With terror and with fear
There are, we’re certain, some twists to come yet in the “Rangers” story. But while we’ve been able to pretty clearly identify and understand the motivations of all the concerned parties in events to date (and our assessments and predictions have accordingly almost always been bang on the money), we’ve finally run into a logical roadblock where we just can’t make sense of anything.
Because we can no longer for the life of us figure out what the SFA is playing at.
With the uncertainty over which league Charles Green’s Sevco AllStars would play in finally ended this week, the matter seemed to have been concluded at last – and just in time, with the new season kicking off in only 11 days. Yet it seems there’s still one more hurdle to clear, with the Scottish Football Association said to be insisting that Mr Green accepts several preconditions before it will allow him to transfer Old Rangers’ membership to his new club.
Now, it seems beyond any sensible dispute that the SFA’s over-riding concern during the entire fiasco to date has been to protect Rangers, pulling every trick in the book to (unsuccessfully) try to bully SFL clubs into providing the Ibrox side with a quick and easy route back into the SPL. Nor is it difficult to understand why – rightly or wrongly (and in our view it’s the latter), the SFA believes that having “Rangers” in the top flight is vital to the continued survival of Scottish football.
And equally, on the surface it’s easy enough to see why the SFA want to make Sevco responsible for the crimes of Old Rangers – it’s so that they can justify presenting Sevco FC as a continuation of Rangers, and allow them to play under the same name, in the same kit with the same badge and with the Rangers honours list. Clearly, if Sevco FC is allowed a clean start free of the encumbrances of Rangers’ past, it follows that it can’t be “Rangers” and can’t be allowed to be presented as the same club.
But that rationale falls apart immediately under scrutiny, because Sevco FC simply can’t afford to be held responsible for the baggage of Rangers. Already facing significant financial difficulties (no season ticket sales, no TV income, the need to lower admission prices), Green really doesn’t want to be landed with another £3m of debt straight away. But more importantly, it would mean that Sevco had to face the music for Old Rangers’ actions in respect of EBTs and dual contracts.
Given that the SFA’s judicial panel has already found the old club guilty of what it described as the most serious crimes possible short of match-fixing, and could yet still suspend or expel Sevco FC from the Scottish game if it accepts being “Rangers”, it’s simply not credible to imagine that any penalty for EBTs or dual contracts could be anything less. (And the old club’s guilt on those issues seems beyond any reasonable doubt.) So the price of Sevco retaining Rangers’ name and history would be, at the very least, a year’s suspension from football altogether.
Suspension would be the final death knell for the club. There is simply no way on Earth that Charles Green would finance keeping “Rangers” alive for a year or more without playing football. Every player would leave. Just keeping the stadium standing for 12 months would cost him millions. There would be nothing left to sell anyone, in football terms – flogging off the buildings and land to developers would be the ONLY avenue left for him to get his money back, and he would jump at it. After all, most of the Rangers support seems to hate him anyway, so what would he have to lose?
The fact of the matter is that the name “Rangers FC” is now utterly toxic, and clinging onto it carries a price Green just can’t afford to pay. Sevco FC as a new club with a fresh start in Division 3 is just about viable, if Green can cut costs, somehow get fans onside and keep a hold of the few decent players he has left for long enough to get promoted a couple of times (by which point he could count on reconstruction providing an expanded SPL to play in).
It wouldn’t be easy, but it could be done, and if the club traded under a new different-but-similar name (say, “Glasgow Rangers FC”, which many people thought it was called already) without retaining the history “officially”, the fans would just pretend it was the same club anyway, rivals would enthusiastically and derisively point out that it wasn’t, and everyone would be happy.
Sevco FC trading as “Rangers”, however, is a man trying to swim with two dead elephants tied to his ankles. Given that the SFA appear to be absolutely desperate to preserve some sort of Rangers-ish football club playing at Ibrox, we’re at a loss as to why they’re now embarking on a course of action certain to kill it once and for all, just as it appears to be dragging itself to its feet.
