Amendments to SPL rules

[iconicman 8]

Isn't this just the retort from the SPL10 because we told them to GTF with their 'rebalancing' of the voting structure?

Unfortunately with noone at the helm, we can't find out if this is the case and therefore can't counter it.

I'd be surprised if Celtic are the ones behind this, it stinks of petty politics more akin to Dundee Hibs.

[boss 1,941]

Two points to add to all the good points already made, and some comments about unfair prejudice.

Resolution 5 proposes updates and extensions to the definition of Insolvency Event in the SPL Articles and clarifies the process in the event that a Member which is the subject of an Insolvency Event is required to transfer its share in the Company.

The full text of this resolution will be interesting. I wouldn't put it past them to try to require the SPL share to be transferred to newco in the event of liquidation (perhaps by making it follow the football club licence?) and thus stop us from going the Division 3 route.

Resolution 3 proposes extending sporting sanctions where an Insolvency Event is suffered by a Group Undertaking of a Member Club of the SPL (Group Undertaking is defined in Section 1161(5) of the Companies Act 2006).

Section 1161(5) includes any parent company (i.e. RFC Group or Liberty Capital), any subsidiary (i.e. Rangers Youth Development Ltd), and any fellow subsidiary (i.e. a completely separate company which has nothing to do with us but happens to be owned by Liberty Capital). This is mental.

A petition to the court on the grounds that the company's (SPL's) affairs are being conducted in a manner unfairly prejudicial to Rangers could be made under s994 CA06:

994 Petition by company member

(1) A member of a company may apply to the court by petition for an order under this Part on the ground—

(a) that the company's affairs are being or have been conducted in a manner that is unfairly prejudicial to the interests of members generally or of some part of its members (including at least himself), or

(b) that an actual or proposed act or omission of the company (including an act or omission on its behalf) is or would be so prejudicial.

Ultimately this might not succeed. But I'm pretty sure it could be used to delay the vote or implementation. After all, timing seems to be a valid tactic. And in any event, surely we could seek a judicial review of these proposed changes, which would again (considerably) delay matters.

[1873bear 192]

Why all of a sudden is a change in the rules required?

I just hope if these rules are changed our supporters wake up and smell the roses..Boycott every away game its the only way to show these bastards...I know supporters want to go to every game but this is about Rangers...Hit these clubs where it hurts..

[Polo 1,433]

Two points to add to all the good points already made, and some comments about unfair prejudice.

The full text of this resolution will be interesting. I wouldn't put it past them to try to require the SPL share to be transferred to newco in the event of liquidation (perhaps by making it follow the football club licence?) and thus stop us from going the Division 3 route.

Section 1161(5) includes any parent company (i.e. RFC Group or Liberty Capital), any subsidiary (i.e. Rangers Youth Development Ltd), and any fellow subsidiary (i.e. a completely separate company which has nothing to do with us but happens to be owned by Liberty Capital). This is mental.

A petition to the court on the grounds that the company's (SPL's) affairs are being conducted in a manner unfairly prejudicial to Rangers could be made under s994 CA06:

994 Petition by company member

(1) A member of a company may apply to the court by petition for an order under this Part on the ground—

(a) that the company's affairs are being or have been conducted in a manner that is unfairly prejudicial to the interests of members generally or of some part of its members (including at least himself), or

(b) that an actual or proposed act or omission of the company (including an act or omission on its behalf) is or would be so prejudicial.

Ultimately this might not succeed. But I'm pretty sure it could be used to delay the vote or implementation. After all, timing seems to be a valid tactic. And in any event, surely we could seek a judicial review of these proposed changes, which would again (considerably) delay matters.

I reckon the 994 action could be a goer.

[iconicman 8]

Two points to add to all the good points already made, and some comments about unfair prejudice.

The full text of this resolution will be interesting. I wouldn't put it past them to try to require the SPL share to be transferred to newco in the event of liquidation (perhaps by making it follow the football club licence?) and thus stop us from going the Division 3 route.

Section 1161(5) includes any parent company (i.e. RFC Group or Liberty Capital), any subsidiary (i.e. Rangers Youth Development Ltd), and any fellow subsidiary (i.e. a completely separate company which has nothing to do with us but happens to be owned by Liberty Capital). This is mental.

