vikingTON Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 the real challenge to their authority would be a european court considering the legality of punishing european ctiizens for attempting to access justice. which is why i think they would duck it. There is about as much chance of me winning Miss Venezuela as there is of Rangers successfully challenging FIFA in a European court. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musketeer Gripweed Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 Crawley and the mighty Fleetwood Town look poised to battle it out for David Healy's signature. I don't know how Rangers can hope to fend off such giants in our game. Healy. I forgot about him. He'll be of the main reasons the big house must be saved as well. Can everyone else not put TSAR on ignore as well please and stop responding to his trolling? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkfish Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 the real challenge to their authority would be a european court considering the legality of punishing european ctiizens for attempting to access justice. which is why i think they would duck it. I agree it seems very dodgy they can do that. But, I think I'm right in saying that contracted parties can surrender their right to settle disputes in court in favour of using an agreed arbitrator. In this case CAS. So, via their SFA membership Rangers have agreed to this. There's also the 'if they don't like it they can leave' argument. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 the real challenge to their authority would be a european court considering the legality of punishing european ctiizens for attempting to access justice. which is why i think they would duck it. Healy. I forgot about him. He'll be of the main reasons the big house must be saved as well. Can everyone else not put TSAR on ignore as well please and stop responding to his trolling? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepitsafe Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 I'm pretty sure that somewhere back in the last dozen pages or so, it was said that there was a list of possible punishments. I believe someone quoted a couple of the more serious options - "a hard stare"and a "gonnie no dae that" . Yup. Got those! Just thought they would have to have a belt and braces kinda thing in place to choose from. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tictictok Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 Rangers Media poster doing to P&B what P&B has been doing to Rangers Media for weeks. Agghh. Someone thinks I'm a bun. NFC. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambos Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 Yep, I'd give the c**t a greenie but I've run out. A greenie for being a morrissey fan. panic on the streets of govan... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T_S_A_R Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 Add on the de facto breach of taking the SFA to the CoS, the resultant pressure by FIFA upon the SFA to act, and the 'severity' case (read; pragmatic in Regan's comments this evening) goes out the window. Which is why Rangers are fucked. they can't be punished for going to court. regan has admitted this already. regan is a clown i wouldn't read too much into the 'pragmatic' comment. this is a guy who came out with the quote ' we won't accept anything which can be offensive to anyone' which for any remedials out there means absolutely everything. how they can give them a punishment that has already been rejected as too severe by two lords for the charges they are guilty of? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blanco Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 Gonna risk this: Doncaster on about the clubs taking the decision on sanctions on a newco. Flexibility of "appropriate sanctions" Am I being thick here? If the clubs can meet and hand out sanctions on an apt punishment for club X. What is to stop club X from going to court to say "there is nothing in the rules to permit these sanctions"? Surely they have a list in place to choose from? Or did I miss that bit? “If there is a newco you have two ways of dealing with it. One is to have flexibility, the other is fixed sanctions. “The clubs have agreed they will impose sanctions depending on the circumstance. That is their view and one I respect as it is very sensible. “The SPL have set out 18 wide-ranging sanctions and it is up to the clubs to pick which ones to impose.” source 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claymores Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 (edited) Agghh. Someone thinks I'm a bun. NFC. Here is your initiation test: WATP means We Admire The Pope True or false? hahahaha - lose/lose when ye answer! Edited May 31, 2012 by Claymores 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambos Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 No offence meant - sorry if it came over that way. It was more of an "If anyone can tell me why these b*****ds deserve anything other than an extremely painful death..." kinda thing. Mea culpa. No worries mate. the brain cells tend to get numbed after a few beers, so I miss the subtleties in text 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustyarabnuts Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 richt ehm awa tae watch the donkey that is cockwomble lets see what nonsense he spouts the nicht 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Buddie Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 the real challenge to their authority would be a european court considering the legality of punishing european ctiizens for attempting to access justice. which is why i think they would duck it. I agree with you, it's wrong for an administrative body to try to prevent a member of their association going to a civil court. However, that court should not disbar any punishment served on the member if the punishment is implicitly or explicitly contained within the association's articles or rules of membership to which the member has signed up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrismcarab Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 Actual lol. So your shame is the equivalent to your long years of cheating? It may have been on the instruction of a few, but your club and its fans benefited for two decades, depriving other clubs of legitimate chances of competing and forcing many others to spend money on 2nd rate foreigners in desperate attempts to play catch-up. Where was your shame when your fellow bears went on the rampage in Manchester? Where was your shame when your club was repeatedly fined for sectarian chants? Where was your shame when your club refused to sign a Catholic for 100 years? You have no shame, because if you did, you wouldn't support such a vile institution. You wouldn't support a club which proudly stands for exclusion, bigotry and racism. Your supporters groups bleat about bigoted singing as being the acts of a minority, but where has the criticism been from the majority? Conspicuously absent, because it is the case, as everyone else knows, that such singing is condoned by EVERYONE in the Ibrox ranks, no matter their age, gender or upbringing. And still, after all the fines, after all the cheating, the singing and the fraudulent schemes, you still fail to show a semblance of dignity, or of guilt. Not a single Rangers fan can provide a genuine reason as to why your stinking carcass of a club should be saved. You don't understand why your club is so despised by the supporters of others. You can't understand why someone would choose to support their local team over the famous Glasgow Rangers. You cheated your way to title after title, trophy after trophy, award after award. And you want us to think the club has suffered enough because of the "shame?" You are right on one thing though - I probably would feel pity for any other club in similar circumstances. But your club is a vile, racist and bigoted organisation, a stain on society and a cause of division and violence for many. You won't be missed. Been a good night for posts, could be that may last one has been usurped already!! Only room for one more in the top 3 for me.......so far......this thread is a wonderful barometer of society regardless of the subject matter. Nice one mate 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roverthemoon Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 A greenie for being a morrissey fan. panic on the streets of govan... First of the Gang to Die? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roverthemoon Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 Doncaster on Newsnight Scotland Something of the night about him 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepitsafe Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 "If there is a newco you have two ways of dealing with it. One is to have flexibility, the other is fixed sanctions. "The clubs have agreed they will impose sanctions depending on the circumstance. That is their view and one I respect as it is very sensible. "The SPL have set out 18 wide-ranging sanctions and it is up to the clubs to pick which ones to impose." source Thank you. I did miss it but! What are they? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real Saints Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 I want to punch him right in the babymaker. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KillieJimbo Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 how they can give them a punishment that has already been rejected as too severe by two lords for the charges they are guilty of? The second lord didn't make any kind of judgement on the severity of the punishment. The first, and indeed the first panel thought that it was too severe due to their belief that any other punishment they see fit was more suitable. They have now been told to find the most fitting punishment between one that wasn't enough, and one that was too much. With FIFA breathing down their necks, and a few £1000's lighter on court fees, which way do you think they'll swing next time? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 "we" have a cva proposal in place 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.