ewerk 26282 Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 Some people comparing Rangers with Darlington, which is a bit unfair seeing as Rangers haven't been crooked since the late 90's and are a much bigger team You do realise why they're in administration? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CleeToonFan 1 Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 Some people comparing Rangers with Darlington, which is a bit unfair seeing as Rangers haven't been crooked since the late 90's and are a much bigger team You do realise why they're in administration? Only been accrued in the last few years and is their only time in adminiatration isnt it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26282 Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Some people comparing Rangers with Darlington, which is a bit unfair seeing as Rangers haven't been crooked since the late 90's and are a much bigger team You do realise why they're in administration? Only been accrued in the last few years and is their only time in adminiatration isnt it? The EBT scheme has been in operation since 2000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brock Manson 0 Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Another loss for them today. Celtic could go 20 points clear on Wednesday if they win then and tomorrow. Motherwell only 6 points behind now, with a game in hand. The fans were an absolute disgrace from reports I've been reading about the game. Absolute pricks, couldn't be happening to a more deserving fanbase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 Read yesterday that problem with the "tax case" is that it is already an existing debt and must be "on the books". HMRC reckoned Rangers (and other clubs) were being dodgy with the way they paid players and have hit them with a bill for the £40-odd million, the case is about Rangers disputing the bill and not HMRC trying to get the right to levy the charge. It's already levied, Rangers have to win their appeal. The case could take the debt away, but until the case is heard that debt is a "real" one, I believe (if what I saw yesterday is correct). Rangers are HMRC's high profile "test case", if Rangers lose the appeal, expect some rather thick brown envelopes to be hitting some other club's doormats very soon thereafter. Ahh fair enough, if that's the case that does change it. Although if Rangers are disputing the figure and manage to get it down to less than 25% of the total debt, then that could all still happen could it not? Either way, Whyte is a crook. Oh aye, there'll be a dodge in there somewhere, I think the Whyte being a secured creditor thing was around the original loan, if the Ticketus cash went to Whyte and isn't secured on Ranger's books, could make the percentages game tricky. HMRC out for blood do you ever post anything about football ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monroe Transfer 0 Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 very funny. So when are Rangers disappearing then ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Carr's Gloves 3193 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 We are now closer to Man city than Rangers are to Celtic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CabayeAye Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Another loss for them today. Celtic could go 20 points clear on Wednesday if they win then and tomorrow. Motherwell only 6 points behind now, with a game in hand. The fans were an absolute disgrace from reports I've been reading about the game. Absolute pricks, couldn't be happening to a more deserving fanbase. Celtic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brock Manson 0 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Rangers mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CabayeAye Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Rangers mate. Their fans are no worse than Celtic TBF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brock Manson 0 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Aye but the Celtic fans weren't the ones at the Rangers game shouting about the ref being a fenian! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 3977 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Administration is a cunt's trick and its shit that people like LM dismiss it as something that's necessary. Where I used to work we dealt with a company about 5 years ago who supplied a huge system to us but just as it went live they went tits up. A couple of months later the same blokes were back trying to get in the door to sell support and were told to fuck right off. They left lads I know who were working for them with thousands in unpaid invoices. It's the same with football - execpt as an extra pisser the league has rules that other clubs are paid first so its the local businesses and the tax man who lose out. Clubs take it on the chin and even if the ten points leads to relegation they're still "better off" in the medium term. I'd relegate the fuckers two leagues at least and wouldn't care if the club disappeared. If someone wants to form a "Rangers 2012" then should have to do a Wimbledon and start from scratch. "Football is a loss making industry" says LM - if that has to be the case then stop paying fucking players that much fucking money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud 59 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toon_don 0 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Aye but the Celtic fans weren't the ones at the Rangers game shouting about the ref being a fenian! They're both as bad eas each other tbh. Celtic just have a bit of a cuddlier reputation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaddockLad 14578 Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Looks like thats it for the Teddy Bears.... http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18407309 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asprilla 96 Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Just when you thought Scottish football couldn't get any more boring, it's now going to be a one horse race! Hoots! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26282 Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 So basically it looks like it's up to the SPL clubs to decide whether to let them in next year or whether they start in the 3rd Division. I'm not sure what way it'll go, there'll be many rejoicing at Rangers' problems but they will also realise the importance of Rangers in the SPL for sponsorship reasons. Though if they aren't allowed back into the league then it's not a great result for Celtic, they've lost their only chance of selling out a game next season and given that they're going to walk to the league title for the next three seasons then they'll be minimal financial investment in the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetleftpeg 0 Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Must be a bit of a split with Celtic fans. If I was a Celtic fan there would be a part of me saying 'suffer in the 3rd division you bastards' then the sensible part which would say that Celtic and the SPL probably need Rangers to be there for money. What would we do if it was the mackems? On second thoughts, definitely the former then.