The Rangers Saga and Fallout Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
GeneralD said:
But this was the sfa's attempt to be lenient, they could have lawfully expellend rangers but elected not too. So in kicking up a stink over the lesser punishment they face the full force one now.
Click to expand...

If they wanted to be lenient they would have used the Cup Ban they didnt they made one up. They said expulsion was too harsh. If thats the case they should have used the Cup Ban. They have that as the perfect get out of jail option.
 
Looking at the Sion case - FIFA ordered UEFA to disqualify them from European league then FIFA told the Swiss they would be banned from Internationals if they did not punish Sion further resulting in 36 point deduction.

So probably punishments ahead for Rangers from both SFA and UEFA.

Given the precedent surely Rangers have to offer a statement ASAP to apologise and accept the transfer ban to minimise fall out? Or ignore it and get told they are not eligible for Europe with any of the players they signed?

Infact I see an easy solution for the SFA - issue a statement saying it is the transfer ban or face expulsion/suspension - you choose if you want to take it further. Actually only option available I can see.
 
Last edited:
Gers sanctions 'light' says former SFA chief John McBeth

By Jane Lewis
BBC Scotland
Rangers "got away lightly" with recent sanctions for bringing the game into disrepute, according to the former Scottish FA president John McBeth.
The Ibrox club had a 12-month transfer embargo imposed by the SFA overturned by the Court of Session on Tuesday.
Speaking to BBC Scotland, John MacBeth said: ''Rangers got away lightly with their transfer embargo.''
And MacBeth said the SFA could impose stricter punishment on the club.
''The SFA should go away and look at their books to determine what their next step should be," he continued. "They could throw them out of the league.''
McBeth, who was a vocal critic of FIFA president Sepp Blatter while in office, also claimed that SPL clubs could survive in a league without Rangers.
''Football would survive without Rangers, maybe not at the same level, and the game would may be lose some fans - but so be it,'' he said.
"If you look after the sport the money will follow you, if you look after the money you'll kill the sport.''
 
McMav said:
If they wanted to be lenient they would have used the Cup Ban they didnt they made one up. They said expulsion was too harsh. If thats the case they should have used the Cup Ban. They have that as the perfect get out of jail option.
Click to expand...

Which would have reduced the potential income of the club, making it less attractive to a buyer. The transfer ban would allow them to take part and make some money. Cup ban means less gate money and potentially scupper the take over as has been mentioned.
 
The more you read and think about the consequences the more you realise what a mistake the court case was for Rangers. The real question is was this done deliberately to force liquidation and allow Green to gain the assets for a bargain price?
 
Metalface Mark said:
The SFA really tried to do Rangers a favour and got their generosity thrown in their face. Throw the book at them.
Click to expand...

Sure they did.

They knew as part of admin senior players had clauses written in to contracts to go on the cheap for taking wage cuts. So they put in a transfer embargo knowing full well senior players would most likely leave and not be replaced. Big favour there Mark. :rolleyes:
 
Nauggie said:
The more you read and think about the consequences the more you realise what a mistake the court case was for Rangers. The real question is was this done deliberately to force liquidation and allow Green to gain the assets for a bargain price?
Click to expand...

Yes it was a huge mistake to challenge an unlawful punishment. What planet are some of you on?

The SFA made a mess of it. It had a list of sanctions that it could have applied but decided that they were either too harsh, or too lenient so made up a sanction which would cripple the club, but still allow it to function as a cash cow for the other member clubs. They did so in the eyes of the highest court in Scotland, unlawfully.

The SFA in choosing to do what they did, have brought more disrepute to the game in Scotland than any of its members ever have.
 
When the alternative was suspension or expulsion, it was a huge favour. It was D&P who did that stupid deal with the players, thats the problem, its always someone else's fault, theres no accountability for what Rangers have done.
 
steve1873 said:
Yes it was a huge mistake to challenge an unlawful punishment. What planet are some of you on?

The SFA made a mess of it. It had a list of sanctions that it could have applied but decided that they were either too harsh, or too lenient so made up a sanction which would cripple the club, but still allow it to function as a cash cow for the other member clubs.

The SFA in choosing to do what they did, have brought more disrepute to the game in Scotland than any of its members ever have.
Click to expand...

The SFA had a clause that they could punish clubs how they see fit in any way.
 
Tried to do Rangers a favour!!!

FFS, I have heard it all now. The sole intention of the transfer embargo was to result in Rangers being uncompetitve next season if/ when the majority of the squad envoke clauses in their contract to leave for free or for a fraction of their market value. In doing so, the SFA had all but extended Rangers European ban by a further year as there is no way a bunch of 17 and 18 year olds were finishing even top 6, far less top 3.

Huge favour.
 
steve1873 said:
Yes it was a huge mistake to challenge an unlawful punishment. What planet are some of you on?

The SFA made a mess of it. It had a list of sanctions that it could have applied but decided that they were either too harsh, or too lenient so made up a sanction which would cripple the club, but still allow it to function as a cash cow for the other member clubs. They did so in the eyes of the highest court in Scotland, unlawfully.

The SFA in choosing to do what they did, have brought more disrepute to the game in Scotland than any of its members ever have.
Click to expand...

While we agree SFA have lots to answer for. The point I'm making is Rangers are in exactly the same position FC Sion were where a civil judge ruled in favour of Sion in a court case. Even if the SFA agree to lift the transfer ban the precedent is Rangers would be thrown out of Europe and have to be punished further. (36 point deduction in Sions case)
 
steve1873 said:
Tried to do Rangers a favour!!!

FFS, I have heard it all now. The sole intention of the transfer embargo was to result in Rangers being uncompetitve next season if/ when the majority of the squad envoke clauses in their contract to leave for free or for a fraction of their market value. In doing so, the SFA had all but extended Rangers European ban by a further year as there is no way a bunch of 17 and 18 year olds were finishing even top 6, far less top 3.

Huge favour.
Click to expand...

So the alternative now is possibly expulsion or suspension, either would be the death nail. One season of embarrassment vs the death of rangers, if I supported rangers I know which I would prefer.
 
Metalface Mark said:
When the alternative was suspension or expulsion, it was a huge favour. It was D&P who did that stupid deal with the players, thats the problem, its always someone else's fault, theres no accountability for what Rangers have done.
Click to expand...

And what have Rangers done?

Failed to pay taxes, which is a matter between HMRC and Rangers and has resulted in the club being placed in administration and on the brink of liquidation.

Yet that was all the work of 1 man, who bought the club in a manner which is being challenged as fraudulent in the case against Collyer Bristow. So how or what could Rangers or anyone else have done to prevent Whyte's actions? He sacked or removed anyone who spoke out against him. Remember Martin Bain. Remember Donald McIntyre?

The bottom line is, Rangers the club did not pay taxes. That much is true. And in doing so did bring the game into disrepute and deserved a punishment. However, the disrepute charges DID have some mitigating circumstances which the tribunal and appeal tribunal failed to recognise and made up a sanction that they were not entitled to utilise. Questions have to be asked, who advised this and why?
 
Metalface Mark said:
When the alternative was suspension or expulsion, it was a huge favour. It was D&P who did that stupid deal with the players, thats the problem, its always someone else's fault, theres no accountability for what Rangers have done.
Click to expand...

No the alternative was cup ban(why does weveryone keep missing that one out) I wonder. Suspension or expulsion.

They shuld have envoked any of them and didnt. They failed to do their job.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom