18:53:27
I wonder how much pressure will be put by say, certain un-named TV companies, with regard to current and/or future TV deals on letting Rangers back in asap. While the numbers might not be clear cut immediately perhaps the threat of future problem might swing it sadly in NewCo FC's favour...


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Saturday, June 16, 2012, 09:14:51
I wonder how much pressure will be put by say, certain un-named TV companies, with regard to current and/or future TV deals on letting Rangers back in asap. While the numbers might not be clear cut immediately perhaps the threat of future problem might swing it sadly in NewCo FC's favour...

If clubs have the balls to play the long game and see this as a chance to remove the stranglehold of the OF then eventually that deal will go back up. And it's only 3 years till they'd be back.

Realistically, clubs will go for the quick buck.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: jonny72 on Monday, June 25, 2012, 16:15:51
Game over for Rangers and the SPL, five clubs have now stated they will be voting against them;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18577192

One good thing is that the clubs voting against appear to have made their decision based on the views of the fans.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: tans on Monday, June 25, 2012, 16:54:54
Fucking brilliant.

Hope they have fun at east stirling


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: wokinghamred on Monday, June 25, 2012, 18:10:16
Game over for Rangers and the SPL, five clubs have now stated they will be voting against them;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18577192

One good thing is that the clubs voting against appear to have made their decision based on the views of the fans.

And if Rangers are out of the SPL, the other 11 clubs can force through fundamental change to the 11-1 majority currently required. (thats if the SFA don't force it themselves) Looks like a definite weakening of the Old Firms stranglehold on the league set-up.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: jonny72 on Monday, June 25, 2012, 18:16:39
I'm sure that's played a role in their decision and there will be some major changes pushed through now.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: donkey on Monday, June 25, 2012, 18:19:00
I'm sure that's played a role in their decision and there will be some major changes pushed through now.

They'd be crazy not to.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 08:30:34
"Scottish Football is driven by two factors: Rangers and Celtic" - Charles Green.


[url width=172 height=192]http://i.imgur.com/KfNRi.gif[/url]

Next up: Whyte arrested
Murray arrested
Administrators investigated (selling £100m+ of assets for £5.5m)
Newco into admin (All season ticket money is going back into the oldco, players are leaving, Green has no more cash left)

This is just the beginning...


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: jonny72 on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 10:47:15
Administrators investigated (selling £100m+ of assets for £5.5m)

I was surprised by how low the figure was, especially as they're now claiming they still own the players contracts.

Has the price actually been questioned by anyone?


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: pauld on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 11:12:51
Newco into admin (All season ticket money is going back into the oldco, players are leaving, Green has no more cash left)
Can they put anything back into oldco? I thought oldco had been liquidated.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: ghanimah on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 11:29:56
Game over for Rangers and the SPL, five clubs have now stated they will be voting against them;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18577192

One good thing is that the clubs voting against appear to have made their decision based on the views of the fans.

It's like Murder on the Orient Express - everyone sticking the knife in (sorry to give the ending away)


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Power to people on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 11:53:26
It's like Murder on the Orient Express - everyone sticking the knife in (sorry to give the ending away)

Dont think they have done that yet as they have to transfer all assets over into newco and at the moment dosen't oldco still hold player registrations until it has all been agreed - although be interesting to see how many desert the sinking ship.

I fully expect a deal to be done somewhere that means Rangers spend 1 season in the SFL Div 1 before being promoted back to the SPL, they should go down to Div 3 or lower and be forced to start again is it was a team like Cally Thistle they wouldn't even be that bothered.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 11:54:59
Can they put anything back into oldco? I thought oldco had been liquidated.

Not yet. All assets have been moved over to the new club by the administrators, which the separate liquidators (HMRC appointed) may take a dim view of.  I think only the old co were allowed to sell season tickets, as they were the ones with the league place and a season to sell, although what happens now to those who have purchased (blind loyalty/stupidity) is anyones guess.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: carbonwhite on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 12:54:11
Hahahaha


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: tans on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 15:14:59
Kyle Lafferty, Steven Whittaker, Steven Naismith and Jamie Ness have all said that the newco can fuck off and they wont play for them :D

Sign Lafferty up Paolo


(I know, i know, no chance of that)


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 16:18:42
Lafferty is an utter bawbag.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: donkey on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 16:23:33
Lafferty is an utter bawbag.

Is that good?


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: jonny72 on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 17:47:32
What happens if the Scottish Football League vote against Rangers joining the league? Think it still needs a vote with something like 75% in favour. There's no reason why they would have to let them in is there?

Part of me thinks the smaller clubs (i.e. everyone bar Rangers and Celtic) are using this as an opportunity to lay the boot in to make up for all the shit they've had to deal with over the years. Can't say I blame them and I'd do it in their position.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Batch on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 18:46:16
Chance of balance of power shift, better chance of Champions league (Hearts, etc), fear of fan backlash, lots of reasons to vote against.

I think they'll go into the first division, doubt the smaller clubs will object to the increased revenue.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: tans on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 19:14:52
They should be made to start in div 3, not div 1 as has been muted


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 19:28:52
I think they'll go into the first division, doubt the smaller clubs will object to the increased revenue.

I would like them to go into the 3rd...but they'll go into the 1st after paying some sort of 'compensation' to the clubs of league 2 and 3. Clubs in those league have already come out saying that they couldn't cope with all the Rangers fans turning up.

I would also give them a big points deduction also, which would mean they would need to win just about all their matches to get promoted.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 19:45:34
McGregoor now turning down the NewCo.

Maybe we can offer them Lanzano...


