Rangers are liquidated

[Prufrock]

Still the same entity though.

Same old arguments with all this though. Almost like they have a set of rules for the circumstances they then stick to.

[fatshaft]

none of these teams got automatically relegated to the bottom division. strictly, they were not even relegated one division. they were merely deducted a set number (ten ? or so) of points.

None of them liquidated either though, which is what the Huns have done, on top of all their cheating of course.

[Salford Trotter]

none of these teams got automatically relegated to the bottom division. strictly, they were not even relegated one division. they were merely deducted a set number (ten ? or so) of points.

None of them liquidated either though, which is what the Huns have done, on top of all their cheating of course.

Is it looking like Div.1 or Div.3?

[Relentless09]

none of these teams got automatically relegated to the bottom division. strictly, they were not even relegated one division. they were merely deducted a set number (ten ? or so) of points.

None of them liquidated either though, which is what the Huns have done, on top of all their cheating of course.

How acceptable is it to call someone a Hun in Scotland ? I know in N.I it will be rather offensive and the reply back would be Fenian/taig. Sorry if that offends but I've seen rangers being called huns from outside N.I and I'm just wanderering the context

[bobo the clown]

Fatshaft's Scotch though isn't he.

I've never seen that title other than in this thread.

(ie. "Some of my best friends are Huns")

[Prufrock]

Now Bobo will probably be able to clear all this up and give a much better overall view than I can, but I (being a boring bastard) find all the discussion around whether the players contracts are valid with the New Rangers. In particular Bobes mentioned 'talent contracts', and I don;t know what they are!

But, according to what I can gather, this vote on whether or not they end up in Div 1 or Div 3 may decide whether the players have to stay/pay damages for breach of contract to the newco. Essentially when a business is sold, here old Rangers to New Rangers, employees contracts are automatically transferred. This is to protect employees. They can however object to their employment being transferred, for any reason, before the sale. New Rangers appear to be saying the players in question cannot object because the sale has already gone through. Apparently there is a case which says the players may still be successful if they did not know the identity of their new employer before the transfer. If so they'll probably win.

If not, under a different subsection they can terminate their contracts if the transfer involves a 'substantial change in working conditions to their material detriment'. They'd argue demotion to Div 3 does so probably more successfully than demotion to Div 1.

Adds an extra dimension to the 'what division will they be in' intrigue, particularly as I read today Rangers fans themselves would rather the club be demoted to Div 3 than Div 1.

[Puskas]

Were they not known as The Hun owing to their fondness for Hunnish Practices?

I would recommend the official Rangers website, but I probably shouldn't.

[Little Green Man]

Essentially when a business is sold, here old Rangers to New Rangers, employees contracts are automatically transferred. This is to protect employees. They can however object to their employment being transferred, for any reason, before the sale. New Rangers appear to be saying the players in question cannot object because the sale has already gone through. Apparently there is a case which says the players may still be successful if they did not know the identity of their new employer before the transfer. If so they'll probably win.

Five of the nine (Ness, Naismith, Lafferty, Fleck, Whitaker) who refused to transfer to the newco have already signed for new clubs. As you'd think both the players and their new clubs would have sought legal advice before the signing, it would seem to imply that the newco is pissing into the wind if it thinks it can retain their contracts.

[CrazyHorse]

The votes are in and have been counted.....
They've been refused entry into the SPL.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18703183" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[bobo the clown]

Now Bobo will probably be able to clear all this up and give a much better overall view than I can, but I (being a boring bastard) find all the discussion around whether the players contracts are valid with the New Rangers. In particular Bobes mentioned 'talent contracts', and I don;t know what they are! .................... .

Obviously a complex area ... & what I refer to as a 'talent' contract is just noting that, in a business like this or say in TV or the like there will be 'ordinary' employees who have normal lives & income etc., and 'special' employees. They still have employment rights but their relatively unique roles mean that they have individual & specific contracts & terms which you & I are rarely going to see.

For these you expect & are contractually allowed to act differently than for the groundsman or the tea lady. Essentuially because it's a commercial contract rather than a simple employment one. However, basic human rights, as an employee, must be upheld as you can't 'agree' to be inhumanely treated & sign away your rights, however much you are paid.

Essentially though, this is a TUPE transfer. The new Company takes over and the employees have the right to say "actually, no thanks". If you DO go over your t&c's are, fundamentally, protected. If they are not it's illegal & breach of contract.

If the employee says "no" they can leave, but aren't entitled to severance as they were offered "reasonable alternative employment". But they can still say no.

