Baxter Parp Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 It discriminates against people due to their age...which is illegal Straw clutching at its finest. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madwullie Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 In that case we should immediately do away with age restrictions for having sex, smoking, drinking, driving, voting, joining the armed forces, gambling etc. Fucking yaaas. Party time. I'm heading down the carry out shop for £500 worth of alcopops, and cider and space raiders. Who's with me? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 The Rangers appeal today is based on the fact that a transfer ban does not appear in the SFA rulebook as a stated sanction for bringing the game into disrepute. Never mind that the rules allow the SFA to impose any sanction they see fit, if by some miracle Rangers win the appeal, then the SFA will be forced to impose the only sanction that is clearly written in the rules, namely expulsion or suspension from the SFA membership. FIFA don't even have to get involved. This is why I'm praying for a Rangers victory today.. WATP! But the good thing is Uefa are already involved whether anybody likes if ir not. If they are to be in SPL next year, they need to be able to hold a Uefa license, which they can't. Doesn't matter for them getting into Europe etc. they need it for Spl...... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claymores Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 It discriminates against people due to their age...which is illegal STUPID, STUPID thing to say. And anyway, Ranjurs can still employ anyone of any age they feel like. Those over 18 will simply not be registered and so will be ineligible to take part in any competitions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spain Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 Is this quote from QC Richard Keen not utter bollocks:- Mr Keen said an appeal tribunal held to review the original SFA decision had heard the suggestion that Rangers had a squad of more than 40 players. However, he said 25 of those players were aged 18 or under. Pretty sure Rangers have more than just 15 players over the age of 18 surely. By my count they have 32 players over the age of 18. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 No. 8 is normally one of the more decent rangers fans on here, but his constant toeing of the party line, willingness to spout so many cliches used in this saga (ie the sky deal that nobody from sky or any reliable source has ever confirmed) and general non acceptance of any fitting and substantial punishment (a couple of closed door games as punishment for a decade of institutionalized cheating for Christ sakes ) has been totally cringeworthy. He's the only one on this site making any kind of defence for his club. I don't know whether that's because he's just got more gall or if he's the only one not resigned to their fate, but fair play. Really? You dont think that further punishment will come if they are found guilty of dual contracts? You dont think that might include expulsion or relegation? You dont think illegally avoiding millions and millions of pounds of tax over a period of years is worse than what Dundee did? I don't think there's any reason for thinking they will result in extra punishment, know. Of course, there's no way of telling - this is a completely unique case and as such all punishment is concocted to suit the crime, but I think most neutrals are inferring everything will be done to keep RFC in the SPL, however poor a team they have to field. You know, for once I agree with you. Rangers should have the terms of their transfer embargo changed so that they cannot sign anybody, even if they are 18 or under! That would be a legitimate solution, were it to be true that any form of age-discrimination whatsoever is illegal. It quite clearly isn't. Rangers don't have a leg to stand on if they seriously think this is their case. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagsman411971 Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 That's over-egging the pudding somewhat. If they somehow agree a CVA, it's just going to be the same as Dundee and any other club who merely went into admin. None of those crimes, which Rangers have unquestionably committed, would be punishable by relegation. The only crime which would see them relegated to the third division would be a risk of not being able to fulfill their fixtures, which despite no.8's defence, will not happen. Rangers will be in the SPL next season. They may be full of pizza faced kids from the Gorbals and Lee McCulloch, and a certainty for relegation, but they'll be there. The dual contracts that they had broke the rules of the SFA and the SPL, so having a squad full of players with illegal contracts should get them expelled from Scottish football. But it wont, thats why they will be demoted. If, as a lot of people expect, the SPL and/or SFA bottle it, and dont do anything that bad, then there is a strong possibility that Scottish football could end up losing more than it could afford. If the Orcs come through all of this with no more than a couple of fines, a transfer ban and a skelped arse, then it wont be long before the banking fraternity start putting pressure on all the other clubs, and ask for their debts to be repaid. Scottish footballs credit rating will go through the floor, sponsors will run a mile, and everyone will know that Scottish football is corrupt. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 By my count they have 32 players over the age of 18. Aye,but are you using the Craig Whyte method of counting? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 No. 8 is normally one of the more decent rangers fans on here, but his constant toeing of the party line, willingness to spout so many cliches used in this saga (ie the sky deal that nobody from sky or any reliable source has ever confirmed) and general non acceptance of any fitting and substantial punishment (a couple of closed door games as punishment for a decade of institutionalized cheating for Christ sakes ) has been totally cringeworthy. Rangers are not being punished for 'a decade of institutionalized cheating'...This punishment is solely for the non payment of tax and football debts by Rangers during Craig Whytes time at the club. Rangers have still to be found guilty of 'a decade of institutionalized cheating'..Then they will have another punishment waiting for them. Don't think for 1 minute i don't think Rangers should be punished...Of course they should and i even posted earlier The Rangers defence that they didn't realise the extent of Whytes financial cheating was nonsense. I wouldn't have posted it on here but i knew months ago that Whyte was simply refusing to pay any outside contractors. The people who put in the PA system were threatening to take it back out if they weren't paid. It was obvious he was taking the club into administration from day 1. He is a liar and a crook and i hope at some stage he has slipped up and does jail time...of course he wont because these slippery b*****ds never do!