We’re reminded of another entity born in 1872 which a lot of people wanted to kill, but which seemed to have survived against all the odds, only to finally succumb at the hands of “some men of higher standing”. It will truly be the final irony if in their blind panic it’s (Stewart) Regan’s team who turn Rangers into “the cat that really was gone”.
You’re right, Stu. It doesn’t make any sense. Either they are a brand new club, or the old club with liabilites. It can’t be both.
The EBT’s and who owns Ibrox are still to rear their heads. Legally they need to be looked at, even if the SFA had hoped to remain in denial until 2026.
Having allowed Whyte previously, and even Murray, the argument that no checks were done in fit and proper people as directors and owners would be beyond even the SFA to justify.
Is there not some clause that they are required to pay all outstanding football debts to allow them to continue to play ?
Is this still a political blog ? Any comment on NATO question for SNP or potential implosion of coalition on Lords reform ?…etc etc
Just starting to look like an Aberdeen fan lovefest with the continued fixation with Rangers.
“Any comment on NATO question for SNP?”
You didn’t bother with today’s earlier post, then?
There is no chance whatsoever of the coalition imploding over Lords reform, and so no possible implications for Scotland.
And no, the clause about paying football debt is in the rules of the English FA, not the Scottish one.
As for the bit you hastily edited out, my previous prediction was that “Were the Ibrox club to be insane enough to engage the CoS a second time, the international body would be likely to impose savage sanctions on the SFA”
Its simple, if they are Newco with no history and really a new club(even though they are really the old club making use of bankruptcy laws to avoid debt) then there is no link and no debt to pay on anything.
If they are not really Newco then there is a link and there is debt to be paid as there would be if they had theoretically went into administration.
There should be a price to pay for admission and to retain links to the old club, anyone saying otherwise would appear to me to be wanting their cake and eat it. Same for folks who say debt should be paid by Newco but no link to old club.
Yes apologies on the missed post on NATO nonsense, that was my fault. It got lost in the wheen of Rangers posts…..
If Rangers want the club to be the old club they need to take the punishment on EBT’s etc, we agree on that.
I agree with you entirely. Sevco Scotland Limited is an entirely new club and should be allowed to play with no sanctions or conditions whatsoever. It should also, however, not be allowed to play as “Rangers FC” or lay claim to the honours of that club, because that club is dead. It’s in the process of being wound up, and Charles Green has snapped up some of its assets for peanuts.
“It got lost in the wheen of Rangers posts…..”
To be fair, five of the last eleven posts (or six of the last 13) have been about Rangers, a minority. And as I’ve said already at length, (a) the Rangers affair in my view has great significance to the independence movement, and (b) Holyrood is on holiday and there’s bugger-all of any great interest going on in politics, as you can see if you read any other Scottish politics blogs. At least we’re still posting SOMETHING.
Sevco seem to exist in a twilight zone. They’re not being treated as a newco or an oldco with rules for both ‘co’s’ being ignored or flouted.
It has gone too far to get them back on track so the eventual outcome might have to be a Sevco Mk2 scenario. It’s difficult to see where any money will come from to fund it for 3 yrs in the lower leagues before it rejoins the SPL triumphant. An SPL by the way that many Sevco fans want to see destroyed due to the ‘punishments’ against The Rangers.
O/T… I see that the creepy Keith Vaz is now on tv pontificating on morals and integrity again at yet another one of his much loved ‘commissions’. Or whatever they’re called. This time he’s talking about the Olympics or something. How many times has Vaz been expelled or held to account for ‘expenses misunderstandings’ ?
Depending on what side of the fence you are on there are folks on both sides wanting their cake plus eating it.
If Newco is not liable for ANY debt of old club and not liable for football sanctions then its not Rangers, IMHO as a Rangers fan.
If Newco are liable for some aspect of Oldco, be that debt or sanctions then its still Rangers.
If we have folk saying a club is a purely commercial enterprise and if the PLC goes then the club goes then purely commercial rules should apply on all aspects…i.e no liability transfer.
Dundee/Livingston and Motherwell never repaid all their debt, yet they still exist. So full debt repayment isn’t a function of a clubs continued existence. The view of what is Rangers and what is not is naturally skewed by the person’s initial prejudice towards the club be that pro or anti.
