Ketsbaia Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 This is all a few years down the line, though. Maybe Ashley does leave us in 2016. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 STVSport: Rangers need 'significant funds' by January to meet day-to-day costs http://t.co/mqp3LrlWnc http://t.co/LjF5O0Z2Xl Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shays Given Tim Flowers Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 He's going to shaft them something rotten and then it'll be oh Mike's not so bad he saved us etc..... He's an opportunist. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawK Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 He's going to shaft them something rotten and then it'll be oh Mike's not so bad he saved us etc..... He's an opportunist. He's the wishmaster. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newintoon Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 basically Rangers will be back in the CL, so essentially its saying its okay for Ashely to deliberately avoid it with Newcastle, surely that's against the rules. What if we qualified for the Europa and Rangers qualified for the CL and were dropped into the Europa? I doubt we could both qualify for even different competitions without a potential conflict of interest. Only one club could take part in a UEFA tournament and the higher profile tournament would take precedence. So if Rangers qualified for the Champions League and we qualified for the Europa League, then Rangers would be allowed to play in the Champions League and we would not be allowed in the Europa League. Therefore if Rangers later dropped into the Europa, it would not be a problem because we would not have been allowed entry in the first place. If we both qualify for the Europa League, then the club with the higher co-efficient would be the club allowed in. At present that would be us because our co-efficient is higher but one would assume once Rangers get back into the Champions League, their co-efficient would soon overtake ours. Where's that from? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/newcastle-united/11257795/Newcastle-and-Rangers-will-not-be-able-to-play-in-Europe-together-next-season-because-of-Mike-Ashley.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgarve Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 http://mobile.nufc.co.uk/default.aspx?s=news-display&aid=4335737 Statement released by the club saying Edwards is lying Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 Article 3 reads exactly as Edwards says it does. Article 3 Integrity of the competition 3.01 To ensure the integrity of the UEFA club competitions, the following criteria apply: a) no club participating in a UEFA club competition may, either directly or indirectly: i) hold or deal in the securities or shares of any other club participating in a UEFA club competition, 5 5 ii) be a member of any other club participating in a UEFA club competition, iii) be involved in any capacity whatsoever in the management, administration and/or sporting performance of any other club participating in a UEFA club competition, or iv) have any power whatsoever in the management, administration and/or sporting performance of any other club participating in a UEFA club competition; b) no one may simultaneously be involved, either directly or indirectly, in any capacity whatsoever in the management, administration and/or sporting performance of more than one club participating in a UEFA club competition; c) no individual or legal entity may have control or influence over more than one club participating in a UEFA club competition, such control or influence being defined in this context as: i) holding a majority of the shareholders’ voting rights; ii) having the right to appoint or remove a majority of the members of the administrative, management or supervisory body of the club; iii) being a shareholder and alone controlling a majority of the shareholders’ voting rights pursuant to an agreement entered into with other shareholders of the club; or iv) being able to exercise by any means a decisive influence in the decision-making of the club. 3.02 If two or more clubs fail to meet the criteria aimed at ensuring the integrity of the competition, only one of them may be admitted to a UEFA club competition, in accordance with the following criteria (applicable in descending order): a) the club which qualifies on sporting merit for the more prestigious UEFA club competition (i.e., in descending order: UEFA Champions League and UEFA Europa League); b) the club which has the highest priority access by virtue of its performance in its top domestic league championship and as indicated in the 2012/13 access list (Annex Ia); c) the club which has the best club coefficient ranking as established in accordance with paragraph 9.02. Clubs that are not admitted are replaced in accordance with paragraph 2.11. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 You know the wankers are rattled and it's probably true when the old statement comes out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
loki679 Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 I like the way the club contacted UEFA and they basically just said 'oh, ffs, piss off and read the rules'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 How have the club proved Edwards was being factually inaccurate? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 How have the club proved Edwards was being factually inaccurate? Presumably the use of 'UEFA have confirmed...', as if he had contacted them, which UEFA say he hasn't. I suspect they're banking on our supporters being so monumentally stupid that we'll just see a statement citing inaccuracies and assume the general gist of the story isn't true, which it is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 Decent gamble tbf. Haven't been on True Faith's Faceys but there'll be a John Toon Toon Armstrong who's started a topic about the London media needlessly stirring things up again no doubt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgarve Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 At least the club is finally acknowledging that Ashley is pretty much running the show at rangers by asking for uefa to speak on this matter. Edwards headline was ridiculous hyperbole but he just stared the facts. Reading into it again though it is highly unlikely this will occur till at least 2016/17 at the earliest and probably (hopefully) Ashley will have sold up by then if he is going forward with Rangers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 The fact the headline says "next season" when Rangers have no chance of being in Europe then is factually inaccurate. They even specifically cite the headline. The gist of the article is 100% true though. Silver lining is maybe he really will f*** off 2 years from now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sempuki Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 Ashley does throw his toys out of the pram very easily. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
summerof69 Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 So the club are deliberately trying to deceive the fans again ? They really never learn do they ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 The fact the headline says "next season" when Rangers have no chance of being in Europe then is factually inaccurate. They even specifically cite the headline. The gist of the article is 100% true though. Silver lining is maybe he really will f*** off 2 years from now. They can qualify for europe via winning a cup, so they do have a chance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Geordie Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 The fact the headline says "next season" when Rangers have no chance of being in Europe then is factually inaccurate. They even specifically cite the headline. The gist of the article is 100% true though. Silver lining is maybe he really will f*** off 2 years from now. They can qualify for europe via winning a cup, so they do have a chance. Wasn't it noted earlier that they could be banned from Europe for a season or two, such is the dire state of their finances? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 The fact the headline says "next season" when Rangers have no chance of being in Europe then is factually inaccurate. They even specifically cite the headline. The gist of the article is 100% true though. Silver lining is maybe he really will f*** off 2 years from now. They can qualify for europe via winning a cup, so they do have a chance. Wasn't it noted earlier that they could be banned from Europe for a season or two, such is the dire state of their finances? Ahh true. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeletor Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 So the club are deliberately trying to deceive the fans again ? They really never learn do they ? They've learned pretty well tbf. It works every time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 So they've released a statement purely to dispute that UEFA made an official statement on the matter? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 If this is true then how come both Man City and PSG can play in the CL? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 If this is true then how come both Man City and PSG can play in the CL? They are owned by different people/organisations. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elliottman Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 fkning he'll Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts