Rangers FC lodge papers to go into administration

Dempsey

Trampas wrote: »

rangers going bang isn't good for celtic as money for the league will go down. snowball effect

Here we go again :rolleyes:

Celtic have downsized before and progressed before. We will be able to adapt to life without Rangers better than those looking from a distance think.

bobmalooka

Trampas wrote: »

rangers going bang isn't good for celtic as money for the league will go down. snowball effect

how much money?

tv money in SPL is very low and accounts for 3% of celtics turnover..

Spl sides need to raise attendances by an average of 400 to cover the loss of Rangers away days. Motherwells have shot up by 3k with the prospect of coming 2nd.

Please show us how Rangers going would cost Celtic and others or are you assuming thats how it would work without checking where Celtic get their money?

KeithAFC

Dempsey wrote: »

Here we go again :rolleyes:

Celtic have downsized before and progressed before. We will be able to adapt to life without Rangers better than those looking from a distance think.

There is downsizing and then destruction of a league. A big difference. Had this debate before. But still to see a reasonable argument why the SPL will get stronger.

Dempsey

KeithAFC wrote: »

There is downsizing and then destruction of a league. A big difference. Had this debate before. But still to see a reasonable argument why the SPL will get stronger.

Scaremongering at its best!

Maybe you should read the McLeish report and all the aspects that are currently on hold & in the process of being implemented. The current Old Firm centric SPL structure will die, a league that isnt heavily dependent on the success of two clubs will come out of it. Any league structure will be better off without a club that has been cheating for over a decade anyways!

You keep ignoring this point and any other valid point about the progression of Scottish Football and maintain your blinkered thinking at all costs, sound familiar?

KeithAFC

Dempsey wrote: »

Scaremongering at its best!

Maybe you should read the McLeish report and all the aspects that are currently on hold & in the process of being implemented. The current Old Firm centric SPL structure will die, a league that isnt heavily dependent on the success of two clubs will come out of it. Any league structure will be better off without a club that has been cheating for over a decade anyways!

You keep ignoring this point and any other valid point about the progression of Scottish Football and maintain your blinkered thinking at all costs, sound familiar?

Again, a poor argument. The McLeish report is pointless without the Old Firm. If Rangers are liquidated, the league just isn't strong enough to attract interest from Sky or ESPN.

That much is a fact. We all know the other teams in the SPL are small clubs and will not be a big attraction to foreign players or any TV company. The BBC deal requires Rangers or Celtic to be in the SPL.

Watch all the TV companies forget about it and show no interest. Can't build a league if you don't have TV interest.

Face up to it, Scottish football IS the Old Firm. Without the Old Firm, it is just another League of Ireland. You know it and I know it.

Dempsey

KeithAFC wrote: »

Again, a poor argument. The McLeish report is pointless without the Old Firm. If Rangers are liquidated, the league just isn't strong enough to attract interest from Sky or ESPN.

That much is a fact. We all know the other teams in the SPL are small clubs and will not be a big attraction to foreign players or any TV company. The BBC deal requires Rangers or Celtic to be in the SPL.

Watch all the TV companies forget about it and show no interest. Can't build a league if you don't have TV interest.

Face up to it, Scottish football IS the Old Firm. Without the Old Firm, it is just another League of Ireland. You know it and I know it.

Explain how the McLeish report is pointless without the Old Firm? Show us all the recommendations that are pointless.

Have Sky/ESPN stated that they wont invest in the SPL if Rangers go under? SKY/ESPN havent said anything yet

Explain these "facts" because they sound like figments of your imagination moreso.

KeithAFC

Dempsey wrote: »

Explain how the McLeish report is pointless without the Old Firm?

Have Sky/ESPN stated that they wont invest in the SPL if Rangers go under?

Explain these "facts" because they sound like figments of your imagination moreso.

Simply not understanding the magnitude of the situation here. The other clubs simply aren't big enough to challenge or maintain a challenge over a long period of time in the modern game. Celtic are way and beyond bigger than the other clubs.

No one will be interested in watching that. You can try and talk about structuring the league all you want but the core element of the whole debate is it comes down to just how competitive the league is at the top. Without a challenge for the title, you will struggle to attract players to the league, TV companies will not invest money in a one team league.

