Celtic Rumours Archive June 19 2012

19 Jun 2012 23:36:24
Celtic Supporters Association calls Emergency Meeting to vote on Selective Boycott.
The Executive Committee of the Celtic Supporters Association met last night to discuss the possibility of a Newco Club being admitted directly into the SPL for the coming season 2012/13.

It was decided unanimously to call an Emergency Delegates Meeting of our branches this coming Sunday June 24th at 1pm in our London Road Social Club.

The EC will be putting forward a motion that states “The Celtic Supporters Association will call on all its members to take part in a selective boycott of any club which votes for a Newco to be admitted directly into the SPL for the coming season 2012/13”.

This has been a very emotive issue for all football supporters in Scotland, we have to decide whether sporting integrity should take precedence over commercial interest, and in the opinion of those supporters canvassed by us up until now that is the case.

We understand the need for chairmen of clubs to balance their books to the best of their ability, but that must be done by operating in an honest and fair market, one or more club’s can’t be allowed to operate with an unfair advantage.

We are calling on all Chairmen and CEO’s in the SPL to vote for honesty and integrity, a clear and appropriate punishment must be imposed on any club who fail to operate in that manner, irrespective of which particular club that happens to be.

The Celtic Supporters contribute a considerable percentage of the finances generated within Scottish Football; we will not continue to support clubs who put their own interests before the basic principles of sporting integrity.

Briggs

Cracking read that mate, even if it is a c+p job. But very interesting for us footie fans south of the border. Wonder how this will all pan out ?
The Real KB

What if Celtic accept the newco??

So rangers fans were slagged relentless fir threatening to boycott yet it's okay for Celtic to threatin a boycott double standards

Some of them will never get.

TRP.

This is a daft move and is unhelpful in the present circumstances. It just looks like threatening others which is not the Celtic style.

It's not double standards it's called standing up to the bully , who think they can do as they please.

Vatman

I hope everyone attending the meeting turns this down...we are Celtic, we stand for fair play and standards helping those less fortunate than ourselves, build on integrity and freedom for all....let the sevco use threats and intimdation, we are better than that.
My personal opinion is I could not care what league they play in, if they stay in the SPL think of the team they will have, every team will be giving them a hammering every week, first old firm game can you imagine the score in front of their loyal fans? liam

If they get in they get in just lets get on with our own team and retain the title. who cares if they get in or not we will scud there arse again. c'mon the hoops

I totally disagree with this, just lowering our standards and copying the bully tactics adopted by the liquidated ones.
The fact is even if by miracle sevco get into spl and can get a team together in time, they will probably be fighting relagation and/or administration.jj

19 Jun 2012 20:58:46
Are celtic playing any games in london, next month.

19 Jun 2012 20:15:37
Evening Ed, is there any truth in the rumour that Hugo Rodallega is signing for Celtic?

19 Jun 2012 15:24:40
Heard that Liverpool are looking at a few of the young Celts, Ki Forrest and Waynama (spl) can't see this happening but it seems that Ki will be off for big money to someone.

If thats the case maybe we could get carrol money for them, out of the 3 i would think ki is the less expensive....we need to hold our ground on the price when it comes to these big clubs because we know they can pay it and will if they do like them.

19 Jun 2012 14:27:54
Couple of questions. Why are the authorities making a meal out of this situation at Schizo rangers? Old rangers,now in the process of liquidation,still hold the SPL share.New rangers need to apply for said share to stay in the SPL.The simple option is a refusal and let them apply to the SFL for a position in division three.This means a speedy conclusion to the whole sorry mess this has become.It also means the end of this punishing new rangers nonsense,as letting them in to the SPL with sanctions(points deductions and cash deductions)is,if we are being honest,unfair.This is a new club,so how can you punish a club with no history?We have been strong on sporting integrity being maintained,if that is the case this does not sit right with that attitude.A vote from the other clubs any other way is a cop out to keep the cash from new rangers being in the league,and that stinks.There is also the subject of new rangers as a going concern,what if administration were to happen again? A lot of people are under the impression that Green is running out of funding,With that and Walters late show he might just decide to pull the plug.Remember right now Green has no playing squad and a manager who sways whichever way suits his own agenda.That leaves old rangers.The fact that,at last,the SFA have decided there is a case to answer to regarding EBT payments must mean division three for new rangers.This would mean that any punishments(if found guilty,trophy stripping) would be erased from the old rangers history needing no further meetings on punishments.The fact that D&P held the required information back from the authorities should be another nail in the coffin.Every club that does not vote new rangers out should have a look at how playing unregistered players affected them before deciding.Finally,why has no one asked Walter or Ally,on the record,if they were paid,at any time,by EBT? Clarity and transparency Ally,remember those words?.........green jhedi

Welcome back GJ, again very good points made.

Didn't old Rangers have their license withdrawn due to the lack of audited accounts which they failed to comply with 2 deadlines to submit. How can they still have a vote on July 4th

Great points GJ, IMO the sfa are gonna hammer the newco making the spl vote irrelivant and its div 3 for them, and IF they survive and make it back to the spl , well done, and if they dont ....... tough !!!!!

I think the SFA are getting away with murder. They are supposed to be the governing body over all things football in Scotland but what do they actually do for the game. They have been a disgrace in the whole rangers soap opera. They are slow and laboured in their processes they fail to make decisions that don't get overturned on appeal yet everything has to go thru them. Scottish football has become a joke because the people at the top of our game are the SFA and do S**** F***A**

Good point GJ lets all hear from Ally. I can remember BBC saying 14 still to be named,so surely Ally would also want to know who has to go on wall of shame.

din22

Ally is not the only one that can be acused of "swaying to suit his agenda" G.J.
Your "speedy conclusion" scenario is over simplified and would not address the multiple and varied issues relevant to the unprecedented situation that RFC and Scottish Football finds itself in at present.
If you believe in due process and fairness then these investigations had to be allowed time for thoroughness and certainty. Is it fair to say that all disciplinary bodies, relevant football authorities,legal representatives,and supporters,not to mention the new owners,are entitled to documented and irrevocable evidence,given the seriousness of the charges?
Just because certain people are convinced of RFC's guilt should not mean that they be hung drawn and quartered without the proper protocol's beng applied .You and others have jumped on the soundbites regarding EBT's,and have become Judge,Jury and executioner. As far as i am aware,the official quote was "Rangers have a case to answer"
I would hope that this would require certain individuals to be interviewed and asked to comment on any charges that may be levelled.
Only then can a decision be taken.There is then the possibility of numerous legal wranglings to consider,some of which may run for month's,even years.I noticed your post on RR,where you spoke of the unfairness to CG's consortium regarding picking up the sanctions for the previous board's misdemeanours.
Interesting though that you are in the camp of doing away with all due process and intimating that the Oldco share does not transfer,therefore cessation of RFC history.This would certainly meet certain peoples agenda,including your own.
You suggest going Newco,with demotion to Div 3 with no further sanctions. If the current RFC share transfer is denied,then Newco it is.But as you said,why should the new owners be punished? You can't have it both ways.
The vote is for "The transfer of the share of RFC" from one corporate entity to another.The hope is that this will be accepted,although i think it unlikely.
If this is denied then Newco then applies for SFL membership.However even this scenario is not straightforward,as we read today that SPL/SFA may make it a condition of acceptance that newco do absorb punishment relevant to oldco.
P.O.B.

@POB; As usual you reply in a flurry of words but assume an awful lot.My "speedy conclusion scenario" is easily workable.What is wrong with a ban from the SPL? We are talking about a newco here,why should they even be allowed to apply for a place in the SPL? No investigation needed on that score.If you would read posts properly you would see,in brackets,i state"if found guilty".You then go on to state"Legal wranglings which may go on for months,even years" and football should just have this hanging over it through this? You are mixing football rules with tax law,if the EBT's were contractual wages thats against the rules,no litigation needed.The football authorities can then act.So as you can see no one is talking about "doing away with due process".My agenda? To see fairness done.I dont want TRFC to vanish,but division three is the logical punishment."if the current RFC share transfer is denied then newco it is".Really? Heres some breaking news for you,it is newco,oldco are soon to be liquidated!So once again a wordy and ultimately rambling piece full of assumption..........green jhedi

