Jdog Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 On 07/07/2018 at 21:26, bennett said: That's not how I read it but carry on Sevco/ing... 13 hours ago, bennett said: Only no one's actually asked me... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Estragon Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 On 28/06/2018 at 20:02, Jimboyjones1976 said: It absolutely is a point scoring exercise. In the case of Scottish football, it is majoritively Rangers fans that lead the charge on this. It certainly isn’t acceptable in any way, but what is for sure is that historic cases of this kind of thing happened when our society was a very different place. Not excusing it one bit mind you. One thing’s for sure, justice will not be served by a mob of baying Rangers fans wrapped up in ‘faux’ disgrace at their rival club’s past, using it as some sort of ultimate moral stance to get one over on them. Not once have I heard a Rangers fan talk about the victims in this and there’s no way on Earth anyone would give any creedence to a crowd of bigoted football fans who seem to take more personal gain from the issue than resolution for the victims. A Celtic fan here who understands the issue completely but will always and only accept a full investigation by the law into the matter, not some blinkered, bigoted attempt at justice from the ‘guardians’ of children’s rights and safe guarding in Ibrox. Fans that are so hell bent on blackening the name of a Scottish legend who even their own legend managers respect above all. In fact, blackening the name of a guy who showed his real colours by picking the dead from stairway 13. On the subject of 'faux disgrace'... I think you've either completely misunderstood my point, or are deliberately trying to misrepresent what I said. When I said that it was in no way acceptable to automatically hold organisations complicit to historical child abuse and the like, I thought that was a fairly obvious reference to all the BJK bile. You've fairly perfectly illustrated the problem here - whereby ANY attempt to scrutinise these cases is automatically lumped in with all that shite, as though it was exclusively "bigoted football fans" who have an interest in this matter. This is exactly what I originally responded to. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
printer Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 Why do the papers keep reporting "Ashley gets 93p in every £1"?Have they been listening to glib and shameless lies? Or are they merely incompetent?Or both? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverWolfe Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 Why do the papers keep reporting "Ashley gets 93p in every £1"?Have they been listening to glib and shameless lies? Or are they merely incompetent?Or both?Because the papers are fannies. It's not difficult to find out what Rangers get out of the new deal and what they got out of the old deal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muirkirk nil Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 Sports Direct and Rangers will meet in court again in late July to settle a contract dispute. Bosses at Rangers Football Club are preparing for a pre-season High Court battle with Sports Direct and Newcastle United owner Mike Ashley over a merchandise deal. The deal, which allows a company in the Sports Direct group to sell replica Rangers kit and other branded products, is expiring. Bosses at Rangers want to sign a new deal with a third party. SDI Retail Services bosses object and say they should have a chance to match any new offer. A judge on Wednesday said he would analyse evidence about the meaning of a contract clause at a High Court trial in London in late July. Mr Justice Phillips said bosses at Rangers should not sign any new deal until he had ruled on the contract row. The judge heard arguments about the dispute, from lawyers representing both sides, at a preliminary hearing in London on Tuesday. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jdog Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 . .what was that £3m for you paid Ashley ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
printer Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 Because the papers are fannies. ^^^^^^^^Libellous to fannies IMO. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jdog Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 On 07/07/2018 at 21:26, bennett said: That's not how I read it but carry on Sevco/ing... Looks like the Judge read it differently too. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 3 hours ago, muirkirk nil said: Sports Direct and Rangers will meet in court again in late July to settle a contract dispute. Bosses at Rangers Football Club are preparing for a pre-season High Court battle with Sports Direct and Newcastle United owner Mike Ashley over a merchandise deal. The deal, which allows a company in the Sports Direct group to sell replica Rangers kit and other branded products, is expiring. Bosses at Rangers want to sign a new deal with a third party. SDI Retail Services bosses object and say they should have a chance to match any new offer. A judge on Wednesday said he would analyse evidence about the meaning of a contract clause at a High Court trial in London in late July. Mr Justice Phillips said bosses at Rangers should not sign any new deal until he had ruled on the contract row. The judge heard arguments about the dispute, from lawyers representing both sides, at a preliminary hearing in London on Tuesday. Sports direct were given a chance to match the offer, the issue is that they want it split into three separate rights. Rangers say that is impossible as they received an offer for all the rights as one/not split up. Where did you copy that from? -2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jdog Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 3 hours ago, bennett said: Sports direct were given a chance to match the offer, the issue is that they want it split into three separate rights. Rangers say that is impossible as they received an offer for all the rights as one/not split up. Where did you copy that from? Looks like the Judge disagrees with the shameless criminal...not for the first time. Looks so far as Ashley has taken a £3m pay off from Rangers , yet still wins 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jdog Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 Big Mike owns you Muppets 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 51 minutes ago, Jdog said: Looks like the Judge disagrees with the shameless criminal...not for the first time. Looks so far as Ashley has taken a £3m pay off from Rangers , yet still wins Have you actually read the court documents Densboy? -2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jdog Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 5 hours ago, bennett said: Have you actually read the court documents Densboy? No, neither did you Ashley wins again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimboyjones1976 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 11 hours ago, bennett said: Have you actually read the court documents Densboy? So Bennett. What do the court documents actually say? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jdog Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 34 minutes ago, Jimboyjones1976 said: So Bennett. What do the court documents actually say? He's waiting to hear what Chris Jack tells him . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeBairn Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 1 hour ago, Jimboyjones1976 said: So Bennett. What do the court documents actually say? You'll wait a while. He'll be waiting for his assistance dog to read it for him. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jdog Posted July 21, 2018 Share Posted July 21, 2018 10 hours ago, orfc said: Dodgy dave told to pay up by court and to shove his excuses https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44901139 Rangers think that's a great result for King https://www.followfollow.com/forum/threads/judge-urges-dave-king-to-make-£11m-rangers-shares-offer.37605/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeBairn Posted July 21, 2018 Share Posted July 21, 2018 6 hours ago, Jdog said: Rangers think that's a great result for King https://www.followfollow.com/forum/threads/judge-urges-dave-king-to-make-£11m-rangers-shares-offer.37605/ They are a tad dense. Maybe someone should explain the meaning of the word "compliance". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Moomintroll Posted July 22, 2018 Share Posted July 22, 2018 They are a tad dense. Maybe someone should explain the meaning of the word "compliance".http://dilbert.com/strip/1999-11-29 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeBairn Posted July 22, 2018 Share Posted July 22, 2018 10 minutes ago, Moomintroll said: http://dilbert.com/strip/1999-11-29 DAVE KING OUTED AS GETTING BUSINESS AND LEGAL ADVICE FROM "DILBERT". I can see the headlines now. 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.