Robbo-Jambo Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Just a reminder that, unless I have missed something (I know both Clyde and Raith have proposed changes, but no-one has confirmed that the resolutions below have been altered as a result) as the resolutions stand, it is not possible to just vote Sevco into Div 3. Some of these statements being made may therefore be more than a little disingenuous. The three resolutions presented to the clubs are as follows:- (i) That the Scottish Football League Members agree to admit Sevco Scotland Limited as an Associate Member and agrees to permit Rangers F.C. to play in the League during Season 2012/13. (ii) That the Scottish Football League Members direct the Board of Management of The Scottish Football League (the ?Board?) to provide that Rangers F.C. shall play in the Third Division of the Scottish Football League during Season 2012/13 unless the Board shall have to its satisfaction negotiated and reached agreement with The Scottish Premier League and The Scottish Football Association on a series of measures which the Board shall consider to be in the best interests of the game, how it is structured, how it is governed and how it is financed, whereupon the Board shall be authorised to provide that Rangers F.C. shall play in the First Division of the Scottish Football League during Season 2012/13. (iii) That the Scottish Football League Members in terms of Rule 12 approve the resignation of either Dundee F.C. or Dunfermline Athletic F.C., whichever shall be admitted to join the Scottish Premier League for Season 2012/13, such resignation to take effect as at the date of admission of such club to the Scottish Premier League, notwithstanding that the requisite notice under Rule 12 shall not have been given.Details of the series of measures referred to at (ii) above shall be made available to the Members in advance of the meeting and an opportunity for full discussion of those measures will be given prior to the proposals being put to the meeting. To vote yes to (ii) and to then say you voted them into Division 3 is pretty much a straight out lie. A vote yes to (ii) is to vote them into Div 1, make no mistake. Section (ii) of the proposal and the last sentence in your post seem a tad worrying re the vote. Does this mean that if they are voted into Division 3 "The Board" can still overrule the vote and catapult them into Division 1 ?? Very confusing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I P Knightley Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 I hope the SFL teams tell them to stuff it. Otherwise it really is the death of Scottish football as we know it and I certainly won't be attending any more game. Ironically, the death of Scottish football as we know it is one of the desired outcomes of this whole hoohah. Should the SFL teams tell them to stuff it, I'd hope that it's the beginning of the rebirth of Scottish football into something that it ought to have been for the last 25 years. If I were on the inside of the SFL1 and ended up with the Ibrox Club foisted on me, against the wish and intention of the majority, I'd hatch a cunning plan. Together with all my colleagues, I'd select one existing SFL1 club, possibly Dunfy, maybe just one at random, and strike an agreement that all clubs would roll over in fixtures against that club and let them walk the league whilst every team gave their all in every other match - perhaps with a bit of extra sauce against the Ibrox Club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Stinkfinger Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 So, the supporters don't condone cheating but the people in charge do ! There is no hope for the future of our game until those idiots are removed from power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Now is this the Share that RFC(IA) sold to Sevco for a pound, is it? No, it's the share that the SPL told Rangers (about to go bust) that they couldn't transfer to Sevco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Section (ii) of the proposal and the last sentence in your post seem a tad worrying re the vote. Does this mean that if they are voted into Division 3 "The Board" can still overrule the vote and catapult them into Division 1 ?? Very confusing Each of the sections is a separate resolution. If the clubs vote for resolution (ii) then it's very likely Rangers would be in SFL1 next year. We expect that they will not vote for resolution (ii) given that 17 or 18 clubs are now opposed to Rangers starting in SFL1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 What the Three Amigos need to remember is that they are employees of their respective associations who are answerable to its members: the clubs. I have a feeling the will of the clubs shall prevail. Regan and Doncaster's positions look vulnerable already, and if tomorow's SFL vote goes against them, I think their positions become completely untenable. Hell mend them. Longmuir's position seems to be slightly different, in that many of the SFL Clubs who have been amongst the most vociferous against Regan and Doncaster, have also made a point of publicly backing him. I'm starting to think that he may be an innocent party in all of this, struggling against the SFA and SPL, trying to do the best he can for his members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarah O Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 They have no right even to go straight into the 3rd division. Let the *******s die for good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hearts151 Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 I wish hearts have us those 3 options to vote on. Based on loyalty points of course though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Regan and Doncaster's positions look vulnerable already, and if tomorow's SFL vote goes against them, I think their positions become completely untenable. Hell mend them. Longmuir's position seems to be slightly different, in that many of the SFL Clubs who have been amongst the most vociferous against Regan and Doncaster, have also made a point of publicly backing him. I'm starting to think that he may be an innocent