Jump to content

Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!


Recommended Posts

I was trying to play nice. It really would be good to have the Ibrox equivalent of those bloggers. Instead it's explayers and Leggo :huh: spouting whataboutery and pish in equal measures.

It seems they're not that interested, all they want to do is sit back, let someone else do all the work & then rubbish/ridicule anyone who reports anything other than the official party line.

Laughable & pathetic in equal measures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And it was all going so well. :(

I'd still like to know why no ibrox minded bloggers are examining the situation to the same degree as McConville, Broganlogantrevino,RTC etc.

It would be nice to have an intelligent, alternative view.

I read the most recent Broganlogantrevino effort at length and made a fairly long critique last night. It suffers from the same problem as many on this board. It starts off with an opinion and then cherry picks from the FTT judgement to try to find facts to support the prejudged opinion. McConville seems to suffer from the same problem. RTC has tried to do a vanishing act. Fortunately, and despite their best efforts, the content has been preserved for posterity.

There are plenty of Rangers blogs around. While they don't have the benefit of leaked information from HMRC or other journalistic support, there are some pretty interesting discussions with regard to what is going on at Rangers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read the most recent Broganlogantrevino effort at length and made a fairly long critique last night. It suffers from the same problem as many on this board. It starts off with an opinion and then cherry picks from the FTT judgement to try to find facts to support the prejudged opinion. McConville seems to suffer from the same problem. RTC has tried to do a vanishing act. Fortunately, and despite their best efforts, the content has been preserved for posterity.

There are plenty of Rangers blogs around. While they don't have the benefit of leaked information from HMRC or other journalistic support, there are some pretty interesting discussions with regard to what is going on at Rangers.

serious question. Could you point to one that dissects the FTTT decision and talks about potential ramifications with regards to the SPL inquiry?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read the most recent Broganlogantrevino effort at length and made a fairly long critique last night. It suffers from the same problem as many on this board. It starts off with an opinion and then cherry picks from the FTT judgement to try to find facts to support the prejudged opinion. McConville seems to suffer from the same problem. RTC has tried to do a vanishing act. Fortunately, and despite their best efforts, the content has been preserved for posterity.

There are plenty of Rangers blogs around. While they don't have the benefit of leaked information from HMRC or other journalistic support, there are some pretty interesting discussions with regard to what is going on at Rangers.

All this "leaked information" they had, how come none of these bloggers knew it would go in rangers favour then ?

And how come so many (sevco fans) on here claim they knew it would ?, Makes you wonder who actually had the "leaked info".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this "leaked information" they had, how come none of these bloggers knew it would go in rangers favour then ?

And how come so many (sevco fans) on here claim they knew it would ?, Makes you wonder who actually had the "leaked info".

NIce, Beermonkey. Very nice. It's been a while since we had a good conspiracy to get our teeth into.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

serious question. Could you point to one that dissects the FTTT decision and talks about potential ramifications with regards to the SPL inquiry?

Serious answer .... I am not aware of any detailed analysis from a Rangers point of view (other than my own) but I haven't looked either. The blogs that I read take the view that the FTT verdict stands on its own and does not need to be dissected.

The ramifications with regard to the SPL inquiry has been looked at by a number of non-Rangers sources. The most interesting one that I have found is that of STV.

But there is a twist to all this. The position of Charles Green is that the 'new' Rangers are not members of the SPL and are not subject to their jurisdiction. He also maintains that he 'owns' the titles and that the SPL cannot take away his property. His position was never based on the FTT outcome. I am told that Green's lawyers feel that he has a very strong position in law.

While the FTT verdict seriously weakens the SPL view that EBTs and their associated side-letters constituted a second or dual contract will anyone actually get into that argument with them? In the event that Rangers choose to ignore the inquiry (as intimated by Green a while ago) will the 'independent commission' (no laughing at the back) test the strength of the SPL's argument?

Then there is the question of the SPL's resolve. No doubt that their position has been weakened by the FTT verdict. There has also been a noticeable change in media attitudes towards Rangers. A general feeling of enough is enough. The SPL might feel that there is nothing to gain either from negative publicity or being dragged through the courts by Green. In that event, look for a 'not proven' verdict in January with the hope that it will all go away quietly.

Edited by Paquis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this "leaked information" they had, how come none of these bloggers knew it would go in rangers favour then ?

And how come so many (sevco fans) on here claim they knew it would ?, Makes you wonder who actually had the "leaked info".

Because the 'leaked' information would appear to have come from HMRC. When your information is coming from just one of the parties then it is going to tend towards their version of reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Serious answer .... I am not aware of any detailed analysis from a Rangers point of view (other than my own) but I haven't looked either. The blogs that I read take the view that the FTT verdict stands on its own and does not need to be dissected.

The ramifications with regard to the SPL inquiry has been looked at by a number of non-Rangers sources. The most interesting one that I have found is that of STV.

But there is a twist to all this. The position of Charles Green is that the 'new' Rangers are not members of the SPL and are not subject to their jurisdiction. He also maintains that he 'owns' the titles and that the SPL cannot take away his property. His position was never based on the FTT outcome. I am told that Green's lawyers feel that he has a very strong position in law.

While the FTT verdict seriously weakens the SPL view that EBTs and their associated side-letters constituted a second or dual contract will anyone actually get into that argument with them? In the event that Rangers choose to ignore the inquiry (as intimated by Green a while ago) will the 'independent commission' (no laughing at the back) test the strength of the SPL's argument?

Then there is the question of the SPL's resolve. No doubt that their position has been weakened by the FTT verdict. There has also been a noticeable change in media attitudes towards Rangers. A general feeling of enough is enough. The SPL might feel that there is nothing to gain either from negative publicity or being dragged through the courts by Green. In that event, look for a 'not proven' verdict in January with the hope that it will all go away quietly.

I know this will sound emotive, and for that i'm sorry, but i don't know how else to put it:

Receiving stolen property is a crime - even if you buy it from a mate in the pub.

Now, the trophies may not have been 'stolen' but if it is proved (and I have no idea if it will be) that they were won by breaking the rules, they will be stripped - no matter who 'owns' them.

They were awarded to a club and can be taken away *if* it is proved that they were wrongly awarded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know this will sound emotive, and for that i'm sorry, but i don't know how else to put it:

Receiving stolen property is a crime - even if you buy it from a mate in the pub.

Now, the trophies may not have been 'stolen' but if it is proved (and I have no idea if it will be) that they were won by breaking the rules, they will be stripped - no matter who 'owns' them.

They were awarded to a club and can be taken away *if* it is proved that they were wrongly awarded.

That is a point of view. Charles Green and his lawyers will disagree with you.

Remains to be seen if Green changes tack or if the SPL choose to back off. Otherwise, chances are that this will end up in the Court of Session and I don't think that serves anyone's interests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...