Ibrox investment is small change for Ashley

Mike Ashley likes a punt. He’s been known to win and lose over a £1 million pounds a throw on the roulette wheels of some of London’s swankiest casinos, and of course he has a passing interest in football as well. So far his interest in Rangers extends to £3 million in interest-free, albeit secured, loans.

The question for Rangers fans - and by extension all Scottish football fans - is what game Mr Ashley is actually playing. Britain’s 23rd most wealthy individual appears to be taking his relatively modest interest in Rangers seriously.

£3 million may be a few bob more than the rest of us would consider pocket money, but Mr Ashley plays at a different level. Whilst the man in Sauchiehall Street might look to strike it lucky at Supercasino.com Mr Ashley might be more inclined to simply buy the whole operation outright, just for the fun of it. His net worth is estimated £3.75 billion - give or take the small change.

And that’s what makes his moves at Rangers so odd. He can’t buy the club whilst he’s involved at Newcastle, and nobody would ever imagine that he’d walk away from there. He’s ridden through enough stick to have proved that several times over.

So that begs the question, are we simply seeing a sharp eyed business man toying with one of the biggest names in British sport simply for the sake of promoting Sports Direct? Or is this an opportunist smash and grab raid to seize an asset and a brand whilst it is going cheap?

Whatever the underlying intention, there is no doubting that Ashley is taking his interest in Rangers personally: all the recent boardroom wrangles at the club have seen a reinforcement of the merchandising tie in with Sports Direct as well as effectively giving Ashley the whip hand when it comes to shaping the board of the club going forwards. But is a long term involvement really all this is about?

The club insist that of the three offers to refinance recently, Ashley’s proposed loan top-up was the only one that passed due diligence. There is, inevitably an irony in those words being attached to the club at a time of such disharmony, especially since, on paper at least, Ashley’s offer was the one that stood to put the least cash into the club.

With an AGM due before the start of the New Year Ashley’s indeterminate status as a sort of ghost backer cannot be sustained for long. In what has all the hallmarks of a brinkmanship manoeuvre, we are all left waiting and watching.

At the moment there are far more questions than answers at Ibrox. The staff cuts that followed what has been described as ‘Ashley’s power grab’ suggest that his input is being felt in practical day to day terms. Even the SFA have expressed frustration at his refusal to communicate fully with them. Ashley is keeping everyone guessing - and for all the collateral damage, it does appear that that is precisely how he likes it.

What happens to Rangers is not the be all and end all of Scottish football, but television sponsorships are bought and sold on the basis of iconic brands and high-octane clashes between so-called ‘big sides’, not to mention the importance of Rangers’ away support to the rest of the league. Rangers are undoubtedly one of those big clubs, even if they do appear to be being treated as little more than a rich man’s punt right now.

Mike Ashley: What's the cost of a £2 million loan?

Tough times at the Ibrox at the moment, will Mike Ashley be the saviour?

As news was announced that Mike Ashley would be providing Rangers with a £2m crisis loan, the magnate's first order of business was to cull Graham Wallace from the chief executive's position. Wallace, who had been at the club for 11 months, will most likely be replaced by Mike Ashley's good friend Derek Llambias, who has been a long-term associate of the Sports Direct owner and has already been installed as a consultant at Ibrox.

Mike Ashley, the current chairman of Newcastle United, played the hero last Saturday and provided the struggling Rangers with a £2m interest free crisis loan. Not only does he own a 9% share of Rangers, but he also has naming rights to the stadium and will propse replacements for two members of the board who are set to move in.

Does that seem like a pretty fair deal? What's the true cost of this £2m interest free loan?

Well, according to an agreement with the Scottish Football League, Mike Ashley cannot own more than 10% of Rangers while he owns Newcastle United. With other shareholders having more voting rights (as they own more of the club), Mike Ashley needed a way to swing power his way. The loan, presented as an act of generosity, is more likely a political move. The club now has this loan swinging over its head like a weight and Ashley, if needs be, can threaten to drop it when he pleases.

Furthermore, Brian Kennedy, who offered a similar package worth £3m, was quickly met with stern words from Mike Ashley's solicitors. Mike Ashley seemed hell-bent on pushing this deal through and he did, using any means possible.

So, what does this mean for the financially struggling Rangers?

With all this political nonsense going on in the background, it cannot be easy for Ally McCoist to concentrate on what's important: the football.

Rangers currently sit second in the Scottish Championship, seven points behind current leaders Hearts and with a game in hand. A recent 3-0 win against Dumbarton, with goals from Boyd, Wallace and Miller, kept Rangers in touch but Hearts remain undefeated while the Ibrox side have slipped up against both the leaders and fellow promotion contenders Hibs.

It may show that, although things were falling apart in the background, Rangers, who should be up there at the top, can manage with the pressure of their current financial climate. It can't make easy viewing at the moment for Rangers fans, who don't know whether or not their club is going to plummet into administration at any time. This loan from Mike Ashley should be quash those fears for now but raises even more questions about the future.

They next face Dumbarton again, this time in the Scottish Cup. Although on paper it looks an easy game for the Glasgow giants, but that it doesn't make it easy when it comes to football betting.

Could the recent changes create a real stir in the Rangers camp?

St Johnstone couldn't capitalise on any financial fallout on the pitch at Ibrox as Rangers progressed in the League Cup quarter final last night night.

Will a Scottish Cup trip to Dumbarton be trickier? It probably shouldn't be. But you just never know.

Written by Gordon Milligan for the Scottish Football Blog.

McCoist downplaying star exit

Rangers boss Ally McCoist has insisted the club have no plans to offload any of their star players in the January transfer window, including key defender Lee Wallace.

The ongoing financial difficulties at Ibrox have been well documented over recent years and the club continue to struggle as a new company, losing £14.4 million during their first 13 months of trading.

Clearly the lack of top flight football and European action is playing a major part in Rangers' struggles and there has been talk in the transfer betting news of a few players leaving the Old Firm side next month.

After an impressive start to the season for both club and country, Scotland left-back Wallace appears to be at the top of the list of potential candidates to make a move away from Ibrox in January.

However McCoist has made it clear that he is under no pressure from the powers that be at the club to sell his prized assets.

The former Scotland striker told RangersTV:

"I've had discussions with board members and the chief executive and there has certainly been no indication at all that we have to sell. If that's the case, I'm sure I'll be informed of that but until that moment comes we obviously want to keep hold of our better and best players."

"You'd have to say Lee certainly comes into that category and in moving forward, which the club hopes to do, we'd be delighted to keep our better and best players."

Rangers look set to win the Scottish League One title at a canter, something the current Scottish football odds clearly suggest, but if they want to make their return to the top flight as quickly as possible, they can't rest on their laurels and keeping players like Wallace is clearly important to the ambitious McCoist.

Scottish football: A good news round-up

Scottish news update provided by Cole Ryan of BangTheBook.com. follow me on twitter @coleryan9

If the people of Scotland still believe in Scottish football as their national sport then it is a measure of a national trait of defiance. News headlines, front page and back, might still be generated by the sport but too often recently it has been for bad news rather than for outstanding match results.