A petition to the court on the grounds that the company's (SPL's) affairs are being conducted in a manner unfairly prejudicial to Rangers could be made under s994 CA06:

994 Petition by company member

(1) A member of a company may apply to the court by petition for an order under this Part on the ground—

(a) that the company's affairs are being or have been conducted in a manner that is unfairly prejudicial to the interests of members generally or of some part of its members (including at least himself), or

(b) that an actual or proposed act or omission of the company (including an act or omission on its behalf) is or would be so prejudicial.

Ultimately this might not succeed. But I'm pretty sure it could be used to delay the vote or implementation. After all, timing seems to be a valid tactic. And in any event, surely we could seek a judicial review of these proposed changes, which would again (considerably) delay matters.

Good catch on the Companies Act, someone should contact D&P and point them to the clause and start legal proceedings to delay if nothing else.

[GeneralCartmanLee 313]

D&P. Their statement mentions they were made aware over the weekend.

Giving the bidders 5 days to consider there position......this delay feels very contrived......

[Gazzalivesforever 1,987]

It seems liewell has come to an agreement with 10 other SPL chairman. He'll vote with them to change the current voting from 11-1 to 9-3 if they vote with him on these proposals. Clearly designed to fuck us.

[hooooootchy 405]

IF we go down the newco route then surely the other clubs voting would know we wouldnt accept these ridiculous punishments and ( as mentioned) opt to start again in the lower leagues . They would lose out on tv money from no sky deal , lose out on the biggest away support no longer coming to their shitey stadims 2-3 times a year . they would lose out on sponsorship money , who wants to invest in a league that the outcomes already decided before a ball is kicked . Scottish european coefficient would drop lower than it is now with celtic either knocked out in qualifying or struggling out bottom of the europa leage group , and one of the other smaller teams get pumped by some san marino team in the 1st qualifier . The only positive i see is that this makes liquidation and a newco an even more unnatractive option for us and potential new owners would fight to avoid it

[cam69r 8]

I would happily drop down to division three if we were to liquidate. Will give us time to get back on our feet as we canter through the leagues whilst stil doing well in the cups. It would also be a massive "F**K YOU" to the other 10 teams in the SPL who could not afford the tv to disappear and for us to not fill out their stadiums twice a season.

I would like someone from Rangers to offer an ultimatum to the other clubs and say something along the lines of "If you vote for these rule changes then we will drop to division 3, we will take the tv money with us and when we do get back up we will boycott your stadiums for X amout of years".

[boss 1,941]

I reckon the 994 action could be a goer.

So do I. Let's hope the Administrators get the point.

[soulboy 2,518]

well if I was in charge of sky I'd tell these spunk monkeys if they make us play with 2 hands tied behind our backs for 3 seasons then there will be no contract as it won't be a competitive league so no point showing games

[Johnny Hubbard 280]

As much as we would love to tell the Spl to ram it and apply for the SFL, any prospective buyers would not. From a business perspective the SFL is far less attractive. With no tv revenue whatsoever in the SFL, we would have to kiss goodbye to our whole current first team. Obviously the club is more important than the players playing for us, but unless the bidder truly has Rangers in their heart then this option will unfortunately be a no go for them.

We would have no need for our current players if we were in Div 3

We'd just increase quality as we moved up

youngsters at Auchenhowe would be maturing in 3 years........that's the new route

meanwhile....

the SPL will get a vastly reduced TV deal....the Tims will benefit only if they can get into Europe

and money from bums on seats will be reduced for them all if we're not there

Traynor's article on how Celtic were lobbying for this is a good read. It's all in the interest of "sporting integrity"....Jimbo believes that like he believes a hole in the head is good for you

[Johnny Hubbard 280]

As much as we would love to tell the Spl to ram it and apply for the SFL, any prospective buyers would not. From a business perspective the SFL is far less attractive. With no tv revenue whatsoever in the SFL, we would have to kiss goodbye to our whole current first team. Obviously the club is more important than the players playing for us, but unless the bidder truly has Rangers in their heart then this option will unfortunately be a no go for them.