Sky or ESPN would just be as well focusing on the Premier League and trying to get more live games. Why would they invest in the Scottish Premier League which is dying with the Old Firm, never mind when it gets worse without one side of the Old Firm? The big game will be gone.

The exact same thing would happen in La Liga. I don't think Sky would be interested in Spanish football if Real Madrid or Barcelona disappeared.

The Scottish Premier League can't afford for the Old Firm fixture to disappear because one of the clubs is liquidated. The small clubs all over Scotland would be severely damaged financially without the large away following Rangers bring to grounds. This is big money to these clubs.

lubo_moravcik

KeithAFC wrote: »

Simply not understanding the magnitude of the situation here. The other clubs simply aren't big enough to challenge or maintain a challenge over a long period of time in the modern game. Celtic are way and beyond bigger than the other clubs.

No one will be interested in watching that. You can try and talk about structuring the league all you want but the core element of the whole debate is it comes down to just how competitive the league is at the top. Without a challenge for the title, you will struggle to attract players to the league, TV companies will not invest money in a one team league.

Sky or ESPN would just be as well focusing on the Premier League and trying to get more live games. Why would they invest in the Scottish Premier League which is dying with the Old Firm, never mind when it gets worse without one side of the Old Firm? The big game will be gone.

The exact same thing would happen in La Liga. I don't think Sky would be interested in Spanish football if Real Madrid or Barcelona disappeared.

The Scottish Premier League can't afford for the Old Firm fixture to disappear because one of the clubs is liquidated. The small clubs all over Scotland would be severely damaged financially without the large away following Rangers bring to grounds. This is big money to these clubs.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=77470101&postcount=1103
As said in that post. Motherwell who now have a chance to finish 2nd have a higher average attendance than they've had in years. You seriously telling me that the rangers visiting twice a season will bring in more money to them than a higher attendance over the other 16 home games over the course of a season would?

Jelle1880

bobmalooka wrote: »

how much money?

tv money in SPL is very low and accounts for 3% of celtics turnover..

Spl sides need to raise attendances by an average of 400 to cover the loss of Rangers away days. Motherwells have shot up by 3k with the prospect of coming 2nd.

Please show us how Rangers going would cost Celtic and others or are you assuming thats how it would work without checking where Celtic get their money?

Eh ?

How did you come to that conclusion ?
I don't for a second believe that that would be enough.

And you keep mentioning how Celtic don't need Rangers, this is however about the other clubs as well.

Dempsey

KeithAFC wrote: »

Simply not understanding the magnitude of the situation here. The other clubs simply aren't big enough to challenge or maintain a challenge over a long period of time in the modern game. Celtic are way and beyond bigger than the other clubs.

No one will be interested in watching that. You can try and talk about structuring the league all you want but the core element of the whole debate is it comes down to just how competitive the league is at the top. Without a challenge for the title, you will struggle to attract players to the league, TV companies will not invest money in a one team league.

Sky or ESPN would just be as well focusing on the Premier League and trying to get more live games. Why would they invest in the Scottish Premier League which is dying with the Old Firm, never mind when it gets worse without one side of the Old Firm? The big game will be gone.

The exact same thing would happen in La Liga. I don't think Sky would be interested in Spanish football if Real Madrid or Barcelona disappeared.

The Scottish Premier League can't afford for the Old Firm fixture to disappear because one of the clubs is liquidated. The small clubs all over Scotland would be severely damaged financially without the large away following Rangers bring to grounds. This is big money to these clubs.

I fully understand the situation but I disagree with you. You continually change your argument when any of your weak points are blown out of the water.

It was impossible to have any other competition at the top of the league because Rangers were continually cheating for over 10 years. Remove the corrupt club and we'll actually have a real chance at healthy competition.

Your point about Sky is a figment of your imagination and you are completely spoofing on that point.

Again, show me the evidence about Rangers away support? Your argument here is again highly flawed and a product of your imagination as you are ignoring the reality.

Look at Motherwell, the prospect of getting 2nd place has their attendances swelling, they dont need the 2 away attendances from Rangers. You also are ignoring the fans appetite for changes to the league structure.