“If Newco is not liable for ANY debt of old club and not liable for football sanctions then its not Rangers, IMHO as a Rangers fan. If Newco are liable for some aspect of Oldco, be that debt or sanctions then its still Rangers.”
As I say, I completely agree with you. I take no responsibility for what anyone else might be saying. (As for the other clubs you mention, they all exited administration by legal means, whether that involved paying their full debts or not. They reached agreement with their creditors. Rangers failed to achieve that, which is why they’re in the process of liquidation.)
As to the outbursts of the usual rentamob Rangers fans on TV regarding their wish for an implosion of the SPL. There have been two very determined camps on this in that some say SPL needs Rangers and some say equally strongly that they don’t. The good news if there is any is that we’ll see who is is right on that argument in the next 5 years.
But Dundee, Livingston and Motherwell were never liquidated, so i wouldn’t say you could compare that scenario.
Oops. Should have read the rest of the comments before posting. 🙁
I think I have figured out at least some of the logic. On their Q&A, the SFA say:
“Sevco Scotland Ltd bought Rangers Football Club PLC’s share in the SPL and membership of the Scottish FA as part of their acquisition of assets. Under Article 14.1, Sevco Scotland are requesting the transfer of the existing membership of Oldco.”
This is in answer to the question of how Zombie Rangers can be allowed into the third division without the requisite number of accounts – it’s being viewed as a transfer of membership. Apparently this includes the history and also the punishments. In fact, later on in the Q&A, as an “answer” to the question of whether the punishments transfer, the SFA simply say that they have the power to transfer membership under any conditions that they so choose.
So I think that the SFA, to allow newco Rangers to play at all, need to transfer membership (otherwise newco Rangers would be stuck playing outside professional football for years, or, more likely, would immediately fold). However, in transferring membership, they are mindful of the potential wrath of UEFA and/or FIFA, who would be most unamused if old Rangers became new Rangers without punishments of some kind for the misdeeds of old Rangers being transferred to new Rangers.
I suspect that they’ll impose punishments on Rangers to attempt to keep UEFA and FIFA happy, while at the same time attempting to make the punishments as non-punishing as possible (and maybe quietly asking Rangers to not create a ridiculously stupid and self-damaging lawsuit, this time).
They are probably not helped by the fact that:
a) Green agreed to the legal action by Duff and Phelps against the transfer embargo, therefore making him complicit in the civil action that FIFA want all clubs to avoid at all costs.
b) Green previously agreed to have Rangers face sanctions as part of the silly deal to elevate them instantly to the first division.
Any idea where UEFA / FIFA stand on this issue?
Personally, I think Sevco will struggle to win Division 3, given the exodus of players.
I’m seriously thinking of checking with the bookies the odds on Sevco failing to gain promotion. If they fail, only hardcore fans will remain. (And I might get a small windfall!)
“Depending on what side of the fence you are on there are folks on both sides wanting their cake plus eating it.
If Newco is not liable for ANY debt of old club and not liable for football sanctions then its not Rangers, IMHO as a Rangers fan.
If Newco are liable for some aspect of Oldco, be that debt or sanctions then its still Rangers.”
To tell you the truth Kenny, I think you’re just about the only “honest” Rangers fan I’ve seen articulating an opinion on any of this on the internet. All non-Rangers fans want is for justice to prevail. If Sevco take on the punishments that would have been dished out to Rangers if they hadn’t been liquidated, then I don’t think many people will complain about them claiming to be a continuation of the old club. I certainly have no problem with that. But the majority of (vocal) Rangers fans are saying that “it’s still the same club”, moan when people call them Newco Rangers (“just call them Rangers, it’s the same club”) and want to act as if nothing happened.
To conflate things further, they talk of entry to Division 3 as being a “punishment”. Well, no, it’s the only place a new professional club can possibly start, and it already seems utterly absurd that there was even a need to have two votes on the issue for that to happen. If the SFL voted to let Spartans into the SFL, their fans wouldn’t start saying “OMG you’re punishing us, why can’t we start at the top?”