This summer, as last summer, the biggest story has been financial. While the problems at Rangers hogged the headlines in 2012, 2013 has seen Hearts enter administration amid the collapse of owner Vladimir Romanov’s business empire and the club struggling to pay wages. They’ll start next season on minus 15 points in the top flight.

Dunfermline, too, remain in administration and have now suffered consecutive relegations to find themselves in the third tier of Scottish football where they’ll find themselves battling against Rangers, as the Glasgow club look to continue their progress through the league structure.

Elsewhere a number of club are looking to rebuild squads in the summer transfer window as players move on to search for more bountiful wage packets or are sold to help balance the books in a game that is not awash with money.

But perhaps Scottish football is beginning to see the darkness partly lifted. The 2014 World Cup qualification campaign has been a struggle that has already seen off one manager, Craig Levein, and any chance of qualifying disappearing. But new manager Gordon Strachan finally made his mark before the summer break with a battling 1-0 win over Croatia with a young and inexperienced team.

And the latest news this week from BangTheBook Football has also been more positive. Scottish clubs are long used to starting their European campaigns before the domestic season has started but they’ve not always enjoyed the finest result. This week, however, they could reflect could reflect on two wins from three matches.

If Celtic’s victory of Cliftonville was expected it was a professional performance nonetheless, goals from Mikael Lustig, Georgios Samaras and James Forrest delivering three away goals.

And St Johnstone delivered the result of the week with an unexpected 1-0 victory away to Rosenborg. Frazer Wright gave the Perth men an early lead and they weathered some serious pressure to hold on for the win and to bring a crucial away goal back to Scotland. Manager Tommy Wright was able to reflect on a “magnificent” win in his first competitive match since taking over from Steve Lomas as manager - in what was also St Johnstone's first ever away win in Europe.

If they can get through the home tie, St Johnstone's reward will be a match against Malta's Valetta or FC Minsk from Belarus as they would enter the next qualifying round as seeds.

Hibs were the only Scottish side who couldn’t record an away win this week, losing 2-0 to a superior Malmo side in Sweden. But after conceding two goals in two minutes to be 2-0 inside 15 minutes Hibs might feel they deserve some credit for keeping the score down, relying on some excellent saves from goalkeeper Ben Williams to retain faint hope for the return leg in Edinburgh.

While Scottish football has never lost its ability to make headlines, it is to be hoped there can be many more weeks like this one where the stories relate to good news on the pitch rather than bad news off it.

Rangers: Say no evil

Jim Traynor has spoken.

We better all listen.

His second blog as the supremo of communications at Ibrox - jolly decent it was of the Daily Record to give him his first Rangers blog as part of his valedictory message to their paying readers - hit every target.

Let nobody accuse James of being high brow. He's so tuned to the lowest common denominator he can name check Benidorm and think he's got away with it.

A tour de force from James is always a thing of beauty, even if it doesn't last forever.

He gets a hard time from some quarters does Jim but I've always agreed with him on a number of issues.

I agreed with him when he said Rangers should end up in the Third Division. I agreed with him when he said Rangers' divisional rehabilitation would be better served by a new manager.

I agree with him too, when he says Rangers will eventually take their place in the top flight. The SPL? Yep, if it still exists. That flies in the face of comments made by Charles Green. But it doesn't mean Charles has been speaking with a forked tongue. Good salesmanship often only flirts with the truth.

I also agree with Jim when he hints at the power of social media. That old line about absolute power corrupting absolutely? The serried ranks of Scottish football tweeters, bloggers, Facebook-ers, Kiltr-ers, forum users et al don't yet have absolute power. But they can be influential and some will always confuse influence with a chance to be destructive.

Jim is right - again - that there are idiots out there using social media. Just as there are idiots writing in the press, just as there idiotic talking heads taking a shilling for bad punditry, just as there are idiots supporting football clubs, just as idiocy infiltrates the corridors of power at our football clubs and our footballing authorities.

Idiocy abounds in society. So does decency, intelligence, the milk of human kindness. We are a mixed bag, us people. Social media reflects us.

The good, the bad and the odd. Jim has never really understood that. He's worn his ignorance of it as a badge of pride. That's fair enough. He's hardly alone.

But it is intriguing. Because Jim's first blog for Rangers suggests he's now in the social media battleground.

It suggests that Rangers are going to try and colonise social media, turn the club website into an opinion driven blog and fight the battles their fans want them to fight using the very channels Jim has previously dismissed. 

I'd guess Rangers will eventually try to monetise that. It could be revolutionary. If there are ten Rangers blogs slagging off the SPL, 10,000 Rangers fans slagging off the SPL on Twitter, then how powerful could it be to harness that, take it in-house? The staid, say nothing drudgery of club websites could be blown away.

All by learning from social media.

Not that Jim would admit it. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. But don't give them the satisfaction of telling them that's what you're doing.

If that is the plan then Jim is not just building barricades to keep out the tweeting enemies of Ibrox. He's also planting his tank amid a thriving Rangers social media ecosystem. And why not?

If there's an audience out there then why not nab them for the good of the club? It's common sense and too few clubs do it.

But there is a danger there. A danger that walks hand in hand with Jim's Phil Mitchell-like threat - these references to TV shows are contagious - to critics of Charles Green's Ibrox project.

Because what Jim really dislikes - more than he dislikes Twitter, more than he dislikes BBC pundits - is opinions.

Not all opinions. He's a big fan of his own opinions and he's being paid to be a big fan of Charles Green's opinions.

No, it's opinions that he disagrees with that really wind him up. And now he's threatening to throw the full weight of Rangers against any journalists who deviates from his world view.

Really? Militant new media atheist and opinionated scribe Jim Traynor using new media to threaten opinionated scribes. He'd have spiked this story himself.

We are, as football fans, a shallow bunch. We love to hear club employees say "woe betide the journalist/tweeter/opposing manager that slags off our club."

Unfortunately that means too many of us too often fall for the charming chancers that can blight this game.

Often it's those journalists and tweeters who hold the money men at clubs to account.

I'd agree with Jim's motivation: we'd all like to do our jobs free from the glare of critical comment.

We don't all have that luxury. Journalists should hold people to account. Strange that Jim Traynor should so quickly forget that.

Strange too that a man so against social media should now be employing social media by any other name to get his message across.

Get the fans onside, hunker down and turn that bunker mentality into cash.

Make sure every story critical of your new boss is derided as fantasy by your fans.

That's Jim's utopia.

I think Rangers fans, the spiritual guardians of their club, deserve more than that. They've carried the club through a nightmare. For doing that they deserve more from the future than Jim Traynor's airbrushed fantasy.

Rangers: A hollow win

Whatever else it’s done, Rangers new life in Division Three hasn’t dented their ability to command column inches.

This week it was the results of the First Tier Tribunal that dominated the media, old and new.

The findings have been pored over. Lines have been read between to prove what the reader believes to be true.

Only one thing really matters though. The majority opinion found in the oldco Rangers company's favour.

Vindication for Sir David Murray and those involved with the controversial EBT scheme. A victory for the fans to celebrate over those who will now forever be framed as "enemies" of the club.

