John Yorkston wants to relegate "newco"

[ian1964 10,626]

JOHN Yorkston, the Dunfermline Athletic chairman, will urge his Scottish Premier League counterparts to stand by the principles of sporting integrity when they are asked to decide on the future of Rangers this week.

 

At Hampden tomorrow, a general meeting of the SPL will reconvene to consider a series of financial fair play proposals, including sanctions for liquidated member clubs that reform as a new company.

 

Under the proposals, clubs such as Rangers, who will become a newco as part of the takeover planned by Bill Miller, will be deducted ten points for two consecutive seasons, and have their SPL payments reduced by 75 per cent for three successive campaigns.

 

Yorkston does not believe that an SPL share should be transferred to a newco in the first place. He insists that, despite the economic consequences for the game in this country, Rangers should be relegated to the Scottish Football League.

 

â??Thatâ??s what I will be arguing for, but I do understand that others will look at the financial side, and that will have more sway than sporting integrity,â? he said. â??I would guess Iâ??ll be almost a lone voice, but it doesnâ??t stop me from having my say.

 

â??Everyone agrees that there should be severe punishment, but there are a number of chairmen who will look at the financial thing and say, â??do we want an SPL without Rangers?â?? It will be a question of sporting integrity against financial necessity. That is the choice facing chairmen.â?

 

If eight of the clubs represented vote in favour of the points penalty, it will come into effect on 14 May. Only five votes are needed to introduce the financial penalties. The decision does not need to be ratified by the SPL board, which recommended the proposals.

 

Under Article 11 of the SPLâ??s articles of association, a club requires the consent of the SPL board for a share transfer to be registered. If Rangers were to be granted this before next Monday, they would not be subject to the new sanctions.

 

Yorkston is concerned about the credibility of a league in which it is possible to wipe out debts through liquidation and start again. He says that a points penalty would not be a sufficient deterrent to others.

 

â??If ten or 15 points is the penalty, then other clubs are going to have a look at that in future. Maybe not right away, but if you have a bad run, somebody else comes in, and maybe these people are not prepared to finance the losses, then you might see it happening

 

 

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...gers-1-2278177

[UCF2008 0]

Hardly surprising coming from the relegation fodder. Who's being selfish now?

[Owain 0]

Miller will have us by 11th....nothing to worry about.

[Gazza_8 233]

Why would we be relegated?

 

Shut up John and worry about your own team.

[chilledbear 16]

In a way I wish it would happen.

 

Take 15 points away and with a youth team we would be candidates for relegation anyway.

 

Not to mention having to play the tarriers 4 times where we could be hammered.

 

A season in a lower League would give the young players some time and experience.

[der Berliner 3,568]

They had to cut their players' salaries for not receiving 80k from our club. He got that from our fans later on, mind you. Now expect the rest of the SPL not reiceiving any income from their games at Ibrox and at home to us. Sure, a promoted Dundee FC will make up for that next season ...

 

On a sidenote, anyone actually checked whether it is actually in the rules that a club in administration is being relegated to Div 3, or for that matter, a newco? The last times this happened was because a) Gretna could not fullfill the fixture list, while b) Livingston was not able to pay their bills. Either commitment would be fullfilled by Rangers next season.

 

On a sidenote, as long as Rangfers FC plc has not been liquidated, its registration to the SPL still stands, does it not? Miller could just keep both companies milling about next season, whether one is still looking for a CVA or not?

 

You do wonder if Yorkston does some mean financial stuff behind the club's back, would he welcome the idea that the club and its fans suffer for his deeds?

[der Berliner 3,568]

Looks like the SPl runs into some trouble with any possible sanctions (snatched from FF):

 

SPL powerless to hit Millers Newco Rangers (Sunday Mail)

 

(Gordon Waddell tomorrow's paper)

 

Basically, they won't be allowed to punish us if they vote to allow us into the SPL

A top QC has been drafted in and his legal advice is all they can ask is yes or no without conditions

 

Meaning a newco Rangers, history intact, back in spl in August on an even keel

 

The only conditions which can be aplied is all debt to spl clubs are settled and we agree to ongoing probe of ebt investigation (hence a pumping there then)

 

Serious doubts over the proposals of consecutive season or 75% points totals anyway even so that won't apply .

 

Just found it and place it in antother thread.

[Guest superrcooper7]

Looks like the SPl runs into some trouble with any possible sanctions (snatched from FF):

 

 

 

Just found it and place it in antother thread.

 

By Gordon Waddell on May 6, 12 07:20 AM in

IT'S the biggest lose/lose decision in the history of Scottish football.

 

A crossroads from which there is no escape. Dark tunnels, dead ends and cliff edges in all directions.

 

What do you do with a newco Rangers?

 

You couldn't pay me enough money to be an SPL suit right now because they'll be damned if they do and damned if they don't.