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 20:05:27
Open letter written by a fan of a SFL club :

http://www.twohundredpercent.net/?p=19515#more-19515


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: ghanimah on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 20:22:25
Open letter written by a fan of a SFL club :

http://www.twohundredpercent.net/?p=19515#more-19515

I echo those sentiments - it's like the nonsense about the 'Old Firm' teams being parachuted into the EPL - clubs should have to earn it, like AFC Wimbledon had to do.

Rangers? Get back to the bottom and start again - after all they can (probably) at least boast of winning 3 trophies that Celtic never will...


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: carbonwhite on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 20:28:28
Think they have a few lower league cups aswell.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 20:31:20
Chance of balance of power shift, better chance of Champions league (Hearts, etc), fear of fan backlash, lots of reasons to vote against.

I think they'll go into the first division, doubt the smaller clubs will object to the increased revenue.

The newco need 23 out of 30 votes to get into D1. I doubt the 20 in D2 and D3 would be too happy about missing out on the chance to cash in, so hopefully that'll be chucked out.

They need 15 to get into D3.

As do Spartans...


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Costanza on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 20:49:19
When does all of this voting stuff come to an end? Seems to be excessively prolonged.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 20:51:51
When does all of this voting stuff come to an end? Seems to be excessively prolonged.

The SPL vote is on 4th July. Don't know about the SFL vote.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: TheMajorSTFC on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 21:19:36
Personally hope they are made to reapply for membership into Div 3 and sporting integrity will prevail...however as some have said, money talks!


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Bob's Orange on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 22:05:37
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeXZMQ1dhNo&feature=youtube_gdata_player

tee hee!


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Batch on Wednesday, June 27, 2012, 06:43:52
I should say that I also think Rangers FC 2012 should start in division 3 too. Old Rangers will be gone, Rangers 2012 is a new club that happen to play in the same stadium. So what they have lots of fans, deal with it OB.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Wednesday, June 27, 2012, 07:47:00
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7zw92lSNus (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7zw92lSNus)

Let's see those shoulders move.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 08:38:09
SPL vote on Rangers re-entry is supposed to be today, with around 8 teams confirmed to be voting no. Only needs 5 no votes to block their re-entry.

Of course the absolute shitgibbons running the SPL/SFA will try their best to stop this vote from happening, with Doncaster already says a vote is 'unlikely' today.

They're close to destroying what is already an utter shambles of a league. Regan and Doncaster need to leave. I'm going to shit on Doncasters fornt garden next time I'm up at my mum and dads.  :smugfu:


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Gethimout on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 08:43:24
Doesn't look good for them at all! Send the fuckers down! Smug cunts


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: tans on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 08:48:27
Still think they should be made to start in div 3.

Tough fucking shit


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 08:53:08
Still think they should be made to start in div 3.

Tough fucking shit
Have you seen the proposal that the SFL sent their clubs asking for Rangers to be put in D1? Literally used the words "financial meltdown".


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: tans on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 08:54:58
Haha what a joke


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: carbonwhite on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 09:49:09
They still probably have more money than most of the teams in div 1,2 and 3


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 10:34:39
They still probably have more money than most of the teams in div 1,2 and 3
As it stands, they have as much money as Green's consortium have, with no income right now.
Interesting to see how they can pay players between now and if they ever start next season.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 13:21:36
SPL vote NO to newco in the SPL. Despite Doncaster, Regan and the media trying their hardest to scare the league into allowing them back in.

Pleasantly surprised.

[url width=98 height=23]http://i.imgur.com/cmUh9.gif[/url]


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: wokinghamred on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 14:13:45
SPL vote NO to newco in the SPL. Despite Doncaster, Regan and the media trying their hardest to scare the league into allowing them back in.

Pleasantly surprised.

[url width=98 height=23]http://i.imgur.com/cmUh9.gif[/url]

Yeah, but now they've put huge pressure on the SFL to change their rules. I hope the SFL hope for SFL3.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Swindon Please Win on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 14:21:13
I see Coventry have signed John Fleck after leaving Rangers, one hell of a signing at this level, he will be a threat next season.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: walcot red on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 14:30:21
I see Coventry have signed John Fleck after leaving Rangers, one hell of a signing at this level, he will be a threat next season.

But with a defence like ours he won't be that much of a threat. (hopefully)


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 14:40:22
I see Coventry have signed John Fleck after leaving Rangers, one hell of a signing at this level, he will be a threat next season.
Sorry, what?

Have you seen him play? He's awful. Stayed at Rangers for so long because of his uncle.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Peter Venkman on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 14:46:26
I see Coventry have signed John Fleck after leaving Rangers, one hell of a signing at this level, he will be a threat next season.
Yes he has a bit of a reputation for being a hot prospect but he is very small and lightweight at only 5 foot 6. When I saw him last season for Blackpool he was pretty anonymous.

Blackpool didn't make him an offer so they obviously didn't rate him that highly after being on loan to them last year.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: ghanimah on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 14:48:15
SPL vote NO to newco in the SPL. Despite Doncaster, Regan and the media trying their hardest to scare the league into allowing them back in.

Pleasantly surprised.

[url width=98 height=23]http://i.imgur.com/cmUh9.gif[/url]

Anything other than bottom of the SFL is not right. Rangers in that situation would at least gain a modicum of respect for pulling themselves into the top league. Otherwise we come into the murky territory of 'moral hazard'


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Swindon Please Win on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 15:06:29
Sorry, what?

Have you seen him play? He's awful. Stayed at Rangers for so long because of his uncle.