Poor reposte again GJ.
You are trying to deflect your inability to stand your post up against reasonable scrutiny. You accuse me of being negligent in processing information from your previous post.
Are you aware that the process Sevco is applying for is to transfer the current RFC share from one corporate entity to another? This is what the SPL clubs vote on the 4th July will be based on.
Are you aware at all of the possible various scenarios that are yet to unfold?
What if...SPL registration is maintained?
What if RFC/Oldco/Newco win big tax case?
What if... above scenario is reversed and they lose tax case?
What if...They win the tax case but still get liquidated?
What if... they win tax case and still go into administration or liquidation?
What sanctions should be applied for any of the above scenarios?
Will we get the result of the btc prior to the start of the season?
Can you lend any credence to your "simple option" statement given all of the above have not yet come to pass?
Therefore there can be no assumption at all on my part. Anyone can see,that you are the one with the pre meditated agenda and an unbridled assumation of events yet to be decided.
It is you who have adopted the role of judiciary,sitting with the black cap already dothed,when the defendant has not even entered the court building.
I note you have also failed to address and explain your contradictory post on
RR.
P.O.B.

@POB; Total nonsense.Your first what if; If SPL registration is ratified then there will be sanctions in place from other member clubs. Second what if: You seem,like a lot of rangers fans to have missed one point re; the BTC,you have lost,you are appealing the penalties and charges.As it stands you owe around 24m.This kinda negates the third what if. Fourth,You are being liquidated as we speak,nothing to do with any pending tax case,this again negates your next scenario.So to recap as you seem to be struggling to grasp some pertinent facts. Old rangers are being liquidated,nothing can stop that now and the tax cases are nothing to do with it. I am assuming nothing other than whats actually happened. Your new owners are trying to gain the SPL share that belonged to the company now being liquidated FACT. To babble on about the tax case is ludicrous and shows you just have not grasped the point.You also seem to think there is a chance you will not be liquidated if you win a tax case you have already admitted to being liable for! get your facts right............green jhedi

GJ. To be fair to P.O.B. he has only used 27 more words in his reply than you did in your original post (sad I know but that is what happens when you have been a long term moderator on a literary site - you always check the word count if you are unsure of something, lol). Having only been one half decent complicated sentence behind him, it is a bit rich of you to call his reply 'wordy' is it not? Both of you had written over 300 words.

Speaking of which here is an EXTREMELY wordy reply to ONE of your points (as you yourself, as do I, write "in a flurry of words" I would be here all night if I were to comment on them all) from the current closest contender to Evingu's crown, lol.

What has gone on at my club over the past decade is inexcusable, unacceptable, and unpalatable for most. In my opinion the second we entered liquidation we, as a club, should have been on our hands and knees humbly requesting a place in the 3rd Div for our new club and graciously accepting it if offered, even with sanctions attached (which I don't agree with either tbh - no history no sanctions in my opinion).

The existing RFC share is 100% toxic from top to bottom and any new owner should not have even attempted to take it back up again, let alone try and shamelessly wangle a way back into the SPL through it. It is time for a clean break.

As I have said on here before, this will give everyone a rest from the unsavoury side of the Old Firm relationship for a few years whilst hopefully improving the Scottish game over the next decade through a more even split of the finances and the need for clubs to concentrate on developing our youth players etc instead of spending money they don't have on average foreigners. This would also allow for the much needed and requested restructuring of the current league set up as we cannot adequately support all of the clubs we have within Scottish football financially at the minute. Two leagues of sixteen would be my ideal scenario with a regional pyramid system underpinning it and keeping it competitive, but it would take at least two seasons and a lot of negotiating between the SFA, SPL and SFL before it could be implemented properly (we really need to get back to having just one administration for the professional leagues with set rules and guidelines working in conjunction with the SFA in my opinion and the enforced separation of the Old Firm may ultimately achieve this hopefully).

I mentioned this idea months ago and received a lot of support for it on here, so this is not a backdoor way of making a top flight return for Newco Rangers easier, as liquidation was an unlikely scenario for most back then and as I say it will take time to implement correctly. It is in relation to the long term improvement of the Scottish game as a product which we also happen to collectively finance as fans of the game.

Anyway, finally to my point which I touched on briefly above and relates to the following from your reply to P.O.B.: "We are talking about a Newco here, why should they even be allowed to apply for a place in the SPL?"

We shouldn't be, end of. The problem is that we have two separate governing bodies looking after the professional game in Scotland and now we are seeing the problems this can cause. This division into the SPL and the SFL has come about because of the initial greed of the Old Firm and these two governing bodies will hopefully amalgamate once again following the demise of Rangers FC. If we were collectively still under the SFL banner then all of this confusion would not exist. Division 3 (unless Rangers subsequently bought over an existing club - Cowdenbeath has been mentioned on numerous occasions - and moved them lock stock and barrel to Ibrox) would be the only option available to the Newco, simple as that. There have been plenty precedents set and there would have been nothing left to discuss.