The distiction in a 'talent contract' is simply to say "it depends what little unusual addendums are in there which we don't know about". In other words, the devil is in the detail.

However, from what I've read & from what seems to be happening they can ... & are ... able to walk.

[Caro-Kann]

So it's now over to the SFL clubs.

The statement below is taken from the Clyde website (it's dying under the volume of traffic) about
the meeting held yesterday and makes interesting reading.

Basically SPL have shat their turd at the SFL and are attempting to blackmail them into swalling it into SFL1.

Club Statement: SFL Meeting
Wed, 4th Jul 2012 12:34pm
The club sent two directors to attend the meeting of the SFL clubs yesterday and they have reported back to the Board. The meeting and conversations covered the best part of 5 hours but there were only a few overarching themes.

The clear message portrayed is that Scottish Football is in a very dark place indeed and there is simply no good solution to what is now a structural problem that has gone beyond a one dimensional issue of where Rangers should play next season. No matter what happens now there is going to be enormous fallout across the Scottish game. Whether some good can be extracted from the impending mess will depend entirely on the SPL clubs, guided by the currently absent leadership of the SFA.

Neil Doncaster wanted only one thing from the meeting, to get a steer from the SFL clubs whether they would allow Rangers into SFL1. He talked the clubs through a detailed explanation of where the SPL clubs would lose £16m next season if Rangers were not entered to the top division of the SFL. This was delivered as a matter of fact, it was a "reality". It seems that most, if not all, major sponsors of the SPL have exit clauses if either of the 'Old Firm' are not within the SPL. The total figure was not new, but the detail behind the number and its impact on individual clubs in the SPL was set out clearly. There were challenges made regarding the flip side of saving the central income from sponsors and media, the obvious impact of loss of supporters to the game who have strongly voiced their intent. Supporter reaction has not been factored in, again there are realities, the SPL clubs are waiting on their Sky cheques in August and clearly that was more important. Nowhere in the presentation was account taken on the impact to the finances of clubs, and more importantly the relevance of the game, should supporters stay at home.

The consequential impact on the SFL from the presentation was that the SFL would lose its entitlement to circa £2m per annum from the Settlement Agreement put together to compensate the SFL for the SPL breakaway, this was made very clear by Neil Doncaster. He told the clubs that if the SPL didn't have the money then they could not pay the SFL. The reality however, which was clear from the detailed figures, is that the SPL, whilst losing an enormous amount of funding, would have the cash to make payment; it is just that the SPL would not meet the legal obligation to the SFL as the cash would be used to finance the SPL teams.

The undeniable statement made on behalf of the SPL is commercially understandable. The SPL would not allow £16m to flow out of their coffers, the impact would be too catastrophic for the SPL clubs to contemplate and as such the only options are that Rangers enter SFL1 or, as a less attractive backstop, a breakaway SPL2 will be formed. There is no prospect, from an SPL point of view, that SFL3 can be allowed to happen.

Neil Doncaster was delivering a very unpalatable proposition and he did it clearly and effectively, hence the representatives of Clyde Football Club understood that the only thing that mattered was the impact on SPL clubs from the loss of money from media and sponsors.

It was to the credit of every SFL club, and probably to the surprise of Neil Doncaster, that nobody asked him to improve on the £1m offer.

The SFL clubs were given a steer for themselves by Neil Doncaster, if the SFL could not tell him how they might vote, then he would expect the SPL clubs not to vote at their meeting either.

There were a few new things learned in the meeting, not least that the rules of the SFL would allow any club accepted into the SFL, by a simple majority, to be placed in any division. The rules do not state, nor imply, that they must join at the bottom tier, only custom and practice around good governance and integrity has seen teams join in the bottom tier. In addition, the attendees at the meeting were left in absolutely no doubt whatsoever by Stewart Regan that if the SPL clubs voted to allow a Newco into the SPL then it would be blocked by the SFA refusing to transfer the SFA membership. It was however caveated well enough to make it less than an absolute statement. The meeting was full of implied actions and outcomes, the use of clever language when delivering the speeches allows anyone to defend with 'that is not what I said'. However, nobody will have left the meeting with anything other than the very clear messages being put across. Denials of the substance of the message being delivered do not assist anyone in this absolutely dreadful situation.

There will be no winners. Any level of integrity for the sport will be lost by one outcome and financial collapse, we are told, will fall upon the SPL with the other. Sadly, the SFA and SPL have decided that whilst they say they are looking for a collaborative solution, they have very clearly made sure that by their own inaction that the blame will sit with the SFL - no matter what the outcome. The Board of the SFL are being put under intolerable pressure by the other bodies looking to avoid the implications of properly applying their own governance procedures.