Much like “new & improved flavour” is the most nonsensical piece of marketing speak ever (for something to be improved, it has to have previously existed, and therefore cannot be new), entry to Division 3 can only be a “punishment” if the club previously existed in a higher division. But this can only be so if Sevco are the same club. And if Sevco are the same club, then they are responsible for the misdeeds of the club owned by David Murray and Craig Whyte. Demotion to Division 3 is par for course when a club enters administration – it’s why Gretna and Livingston were bumped down to the bottom division. So whichever way one looks at it, division 3 really was the only place this club could start next season (if indeed it is granted an SFA licence).
The only people really wanting to have their cake and eat it are Rangers fans who want to pretend demotion to Division 3 is “punishment enough” and then pretend as if nothing else happened. Those who want Rangers to die AND pay for their crimes are, I think, very much a minority. Most people just want the right thing to be done.
If they retain full time football they should win the 3rd Division. I would expect a drop in fan numbers but I still expect a ‘hardcore’ of XX,000+, especially in first year.
However I’m just guessing as is everyone, the anticipated collapse of the support is second only in anticipation of the team makeup. There are no odds on Betfair on anything outside of SPL. Celtic at 33-1 on to win SPL
Stu, I think the logic is something along these lines:
All three associations – SFA, SPL and SFL – all kind of wanted Rangers as far up the chain as possible. However, none of the three wanted to be the ones “to blame”, as such, and tried to get the others to do their dirty work for them (even the SFL chairmen to a small extent, since only Stranraer voted to treat them completely the same as any other club looking to fill a vacancy in the league).
The SFA wants Rangers in the league. But this can only happen if Sevco follow the SFA’s rules. I suspect that when Stewart Regan said Rangers would not be playing in the 3rd division, he perhaps knows that there is not a hope in hell of getting Charles Green to accept the SFA’s punishments to Rangers being handed down to Sevco. If Sevco had been given entry to the SPL or SFL1, it might have been worthwhile for Sevco to take on these punishments. But as a third division club, they are effectively killing the baby as soon as it leaves the womb. So when he said they wouldn’t play in the 3rd division, what he meant was “I know for a fact that, if Sevco are punted into the 3rd division, they won’t accept the terms that allow us to transfer Rangers’ membership to them, and if they won’t accept those terms, we can’t give them membership because they don’t have the relevant accounts history.”
I don’t know if the SFA are compelled by UEFA to refuse a Newco automatic entry, or if they just don’t want to be seen breaking their own rules, but whatever the reason, I think this explains why Regan was so desperate for the SPL or SFL to let Sevco jump a few divisions. He knew he wouldn’t be able to pave the way for Rangers to come back, so he needed one of the other two to facilitate it. Hence why he tried to bully them into doing his dirty work.
If Sevco are really Rangers then they would have to be put into liquidation again as they couldn’t hope to cover the costs of the small and big tax case, the 84 creditors, the transfer money due to Dundee Utd, Hearts etc as well as running Ibrox and meeting all the wages etc.
So something must have changed to make them not really Rangers. Whatever the SFA etc might say.
Can we see the likes of Neil Alexander staying on in SFL3?
“he perhaps knows that there is not a hope in hell of getting Charles Green to accept the SFA’s punishments to Rangers being handed down to Sevco”
I’m not at all sure that’s right. I think at this point Green doesn’t feel the embargo is a very big deal, because it doesn’t look like he’s going to have any money to spend on transfers anyway. Indeed, he might actively welcome it – as the Sevco FC fans bemoan the lack of quality on the pitch, he can truthfully say “Hey, my hands are tied, I’m not ALLOWED to spend any money on players”.
I think the sanctions will be accepted, Sevco FC will start the league season as “Rangers”, and will fold at some point mid-season as they run out of cash again. The SFA may well be counting on that, as they can’t put off the dual-contracts investigation forever.
Eoin, good detailed analysis. Initially I found myself nodding and agreeing. Then I returned to my former premise.
I believe we are were we are because the SFA don’t know what they’re doing. No other reason.