This issue has mainly arisen (aside from the fact that it is one of the Old Firm which makes it even more complicated than it really should be) because we have two separate self interested league entities with their own rules and regulations who happen to have an agreement in place regarding promotion and relegation but not much else.

Rangers are the first club from within the SPL to enter liquidation and no rules were in place to deal with the scenario despite previous flirtations with administration. If a club is liquidated in the SFL it applies to the bottom of its three leagues and starts again. How many leagues constitutes the SPL? Therein lies the issue for me. If a Newco SPL club applies for re-admittance then there are technically no lower divisions under their auspices for a club to apply to enter. If accepted they return straight into the top tier as crazy and unacceptable as that appears to us on the outside looking in.

The entire game in Scotland requires serious fundamental change and we need to begin with returning to a single governing league body to stop the possibility of situations like this arising again (a Newco with no history applying to the top league in the country with the potential of actually being accepted - how crazy is that when you think about it!?).

The time for individualism within football is over and we need to move forward collectively if we genuinely want to improve our game for the betterment of all. I hope to still have a team to support and I genuinely hope it is from within Division 3 working and earning its way back to the top league as opposed to the alternative.

Brian

p.s. Apologies for rambling but you should know me well enough by now. ;-) {Ed007's Note - You count words Brian? Gee mate I thought this could get tedious at times.}

Lol, ed. Word does it for me mate. It takes about two seconds. I am the first to admit I am a saddo but when I was a moderator we had strict guidelines as to length and word count etc. It was a necessary evil and part of the job as you would not believe (actually you probably do given you moderate this site) the petty bitching etc that went on between the regulars. We had to keep them on a tight leash but I am just glad I wasn't counting them pre word!

Brian

p.s. Obviously anything I wrote required serious editing to even get close to being within the guidelines,lol! :-)

Thought I was reading a book for a second there haha...... I see you go on about splitting money evenly but question is how would Celtic feel about this going by the past not very happy as it would seem

GJ.
Hopefully this will be accepted as discussional debate,rather than petty sniping or point scoring. You do put your thoughts out there,so therefore they should be open to repostes.

It would appear that you are incapable of reading between the lines of what people are getting at,and take everything literally.
Try thinking outside the box a bit more.

In response to your original post,in which you question the length of time the whole RFC process has taken,and then offer a simplified solution,i have simply listed various areas that had to be taken into account.I am referring to the "What if's".All of them wee prevalent at the outset,Some of them have still to be decided.
Collectively or individually these are very time consuming processes.
Can you not work that out? To say i am in denial,or don't seem to have grasped the seriousness of my club's position, is nothing more than petty deflection tactics. I was going to offer further clarity on my previous post regarding "What if SPL registraton is maintained?" Brian has already done that adequately.
Finally...
As you yourself have stated there is still an appeals process in operation,regarding the btc,so why is my third what if "Kinda negated?
P.O.B.

@Brian; Is that your point,he used only twenty seven more words? Jaysus! That would have done y'know.............green jhedi

@POB;Just a courtesy reply as i now find your posts very tedious and lacking in consistency.A: How can newco win a tax case in which they have done nothing wrong? B:Oldco are in the process of being liquidated so i assume when you say"win the tax case and still go into administration or liquidation"you mean newco? To suggest thinking outside the box,in posts so jumbled as yours is nonsense.And just to point out,SPL registration cannot be maintained.The club that held that are dead,hence the reapplying for the position.If you respond just ask a question and i will answer........green jhedi

Oooh, tetchy! Still recovering from the flight? The points I made related to the Rangers situation and the current state of the game, which you haven't commented on. The highlighting of the amount of words used in comparison to P.O.B. was a simple observation related to your use of the term 'wordy' as though you had only written one sentence and he had written one hundred. It was just an observation, nothing more.

