hellbhoy

There was a post before that post, the one where you re-branded an SPL licence as an SPL share ?, I simply furthered your warped logic and applied it to the SFL, their members licence is now nothing more than a share. You do realise that the SFA have a restricted 200 member share list ?, they just simply rename the old share to the newly applied club when one of their members get financially liquidated. I'm just furthering your warped logic Kinky, the SPFL have 42 shares or members licences that get reused every time a club gets booted out of the associations competitions and another club is accepted into the association that gets issued the former members share or members licence that gets amended for the new members name etc. The SFA is just another footballing association that has members who are issued a share in their association as licensed members. There only 200 shares or licences that can be issued and be in use at any given time. When one of their members either leaves, goes bust or other they just simply amend that share to be issued to the next new member. Logical approach.

^^^ DAFUQ is this shit you been posting on the BRALT tonight ffs ? Reads as the incoherent ramblings of an Alzheimer's patient who has forgotten where the fack they are and what century they are in. Maybe I should break it to you softly as a kindly reminder, YER CLUB DIED 3 years ago which might be 30 years from the pace your head is at just now.

Surely they would have been given what the Kincarcrash called an SFL share to The Rangers that Dundee used before they got promoted ?, I mean exactly what they did every year before Rangers liquidated. The relegated SPL club swap shares/membership licences with the SFL club as they move through the divisions surely. No point Rangers fans arguing they were kicked out of the league, every season before them the bottom club got kicked out of the SPL league. They just swapped places with the winners of the SFL 1st division. So what was different here then ?, why treat an existing SFA member as a new club ?, a first surely ?, and they also lost their ranking in the cup draws as well even though they apparently finished 2nd in the SPL the season before. Too many new club thingys happened to them.

Oh ?, so now the defunct SPL licence has been re-branded to an SPL share now to suit your warped view ? According to the SFA's official handbook they only ever issue out members licences to clubs and only clubs. Maybe you can explain how they managed to transfer a clubs licence from one company to another company bearing in mind they only ever issue out members licences to clubs. If the club according to the SFA was transferred from one company to another then why didn't the club take with it it's SFA members licence ? Why was there the need to transfer it from one company to another if it was in the possession of the club itself apparently and the SFA only issue them out to clubs ? And seeing as you think you are so smart, define what now constitutes being a club and what constitutes be the company that owns and operates what is supposed to be the club ? A club needs players, strips, staff, stadium and a ball to be considered a club. The SFA now say that the club is and ethereal entity with no legal status that is in common speech a club ??? So no players, kit, staff, stadium or even a fucking ball but to the SFA it is still considered a club ??? go on explain that Kinky ?

It was a quip at the Mad King saying it wasn't debt Snaffers. You may also find it funny that the SFA only give out SFA members licences to ? wait for it !, clubs. So if were issued to a club in the first instance then who was it that had ownership of it for it to be transferred over to ??? another club seeing as they are only issued out to clubs only. The SFA claimed that they were transferring it from the oldco to the newco but still the SFA only issue licences to clubs ??? Hope you see the point here, in the SFA's handbook they keep mentioning the club gets the members licence and no mention of a company anywhere in sight for the licence to be transferred over to seeing as they are issued to clubs alone. So if the SFA now deem clubs as an ethereal entity then why was there a need to transfer a licence over to a company when it is the ethereal club that had possession of the licence. Just another con by the SFA because the licence needs to be transferred over to a legally recognised entity that is a club for it to be legally binding.

Shut it pishy.

So you basically want me to finger paint the alphabet ?

It's been paid back, only the small formality of handing over the cash whenever the G&SL can be bothered.

The UTT has sent the bears into ???, well fucked if I know but it sure looks like troll mode with endless cycles of pish regurgitated over and over again. The timing of the UTT must be questionable at least ?, result of the hearing due out on either the 11th, 12th or 13th of the month ??? I love the revisionism and rewriting of history trolling from the bears, we been over it many times with them but yet they still parrot out the same old pish that gets shot down time and time again but yet they still throw out the fishing bait for a bite. It doesn't matter one iota to me about the UTT, they got their just desserts !, they died. Shame the associations came up with new rules & regulations to con us all it's still to them the same club, why don't they offer the other liquidated clubs their original SFA members licence and be done with it. The only result that throws the cat amongst the pigeons is if MIH are found guilty of deliberately abusing a legal pension scheme to avoid paying the full amount of tax by defrauding the HMRC by devious financial mechanisms to pay players and staff more in wages and bonuses by calling them loans you do not ever have to pay back. The pressure on the SFA & SPFL to admit that they will need to revue the defunct SPL's decision which was based on the FTT outcome from fans and the media should be hilarious at minimum. The associations will dig their heels in by claiming it has already been dealt with but legally knowing they did in fact have an unsporting advantage on the field will forever have them branded as cheats. Honestly I'm not expecting a favourable result from the UTT but if it they lose it !

Do you ever tire of making an absolute fanny out of yourself ?, obviously not. Everyone can just go to your rep given window and go back through your rep given and find out you personally red dotted posters you had spats with in their old posting history, not just one or two times dopey you did this for months on end and still probably do. Now you have shown levels of obsessiveness on the forum recently that would suggest you have some sort of mental health impairment of sorts ffs. Get a fucking life in the real world.

Thread has went pish.

The UTT hearing will chair on the 7th of July lasting 4 days, the expected result could be either on 11th or the 12th, I'm not sure here ? No sure if this has timed to piss of the orc horde or even worse to give them something to make their fucking Orange walk more enjoyable. But one does live in hope that it's not a good outcome for the orcs and it fucking spoils one of the worst sectarian public events still in the modern era. I will pray for the wifies and bairns good health should it be bad for the proddy faithful. Or prepare a way for multiple new users and aliases bombarding the forum with many many GIRFUY's even though it doesn't affect their club and it's tainted bought history at all even if they had lost. So I will just post "They died, a humiliating and embarrassing death" and it doesn't matter along with "£250K for breaching the rules aKa cheating".

^^^ This coming from a clown who claimed not to have posted anything from Mad Phils blog and forgot he actually did this, A, summarised Mad Pkils blog in detail after reading it & B, posted Mad Phils twitterings & C, to actually posted a link to Mad Phils website. You have the bare faced cheek to slander another poster for doing exactly what you did. And worse still about Mad Phil, the rumours are that Jack Irvine has given Mad Phil information to blog about and Media House was paying him to destroy Rangers related folk. How does that feel dopey ?, you've been slagging off Mad Phil but if the rumours are true it was Rangers related people who paid him to blog about The Rangers problems or even for feeding misinformation in power plays.

Are the ST's being bought by the cash only method ?, you pay upfront like last season and then take the payday loans. How much of the ST money will go to pay off last seasons debt or for Tedi "operating loss" ?

Won't stop me mocking him either Benny.

Well it saves you the time in assessing his blog in detail and then posting his twitter comments and finally to posting links to Mad Phils web site doesn't it dopey.

Why tell me ?, just send a PM to Tedi and No8. and call it care in the community.

The bear pack consist of yourself, No8., Tedi, The Bennett, RedBoaby, and a few misguided youngsters and you have the audacity to label other posters have less than adequate care from the community ?

It was a thing of beauty. I can't wait until he does it again.

He is still using the advanced search function since you asked, must be embarrassing for him when all that shows up is his stupidity with the search results.

Aye OK then the Scottish Simon Schama.

Ffs Kinky, Norman ?

There is no point disputing the facts as there have been a few banned for such abysmal and defamatory nature.

Didn't you used to be "Kincardine" before you copied what your club did ?, came back under a new account/company and tried to inherit the posting history. That thread was comedy gold. Eta, why didn't you offer Div a few bob to have yer old posted shite to be added to yer newco account and try to claim a continuous posting history.

Yip, well done and at least you admit what you post on the forum chump.