No, im guessing I have no clue where he played or anything. I'm sorry I said something nice about a former Rangers player...

He has huge potential and is very tricky player.



Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 15:12:53
No, im guessing I have no clue where he played or anything. I'm sorry I said something nice about a former Rangers player...

He has huge potential and is very tricky player.


Ah I see you're implying that because he plays for Rangers then I just don't like him for that reason. Maybe you're assuming I'm a Celtic fan, "cause we're all Rangers or Celtic".

I dislike him because I've seen him play, and this 'huge potential' he's had over him for years has come to nothing.

L1 might well be his level, Blackpool decided he wasn't Championship class, he certainly wasn't SPL class. Then again, neither was Charlie Adam, the English game just suited him better, having more time on the ball lets him show what he can do with his left peg.

Or maybe you're going on champ man.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Swindon Please Win on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 15:19:12
Ah I see you're implying that because he plays for Rangers then I just don't like him for that reason. Maybe you're assuming I'm a Celtic fan, "cause we're all Rangers or Celtic".

I dislike him because I've seen him play, and this 'huge potential' he's had over him for years has come to nothing.

L1 might well be his level, Blackpool decided he wasn't Championship class, he certainly wasn't SPL class. Then again, neither was Charlie Adam, the English game just suited him better, having more time on the ball lets him show what he can do with his left peg.

Or maybe you're going on champ man.

Or maybe I've seen him play and thought he was good? Yes he's no way near the finished article, but you can see he has talent.

And no, I know you don't like Rangers, it's pretty obvious if you read the thread.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: jonny72 on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 15:32:51
Have you seen the proposal that the SFL sent their clubs asking for Rangers to be put in D1? Literally used the words "financial meltdown".

I don't get why them starting again in the 3rd Division will be such a disaster. I'd have thought it would be great for all the lower league clubs as it will be a massive boost for attendances. Plus it will give some other clubs more of a chance in the SPL. Seems like a win win to me, except for Rangers - though they will be guaranteed some silverware.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Kinky Tom on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 15:35:33
rangers make official application to join sfl, saying they will play in whichever division officials see fit.  what a stupid thing to say, they're not just gonna say "sorry don't fancy D3, we'll just go out of business entirely" are they...


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: walcot red on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 15:38:30
stick 'em in div 3 and give them a 30 point deduction.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: nochee on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 16:15:59
stick 'em in div 3 and give them a 30 point deduction.
And they are not allowed a goalie either


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 16:42:40
I don't get why them starting again in the 3rd Division will be such a disaster. I'd have thought it would be great for all the lower league clubs as it will be a massive boost for attendances. Plus it will give some other clubs more of a chance in the SPL. Seems like a win win to me, except for Rangers - though they will be guaranteed some silverware.
Sponsors walk away/reduce sponsorship and TV venues pay a lot less for a Rangersless SPL.

£16m over the 3 years according to the big wigs.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 17:14:18
Rangers (New co) should start in the 3rd...end of.

There seems to be a lot of militancy in the SPL from the clubs, and it looks unlikely that they will start in the 1st div, as the SPL Chief Exec wants, in his worse case scenario.The fact is what right do they have to automatically deserve that place. There are a number of fans of Scottish league clubs that have threatened not to go to any games in Scotland if Rangers were let back in the SPL or Div 1.They need to start in Div 3.

And SPL Chief Exec Doncaster should resign. It was obvious he is pro-Rangers after his comments earlier today trying to delay the vote, where Rangers had no chance of winning.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 19:24:59
^Spot on.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: jonny72 on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 19:37:33
I see that there was only one vote for Rangers, which was them voting for themselves. If they had any dignity or respect for the rest of Scottish football, they'd stop fucking about and request to be put in the 3rd Division. Wouldn't be a bad idea if they withdrew the threat to take legal action against any players that leave as well.

They seem to be sinking lower and lower by the day. I'm still hoping the SFL vote for another club to have the spare spot in the 3rd Division so Rangers are left without a league to play in.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: ChalkyWhiteIsGod on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 19:44:57
What happened to City in 1982? I'm guessing they got to keep their place in the football pyramid?


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 19:51:07
I see that there was only one vote for Rangers, which was them voting for themselves.
Have you got a source for that? I've only seen it being called an "overwhelming vote", but not seen it confirmed as 11-1. (I'm only just back in though).

Wouldn't be a bad idea if they withdrew the threat to take legal action against any players that leave as well.
And in the latest of fuck ups, the SFA who hold the registrations are refusing to pass them over as they're being transferred. Being referred to FIFA. This could just be one case to confirm the rules (which every legal bod has confirmed that they can leave) and will set the precedent.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 19:55:34
Have you got a source for that? I've only seen it being called an "overwhelming vote", but not seen it confirmed as 11-1. (I'm only just back in though).

I saw somewhere that it finished 10-1, with one abstention.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: chalkies_shorts on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 19:58:03
The BBc are saying 10-1 against with Kilmarnock abstaining. Green is coming across as a complete and utter tool. How the fuck does he think the players automatically transfer over. I'm not an employment law expert but I know some people who are and they laugh at him. He's just pissing wind. He was on Sky Sports saying that Rangers will be playing Euro football before any of the players that leave and taking the piss out of Norwich.
He appears to be an utterly charmless, gormless tool who was looking for a quick buck and its looking harder work than he imagined.
Fuck Rangers and fuck Scottish football.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 19:59:13
What happened to City in 1982? I'm guessing they got to keep their place in the football pyramid?

