Solitaire Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 Will the racist mouthpiece be on the new board of the ...laughably independent ' club1872? Let's be very careful here not to throw stones in glass houses. You refer to an ex-rangers director. Your 40 goal striker is an admitted racist: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/jan/11/leigh-griffiths-wolves-racist-tweet Be careful. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solitaire Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 You've also got this guy in your team: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-26960629 Basically, wind yer neck in when it comes to quoting morals. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 Check the two bald guys fighting over a comb. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 No official organisation anyway says we are a new club. It's only envious yesser loon idiots that actually believe it. I wasn't even referring to the "new club" nonsense specifically but this resolution 12 garbage that clearly is a lot of Twitter and blog driven nonsense that won't go anywhere. It's flattering to see the diddies shit themselves though. Didn't FIFA allow players registered to the old club to transfer for free? Is that not official enough for you? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 Don't worry Nacho. I'd never accuse you of being dismissive. The extent of you're engagement is in fact mind boggling. Your insecurity about things Rangers related, is absolutely towering. insecurity i am secure in the knowledge that my club survived, laughing at you new club fuds is the reason im here 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 With Newcastle being relegated we now have some interesting rules about to come to bear. The punishments for flaunting these can also be quite severe. This of course goes beyond having to offload Rangers and Rangers retail shares, he also has commercial interests in Oldham. 98.1 Except with the prior written consent of the Board no Club may, either directly or indirectly: 98.1.1 hold or deal in (or make any application to hold or deal in or underwrite any issue of) the securities or shares of another football club; or 98.1.2 be a member of another football club; or 98.1.3 be involved in any capacity whatsoever in the management or administration of another football club; or 98.1.4 have any power whatsoever to influence the financial, commercial or business affairs or the management or administration of another football club; or 98.1.5 lend to, gift money to, purchase future receivables from or guarantee the debts or obligations of that football club (or any other arrangement of substantially similar effect). ...... 105 Powers of The Board in Event of Default 105.2 Any breach of any of the foregoing Regulations 98 to 101 inclusive, including without limitation knowingly rendering incorrect or incomplete information pursuant to Regulations 101 and 103, shall constitute misconduct.Without prejudice to the range of other sanctions that may be imposed in respect of such breach, any Club in breach of any of the aforesaid Regulations may with the sanction of a special resolution passed at an Annual or Extraordinary General Meeting of The League, be expelled from The League. There shall be no right of appeal against such expulsion. cant see this happening at all in regards to getting the fat scumbag out or our club 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 Didn't FIFA allow players registered to the old club to transfer for free? Is that not official enough for you? nope , as that is based on the fallacy that club is the same as company which the facts contradict, the only available info from fifa regarding the status of the club are news articles on their website of which 5 say same club and 1 says new club - hope that helps 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 Reply from The offshore game. http://www.theoffshoregame.net/a-correction-and-statement-regarding-our-report/ http://www.theoffshoregame.net/the-uefa-licence-issue/ On a side note i find it hilarious that the bloggers are the only ones making legit money from tainted fc doesnt really address the points raised on rangers media unsurprisingly i also find it hilarious that the bloggers are making money from gullible celtic fans by feeding them a load of nonsense on this issue and the various other issues 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 So basically, thanks for all your hard work corresponding, but we disagree with what you say, and here's why. To appease you, we'll change the wording on two lines. I like this line... The history and the spirit of the club remain with the fans, not with any company. ETA: Has the guy on RM posted anything for our wee Nacho to cut n paste? thanks for corresponding but we will ignore most of what you say as it doesnt suit us , is more the gist of it, i cant imagine anyone is really surprised with that as the ususal suspects like ill phil etc are behind it, the latest attempt to kid on that its an impartial viewpoint when we all know its celtic fans behind it - like the scottish football monitor, rangers tax case etc 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 Rangers fan posts rangers fans blog/report/reply from Rangers website on Rangers about tax dodging from some tax dodging site, but blames Celtic fans....buffffffff!!! I'd imagine thats because a quick search of the twitter timeline of that website shows its infested by the celtic twatteratti and the guy running it says that it was celtic fans that gave him the information 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 insecurity i am secure in the knowledge that my club survived, laughing at you new club fuds is the reason im here Ah, smiley faces and insults. That's definitely how to win an argument. Anyway, I'm not a "new club fud". I'm an "it's all a bit murky and indistinct" fud. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 the only available info from fifa regarding the status of the club are news articles on their website of which 5 say same club and 1 says new club - hope that helps It really does help in establishing that it's all a bit murky and indistinct, even in the view of the corrupt governing body whose verdict you wish to cling to. Thanks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 Ah, smiley faces and insults. That's definitely how to win an argument. Anyway, I'm not a "new club fud". I'm an "it's all a bit murky and indistinct" fud. You forgot 'immoral'. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 (edited) nope , as that is based on the fallacy that club is the same as company which the facts contradict, the only available info from fifa regarding the status of the club are news articles on their website of which 5 say same club and 1 says new club - hope that helpsHave you read the FIFA transfer regulations I posted earlier in the thread? According to FIFA players are contracted to a club.UEFA defines a club as the legal entity which is responsible for the fielding of a team. The falicy is that club and company are seperate. Edited May 13, 2016 by stonedsailor 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 You forgot 'immoral'. Oh, I never forget that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 It really does help in establishing that it's all a bit murky and indistinct, even in the view of the corrupt governing body whose verdict you wish to cling to. Thanks. No problem 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 Have you read the FIFA transfer regulations I posted earlier in the thread? According to FIFA players are contracted to a club. UEFA defines a club as the legal entity which is responsible for the fielding of a team. The falicy is that club and company are seperate. Not according to Scottish law as Lord glennie and Nimmo established, not according to the sfa, spl, spfl, uefa, the Eca and the sfl as they all officially recognise us as the same club, not according to hmrc, bdo, duff and phelps and the stock market who all say the club has survived, ditto the asa, not according to the 20 other teams who have gone through the same process as Rangers and have remained the same club, the fallacy is that club and company cannot be separated, as for your source send me a link and I will have a look at it 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 Not according to Scottish law as Lord glennie and Nimmo established, not according to the sfa, spl, spfl, uefa, the Eca and the sfl as they all officially recognise us as the same club, not according to hmrc, bdo, duff and phelps and the stock market who all say the club has survived, ditto the asa, not according to the 20 other teams who have gone through the same process as Rangers and have remained the same club, the fallacy is that club and company cannot be separated, as for your source send me a link and I will have a look at it nacho, you've just gone up in my estimation. A Rangers fan who is actually prepared to look at evidence. Good lad. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 Not according to Scottish law as Lord glennie and Nimmo established, not according to the sfa, spl, spfl, uefa, the Eca and the sfl as they all officially recognise us as the same club, not according to hmrc, bdo, duff and phelps and the stock market who all say the club has survived, ditto the asa, not according to the 20 other teams who have gone through the same process as Rangers and have remained the same club, the fallacy is that club and company cannot be separated, as for your source send me a link and I will have a look at it UEFA FFP rules state that a club cannot change legal form in the case of insolvency, these rules came into force in 2011 any clubs with recognised continuation after an insolvency prior to that cannot be used as evidence. FIFA, as stated allowed transfers from the old club without fees being paid to the new club. There has been no ruling under Scots law, any law lord who has ruled have ruled based on SPL rules. Duff and Phelps are implicated in a fraud trial involving old Rangers and the creation of new Rangers. The stock market, HMRC and BDO have said no such thing. The ECA are the equivalent of a union for clubs and as such only interested in the fees garnered from members. The SFL, SPFL and SPL are hardly impartial given the "armageddon" that they foresaw. As for the link just google "FIFA transfer regulations or look back in the thread. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 I wonder if our nacho here held up a red card at ibrokes during the no to newco debacle and if so what was his reasons for doing/not doing so... weve covered this numerous times before, i was there , i held up the red card, i knew however that liquidation wouldnt mena the end of the club as we had numerous interested buyers at that point, i wanted to avoid liquidation due to the many other negative consequences that it involved, possible demotion, loss of players due to tupe etc 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.