Rangers FC lodge papers to go into administration

Dempsey

Its Eric Riley thats on the SPL board, what committee is Lawwell on?

Jelle1880

Regan's twitter account follows many people, yet only one single supporters club from a football team.

TheSmallestCSC.

Odd. :pac:

Eirebear

Dempsey wrote: »

Its Eric Riley thats on the SPL board, what committee is Lawwell on?

the same one as Ogilvie!
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_football.cfm?page=2560

Eirebear

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Regan's twitter account follows many people, yet only one single supporters club from a football team.

TheSmallestCSC.

Odd. :pac:

I wouldnt know - He's blocked my account for asking why he walked out of the meeting with Rangers fans a few weeks ago.

blahfckingblah

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Regan's twitter account follows many people, yet only one single supporters club from a football team.

TheSmallestCSC.

Odd. :pac:

so all celtic fans or suspected celtic fans are rangers haters, sounds to me like conspiracy RSC

Eirebear

blahfckingblah wrote: »

so all celtic fans or suspected celtic fans are rangers haters, sounds to me like conspiracy RSC

Nah - He's just a spineless **** who is stuck between a Lawell and a hard place.

Dempsey

Eirebear wrote: »

the same one as Ogilvie!
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_football.cfm?page=2560

You'd have to have the chief executive of the best run club in scottish football involved in corporate strategy and top-line decision-making of the professional game. Silly not to...

Eirebear

Dempsey wrote: »

You'd have to have the chief executive of the best run club in scottish football involved in corporate strategy and top-line decision-making of the professional game. Silly not to...

Not biting!

fryup

Donald Trump is in town, maybe he'll buy out Rangers???

A Dub in Glasgo

As seen on the STV today

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEKICgiv9Lo

And Ch4 news

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OiO1O8psvI

Eirebear

Ahm, you'll be delighted ADIG.

Now, will you all stop whining about the cracked crest?

A Dub in Glasgo

Eirebear wrote: »

Ahm, you'll be delighted ADIG.

Now, will you all stop whining about the cracked crest?

What? this one?



I have forgotten about the Celtic cracked crest ages ago

Fuhrer

Someone said earlier that it looks like Whyte is deliberately burning the club to get a big pay out, it does seem likely given his actions.

Surely this is some sort of fraud hes involved with

Eirebear

Fuhrer wrote: »

Someone said earlier that it looks like Whyte is deliberately burning the club to get a big pay out, it does seem likely given his actions.

Surely this is some sort of fraud hes involved with

It's certainly looking that way from where i'm sitting.

He's a conman, plain and simple - We were taken in by him as we had nowhere else to turn.

Dempsey

Fuhrer wrote: »

Someone said earlier that it looks like Whyte is deliberately burning the club to get a big pay out, it does seem likely given his actions.

Surely this is some sort of fraud hes involved with

The SFA returned a verdict of not proven on this charge for Craig Whyte

Rule 71: A recognised football body, club, official, Team Official, other member of Team Staff, player or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall, at all times, act in the best interests of Association Football and shall not act in any manner which is improper.

and this charge for Rangers

All members shall:
(b) be subject to and comply with the Articles and any statutes, regulations, directives, codes, decisions and International Match Calendar promulgated by the Board, the Professional Game Board, the Non Professional Game Board, the Judicial Panel, a Committee or sub-committee, FIFA, UEFA or the Court of Arbitration for Sport;

Either D&P take the current punishment on the chin or they let the SFA look at the books in a desperate attempt to push more blame onto Whyte. I doubt they will because the SFA will most likely come across more rule breaks.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17833957

Rangers' administrator must wait until October to make its case on the club's behalf for almost £30m in damages and money owed at the High Court in London.

I think ye'll be giving Motherwell a run for the longest administration period in Scottish Football history title.

Pompey Magnus

fryup wrote: »

Donald Trump is in town, maybe he'll buy out Rangers???

Well given his record of bad decisions and colossal business failures I wouldn't rule it out!

bobbysands81

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Who do you think owns Rangers if it's not Whyte?

Jelle - Did you answer this question yet?

Jelle1880

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Jelle - Did you answer this question yet?

Didn't see that question, sorry.

But yeah, seems like he still is the owner, I thought he wasn't anymore when D&P took over.

