jester Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 wow actual jounalism with proper research.....not seen much of that recently ! good to see the comments as well reflecting real life, more diddies talking sense and illiterate rantings from the of fans Actual journalism? It's virtually lifted wholesale from this thread! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p&b is a disgrace Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 They'd be dead by Christmas. No income, but still with wages and overheads? They couldn't do it.........unless through borrowing again. First post on page 1500. GET IN THERE! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeeHectorPar Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 What Might Happen to Rangers at the Re-Heard Appellate Tribunal? Some lengthy reading for a Sunday, in which I attempt to answer the question of what Lord Carloway's Appellate Tribunal will decide about an additional sanction on Rangers. In the process of reaching a conclusion on this, I consider the following. What did the Judicial Panel think of the gravity of Rangers' offence? What options are open to the Appellate Tribunal? Why I do not think ejection from the Scottish Cup is either competent or appropriate. What effect would suspension, expulsion or termination have on Rangers. What could Mr Green do, in the event of any of the above three penalties being imposed? Can Rangers agree a shorter signing ban with the SFA? What will happen before Lord Carloway? If unhappy with the decision can Rangers appeal further, whether to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, or to the Court of Session? And I conclude with a foray into Shakespearean adaptation! http://scotslawthoug...llate-tribunal/ In answer to all those who see the punishment as a ban from next season's Scottish Cup as the probable result then consider this However, the Scottish Cup has not started for season 2012-2013. How can a team be “ejected” from something which has not commenced? Interestingly there are various rules, such as Rule 313, which specify that a team can be “ejected” from the Scottish Cup, or “suspended” from it. Taking the Rangers approach of focussing on the letter of the law, rather than the spirit, I suggest that it would not be competent to remove Rangers from the Scottish Cup, when it has not yet started. That would in fact be a suspension, rather than an ejection. Rule 66, which prescribed the penalties for a disrepute “conviction” does not include reference to suspension from the Scottish Cup, only ejection. Accordingly, on that reading, the AT cannot suspend Rangers from the next Scottish Cup. F.U.C.K.E.D 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 We'll be getting pictures of Itzdark entering Slaters shortly. i would never do that to a woodlouse 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 actually pishing myself laughing at the op in this http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=221803 aye thats the same thing mate 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sting777 Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 (edited) First post on page 1500. GET IN THERE! No 8 is a 1/5 shot to bag page 1690 Edited June 3, 2012 by Sting777 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 Good news for Rangers fans - apparently the SFA can't kick you out. Bad news for Rangers fans - it's LEGGO that's saying it. http://leggoland2.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/why-rangers-cannot-be-kicked-out-of-sfa.html 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jester Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 playing games closely together is NOT a punishment a real suspension i.e losing all games by default 3-0 over a 6/12 month period is a punishment if they get to play every game there is no point at all in suspending them , maybye a suspended 6 month suspension would suit better i.e give them a chance to behave under new ownership should it happen under close supervision if its decided they arent suspend them for the 2nd half of the season Allowing them to play every game in a shortened period also affects the other teams who will have to play games when they have no need to. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 i would never do that to a woodlouse I'm starting to worry about you, that's twice in a month you've been sharp in reply, are you in cold turkey? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beermonkey Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 What is the Problem with “Ejection” From the Scottish Cup?Normally “ejection” from the Scottish Cup comes when a team wins a match, but plays an ineligible player, or otherwise breaks the rules. In those circumstances the team is eliminated from the competition, and is replaced by the team it defeated. However, the Scottish Cup has not started for season 2012-2013. How can a team be “ejected” from something which has not commenced? Interestingly there are various rules, such as Rule 313, which specify that a team can be “ejected” from the Scottish Cup, or “suspended” from it. Taking the Rangers approach of focussing on the letter of the law, rather than the spirit, I suggest that it would not be competent to remove Rangers from the Scottish Cup, when it has not yet started. That would in fact be a suspension, rather than an ejection. Rule 66, which prescribed the penalties for a disrepute “conviction” does not include reference to suspension from the Scottish Cup, only ejection. Accordingly, on that reading, the AT cannot suspend Rangers from the next Scottish Cup. In any event, and standing the comments by the JP and AT about the seriousness of the offences, would elimination from the Scottish Cup for one season be a suitable and proportionate penalty? As a team can go out of the Cup in the first round in which it competes, then the penalty is a variable one. Teams are “ejected” from the Scottish Cup for gaining an unfair advantage by playing an ineligible player, which can be as a result of an administrative oversight. Would that be a suitable punishment for the “undoubted gravity of the breaches”? I would suggest not. On the strict “letter of the law”, Rangers cannot be “ejected” from the Cup before they are in it. And even if they could, it is not a “proportionate” penalty. Interesting.... suspension it is then ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 Lord Glennie did not suggest or request that the sentence be sent back to the INDEPENDENT Appellate Tribunal. Lord Glennie ordered that it be sent back to the INDEPENDENT Appelate Tribunal. have i not had enough sleep or something 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 I'm starting to worry about you, that's twice in a month you've been sharp in reply, are you in cold turkey? you cant lose them all tony 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Connolly Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 [/size][/font] have i not had enough sleep or something IF I SHOUT SOMETHING AND USE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT WORDS TO ENFORCE THE POINT, IT MAKES ME SEEM LIKE A REAL JOURNALIST INSTEAD OF AN ALCOHOLIC BIGOT. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 IF I SHOUT SOMETHING AND USE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT WORDS TO ENFORCE THE POINT, IT MAKES ME SEEM LIKE A REAL JOURNALIST INSTEAD OF AN ALCOHOLIC BIGOT. BUT DID HE NOT JUST REPEAT WHAT HE WAS SAYING AND TRY TO PASS IT OFF AS TWO DIFFERENT THINGS 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sting777 Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 Quote from Leggo on Saturday I have been told that there is a plan for someone to go public with their fears about Charles Green. But that it is being held back as a nuclear option. A last resort when all other forms of persuasion have failed to rally and unite Rangers supporters. Here comes the saviour!! http://www.3drealms.com/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 (edited) Wish a legal eagle could suggest whether Rangers are behind the 8 ball on this appeal issue, who's holding the aces in this situation? Is it scots law re articles of association or law of land re right to appeal to the courts. I was off the opinion that Scots law would only be usurped if it were regarded to be unfair/discriminatory etc, how can it be unfair when Rangers along with others have created it? Edited June 3, 2012 by ayrmad 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Leighton Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 Allowing them to play every game in a shortened period also affects the other teams who will have to play games when they have no need to. As already pointed out, the effect of the other eleven having to play 2 extra games within an 18 week period is minor compared to Rangers having to play perhaps 20 additional matches in that period. If the SFA suspend Rangers for a full season I'd be very surprised, and I don't see how they can void their games for matches within the suspension period when the SPL runs its own affairs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p&b is a disgrace Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 No 8 is a 1/5 shot to bag page 1690 And the fecker is trying to get us to that page as quickly as possible ( him and his alias T_Z_A_R ) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 Unfortunately, at the time they put it in place it was legal. The way they used it was illegal. Hope this helps. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 There is a loophole that didn't insist on loans being repaid. No there isn't. Hope this helps. 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.