 

And it's an absolute scandal that these men are now being made to look like villains in a piece where there should be only one.

 

Tomorrow morning they'll get together and although there'll be no vote on the subject because at the moment there's no application, they're going to have to talk about what they do when the letter lands on the doormat.

 

Do you allow them to simply transfer their share in the SPL across from their stricken PLC to Rangers 2012? Or do you call their bluff?

 

A decision made all the simpler - yet a million times more complicated - by the news that it is a straight yes or no. That they cannot apply punitive conditions to their return.

 

It should be a straightforward choice between right and wrong. A quick tap on the old moral compass and off you go.

 

But the problem with using words like morality and sporting integrity is that the use of them is a luxury afforded to people who don't have to pay for the consequences of actually applying them.

 

You're expected to do the right thing. But right for whom? The league? Football? Your club? Fans? Your bank?

 

The answer's different every time.

 

Let's say they allow them back. On the plus side you protect the Sky deal and the security of income that provides for all clubs. It's based on four Old Firm games a season and they survive.

 

Every club will also gratefully welcome the size of the Rangers away support which, even if some of them threaten boycotts, will still be better than not having them there.

 

And from Celtic's point of view they still have a rivalry to indulge themselves in, ugly though it is. The downside? Almost every punter from outside the G51 postcode will be catatonic with anger.

 

Huge numbers have written to their clubs already saying if they vote for Rangers, they will never be back. That football may as well not exist if there is no price to be paid for the corporate outrages they've indulged in.

 

And if they waltz back in the door without ANY conditions? Have the potential to become instantly competitive?

 

Hell, Celtic punters still haven't forgiven Peter Lawwell for not signing Steven Fletcher three years ago. If they thought Eric Riley had voted to let Rangers off scot-free they'd burn their own house down.

 

And the fans at Dundee United, Motherwell, St Mirren and everywhere else would protest the only way they know how. By withholding their cash.

 

There would a complete breakdown in trust between the clubs and their supports.

 

There's no doubt the vast majority of fans want Rangers punished for what they've done. That it's the RIGHT thing to do.

 

So the only punishment they have at their disposal is to refuse to grant them their

share. Consequences? Apocalypse meets armageddon.

 

The Sky deal goes, potentially. No Old Firm = no interest as far as they're concerned.

 

If it does? It's a house of cards job. Hearts and Kilmarnock are already on a financial precipice. The loss of income would push them over instantly.

 

Others like Motherwell and St Johnstone and Dundee United have budgets of between £1.5million and £2m. They would have to drop by anything up to 70 per cent but, with contracts in place, doing that would be next to impossible.

 

The only way out for any of these clubs would be administration. Maybe you can debate whether Sky would want to have the death of Scottish football on their conscience over what, for them, is still a relatively small sum - but that's assuming Sky have a conscience, which is dangerous.

 

You also have to factor in not having Rangers visit twice a season. That's a lot of dough to lose. The best part of 300 grand a season for a Saints or a Well.

 

Then there are the intangibles like the threats to your personal safety.

 

Ask the Hampden three from last week. They got "the treatment" big time. Had their lives turned upside down over a transfer embargo and a fine.

 

And Sandy Jardine has already cranked the thermostat up on the SPL clubs by warning them of reprisals for the "wrong" decision.

 

It's already happening. When you're forced to have the police accompany you into Ibrox for a game because they fear you're a target, simply for trying to put something back into football by sitting on a board, you're entitled to wonder why you bother.

 

Guys like Stephen Thompson and Stevie Brown - it's not other people's money they're playing with here. It's theirs, their families'. The decisions they make will directly impact on them for years to come.

 

There is no upside to any of this for any of them. Honestly, I don't envy these guys their choices.

 

We all know what we THINK should happen.

 

Just spare a thought for those who have to do it and the consequences THEY have to live with.

[der Berliner 3,568]

Methinks that there's a lot of animosity amongst the other teams' support and sure they want one of the two most successful teams and thus rivals for any sort of trophy gone ... for the benefit of their own club, rather than financial misdeeds. Yet, these people much like many journos targetting us IMHO simply ignore the fact that Whyte is the man who landed us into this, not the club itself. And along with Whyte, it was the SFA's failure to stop any deal between SDM and Whyte, as much as HMRC's unwillingness to deal with Whyte at all - be it the big, small, or general tax paying cases. IMHO, out of the various culprits, Rangers FC the club, the players, and ths support are the last who should be held to account here, but remain the easiest to target. (And that, it looks, is the approach Miller is taking.)

[biggordy 0]

IF we had the options.

I would prefer us to re-locate to England (Div 3), or move to Scots 3rd Division (rebuild youth development etc), before remaining in the quickly failing SPL.

If we remain solvent whilst all others fail round about us, there would soon be no League to play in. Inevitably, a sound case could be put to UEFA regarding any move to another League maybe in England.

 

Any thoughts ?