Ric

Works fine here (Englandshire / BT). So either your computer or your provider has an issue. Personally I would consider it as a bonus that RM was not available.

There is no way in hell that Rangers should suffer a limited suspension, just give them a points deduction and be done with it if that was the case. Giving them a 3 month (or a quarter or a half season) suspension from the league just fucks everyone about and once again seems to be the tail wagging the dog.

http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showforum=1

I take it you didn't follow the link..

Well played... That's definitely something that should be posted on RM.

Rangers have failed to pay tax again? Is this not just beyond fucking stupid, it's not as if they sneak it past anyone.

Avoidance of the point, I'm afraid. The fact still stands if Man U, or Chelsea or any other team were to be in a position where they were to be relegated then that is what would happen. Period. Well that is only one element of the charges as the SFA document outlines. As I said, that is utterly irrelevant to the definition of fairness. Do you feel either judge that has ruled on Rangers' sanctions are regular attendees to football? Because one may attend more, does that make his opinion more relevant? No, of course not. I certainly don't mean to sit here and bounce arguments back and forth. It's pretty clear you think that any decision taken should reflect whether it will affect Motherwell whereas I don't believe it should as it has nothing to do with Motherwell. Just because they may be financially hit is irrelevant to the actual crime/punishment element of it all.

But no team should be considered so big that they cannot either be punished or relegated. If Manchester United finished bottom in the EPL they would be relegated, it's as simple as that so there is no comparison to our English cousins. Well it's all relative to be fair. Considering some of the information coming out, could Rangers not be considered to have colluded to maintain an advantage not for just the one season but for decades? A pretty low blow, I don't see what that has to do with anything. Being out of the country for the best part of 2 years does limit my attendance that is certainly fair to say, but I don't see why that means my opinions of fairness or my willingness of my club to survive is any less (or more) than yours. A very poor argument that one.

In truth, I don't know what is fair, I have to leave that up to the SFA and/or SPL. What I do find disappointing is the noise created by either side of the argument, especially the spin based on completely unknown unknowns (ie: no Rangers and no TV deal) and those who have built their house of cards on sponsorship money of the OF meaning neither club can ever be relegated or even punished (which looks to be teams like Motherwell, Kilmarnock and Dundee United if you believe the chat). I don't particularly wish to see Rangers hammered so heavily they stop existing. That's a bit daft as football teams will tend to exist if they have a support base and Rangers clearly have that. However they can't be seen as too big to be punished if they are judged to have done wrong (and of course the level of wrong is still open to debate). The muppets on places like FF and RM do "grind my gears" (©Peter Griffin) in regard to their inability to accept the club has been caught with their pants down and that it's not all one big conspiracy against them.

I don't, it's the highest league in the land and should be based on "sporting integrity" rather than commercial terms, otherwise we would have a franchise similar to the MLS in the States. That's a bit of a contradiction. They should be based on their rules but should also be relative to other national organisations. Let's be honest here though, the reason the CoS asked the SFA to reconsider their ruling was down to an interpretation of the rules, however the judge did say that the harshest sanctions that was not applied and fudged in order to benefit Rangers were applicable to the situation. You mean the club that was relegated for cheating? This again all goes past the point of which you were claiming to be fair, when at least you admitted you wished them to be fair to Motherwell rather than fair in general. This is where we disagree and even if it means that it harms my team, I would still wish for the punishment to be harsh if the authorities thought so irrespective of whether it affects other clubs.

Ok, TSAR, the problem with your reply is that you are saying what is fair for Motherwell, not what is fair. A subjective point of view rather than objective. If you think a team that to all purposes has cheated (and looks like to have cheated for a very long time indeed) should be given a reduced level of punishment because your club needs the money they bring in then that's fine, but it's not fair. The same point pretty much sums up my opinion of McCall's comments. If Motherwell have put themselves into a position where they would be fucked if Rangers were not part of the SPL then that is an issue for Motherwell and Motherwell only, not one for the SPL and only goes to show the club have been badly positioned to deal with such a situation.

So you are in the "they are too big to be relegated/expelled/suspended" camp then? Personally I feel you have moved away from what is fair to what you think is commercially suitable. Why would it harm the league? Certainly the 10 point deduction Rangers suffered for entering administration didn't harm it. The current rules are that each case is to be dealt with on an individual basis. Just how many points do you think are suitable? Personally, I don't feel points are the answer, either the club exists within the SPL structure or it doesn't. You argue against the SFA from implementing this punishment but wish a multi year ban. Fair enough, but I don't feel that expulsion from the Scottish Cup is a suitable punishment for the "crimes" that have been perpetrated. Again, this is nothing to do with the SFA and everything to do with UEFA. You claimed that this punishment would be for a NewCo which we all know cannot compete in Europe without having 3 years worth of accounts. That is not a punishment, but the actual rules. You started your reply by referencing the issue in an exclusively Scottish position (too big to go down malarkey) and at the end you start referencing other FA's punishments meted out. You can't have it both ways. You claimed in your initial post that you thought that certain punishments were fair or not, yet all your arguments seem to be not about Rangers but about other clubs. The bottom line is this is about breaking the rules and the sanctions that should be meted out for that. If clubs have tied themselves so tightly to the skirt tails of one or other club then that is a fault of the club, and should not interfere when that other club is punished. That's fairness and if Motherwell (for example) go into debt because of that, that is entirely the problem with Motherwell and not the structure and equity within the league.

Really? A newco with no debts and an uncertified points deduction, a season's worth of cup ban is equivalent to what they've done. As for the 3 year Euro ban that isn't imposed by the SFA that's a given simply for being a new company. Clearly you have a leaning towards the blue side as I don't think anyone other that the journos and the Rangers fans would think that was fair in the slightest.

Has the face painter been paid. That's what I want to know...

Clearly Yorkston is going to put McIntyre's money into an offshore account and pay him a random £30k ten years after he left the club. All the savvy money people do it this way..

Probably only those who aren't one of them... Looking at the creditors list there are still many of them who are looking for just a couple of hundred quid, yet Rangers and/or RFF can afford to have the pitch relaid, jollies arranged for Hong Kong and pay for lawyers. Shameful!

Do you really need to ask that?

IIRC it was actually the combination of the Laurentia and Baltica continents that formed Scotland, the former being the one associated with the current Northern American continent. Edit: OOooh, and the Highlands of Scotland have some of the oldest rocks on Earth, at over 3 billion years old.

Aye, because he managed to lead Sion to such a successful outcome. Just think if they didn't fight they might have had a worse punishment than docked 36 points and thrown out of Europe.

Immediately taking 1500 pages down to about 12!

I knew there was a reason I didn't go in there... Seriously though, it's a pub, it's in town, and it's going to be frequented by fans. Can't say I've had more than a couple of pints in Paddy's, but I never saw it as a Celtic pub in any way. There is one in town (the wig or something?) where I was once and it is definitely of the green persuasion.

Except they don't. Most fans I know drink in The Bull.

I did, ya dobber! This seems to be my best bet... Gilmour Rant

Anyone got a link to the Gilmour comments, down here in Englandshire the whole Rangers thing hardly raises an eyebrow.

Oh, completely. I merely said it was nice to see. Even if it's lip service it's a lot better to palette than Danny's comments about needing Rangers.