What shall we do with Glasgow Rangers?

Postby Games_Bond » Fri May 11, 2012 7:25 am

Yes, that's right, a poll about Scottish Football. Or is it?
This is just as much about business ethics and breaking the law/ crime and punishment and moral responsibility.
I admit two things: First, that I know most people on this site won't really know what this is about, hence the background info below. Second: I am likely to be biased against Rangers (cheating b******s!), so the background info provides the cases of each side ONLY, whether I agree with them or not. Frankly, I find some of the arguments that I have heard put forward to be complete {insert profanity here}, but I will post them anyway, for sake of balance.

Background Info

Glasgow Rangers FC are one of Scotland's oldest Football Clubs. They draw a huge fan base, based in Glasgow (and Govan in particular), drawing mainly on Protestant supporters. They do have supporters in every city and most towns in Scotland, and worldwide support as well, as every football club generally does. Because this support was much larger than any other Scottish Football Club except Glasgow Celtic (who also have a large, mainly Catholic) following, Rangers and Celtic (known collectively as 'The Old Firm') have dominated the Scottish Game for years. Every top flight league championship has been won by either one of the two every season since 1985, when the 1984-85 season was won by Aberdeen (then managed by (now Sir) Alex Ferguson). Back then, you didn't have pri-madonnas who demanded half a million pounds in wages per week, so other clubs like Aberdeen, Hibernian, Heart of Midlothian and Dundee United could from time to time mount a challenge, though the records show these challenges were not constant as opposed to coming in waves. After season 1984-85, Rangers had not finished in the top 3 of the then Scottish League Premier Division (which became its current Scottish Premier League in 1998) for three seasons, nor did they finish in the top 3 the following season. A few years later, David Murray became Chairman, and with Graeme Souness as Manager, Murray vowed that he would ensure the other clubs in the SPL would not be able to compete financially with Rangers.
Despite this, the other clubs tried, with near disastrous consequences. When Aberdeen lost the chance of winning the title on the final day of season 90-91 at Ibrox Stadium (Rangers' Home Ground), their manager (Alex Smith) was sacked and they tried to compete financially, almost ruining the club. At the time, Aberdeen believed they were trying to compete on a level playing field, and that they were the "third force" in Scotland. Although Glasgow is a much bigger city than Aberdeen, Aberdeen FC drew their support from the entire region of Aberdeenshire (or "Grampian" as it was formerly known), and actually have the largest catchment area in Europe. Even Celtic almost ruined themselves before being saved by a millionaire supporter.
In fact, the reason the other clubs could not compete when they had managed up until then was not just because of Rangers' fan base or the financial backing of David Murray. He was in actual fact spending money that the club did not have, paying bumper wages and transfer fees with hypothetical money (recognise this pattern now? World Banking Crisis perhaps?) that amounted to ever-increasing debts they couldn't pay off. None of the Rangers fans paid this any heed as the team on the mark romped to 9 League Titles in a row (by now managed by Walter Smith). Rangers were guilty of financial doping of every club in the league.
But things got worse. Murray set up something called an "Employee Benefit Trust", which when you strip it right down was basically an illegal tax-dodge scheme where players' wages were sent to offshore accounts. Many of their players went into this scheme. Meanwhile, some of Murray's misdeeds were coming to the fore as there was dissention in the fan base. Some fans were beginning to realise Murray was not the Angel they had once believed. Despite this, he retained control of the club for years more, owing mainly to the fact that he could not find a buyer.
Enter Craig Whyte. He struck a deal to buy all of David Murray's controlling shares for £1, on the understanding that he used his money to write off some of the club debt. What the Rangers fans were told was that Whyte had stepped in and used £24million of his own money to write off said debt. In actual fact, the only money of his own that Whyte invested was the one pound he used to buy David Murray's shares. The £24million he had actually been loaned by a company called Ticketus, and that went into one of the companies he owned, which he then re-named "The Rangers Group Limited", and with this company he then bought the debt from Lloyd's TSB. Rangers fans were delighted - for a long time their buying and selling had been restricted by the bank as their debts caught up with them. They did not know at that time about the deal with Ticketus (nobody did, apparently), or that Ticketus were in return getting a share of future season ticket sales - money that as far as the rest of the Board were aware would be theirs (the club's) when the time came. Presumably their budgets were built on this. However, depite repeated requests, not once, in all his time in charge, did Craig Whyte attend or call a Board Meeting.
Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC) now entered the fray. They had found out about the Employee Benefit Trusts and they wanted the money they were due, which stood at an initial estimate of £49million. Rangers of course bought time by disputing this and the case went to court. It is understood that the actual debt to HMRC is in fact in the region of £150million. Whether it will be found that is the figure they owe - the jury is still out and a verdict is expected soon, but overdue. What is known is that HMRC will have crossed the ts and dotted the "i"s on this case, because when they're done with Rangers they are going after 8 English Premier League Clubs, who have apparently done the same thing.