Those enemies include a vindictive tax authority - although the findings of the the FTT at no point accuse HMRC of indulging in frippery in their pursuit of Murray’s Rangers - and all those in the mainstream media and online who pre-judged the club as guilty and demanded the death penalty.

Confession time. I was named on a Rangers forum this week as one who should be issuing an apology. Strange company for me to keep, being included (admittedly at the bottom) in a list that included Neil Lennon, Alex Thomson and, somewhat oddly, Andreas Hinkel.

Another confession. I’m not going to apologise.

What I take to be the offensive passage from Valentine's Day 2012:

"Yet Rangers are where they are - and yesterday's developments do little more than nudge us closer to knowing where that might be - through financial mismanagement. 

"It might also be, and we're approaching a legal decision about this, that they are where they are on account of a gargantuan theft against the state. 

"These are things that should be punished. 

"A theft against football as well. Our football. Championships have been won that Rangers couldn't afford. Talents have been taken from other teams - although we must concede that those other teams have enjoyed the financial benefits - that Rangers couldn't afford. 

"That's cheating. Doping the game. Financial doping. Doping is cheating. We've all suffered. 

"But as Rangers falsely speculated, others in the league often accumulated. Football can send us down a cul-de-sac where moral absolutes are hard to find. 

"Let's finger David Murray and his cohorts as guilty. We can, at the very least, sentence them on the charge of gross mismanagement."

You'll note, I hope, that I didn't prejudge the outcome of the FTT - although my language might have been overly dramatic.

I think, and I've embarked on a somewhat egotistical trawl of my own archives, I was always careful not to make a premature decision on behalf of the three tribunal judges.

Yet I wrote the line: "That's cheating. Doping the game. Financial doping. Doping is cheating. We've all suffered."

How could I have written that when, according to the narrative adopted by many this week, Sir David Murray is once more above reproach and the FTT decision clears the Rangers he presided over of any wrongdoing?

Maybe that comes back to football's lack of moral absolutes.

Financial doping, noun,

Definitions

1) the situation in which a sports franchise borrows heavily in order to contract and pay high-performing players, jeopardizing their long-term financial future

2) the situation in which the owner of a sports franchise invests his or her own personal wealth into securing high-performing players, rather than relying on the revenue the franchise is able to generate for itself

Was Sir David Murray - along with other owners and directors in Scottish football - guilty of any of that during his tenure at Ibrox?

I'd suspect so.

Was he guilty of the kind of financial management described by Alan Keen MP in 2009?

"Lack of proper governance and financial instability are the two fundamental vulnerabilities to the success that English football has enjoyed in recent times. 

"Our report includes tough measures to improve the way the game is run and to combat 'financial doping' whereby short-term success can be bought at the expense of long-term financial stability."

I'd say he was.

Did Murray's business style at Ibrox fit Michel Platini's description of certain types of football governance representing a "serious challenge to the idea of fair play and the concept of financial balance in our competitions."

I'd say so.

None of this is against the rules, of course, and I fear that any rules that Platini's UEFA introduce on financial fair play will have the all effectiveness of a chocolate fireguard. Nor was Sir David Murray the only club owner in Scotland to indulge in such practices.

For a romantic old lefty like me though, it's an approach that doesn't fit with the spirit of the game. An approach that cheats the game of the fundamental requirements of fairness,

Others disagree. It was Murray's money to spend as he liked, Murray's club to fund as he saw fit and, as former Ibrox chairman Alistair Johnson said in September this year,:

"What is clear is that 'financial doping' is not and could never be construed as describing a situation where a club extends its credit facilities with a recognised financial institution."

Let the free market rule in football as everywhere else. Which is fair enough, although it also means that clubs and their supporters will sound hollow if they demand special treatment when they become the subject of investigations by the taxman.

In the case of the Murray era Rangers I think this week's decision has been used to fuel revisionism.

While it's true that he'd worked to lower the debt the club had amassed he failed to reach a stage where he was free from the attentions of the bank or able to find a legitimate buyer for the club.

Some bad luck played a part: Murray's Rangers helped create a new architecture for the European game that eventually left smaller leagues like Scotland in its wake. The game didn't offer the potential for earnings to reward a high risk business plan.

He also fell foul of the financial collapse that left the bank twitchy and, because this high risk strategy extended to other colonies in his personal empire, left him diminished as owner-protector of Ibrox in the eyes of those same banks whose own disasters cost him millions.

In speculating to accumulate at Ibrox, Murray sowed some very destructive seeds.

Enter HMRC - with their legitimate but ultimately failed investigation - and the stage was set for Craig Whyte, that evil caricature of a saviour.

The victims of all this were the Rangers fans. It's disrespectful to them for Sir David Murray's supporters to paint him as the wronged party in a nightmare that he co-authored.

There is a wider point here about the governance of football in Scotland.

I've written many times about how we gauge the successes and failures of our game with too much reference to the English game.

Our game is a very different beast. And our clubs must be managed differently.

We need to look at different models of ownership, different ways of delivering sustainability.

The Murray-model - and you can add in the Romanov-model and the Brooks Mileson-model - took no cognisance of that.

That's fine when the trophies roll in and the good times swing. But it's destructive when things turn sour.

It's a business model that disenfranchises the fans as stakeholders and turns them into anonymous consumers of big business.

The bigger the risks taken by the owners, the bigger the implosion will be if and when it comes.

And the more powerless the fans will be to step in and clear up the mess.

Where did a business model he no longer wanted to support and a tax investigation he wanted to fight but couldn't be sure of winning leave Sir David Murray?

It left him taking a quid and a fantasy from Craig Whyte. That meant the FTT win would forever be condemned to a Pyrrhic victory an nothing more.

There has to be a different way.

In the case of Rangers there has to be way of returning them to the top of the game that doesn't wrack up huge debts or lead to an end point where fans are celebrating the legality of a method of making overpaid players richer and a Labour MP is criticising HMRC for pursuing a case against a company working a system of aggressive tax avoidance.

The people's game indeed.

Last week I wrote about Hearts:

"Hearts aren't finished.

"We can only hope that the era of men like Vladimir Romanov soon will be."

For Hearts read Rangers, for Vladimir Romanov read Sir David Murray.

The prospect of an HMRC appeal remains. The findings of the SPL's inquiry into Rangers will be delivered in the New Year. There are growing calls to punish those who leaked information regarding the tax investigation to media outlets and the now disappeared Rangers Tax Case blog.

This story has not yet run its course. And Sir David Murray will remain in the public eye, unlikely to surrender his opinion of his own innocence.

But at every club we should be writing a new chapter, no longer in thrall to the dreams of unlikely profits propagated by false prophets.

Demanding a new start for a sustainable future.

If we don't, we'll be cheating ourselves out of the game we love.

League Cup: Rangers v Motherwell

Order returned to the Scottish Communities League Cup last night with six SPL clubs beating lower league opposition.

Not a cakewalk for them all - Inverness needed penalties to get past Stenhousemuir, St Mirren waited until stoppage time to get the winner against Hamilton - and their efforts appear to have been met with a wave of apathy.

Apparently you could fit the combined attendance for the six games into Celtic Park and still have 30,000 empty seats.

Say what you like about the league cup but it's consistent. Every year the same:

A round where a few upsets are taken to prove the theory that there is so little to choose between the leagues that the SPL should be dramatically expanded forthwith.