Brian

@Brian;The current state of the game is a shambles.New rangers apply to take the share of old rangers,and old rangers are allowed a vote! Pathetic.I have said before,it is morally wrong to allow newco into the SPL just because they generate cash.It is perhaps even worse to impose sanctions against a club(newco) who have done nothing wrong.Apply to the SFL,no sanctions or recriminations and work through the leagues.It really is that simple...........green jhedi

GJ. Agreed. Agreed. Agreed. Agreed. Agreed (I have said that since pre-liquidation as you know). Blooming ada, would you look at that. We are in total agreement and I can't remember ever arguing against any of the points you have just made.

Brian

P.S. Any info on the latest bid or those involved? I'm hearing they are shady characters with dubious business credentials. Just what we need! Why �11m if that's how much it is? 100% profit for Green to walk? Surely not. Certainly won't go to the creditors, unfortunately, that's for sure.

GJ.
I appreciate the courtesy reply,although it would have been better if you had addressed the points raised about the inaccuracies in your posts throughout this thread,rather than resorting to petty deflective tactics.
You come across as a fantasist,who does not live in the real world,which probably explains your failure to be rational.
The difference in our thinking and thought process is easily explained. If i hear galloping of hooves,i think horse,
whereas you think Unicorn.
However i will attempt one final time to point out that the A+B points that you are still harping on about,were scenarios that faced Rfc... PRIOR... to CG taking over.
You are suggesting that they could have been sorted quite easily.
Not so.This is far from a simplistic situation GJ,and that is all i'm saying. I merely attempted to be as graphic as possible by listing some of the difficulties faced by authorities,and adminisration
process...from the beginning! The whole point of CG purchasing the assets,and applying for transfer of share,is to remain in SPL,why would he as a businessman voluntarily plump for Div 3?
He is either in this to attempt to take the club forward,and make a bigger profit later on,or make a quick profit,by selling it sooner rather than later. Obviously that would depend on the level of cash he has at present, how much anyone else is willing to pay to buy him out,and if the supporters back him with season ticket purchases.
Still a helluva lot of things "up in the air" G.J.,therefore there is no "simple option".
You also seem to be unaware that this situation is unprecedented with regard to both the SPL and this country.
Any sanctions have to be implemented Ad-hoc,we have seen where that got us before with the transfer embargo.
Now...Here lies the quandary for CG.
Will the transfer application be accepted without conditions of sanctions? Will CG walk away? Who are these property developers now bidding? What are there plans?
Further ingredients added to an already overly concentrated Soup.
P.O.B. {Ed007's Note - Do you remember a poor quality USA TV show called Soap POB? Your ending there reminded me of that lol}

Lol. I do indeed Ed.
Poor quality?? Are you kidding me?
Soap was brilliantly hysterical. I loved every rediculous and totally bombastic episode Ed. Years ahead of it's time,and a definitive pioneer for much of today's programming.
I remember Bert (Main character) in one sketch where he was so drunk he got trapped in the coffee table,one of the funniest things i've ever seen. We used to go to work and recount the whole show. Ahh the good old days.lol.
P.O.B. {Ed007's Note - I was young at the time, I only vaguely remember it, didn't that crackpot with the dodgy jumpers from Americas Top 10 Chart Show star in it? Keep reaching for the stars......? I might be miles out, I'm only 38 lol.}

Aye okay Ed,That'll do with the sarcastic RFC references please!
"Dodgy Jumpers -From the top ten"
"Keep reaching for the stars"
P.O.B. {Ed007's Note - LOL I never noticed that! You know who/what I meant lol}

@POB:To talk about deflection then rattle on about Unicorns and Horses i find a bit trite and Fatuous.However, your points:From the start.D&P,when appointed should have started a cull of the highest earners,Instead they try to sign Cousin! They also should have slashed the backroom staff to cut costs dramatically.As for Charles Green,He must have known,despite his bluster that HMRC were never going to accept his CVA,its on their web site.He therefore knew liquidation was inevitable,meaning a three year Euro ban.He also knew he had the wage deferral problem coming up.It would make sense to me,that division three,with a scaled down squad on smaller wages,was the obvious way to go.With no Europe the SPL is less important,this would have given rangers the chance to regroup,raise funds and reshape the whole business model for the club.This,as per your point,would make selling on in the future,with Europe back on the cards ,a very attractive purchase.Think about it,a well run fiscally astute club,that pays sensible wages to young hungry players,about to start playing in Europe again.The transfer of the share? Who knows.As i have said division three,end of sanctions.Newco in the SPL with a point penalty is wrong,you cant punish a new club,they have done nothing wrong.........green jhedi

Can't argue with this post GJ.
P.O.B.

