buster.

Our statement on Sunday says we will present the evidence to the clubs in advance of the GM. I think Rangers recognise that to have a chance of gaining enough support in GM, that now becomes the appropriate time to show the clubs what we have and if we only go with what is out there, we'll be onto plumbs.

The SPFL have shown that they have a weak hand. In this case, it's difficult to spin a web if you don't have anything useful to use. If they go negative and look to discredit, many watching club chairmen won't be impressed. We should be careful not to give them anything. The statement on Sunday was I think, just right. It's pretty much all on the card that hasn't yet been upturned.

The year 2051 The Gersnet messageboard will have morphed into some virtual reality studio on a cloud. Scott´s great great grandkid will have started a conversation on Cup Finals and there will be an old foggy who can remember the scenes after winning the 2021 Scottish Cup against Arbroath. The Red Lichties having become the second power in Scottish Fitbaw Post C19.

At least we won it in the end ! The end of season league game at Easter Road that season (after the 3 Cup Final matches and losing the league/treble chance) was just more than people were ready to take. I went along and there was literally a sprinkling of folk on the terraces. I sat down with nobody within 10 metres, surreal. My favourite Cup Final attended was the win over Dundee Utd in 1981. Like the Hibs Final in 79, it started with a goalless draw. We all went trooping off to the bus dissappointed because Ian Redford had missed a last minute penalty but very glad that he did by HT in the replay.

Is it not that 2 clubs need to back the resolution and/or call for a General Meeting The requisitioners !!! (blast fae the past) In such a General Meeting, 75% of the 42 clubs would need to back the call for an Independent Enquiry to get it through. ie. at least 32 clubs from the 42 Until the clubs see the evidence for themselves, it'll be pretty pointless to do any polling or estimates.

Interesting chat ! Thanks to all those who took part. Would be good to see @JohnMc post his views on the board during this lockdown but I appreciate he might be busy with Sonia !

The Tom English reaction after the Gregory Campbell MP phonecall was simply a disgrace. The quote by itself, "why was that man allowed on the show"? doesn't convey the indignant tone that it was delivered in. On a PR/lobbyist note, I think having a DUP MP on Sportsound might actually have a net negative effect on Scottish football clubs and their Chairmen. Despite the fact that, as 26th pointed out, Campbell had played with a straight bat, talked openly and courtesly.

Quick look aroud various places and I don't think the importance of this statement has hit home. For me, it´s got more of a punch to an SPFL solar plexus than the longer and louder statement that first mentioned the evidence.

Club Statement THERE are key issues to be discussed and agreed within Scottish football including the circumstances and dates on which football can resume, the health and safety of all involved and the financial implications for members. It is vital that those involved in making those decisions have the confidence and support of member clubs. An independent investigation provides a route to achieving this. It has always been Rangers’ intention to produce our evidence at the appropriate time. The evidence will be provided to all member clubs well in advance of a general meeting to approve an independent investigation. https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/independent-investigation ------------------------------------------------- Short, to the point and a promise of sharing evidence in a timely way. You could read it and for the first time think leadership. More importantly, I think that going into the meeting, many clubs will appreciate it. Odds on getting a Yes vote have shortened.

Can't see the SPFL being willing to agree to a CAS hearing. How would it work re. charges/civil/criminal court? Corruption & bribery would be criminal charges I ask, thinking about standards of proof. McKenzie and other advsors will have played the game through in his head (I wonder if they have an idea what the evidence is), considering probable routes as they consider strategy. Up until now, they have been kicking the can down the road, without any decent cards to play. The show goes on...........

Interesting Gaffer ! Are you 100% that this falls within the remit of CAS (not disagreeing, I just don't know) All seems to come down to what evidence we have. A CAS procedure would take months and they seem to be booked up until at least the end of June. https://www.tas-cas.org/en/general-information/news-detail/article/list-of-hearings-2.html Is there a stage (internal remedy) we would have to go through with the SFA prior to CAS ? It would be interesting to listen to the conversations in the SPFL bunker speculating on I.D. of whistleblower and what the evidence may consist of. McKenzie might lose some weight with the effort. I optimistically hope some clubs are recording any phonecalls from the SPFL lobbyists in the days leading up to this 42 club meeting ?