Doug, I’ve seen a lot more honest Rangers fans saying the kind of thing Kenny is saying, but more now, I’m starting to see them not caring what the end result is, just so long as there is an end!
Barbarian, Rangers will win division three. Simply by dint of being full time professionals. Also, don’t underestimate the draw of some very good div 3 div 2 players who may have always wanted to play for Rangers now having the chance to realise their dreams. And if there is a transfer embargo they’ll still have the best under 18s in the country who will be more than a match for most of the Div 3 teams. Then there’s the fact they won’t have to worry about fixture congestion, they’ll be the only Div 3 team with under soil heating. And their players will stay fit through the winter because they have good indoor training facilities at Murray park, another advantage over your average div 3 team.
In summary, the biggest club will attract the best players at that level and has the facilities to make them better.
Rangers will win the third division.
I also suspect they’ll win thier league the following season. They should walk Div 2, but under league reconstruction may find themselves in a Div1 that is actually missing the six best teams (They’ll be moved up to the SPL) That should make it easier for Rangers to win, So look out for the Rangers in the SPL season 2014 -15.
As Rev Stu says, there are parallels between this and the independence Referendum. Lets hope the Union doesn’t follow my prediction and find itself roaring back to life at the top of it’s game in August 2014!!!
“Rangers will win division three”
I don’t think many of us have any idea of whether that’ll happen or not, because I doubt many of us have watched an SFL3 game in recent memory. As I previously suggested, I’m not sure whether the few decent players who agreed to have their contracts transferred will still want to stay now that the club is in SFL3, and Green will be keen to offload them anyway to cut the wage bill and bring in a few quid in transfer money. Certainly at the start of the season the players are going to lack match fitness, having had no pre-season friendlies at all and not much in the way of training, and will never have played together so will take quite a while to gel into a cohesive team.
SFL3 players might lack skills, but they have experience. The kids that will make up most of the Sevco FC side will have youth and enthusiasm, but will also be naive, short of discipline and tactical nous. I think they might get a few thumpings in the early weeks at least. I’d need to be getting decent odds to back them to win the SFL3 title first time out.
But returning to the original point, I can only guess that the SFA is thinking that if Sevco refuses the sanctions and doesn’t play this season, the financial catastrophe they promised will descend on the other clubs after all. Then, when Sevco applies to join the SPL again in 2013-14, the SPL clubs and their fans will be forced to acknowledge that they DO need “Rangers” in order to survive, and that will head off the fan protest that would otherwise erupt again.
If that’s the case it’s an ENORMOUS gamble on multiple levels, really just about off the scale. It needs Sevco to somehow stagger on for a year without any income, and it all but requires the SFA to actively sabotage the Scottish game to ensure the disaster is sufficiently severe. If that’s the plan, we really are through the looking glass.
Its not par for the course for clubs in administration to be demoted 3 divisions. I think demotion to SFL3 is a punishment in any regard, if its punishment enough is another question entirely. Rangers ‘league placeholder or membership’ was still in the SPL despite a 10 point deduction for administration. If as you say they are an entirely new professional club then they should be in SFL3 but there is no further punishment possible and no debt to be repaid. However they are not entirely a new club as their placeholder exists.
If they’d say bought St Mirren and changed the holding company who owned them then there would be no expectation of demotion as a result. Gretna were demoted for being unable to fulfil their games, not for bankrupcy. Dundee got relegated a division for going into admin twice and as a result of a 25 point deduction. Airdrie’s coup d’etait of Clydebank did not result in relegation.
The key point is what is or was Rangers, if its the placeholder then there are ‘football’ liabilities and potentially punishments that adhere to their SFA/SPL membership. If its the PLC then there is nothing more to be done and indeed a new team. If its something in between then of course we’ll be having this discussion for another 50 years, well I won’t but you get my drift ::)
In the end this could be the best thing that happened to Scottish football, the worst outcome is no further change from the previous status quo.
Football wise I’m quite looking forward to it.