They've changed the rules since then, to stop other clubs 'doing a shitty'.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 20:04:21
The BBc are saying 10-1 against with Kilmarnock abstaining. Green is coming across as a complete and utter tool. How the fuck does he think the players automatically transfer over. I'm not an employment law expert but I know some people who are and they laugh at him. He's just pissing wind. He was on Sky Sports saying that Rangers will be playing Euro football before any of the players that leave and taking the piss out of Norwich.
He appears to be an utterly charmless, gormless tool who was looking for a quick buck and its looking harder work than he imagined.
Fuck Rangers and fuck Scottish football.

Fully agree on all that.

The guy comes across as a chancer. But he's apparently only 'paid' £5.5m for assets that have been estimated to be worth closer to £100m, so they're quids in already.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 21:28:52
Just been reading through this :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18702275

Look at some of the tweets from Rangers 'fans' hoping that a number of SPL clubs will go bust if they have to start back from Div 3. Also the deluded ones who say they should restart in England.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: reeves4england on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 21:30:21
Just been reading through this :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18702275

Look at some of the tweets from Rangers 'fans' hoping that a number of SPL clubs will go bust if they have to start back from Div 3. Also the deluded ones who say they should restart in England.

Perhaps they'd like to enter at Championship level? No reason why they shouldn't is there?

:D


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 21:37:24
Perhaps they'd like to enter at Championship level? No reason why they shouldn't is there?

:D

Don't give them ideas, otherwise they'll apply to join the Premiership as well.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: janaage on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 06:11:37

Look at some of the tweets from Rangers 'fans' hoping that a number of SPL clubs will go bust if they have to start back from Div 3. Also the deluded ones who say they should restart in England.

Been keeping a close-ish eye on this and that attitude is repeated thousands of times over. Get on to the Rangersmedia forum for a good view of Rangers fans' views.

This 'I hope they put us down to Div 3' isn't a fall on your sword, take your punishment view, it's a hope that if they're out of the SPL then half the division's clubs won't exist by the time the newco get back there. Meaning others would have to go down the leagues too. Problem is they haven't worked out that that may not happen, unless the clubs folding are going under due to corruption.

I have hope for the SPL, clubs have been existing on tight budgets before (when there was no tv deal in place) and I think (hope) the clubs will be able to cut their cloth accordingly. And in truth it will be good to see Rangers fighting their way back up, and back into the SPL. Could be worse for them, they could have become the new Third Lanark.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: kerry red on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 08:50:39
The fact is, though, this could put the entire future of Jock football in jeopardy.

Outside Scotland nobody is interested and I can never get my head around why Celtic/Rangers supporters aren't bored shitless by playing St Mirren 4 times a year.

I can't see the point of Scottish football


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 08:58:20
The fact is, though, this could put the entire future of Jock football in jeopardy.

Outside Scotland nobody is interested and I can never get my head around why Celtic/Rangers supporters aren't bored shitless by playing St Mirren 4 times a year.

I can't see the point of Scottish football
It's lucky you don't live in Scotland then. Up there, and around the world, nobody see's the point English football outside the premiership.

And it's not just Celtic and Rangers fans who are bored shitless playing the same clubs 3 or 4 times a season (not St.Mirren as they're not a top 6 side).

And ironically, it's Rangers and Celtic blocking the restructuring of the league. Why should they share the pot of money with more clubs?


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: kerry red on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 09:01:11
But at least every English league is competitive.

What joy can a Celtic or Rangers supporter get out of beating St Mirren every season?

Just seems pointless to me



Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 09:05:19
Yes the premiership is real competitive. Man United vs whoever has a bit of money that season. Every year.

The Scottish lower leagues are competitive. Most clubs are on an even standing. It's a gambling nightmare.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: ghanimah on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 09:10:28
The fact is, though, this could put the entire future of Jock football in jeopardy.

Outside Scotland nobody is interested and I can never get my head around why Celtic/Rangers supporters aren't bored shitless by playing St Mirren 4 times a year.

I can't see the point of Scottish football

Not forgetting the joke that is splitting the league in half meaning often teams in 7th place end up with more points than the one in 6th, besides countless other anomalies.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 09:12:18
Not forgetting the joke that is splitting the league in half meaning often teams in 7th place end up with more points than the one in 6th, besides countless anomalies.

The team in 7th are playing poorer quality teams than the team in 6th, so they're expected to gain more points. Don't blame the league for your lack of understanding.

The split adds a bit of excitement to mid-table teams.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: kerry red on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 09:12:31
The Scottish lower leagues are non-league standard attracting a handful of supporters.

Never understood why they are on the 'coupon' every week.



Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: lambourn red on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 09:17:49
It's lucky you don't live in Scotland then. Up there, and around the world, nobody see's the point English football outside the premiership.


I would wager that Leeds for example would have more fans worldwide than all the Scottish L1,L2,L3 combined


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: ghanimah on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 09:19:21
The team in 7th are playing poorer quality teams than the team in 6th, so they're expected to gain more points. Don't blame the league for your lack of understanding.

The split adds a bit of excitement to mid-table teams.

I do understand the reasons why it happens... not sure why you think I don't. The format is just crap and its existence is a reflection on what is wrong with Scottish football


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 09:23:43
I would wager that Leeds for example would have more fans worldwide than all the Scottish L1,L2,L3 combined
Leeds have also had a lot more exposure via your best pals Sky than all the Scottish L1, L2 and L3 combined. Whereas Scottish football are pretty reliant on the Old Firm, English football is even more reliant on Sky paying silly money year on year.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Bob's Orange on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 09:24:32
The team in 7th are playing poorer quality teams than the team in 6th, so they're expected to gain more points. Don't blame the league for your lack of understanding.