As much as we would love to tell the Spl to ram it and apply for the SFL, any prospective buyers would not. From a business perspective the SFL is far less attractive. With no tv revenue whatsoever in the SFL, we would have to kiss goodbye to our whole current first team. Obviously the club is more important than the players playing for us, but unless the bidder truly has Rangers in their heart then this option will unfortunately be a no go for them.

We would have no need for our current players if we were in Div 3

We'd just increase quality as we moved up

youngsters at Auchenhowe would be maturing in 3 years........that's the new route

meanwhile....

the SPL will get a vastly reduced TV deal....the Tims will benefit only if they can get into Europe

and money from bums on seats will be reduced for them all if we're not there

Traynor's article on how Celtic were lobbying for this is a good read. It's all in the interest of "sporting integrity"....Jimbo believes that like he believes a hole in the head is good for you

[Sheikh Salim 215]

We would have no need for our current players if we were in Div 3

We'd just increase quality as we moved up

youngsters at Auchenhowe would be maturing in 3 years........that's the new route

meanwhile....

the SPL will get a vastly reduced TV deal....the Tims will benefit only if they can get into Europe

and money from bums on seats will be reduced for them all if we're not there

Traynor's article on how Celtic were lobbying for this is a good read. It's all in the interest of "sporting integrity"....Jimbo believes that like he believes a hole in the head is good for you

I am happy with the above plan, that is not the point I am trying to make.

What I am saying is that a buyer, who will need to invest a lot if money to get us on an even keel again, will not want us to be in div3 as it is not commercially attractive. The only buyer who would apply for the SFL is one with Rangers at heart and money to burn.

[will_1974 204]

Said it before, saying it again the anti rangers agenda at present is breathtaking. No-one can doubt now that we are being targeted from every angle, not even CARTMAN. We have been out manoeuvred, big time. We really need to fight back.

[Govan Front 78 43]

As much as we would love to tell the Spl to ram it and apply for the SFL, any prospective buyers would not. From a business perspective the SFL is far less attractive. With no tv revenue whatsoever in the SFL, we would have to kiss goodbye to our whole current first team. Obviously the club is more important than the players playing for us, but unless the bidder truly has Rangers in their heart then this option will unfortunately be a no go for them.

I see your point & I thought about that too, however as there's no current TV deal in the SFL the door would be open for RTV to organize broadcasts of our matches with a small percentage going to the opposition - how many bears around the world would subscribe to see our return to greatness over the course of a couple of seasons? I certainly would, in the knowledge that the majority of the subscription fees were going to the club instead of into a pot to be shared round the rest of the teams - i'm sure the other teams wouldn't demand a 50/50 share of the fees for matches they were involved in as they & the league would probably be most welcome of any extra income.

It's true to say that the vast majority of the current team would be lost, however we then wouldn't be paying millions of pounds out every month un-necessarily on high wages for players to pump smaller teams week in week out - if I were currently a Rangers player on £20k per week, i'd play for a nominal fee until we got back into the SPL, that's not going to happen with our first team admittedly, but i'd hope the youngsters coming through would want to take on new contracts in the knowledge that they'd be making a name for themselves & be guaranteed a game every week too - they'd surely be affordable.

All of this will ultimately remain pie in the sky, however it would be an interesting shake up of Scottish football as we know it were it to happen - I for one shall remain blindly optimistic until I hear for sure our new owners have sucked it up big time & kept us in the SPL with as few penalties as they can realistically get away with...

[wullho 25]

Im not an expert but amendment to rules of any organisation have to be proposed and seconded

as a member club somebody from Rangers has to DEMAND to see the minutes of this meeting

where these proposals were made lets see whos fucking kicking us when were down.

Next tender our resignation from the SPL dated the last day of the season and also copy this

resignation to Sky then watch brown stuff hit the fan.

Next take full allocation for the Girodome at month end but then at 7.30 deliver the whole fucking lot

back to that cunt liewell by courier not giving them time to sell to there own vermin.

Have some kind of open day on CUP FINAL DAY for the fans to thank the players for there effort

during the difficult away games with no support there.

Test the water apply to join the SFL see if any TV company would be interested in rights with us in it

I honestly dont think we cud lose.

