T_S_A_R Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 So why did the Rangers directors try to hide it if it was only an "admin error"? they will presumably argue that they believed and believe that the spl rules didn't require them to disclose the operation of employee benefit trusts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 You're not a true plastic though. After all you'll be pouring the drinks tonight for your Rangers supporting wife wife and father-in-law. Is he a Mormon? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Is he a Mormon? Credit to Henrik. He admitted that he is - if you delete the middle 'm'. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Guilty of admin errors, not submitting paperwork. Thats it. And guilty of delaying proceedings, withholding information etc etc. Admin errors usually see clubs kicked out of competitions, so guilty but let off..... I for one welcome our new Masonic overlords. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Credit to Henrik. He admitted that he is - if you delete the middle 'm'. Aye. just spotted the riposte - this thread is back to the "good old days", when you had to plough through 10 pages to catch up. Came back here to delete my post - not much point now! Back to page 2826 for me! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
54_titles_and_still_going_ Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 (edited) Talksport... Some Dundonian slept wae his own daughter mug: "awrite ken, am a dundee hibernian fan, and i want tae talk aboot the Rangers" Adrian Durham: "I bet you do you because no-one wants to talk about your little club do they?" Awww I'm in stitches. Edited February 28, 2013 by 54_titles_and_still_going_ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpungoMcGoo Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Nimmo Smith For Dummies: http://wingsland.podgamer.com/nimmo-smith-for-dummies/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
As We Rise Again Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Talksport... Some Dundonian slept wae his own daughter mug: "awrite ken, am a dundee hibernian fan, and i want tae talk aboot the Rangers" Adrian Durham: "I bet you do you because no-one wants to talk about your little club do they?" Awww I'm in stitches. That was a belter man 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
As We Rise Again Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 (edited) Also from Durham even though Rangers are in the third division they're still a bigger club than Dundee United, Dundee United will never be as big as Rangers. The dundee fan didn't know what to say after that Edit: The dundee United fan I should say, or the DundeeHibernian fan whichever one floats your boat. Edited February 28, 2013 by As We Rise Again 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Guilty of admin errors, not submitting paperwork. Thats it. They neither seeked nor did they gain from an unfair advantage on the field. All players were correctly registered, no illegal dual contracts No advantage = no cheating = no tainted titles. Suck it right up. Ben, I haven't gloated on here because I think the whole commission process was a petulant farrago from the get-go. However, I do laugh at posts like the one you referred to from williemillersmoustache. "Cheating, lying, stealing minks. Confirmed." In what parallel universe do these chunts live? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
54_and_counting Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 So why did the Rangers directors try to hide it if it was only an "admin error"? It was in the annual accounts for a fucking decade lol 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Thanks for masonic comment, showing your KDS background Only was on KDS for a fortnight, overmodded, and never been on HB or CM either........ ''Guilty as charged but I'm naw doin' the SPL's dirty work thus avoiding death threats'' © LNS 28/02/13 ''Guilty as charged but I'm naw doin' the SPL's dirty work thus avoiding death threats'' © LNS 28/02/13 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 So why did the Rangers directors try to hide it if it was only an "admin error"? LNS: “Rangers FC did not gain any unfair competitive advantage…nor did the non-disclosure have the effect that any of the registered players were ineligible to play and for that reason no sporting sanction or penalty should be imposed upon Rangers FC.” There's yer meltdown, Rico. Right there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edi1011 Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 And guilty of delaying proceedings, withholding information etc etc. Admin errors usually see clubs kicked out of competitions, so guilty but let off..... And, on the same day reported in tonight's Edinburgh Evening News. Hutchison Vale U'16s ejected from Scottish Cup after it emerged a player had not been registered correctly. The Scottish Youth Football Association, affiliated to the SFA, said the rules had to be applied ! " They have been dealt with along the SAME LINES as other clubs who have committed the same infringement " ... SYFA chief executive said. That will be excluding Rangers, should have been added. I for one welcome our new Masonic overlords. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Also from Durham even though Rangers are in the third division they're still a bigger club than Dundee United, Dundee United will never be as big as Rangers. The dundee fan didn't know what to say after that Edit: The dundee United fan I should say, or the DundeeHibernian fan whichever one floats your boat. The wee Hibs we call them these days. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 So what happens when HMRC win an appeal? This will decision start to look even more illogical than it already is. My only conclusion is LNS doesn't understand how football works. The reason these EBTs were not declared was because Moonbeams knew at best it was agressive tax avoidance, and quite possibly tax evasion. When you add up the number of years the EBTs start to total £50m (not to mention how much he, the directors and non-playing staff were getting). So we can deduce that a £25m unfair sporting advantage was gained via this method. Meaning that on average he's getting 20-30% extra juice. That can buy more players to help with squad rotation, or bring in a couple of big name players Minty would have otherwise have been unable to afford. With the amount of narrowly won titles in the middle of the last decade there is no doubt these players made the difference not just in winning leagues and cups, but doing better less badly in Europe. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T_S_A_R Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 (edited) Nimmo Smith For Dummies: http://wingsland.podgamer.com/nimmo-smith-for-dummies/ why would you write an explanation of a document you clearly don't understand? re-read the part about sandy bryson's evidence relating to registration. everyone agrees that there are only two possible positions. registered or unregistered, it is impossible to be invalidly registered. this part of your blogpost is completely incorrect We’ve cut out a huge section referring to the eligibility rules, because they can be summed up very briefly: the SFA’s understanding of the SPL’s rules was that a player registered incorrectly was automatically ineligible to play. The Commission found that even if a registration was improper, it nevertheless remained in force unless and until it was explicitly revoked. 1. the sfa have no understanding of the spl rules, they need none. 2. it states the spl rules are basically copies of the sfa ones 3. the sfa guy says that an player wrongly registered is still eligible to play until the registration is revoked. not the commision and if you are unable to decipher that from the text then you should be doing something less challenging in your spare time. 4. the spartans case you link to isn't relevant as the sfa never considered the player to be registered. Edited February 28, 2013 by T_S_A_R 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
As We Rise Again Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Listening to snyde now and Delacunt and Walker are seething more than the posters on here. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingrodent Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Predicted this about two days ago... I'd say that the most striking point of all the Lord X inquiries in the political world over the years is this - that they almost always agree that everybody in authority acted "in good faith"; that "mistakes were made" although not by any identifiable individuals; that there were "institutional failings" that account for all "missteps" without attributing blame and most importantly, that nobody needs to go to jail. I fully expect the same from Lord Nimmo i.e. errors were made by everyone... (snip) ...Followed by the football equivalent of a slap on the wrists and an agreement by the offending parties not to do it again. Quite how they'll manage to come to this conclusion given the evidence available is beyond me, but they manage it in every other judicial inquiry, so I'm fairly sure they'll pull it off in Rangers' case as well. Turns out that if anything, I was insufficiently cynical - Lord Nimmo's actually found them guilty of deliberately dodging proper registration, said that deliberately violating the rules doesn't amount to substantive cheating, and then hit a dead club that has no money with a whacking fine. A brave move, that. So, if deliberately concealing payments isn't a way to "gain advantage", why even bother with a rule against concealing payments in the first place? And why not just fine the dead club ninety million bajillion pounds, since nobody's getting a penny out of the nuked remnants of Rangers, especially not their creditors? You have to laugh, really. This hilarious nonsense is right up there with "Massive cash gifts that never have to be repaid are actually loans" for nonsensical, within-a-baw-hair-of-legality legal horseshit justifying intentional sharp practice. Credit to the Scottish football authorities for the way they've tackled financial f*ckery at Ibrox, though. They've made the Italian system look transparent and decisive by comparison. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Listening to snyde now and Delacunt and Walker are seething more than the posters on here. Walker, in particular, could barely control himself. He even had to check himself and proclaim that in no way was he prepared to criticise a law lord, a QC and a high court judge. 'Twas beautiful. 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.