On another note, hopefully this bastard gets jailed for it:

Lawyers for Rangers administrators Duff and Phelps have forced former owner Sir David Murray’s group to release correspondence between it and Craig Whyte’s lawyers over the sale of Rangers FC.

At the Court of Session in Edinburgh on Wednesday, an administration order for Rangers Football Club Plc was heard by Lord Hodge.

During the ten-minute hearing, the judge granted a request of lawyers acting on behalf of the club’s administrators to force Murray International Holdings (MIH) to release information sent between it and Collyer Bristow, the law firm who were Mr Whyte’s lawyers throughout the process to purchase MIH’s 85.3% stake in Rangers in May 2011.

The court hearing follows a tumultuous day at Ibrox on Tuesday, where the Duff and Phelps said the Scottish Football Association’s decision to fine the club and ban it from registering players for the next 12 months could have a “very detrimental effect” on the sale of the club.

American businessman Bill Miller and the Blue Knights consortium, led by former Rangers board member Paul Murray, are in the running to take over the reins at Ibrox.

Craig Whyte, in an interview with STV News on Tuesday, reiterated that the club was in a financial mess before he arrived and said he has not made the situation worse since he became the owner of the former Scottish Premier League champions.

Old Gill

I dont think Craig Whyte has done anythign wrong/illegal. His previous business history was as an asset stripper so it wasnt a complete shock when he did the same to rangers. I'd agree that the club was ina mess before he took over and although he hasnt helped it he hasnt made it too much worse either. Remember he was the only show in town last year and if he didnt take over then nobody was going to

A Dub in Glasgo

Brewster wrote: »

I was referring to the judgement Bobby. I have read the judgement and I stand by what I say. All the fines stem from one event, not paying the PAYE. This forced administration and fine, this forced bringing game into disrepute charge and the fine. The actions of one man has lead Rangers to their current situation. Nothing whatsoever to do with 20 years of maladministration in my view. If Craig Whyte had not seized control of Rangers would they be in administration now? I'd argue no, but that's just my opinion based on what I've read. You have a different view and that's cool. This is last I am going to say on this subject as its the wrong thread for it by all accounts. I dont want to annoy the posters on here, yet clearly I have done so which is not my intention.

Explain how Craig White 'seized' control of Rangers

Pompey Magnus

Old Gill wrote: »

I'd agree that the club was ina mess before he took over and although he hasnt helped it he hasnt made it too much worse either. Remember he was the only show in town last year and if he didnt take over then nobody was going to

I'm not so sure about that. I genuinely believe Rangers would be in a far better position had David Murray remained at the club.

Old Gill

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

I'm not so sure about that. I genuinely believe Rangers would be in a far better position had David Murray remained at the club.

Possibly yes..I'll concede that. But the main issue still needed adressed that the club were losing 1.5m a month. It would have taken strong leadership to sell any player with any value and not create more creditors by signign new players. Pride comes before a fall and whoever was in charge should have sold off assets sooner or got players to take wage cuts earlier. Its murrays mess..he simply jumped ship so that he didnt have to sort it out

Eirebear

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

I'm not so sure about that. I genuinely believe Rangers would be in a far better position had David Murray remained at the club.

Old Gill wrote: »

Possibly yes..I'll concede that. But the main issue still needed adressed that the club were losing 1.5m a month. It would have taken strong leadership to sell any player with any value and not create more creditors by signign new players. Pride comes before a fall and whoever was in charge should have sold off assets sooner or got players to take wage cuts earlier. Its murrays mess..he simply jumped ship so that he didnt have to sort it out

A couple of points here.

In the last couple of years of Murray's reign, Lloyds TSB were calling the shots as far as we know.
And as far as we know, the debt was being reduced steadily, and things were going well.

Whyte, has come in - and yes, technically he has done nothing illegal.
What he has done however, is used the law of the land, to give him opportunity to ignore the rules of football.
With this in mind, it is quite obvious to see how much damage Whyte has done to Rangers as a football club, and how much he has conned the Rangers support, the SPL, The SFA and everyone else who is now struggling to regain money from the club.

What i'd really like to know - and it's something that doesn't seem to come up very ofter. Is how much of a hand Lloyds TSB had in the sale of the club to Whyte.