Whether you like Charlie Richmond or not thats another grade one ref resigned our football is fucking rotten to the core lets

highlight the SPLS and SFAS every wrong move.

[iconicman 8]

We should all email Ralph Topping, (Non-exec Chairman) and ask that he be the voice of our club and question the validity of the retrospective action of these proposals and that Rangers should be held to the same approach as Motherwell (who the SPL saved from relegation due to Falkirk 'not meeting' the requirements of the SPL for promotion).

I have email the following to him:

I urge you to consider Rangers interests in this matter, with no voice of their own, no executive management, the fans look to the Chairman of the SPL to be that rational voice, the one urging respect and caution when dealing with league matters. At the very least the rules should apply from the date of assent onwards and certainly not to Rangers in their current situation who, like Motherwell, should be held to the rules in existence at the time they went into administration.

[North Rd 2,860]

Commeth the Hour, commeth THE MAN, Step up to the plate Mr Kennedy.

[Ger for life 199]

So do I. Let's hope the Administrators get the point.

I hope someone at our club is in contact with Donald Findlay QC. We need him battling our cause like McBride did with them!!!

[gunslinger 270]

Two points to add to all the good points already made, and some comments about unfair prejudice.

The full text of this resolution will be interesting. I wouldn't put it past them to try to require the SPL share to be transferred to newco in the event of liquidation (perhaps by making it follow the football club licence?) and thus stop us from going the Division 3 route.

Section 1161(5) includes any parent company (i.e. RFC Group or Liberty Capital), any subsidiary (i.e. Rangers Youth Development Ltd), and any fellow subsidiary (i.e. a completely separate company which has nothing to do with us but happens to be owned by Liberty Capital). This is mental.

A petition to the court on the grounds that the company's (SPL's) affairs are being conducted in a manner unfairly prejudicial to Rangers could be made under s994 CA06:

994 Petition by company member

(1) A member of a company may apply to the court by petition for an order under this Part on the ground—

(a) that the company's affairs are being or have been conducted in a manner that is unfairly prejudicial to the interests of members generally or of some part of its members (including at least himself), or

(b) that an actual or proposed act or omission of the company (including an act or omission on its behalf) is or would be so prejudicial.

Ultimately this might not succeed. But I'm pretty sure it could be used to delay the vote or implementation. After all, timing seems to be a valid tactic. And in any event, surely we could seek a judicial review of these proposed changes, which would again (considerably) delay matters.

[TheMotor 2,208]

If anyone needed any indication of the mentality of the mongs who follow your average diddy SPL team, they actually believe that these changes are being instigated to BENEFIT Rangers.

I've done a wee tour of some forums to see how they think it may affect their clubs, or diddies like them, and they all think this is a plan to let a newco Rangers off from being relegated.

Seriously.

[Bad Robot 21,152]

We should all email Ralph Topping, (Non-exec Chairman) and ask that he be the voice of our club and question the validity of the retrospective action of these proposals and that Rangers should be held to the same approach as Motherwell (who the SPL saved from relegation due to Falkirk 'not meeting' the requirements of the SPL for promotion).

I have email the following to him:

I urge you to consider Rangers interests in this matter, with no voice of their own, no executive management, the fans look to the Chairman of the SPL to be that rational voice, the one urging respect and caution when dealing with league matters. At the very least the rules should apply from the date of assent onwards and certainly not to Rangers in their current situation who, like Motherwell, should be held to the rules in existence at the time they went into administration.

Their 'get out' is going to be that the old season has finished and thats what the bastards will stick too.

A SPL with any type of integrity would have proposed the measures were adopted at the start of the new season.

[DinViesel 399]

So if this goes through and we do become a newco am I right in saying we would be better off next season if we take no more points from now until the end of the season of they are just planning on taking 1/3 of them back next year. Sook ma willy Liewell. Div 3 for me!

[TheMotor 2,208]

So if this goes through and we do become a newco am I right in saying we would be better off next season if we take no more points from now until the end of the season of they are just planning on taking 1/3 of them back next year. Sook ma willy Liewell. Div 3 for me!

Yeah, there are a number of the proposed amendments that they haven't even got close to thinking through properly. The opportunity for what would effectively be match-fixing for any club facing lquidation that had passed the 45 point mark is certainly one of them.