Hit with all this debt, Craig Whyte had no option but to put the club into Administration in early 2012. The club has been in Administration ever since. The club was threatened with liquidation, but a more likely option (and what is widely believed to be Craig Whyte's plan all along) was that assets including stadium and players would be transferred to the Rangers Group before the club was liquidated, and "Rangers" would survive under a new name. Creditors could whistle. In the mean time, Dunfermline and Dundee United were particularly badly affected as Rangers had sold tickets for Away games against them but not paid the money. The two clubs had to re-evaluate their budget because of the possibility they would never see the money they were owed. It was feared that Dunfermline would fold. (Interesting side point: nobody raised a finger to help them).
Rangers have been looking for a buyer ever since. American Tycoon Bill Miller was named Preferred Bidder by the Administrators (Duff & Phelps) last week, but he then pulled out citing undisclosed debts noticed in the due dilligence and fan opposition as two reasons. Rangers have been punished by the SFA for some of their misdeeds (they have broken just about every financial law there is), but they await that Court Ruling and punishment from the SPL. Their future is uncertain as it may be that a NewCo has to be formed. Under rules of Scottish Football, a club emerging from a NewCo is a completely new club and therefore must enter at the bottom tier - they can't just come into the top flight just like that.
Or can they? Enter the Rangers fans and some accountants.
Okay, I might as well get this said now, and out of the way so that I don't have to worm it into later info. Rangers fans, by and large, live on a different planet. I make no apology for saying so. Most of them think that the world and everything in it revolves around them (Rangers), should bend over backwards to support them, that they should get off with rule breaking because they are Rangers, and that any punishment levelled at them for anything they do wrong is a "witch-hunt". Not all of them, but most of them, are completely and utterly clueless. They've been brought up, generation after generation, to think a certain way and reasoned argument and logical coherence are beyond them. Don't get me wrong, there are down-to-earth, intelligent, reasonable, up-standing members of society that support Rangers. But they are outnumbered by thugs, bigots and down-and-outs that just don't know any better. For example, death threats and the like were levelled at the members of the SFA judiciary panel that ruled to fine them and impose a transfer embargo which they thought was overtly harsh. In fact, it was unbelieveably lenient - they were not stripped of any trophies, they were not booted out of the SPL (or Scottish Football altogether), they were not required to pay monies to various parties - you get the idea. Such was their delusion that they marched on Hampden to demand being let-off and even discussed sanctions on OTHER CLUBS who they believed had "treated them unfairly" - ie been unsympathetic to their plight.
No wonder, then, the Rangers fans (and in fairness, less of them) argue that they should be allowed to stay in the SPL as a NewCo. Most of them just don't get it. But some of them put up a reasonable point: Rangers bring a lot of money to the SPL. That is to say, their large travelling crowds to Away Games boost ticket revenue for other clubs, and their existence is a factor in TV money paid to the SPL - Scottish Football sold its soul to TV broadcasters years ago. The game is hopelessly dependent on TV money and the current deal is based on the broadcasters (particularly Sky) getting to show 4 Old Firm Derbies per season. There is no way the re-negotiated deal would be anything like as lucrative. The other member clubs in the SPL are likely to be told by their accountants to wave through a NewCo Rangers just because they will bring money. "Let us stay for the good of the other clubs" they plead. Certainly, this view has some merit. The majority view is that the morally right thing is that any NewCo should start at the bottom, but that is perhaps off-set by the financial need of their rivals who have done nothing wrong. Even Rangers fans accept this - or a fair number of them, anyway. Obviously, the clubs will also get a trickle-down benefit from sanctions placed on a NewCo Rangers playing in the SPL, although whether what they are owed will be recouped, or whether the sanctions will be as stringent as they should be, remains to be seen.
My question in the Poll is on what SHOULD happen. Any other business and any other club in the same type of debt crisis would have been wound up months ago. Scottish Clubs for example. Dundee and Motherwell have both been in Administration and survived in their present form. Third Lanark and Gretna are no more and nobody argued that they should be saved - and they had not broken anything like as many rules as Rangers. They were guilty of financial mis-management only. But they were allowed to go to the wall. When Meadow Vale changed their name to Livingston, they had to go to the Third Division and start again, as did Airdrieonians when they became Airdrie United. Should Rangers be afforded special treatment? Make no mistake: underlying this whole issue, there are still plenty Rangers fans who genuinely believe that they should get special treatment for the sole reason that they are Rangers.
Needless to say I have my own views on this but I will refrain from posting them until I see what others have to say.