A round where pitifully low attendances are taken to prove the theory that the competition has run its course and should continue only after extreme surgery.

Quite comforting in its own way.

Combining the two, reworking the league cup as part of the (hopefully) impending reworking of the league structure, might be a good place to start.

But those are questions for another day, to be chewed over by the great and good of the Scottish game.

In the meantime we can enjoy another fun game of cross-division "my attendance is bigger than yours" as Rangers host Motherwell at Ibrox.

When the dust settled after the summer's soul searching it always seemed likely that Rangers would face SPL opposition at some point this season.

The league cup draw was kind enough to throw up this peculiar spectacle relatively early.

The last time Rangers and Motherwell met in this competition Rangers won a 2010/11 semi final 2-1 en route to the trophy.

Less than two years later Motherwell sit top of the SPL - a Champions League qualifying appearance behind them - and Rangers lie second in the Third Division.

At times I think we're maybe too close to recent events, too drained by the tedium of the ever decreasing circles of vitriol and conspiracy theorising that surrounds it, to properly appreciate how spectacularly the game has been turned on its head.

All of which adds another level of intrigue to tonight's game.

It's hard to imagine any other set of circumstance that would see a team that hasn't won away from home in the fourth tier enter a game against a side unbeaten in the top flight as favourites.

But there we have it. Rangers are 6/4 to win. Motherwell are 7/4 to win.

This is Scottish football and normality has been suspended for the duration.

For all that their away form has been laboured, Rangers have scored 17 goals in five home games.

But there's only one clean sheet in that run and they were shunted out of the Challenge Cup by Queen of the South.

Motherwell will be their biggest test so far. And I'm still struggling to see how this one will go.

If Ally McCoist can't motivate his players tonight then his position deserves to be questioned.

And Motherwell's record against Rangers can't be ignored. The last time they won at Ibrox Tony Blair had only been Prime Minister for four days. He wasn't even bathing in creosote back then.

A tricky one.

Rangers to start strongly, maybe nick a lead and Motherwell to eventually prevail? A half-time/full-time home/away combo at 20-1 looks generous.

In a game that would seem to promise goals you can get the same price for either side to win 3-2.

I fancy it will be close and Motherwell might just nick it. I'd not be shocked if they don't though.

Elsewhere this evening Aberdeen travel to Dunfermline as favourites - a label they've not always worn comfortably against lower league opposition.

Dunfermline manager Jim Jefferies has apparently promised to "have a right good go."

In seven games this season his side have lost only one, scored 18 and conceded just three goals. They look equipped for the job of right good going.

Aberdeen have beaten only St Johnstone in the SPL and required extra time to get past Morton in the last round.

I feel I should be more confident about Dunfermline's chances of pulling this off than I am.

Perhaps I'm being persuaded by Aberdeen's resilience in saving a last gasp point in their 3-3 draw with Motherwell at the weekend.

A nice simple 2-0 win for the SPL side? 9/1.

Tempting. But would a lower league shock actually shock me? 2-1 to Dunfermline? 10/1.

I might just settle for a Motherwell - Dunfermline double at 8.80/1.

It's going to be an interesting night.

All odds from Ladbrokes

Always remembering www.gambleaware.co.uk

Rangers get out of jail in Peterhead

Rangers began what is billed as a stately progression through the leagues on Saturday. But, as guest blogger Robbie Devine found out, Peterhead had other ideas.

Berwick, Chesterfield, Hamilton, Kaunus, Maribor.

At 2:30 on Saturday little Peterhead were on the verge of being added to that list as a side to have ripped up the form book by humbling Rangers with a humiliating defeat.

Only a last minute touch from Andy Little spared the Glasgow’s teams blushes to break the hearts of the Blue Toon on one of the most surreal days in the history of Scottish football.

Pre match the tiny north eastern town more famous for its fishing port than its football team found itself the centre of the football universe with hordes of Rangers supporters descending on this normally sleepy part of Aberdeenshire to witness the rebirth of their troubled club.

Sky TV rolled into town as did countless football hacks, the tiny little Balmoor ground had never seen anything like this.

Peterhead manager Jim McInally  said it was like a circus event, certainly the Rangers team included more than their share of clowns as they really should consider themselves fortunate to leave with a single point.

Credit must go to the home club who were considered an afterthought before the game as the spotlight was on Ally McCoist’s new look Rangers but they were the ones who emerged with all the plaudits giving the Govan giants a real scare.

Although after a sticky start it was the former Scottish champions who took the lead,  17 year old Barrie Mackay showing a maturity way beyond his years with a cool finish.

But the expected avalanche did not materialise and it was no surprise when the hosts drew level thanks to a wonderful piece of skill from Rory McAllister.

With only eight minutes remaining Peterhead were in dreamland as Scott McLaughlin lashed the ball home and a real shock was on the cards.

But the part timers were unable to hold on for a famous victory after Kevin Kyle’s last minute header glanced off the crossbar presenting Little with the opportunity to touch the ball into the net.

Aftewards McCoist did not hold back in his criticism of his defenders which was no surprise as the international centre half paring of Carlos Bocanegra and Dorin Goian combined to produce a shocking display of ineptitude and laziness.

Once he is granted international clearance former Lazio defender the Brazilian Emilson Cribari will no doubt be given a starting place with both the US skipper and Romanian joining the mass exodus out of Ibrox.

McCoist finds himself in a difficult position as despite their stuttering start Rangers should still secure promotion with a bit to spare though already he must have concerns over one or two of his players attitudes and desire to roll their sleeves up and get the job done.

He has been busy bringing in new players to bolster a depleted squad with former SPL stalwarts Ian Black, Dean Shiels, Francisco Sandaza and Kevin Kyle arriving but considering they still have the obstacle of a 12 month transfer embargo kicking in at the end of August I would still expect the Rangers boss to pull out all the stops to bring in further arrivals.

Make no mistake the part time players in the lower leagues will rise to the occasion of facing their more illustrious counterparts from Glasgow and day one should be a wake up call for the Rangers supporters.

Off the field it has been revealed that controversial Newcastle owner Mike Ashley is prepared to pump in around £10 million to the Ibrox coffers with chief executive Charles Green hinting another two billionaires will also be making a major investment as Rangers attempt to drag themselves out of the financial wilderness.

What Greens and his fellow board members real motives are is something of major conjecture as they are still treated by suspicion by the majority of the clubs supports though an incredible 38,000  did attend the 4-0 League Cup romp against East Fife so the fans commitment to stick with their club remains strong.

The story of Rangers adventures in the third division allied with how Green and co plan to restructure the clubs finances is an intriguing one and I expect to bring you more interesting updates as the weeks go by.

SFL to patch up Rangers

With Rangers entry into Division Three now all but confirmed, football shirt expert Steven Dow takes a look at an unexpected consequence - and identifies some winners - from Scottish football's summer of uncertainty:

On the face of it, they are just two thin pieces of material that heat seal onto a football shirt. No great shakes and barely noticed beyond the confines of the normally elusive Scottish Football League coverage seen in Scotland.