party in all of this, struggling against the SFA and SPL, trying to do the best he can for his members. I think Longmuir has been dumped in the middle of a shit storm here, and I think most of the SFL clubs seem to like him and think he's a good guy. I'm not convinced he's made the right calls on a lot of the issues though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) Now is this the Share that RFC(IA) sold to Sevco for a pound, is it? I think it's the SPL share that D&P sold to Sevco5088 for ?1, then was transferred free to Sevco Scotland Ltd, all in contravention of the SPL rules, and which was voted against last week...? Edited July 12, 2012 by The Gasman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vintage1874 Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Section (ii) of the proposal and the last sentence in your post seem a tad worrying re the vote. Does this mean that if they are voted into Division 3 "The Board" can still overrule the vote and catapult them into Division 1 ?? Very confusing I think Clyde requested that this question be reworded. The questions are loaded ideally there would be a question which league should Sevco/RFC play in. It appears that voting Rangers into SFL means they will play in div 1 as the board get to decide. It will be interesting if the sfl clubs counter this by not allowing Rangers in at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkishcap Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Feelin a bit like a kid on Christmas Eve, just hope I aint peed off with my main prezzie, but will I sleep tonight as we go into Friday meltdown? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbo-Jambo Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Each of the sections is a separate resolution. If the clubs vote for resolution (ii) then it's very likely Rangers would be in SFL1 next year. We expect that they will not vote for resolution (ii) given that 17 or 18 clubs are now opposed to Rangers starting in SFL1. Do you mean the 17 or 18 clubs will not vote at all in resolution (ii) or that they will vote no to resolution (i). Still a bit confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 I think Clyde requested that this question be reworded. The questions are loaded ideally there would be a question which league should Sevco/RFC play in. It appears that voting Rangers into SFL means they will play in div 1 as the board get to decide. It will be interesting if the sfl clubs counter this by not allowing Rangers in at all. They get a vote on letting Rangers into the SFL. They get another vote on the idea that Rangers should go to the first division if the board agree (which they would). What's not clear is where they go if they are let in to the SFL, but the bit that the board decide is voted down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Do you mean the 17 or 18 clubs will not vote at all in resolution (ii) or that they will vote no to resolution (i). Still a bit confused. I think that they will vote for resolution (i) which lets them into the SFL. I think they will vote against resolution (ii) which allows the Board to decide if they get into division one. Quite a few clubs have said they think Rangers should be admitted to the SFL, but only in division three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
givememychoice Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 I think that they will vote for resolution (i) which lets them into the SFL. I think they will vote against resolution (ii) which allows the Board to decide if they get into division one. Quite a few clubs have said they think Rangers should be admitted to the SFL, but only in division three. re (i) But how can the SFL grant SFA membership? Surely SFA chose who are members of the SFA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbo-Jambo Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 I think that they will vote for resolution (i) which lets them into the SFL. I think they will vote against resolution (ii) which allows the Board to decide if they get into division one. Quite a few clubs have said they think Rangers should be admitted to the SFL, but only in division three. Got you now. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 The last paragraph of the Heads of Terms on the deal which is supposed to persuade the SFL clubs clearly states that the document is not legally binding. It is just a week since Doncaster and Regan were threatening the SFL clubs that the SPL would not meet its legally binding contractual obligations under the Settlement Agreement. How much faith can theSFL clubs possibly have that the SPL and SFA will stand by an agreement which is, in legal terms, not worth the paper it is written on. And the refusal to modify the proposals to be voted on means that the SFL clubs will be told tomorrow that it is "SFL1 or nothing" and that anytthing short of SFL1 means meltdown, Armageddon and all the other nonsense. I don't see that this leaves the SFL clubs in any sort of dilemma. If, or rather when, they vote No tomorrow, does anyone really believe that's it and there won't be another meeting and another motion in a few days to get Sevco into SFL3? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vintage1874 Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 They get a vote on letting Rangers into the SFL. They get another vote on the idea that Rangers should go to the first division if the board agree (which they would). What's not clear is where they go if they are let in to the SFL, but the bit that the board decide is voted down. When it was released i had to read it a few time to get my head round it, but took it to mean the sfl board would make the final decision as they will have been working on a deal with the spl and sfa and as well all know they want RFC in Div 1. I was unsure if voting Rangers in to SFL meant the other sections would automatically kick in. As I don't trust any of the governing bodies. It's good news that this part can be voted down and clears up the confusion I've had. (ii) That the Scottish Football League Members direct the Board of Management of The Scottish Football League (the ?Board?) to provide that Rangers F.C. shall play in the Third Division of the Scottish Football League during Season 2012/13 unless the Board shall have to its satisfaction negotiated and reached agreement with The Scottish Premier League and The Scottish Football Association on a series of measures which the Board shall consider to be in the best interests of the game, how it is structured, how it is governed and how it is financed, whereupon the Board shall be authorised to provide that Rangers F.C. shall play in the First Division of the Scottish Football League during Season 2012/13. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 I think that they will vote for resolution (i) which lets them into the SFL. I think they will vote against resolution (ii) which allows the Board to decide if they get into division one. Quite a few clubs have said they think Rangers should be admitted to the SFL, but only in division three. That would still leave the question of what Division Sevco would play in and I'd fear some fix by the Board. Much safer to vote No to everything, with a rider that, if a motion to introduce them to SFL3 is made (which it will be if the alternative is no place in the SFL) then it would be acceptable. There is time for another meeting and vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf's Mate Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Why? Read the proposal, it's either Dundee or Dunfermline. So both or neither, surely. Ok, I'm only going by what's on here as I'm not really reading any of the shit in the media bar what you guys are saying is a very good read. What I was trying to say was the other poster was stating 28 clubs and you were stating 30 re the voting. I read on here that Dundee weren't being allowed a vote which I'd true, I make this 29 clubs voting? This was all I was tryin to point out and it was taken from comments made on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmaroon Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 You would have to say that the 3 stooges have made a pigs ear of blackmailing the SFL clubs as they have done with most everything else sometimes i wonder if they want to fail but they are not up to such macavellian arts . The only sensible option is to say no and make Greenco apply the proper way and look at their set up and sustainability once that application is made along side any others . The SFL should refuse Greenco but accept the review into changes to the football set up . That to me is what should be argued and accepted the morn . Let's not forget George Burley's wonderful piece of "encouragement" for the "muppets" to die! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hackney Hearts Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Longmuir's position seems to be slightly different, in that many of the SFL Clubs who have been amongst the most vociferous against Regan and Doncaster, have also made a point of publicly backing him. I'm starting to think that he may be an innocent party in all of this, struggling against the SFA and SPL, trying to do the best he can for his members. Yes, I think this is right. But I remember not so long ago most of us were clinging to the idea that Regan was a good guy and would save the day. Look how that turned out. For the SFL clubs, Longmuir probably seems like the one last honourable man standing. But this is like Invasion of The Body Snatchers - in the end, even the ones you thought were 100% safe, have been got at............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) Let's not forget George Burley's wonderful piece of "encouragement" for the "muppets" to die! ....or even Craig Burley's? Edited July 12, 2012 by The Gasman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vintage1874 Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 That would still leave the question of what Division Sevco would play in and I'd fear some fix by the Board. Much safer to vote No to everything, with a rider that, if a motion to introduce them to SFL3 is made (which it will be if the alternative is no place in the SFL) then it would be acceptable. There is time for another meeting and vote. now I'm back to being confused again. What you say is what I initially thought before changing my mind 2 or 3 posts ago. My big worry is the "fix by the board". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mysterion Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) Let's not forget George Burley's wonderful piece of "encouragement" for the "muppets" to die! Was it George or Craig Burley ? I never read the story but heard about it - just assumed it was Craig as he's known for being a moron. [QUESTION ALREADY ANSWERED BY RANGERS MEGATHREAD TOP POSTER THE GASMAN] Edited July 12, 2012 by Mysterion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Regan and Doncaster's positions look vulnerable already, and if tomorow's SFL vote goes against them, I think their positions become completely untenable. Hell mend them. Longmuir's position seems to be slightly different, in that many of the SFL Clubs who have been amongst the most vociferous against Regan and Doncaster, have also made a point of publicly backing him. I'm starting to think that he may be an innocent party in all of this, struggling against the SFA and SPL, trying to do the best he can for his members. My reading is that the clubs are just avoiding tearing the SFL apart by openly criticising Longmuir and I suspect he is not immune from criticism in private - the first Clyde statement for example, while expressing confidence in Longmuir with one breath, implicity critised him in the next for trusting a word Regan and Doncaster say. I can't see much to be gained by the SFL clubs inciting a civil war inside the SFL, when the majority seem of one mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Das Root Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Was it George or Craig Burley ? I never read the story but heard about it - just assumed it was Craig as he's known for being a moron. Pretty sure it was old toothless...jnr Burley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drumelzier Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Great statement again from Clyde. Here's a tweet from a freelance football reporter: Alex O'Henley ?