In summary, the SFA implication is that there will be no entry to the SPL. The SPL implication is that it therefore has to be SFL1 with a bit of restructure, or an SPL2 with the rest of the SFL cut adrift. There were no other options. Whilst Stewart Regan said that the SFA did not favour an SPL2, there was no equivalent abhorrence of that proposal as was attached to the proposal for a Newco in the SPL, leaving the implication that the door remains wide open for the SPL to secure their £16m with or without the SFL.

The Board of the club will consider the feedback from its representatives and also the outcomes of the next few days and will keep its supporters fully appraised, but in the meantime see no reason to amend any previous comment.

[Worthy4England]

I really hope, they refuse en masse, to form SPL2.

I really hope we'd do the same should it befall one of our "Big" teams.

[BWFC_Insane]

That all seems very complex. And a complete mess.

[Harry Genshaw]

What I'm struggling to grasp is the SPL CEO saying if Rangers go into Division 3 it will have massive implications for 40 odd other clubs. I dont see how. Certainly all the Prem clubs are going to miss the income Rangers bring and the TV revenues, but the clubs in the other 3 divisions would have never figured Rangers into their business plans anyway

[BWFC_Insane]

What I'm struggling to grasp is the SPL CEO saying if Rangers go into Division 3 it will have massive implications for 40 odd other clubs. I dont see how. Certainly all the Prem clubs are going to miss the income Rangers bring and the TV revenues, but the clubs in the other 3 divisions would have never figured Rangers into their business plans anyway

I think the argument is that currently some of the SPL TV money is given by the SPL clubs to the SFL clubs and if they lose the TV and sponsorship money (because Rangers and Celtic being in the league is stupidly written into all the SPL contracts) they won't give any to the SFL clubs, some of whom presumably rely on it......

[Little Green Man]

What I'm struggling to grasp is the SPL CEO saying if Rangers go into Division 3 it will have massive implications for 40 odd other clubs. I dont see how.

There is a bit of SPL money that finds its way to the SFL, some of it in parachute payments and I guess some in transfer fees. I'm not sure whether its disappearance would be enough to put any of those clubs under. The majority of the SFL clubs would certainly stand to lose out with the creation of an SPL2 which is what Doncaster threatened. I presume he sought to do that because as CEO of the SPL, he felt his job was to get the new Rangers back in the SPL ASAP (either through SPL2 or SFL1 plus a large TV rights bribe). Trouble is, given the number of SFL clubs who have already stated they won't accept the new club into SFL1 (suggesting an SFL3 new Rangers would not spell their demise), it seems likely that Mr Doncaster might only have succeeded in shortening his length of tenure.

[officer_dibble]

Wow. what a feck up!

[Caro-Kann]

This was on the Scotsman website this evening but then taken off-line.
Wonder if it makes the paper tomorrow.

Scottish football does indeed seem to be rotten to the core.

By STEPHEN HALLIDAY
Published on Wednesday 4 July 2012 21:26

SCOTTISH Football Association chief executive Stewart Regan has issued a startling warning of "social unrest" in Scotland if newco Rangers are denied entry to the First Division of the Scottish Football League following the emphatic rejection today of their application to retain top-flight football at Ibrox.

Regan's remarkable comment came as he insisted admission to the First Division is now the only viable option if Scottish football wishes to avoid what he described as a "slow, lingering death".

The Scottish Premier League turned down Charles Green's bid to have Rangers' existing share in the organisation transferred to his newco for next season, with ten of the member clubs voting against the application. It is understood Green cast the only vote in favour, while Kilmarnock chairman Michael Johnston is believed to have abstained.

The SPL will now await the outcome of an SFL meeting next week when that organisation's 30 clubs will vote on a proposal to accept newco Rangers into the First Division in the new season ahead of an amalgamation of the league governing bodies from 2013-14.

There is considerable opposition and resistance to the plan among SFL clubs and their supporters with many believing Rangers should have to apply for entry to the Third Division in the wake of their spectacular financial collapse.

But Regan bluntly asserted that Scottish football simply cannot afford to have Rangers outwith the top two tiers of the league structure, with his argument not confined to the commercial impact their absence would have.

"Without Rangers, there is social unrest and a big problem for Scottish society," claimed Regan. "They have a huge fan base and to contemplate the situation where those fans don't have a team to support, where those fans are effectively left without a game to follow, I just think that could lead to all sorts of issues, all sorts of problems for the game.