But now (and I won’t go into the details) the team formerly known as Rangers and all that sail with them have just docked in Division 3 of the SFL and the Irn Bru sleeve patch has just taken off.

Not all that long ago we didn’t have sponsors on football shirts but the financial demands soon saw to that and a further addition to the corporate hold on football was the league sleeve patch. At every senior level of the game it is commonplace to see the league sponsor’s name in some form on the sleeve of each team at home or abroad.

Whether it’s global brands such as Coca Cola or Barclays, they all strive for maximum coverage and it’s no different for Scotland’s very own Barr’s Irn Bru. The difference here is that Irn Bru just struck gold!

The sudden arrival of Ranger’s into Division Three will mean a huge surge of interest in the league and pictures that formerly showed the silver and red Clydesdale Bank logo on the sleeve of the blue shirt will be replaced by the vivid blue and orange of Irn Bru.

For a retailer such as us demand for the sleeve patches has surged. The irony that the colours of the new sleeve patch sit perfectly with Govan’s finest is not lost on anyone and this will also feed the demand. Irn Bru's owners AG Barr will be delighted with the extra coverage that they will receive globally, tempered only by the fact that this is the last season of their current sponsorship deal.

I certainly hope the kitman didn’t jump the gun in May and start applying the Clydesdale patches to the various Rangers kits in the Ibrox dressing room. I can assure you that those bad boys don’t come off if properly applied.

So it’s the fizzy pop patches for Rangers now along with official SFL numbers. Names on the back of the shirt? That’s also a thing of the past. Due to the tighter finances at the lower end of the senior game in Scotland, it’s one set of shirts numbered 1-16, no names and a few spare shirts in case of a laundry accident.

All change but not for the worse, every cloud has a silver lining and the demand for authentic Rangers shirts adorned with the correct personalisation will certainly mean good business for Barr’s Irn Bru and, of course, forward thinking independent football retailers.

Steven Dow is the co-owner of Football Nation, an independent football retailer based in Edinburgh and online at www.thefootballnation.co.uk

Rangers newco: Clyde comment

Devoid as we are of international success it might be heartening that Scottish football is now head and shoulders above any other country when it comes to releasing statements.

Today it was the turn of Clyde.

Quite explosive this one. It seems to nail as hollow some of the threats that have been made, it questions the continued silence of most SPL clubs and draws attention once more to the uncertainty that still surrounds the Charles Green owned Rangers newco.

And it also suggests - perhaps more explicitly than any other club statement - that based on the information so far provided to the SFL the Rangers newco should not actually be admitted at any level.

It certainly seems to me that, whatever the outcome on Friday, it is going to be difficult for Scottish football to keep either Neil Doncaster or Stewart Regan in positions of such influence.

The board of Clyde Football Club met last night to consider how it might approach the resolutions (see below) to be voted on at the SFL meeting on Friday 13th July. This update is to inform our owners and supporters and hopefully explain some of the complexities that face the club when carefully and objectively considering how we might vote. We hope that by being as clear as possible about the difficulties surrounding this situation that the people able to support the process act swiftly to do so.

The overwhelming reality is that we are being asked to make one of the most important decisions for Scottish Football in a vacuum devoid of factual information, that vacuum having been filled with unhelpful rhetoric and scaremongering by the chief executives of the SFA and SPL.

We therefore looked at what we were being asked to vote on, how it fitted with the principles of the sport, and what information we might need to inform a logical decision in context of the current reality.

It was clear that the resolutions marked a clear departure from all previous process and custom and practice when considering admitting a team to the SFL, albeit operating within the rules of the SFL. It was in that context which we considered the resolutions. In reality, the customary principles of sport were not at the forefront of the resolutions.

We first concluded that there was limited risk to the SFL from the 'Armageddon' theory, as depicted in the detailed presentation by Neil Doncaster and supported by Stewart Regan, which had prompted fears of cash flow loss to the SFL next season. We have obtained a copy of the Settlement Agreement signed up to by the SPL and the SFL in April 1998 - it is clear that the agreement is not ambiguous in this regard and there is no scope for the SPL to fail to meet the obligations to the SFL except by deliberately breaching the agreement. Neil Doncaster was unequivocal when he said that there would be no payment under the agreement and stressed that it was not the board of the SPL that made big decisions, it was the clubs themselves. We have concluded that it defies credibility that the SPL clubs would instruct the SPL to deliberately breach a legal agreement. To assist the SFL clubs to take decisions in the right manner then the external threat should be removed by the SPL clubs, confirming to the SFL that they have not and will not instruct the SPL to breach the Settlement Agreement.

Consideration was then given to Resolution 1 which we concluded required to be reworded to be explicit that entry was to SFL3. The reason for this is that once entered to the SFL in the manner proposed under Resolution 1, we understand that it is within the power of the Board of the SFL to place a club into any league of their choosing. We believe that, due to the intolerable pressure placed on the SFL board to date by external parties, this resolution should be explicit to avoid the Board coming under pressure from either the SFA or SPL in the event that Resolution 2 is rejected. It is also our opinion that Resolution 1 being explicit sits more appropriately with Resolution 2 which in itself is explicit about where any club might play.

In terms of Resolution 1, whether reworded or not, it seemed inconceivable to the Board of Clyde that absolutely no information whatsoever has been provided to support the resolution. This is clearly a matter of haste and again driven by an external agenda, perhaps because Sevco have not lodged an application to join the SFL then they have not submitted any information. Whilst we have accepted that this is being treated as a special case and we are willing to run with this, it simply was not possible to conclude that we could make any decision at this time. The matter is made worse because of the extent of uncertainty which hangs over Sevco. There is no need to prepare an exhaustive list of the issues as they are well publicised, however the extent of outstanding sanctions that may or may not be levied against a club which has yet to obtain SFA membership, together with the increasing number of possible commercial and legal challenges to the transactions to date simply presents a significant risk to the ability of the club to fulfil its fixtures in any league. Given that some of these matters are in the hands of the governing bodies it seems inexplicable that they are left hanging. We are clear that for the good of the game that we would want a swift and positive conclusion that would see Rangers Football Club taking part in the game again and we would wish to be able to support a Resolution that saw them entered to SFL3. However, until we receive enough information to inform such a decision then we are being pushed into a corner which would actually leave any club making a logical decision arrive at the conclusion that Resolution 1 should not be supported. The SFA could assist the process by transferring the SFA membership to Sevco prior to the Friday meeting if they have satisfied themselves of fit and proper tests and have carried out their own diligence on the viability of the club and the various legal challenges.

