flameboy Posted June 13, 2012 Author Posted June 13, 2012 http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11781/7807945/Gers-pushed-towards-liquidation happy days I'm not gonna go as far to say Happy days but I don't think HMRC (taxman) should be slammed for rejecting the CVA which basically forces Rangers to go into luquidation. At the the day Rangers have this huge tax bill and were offering just 2p for the £1. HMRC are constatly getting screwed over by football clubs, granted Portsmouth won recently in court with a view to this but still. Everyone else pays their taxes so why the hell shouldn't football clubs?! Port Vale recently owed something like £300,000 and went into adminstration and in the end only paid something like £7.
Charlie Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 I'm not gonna go as far to say Happy days but I don't think HMRC (taxman) should be slammed for rejecting the CVA which basically forces Rangers to go into luquidation. At the the day Rangers have this huge tax bill and were offering just 2p for the £1. HMRC are constatly getting screwed over by football clubs, granted Portsmouth won recently in court with a view to this but still. Everyone else pays their taxes so why the hell shouldn't football clubs?! Port Vale recently owed something like £300,000 and went into adminstration and in the end only paid something like £7. Yeah it's ridiculous. What's annoying for me, as a Celtic fan, is that Rangers won the league multiple times because they bought players they couldn't afford and did this by not paying taxes. Without these players Scottish football history could be very different. There are 2 tax cases. The more recent one is from Craig Whyte's tenure when he didn't pay any NIC at all. The bigger one dates back to 2001 (or earlier?) when they bought Tore Andre Flo and Ronald de Boer and how they tried to pay these players to avoid tax. One statement from David Murray stands out, "for every £5 Celtic spend, we'll spend £10". That's certainly served them well... I personally think that Rangers newco should be made to start in the 3rd division but I don't think the clubs in the SPL will go for that because of the money aspect. I think if Rangers did start from the bottom after a couple years Scottish football would be doing really well. It would be competitive at the top, teams would be challenging Celtic for the top spot and attendences in all divisions would increase as there's a real chance another team could win something. Not only that, attendances and sponsorship would increase in the 3rd division from Season 1 as Rangers would be bringing thousands of supporters wherever they go with them. As Rangers get promoted each division would get a turn.
Dog-amoto Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 It's saying on the live BBC feed for Euro 2012 that Chelsea have appointed Di Matteo as their permanent manager on a two year deal.
khilafah Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 (edited) It's saying on the live BBC feed for Euro 2012 that Chelsea have appointed Di Matteo as their permanent manager on a two year deal. he is just a stop gap till either Roman gets Pep or finally gives up! Good thing is that di matteo has been told that the style of football has to be much better this season. Yeah it's ridiculous. What's annoying for me, as a Celtic fan, is that Rangers won the league multiple times because they bought players they couldn't afford and did this by not paying taxes. Without these players Scottish football history could be very different. There are 2 tax cases. The more recent one is from Craig Whyte's tenure when he didn't pay any NIC at all. The bigger one dates back to 2001 (or earlier?) when they bought Tore Andre Flo and Ronald de Boer and how they tried to pay these players to avoid tax. One statement from David Murray stands out, "for every £5 Celtic spend, we'll spend £10". That's certainly served them well... I personally think that Rangers newco should be made to start in the 3rd division but I don't think the clubs in the SPL will go for that because of the money aspect. I think if Rangers did start from the bottom after a couple years Scottish football would be doing really well. It would be competitive at the top, teams would be challenging Celtic for the top spot and attendences in all divisions would increase as there's a real chance another team could win something. Not only that, attendances and sponsorship would increase in the 3rd division from Season 1 as Rangers would be bringing thousands of supporters wherever they go with them. As Rangers get promoted each division would get a turn. be interesting to see how the vote goes. Celtic better say No, I think Hearts and Aberdeen will say No for sure. If Newco do get a place in the SPL then sporting integrity will be gone. Edited June 13, 2012 by khilafah
Charlie Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 be interesting to see how the vote goes. Celtic better say No, I think Hearts and Aberdeen will say No for sure. If Newco do get a place in the SPL then sporting integrity will be gone. Rumours are that Celtic will say yes so that the Old Firm still have the veto vote between them. All Hearts fans actually support Rangers so they'll say yes.
