Parklife Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 I never said it was. It was a genuine question. The SPFL is not well off, and I could see it going to court if they tried to strip titles. Is Oldco Rangers well off? Is Newco Rangers well off? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debian Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Oh oh. Here comes the intelligent one again. Who's playing a victim? That's bizarre,even for a weirdo like yourself. When I say repeating things,it's not just in the last week.its since the old thread was locked and this one started, but being capable of using big words to try and insult people,you knew that anyway. Well said DandyDunn... Plinthy rocks about the place thinking he is it... Good to see some decent posters like yourself who like a bit of ribbing, but don't obsess over it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debian Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Is Oldco Rangers well off? Is Newco Rangers well off? Hey Parky, how's tricks mate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langtonian Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 I was merely stating your desperation to see then fall again. l: not just him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Would actually be interesting to see what the reaction would be if titles were stripped. On what basis would they be stripped though? That Rangers gained a sporting advantage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Farrington Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 I never said it was. It was a genuine question. The SPFL is not well off, and I could see it going to court if they tried to strip titles. Na, this is a mess for others to sort out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pool Q Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Wilson's quite open about supporting International Rangers. Very possibly. Thing is, I don't know who he is. As I say did a quick Google and he's not the journalist I had thought, and I've a feeling he writes for the Herald. But that's as far as it goes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonzo Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Who actually gives a shit about Europe except Celtic? Europe is a total stitch up designed to make it impossible for smaller clubs to get anywhere. I could give less of hoot.judging by sellicks European performances they don't give a shit about Europe either Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armitage Shanks Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 On what basis would they be stripped though? That Rangers gained a sporting advantage? They clearly did gain an advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tartan_McCole Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 (edited) They clearly did gain an advantage. and still could only win 5 titles Tainted x 5 Edited November 10, 2015 by Tartan_McCole Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tartan_McCole Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 On what basis would they be stripped though? That Rangers gained a sporting advantage? The Russians never cheated either...1 person agin another Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce778 Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 They clearly did gain an advantage.Any club that is indebted to anyone else is gaining an advantage. At what time is the advantage gained? People seem to be retrospectively applying debts to seasons because it's quite easy to do that with the eBt scheme. But if a team gets a loan of £5m this season, spends it all this season, wins the treble, doesn't repay the loan at the end of the season when it is due, has that team gained an unfair advantage this season? The only difference that I can see is that the team in that circumstance has elected to pay hmrc instead of its lender. If Rangers borrowed the money from ticketus to pay hmrc and then never paid ticketus, would people still say the same thing? What's the difference? At the end of the day any company that incurs an insolvency event has failed to pay creditors. The law does not rank hmrc as a preferred creditor. What people are proposing is to go beyond an insolvency event and look into the circumstances and timing that debts became due. It's simply not feasible and would lead to inconsistent findings. Not to mention that there is no entitlement under the SFA or SPL rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Mr Black Advisers split on Rangers tax case ruling Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Wow, King attempting to strip Ashley of his voting rights and Ashley has just challenegd the SFA passing King as Fit & Proper in the court of session. Things are heating up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debian Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Wow, King attempting to strip Ashley of his voting rights and Ashley has just challenged the SFA passing King as Fit & Proper in the court of session. Things are heating up. The LSE passed King as Fit and Proper - hence the SFA's ruling. King made the Ashley proposal 2 weeks ago, and it is also part of Resolution 11 at the AGM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMcoolJ Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Who actually gives a shit about Europe except Celtic? Europe is a total stitch up designed to make it impossible for smaller clubs to get anywhere. I could give less of hoot. I totally agree, it's an utter stitch up. That said, I've really enjoyed the Dons in Europe over the last two season. They've exceeded expectations, played really well and actually been a bit unlucky not to have progressed further against teams they probably had no right to. My guess is it has ruined two seasons due to later fatigue and earned us very little by way of revenue though!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