The current setup is actually putting alot of fans off, restructuring has better chance of bringing them back than Rangers staying in the SPL or any attempt to maintain the status quo.

In short Scottish Football will be better off in the long run without cheats.

Jelle1880

Dempsey wrote: »

I fully understand the situation but I disagree with you. You continually change your argument when any of your weak points are blown out of the water.

It was impossible to have any other competition at the top of the league because Rangers were continually cheating for over 10 years. Remove the corrupt club and we'll actually have a real chance at healthy competition.

Your point about Sky is a figment of your imagination and you are completely spoofing on that point.

Again, show me the evidence about Rangers away support? Your argument here is again highly flawed and a product of your imagination as you are ignoring the reality.

Look at Motherwell, the prospect of getting 2nd place has their attendances swelling, they dont need the 2 away attendances from Rangers. You also are ignoring the fans appetite for changes to the league structure.

The current setup is actually putting alot of fans off, restructuring has better chance of bringing them back than Rangers staying in the SPL or any attempt to maintain the status quo.

In short Scottish Football will be better off in the long run without cheats.

Pull the other one.
Let's forget the other decades when the 2 clubs dominated Scottish football for a second, or what ?
And as if Celtic aren't complicit in keeping the current set-up as it is...

If Motherwell is your only argument against clubs not needing the money from Rangers fans then that's pretty weak.
Just look at Dunfermline, who can't even pay their players because Rangers didn't pay 85k.

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Let's forget the other decades when the 2 clubs dominated Scottish football for a second, or what ?

As if Celtic aren't complicit in keeping the current set-up as it is ?

If Motherwell is your only argument against clubs not needing the money from Rangers fans then that's pretty weak.
Just look at Dunfermline, who can't even play their players because Rangers didn't pay 85k.

So that makes cheating ok? That makes the removal of fair competition ok? GTF!

When the vote is put to Celtic to change to a better setup than the previous, they have always voted for it.

Dunfermline had a slight cash flow issue caused by fixture postponements and storm damage to their grounds, nothing compared to the problems at Rangers. They are paying their debts and taxes unlike the cheats, they are a solvent business regardless of what you seem to think.

KeithAFC

I fully understand the situation but I disagree with you. You continually change your argument when any of your weak points are blown out of the water.

Which arguments are weak? My arguments are footballs realities and even more so in a league which is really poor. You can't ignore that.

It was impossible to have any other competition at the top of the league because Rangers were continually cheating for over 10 years. Remove the corrupt club and we'll actually have a real chance at healthy competition.

Laughable, absolutely laughable. No one club in the modern game outside Celtic, can compete with Rangers in the SPL. You need to accept that. The rest of the league is full of garbage and small clubs who can't possible compete.

Take Rangers out of the way and it is even worse. A one team league dominated by one club every season. The other clubs don't have the support or the attraction to bring in talented players.

Your point about Sky is a figment of your imagination and you are completely spoofing on that point.

Look at the reality, Sky are more interested in the Premier League. They only invest in the Scottish Premier League because of the Old Firm. There is absolutely no interest in it for them if the Old Firm fixture and Rangers don't exist. Why would they be interested in the league? This isn't the Premier League you are talking about which has a number of big clubs.

Again, show me the evidence about Rangers away support? Your argument here is again highly flawed and a product of your imagination as you are ignoring the reality.

Rangers has a huge away support which pumps money not just into the clubs themselves but the local shops around the clubs which helps the economy in general (albeit in a small way).

Look at Motherwell, the prospect of getting 2nd place has their attendances swelling, they dont need the 2 away attendances from Rangers. You also are ignoring the fans appetite for changes to the league structure.

Motherwell are a small club. Motherwell can NOT maintain a challenge to Celtic over a long period of time. Motherwell don't have anywhere near the support that Rangers have.

The current setup is actually putting alot of fans off, restructuring has better chance of bringing them back than Rangers staying in the SPL or any attempt to maintain the status quo.

The quality of footballer in general in Scotland is what is putting fans off. The awful standard of player (Scottish footballers). These clubs in the modern game with rubbish coaching from grass roots levels have no chance of competing now. They can't attract good foreign talent.

lubo_moravcik

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Pull the other one.
Let's forget the other decades when the 2 clubs dominated Scottish football for a second, or what ?
And as if Celtic aren't complicit in keeping the current set-up as it is...