Next stage is the 42 club GM (whenever that is). No significant disclosure and IMO it's doubtful there will be an Independent Enquiry. If we don't show and don't get the vote through, the main focus surrounding this will become us, rather than the SPFL. Basically we've placed everything on red (the evidence). Smoking gun - we win (probably to a significant level) Damp squib - we lose (don't want to go there)

A long game points to the title question being more or less conceded weeks ago. I don't think there was ever much doubt that the league would be called and Celtic awarded the title. I labour the point but it was about discrediting such an award. We were late to that game and for the time being, have let up on it. As for a long game. Given present circumstances, it doesn't make sense to me, unless the dossier would persuade a court to act against the individuals in the SPFL and it might implicate or stain the organ-grinder. IMO (but without knowing what the evidence is) this should be about a sprint and not a marathon.

We knew about this type of thing years ago but practically, you can only really look to alter or change what is within your grasp. The question on such a support structure becomes....WHY do we lag so far behind and WHAT can we do to improve/change it.? We asked this question on FF about a decade or so ago and got various responses that centered on the WHY but predictably nothing much on a very difficult WHAT. As of today, we appear to be in the same place.

So, a 42 club meeting to look at our resolution this week. Look's like...... - Difficult ask to get 32 clubs to vote yes. - Probably a non-starter if we don't give other clubs a taster+ of the whistleblower evidence and they regard it as strong enough. - If strong evidence is presented to clubs, good chance of Independent Inquiry Do we show the clubs or not ?

The word in Gorgie is that Ann has reading up on what Gafferposted.

Ann Budge seems to be telling the players to take a cut now or contract will be suspended. i wish there was an option other than a temporary wage cut but after careful consideration it is the only way for the club to proceed with financial certainty. having paid the players’ wages in full for march, i have written to them today to request the formal notification of their acceptance of the temporary wage cut proposed in order that we can process salaries next week. i remain hopeful that the players will accept for the reasons outlined above, as the only viable alternative is that their contracts remain suspended under clause 12 of the standard spfl contract which means that they will not receive any wages during the period of suspension. to reiterate, this is the least palatable of the viable options available to us and even if this is ultimately the route we have to take, we would continue to be open to dialogue with individual players on a month-by-month basis. https://www.heartsfc.co.uk/news/article/chairmans-update

The scope of the Deloitte investigation is almost laughable but reality is that it will probably help the SPFL to persuade enough clubs to shelve the whole affair and get on with the crisis management surrounding C19. Hardly convincing it is not a difficult sell in these circumstances. Part of me now looks toward the existential threat coming into focus for football clubs, including our own and wonders why we continue on this route. If there was a realistic chance of getting 75% of clubs to vote in favour of a resolution for an Independent Inquiry, then perhaps but I don´t think there is.....What would happen after that ? Some of the posters who know about finance point towards an IMMEDIATE prioritisation and action regards getting costs as low as possible. As well as bringing in as much revenue as possible. Today we hear from Club1872 that season ticket renewal time is close. Perhaps our latest move does have something to do with the real priority, perhaps not. The still hidden trump card that could inject disinfectant into the 6th floor at Hampden, to clean it out so to speak and render some of what is written above as pish, is the Whistleblower evidence/dossier. Given what we have said, how do we get it out there if the clubs do not vote for an Independent Inquiry ? Would then going a legal route (if this were to be the next option) be feasible and give us a realistic chance of success? What would that success look like and would it be worth the money spent at a time of impending financial crisis?

Saudi´s at Ibrox Instead of Mediahouse, they bring in the Turkish death squad. ?

Deferrals rather than cuts weren´t an encouraging sign. I´d hope the club at least asked for cuts first, even if the players then refused. We´ve run a structured loss for a number of years and this pandemic has arrived at a point when we were looking to get a lot closer to break even, without soft loans or share issues to keep us going. The last couple of seasons has brought in significant European cash. If we were to lose out on that in 20/21, it would be a big hole to fill. You also have to wonder when we get the UEFA cash for this season regards cashflow.

Every week, the timescale estimates seem to be gaining 6 months ? It shouldn´t be beyond the collective wit of man to come up with more timely solutions. If your 18 month at least were to be accurate....Rangers and Celtic would probably be starting from scratch.

If the roles were reversed and the circumstances the same. Personally, I´d allow them to make the noise up until the title is awarded, then as a club put out a statement saying that although we´d take the CL entry, we wouldn´t consider it a full title and the number going into a prospective 2020/21 would still be 8IAR.

A good post is a good post. You are very capable of good objective anaylsis when it doesn´t involve politics of any kind.

Good post Bill ! Focuses on the stark reality that faces the club and deserves a bump.

This thread shows the importance we place on European football. For me it has to be the penalty shoot-out win in Florence and what it signified, ie. a European Final. Something, that by that time in our history, I never thought I´d see.