“I think demotion to SFL3 is a punishment in any regard”
It clearly isn’t. It’s the absence of special treatment. As far as I’m aware, no club in the entire 100-odd-year history of the Scottish Football League has ever been admitted at anything other than the lowest level. Correct me if I’m wrong. Sevco Scotland have already been granted special favours, in that they didn’t have to compete in an open application process, and have had various qualifying requirements waived.
“If they’d say bought St Mirren and changed the holding company who owned them then there would be no expectation of demotion as a result.”
Indeed. But they didn’t. Had St Mirren gone bust and been unable to exit administration through a CVA, they’d be in SFL3 (at best) now too.
“In the end this could be the best thing that happened to Scottish football”
I think we’re all agreed on that.
Stu,
If the GreenRangers are a Newco entirely then they are indeed getting a good deal. If they are in on the old membership placeholder then they are not entirely a new club, unless there is a rule that says league membership dies with PLC.
I agree they could still go bust again. Its a dogs dinner of epic proportions and I fear too many positive assumptions may have been made by Green. There are a few folks with old associations with Rangers that fucked up on an unimaginable scale in my view, including their tax advisors and auditors for allowing it.
It’s certainly a story that has had legs.
Has Jim Traynor imploded yet?
Wouldn’t that be a sad loss?
Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
July 17, 2012 at 3:20 pm
But returning to the original point, I can only guess that the SFA is thinking that if Sevco refuses the sanctions and doesn’t play this season, the financial catastrophe they promised will descend on the other clubs after all. Then, when Sevco applies to join the SPL again in 2013-14, the SPL clubs and their fans will be forced to acknowledge that they DO need “Rangers” in order to survive, and that will head off the fan protest that would otherwise erupt again.
————–
Is it necessary to see conspiracy in everything? The most likely explanation is that what Regan was saying was misconstrued – when he said to the clubs that its Division 1 or nothing he wasn’t talking about it from a Scottish Football view, he was talking about it from a Sevco view, telling the clubs that if they put Sevco in Division 3 then its likely that’d be the end of Rangers forever, not Scottish football. He knew exactly what sanctions the SFA were asking for, and these would apply in Division 1 or 3, he also had a fair guess that if it was Division 3 the sanctions would make Sevco unviable.
He gave them a simple choice, ignore sporting integrity, put Sevco in Division 1 and you’ll have a “Rangers” of sorts in Scottish football. Chose sporting integrity, put Sevco in Division 3 and you’ll be most likely finishing them forever.
This doesn’t explain why they were so desperate to ruin Scottish football to save Sevco, so doesn’t get Regan off the hook, but it does explain why it now looks as if the SFA are trying to finish them off – the sanctions were going to apply no matter where they ended up, and Regan knew this.
“The most likely explanation is that what Regan was saying was misconstrued – when he said to the clubs that its Division 1 or nothing he wasn’t talking about it from a Scottish Football view, he was talking about it from a Sevco view, telling the clubs that if they put Sevco in Division 3 then its likely that’d be the end of Rangers forever, not Scottish football.”
That’s not very plausible, given that he openly said Scottish football – not just Sevco – would die “a slow, lingering death” if they weren’t admitted to SFL1.
link to wingsland.podgamer.com
“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.”
Seems pretty unambiguous.
it would be a loss if not at least caught on camera….
I will declare firstly that I am insolvency practitioner. Old Rangers ditched their debt in total when they entered an insolvency procedure. There is no conventional way that anyone can pursue these debts directly against old Rangers any more, rather creditors have to rely solely on what the administrators/liquidators can recover for them.
A creditor, however, has the right to refuse to trade with any Phoenix company which appears and that is often used when a Newco needs a particular supplier and has no alternative.
The SFA are in the position of determining whether Newco Rangers can play football or not and can impose whatever conditions they want to allow that to happen. The transfer embargo was deemed ultra vires by the Court of Session when applied to the old company who already held a licence to play.
There is no such restriction when applied to Newco as a condition of getting a licence to play. Ditto the football debt.
As for what is going on, could this be Regan’s final revenge on Scottish football before departing?
That’s not very plausible, given that he openly said Scottish football – not just Sevco – would die “a slow, lingering death” if they weren’t admitted to SFL1.