Resolution 2 suffers from the same issues as Resolution 1, in that no information of any sort about Sevco, not even whether it will obtain SFA membership, leaves no possibility of making a decision about entry to the SFL based on facts or logic. Clearly it is incumbent on all the governing bodies to make available all factual information they have available if they truly want this process to have any chance of being recovered from the current chaos. At the very least the business plan for Sevco and any other information that led the SPL clubs to arrive at a decision should be made available to the SFL clubs, and not with inappropriately short notice, although that point has as good as passed. Resolution 2 was where the challenge to sporting integrity arose. It was impossible to engage with this concept without continually bearing in mind that the SFA had already undermined the prospects for any integrity to be maintained by making it clear that failure to deal with the admission of a newco to SFL3 would be a dereliction of duty. In effect posting notice that no matter what decision is taken by the SFL clubs to administer their league, the SFA would not tolerate anything other than SFL 1, an equivalent point having been made by Neil Doncaster on behalf of the SPL clubs. The stated position of the SFA and SPL chief executives means that, whilst this club can have faith in David Longmuir to do all in his power to deliver a new combined structure that meets the objectives of Resolution 2, we have no faith in the parties that the new arrangements would be negotiated with. Their behaviour to date is evidence enough for us. We should not be disingenuous on our own position in terms of the question of trading sporting integrity for transformational change to the way the game is governed that is posed by Resolution 2. We have said previously that there would be no winners and that compromise would be required at some point. With this in mind, had we worked through this process and seen positive collaborative behaviour from the leaders of the SFA and SPL and we were challenged with backing Resolution 2 in exchange for revolutionary change that would truly benefit the game as a whole, then we would have engaged with that. As it stands, we have no information on the proposals other than that distributed in advance of the meeting last week and no confidence in the parties that will control the process outside of the SFL. As such we would vote no to Resolution 2.

Resolution 3, as many have pointed out this resolution seems presumptuous as no invitation has been issued from the SPL to either club. Again, this arises because of the external pressures, the haste and the failure of other bodies to complete their own processes. As things stand, whilst Sevco/Newco was not voted into the SPL, it seems that the SPL still has 12 members based on the reported voting at the SPL meeting last week, albeit one of whom is in liquidation. It seems to make more sense that the SPL complete their processes and make the appropriate invitation for a club to join the SPL. We would seek to support whichever of our member clubs are invited to join the SPL to make that move, however, at the moment there is no certainty that Sevco will be entered into the SFL and the SFL should not risk leaving itself short of a team.

In summary, the complete absence of information on Sevco Scotland Ltd renders it impossible to vote with any logic in favour of any of the Resolutions. The default in these circumstances would unfortunately be to vote against. We hope and trust that this unacceptable situation will be resolved swiftly and will allow Clyde Football Club to support Resolution 1 from an informed position and will see Rangers Football Club playing in SFL3. We see Resolution 2 as a matter of trust and it would take a change of personnel and attitude for us to be confident that David Longmuir would be entering discussions with a group of people committed to a collaborative process in a spirit of genuine partnership. In the current circumstances our only decision could be to vote against Resolution 2. Subject to a satisfactory outcome on Resolution 1 we would support Resolution 3.

The three resolutions presented to the club 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.

From www.clydefc.co.uk

Like this? Like the Scottish Football Blog on Facebook.

Rangers newco: Hamilton hit back

Another day, another statement.

Hamilton this time, again capturing the anger that SFL feel about the position they've been put in. And still no response from the SPL "no to newco" majority that could help allay these fears.

Coupled with the earlier statement from Raith might we be moving to a position where the SFL clubs refuse to take any vote on admitting the Rangers newco? That would certainly heap the pressure back on the SPL and SFA.

The full statement:

As you all know I attended the SFL meeting earlier this week to discuss the various proposals put to us by the SFA/SFL/SPL. We have subsequently had a board meeting to discuss the consequences of each of these scenarios. It is also now apparent that Rangers Newco will not play in the SPL next season.

As you are aware the proposal being favoured by the governing bodies is that Rangers Newco are parachuted into the Irn Bru SFL Division 1, contrary to Scottish Football League rules. If our Governing bodies ever get round to tabling any firm proposal to vote on it is unlikely in our opinion that this proposal, in isolation, would be acceptable to the members.

We believe that a complete overhaul of the game is required for the good of Scottish Football. League Reconstruction, play-offs, a fairer financial distribution model and a more effective Corporate Governance are some of the major issues which require to be addressed. The current circumstances we find ourselves in have created an opportunity for these changes to be implemented.

We believe the problems facing the game are not of the SFL’s making and as such would strongly suggest that the SFA, our governing body, take immediate ownership of the current situation in tandem with the two League bodies, and table a set of proposals at next week’s meeting providing a solution for the way forward in the best interests of Scottish Football.

In the meantime the situation changes daily and it is our view that HAFC and the other SFL clubs should not be put in the position to vote on something which may destroy Scottish Football.

Thank you for your support in these most challenging of times.

Les Gray
Chairman HAFC

From www.acciesfc.co.uk

Like this? Like the Scottish Football Blog on Facebook.

Rangers newco: Hibs statement

Hibs this morning issued a statement regarding yesterday's news that plans were being put in place to parachute Rangers into the First Division.

With fans getting somewhat annoyed at this latest proposal, Hibs - whose chairman Rod Petrie was said to have met newco owner Charles Green - have moved with uncharacteristic speed to get a message to the fans.

Of course it doesn't actually say if they agree with the First Division option or not:

At an informal meeting of SPL clubs held at Hampden Park yesterday, the views of Hibernian FC were represented by Chairman Rod Petrie. The Chairman articulated very clearly that the Club is ready and willing to cast its vote on the transfer of the Rangers share in the SPL at the formal meeting of clubs on 4 July.

The Chairman made the point that the vote should proceed without any further delay and that Hibernian FC will vote against the share transfer. The resolution will fail if four other clubs vote against it or abstain. If as a result of the vote on 4 July the Rangers newco is not voted into the SPL then it will be for other bodies to decide if and at what level Rangers might be accommodated within Scottish football.

(Published on Hibernianfc.co.uk on 29th June)

Rangers: Newco or no go?

A liquidated Rangers start life again as a newco. The Rangers Football Club.

Rangers are no more.

Not quite, of course. The football team - its home and its training facilities if not its players - has a new owner in a new corporate structure.

For now ownership lies with a consortium led by Charles Green. Tomorrow, next week, next month it might be a consortium led by Walter Smith.

Even after liquidation Rangers are haunted by uncertainty and tussled over by businessmen to the bewilderment of the ordinary fan.

But a new Rangers have indeed risen from the liquidated shell of the old company.

Where do they go now?

The decision that most SPL chairmen didn't want to make now lies with them.

Yes to the Rangers newco?

No to the Rangers newco?

It makes me worry about the business acumen available to Scottish football if it is indeed true that representatives of the other 11 clubs sat round a table and allowed themselves to be persuaded that Rangers didn't face the prospect of liquidation.

I suspect, however, it's far easier to convince an audience if they already want to believe what you're saying.

And how the SPL chairmen must have hoped that they didn’t have to make this choice.

Vote "yes" to a newco and stick with the comfort of familiarity.

Maybe the odd sanction to give an impression of resoluteness - or hope that the SFA do that for you - and then carry on as before.

Or vote "no" and take a step into the unknown.

When Rangers first went into administration I wrote that what is a simple moral decision for fans wouldn't necessarily be reflected by directors facing more complex debates about what their choice would mean for their own clubs.

That remains the case.

Fans have been vocal and overwhelming in their opposition to Rangers being allowed entry to the league.

Supporters are often out of step with their chairmen and directors. No SPL club is yet run as a democracy, these are not elected officials and more often than not what they feel is best for us and our clubs doesn't chime with the wishes of large sections of their "customer base."

