Paquis Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Ah, there's that ignore choice, c'ya I suppose that is one way to improve your general knowledge 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DuntoiRab Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 FS, yes it is was a reference to remedials polluting this glorious thread, must e-mail Tam for some good lines to make things plain! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Google it ya lazy cunt I did, ya dobber! This seems to be my best bet... Gilmour Rant 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paquis Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Yes it is. Associate member. Should I call you an arsepiece ? However there is also the largely defunct term of associate member. It has occasionally been applied to states which have signed an association agreement with the EU. Associate membership is not a formal classification and does not entitle the state to any of the representation of free movement rights that full membership allows. The term is almost unheard of in the modern context and was primarily used in the earlier days of the EU with countries such as Greece and Turkey. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_State_of_the_European_Union#Related_states 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forest_Fifer Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Oh no it wasn't ! fuxake. Bit early for panto season isn't it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doink Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Rangers Media now calling for a St. Mirren boycott next season. Boycott St. Mirren The best comment was St Mirren fans drink in a bar called Paddys. Evidence in the wonderful world of RM 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GirondistNYC Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 1338405442[/url]' post='6288282']Yes. The SFA disciplinary process does not conform to the FIFA rules for such matters. As such, it left Rangers with no other possible avenue for appeal. This was noted by Lord Glennie himself when rejecting the SFA's argument that he was not competent to hear the case. Specifically ... Article 64.3 of the Fifa statutes reads "disputes shall be taken to an independent and duly constituted arbitration tribunal recognised under the rules of the association or confederation or to CAS". The SFA chose to make their Judicial Panel the body which hears such disputes and not CAS, which is entirely legitimate under Fifa rules. The problem is that the SFA Judicial panel is neither 'independent' (because it is appointed by the SFA) nor is it a 'duly constituted arbitration tribunal'. That said, it would be entirely consistent of the SFA to try to punish Rangers for going to court when it was their own failing that provoked it. Unless you can show me a lengthy definition from the FIFA rules (which may exist) limiting what "arbitration tribunal" means in 64.3 then I'm not sure you're right there: small a arbitration means contractually agreed dispute resolution, and in the real world ranges from internationally recognized bodies working under procedures very similar to courts to sole practioners mediating family law disputes. The SFA tribunal had rules, procedures etc and was contractually agreed. I think it could be easily classed as a small a arbitration panel and fit under FIFA rules. I also think that the procedures to pick the panel members could be classed as "independent". It wasn't a tribunal of SFA employees. It wasn't a tribunal of chairmen of the other clubs. Nobody involved had a direct stake in the decision. If the entirety of the procedure had been made up when Rangers appealed and no prexisting list for selection existed you would have a better case, but again if it's small i "independent" the SFA or FIFA can argue quite credibly 64.3 was met. I think from both a legal and moral perspective Rangers would have a better case if the rules in question hadn't been agreed to by Rangers recently (last year?) The SFA bollixed this up badly in having poorly drafted rules. CAS appeals should have been in there. But IF FIFA really does care and puts pressure on Rangers, and/or IF the panel on remand gives Rangers a savage, but explicit in the rules, penalty I don't think recourse to FIFAs rulebook would save you. There are some very good legal bloggers and twitters who were excellent in explaining why yesterday's decision made sense in the context of a lack of specificity under Scottish, as opposed to English, precedent. I haven't yet seen an argument why a specifically enumerated punishment like expulsion would also be subject to reversal by the COS. There may be an excellent one. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DuntoiRab Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 I suppose that is one way to improve your general knowledge Nothing personal m8, but most who have joined in the past 4 weeks, OF fans that is, have an agenda which is basically crap, there are exceptions, but you ain't one of them. HellBhouy ain't bad but even then .... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiddy Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Surely it's as simple as, if you won't abide by the rules, & regulations agreed, of the Association. Then you cannot be part of that self same organisation. Ergo, you have resigned your membership by doing so? Cheerio then. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 The best comment was St Mirren fans drink in a bar called Paddys. Evidence in the wonderful world of RM Except they don't. Most fans I know drink in The Bull. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustyarabnuts Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=221601 Page not found 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Sensible Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 (edited) The best comment was St Mirren fans drink in a bar called Paddys. Evidence in the wonderful world of RM Yeh, read that. The comments are hilarious. Gilmour is also apparently a 100% pape and a bigot. And St. Mirren are a bunch of ta-ig lovers! Seriously, how stupid are these people? Edited May 30, 2012 by Captain_Sensible 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
54_and_counting Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Looks like the Orcs favourite bilesite is down right now. Oh dear what a shame. Lets see how many guests we get here. its been down for 24hrs the threads found by others are old ones 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captainkev Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Rangers Media now calling for a St. Mirren boycott next season. Boycott St. Mirren They're so delusional that it goes beyond being funny and is instead just a bit sad. Fucking morons. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrismcarab Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 http://forum.rangers...howtopic=221601 What a bunch of fucking idiots. What exactly did Stewart Gilmour have to do with the Duncan Ferguson situation? He wasn't even Chairman of SMFC for another 3 years after the said incident. My favourite comment on that thread is someone having the temerity to say that the SFA would do well to abide by the laws of the land....... irony overload 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DuntoiRab Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Except they don't. Most fans I know drink in The Bull. Well us Killie fans like the Alamo, too many last time mind, took ages for a pint, still, stayed to long to get a good seat to watch the pumping. See, I don't mind getting humped by fellow diddies, we'll have our turn. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustyarabnuts Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 its been down for 24hrs the threads found by others are old ones ahhh that explains it then 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
54_and_counting Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 I also think that the procedures to pick the panel members could be classed as "independent". It wasn't a tribunal of SFA employees. It wasn't a tribunal of chairmen of the other clubs. Nobody involved had a direct stake in the decision. If the entirety of the procedure had been made up when Rangers appealed and no prexisting list for selection existed you would have a better case, but again if it's small i "independent" the SFA or FIFA can argue quite credibly 64.3 was met. the guy has a point though, its like allowing the victim to choose the judge in a court case an appeal panel should be the form of a neutral panel that is agreed by both parties, 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenolly Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 What folk need to remember about Stewart Gilmour is that he is a die-hard St. Mirren supporter. He has been all his life. His connections with the club go back almost a 100 years. His grandfather was chairman of the club in the 1920s. His uncle was a director and was also chief scout, responsible for bringing many of the greats to Love Street. He will hate Rangers with an absolute passion. His mates will all hate Rangers with a passion. He hates the Old Firm. My main concern was that he might want to protect the value of his shares that he is trying to sell. However, I don't think the value of his shares is reliant on Rangers survival as its a supporters buy out. Indeed, the death of Rangers might encourage more fans to join in. I have faith that Stewart Gilmour will be ready to stick the boot into Rangers. Unlike Lawwell, Reid & Co at Celtic Park who are desperate to keep Rangers alive. Gilmours comments were spot on, I am going to write to the Paisley council to get them to name the train station after him so all travelling supporters can remembr his wise words 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T_S_A_R Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Yes it is. Associate member. Should I call you an arsepiece ? and is being an associate member the same as being a member? no, so you are doubly an arsepiece for being wrong in the first place then continuing to argue otherwise despite multiple posters commenting on you lack of knowledge. educate yourself 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.