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 6844 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 couldn't care less but it'll be a total shambles of a judgement either way, if they relegate them it'll be a disaster financially, and if they don't it's a kick in the teeth to the smaller clubs who wouldn't get the same treatment Bit of a fallacy that Ant. The OF get 80% of the TV money anyway for example, it only would take a couple of hundred more fans a game for each team to balance the loss of Rangers visits. That'd be easily achievable if teams actually had a chance (albeit for second place initially). SPL rules can only be changed by a vote of 11 - 1 and as the OF always vote in their own interest it's a closed shop. It's great chance for reform up there, maybe some steps backwards initially but to move forwards longer term. Everything up there is weighted by the OF for the OF. It needs to change. If they vote them back in, many teams own fans are going to desert in droves because they haven't just lived beyond their means (a'la Portsmouth) they've actually cheated, by the use of the EBT and double contracts, if proven (and it looks nailed on) all games involving inelligible players should be, according to the rules, made 3-0 losses. If that's applied in Rangers "glory years" Hearts, Hibs, Motherwell, Aberdeen and Dundee Utd (I believe) would all have won titles. As far as fans up there think, if the cheats prosper and the SPL/SFA/SFL and even their own clubs bend over backwards because they are worried about £££'s, really as a fan, what is the point. This is about money v sporting integrity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 I've always regarded Rangers as a small club, they have a nice ground, but like Celtic you take the bigotry away and glory hunter element and you're left with two clubs no bigger than Boro, illustrated by the fact neither averaged over 40,000 in their entire histories before 1997. That said they are significantly bigger than every other SPL club, but I agree with Toonspac, the loss of Rangers to clubs like Kilmarnock and Motherwell won't be that great. Two gates with an extra 5,000 won't kill them. £250,000 max. Plus they'll have a better chance of getting in to Europe. Not that Scottish football commands any respect, but any spor of it will disappear if they allow Rangers back in to the SPL. Rangers FC, will no long exist, so surely they can't be called Rangers FC any more. Boro had to change to Middlesbrough FC, from Middlesbrough AFC iirc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaddockLad 14578 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Bit of a fallacy that Ant. The OF get 80% of the TV money anyway for example, it only would take a couple of hundred more fans a game for each team to balance the loss of Rangers visits. That'd be easily achievable if teams actually had a chance (albeit for second place initially). SPL rules can only be changed by a vote of 11 - 1 and as the OF always vote in their own interest it's a closed shop. It's great chance for reform up there, maybe some steps backwards initially but to move forwards longer term. Everything up there is weighted by the OF for the OF. It needs to change. If they vote them back in, many teams own fans are going to desert in droves because they haven't just lived beyond their means (a'la Portsmouth) they've actually cheated, by the use of the EBT and double contracts, if proven (and it looks nailed on) all games involving inelligible players should be, according to the rules, made 3-0 losses. If that's applied in Rangers "glory years" Hearts, Hibs, Motherwell, Aberdeen and Dundee Utd (I believe) would all have won titles. As far as fans up there think, if the cheats prosper and the SPL/SFA/SFL and even their own clubs bend over backwards because they are worried about £££'s, really as a fan, what is the point. This is about money v sporting integrity. Only Hearts,Aberdeen and Motherwell (apart from Celtic obviously) have finished 2nd since their first title under Murray in 1987, but yeah, it puts their Celtic-equalling 9-in-a-row in a new light. Gazza and Brian Laudrup in the same side in the mid nineties doesnt prove anything, but it gives a pretty strong indication that something was going on. Their history for the last 25 years is now utterly redundant. Fuckin hell thats verging on cataclysmic with regards to their relationship with every other club theyve played in that time. A European Cup semi final in 92 is about as worthless as the bribe-paying Marseille winning it that year as well. Hopefully the other chairman will realise all this and put integrity above income but I wouldnt bank on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Only Hearts,Aberdeen and Motherwell (apart from Celtic obviously) have finished 2nd since their first title under Murray in 1987, but yeah, it puts their Celtic-equalling 9-in-a-row in a new light. Gazza and Brian Laudrup in the same side in the mid nineties doesnt prove anything, but it gives a pretty strong indication that something was going on. Their history for the last 25 years is now utterly redundant. Fuckin hell thats verging on cataclysmic with regards to their relationship with every other club theyve played in that time. A European Cup semi final in 92 is about as worthless as the bribe-paying Marseille winning it that year as well. Hopefully the other chairman will realise all this and put integrity above income but I wouldnt bank on it. Nar they were more or less self sufficient in the Gazza/Laudrup years, they were Champions League regulars, had full houses, and with the help of a certain Freddie Fletcher were marketed superbly. The downfall of Rangers financially came in the Advocaat years. They spent nigh on £100m, £12m alone on Tore Andre Flo, the de Boer's, van Bronckhorst, Artur Numan the list is endless and this is where their financial woes started. If you remember by the time MON took over Celtic they were spending all of the money and McPish had to rely on frees like Nacho Novo. It's amazing McPish won two titles, and Rangers have been struggling financially ever since. I bet Souness knew the seriousness of their plight when he gave them £8m of OUR MONEY for Boumsong. Scum bag and scum bags. My heart bleeds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26282 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Nar they were more or less self sufficient in the Gazza/Laudrup years, they were Champions League regulars, had full houses, and with the help of a certain Freddie Fletcher were marketed superbly. Seriously? Despite being bankrolled by Murray they were also in massive debt which led to the banks taking a stake in the club because Rangers couldn't afford the repayments. And during their 9 in a row years they more often than not didn't make the CL group stages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Seriously? Despite being bankrolled by Murray they were also in massive debt which led to the banks taking a stake in the club because Rangers couldn't afford the repayments. And during their 9 in a row years they more often than not didn't make the CL group stages. Seriously? Despite being bankrolled by Murray they were also in massive debt which led to the banks taking a stake in the club because Rangers couldn't afford the repayments. And during their 9 in a row years they more often than not didn't make the CL group stages. The vast majority of the debts they now have are as a result of the Advocaat years. Rangers in the mid 90s were one of the 20 richest clubs in Europe on turnover, paying £3m for Gazza and £4m for Boli and Laudrup didn't break the bank, the Advocaat years ruined them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now