If Motherwell is your only argument against clubs not needing the money from Rangers fans then that's pretty weak.
Just look at Dunfermline, who can't even pay their players because Rangers didn't pay 85k.

So rangers should stay in then because when they're there they don't pay other teams what's due to them, but if they're not there then the other team will suffer :rolleyes:

lubo_moravcik

KeithAFC wrote: »

Which arguments are weak? My arguments are footballs realities and even more so in a league which is really poor. You can't ignore that.


Laughable, absolutely laughable. No one club in the modern game outside Celtic, can compete with Rangers in the SPL. You need to accept that. The rest of the league is full of garbage and small clubs who can't possible compete.

Take Rangers out of the way and it is even worse. A one team league dominated by one club every season. The other clubs don't have the support or the attraction to bring in talented players.


Look at the reality, Sky are more interested in the Premier League. They only invest in the Scottish Premier League because of the Old Firm. There is absolutely no interest in it for them if the Old Firm fixture and Rangers don't exist. Why would they be interested in the league? This isn't the Premier League you are talking about which has a number of big clubs.


Rangers has a huge away support which pumps money not just into the clubs themselves but the local shops around the clubs which helps the economy in general (albeit in a small way).


Motherwell are a small club. Motherwell can NOT maintain a challenge to Celtic over a long period of time. Motherwell don't have anywhere near the support that Rangers have.


The quality of footballer in general in Scotland is what is putting fans off. The awful standard of player (Scottish footballers). These clubs in the modern game with rubbish coaching from grass roots levels have no chance of competing now. They can't attract good foreign talent.

So you cheated to be better than Celtic, that's basically what you're saying there. The whole quest for 9 in a row, for every fiver we'll spend a tenner, all reaction to Celtic and to be the bigger and better team. Do it on a level playing field is all that people ask. you cheated and deserve to be severely punished

Coillte_Bhoy

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Eh ?

How did you come to that conclusion ?
I don't for a second believe that that would be enough.

It's hardly rocket science. You do the maths then and give us a figure....

Jelle1880

Dempsey wrote: »

So that makes cheating ok? That makes the removal of fair competition ok? GTF!

When the vote is put to Celtic to change to a better setup than the previous, they have always voted for it.

Dunfermline had a slight cash flow issue caused by fixture postponements and storm damage to their grounds, nothing compared to the problems at Rangers. They are paying their debts and taxes unlike the cheats, they are a solvent business regardless of what you seem to think.

Rangers have pretty much always voted similar to Celtic, so does that mean Rangers too have always voted for a better setup ?
Because the way you describe it it seems that Rangers are the sole reason of the SPL's demise.

Claiming that the history with the EBT's is what caused other Scottish clubs to be unable to keep up is ridiculous.
Both clubs have nearly 100 League wins combined, before this happened the competition was already dominated for decades.

If there is a monopoly by Rangers and Celtic which keeps the rest of Scottish football down then both clubs are as complicit as the other.

edit: Coiltte, Dempsey claimed it, he might as well back it up.

lubo: Stop twisting my words (Not just you, your fellow fans seem to make a habit of it too), it makes you look desperate.
I never said that it 'makes cheating ok', but when clubs get into trouble because of a one time payment that didn't happen then it clearly shows they rely on that money.

We all know you're desperate to get rid of Rangers, but that doesn't mean that the SPL would be better off.

Dempsey

Nothing but hot air keith and rewording what you've already said. I asked for tanigble proof and you have none. I asked for evidence (several other people have too) about the away support of Rangers which you claim to be the biggest in Scotland and you have shown us nothing.

I asked you to back up your claim that the McLeish report is pointless, again nothing.

Sky/ESPN will make an offer for Scottish Football based on demand to watch it on the TV, no rangers will see the new deal, which hasnt even come into force yet, renegotiated but they will still invest because it will be profitable to do so

Oh, you ignoring the £500m investment into grass roots football? Surely not! :rolleyes:

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Rangers have pretty much always voted similar to Celtic, so does that mean Rangers too have always voted for a better setup ?
Because the way you describe it it seems that Rangers are the sole reason of the SPL's demise.