But the strength of opinion here is perhaps unprecedented across the clubs. Can the men who will ultimately make the decision afford to ignore that?

Ramifications for the TV deal and other potential losses of income will influence their decision. The clubs themselves should be better acquainted with the consequences of refusing entry than anyone else.

And yes, protecting revenue streams is important. But the sheer scale of the financial folly at Rangers means that being seen to capitulate to a newco might have even graver consequences.

The idea of "sporting integrity" risks being cheapened by over use in recent weeks.

But if the other clubs are prepared to let Rangers back simply so they can chug along in the shadow of two dominant clubs, unable to stand on their own two feet, then the SPL can make no pretence at being a sporting entity anyway.

We've seen what greed and bad management can do to football clubs. Now should be a time to readjust.

I suspect that the scale of Rangers' wrongdoing, the lack of humility in the face of that wrongdoing, the "you'll die without us" attitude and the weight of public opinion is beginning to tip the balance against a newco.

I've also got a feeling that clubs struggling with their own finances won't buy the line that Rangers have been punished enough with a European ban, a ten point deduction and a period of emotional turmoil.

Fans of Rangers and fans of other clubs will always be at loggerheads on these issues but "we've been punished enough" is a bad argument to make.

It focuses attention on the litany of misdemeanours and leads the listener to the conclusion that contrition is unlikely to follow.

Rangers cocked-a-snook at corporate governance, stiffed their creditors and were gobbled up for pennies by a man who didn't see any problem in discussing transfer targets even as football debtors went unpaid.

It sends out a very dangerous message for the future of football governance in this country if a place is set for them and they are warmly welcomed back to the top table.

That is really not punishment enough.

The issue of football governance also means that the inquiry into alleged impropriety in player's contracts must be allowed to run its course.

The outcome of that investigation will tell us much about the health of the game in this country.

If a vote on the newco is taken before any findings are delivered then that vote will be compromised, a decision made without full possession of the facts.

Like everything else in this sorry saga the timescales are rushed, the details murky, the outcomes uncertain.

Should new Rangers be allowed into the SPL?

No.

Will new Rangers be allowed into the SPL?

Possibly.

A month ago I would have said they almost certainly would be. I think they still probably will be but it's no longer such a certainty.

The next few weeks are going to be messy, divisive and nasty.

Whatever the decision, for better or for worse, I suspect Scottish football will never be the same again.

The history issue

Does a newco retain the history of the oldco?

The findings of the current SPL investigation notwithstanding I find it unlikely that any directive is going to be issued from Hampden denying "new" Rangers the list of trophies won by "old" Rangers.

That won't stop fans of other clubs trying to deny fans of Rangers that history.

And it won't stop Rangers fans trying to deny fans of other clubs the right to deny them of that history.

A difficult one to be sure.

If you've watched Rangers at Ibrox for 20 years and plan to watch them at Ibrox for another 20 years I find it unlikely that you're going to consider 2012 a dividing line separating the achievements of the old and the new.

History in this case is surely subjective. Fans will bicker over this forever and a day but they'll only be bickering over a perception of whether this is "Year Zero" or not.

Your own perception might depend if you love Rangers or if you hate them. If you're stuck in the middle you'll probably just hear "blah, blah, blah."

I'm not sure the next time Hibs host Rangers I'll be thinking "Well, this is jolly nice, this is the first time we've met these boys in blue at Easter Road, I do hope we go on to forge a superior record to them in our head-to-head clashes."

I don't really think it works like that. Rivalry understandably inspires glee that Rangers' history will be wiped out. But it doesn't give anyone "control" of that history or someone else's interpretation of history.

(If the SFA were to offer guidance on this - and what could possibly go wrong if that august body starts wrestling with the philosophical issues involved in taking ownership of history - might I also suggest they bring in some governance on the issue of stars above badges which has, frankly, given over to anarchy in recent seasons.)

My own view?

If you ask me when Hibs were formed I'll say "6th August 1875."

I won't mention the period in the early 1890s when the club was forced into what we might call abeyance.

The timeline goes back to the beginning, skipping over the break.

The history of football clubs is a powerful thing and it has always been about more than decisions made in committee rooms, law courts or tax offices.

Like this? Like the Scottish Football Blog on Facebook.

Rangers: An end of sorts

Nine minutes.

Not a long time.

But that's all it took for creditors to reject a CVA proposal and condemn Rangers to liquidation.

Before those nine minutes: months of uncertainty and years of greed, lies, broken promises and charlatans running a historic football club into the ground.

Today was expected. We learnt this week that HMRC would block the CVA. The end was coming before even that.

In a story where little has been guaranteed, the only rule has been that bad news today will likely be followed by worse news tomorrow for Rangers.

That we sensed liquidation was inevitable has maybe inured us to its impact.

Take a moment to think about it, ignore the whirlwind that has come since.

This has been a remarkable day.

Rangers. Scottish football's most successful snaffler of domestic honours, a financial powerhouse, the club that saw itself as an institution to rival the pillars of Scotland's establishment.

None of that was enough to save them.

In a sport dominated by business here is proof that historic achievements and continued success can't insulate clubs from the destructive attentions of the rogues and crooks who see football as a way to massage their egos and feather their own nests.

A salutary lesson for our times.

What next?

Charles Green has taken control of the old company's assets and sets up a new company called The Rangers Football Club.

He will expect the SPL and SFA to rubber stamp this manoeuvre and the team to start next season unhindered by historical controversy - but with their histoic achievements intact - and free of any debt except any that which he's created to fund his takeover.

He thinks he's got a big football club on the cheap, the creditors already stiffed, a fine opportunity to make himself richer.

It's a solution that has always looked problematic.

The other SPL clubs, with the vocal encouragement of their fans, seem to have been hardening against the newco option as the weeks have dragged on and those running Rangers have continually groped in the dark to find others to blame for their predicament.

And Green himself presents a problem. The only character references forthcoming describe him as something that sounds a lot like "a total runt" and in his public utterances he's displayed either a worrying naivety about the realities of the challenges ahead or an inability to tell the truth in his bluff Yorkshire accent.

And now another twist.

We were promised just a short window between this morning's confirmation of liquidation and Green's bargain basement hoovering up of the assets.

A short window. But enough time for Walter Smith to attempt to lead a new cavalry to the rescue.

Suddenly Smith had the backing of, amongst others, Jim McColl and Douglas Park and wanted to buy the Rangers newco. Here was Walter, the stony-haired sage, urging Green to step aside and let proper Rangers people help a newco phoenix rise from the ashes of financial arson.

An oddly dramatic flourish from Smith and the money men standing four-square behind him. It certainly had an impact.

Although Rangers' representatives had somehow apparently convinced their SPL colleagues that liquidation was not "on the radar" it had become inevitable.

That being the case, proper Rangers people didn't want blood on their hands. Far better to let Craig Whyte, Duff & Phelps and Charles Green take the heat of liquidation then ride to the rescue once the deed had been done.

That was a guaranteed way of seizing the initiative and the narrative: Green killed Rangers, Walter wants to help them rise again.

Simplistic of course, but that seemed to be the plan, to reach into Rangers' past to find a figure that gave hope for the future.

Too late?