————
In Regans eyes there is very little difference between the two – he clearly equates Scottish football with Rangers and Celtic. – Regan sees the end of Sevco by virtue of being unsustainable in Division 3 as the cause of a slow lingering death for a Sevco-less Scottish game.
Ultimately the point is that Regan made his statements knowing full well that Sevco would face the same sanctions whether they ended up in Division 1 or Division 3. The SFA aren’t up to anything here, theres no conspiracy. Regan pushed for Division 1 because he felt the sanctions would be easier for Sevco to deal with there, saving them, and then in his eyes saving the Scottish game.
The surprise seems to be that the sanctions are still going to be applied in Division 3. Surely it would be far more surprising if they weren’t? This is about the first thing the SFA have handled correctly in this entire situation.
I disagree. The only proper way to handle it would be to acknowledge that “Rangers” are dead, and that Sevco are a new club who need a new name and a fresh start. They have no right to the history, and no responsibility for the previous club’s crimes.
I think saying that old Rangers are dead and Newco is a clean start with equally no right to the history and no responsibility for past crimes is an over simplification.
No matter what the situation is, any team playing at Ibrox in Royal blue will be regarded as Rangers by most people, especially their supporters. They might not officially inherit the titles but they will carry on the traditions good and bad. Does anyone seriously think that newco’s fans will turn a new leaf and stop spouting their sectarian bile or crowing about “9 in a row”?
Most importantly, Newco will carry on playing football in the Scottish leagues as Rangers or some minor variation on that name and so if football carries on, so too should the baggage attaching to that.
I think there has to be a distinction between Rangers corporate body and their existence as a footballing body. The former is dead, having been executed by process of law. The latter continues and, as such, must carry any football baggage.
As a fan of a club that has spent a while in the SFL (Thistle), I feel compelled to correct some of Kenny’s comments about other clubs who have been in fiscal trouble.
Airdrieonians went bust after finishing 2nd in SFL1 (behind Thistle) in 2002. The Newco Airdrie United was formed and applied to join the SFL. The application was rejected and Gretna given associate membership. Airdrie United then bought over Clydebank, changed the name and moved the operation to Airdrie. Bankies had been in SFL2 at the time, so that’s where Airdrie United started.
Gretna went into administration while in the SPL in 2008 and were kept on life-support by the SPL so that the League could avoid the accusation (valid) of being a dysfunctional shambles. Following relegation and mass redundancies, the SFL relegated the club to SFL3 for fear of the club failing to fulfil it’s fixtures. The club resigned it’s position in the league and was liquidated. Annan were elected to replace them.
Dundee went into administration (again…) in 2010 and had a 25-pt deduction. They kept a strong squad together (great for the club, less so for the creditors [including HMRC] who eventually received 6p in the £) and finished in 6th place. They managed to finish 2nd in 2011-12 and are now in the SPL…..
Livingston (for the sake of completion, though you didn’t mention them) went into administration (also again…) in 2009 and were close to liquidation. So close in fact, that the SFL demanded a bond in excess of £700K to insure against the threat that they might fail to fulfil their fixtures. The new owners could not afford the bond and the club was relegated to SFL3. They then refused to play a fixture against East Stirlingshire but received no further sanction. Hamilton Accies fans might have been a bit miffed by that since their club was previously deducted 15 pts for failure to fulfil a fixture when their players, tired of not being paid, refused to play. The deduction resulted in Accies being relegated to SFL3 for season 2000-01.
There ends the lower league history lesson. Hopefully accurate!
“Sevco FC trading as “Rangers”, however, is a man trying to swim with two dead elephants tied to his ankles.” 🙂
I have to say I am subject to a severe degree of Rangers/Sevco fatigue but if it continues to inspire comments like that then I could stand a little more.For whats its worth I doubt whether Sevco can see the season out and thats if they are admitted to Div3 at all.Sad really.I know their fans can often be belligerent and uncouth but there have been moments of greatness at Ibrox.Offhand I cant think of any but I am sure there must be some.
Are you aware there is a dead man in the middle of your soccer article.