Claiming that the history with the EBT's is what caused other Scottish clubs to be unable to keep up is ridiculous.
Both clubs have nearly 100 League wins combined, before this happened the competition was already dominated for decades.

If there is a monopoly by Rangers and Celtic which keeps the rest of Scottish football down then both clubs are as complicit as the other.

edit: Coiltte, Dempsey claimed it, he might as well back it up.

lubo: Stop twisting my words (Not just you, your fellow fans seem to make a habit of it too), it makes you look desperate.

Rangers long term cheating would be a main factor in the demise of competitiveness within the SPL. Clubs had to offset your cheating by selling players and taking on debt.

You have been cheating even before its inception, its just the SFL are not bothered going after you. The SPL will because you are its current member and they have more powers to get the information to prove that you were cheating at least since 1998.

We'll see at the next SPL vote, Celtic wont be voting the same way as Rangers. Rangers will be voting to suit themselves and Celtic will be voting for whats best for the league.

What do I have to backup? I didnt pass the remark about attendances but I'll do the math for you since google wouldnt help you

400 x 17 = 6800

2 fixtures = 3400

Do Rangers bring roughly 3400 to every away game?

lubo_moravcik

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Rangers have pretty much always voted similar to Celtic, so does that mean Rangers too have always voted for a better setup ?
Because the way you describe it it seems that Rangers are the sole reason of the SPL's demise.

Claiming that the history with the EBT's is what caused other Scottish clubs to be unable to keep up is ridiculous.
Both clubs have nearly 100 League wins combined, before this happened the competition was already dominated for decades.

If there is a monopoly by Rangers and Celtic which keeps the rest of Scottish football down then both clubs are as complicit as the other.

edit: Coiltte, Dempsey claimed it, he might as well back it up.

lubo: Stop twisting my words (Not just you, your fellow fans seem to make a habit of it too), it makes you look desperate.
I never said that it 'makes cheating ok', but when clubs get into trouble because of a one time payment that didn't happen then it clearly shows they rely on that money.

We all know you're desperate to get rid of Rangers, but that doesn't mean that the SPL would be better off.

eh, where did I twist your words? And how am I looking desperate?? Neither am I desperate to get rid of your lot. Believe it or not, I love my club more than I hate yours

Jelle1880

Motherwell play 34 home games now ?

Not necessarily 6800, but when you see that for example about 75% of the crowd at the last ICT - Rangers game were Rangers fans... You think ICT will make up for that when Rangers are gone ?

It's far from ideal and it's definitely not good for the league to have clubs dependent on Celtic and Rangers, but that's the case right now.

Nobody forced clubs to sell players and take on debt, that's their own choosing.

If you honestly think that, if all of this didn't happen, clubs like Hibs, Hearts, Aberdeen, Motherwell,... could rival us you're deluded.

edit: By making it sound like I condone cheating lubo.
Or why else would you make that remark ?

Dempsey

I edited my post 12 minutes before your reply, try to keep up! :rolleyes:

Jelle1880

Still means nothing, as soon as they get a bad run of results it'll probably drop again.
It's useless to take short-lived increases like this as fact.

If they keep it up season after season you'd have a point and even then it would have to be regardless of their league position.

edit: And an increase of 400/game, simply because they have the chance to end up 2nd, is pretty pathetic.
Motherwell are a decent club with a decent fanbase, 400 is pretty low.

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Motherwell play 34 home games now ?

Not necessarily 6800, but when you see that for example about 75% of the crowd at the last ICT - Rangers game were Rangers fans... You think ICT will make up for that when Rangers are gone ?

It's far from ideal and it's definitely not good for the league to have clubs dependent on Celtic and Rangers, but that's the case right now.

Nobody forced clubs to sell players and take on debt, that's their own choosing.

If you honestly think that, if all of this didn't happen, clubs like Hibs, Hearts, Aberdeen, Motherwell,... could rival us you're deluded.

edit: By making it sound like I condone cheating lubo.
Or why else would you make that remark ?

So it was ok to cheat because you believe this clubs could never ever get close anyways? You are a joke!

Clubs had absolutely no chance of progressing because of your cheating, thats the point. Cheating forced the clubs to sell.

Jelle1880

Yeah, see my comment about twisting my words.