The split adds a bit of excitement to mid-table teams.

I feel for you if you think that is excitement Joycie!


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Ardiles on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 09:30:56
The Scottish lower leagues are non-league standard attracting a handful of supporters.

Never understood why they are on the 'coupon' every week.

What do you expect though?  There are 10 of us (assuming you're English...think you said you were) to every 1 of them.  Personally, I think it's brilliant that a country of 5 million people can support a league set up of 4 divisions with promotion and relegation between them all.  Of course there are going to be differences and of course the standard is not going to be as high.  But give credit where it's due.

As it happens, the population of South West England (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_West_England) is also just under 5 million.  Imagine a league set up covering that area, 40 teams, 4 divisions.  What kind of competition would that provide?  Puts in to perspective just how successful the Scottish leagues really are.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 09:36:23
I feel for you if you think that is excitement Joycie!
I know it pales in comparison to playing the likes of Tranmere, Carlisle and Bury, but it gets me through the year.

We were involved in a challenge for the split, and it is exciting. You also have the bonus of playing Rangers and Celtic again, bigger crowds with Hearts etc, and the off chance of Europe.

We've also been involved in Europe and will be in the Champions League this year. That's pretty exciting.  :D

Edit - Apologies for using that smiley yellow man, but my choice is a bit limited.

Edit again - Ardiles I like you.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Bob's Orange on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 10:04:21
I know it pales in comparison to playing the likes of Tranmere, Carlisle and Bury, but it gets me through the year.

We were involved in a challenge for the split, and it is exciting. You also have the bonus of playing Rangers and Celtic again, bigger crowds with Hearts etc, and the off chance of Europe.

We've also been involved in Europe and will be in the Champions League this year. That's pretty exciting.  :D

Edit - Apologies for using that smiley yellow man, but my choice is a bit limited.

Edit again - Ardiles I like you.

Stop coming up with entirely reasonable answers Joycie!!

Hearts are in Europe this season as well, wonder who will last longer?


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 10:20:08
As much as I really don't like Hearts, I do love Vlad. I think we drop down into the Europa League when we get put out, and we tend to be kicking about the play-off round(if that's not where we're dropped), would be nice to see one of us (including United) reach the group stages but I'm not holding my breath.

St. Johnstone can get to f**k though.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: janaage on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 10:21:50
What do you expect though?  There are 10 of us (assuming you're English...think you said you were) to every 1 of them.  Personally, I think it's brilliant that a country of 5 million people can support a league set up of 4 divisions with promotion and relegation between them all.  Of course there are going to be differences and of course the standard is not going to be as high.  But give credit where it's due.

As it happens, the population of South West England (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_West_England) is also just under 5 million.  Imagine a league set up covering that area, 40 teams, 4 divisions.  What kind of competition would that provide?  Puts in to perspective just how successful the Scottish leagues really are.

Fair play to you Ardiles for giving a reasonable viewpoint. To be honest Joycie is doing a fantastic job of explaining the merits of Scottish Football.

Never really understand the 'don't give a **** about scottish football' that you get on here at times. Why would you, unless you're Scottish.  Or do you constantly bang on about how you don't care about the leagues of Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, Switzerland, Austria....

I find it quite hypocritical of some Swindon Town fans, fans of a club that has had a handful of decent seasons where they just about squeezed on to national level of awareness to be making such comments about other clubs being shit/pointless.

Next time there's a debate on making the ELP/2 a closed shop and that doesn't include Swindon, remember how unimportant a club Swindon Town is to people in other parts of the country.  We're all just stars in the universe of football, just some clubs are bigger stars than others.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 20:45:56
Here's a couple of excellent reads. I do agree with the comments of EJH in the first article :

http://www.twohundredpercent.net/?p=19616#more-19616

http://www.twohundredpercent.net/?p=19619#more-19619


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: janaage on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 20:49:33
Just read, after a day where Stewart Regan has been painting the 'long and slow death' picture with tv deals lost etc, Sky have ended up tweeting the pro- 'gers arse words to the effect of 'Stewart, we have no plans to end our coverage of the SPL'.

FAO Mssrs Doncaster & Regan - the blackmail approach is not working, viva la revolution!


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Baggins on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 20:58:05
I actually find scottish football quite interesting and agree with Ardiles' argument (I also can't match it for eloquence).  For a while there was a blog on the BBC by Chris Jardine who played for Annan (he may still).  It was a really good read.  Everything is relative but who are we to belittle clubs or leagues as poor/pointless/tinpot etc.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: janaage on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 20:59:38
I actually find scottish football quite interesting and agree with Ardiles' argument (I also can't match it for eloquence).  For a while there was a blog on the BBC by Chris Jardine who played for Annan (he may still).  It was a really good read.  Everything is relative but who are we to belittle clubs or leagues as poor/pointless/tinpot etc.

I used to read his blog too. Think he ended up getting injured half way through the season then couldn't get back in the side. Still, an interesting read.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: bigbobjoylove on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 21:01:46
Why doesn't the Scottish Football League have a way for non-league sides to get promoted?


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Batch on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 21:02:28
Scots punch above their weight alright.

They've won the elephant polo world cup at least three times. I've been to Scotland and I haven't even seen an elephant, let alone a polo ground.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: janaage on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 21:04:43
Why doesn't the Scottish Football League have a way for non-league sides to get promoted?

That is set to be introduced in the near future. One team up from the highland league and one from the soon to be introduced central belt, southern region league, which will be called something much more catchy than what I've just labelled it.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: bigbobjoylove on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 21:05:49
That is set to be introduced in the near future. One team up from the highland league and one from the soon to be introduced central belt, southern region league, which will be called something much more catchy than what I've just labelled it.

