this 25 point deduction thingy

[happytim]

that people have been hypothetically debating can in theory happen but never for the circumstances rangers are in.

a fact many including those running the game have missed.

using the rangers are the same club argument, rangers never liquidated, the company did, so the company would have entered administration too, making any new company entering admin as only the first time they would have done so, as its a different company running the club according to buns. so the 25 point deduction argument is obsolete in rangers circumstances they say they are in.

the 25 point deduction can only happen in the following circumstances, ie club enter admin, club negotiate cva, club exit admin, club re enter admin at a later date, meaning 2 admins and a 25 point deduction, but that cant apply to rangers as there was a liquidation in the middle. if it was the club that liquidated, which it was then the club cant re enter admin cos they are deed. if it was the company that liquidated as the buns like

[DeezAreGood]

Dundee went into administration in 2003, although it was the holding company which had all the debt racked up, the company owning the club didn't have any debt. When Dundee went into administration in 2010, the holding company was gone, and all the debt belonged to the company owning the football club. As this was Dundee's 2nd admin, the 25-point penalty was decided upon, even though administration wasn't a punishable offence in 2003. Also, the first admin was because of a holding company running up debts.

Not sure if that helps, or not

[happytim]

sounds complicated but dundee didnt liquidate, thats the major difference.

[DeezAreGood]

were hit with a 25-point penalty, though, for what was a first offence.

[Ed_ScottishFitba]

Only real winners in this are the lawyers as they can argue either way as the meter ticks away increasing their fees

[DeezAreGood]

It's the accountants that are cashing in here, BDO, if they receive the 20m they sued for, will take a fair ch[size=3]unk of that.

[afc_1983]

[quote="happytim"]that people have been hypothetically debating can in theory happen but never for the circumstances rangers are in.

a fact many including those running the game have missed.

using the rangers are the same club argument, rangers never liquidated, the company did, so the company would have entered administration too, making any new company entering admin as only the first time they would have done so, as its a different company running the club according to buns. so the 25 point deduction argument is obsolete in rangers circumstances they say they are in.

the 25 point deduction can only happen in the following circumstances, ie club enter admin, club negotiate cva, club exit admin, club re enter admin at a later date, meaning 2 admins and a 25 point deduction, but that cant apply to rangers as there was a liquidation in the middle. if it was the club that liquidated, which it was then the club cant re enter admin cos they are deed. if it wa

[afc_1983]

Look at the rules about insolvency events, which incidentally refers to entering administration, liquidation or a whole host of other things, including receivership.

However, the main thing to note is that the rules are not back-dated to the initial Rangers admin/liquidation.

And why should they be? The SPFL is a whole new body and competition. The slate is wiped clean.

If Rangers enter admin now they'll be hit with a 15 point penalty. The rules are clear about that.

I can't really see an argument for saying the 25pt penalty should be applied. - view external link

[Mickybhoy]

"The slate is wiped clean" away and tae a f**k tae yersel

[afc_1983]

Listen Mick, I'm not arguing it's right.

From a legal perspective I'd suggest it's correct though.