@OHenleyAlex I hear the Charles Green camp are very confident about getting newco Rangers admitted to Div 1 tomorrow. What do they know that we don't? I hope one of the things we see tomorrow is Green blowing the lid on just how involved Regan and Doncaster were in the Rangers administration process and Green's own bid. Just to add my tuppence worth,IMO,if newco actually have a position in any Scottish League next season they already know it will be in D1 or even an extended SPL,all this crap about wanting D3 is all bluster to attempt to convince all non-newco clubs/fans that this is what the remnants of the oldco management team really, really want and deserve so they can try to look other clubs/fans in the eye and say that they wanted D3 but justice gave them D1 so what could they do. Like some others are thinking I've got a fait accompli feeling about tomorrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol1874 Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 If I were Dunfermline I would not cast my vote for fear of prejudicing my position in any dispute over who, if anyone, goes up. If Dundee have a conflict of interests, Dunfermline should declare likewise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Ok, I'm only going by what's on here as I'm not really reading any of the shit in the media bar what you guys are saying is a very good read. What I was trying to say was the other poster was stating 28 clubs and you were stating 30 re the voting. I read on here that Dundee weren't being allowed a vote which I'd true, I make this 29 clubs voting? This was all I was tryin to point out and it was taken from comments made on here. This is a strange one.... In theory either Dundee or Dunfermline could be going up, but the SFL are allowing Dunfermline to vote, but not Dundee. Airdrie United have said they have a conflict of interest so won't be voting, but the other clubs with exactly the same conflict will be voting. ...and the SFL's rules seem to suggest that it is mandatory for all clubs to vote, meaning Airdrie Utd and Dundee would be breaching the rules. Clear as mud.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 now I'm back to being confused again. What you say is what I initially thought before changing my mind 2 or 3 posts ago. My big worry is the "fix by the board". I'm not sure if I am right to be worried (OK change that - I think I have every right to be suspicious!) but I just can't see anything to be lost by the SFL clubs who don't want Sevco in anything higher than SFL 3 just simply voting No until they have a proposal which clearly specifies which League they will be entered into. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughesie27 Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 What time is the vote tomorrow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMEdinburgh Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 very simple club goes burst, automatically lose share, meet the criteria and apply to join the SFA for membership under new football name and submit application to join the SFL, if accepted join the 3rd division like Ross County, ICT, Annan, Gretna etc as new members before them, not rocket science. unless you are rangers, I feel sorry for both the Pars and Dundee as soon as the season ended and we knew who was going to be promoted/relegated this farce should have been sorted out to let teams work out their budget asap, but the SFA have purposly not done this as it would have meant the oldco share going to another club not newco, with a few weeks until the start of the season this to me is the same as a criminal act, if the Pars/Dundee do go up with their budget of the 1st Division do you not think they will be relagation canidates along with hibs. I hope the onus is left to the SFA to sort this mess out as they should have been instrimental at the start and regan should walk either way. Someone mentioned the SPL as the laughing stock of europe but I think the SFA should hang their head in shame over this and more figures need to consider thier positions within this assosition very carefully. I would also like the SFA to persue new/oldco for their debt to other football clubs as one of the conditions of joining the SFL but Clyde are bang on as they don't even know the business case for newco which is in the application of trying to join the SFL as a new club you and need to prove that you aren't going to go bust within a very short period of time, Away for my tea rant over Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bean counter Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Been told no amendment to resolutions, Longmuir will explain why at the meeting. Also, The proposals document I referred to yesterday is now on STV website. I thought two Clubs had tabled amendments for Clause i to say Vote Newco into Div 3 and then amend clause ii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbo-Jambo Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Let's not forget George Burley's wonderful piece of "encouragement" for the "muppets" to die! Craig. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drumelzier Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Yep, they've managed to make a sow's ear out of a sow's ear. INEPTITUDE my favourite word at the moment. Come on Tas, give them some credit, they have made a sow's ear into an even uglier and smellier sow's purse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hackney Hearts Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) It's absolutely disgraceful, given how close we are to the start of the season, that - through an utterly pathetic and transparent attempt to rig the outcome - the SFL clubs are not going to have the chance tomorrow to produce a clear decision regarding a Division for Newco to play in. Which means another meeting. Another wait of 5 days? Another vote? All eventualities in the vote should have been covered. But still we get more of this childish chicanery. Just face the facts and get on with it - they ain't going into Div 