khilafah Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 Rumours are that Celtic will say yes so that the Old Firm still have the veto vote between them. All Hearts fans actually support Rangers so they'll say yes. yeah i know the hearts fans are mini gers but i think the club will vote no. celtic cant not vote no, fans will not be happy if they give up sporting integrity for commercial gains. I think Hibs will vote No also!
Iun Posted June 14, 2012 Posted June 14, 2012 Harry has left Spurs. Can't believe it. He absolutely MUST stay in London, he looks too shifty to go anywhere else.
Dog-amoto Posted June 14, 2012 Posted June 14, 2012 Farewell Jussi. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18430239 Good luck to Bolton Wanderers reserves in the Premiership next season
Mokong Posted June 14, 2012 Posted June 14, 2012 So Rangers as we know it are dead and gone then? Wonder will this end the sectarianism associated between Celtic and Rangers... or will the new Rangers just pick up where old Rangers left off? What happens to the stadium though? Will the new Rangers owners be able to buy it back? I think they should not be allowed back in the SPL, technically a new club so they should start from scratch like any other new club would have to do. What would happen to the players though? I assume they are all now free agents as their contracts to old Rangers would no longer be valid? If new Rangers don't get to start in the SPL doubt any of the players would resign to play 3rd div Scottish Football So it could be longer before they get back to the SPL. Which again I wouldn't mind seeing, the longer the SPL is without Rangers the more likely one of the other clubs may step up to offer proper challenge for the title. Having it jump jump from Celtic and Rangers over the last what 20 years, has been a bit boring.
bob Posted June 14, 2012 Posted June 14, 2012 Which again I wouldn't mind seeing, the longer the SPL is without Rangers the more likely one of the other clubs may step up to offer proper challenge for the title. Having it jump jump from Celtic and Rangers over the last what 20 years, has been a bit boring. Yeah because a SPL without Rangers won't be boring at all....:p
Charlie Posted June 14, 2012 Posted June 14, 2012 So Rangers as we know it are dead and gone then? Wonder will this end the sectarianism associated between Celtic and Rangers... or will the new Rangers just pick up where old Rangers left off? What happens to the stadium though? Will the new Rangers owners be able to buy it back? I think they should not be allowed back in the SPL, technically a new club so they should start from scratch like any other new club would have to do. What would happen to the players though? I assume they are all now free agents as their contracts to old Rangers would no longer be valid? If new Rangers don't get to start in the SPL doubt any of the players would resign to play 3rd div Scottish Football So it could be longer before they get back to the SPL. Which again I wouldn't mind seeing, the longer the SPL is without Rangers the more likely one of the other clubs may step up to offer proper challenge for the title. Having it jump jump from Celtic and Rangers over the last what 20 years, has been a bit boring. Essentially Rangers newco will be a brand new club but everyone will know that they're the same club and the history for Rangers FC will be transferred over to Rangers Newco FC in all but name. The liquidators have said that there will be football at Ibrox next season. The buyer of the assets is paying only £5.5m for Ibrox, Murray Park (training complex) and a huge car park in the centre of Glasgow. Not too sure how he's managing that considering I thought they would be worth a lot more than this... Players - Charles Green (buyer) said that they have to transfer to newco as that is the rules. Other sources say otherwise; that they can if they want and newco has to honour contracts. SPL status - That goes to a vote by all the SPL clubs (inc. Rangers).
khilafah Posted June 14, 2012 Posted June 14, 2012 So Rangers as we know it are dead and gone then? Wonder will this end the sectarianism associated between Celtic and Rangers... or will the new Rangers just pick up where old Rangers left off? Rangers newco fans even in the 3rd division will still be singing there anti Irish and anti Catholic hatred.