Re: What shall we do with Glasgow Rangers?

Postby KP Presents » Fri May 11, 2012 7:35 am

You miss out one vital and important point in your eloquent statement - the fact that Glasgow Rangers and the SFA are particularly hand in fist with each other. The connections between the two run far far deeper than many people realise, and more than oen commentator has suggested the link is more than political and business - it's almost Fraternal.

Very few people outside Scotland will have seen Only an Excuse, or heard of Chic Young, but when the club banned BBC Scotland for darign to suggest what is now known to be the truth, it exposed things a lot of people hav esuspected for a logn time.

Should they survive? when Gretna lost their major backer, they were forced into administration. I think the same should happen here.
Read stories of ordinary women in distress at http://www.kppresents.com

Re: What shall we do with Glasgow Rangers?

Postby skybird137 » Fri May 11, 2012 7:43 am

I heard several years ago, there was a massive crisis involving basketball in America.

This was supposed to happened over massive fees to players and the wages.


The prediction was that this would happen to football in the UK. It seems that this is now coming true. We have probably only seen the tip of the iceberg with what is happening.

I'm not a fan of soccer, so in that respect it doesn't bother me. But if clubs have been involved in criminal activity, there should be severe punishments.
Calling Fifty Shades of Grey a Bondage Story is like calling Titanic an Iceberg Movie...

http://skybird137.deviantart.com

Re: What shall we do with Glasgow Rangers?

Postby Games_Bond » Fri May 11, 2012 8:21 am

KP Presents, you are so right. Many thought that the SFA would do nothing about Rangers, and certainly nothing to stop them. They did come up with a punishment of sorts, but they didn't blast back at the wave of criticism they received for acting at all. As far as the SFA are concerned, the sooner they can get back to the same old boy's club dominated by the big two, the better - and to hell with all the fair playing and smaller but ambitious clubs that might have had a chance to compete.
You are also right about Gretna, although I assume you meant "Liquidation" as opposed to "Administration". Administration after all is a survivable process so long as you haven't gone too far astray. That said, I'm not sure what Duff & Phelps are playing at. The point of an Administrator is that they can impartially make tough decisions without emotion. Rangers could probably survive in their current form by selling off Ibrox and Murray Park, with a firesale of players in the transfer window. Surely they could rent Hampden Park from Queen's Park FC for an agreeable fee for their Home Games? But of course, Rangers don't want to take such drastic measures because that would damage their on-field competitiveness for years to come. After all they've been through, that still matters. Sigh.