"Tribalism in football is really important. It is part of the game. People follow their clubs with pride, it is passed down from generation to generation. There are thousands of Rangers fans whose fathers and parents and grandfathers have been Rangers fans. You can't contemplate a situation without that and if Rangers weren't to exist that could have real dire consequences.

"There is a lot of emotion around this subject because Rangers are a huge institution in Scottish football history and they are where they are. Their fans have been hurt, they don't know what's happening. There hasn't been a great deal of leadership at the club and there hasn't been a huge amount of communication from the football authorities.

"The SPL have now decided that Rangers won't be coming back into the SPL. From our perspective it's important we set out the landscape because there is only one solution for the game now.

"The only solution for the game now is that Rangers come into the Scottish Football League and they come into it in the First Division. If Rangers were to go anywhere other than the First Division, then there would something in the region of £15.7 million worth of losses to the game.

"For the bigger clubs at the top of the league, that's half their annual distributions. For clubs at the bottom it is basically wiping out their entire distributions, for some of the smaller clubs it's a huge proportion of their annual turnover.

"The same will be true for most clubs. Perhaps clubs could survive for a short period of time but it's not sustainable. Even if Rangers end up in the First Division, there is still going to be a £5 million loss of income to the SPL clubs. The game is not sustainable so there would be a slow lingering death for the game in Scotland. It would then trickle down to the SFL. From our perspective as the governing body and we cannot allow that to happen.

"If we allowed that to happen, it would simply be a dereliction of duty. Therefore, this whole decision-making process has been one of the most challenging and complex decisions that I have ever been involved in in 27 years of business as sport.

"Some clubs in the SFL are afraid of the implications of the decisions. There is the moral argument, the fear of a fans' backlash and there are financial implications to consider. But when we look at the alternative, it is not possible to think about it without thinking of the game withering on the vine. We cannot contemplate that and the message has to be that Division One for Rangers is the only show in town as far as the future of Scottish football is concerned."

Regan admits the influence of television contracts, which are largely predicated on the presence of Celtic and Rangers in the Scottish game, are the biggest single factor in his determination to ensure the Ibrox club drop no lower than the First Division. "We have had dialogue with the broadcasters," he added, "and we understand what the various stakeholders from Sky television, ESPN, Sport Five and a number of the SPL's other commercial partners are likely to do in the event Rangers are not in either of the top two tiers. It's not pretty. That's why we cannot sit back and let that happen without trying to get all parties to accept this is the only solution which can keep the game afloat.

"Without Old Firm games, the value drops, the overseas deals are almost exclusively about the Old Firm derby and that would go immediately. Then you look at the rest of the game and what it is worth. It is fair to say the broadcasters would live with a year without Rangers in the SPL, because it could be a fantastic story for them, which is why I think First Division rights will be an interest as people will want to see how this club is going to bounce back."

Regan conceded, however, that there can be no guarantee a financially weakened Rangers will climb back to the top flight at the first attempt. "If Rangers don't get promoted, then the game has got another year to suffer with the financial consequences that brings," he said. "I can't predict what will happen, because Rangers at the moment are a weakened team because of everything that has gone on.

"They are a newco at the moment, they have got very few players on their books. They are going to be entering the SFL in whatever division with a weakened team and I don't think it's by any means certain they are going to come back in the way they or their fans might like them to recover.

"It's going to be a slow recovery to get back to the football fitness they have shown in the past. So we can't look into the future and say 'what if they don't operate in a certain way?'. We can only look at building the foundations, to change the game for the better and provide an infrastructure that can bring financial certainty to the other 41 clubs."

Regan confirmed that sanctions will apply to newco Rangers in the First Division and also made it clear the formation of an SPL2 will be pursued in order to accommodate the Ibrox club if they are rejected by the SFL next week. "The SFA have to transfer Rangers' membership from oldco to newco," he said. "That can be done with any conditions attached to it that the SFA board deem fit. We would expect a newco to carry some of the sanctions which would have related to the club had it still been in the previous incarnation. The membership cannot be transferred on financial grounds alone. It has to have a degree of sporting integrity and that means sporting sanctions."

[Zulus Thousand of em]

Why is "outwith" an acceptable word in Jockoland?

... and why can't a Scottish football administrator have the balls to say "We want to rewrite the rules and ride roughshod all over you little clubs to accomodate the mighty Glasgow Rangers?"

Tinpot football. Tossers.

... and breathe.

[Worthy4England]

It really is reeedhicolus, that the SFA seem to be using scare tactics to justify their own existence on a decision that they themselves aren't taking.

This Reagan bloke comes across as a reet nobber.