Clubs have no chance because Rangers and Celtic have pretty much formed a monopoly on Scottish football.

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Yeah, see my comment about twisting my words.

Clubs have no chance because Rangers and Celtic have pretty much formed a monopoly on Scottish football.

Whilst every other club was trying to operate in a sustainable manner, Rangers cheated. Its quite easy to see that if you werent cheating then you would have struggled to finish even 2nd some years never mind challenging Celtic for titles. Factor in UEFA money that you shouldnt have gotten then you begin to see how you should have hit administration years ago.

Jelle1880

Speculation of the highest order.

So all the other years of dominance by Rangers are what... flukes ?

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Speculation of the highest order.

So all the other years of dominance by Rangers... flukes ?

Unbelievable

Jelle1880

Dempsey wrote: »

Unbelievable

Yeah, your point sure is.

Mind answering the question ?

You claim that Rangers' actions caused the rest of Scottish football to be unable to cope.
How do you explain Rangers winning countless league titles before that ?
Despite the fact that back in those days the Scottish Division One was already dominated by Rangers and Celtic, while smaller clubs hardly got a piece of silverware.

Or is that part of the institutionalised pro-Rangers bias that has been going on for over a decade ?

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Yeah, your point sure is.

You continue to believe that Rangers have done nothing wrong and the cheating had no material effect on Scottish Football. You have been sticking your head in the sand for several months as it is, I was foolish to think that this would change.

Dempsey

BBC wrote:

Administrators Duff & Phelps say no decision on players' futures until Friday

LOL

Jelle1880

Dempsey wrote: »

You continue to believe that Rangers have done nothing wrong and the cheating had no material effect on Scottish Football. You have been sticking your head in the sand for several months as it is, I was foolish to think that this would change.

Keep putting words in my mouth, maybe you'll get it right some day.
I never said that the EBT's etc. didn't have an effect on Scottish football, but your claim that this is the sole reason for other clubs being unable to keep up is retarded at best.

edit:

This might be the reason why there won't be any statement regarding players soon:

http://news.stv.tv/scotland/west-central/300049-rangers-to-be-sold-in-next-few-days/

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Keep putting words in my mouth, maybe you'll get it right some day.
I never said that the EBT's etc. didn't have an effect on Scottish football, but your claim that this is the sole reason for other clubs being unable to keep up is retarded at best.

You need more english lessons. Where did I say that?

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Keep putting words in my mouth, maybe you'll get it right some day.
I never said that the EBT's etc. didn't have an effect on Scottish football, but your claim that this is the sole reason for other clubs being unable to keep up is retarded at best.

edit:

This might be the reason why there won't be any statement regarding players soon:

http://news.stv.tv/scotland/west-central/300049-rangers-to-be-sold-in-next-few-days/

They've been trying to sell the club since the day they walked into the club! Paul Murray has expressed an interest since HMRC forced you into administration. This is just incompetence of the highest order at this stage from the people that Whyte employed when he wanted to takeover the club or this has been the end game all along which puts Whyte first not Rangers

Jelle1880

Dempsey wrote: »

You need more english lessons. Where did I say that?

Clubs had absolutely no chance of progressing because of your cheating

There you go.
Or wait... 'I misread that', right ?

Fuhrer

Jelle1880 wrote: »

The way you keep going on about it.

You find the reason that other clubs couldnt keep up because Rangers had over 50 million extra to spend on transfers and wages by cheating on their taxes is retarded?

Jelle1880

Fuhrer wrote: »

You find the reason that other clubs couldnt keep up because Rangers had over 50 million extra to spend on transfers and wages by cheating on their taxes is retarded?

When they actually haven't been able to keep up since... forever ?

Yes.

I'm not denying it gave Rangers an unfair advantage, but it's simply not true to state that only this caused other clubs to be unable to compete.
Rangers and Celtic have been the dominant forces in Scottish football for over a century, causing other clubs to have to adapt to their wishes all the time.

That's why I said that this tax thing isn't the sole responsibility of clubs being unable to compete.

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

The way you keep going on about it.

I made my viewpoint very clear

Rangers long term cheating would be a main factor in the demise of competitiveness within the SPL. Clubs had to offset your cheating by selling players and taking on debt.