Re: What shall we do with Glasgow Rangers?

Postby Jason Toddman » Fri May 11, 2012 11:01 am

Don't know and Don't Care, not being mutually exclusive by any means, should constitute its own choice.
That's the one I'll pick. :twisted:
Btw my choice would be the same if we were discussing American teams playing American sports too.
I enjoy watching kids playing sports just for the fun of playing the sport; it's my interest in professional sports teams (many of whose members make more in one year than the average working stiff makes in an entire lifetime) which is non existent. Watching kids play sports is not only more fun in general, but it is usually free; so why should I shell out my hard earned watching some ugly hairy lumps who have a hundred times my money doing the same thing? No way! Even watching them on TV for free wouldn't interest me just because I know they're often more interested in raising their already exorbitant pay than they are in playing the game itself.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: What shall we do with Glasgow Rangers?

Postby capturedsuperhero » Fri May 11, 2012 2:55 pm

If Rangers were relegated to the bottom division it would totally kill Scottish football. Life it or not Rangers and Celtic own 90% of the fan base in Scotland and have by far the most global exposure. There is no way that they will be sacrificed.

However, doesn't mean they won't be made to squirm first as enemies toy with them a little....
Arrogant Superhero here, Looking for a Nasty Villain!!!!

Re: What shall we do with Glasgow Rangers?

Postby Games_Bond » Sun May 13, 2012 4:00 am

I have to say I disagree with the scaremongering around a Rangers NewCo starting in Division 3. There would be no debate whatsoever had this been Livingston or Airdrieonians. If any of the ten other SPL teams had gone into administration there would be no debate. If they came back as a NewCo they would start in Division 3. "Oh BUT..." The Rangers fans protest, "BUT that's because they don't fill stadiums like old firm games do". Oh really? Try telling that to Dundee United, who fill half their ground with Aberdeen fans at least once every season, not to mention the bumper crowds a Dundee derby would attract if Dundee took Rangers' place. Given the money owed to them by Rangers that they haven't a snowball in hell's chance of seeing, I would argue Rangers' demotion to Division 3 would actually benefit Dundee United (and Dundee, for that matter). Then there is Champions' League revenue to be gathered - money that would genuinely be up for grabs by most SPL clubs. Is it any wonder that the one club chairman that has come out and publicly said we should allow them straight back in is chairman of KILMARNOCK, a team that can't attract more than the proverbial one man and his dog to home games no matter how attractive their football is.
But said excuse and response are irrelevant really - what matters is ethics and responsibility. Strip the bare bones of this case and what you get is a business that has cheated on tax and financial regulations for years, got caught, and are now trying to dig their way out by saying "we're too big to be allowed to suffer".

But I would like to put paid to Rangers' hopes through Reductio Ad Absurdum. If they are allowed straight back into the SPL, that is effectively claiming they are too big to be got rid of. Yet they WOULD have the transfer embargo in place and may have to field a weak side if they have to sell all their "good" players. So how about (shock horror) they actually finish bottom of the SPL next season? Do they then NOT get relegated because they are too big to be got rid of? What a joke.
Furthermore, not too long ago, Rangers were all set to up and leave for the English League (along with Celtic) as soon as they thought they had a chance, and they didn't give two brass monkeys about the lost revenue for other clubs then. Oh, and remember - they wanted to get straight into the FA Premier League; they didn't want to go into what was then the Nationwide Division 3. Furthermore, their own rivals didn't have a second thought about financial impact either - we were all for it. We wanted rid of them in order to leave behind an open league that anyone could win.

Just to re-iterate to the UK TUGgers on here, just in case you missed it: these cheats have ripped off everyone in Britain, you and me included. Do 80% of us really "not care" about that? What a pity.

Re: What shall we do with Glasgow Rangers?

Postby Reidy » Sun May 13, 2012 1:43 pm

My suggestion is that the scummy bastards are left to rot away and die. Liquidate and never be seen again.



Does it show that I'm a Celtic fan?