Moyes says Rangers plight is a 'tragedy'

Blame the owners who put Rangers in this position, not the players who got screwed along with the other Rangers' employees and the fans.

Green bitching is humorous. He didn't bitch about the price he paid for the Club, did he?

It could be disastrous for Scottish football. So many Scots feared what would happen if the old firm joined the English league. Well, it could be that effectively for some years, one half of the Old Firm has gone.

As for the players, it is surely an open and shut case. Rangers owns the players contracts and its debt. Rangers no longer exists, and so such ownership no longer exists. Your contract can't be owned by someone or something that doesn't exist. The New Rangers is a new company, albeit with the same fans etc that would be there for us if Everton ever went bust and created a new company.

It's a little sorry to think you can ditch your liabilities, but keep your assets. But I understnaand them. I'd be desperate if such Hell befell us. Heaven Forbid!

As terrible as it is for Rangers supporters, I have little sympathy for the club itself; not only were they operating some very dodgy financial practices but I seem to remember them being all too quick to take the pick of our players after Hysel.

What goes around...

A bit harsh, Andy. How would you feel if it was us? I find it hard to believe that Rangers are an isolated case. Yesterday the SPL clubs did what they had to do but the outcome will run well beyond Rangers. Full time football in Scotland will be dead this time next year, Scotland will join Northern Ireland as utter nonentities in international football.

The only possible upside is that integrity won. I believe that the demise of Rangers is almost beyond belief but is only the start of a long overdue examination of a corrupt and obscene industry. The game is up.

Andy #298, Scotland is already a nonentity in international football.

The real back story here is what has in part brought this to bear - the reduction in TV money after the SPL rejected Sky's offer of around £45m for 4 years a decade ago. Chicken feed compared to the EPL I know, but the TV company can't make the money off broadcast sponsorship and TVCs with too small an audience / subscription base.

They ended up with BBC Scotland for next-to-fuck-all, until Setanta came in. That worked well for them. In the end ESPN and Sky picked it up for the same price (about £12m / season) as they did for the EPL games.

It's now about £15m a year for the next five years, but it's a story of greed on behalf of the SPL and the clubs. Rangers and Celtic wanted to go down the Spanish route of having individually negotiated TV deals. It makes sense, as the SPL is about as competitive as the Primera Liga.

The EPL is the big cheese now, and will be for a time yet. As long as the likes of Al Jazeera and ESPN are around to bid, Sky will always pay big to keep the monopoly, and a new entrant like BT will be susceptible to buy in for one package to get a foothold. Such competition for the EPL repeats in countries around the world, helping drive up the overseas contracts too.

But, other leagues are onto this, and trying to redress the balance. I'd argue it's tough / nigh impossible for the likes of the Bundesliga to do this - this is (in part) why EPL clubs pay obscene wages to attract the biggest names. However, through commercial sponsorship deals way ahead of most EPL teams, German teams can offer competitive wages too - a reason why most of the top German players stay there. For Serie A to do this, they'd just need a former PM who's a media mogul, and a proclivity to bribe, and they'd be away (okay, but you see my point).

If the EPL revenues for whatever reason ever took a nosedive, it'd really screw a lot of teams over down here. As a team that is far too dependent on broadcast revenue than most, we would be more exposed than most.

Matt, a very interesting post. In terms of jeopardy where would you or anyone else put us in a Premier League table?

Andy #307. I don't have the figures to hand, but I did see some a couple of years ago which broke down club revenue in absolute and percentage terms for matchday, commercial and broadcast.

This was pre the new shirt deals for the top clubs, pre the training gear deal for Man U that eclipses ours, and others shirt deals, and pre the Man City "sponsorship / naming rights package" with Etihad.

A few things stood out. Arsenal's new stadium had a drastic effect on matchday revenue (absolute terms and percentage) - bearing in mind it includes corporate hospitality not included in sponsorship, and their naming rights deal for Ashburton Grove.

Everton's broadcast revenue (i.e. equal share, merit, facility fee, overseas TV) was a massive proportion of our total revenue. Off the top of my head if our turnover was £80m and we were getting £54-55m from that, then you're at 2/3 right there.

My point is that all clubs would suffer with a reduction, and have to cut their costs accordingly. But next year when you consider that Liverpool's commercial turnover alone will outstrip our total revenue, you see why we'd suffer more than most as our commercial revenue is not on a par with comparable clubs like Villa, and our matchday revenue is severely hampered due to the stadium (lack of corporate facilities, limited opportunity for catering / other secondary revenue to crowd).

I can't understand why Rangers aren't desperate to play in english League 2. Surely clubs in that division would back it cos of increased gates, carling cup, fa cup and tv money and Rangers would profit massively from moving up the leagues whilst at same time sticking 2 fingers up at Scottish EPL & Celtic

I agree with Andy Walker. Rangers are in the mess they are because of some exceedingly questionable business practices.

Frankly the "punishment" after going belly up and surely stiffing a hell of a lot of innocent vendors, never mind the fans, is unforgivable.

I've heard many ppl say Celtic need Rangers. Possibly. But another team in the long run would eventually fill the Rangers void. It's gonna hurt the SPL for the next 2-3 years no question. But if you allow Rangers straight back into the First Division, what lesson / deterrent is that sending?!

I know quite a few Celtic supporters and I personally consider them my second team. I can't fathom Rangers, after arguably gross and destructive negligence, being able to follow any other path than the one they are on.

Good luck to them as I hope they'll be back playing Celtic in a few years time. The Old Firm derby can take a brief but necessary hiatus in the interim.

Rangers have been involved in a scheme not unlike the one that Jimmy Carr has been caught up in, and incidentally Man City used to pay Carlos Tevez.

Football attracts dodgy owners in the main, either local lads done well or international owners who want to cleanse their PR or serve their vanity.

Rangers are where they are due to their own greed and mismanagement. We may not have their wheeler dealing, but we most certainly have a fantasist at the helm with a lightweight board and doomed plan.

We are the proverbial "Glass house" owners. Let's enjoy the player and prey for Goddo.

There are more Rangers and Celtic supporters in every town and city in Scotland than there are fans of the local team. An imbalance such as this is a double-edged sword in as much as it has aided them to dominate their domestic scene but produce a crap league. This has been the situation up there for 40-50 years.

If you add this to the complication of TV and all of the nonsense that goes along with those no-marks and the bums that they attract, then you end up with the current situation where even an "institution" (which is what Rangers are) being brought to this point.

It will be interesting to see how the SPL copes without them. Celtic apart, it will be more competitive. It could come to the point of people pretty much ignoring Celtic and enjoying the competition from the rest.

Also curious to see where those Rangers fans would end up!!