Ah, good for them. Should shake things up a bit.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Friday, July 6, 2012, 08:50:23
Tbh, not many of the Junior clubs would want into the SFL. They attract reasonable crowds because their games are mostly local. Obviously if these new 'lower leagues' are regional then it might help them, but as soon as they get into D3, they lose that locality. It's why you see teams like Elgin, Annan and Gretna joining the SFL instead of the juniors.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Power to people on Friday, July 6, 2012, 11:55:57
That is set to be introduced in the near future. One team up from the highland league and one from the soon to be introduced central belt, southern region league, which will be called something much more catchy than what I've just labelled it.

Is that not hte carrot they are offering SL clubs that if you allow rangers in in SFL1 then we will introduce promotion and playoffs and share more tv money


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: walcot red on Friday, July 6, 2012, 12:06:52
Just heard on 5live that Rangers want to go into div3 as it'll give them more time to re-structure   ???


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: kerry red on Friday, July 6, 2012, 12:50:36
3 years is a large chunk of a player's career and not many will want to be running out at Stirling on a February afternoon.

But I suppose their youth team will still stroll thru the leagues.

On a different note, I see Man U are going public to raise some cash to pay off their mountainous debts - and this is one of the biggest clubs in the world.

Is football really a house of cards and is starting to unravel? (if cards can unravel, of course)


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Batch on Friday, July 6, 2012, 13:00:15
Just heard on 5live that Rangers want to go into div3 as it'll give them more time to re-structure   ???

McCoist was making noises about that yesterday but was saying it was to protect "sporting integrity" after 75-80% of the fans at a fans forum had said they'd support such a move (presumably they are pissed off with it all and just want to get on with it).

And fair play if they do start in division 3, quite literally.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: walcot red on Friday, July 6, 2012, 13:06:18
McCoist was making noises about that yesterday but was saying it was to protect "sporting integrity" after 75-80% of the fans at a fans forum had said they'd support such a move (presumably they are pissed off with it all and just want to get on with it).

And fair play if they do start in division 3, quite literally.

It would be good for the 'Smaller' clubs in Scotland to get to play Rangers twice (or is it 4 times a season?) it would be like Man U in League 2. nice little earner for the clubs.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Friday, July 6, 2012, 16:00:40
McCoist was making noises about that yesterday but was saying it was to protect "sporting integrity" after 75-80% of the fans at a fans forum had said they'd support such a move (presumably they are pissed off with it all and just want to get on with it).

And fair play if they do start in division 3, quite literally.

Another reason for that is the 12 month transfer embargo...and they've only got abot 6 senior players, so at the moment, there are more likely to get relegated from Div 1.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Crispy on Friday, July 6, 2012, 16:25:31
It would be good for the 'Smaller' clubs in Scotland to get to play Rangers twice (or is it 4 times a season?) it would be like Man U in League 2. nice little earner for the clubs.

Remember reading somewhere that a lot of the lower league teams don't want them in there because the would struggle to pay Policing costs. Imagine United in league 2 now, couldn't see many teams wanting to fork out for that! (Probably a bad example, I reckon league 2 teams on a whole would have more resources to pay the police than the scottish Div 3 sides! Apart from Gills!  ;))



Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: walcot red on Friday, July 6, 2012, 17:02:21
Remember reading somewhere that a lot of the lower league teams don't want them in there because the would struggle to pay Policing costs. Imagine United in league 2 now, couldn't see many teams wanting to fork out for that! (Probably a bad example, I reckon league 2 teams on a whole would have more resources to pay the police than the scottish Div 3 sides! Apart from Gills!  ;))



I see your point Crispy but then teams lower in the footballing pyramid such as havant and waterlooville could manage to pay policing costs if it was for a cup game against say liverpool, surely the revenue generated by the visiting teams fans and an increase in fans for the home team would surely be beneficial to the club?


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: jonny72 on Friday, July 6, 2012, 17:41:06
Another reason for that is the 12 month transfer embargo...and they've only got abot 6 senior players, so at the moment, there are more likely to get relegated from Div 1.

The transfer embargo was overturned by the courts wasn't it?

Does it count anyway now that Rangers have reformed?


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Friday, July 6, 2012, 17:43:38
The transfer embargo was overturned by the courts wasn't it?

Does it count anyway now that Rangers have reformed?

McCoist mentioned it in a TV interview yesterday.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: red sheldon on Friday, July 6, 2012, 19:19:52
What you've got to remember with the Highland League teams is that they are so small.  I have a soft spot for Buckie Thistle and Keith having seen them both play when I was a kid but they are the size of Purton & Bassett, so its crackers to think that they could draw Rangers in the cup.   If you say that Rangers are like a Championship team, can you see the problems if Leeds came to Purton in the FA cup it would be carnage in the Ghost Train (is that still open not lived in Swindon for a long time)


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Sunday, July 8, 2012, 18:15:20
Looking through a couple of Scottish papers today, it now seems the SFL board will decide what division Newco will play in if SFL clubs vote them in. Apparently at least 16 of the 30 SFL clubs would vote for Newco to start back in Div 3, but the vote on which division wll be taken out of their hands.

And 'Smith must score' saying that he believes there is a lot of anti-Rangers feelings (No Shit Sherlock !!) ...

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/football/spl/rangers/2012/07/08/rangers-in-crisis-gordon-smith-believes-there-is-a-lot-of-anti-rangers-feeling-out-there-86908-23906002/


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: tans on Sunday, July 8, 2012, 18:17:54
Thatll be them put in the 1st div then, whats the point of them voting if the board are going to over rule them anyway


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Sunday, July 8, 2012, 18:27:19
Thatll be them put in the 1st div then, whats the point of them voting if the board are going to over rule them anyway

My thoughts exactly. Saying that, the clubs could not vote Newco back in, and that would leave Regan and co. in the lurch.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Sunday, July 8, 2012, 18:38:09
The second motion, once they vote on whether Newco are allowed back in is worded as follows :

'that Rangers FC shall play in the Third Division of the Scottish Football League during Season 2012/13 unless the board shall have to it's satisfaction negotiated and reached agreement with The Scottish Premier League and The Scottish Football Association on a series of measures which the board shall consider to be in the best interests of the game.

If that is a not a way to let the SPL and SFA get their way and let Newco in to the First Division, I don't know what is.

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spl/rangers-newco-new-divisions-appear-1-2399610


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: chalkies_shorts on Sunday, July 8, 2012, 19:54:51
If the SFA are going to be like that then the clubs should vote against Rangers, particularly the lower division ones. What would happen then?


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Sunday, July 8, 2012, 20:01:30
If the SFA are going to be like that then the clubs should vote against Rangers, particularly the lower division ones. What would happen then?

I don't think no-one else has applied to take over Oldco's place, so one of the division's will only have 9 teams...and Newco will have to play against themselves, whilst paying for the players that transferred from Oldco.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: chalkies_shorts on Sunday, July 8, 2012, 20:13:41
I don't think no-one else has applied to take over Oldco's place, so one of the division's will only have 9 teams...and Newco will have to play against themselves, whilst paying for the players that transferred from Oldco.
That doesn't sound too bad does it...unless you're a bluenose. I think the guys who run the SPL and the SFA should be forced out. They've been pretty biased.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Power to people on Monday, July 9, 2012, 11:51:48
It is poor when the actual SFA dont want to be transparent and clearly want rangers in Div1 so they quickly get back to the SPL, I'm sure there will be some token compromise somewhere along the line and it will be claimed everyone agreed to it


Title: Re: Re: Re: Rangers
Post by: Only Me on Wednesday, July 11, 2012, 07:16:04
Remember reading somewhere that a lot of the lower league teams don't want them in there because the would struggle to pay Policing costs. Imagine United in league 2 now, couldn't see many teams wanting to fork out for that! (Probably a bad example, I reckon league 2 teams on a whole would have more resources to pay the police than the scottish Div 3 sides! Apart from Gills!  ;))
That would mean the Gillingham match is off


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Batch on Friday, July 13, 2012, 13:11:07
Division 3 ?!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18813407


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: tans on Friday, July 13, 2012, 13:16:07
Common sense prevails


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Friday, July 13, 2012, 13:17:39
Division 3 ?!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18813407

Just wait till the SFL/SFA stich up into Div 1...

Some bookies had it odds on for the league to still start late, this morning.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Batch on Friday, July 13, 2012, 14:44:05
Just wait till the SFL/SFA stich up into Div 1...

Already talking about an SPL2....


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: thedarkprince on Friday, July 13, 2012, 14:44:54
Although frankly would a SPL2 draw bigger income than the current Div 1?  Probably not...


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: REDBUCK on Friday, July 13, 2012, 15:21:37
Already talking about an SPL2....

They'll create SPL2 and then invite teams to join settng the criteria such that Rangers New Co can be accepted.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: jonny72 on Friday, July 13, 2012, 15:43:40
Still can't believe how fucked up the whole process has been, we might have some twats running the game in England but at least they could organise a piss up in a brewery. Scottish football has got major problems and they don't even seem to be asking the right questions at present, let alone getting close to the answers.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: yeo on Friday, July 13, 2012, 15:48:48
Will there be a renegotiation of the SPL TV deal now?


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: jonny72 on Friday, July 13, 2012, 16:10:32
Seem to recall a tweet from Sky saying whatever the final decision was it wouldn't have any effect on the current TV deal.

It's not like there is big money involved, ESPN and Sky only pay £16m a season between them for the SPL rights. Peanuts even when compared to the money Sky pay for the Football League rights, which is £65m a season.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Saturday, July 14, 2012, 14:45:11
The current TV deal runs out in a year. It might not affect it this season...but it might next when negotiations take place.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: leefer on Saturday, July 14, 2012, 14:48:37
Queen of the South could have a home crowd of 52,000 on there hands this coming season :eek:


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Coca Fola on Saturday, July 14, 2012, 15:21:01
I thought it was Queen of the South that played at Hampden Park?


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Reg Smeeton on Saturday, July 14, 2012, 15:21:36
I thought it was Queen of the South that played at Hampden Park?

Queen's Park....


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Peter Venkman on Saturday, July 14, 2012, 15:22:15
Yeah Clyde only holds about 8k Lee, I think you mean Queens Park at Hampden.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Coca Fola on Saturday, July 14, 2012, 15:22:45
Or them. They should merge because their names are too similar, and I for one don't like that.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: leefer on Saturday, July 14, 2012, 15:23:17
Thats what i said :D.. :-[


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: tans on Saturday, July 14, 2012, 15:34:05
East stirling la la la!


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: kerry red on Saturday, July 14, 2012, 15:39:07
I thought Brighton were Queens of the South


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Reg Smeeton on Saturday, July 14, 2012, 18:45:14
East stirling la la la!