19 Jun 2012 13:54:40
Hi Bhoys and Ghirls

So RANGERS or THE RANGERS have a case to answer for the use of EBT'S and the SFA/SPL have a long list of sanctions available to them. One of the most interesting sanctions i seen was the one that allows the SFA/SPL to reverse any result where a player implicated in the use of EBT's to a win for the opposition, judging by the number of players implicated i think it would be safe to say that they would have been relegated. For example, Stefan Klos played an entire season in 2002 - 2003 and was implicated in the EBT's so should all results for the season be reversed then RANGERS would have had no points and been relegated. Now take in to consideration that the SFA/SPL are investigated a time peroid over nearly 10 years, that is 10 years where teams have been relegated and finished in a lower league position that they would have should RANGERS crimes been known. The loss of income to the teams that have been relegated or missed out on europe due to RANGERS crimes over the period of time in question is millions of pounds. If these crimes had been known and had they been punished at the time then RANGERS would have been playing pub league football as they would have been relegated so many times. The only fair punishment would be to relegate THE RANGERS to the 3rd division and have them start again becuase technically that is where their predecessor would have been.

Would love to know what the site regulars and you think Ed?

Scotty Bhoy {Ed007's Note - It's not really relegating them Scotty. There is nothing to relegate, it is a new club trying to gain league entry at what ever level.}

I dont think they will go into it on a game to game basis.if they did that for cup games then it would be a mine field.technically rangers would be out in the first round of each cup.they would have to work back from the final and that couldnt be done.they will probably just award it to the runners up.not sure how i feel about us getting the trophies,wouldnt feel right.

Since they are a new club they should ask for entry into the scottish lower league just like any other club wishing to do so. Why even let them ask to go straight into SPL should be 3rd division or non league football for The Rangers

19 Jun 2012 13:00:12
A think we should be looking at a strong centre half and another striker selling ki and stokes if possible what u reckon ed
Dez {Ed007's Note - I'm not sure about selling Stokes Dez, it would depend who was coming in and the fee we would get for him.}

Lennon very rarely plays stokes in big games.do you think lenny should show more faith in him ed?

MK BHOY {Ed007's Note - I think if Stokes is happy with the situation then it is worth keeping him. He is a decent enough goalscorer but when NL went with one up front he had to pick Hooper.}

Can't see Lenny getting rid of Stokes. He's a goal scorer.

say we did get rid & brought in a big CF, what happens if him or Hooper gets injured?

You need min 3 good strikers.

Richybhoy

Would rather see us sell Samaras and keep Stokes. Get a strong striker in and with Watt coming through should be enough competition for places... Yatesy

The problem with stokes is he stops plauing to complain when he didnt get the pass or if it didnt workout for him....too many times i saw him with hands in the air, he needs to become a more round player because he is a good striker.

I would keep Stokesy he is a 20 goal a season striker . Why would you want rid , Hooper isnt always the answer . Goals per minutes played he is right up there with Hoops . Good strikers always moan about not getting the ball , MacDonald ,Hartson , Hooper all goalscorers and all moaners .
CelticMatt

We have to keep stokes at all costs. hes a 20 plus goals a season striker and we can do so much worse than stokesy. keep him at all costs.

19 Jun 2012 02:13:48
Ed have we got any closer to signing keith andrews or was this a paper-filling story? and what is the situation with hugo roddalega? (spelling sorry)

Love the site mate
CumbrianBhoy {Ed007's Note - I don't know of any interest in Andrews and the Rodalegga story came from Columbia, nobody at CFC has confirmed it, in fact they are blaming his agent for the story surfacing.}

Andrews wouldnt get in our reserve team

Dont know why ppl want Andrews? is it because he is Irish and is that the same reason ppl dont want paddy to go? i think we could find better yunger players, i havent seen him but does look ok in euroes but i would go after the henk kid for 3mill then him.