Green confirmed that the transfer of the assets to his consortium has already taken place and applications for the transfer of SFA and SPL membership were ready to be submitted.

The key to staging a last-minute heroic intervention is timing. Walter's watch was slow.

That doesn't mean the Smith consortium is dead: they could buy the newco from Charles Green tomorrow and deliver him a tidy profit for a very short commitment to Scottish football.

Or is Green stubborn enough to hold out? He might well be. You don't make the number of enemies he made at Sheffield United and then try to get back into football if you don't have a healthy contrary streak. For now he looks to be king of the castle.

His statement confirming the purchase also made a great play of contradicting today's Daily Record and standing by Ally McCoist: he's not going to give in to one Rangers legend but he's keeping another to comfort the fans.

Yet Smith's backers must always have known that Green was likely to move quickly, they're unlikely to be put off if they have to buy the club from him.

Even as Green spoke to press Ian Hart - publicly announced today as a member of his consortium - was saying "who me? Nah, I'm backing Walter's mob."

An inauspicious start. We can be confident that Walter Smith will not take Green up on his invitation to become chairman tomorrow.

With Smith's group on the sidelines Green can also look forward to fans - and sections of the media - barracking loudly and agitating for him to sell up. He's going to endure an uncomfortable few days.

The ownership question will have long term implications for Rangers and might also colour the club's approach to the SPL's newco vote.

If Smith's consortium do seize control I'd expect a very different Rangers approach, a contrite board talking of rebuilding the club within a stronger Scottish game - even if Smith himself find himself answering question about his own experience with the EBT payment scheme operated during David Murray's tenure.

Charles Green's approach is likely to focus more on bluster, talk of deals and high level talks that are based only loosely in reality, pandering to a fanbase that would do well to not get fooled again.

There are still high stakes to play for.

That might be another reason for the lack of shock today.

Ranger were liquidated. But closure on this tumultuous era doesn't seem much nearer.

Like this? Like the Scottish Football Blog on Facebook.

Rangers and the SPL: Looking for leaders

Another week slips by and the saga of Rangers drags on.

It seems the capacity this story has for delivering farce is almost limitless.

Where are we this week?

Hard to know exactly:

• Charles Green and his largely unknown consortium still want to take control of Rangers, delivering them from evil either through a CVA or the unknown delights of a newco
• "Take control" rather than buy: it seems Green - and his still conditional offer - will involve him and his mates spending cash that Rangers will then need to pay back, with interest, over the next eight years
• A CVA offer has gone out - showing that debts have risen since the scale of Rangers' financial dunderheidedness was first revealed - but outstanding tax cases and outstanding legal challenges make a proper appraisal of that CVA offer look all but impossible
• Duff and Phelps are under increasing scrutiny regarding their relationship with Craig Whyte - a scrutiny they dismiss as the muckraking of the tittle tattle brigade - but seem to be pretty sure of their own multi million pound payday whatever happens
• Rangers took the SFA to court and won over the transfer embargo, the SFA being told that they'd need to consider a punishment within the specific sanctions laid out in their own guidelines
• The SFA are preparing another appeals panel in light of that court ruling while FIFA - for whom clubs taking such matters to national courts is about as appealing as a transparent trial of goalline technology - consider how they're going to deal with what is no longer Scotland's little local difficulty
• To the sound of hoofs rumbling through an unlocked door the SPL agreed to bring in a selection of financial fair play rules but decided that decisions on newcos getting into their exclusive club would be decided on a case-by-case basis by all the clubs
• Oddly Charles Green - who currently owns about as much of Rangers as any taxpayer - was allowed to play a part in that SPL meeting, the lunatic invited out for tea before taking over the asylum
• Rangers have finally delivered, three months after being asked, the documentation the SPL requested as part of their dual contact deliberations, with the SPL board set to receive an update on the progress of the league's investigation on 18th June
• After the BBC's Mark Daly raised the ceiling on ridiculousness with cameos in this story for Joanna Lumley, Prince Albert of Monaco and a "Cockney football fixer," this week we had the SPL's Neil Doncaster suggesting that Gandhi - while possibly a damn fine football chairman - might struggle to pass a fit and proper person test

What next?

The SFA must react to the slap in the face delivered by the Court of Session and, to avoid an international conflagration, do so in a way that doesn't further antagonise FIFA.

Chief executive Stewart Regan has confirmed tonight that the they won't risk the wrath of FIFA by indulging in a tit-for-tat court appeal (one appeal judge backed the embargo, one appeal judge dismissed the sanction, who knows where a best of three contest could end up?)

So now the SFA's appeal panel must refer back to the other sanctions available and bar Rangers from the Scottish Cup or suspend or terminate their SFA membership.

They'll also probably have to make yet more adjustments to their disciplinary procedures come this summer's AGM. One step forwards, two steps back.

Rangers can also expect an additional punishment for taking this matter to the Court of Session in the first place. FIFA will be watching out for that one.

This might still be a most Pyrrhic of victories.

For those of us who have argued that the outrage and uproar over the transfer embargo was a well orchestrated diversion by some at Ibrox might now look at the CVA offer - I speak only as a cheated taxpayer not a direct creditor - and see a deal that looks as measly as Duff and Phelps look weaselly.

Non-acceptance of that offer would send us back to the delectable prospect of internecine warfare as Scottish football decides on a home for Rangers 2012.

Meanwhile, of course, the issue of dual contracts won't go away.

I'm sure Neil Doncaster wishes it would go away but it won't. Every room he walks into, there it is, a big, well paid elephant lounging on the couch.

Without closure on that, one way or the other, it's difficult to see how the rancour and distrust will ever clear.

And that's a big problem.

Things have dragged on too long without resolution.

I've seen too many people connected with Rangers not only predict that letting Rangers die would be nothing more than a mass suicide pact for Scottish football or, worse, taking gleeful delight in the idea that if they're drowning, they'll drag the rest of us down with them to really care now if they don't survive in the SPL. Or even survive at all.

A tragedy for the decent Rangers fan of course. But there it is.

Duff and Phelps, the Keystone Cops of administrators, and Charles Green, a man who looks perpetually lost without his black cloak and scythe, still seem to be the only people standing between Rangers and further disaster. They're hardly the Fantastic Four.

But what's the plan for Scottish football?

Forget about Rangers.

Financial fair play rules are all well and good. But we're entering the summer without a clear idea of the teams that will make up our top flight, we've got a TV deal that looks no closer to being signed, a headline sponsor winding down with no sign of a replacement.

Somebody's got to take control of the situation and plot a course to safety.

If life without Rangers is going to be as petrifying as some tell us then start planning for the worst. If Rangers somehow pull their listing ship through just about intact then that will be a bonus.

It should also be a lesson to all that living beyond our footballing means is no longer option.

In the meantime there's thousands of people like me who have already made an investment in next season.

Who's fighting our corner? Rangers' mess is their mess. Isolate it and find a way to fill the gap.

We deserve more than a whole game paralysed in the face of someone else's greed, mendacity and disregard for the sport we love.

We're not looking for a Gandhi. But I'm not sure we're looking for a Neil Doncaster either.

Like this? Like the Scottish Football Blog on Facebook.