As said yesterday, the difference between 2nd and 3rd is massive, financially For other clubs, its the difference between keeping their best players and loosing them for undervalued amounts. 10+ years of that is significant for any league. Its deluded to think otherwise.

Dempsey

http://sport.stv.tv/football/scottish-premier/rangers/300064-no-european-football-for-rangers-next-season-administrators-confirm/

Paul Clark, joint administrator from Duff and Phelps has said that the clubs' financial position means that Rangers will not meet the criteria required for a UEFA club licence by the required deadline.

Its finally official

ColeTrain

Dempsey wrote: »

http://sport.stv.tv/football/scottish-premier/rangers/300064-no-european-football-for-rangers-next-season-administrators-confirm/



Its finally official

They've surpassed themselves getting put out of Europe earlier than last season...

PauloMN

It actually sounds even worse than before, if that were possible. This "quick sale" thing seems to be based on the fact that they won't even last until the end of the season unless someone buy them and throws a pile of cash in.

But who will buy it with the big tax case looming?

Jelle1880

That's how I see it as well, sounds like they're not getting out of it and that it's either quickly selling the club, or liquidation.

Dempsey

Surely you can just sell this and all will be sorted



:pac:

lubo_moravcik

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Motherwell play 34 home games now ?

Not necessarily 6800, but when you see that for example about 75% of the crowd at the last ICT - Rangers game were Rangers fans... You think ICT will make up for that when Rangers are gone ?

It's far from ideal and it's definitely not good for the league to have clubs dependent on Celtic and Rangers, but that's the case right now.

Nobody forced clubs to sell players and take on debt, that's their own choosing.

If you honestly think that, if all of this didn't happen, clubs like Hibs, Hearts, Aberdeen, Motherwell,... could rival us you're deluded.

edit: By making it sound like I condone cheating lubo.
Or why else would you make that remark ?

If you read back you'll see I was talking to the Keith.

A Primal Nut

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

What utter bull****. You have no idea of what it means to be a celtic fan

So why do so many Celtic fans go to Celtic-Rangers games more than game? And yet can still be happy that Rangers are going bust?

greendom

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Yeah, see my comment about twisting my words.

Clubs have no chance because Rangers and Celtic have pretty much formed a monopoly on Scottish football.

A duopoly, surely ?

bobmalooka

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Still means nothing, as soon as they get a bad run of results it'll probably drop again.
It's useless to take short-lived increases like this as fact.

If they keep it up season after season you'd have a point and even then it would have to be regardless of their league position.

edit: And an increase of 400/game, simply because they have the chance to end up 2nd, is pretty pathetic.
Motherwell are a decent club with a decent fanbase, 400 is pretty low.

No wonder you're disagreeing with everyone, you've mixed up the figures.

Motherwell have seen an increase of about 3,000 not the 400 you seem to think.

A very quick bit of calculating suggests that each SPL club needs an increase of about 400/game to cancel out the loss of Rangers not coming to town twice a year, not an unachieveable figure seeing as Motherwell have already achieved a 3000 increase at the gates.

Jelle1880

I only went forward on the 400 that Dempsey used, I thought that's the amount of extra fans he said Motherwell had now.
That's pretty good for them, they deserve to get bigger crowds imo.

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

I only went forward on the 400 that Dempsey used, I thought that's the amount of extra fans he said Motherwell had now.

But my point remains, how many of those will come back if they, hypothetically, can't reach 2nd anymore ?

Did I? I dont think so and I told you that earlier that I didnt when you said that I did. :rolleyes:

bobmalooka

Jelle1880 wrote: »

I only went forward on the 400 that Dempsey used, I thought that's the amount of extra fans he said Motherwell had now.

But my point remains, how many of those will come back if they, hypothetically, can't reach 2nd anymore ?

Well thats the challenge for Motherwell and other clubs, they will need to get 400 extra in to games each week to not miss Rangers.

Rangers have a strong fanbase in Motherwell, maybe a few of them will follow their local team when Rangers are gone.

The reason im pointing out the huge surge in support in Motherwell is that there is definitely an appetite for football in Scotland outside of the 'old firm', now is the time for the SFA and SPL to think outside of the 'old firm'.