19 Jun 2012 12:04:00
a few months ago i signed my posts as bllybhoy, but a billyboy then a billyboy1 started posting and it all got a bit confusing so i went to bb. anyhoo back then i posted on the 3rd of march that there was a ral possibility that old rangers {r.i.p}would be stripped of all titles from the mid ninties onwards and that would mean we would win 18 in a row this year , looking at the papers today , it seems that will probably come true. if they do lose them should we claim them ..bb

I don't think there should be a campaign to get TAINTED titles by default mate.
No, let them forever be quoted as 'stripped of the title for financial irregularities'.
We'll eventually pass them as the most successful league champions anyway......kbt1978 {Ed007's Note - Exactly my thinking KBT.}

To be honest we never won they titles and if it was up to me I would leave the titles unawarded with a note to say they had been taking off Rangers due to cheating. That way for the rest of time it will be in the history books that Rangers cheated their way to success and even when they were cheating we still triumphed on a few occasions.

I don't want them. Much better to have this
2007 -*- Winners have been removed due to cheating by R*****s FC

I wouldn't claim them just let them be known as the cheating years by the club formally known as Rangers and left as reminder to future generations as how low this club stooped because they couldn't take celtic and other clubs on fairly.

Vatman.

Absolutely claim them bb they cheated to win them as far as I'm concerned any trophy they won should be given to the 2nd placed team that season or the runner up in whatever cup competition they played in. If someone wins gold in the Olympics then fails a drug test they strip them of the medal shouldn't be a difference here.

Kevbhoy87

Celtic didn't win 18 league titles in a row though. You can't pass the league titles over. That's just wishful thinking bud.

Anyway, what is stripping titles going to achieve. It solves nothing. Rangers didn't win every title they challenged for, so you can't say they cheated to gain an advantage over anyone. Rangers won a league title under Alex McLeish even though they had a worse team than Celtic, I may be wrong but Celtic were unbeaten against Rangers in this season. Then we have the year Rangers finished 3rd, that's not exactly cheating to gain an advantage is it.

TTG

I agree totally lads. We don't want any titles handed over to us, even though we were cheated out of them. It will be enough that they will have them stripped. We will overtakes them by winning them off our own backs and then there will be no excuses or tainted titles nonsense.

Thanks for your thoughts guys , bb

"Celtic didn't win 18 league titles in a row though. You can't pass the league titles over. That's just wishful thinking bud."

History shows inter as the league champions when juventus got stripped of their titles. Different circumstances I know but just a point.

MgC {Ed007's Note - Different country, different FA and possibly different rules as well.}

Claim them all it is not as if we lost them by large margins. RFC cheated and should have their record expunged, therefore Celtic should be the rightful champions

How can Celtic be rightful champions when they didn't in the league?

I don't know you can say Rangers cheated to win titles when they won a title with Bob Malcolm, Stevie Smith, Chris Burke, Marvin Andrews, Nacho Novo etc in the squad when Celtic had Hartson, Sutton, Thomson, Larsson, Petrov etc in their squad the exact same season. The same Rangers players mentioned then finished 3rd the following season. Celtic were also unbeaten against Rangers in a year Rangers won a league.

It was 11v11. Stripping Rangers of titles is wrong!!

TTG

I wouldnt claim them either, (maybe 1 for Tommy Burns) but better left unclaimed and when people look back in years to come we will see they lost them for their cheating ways. hail hail

"I don't know you can say Rangers cheated to win titles"

"It was 11v11. Stripping Rangers of titles is wrong!"

What is this guy on?!?! How can we say Rankers cheated.....easily they deliberately gave players extra contracts tax free and did not register that with the SFA...THAT is cheating my friend!! Blatant Cheating....not to mention that the tax free bit (as you are about to find out) is highly illegal.

Are you honestly saying this is not cheating? Should we all not just have done this?

You are also saying that the stripping of titles is wrong? Well the punishment for fielding ineligible players is a 3 - 0 defeat automatically, can you explain why that is wrong?

The dual contract renders every one of said players ineligible so the SFA HAVE to automatically award 3 - 0 defeats in every game any one of them they played. If after that you still have the points that won the league I have no problem with you keeping that title, if not they obviously lose the title.

The punishment here is not just stripping the title, it's correction of match results which ends up with showing you won SFA...

Now surely IF (and ok I say IF....but it is pretty likely) it is shown that players had these 2 contracts then do you not agree with this?

If not, why not? A simple question TTG....

Iain

If they're stripped of their titles (like say Juventus during Calciopoli) then one would imagine the 2nd place club would be awarded the championship (2004-5 2nd place Milan were also implicated so the title wasn't awarded, but the 2005-6 championship was awarded to Inter). This would all make sense, but with the SFA/SPL when does "sense" ever enter the discussion?