wunfellaff Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 Football debts had to paid for transference of SFA membership but you already knew this, so thats this bit sorted. From one 'club' to another 'club' 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 From one 'club' to another 'club' Post the quote in full or not at all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 Post the quote in full or not at all. you said ''that thats bit sorted'' , ie YOU put it into parts. I responded to a part. You lose. Again 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 Football debts had to paid for transference of SFA membership but you already knew this, so thats this bit sorted. Further punishment for what exactly? If a CVA was achieved then the club wouldn't have been responsible for any debt and not suffered any of losses i previously mentioned. A long winded way of disagreeing over absolutely nothing How many COMPANIES are members of the SFA?* Who defined what was a footballing debt? Charlie appeared to think he'd paid them all with an amount of less than half what they owed Vienna. (*This is in response to your sarky wee snipe at wunfellaff) Further Punishment? For offences "second only to match fixing"? ANY fucking punishment other than a fine which was unenforcable would have been nice. A CVA was never going to be agreed - probably during your tear-stained absence, but we discussed this, and the reasons, quite extensively at the time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 Further Punishment? For offences "second only to match fixing"? ANY fucking punishment other than a fine which was unenforcable would have been nice. Oh please don't use that quote and regard it as being, in any way, credible. This came from the same discredited SFA tribunal that chose to apply a punishment that they weren't competent to give. It's nothing more than a cheap soundbite designed to appeal to the diddy masses. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
10 CC ICT Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 Oh please don't use that quote and regard it as being, in any way, credible. This came from the same discredited SFA tribunal that chose to apply a punishment that they weren't competent to give. It's nothing more than a cheap soundbite designed to appeal to the diddy masses. It really worked too!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 It really worked too!! Yes! Just shows that it's not just we Bears who are easily won-over by a spot of unjustifiable hyperbole. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 How many COMPANIES are members of the SFA?* Who defined what was a footballing debt? Charlie appeared to think he'd paid them all with an amount of less than half what they owed Vienna. (*This is in response to your sarky wee snipe at wunfellaff) Further Punishment? For offences "second only to match fixing"? ANY fucking punishment other than a fine which was unenforcable would have been nice. A CVA was never going to be agreed - probably during your tear-stained absence, but we discussed this, and the reasons, quite extensively at the time. The company owns the club which requires the license fro..................................... why must we go down this road everytime we try to have a sensible discussion as it's been doen to death Norm? You never answered the question and gave only a stupid quote more at home on a Celticminded blog. Maybe, no one knows for sure. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Umbungo1874 Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 The company owns the club which requires the license fro..................................... why must we go down this road everytime we try to have a sensible discussion as it's been doen to death Norm? You never answered the question and gave only a stupid quote more at home on a Celticminded blog. Maybe, no one knows for sure. Is it the company or the club which buys the titles? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 Is it the company or the club which buys the titles? It's either no-one or it's Henrick's Tongue as part of a job lot when he bought the history of World War 2. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 Is it the company or the club which buys the titles? Never try to replace bathroom tiles yourself, it's not that easy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotbawmad Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 (edited) Oh please don't use that quote and regard it as being, in any way, credible. This came from the same discredited SFA tribunal that chose to apply a punishment that they weren't competent to give. It's nothing more than a cheap soundbite designed to appeal to the diddy masses. Deliberate withholding of PAYE & NIC is not a petty offence by any stretch of the imagination. This is something the majority of oldco fans can't seem to grasp. They did know the punishments available to them at the time being... 1. Removal of football memebership 2. Suspension of football membership 3. Expulsion from the cup 4. Fine Clearly 3+4 are far too petty, and number 1 is too severe. Which leaves number 2 the only option they can go with. No doubt it would have been something like a 1 game forfeit had they gone down that route. Edited December 22, 2012 by Fotbawmad 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 Deliberate withholding of PAYE & NIC is not a petty offence by any stretch of the imagination. This is something the majority of oldco fans can't seem to grasp. They did know the punishments available to them at the time being... I didn't say that it was. I said it was a cheap soundbite from an incompetent panel - which it was. I am not downplaying the seriousness of what we did. I'm simply saying that that quote should give people a red neck given its origin. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 It's either no-one or it's Henrick's Tongue as part of a job lot when he bought the history of World War 2. Yep. They're now mine. I got them free in a buy 2 get one free deal when I purchased WWII and the musical history of Merseyside in the 60's. Anyone want to buy Cilla Black? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam. Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 Oh please don't use that quote and regard it as being, in any way, credible. This came from the same discredited SFA tribunal that chose to apply a punishment that they weren't competent to give. It's nothing more than a cheap soundbite designed to appeal to the diddy masses. I presume the people who appointed the tribunal have also suffered equal, if not more, damage to their credibility. Especially considering they defended the punishment in court. If so, why do so many The Rangers fans (including yourself, iirc) use the SFA's transference of membership as evidence they're the same club? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 Never try to replace bathroom tiles yourself, it's not that easy. My nephew replaced his without a problem tbh. He's a tiler though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 I presume the people who appointed the tribunal have also suffered equal, if not more, damage to their credibility. Especially considering they defended the punishment in court. Well I'd also hope so but I think The SFA have got off lightly. The fact that their panel of incompetents is being quoted, to use the old saw, "Like a drunkard uses a lamp post for support, rather than for illumination" makes me think that people are forgetting how much of a f**k-up it was by the SFA. If so, why do so many The Rangers fans (including yourself, iirc) use the SFA's transference of membership as evidence they're the same club? That was never an argument used by me (unless I was on a drunken ramble one night). It doesn't even sound like the kind of argument I'd make. My tendency would be to argue to the contrary: a club's existence and SFA membership are not coterminous. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 My nephew replaced his without a problem tbh. He's a tiler though. I'm pretty sure you actually meant 'tyler': 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burma Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 I thought that myself at first but when you take into account that he's had to pay back football debts while losing money due from player sales, lost TV money, lost 'prize money', reduction in ticket money, lost a squad of players worth maybe say £20m, no Euro fitba for atleast 3 years then maybe a CVA would've been a better idea. Chuckie just assumed his new club would start life in the spl. Hence his deaperate attempts to convince everyone they would die without them. Also explains his massive huff since being refused entry. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 Chuckie just assumed his new club would start life in the spl. Hence his deaperate attempts to convince everyone they would die without them. Interesting rewriting of history. The greatest desperation was actually shown by Regan and Doncaster with their Armageddon shite which seems to have been conveniently attributed, now, to Rangers' fans or supposedly Rangers-sympathetic hacks. The past few posts have provided a useful insight into the mind of the average diddy: The discredited tribunal can be quoted with authority The ones who forecast the demise of the SPL were not the ones who tried to gerrymander Rangers back to, at least, SFL1. 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.