It's possibly a little known fact that East Stirlingshire, were subject to an early example of franchising, in the mid 60's when a couple of Glasgow brothers, who owned the club thought that with gates of 200 that Falkirk was already sorted for football, by Falkirk FC and moved ES to Clydebank...then a new area of outer Glasgow with some industry and a sizeable population. The new club was called East Stirlingshire Cydebank, and for a while did OK.  The faithful 200 ES fans though kept the fight going, and eventually won a court case, that their club had in effect been stolen and should be returned to Falkirk...the judge agreed.

So ES went back and are still going, whereas Clydebank as they became when eventually being accepted into the  league, have disappeared. If only something similar could happen to Milton Keynes.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Saturday, July 14, 2012, 18:56:41
If only something similar could happen to Milton Keynes.

Amen.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Summerof69 on Saturday, July 14, 2012, 19:35:25
A couple of good reads here :

http://www.twohundredpercent.net/?p=19790#more-19790

But I did like Annan's statement in this :

http://www.twohundredpercent.net/?p=19794#more-19794

For those who cannot be bothered to read the article, they said the following :

We were delighted to hear the unanimous response from all ten 1st Division clubs who stated that they are only interested in a 42 club resolution (for any CEO’s or others who are unsure what that means, bluntly it is stick SPL2 where the sun don’t shine)


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Bob's Orange on Saturday, July 14, 2012, 21:30:50
My ex-flatmate is signing for Berwick next week and potentially will be playing at Hampden and Ibrox next season!


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Joycie on Sunday, July 15, 2012, 11:45:53
It's possibly a little known fact that East Stirlingshire, were subject to an early example of franchising, in the mid 60's when a couple of Glasgow brothers, who owned the club thought that with gates of 200 that Falkirk was already sorted for football, by Falkirk FC and moved ES to Clydebank...then a new area of outer Glasgow with some industry and a sizeable population. The new club was called East Stirlingshire Cydebank, and for a while did OK.  The faithful 200 ES fans though kept the fight going, and eventually won a court case, that their club had in effect been stolen and should be returned to Falkirk...the judge agreed.

So ES went back and are still going, whereas Clydebank as they became when eventually being accepted into the  league, have disappeared. If only something similar could happen to Milton Keynes.

Clydebank still exist under the name Airdrie United. *spits*

I'd laugh at Rangers if I didn't feel like a really pale jobby.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: janaage on Sunday, July 29, 2012, 14:13:49
Congratulations to The New Rangers FC. They've just scored the first competitive goal in their history.

Live on BBC Alba (168) for those that are interested.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: horlock07 on Thursday, January 10, 2013, 13:07:38
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20963963

He is getting boring now, if they quit Scottish football exactly where is he planning to take them?


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Ardiles on Thursday, January 10, 2013, 13:18:38
I think it's getting to the point where most Scottish fans would be happy for them to move on as well.  The line put forward by many Rangers fans that other clubs need Rangers to generate crowds/revenue etc. is true to a point...but they would live.

But as you say, where Rangers would go is another matter.  Very little incentive for the English leagues to take them on; fine as they are.  Perhaps they could join the League of Wales?


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: suttonred on Thursday, January 10, 2013, 13:32:17
Be League of ireland i reckon


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Paolo69 on Thursday, January 10, 2013, 15:00:35
Be League of ireland i reckon

Welcomed with open ARMS....


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Arnold.J.Rimmer on Thursday, January 10, 2013, 15:23:24
Queen of the South could have a home crowd of 52,000 on there hands this coming season :eek:

How's that?


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Peter Venkman on Thursday, January 10, 2013, 15:24:06
How's that?
Hampden Park.

In the first game there was 30,117 there.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Abrahammer on Thursday, January 10, 2013, 15:50:13
Well Queens Park did, not Queen of the South


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Peter Venkman on Thursday, January 10, 2013, 15:57:02
Well Queens Park did, not Queen of the South
Ah good point I misread what leefer wrote, apologies :D


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: jonny72 on Thursday, January 10, 2013, 16:40:11
Even Celtic seem to be distancing themselves from Rangers these days, I'd be surprised if they had any friends left in Scottish football. They could (and should) have just taken their punishment and got on with it but instead they haven't stopped moaning and are continually picking fights with other clubs and the league in general. I doubt there'd be many tears if Rangers did fuck off somewhere else.

Thought the new league structure they've come up with is pretty good and could improve things a lot if implemented. Not really sure why Rangers are opposed to it, they seem to be claiming there will be no promotion or relegation but that isn't how I read the proposal.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Ardiles on Thursday, January 10, 2013, 16:54:30
They're simply complaining that since the 18 club tier three division would consist of all of the present Division 3 clubs (together with the lowest finishing clubs from Division 2), what is the point of Division 3 clubs completing their fixtures this season.  Every other club in the division might say the same, but they're not.  All getting very petty from Rangers now.  They have had a planet-sized chip on their shoulder ever since they realised that the rest of Scottish football wasn't going to give them a free pass back to the SPL.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: Paolo69 on Thursday, January 10, 2013, 17:03:42
Every other club in the division might say the same, but they're not. 

In fairness those in with a chance of promotion probably are but because it's Rangers it's getting reported.

Green has a point that this season is a complete waste of time for the lower teams if there's nothing to compete for. He's right. Imagine if they decided to restructure English football around now and there was no promotion from League One. Can't see Saturday being quite as exciting. By throwing his toys out of the pram and threatening to quit Scottish football though he has just left himself/Rangers looking pathetic/spoilt though.


Title: Re: Rangers
Post by: tans on Thursday, January 10, 2013, 17:35:08
Green is a fucking bellend who behaves like a kid whomhas hid toy taken from him.

The cunt.