Dempsey

Eirebear wrote: »

What i'd really like to know - and it's something that doesn't seem to come up very ofter. Is how much of a hand Lloyds TSB had in the sale of the club to Whyte.

They most likely encouraged it since they were getting their money out. Was Donald Muir on the board at the time of the sale?

Jelle1880

Old Gill wrote: »

I dont think Craig Whyte has done anythign wrong/illegal. His previous business history was as an asset stripper so it wasnt a complete shock when he did the same to rangers. I'd agree that the club was ina mess before he took over and although he hasnt helped it he hasnt made it too much worse either. Remember he was the only show in town last year and if he didnt take over then nobody was going to

Not paying PAYE is pretty illegal :pac:

Dempsey

Rangers have already released the team photo for the 2012/13 season...



:pac:

Eirebear

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Not paying PAYE is pretty illegal :pac:

Actually, it's not!

I don't know the ins and outs of it, but it's illegal within football - but not illegal in the business world.
(Some sort of loophole i'll never hope to understand)

Old Gill

Eirebear wrote: »

Actually, it's not!

I don't know the ins and outs of it, but it's illegal within football - but not illegal in the business world.
(Some sort of loophole i'll never hope to understand)

His dealings come across as dodgy but just within the law. he has shafted over so many companies he's an old hand at it and was cuning enough this time to cover his own back, knowing there would be more scrutiny on him.

BTW the SFA just re;eased a statement condemning the actions of rangers in trying to name the judicial panel. The police are now involved after some received abuse/threats. After those bomb sent last year they seem to be treating it fairly seriously. Very irresponsible comments by mccoist last night IMHO.

Lonesome Boatman

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17846691?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

scotlands shame

Dempsey

This is why the panel is decided the way it is and this is why confidentiality is important. McCoists comments last night were reckless and inflammatory but I dont think that was the response he was looking for. The people that targeted the people on the panel are nothing short of scum and I hope they are caught.

TheBuilder

McCoist has every right to ask who decided on the punishment. I don't believe he asked for it to be made public did he?He or Rangers FC is not responsible for some absolute dick thinking it'll help the clubs cause by sending a package to someone.

Dempsey

TheBuilder wrote: »

McCoist has every right to ask who decided on the punishment. I don't believe he asked for it to be made public did he?He or Rangers FC is not responsible for some absolute dick thinking it'll help the clubs cause by sending a package to someone.

"Who are these people? I want to know who these people are," added McCoist.

"I'm a Rangers supporter and the Rangers supporters and the Scottish public deserve to know who these people are, people who are working for the SFA.

"Make no mistake about it, this is an SFA decision. They have appointed the panel so therefore they are working for the SFA, but who are they?

"I think we have a right to know who is handing out this punishment to us, I really do."

He did

TheBuilder

Dempsey wrote: »

He did

Cheers!

I still think he had every right to ask, he doesn't represent some mindless moron.

A Dub in Glasgo

McCoist's interview was totally over the top and inflammatory. He should be ttaken to task for it. The frustration is starting to show.

Jelle1880

I don't see why he shouldn't want to know it, after all: Isn't the SFA 'transparent' now ?

Anyway, fans of a team that hired a private eye to investigate a ref shouldn't talk about 'inflammatory'.

TheBuilder

Seems people jumped the gun a bit, there was no package sent to anyone, they were just given advice on what to do if they did recieve one.

Dempsey

TheBuilder wrote: »

Seems people jumped the gun a bit, there was no package sent to anyone, they were just given advice on what to do if they did recieve one.

They were threatened

TheBuilder

Dempsey wrote: »

They were threatened

Yes, the same threats that rangers and Celtic players recieve every day on the Internet, doesn't make it right but the mock outrage over 'Scotland's shame' srnding bombs because McCoust gave an opinion, when nothing actually happened is pathetic, maybe the police should take the threats to Bartley, Aluko, Ledley etc just as serious and it might stop.

Dempsey

TheBuilder wrote: »

Yes, the same threats that rangers and Celtic players recieve every day on the Internet, doesn't make it right but the mock outrage over 'Scotland's shame' srnding bombs because McCoust gave an opinion, when nothing actually happened is pathetic, maybe the police should take the threats to Bartley, Aluko, Ledley etc just as serious and it might stop.