er yir macaroon Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Pretty much what i thought when listening. Lambert conflating "Scottish Football" with "Celtic and Rangers". These two clubs are struggling, comparatively. Meanwhile, Aberdeen, ICT, St Johnstone, Ross County, Hearts, etc are having a great time Really? I can remember Aberdeen and Dundee Utd having a great time in the 80s and it was fantastic. They're a bit of a laughing stock at the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RenfrewBlue Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Any club that is indebted to anyone else is gaining an advantage. At what time is the advantage gained? People seem to be retrospectively applying debts to seasons because it's quite easy to do that with the eBt scheme. But if a team gets a loan of £5m this season, spends it all this season, wins the treble, doesn't repay the loan at the end of the season when it is due, has that team gained an unfair advantage this season? The only difference that I can see is that the team in that circumstance has elected to pay hmrc instead of its lender. If Rangers borrowed the money from ticketus to pay hmrc and then never paid ticketus, would people still say the same thing? What's the difference? At the end of the day any company that incurs an insolvency event has failed to pay creditors. The law does not rank hmrc as a preferred creditor. What people are proposing is to go beyond an insolvency event and look into the circumstances and timing that debts became due. It's simply not feasible and would lead to inconsistent findings. Not to mention that there is no entitlement under the SFA or SPL rules. This is what I've been trying to work out. What rules would be used? If it's the old ineligible player, which has already been decided wasn't breached, then I believe they can overturn a games result and make it a 3-0 loss?Now if Rangers were cheating then so we're Hearts. Dundee (twice), Livingston and potentially Celtic, Kilmarnock, Aberdeen and most EPL teams. After all, if you're spending money you don't have then it could be considered cheating. So, if Rangers are stripped of titles, what about the associated prize money and that paid to the other teams that cheated? What about Cup results? Exactly how far do you go? Whether you think Rangers should lose titles or not, how do you think the SFA will react when faced with these questions? Legal action will undoubtedly follow anyway, so this isn't getting settled anytime soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Mr Black Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stocky Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 This is what I've been trying to work out. What rules would be used? If it's the old ineligible player, which has already been decided wasn't breached, then I believe they can overturn a games result and make it a 3-0 loss? Now if Rangers were cheating then so we're Hearts. Dundee (twice), Livingston and potentially Celtic, Kilmarnock, Aberdeen and most EPL teams. After all, if you're spending money you don't have then it could be considered cheating. So, if Rangers are stripped of titles, what about the associated prize money and that paid to the other teams that cheated? What about Cup results? Exactly how far do you go? Whether you think Rangers should lose titles or not, how do you think the SFA will react when faced with these questions? Legal action will undoubtedly follow anyway, so this isn't getting settled anytime soon. surely the only team that you can compare it to is Gretna. They are the only other team to go into liquidation. the rest just went into administration. No Titles have been stripped from them Have they. so there is the precedent i think Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donaldo87 Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Like Roger Mitchell said on Sportsound last night Rangers would just do a Juventus and refer to it as "54 titles won on the pitch" etc So I say void the titles. Keeps everyone else happy and Rangers can just pretend it never happened... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShedTA Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 This is what I've been trying to work out. What rules would be used? If it's the old ineligible player, which has already been decided wasn't breached, then I believe they can overturn a games result and make it a 3-0 loss? Now if Rangers were cheating then so we're Hearts. Dundee (twice), Livingston and potentially Celtic, Kilmarnock, Aberdeen and most EPL teams. After all, if you're spending money you don't have then it could be considered cheating. So, if Rangers are stripped of titles, what about the associated prize money and that paid to the other teams that cheated? What about Cup results? Exactly how far do you go? Whether you think Rangers should lose titles or not, how do you think the SFA will react when faced with these questions? Legal action will undoubtedly follow anyway, so this isn't getting settled anytime soon. well the thing is RB this isnt striclty true. if you consider the undeclared side letters which allowed rangers to employ the EBT thing and therefore field ineligble players which were not declared to the SFA, then hearts , dundee and the rest didnt do that did they? rangers hid these side letters from the SFA thereby clearly breaking the rules. so they could be pulled up on that one alone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donaldo87 Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Yeah I was going to ask - is the spending more than they could have not a bit of a red herring anyway and the real issue should be undisclosed side letters / contracts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jailender Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Were Rangers not already fined for the side letters? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debian Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 well the thing is RB this isnt striclty true. if you consider the undeclared side letters which allowed rangers to employ the EBT thing and therefore field ineligble players which were not declared to the SFA, then hearts , dundee and the rest didnt do that did they? rangers hid these side letters from the SFA thereby clearly breaking the rules. so they could be pulled up on that one alone. Yeah I was going to ask - is the spending more than they could have not a bit of a red herring anyway and the real issue should be undisclosed side letters / contracts? This was the Lord Nimmo investigation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.5eeaf0fbe501ba3c868c32fd77caef1f.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.