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 In that case we should immediately do away with age restrictions for having sex.. You do realise you'll get accused by the buns of being Celtic minded now... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spain Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 Aye,but are you using the Craig Whyte method of counting? Fair point, in that case they have 34,078 players over the age of 18. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 I don't think there's any reason for thinking they will result in extra punishment, know. Of course, there's no way of telling - this is a completely unique case and as such all punishment is concocted to suit the crime, but I think most neutrals are inferring everything will be done to keep RFC in the SPL, however poor a team they have to field. I would say the opposite, in my opinion. If found guilty of dual contracts there is nothing to suggest that they wont be punished further. I would go so far as to say that there is no way they couldnt be punished. UEFA and FIFA might be, currently, at the end of a long barge pole but I cant see how they would simply stand by and watch a club get away with years of financial doping 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaspode Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 Too many cocks being sucked for that outcome I'm afraid. Yeah plenty of cock sucking but if the SPL and SFA don't apply the rules for this little outing at the Court of Session then I'm sure FIFA or UEFA will apply pressure to make sure Rangers are dealt with properly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thistle_do_nicely Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 (edited) I may be wrong, but is it not a case that Rangers would still be allowed to sign, pay and employ players over any age they like, they just aren't allowed to register/play them under the terms of the embargo? edit: this thread moves too fast! Points already been made above. Edited May 29, 2012 by Thistle_do_nicely 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 You know, for once I agree with you. Rangers should have the terms of their transfer embargo changed so that they cannot sign anybody, even if they are 18 or under! Allowing Rangers to register players under the age of 18 is yet another example of the SFA going easy on them, they could have and should have been expelled but no the SFA hand them multiple lifelines and it's not good enough for Rangers or their fans. It's like someone surviving through a good Samaritan's efforts at CPR then contacting claims4u about their broken ribs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ribzanelli Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 The delay by D&P is because it is not only the quantum of the CVA that is important, but also the deliverability. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spain Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 Rangers are not being punished for 'a decade of institutionalized cheating'...This punishment is solely for the non payment of tax and football debts by Rangers during Craig Whytes time at the club. Rangers have still to be found guilty of 'a decade of institutionalized cheating'..Then they will have another punishment waiting for them. Don't think for 1 minute i don't think Rangers should be punished...Of course they should and i even posted earlier The Rangers defence that they didn't realise the extent of Whytes financial cheating was nonsense. I wouldn't have posted it on here but i knew months ago that Whyte was simply refusing to pay any outside contractors. The people who put in the PA system were threatening to take it back out if they weren't paid. It was obvious he was taking the club into administration from day 1. He is a liar and a crook and i hope at some stage he has slipped up and does jail time...of course he wont because these slippery b*****ds never do!! It's a fair point. You've recieved a 1 year transfer ban for one season of financial doping. This should be carried forward as 1 further year for each and every year the EBT's were used. So what would this be, an 11 or 12 year transfer embargo? Sounds good to me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarreZ Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 You know, for once I agree with you. Rangers should have the terms of their transfer embargo changed so that they cannot sign anybody, even if they are 18 or under! They can sign anyone they want, they just cant play them, which its why its not illegal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaspode Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 (edited) Rangers are not being punished for 'a decade of institutionalized cheating'...This punishment is solely for the non payment of tax and football debts by Rangers during Craig Whytes time at the club. Rangers have still to be found guilty of 'a decade of institutionalized cheating'..Then they will have another punishment waiting for them. Don't think for 1 minute i don't think Rangers should be punished...Of course they should and i even posted earlier The Rangers defence that they didn't realise the extent of Whytes financial cheating was nonsense. I wouldn't have posted it on here but i knew months ago that Whyte was simply refusing to pay any outside contractors. The people who put in the PA system were threatening to take it back out if they weren't paid. It was obvious he was taking the club into administration from day 1. He is a liar and a crook and i hope at some stage he has slipped up and does jail time...of course he wont because these slippery b*****ds never do!! A wee bed each for Murray and Whyte, how cosy!! Edited May 29, 2012 by Gaspode 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted May 29, 2012 Share Posted May 29, 2012 (edited) Yeah plenty of cock sucking but if the SPL and SFA don't apply the rules for this little outing at the Court of Session then I'm sure FIFA or UEFA will apply pressure to make sure Rangers are dealt with properly. That's been my thought from day 1, those in the know never ever talk about it though, I'm assuming I might be wrong. When Livi failed to fulfill a fixture I went out on a limb and stated they were in the right, in this case, I'm not convinced that the powers that be aren't going to get the 10 litre bottle of Tip-pex out. Edited May 29, 2012 by ayrmad 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.