Footballers normally have higher levels of security and they have the clubs security when at work. These people wouldnt and thats part of the reason why their names are kept confidential. Didnt see much moaning from McCoist when the procedures were in the process of being implemented. He's the one full of mock outrage

Jelle1880

Dempsey wrote: »

Footballers normally have higher levels of security and they have the clubs security when at work. These people wouldnt and thats part of the reason why their names are kept confidential. Didnt see much moaning from McCoist when the procedures were in the process of being implemented. He's the one full of mock outrage

I'll just quote this here, in case Lennon gets hit with a big ban tomorrow.

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

I'll just quote this here, in case Lennon gets hit with a big ban tomorrow.

Whats happening tomorrow?

AFAIK, Lunny hasnt written any letters yet

Lonesome Boatman

McCoist, the catalyst of the Neil Lennon death threats and now solely responsible for SFA employees fearing for their lives

Poisonous bigot.

KeithAFC

Lonesome Boatman wrote: »

McCoist, the catalyst of the Neil Lennon death threats and now solely responsible for SFA employees fearing for their lives

Poisonous bigot.

:rolleyes:

Less of that nonsense.

Lonesome Boatman

KeithAFC wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Less of that nonsense.

Hows it nonsense? 3 men are fearing for their lives because of his comments

Jelle1880

Lonesome Boatman wrote: »

McCoist, the catalyst of the Neil Lennon death threats and now solely responsible for SFA employees fearing for their lives

Poisonous bigot.

Let me guess: 'It was a joke' ?

:rolleyes:

edit:

Telegraph Sport understands that a handwriting expert, who works with English forces, has been called in to assist Strathclyde Police with their investigation into Whyte’s takeover of Rangers. In the High Court in London on Tuesday, the Ibrox administrators raised a £25 million action against the club’s former lawyers, Collyer Bristow.

Gary Withey, a former partner of Collyer Bristow and Rangers’ company secretary under Whyte, was accused by Mark Phillips QC - acting for Duff & Phelps - of having forged Whyte’s signature on a letter that stated that Collyer Bristow held funds relating to the takeover when, in fact, they did not.

Meanwhile Strathclyde Police have dropped an investigation into a complaint by the chief correspondent of Channel 4 news, Alex Thomson, that he had been threatened physically by other journalists after arriving in Glasgow to cover the story. In a blog entry that was widely repeated in newspapers and such media sites as UK Press Gazette, Thomson wrote: “What I didn’t expect were the insults (and in at least one case, a direct physical threat) not from fans but from Scottish journalists. Sarajevo, Mogadishu, Kabul, Islamabad, Tripoli, Baghdad... I could bore you with more - in none of these places have I ever got this interesting reaction from local journalists. Only in Glasgow.”

However, Strathclyde Police found no evidence to support Thomson’s complaint. “Frankly, it was laughable,” a source told Telegraph Sport.

Aaw diddums

Dempsey: I read on some forums that he was up for charges at the SFA tomorrow, but I can't find any proof, so I guess it's not true.

By the way:

Lonesome Boatman

The pressures starting to get to McCoist.

He should resign before he embarrasses himself any further.

Jelle1880

Or not.

Found this on a Rangers forum:

Rangers were found guilty in respect of Rule 2.

Rule 2: Each member shall procure that its officials, its Team Staff and its players act in accordance with Rule 1.

But we were found Not Proven in respect of Rule 1. Whyte wasn't even charged under Rule 1. So who was found guilty under Rule 1 which formed the basis for our guilt under Rule 2?

For reference, Rule 1:

Rule 1 (b): All members shall:
(b) be subject to and comply with the Articles and any statutes, regulations, directives, codes, decisions and International Match Calendar promulgated by the Board, the Professional Game Board, the Non Professional Game Board, the Judicial Panel, a Committee or sub-committee, FIFA, UEFA or the Court of Arbitration for Sport;

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Dempsey: I read on some forums that he was up for charges at the SFA tomorrow, but I can't find any proof, so I guess it's not true.

Neil Lennon has to be charged first, Lunny hasnt written any letters, if he did it would be all over the news and on the SFA website.

Jelle1880

He doesn't HAVE to write any letters.

The last time he did it it was only to ask Lennon to explain himself.

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Or not.

Found this on a Rangers forum:

Surely you know about this?

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=2566&newsCategoryID=1&newsID=9718