1. Edited July 12, 2012 by Hackney Hearts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vintage1874 Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 I'm not sure if I am right to be worried (OK change that - I think I have every right to be suspicious!) but I just can't see anything to be lost by the SFL clubs who don't want Sevco in anything higher than SFL 3 just simply voting No until they have a proposal which clearly specifies which League they will be entered into. I agree. A no vote would show clearly that the SFL clubs will not be bullied. Time is running out. There seems to be a lot of issues to be solved and the start of season is not far away as they start before us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 It's absolutely disgraceful, given how close we are to the start of the season, that - through an utterly pathetic and transparent attempt to rig the outcome - the SFL clubs are not going to have the chance tomorrow to produce a clear decision regarding a Division for Newco to play in. Which means another meeting. Another wait of 5 days? Another vote? All eventualities in the vote should have been covered. But still we get more of this childish chicanery. Just face the facts and get on with it - they ain't going into Div 1. Another five days of bullying, threats, and propaganda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imeantasong Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 If I were Dunfermline I would not cast my vote for fear of prejudicing my position in any dispute over who, if anyone, goes up. If Dundee have a conflict of interests, Dunfermline should declare likewise. Or give them a possible reason to void a No vote. Wouldn't put it past this lot (authorities, not Dunfermline). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EreWeG0.. Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Another five days of bullying, threats, and propaganda. I have a horrible feeling they have already decided the outcome and no matter what Rangers will be in Div 1 next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 It's absolutely disgraceful, given how close we are to the start of the season, that - through an utterly pathetic and transparent attempt to rig the outcome - the SFL clubs are not going to have the chance tomorrow to produce a clear decision regarding a Division for Newco to play in. Which means another meeting. Another wait of 5 days? Another vote? All eventualities in the vote should have been covered. But still we get more of this childish chicanery. Just face the facts and get on with it - they ain't going into Div 1. I completely agree with what you're saying about this farce, but just for clarity: The SFL Clubs must get a minimum of 5 working days written notice of any vote on any new proposals. The SPL Clubs must get a minimum of 14 calender days written notice of any vote on any new proposals. It's a frikin shambles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingdannyb Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Tomorrow's going to be the day when the unwanted illegitimate offspring of the biggest cheats in footballing history get completely voted out of the league by the league members despite an avalanche of bullshyte from the authorities. Most pleasing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homme Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Almost 900 pages Had the authorities did their jobs properly then this would have been gone long ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hackney Hearts Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) If Dundee have a conflict of interests, Dunfermline should declare likewise. You could probably make a case for just about every club in the SFL having some sort of conflict of interests. There's the knock-on effect on promotions, there's all the chairmen who support Rangers - and it's actually been suggested on this thread that Brechin are voting Yes because if Newco are in Div 1 they'll get to play them in the Ramadan Cup or something... Edited July 12, 2012 by Hackney Hearts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Spackler Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Yes - and they did this: Harry Haddock lifted the Cup against Hibs! Tremendous. Was Billy the Fish in goals? Tommy Ring got a mention too just like on Off the Ball every week. By the way, did you see how many people were there? Stuff Sky. The game was obviously buzzing back then, get onto the phone to British Pathe about a new Broadcasting deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMA MAROON Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Tomorrow's going to be the day when the unwanted illegitimate offspring of the biggest cheats in footballing history get completely voted out of the league by the league members despite an avalanche of bullshyte from the authorities. Most pleasing. That would be the best thing that could happen for Rangers in the long run. Green is up to no good and the sooner he is off the better it is for Rangers fans. A place in the SFL could be kept open for them for the start of next season when trustworthy owners have bought out sevco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawaii Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 The SFA are supposed to act for the clubs, so if they try and railroad something in which clubs have voted against I think that there will be a vote of no confidence getting raised against the 3 amigos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imeantasong Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) Harry Haddock lifted the Cup against Hibs! Tremendous. Was Billy the Fish in goals? Tommy Ring got a mention too just like on Off the Ball every week. By the way, did you see how many people were there? Stuff Sky. The game was obviously buzzing back then, get onto the phone to British Pathe about a new Broadcasting deal. And the season we won the League witth a still record goal difference EDIT - How close was that. Page 900, but I wen't one post over <------ Edited July 12, 2012 by Imeantasong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
64,113
Recommended Posts