Charlie Posted June 14, 2012 Posted June 14, 2012 (edited) SO how many votes they need to get into the SPL? 8 but they get a vote in the process, so 7. From what I've just been reading it looks already like they will be voted back in, but with heavy sanctions. Edited June 14, 2012 by Charlie
flameboy Posted June 14, 2012 Author Posted June 14, 2012 I think you only have to look at other countries around the world where similar things have happened, Fiorentina had to reform and even under a different name and started from the bottom with Angelo Di Livio sticking with them (I think he was the only one) they started from Serie C2 the bottom of the Italian professional football...
Gizmo Posted June 14, 2012 Posted June 14, 2012 My home town team entered liquidation and were subsequently demoted to the 3rd divison (albeit from Division 1, not the SPL). Regardless, if they had been in the SPL, theres no doubt in my mind that they would have been slammed down into the 3rd. If Rangers are allowed to remain in the SPL it makes a mockery of our entire football system.
flameboy Posted June 14, 2012 Author Posted June 14, 2012 Was it Gretna who went bust as well and were completely kicked out of the league and then folded?
Charlie Posted June 14, 2012 Posted June 14, 2012 Was it Gretna who went bust as well and were completely kicked out of the league and then folded? Yeah it was.
gmac Posted June 14, 2012 Posted June 14, 2012 well technically Gretna folded and then didn't re-apply but if they had they would have been in at the bottom and everyone else was shifted up one place (Annan took the empty spot in the SFL) and although Livingston started liquidation proceedings they weren't actually liquidated and they were still demoted to the bottom division so the precedents have been set lets see if the clubs and the SPL board do the right thing
Ellmeister Posted June 14, 2012 Posted June 14, 2012 Okay, so which one of you bright boys can tell me apart from the name change and the possible reduction to a lower league. How is this going to help creditors get paid back. On the face of it, this looks like they're saying they will fold, start again under a different name and just buy the assets back at a really cheap price. I want to know how they're going to be kept under stringent safeguards and work to pay back or at least show culpability for their wrongful financial actions. And...go!
gmac Posted June 14, 2012 Posted June 14, 2012 (edited) well the CVA offer was so minimal anyway it was almost insulting, it would have ended up being 1p in the £ (assuming HMRC win the Big Tax Case and deducting administrators fees) HMRC have now said that the Liquidators they have appointed will do forensic accounting on the books of Rangers to see if they can go after the individuals who have caused this issue as they believe that they can gain more money down this route Edited June 14, 2012 by gmac
flameboy Posted June 15, 2012 Author Posted June 15, 2012 I feel like the other teams in the league shouldn't be making decisions as they have a vested interest...then again other teams in the PL had to vote whether Portsmouth could get their TV revenue early even though it technically meant they were getting an advantage (not really as it was just to pay players and outstanding transfer fees to Watford) Yeah the HMRC who rejected the CVA must genuinely believe through this route they can get more than 2p to £1 which lets face it is sod all of what they actually owed.
Charlie Posted June 15, 2012 Posted June 15, 2012 Okay, so which one of you bright boys can tell me apart from the name change and the possible reduction to a lower league. How is this going to help creditors get paid back. On the face of it, this looks like they're saying they will fold, start again under a different name and just buy the assets back at a really cheap price. I want to know how they're going to be kept under stringent safeguards and work to pay back or at least show culpability for their wrongful financial actions. And...go! Basically they're not going to (at least anyone other than the HMRC, and even they'll get a minuscule amount). So essentially Rangers are more than likely going to be playing SPL football again next season, debt free, with only a few sanctions in place. No European football for 3 years because they're a new team. The transfer ban could be re-imposed too now as it is for a different crime. They could also be banned from the Scottish cup.
Recommended Posts