Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[GiGi]

think somebody is in desperate need of a cuddle.

The fact that the stock response from Sevco fans has been this kind of patter and 'seething' and 'crying' etc rather than any kind of comeback or reasoned, intelligent debate on the subject merely reinforces my point. You're like monkeys. Regardless of what you're told you're just going to throw shit at the walls.

[eraser]

so did the commision accept that side contracts were used. if so will this help hmrc in the appeal of the tax case.

My understanding is that no new evidence can be provided to the appeal as it's purely looking at the decision that was made previously

[Velo]

The fact that the stock response from Sevco fans has been this kind of patter and 'seething' and 'crying' etc rather than any kind of comeback or reasoned, intelligent debate on the subject merely reinforces my point. You're like monkeys. Regardless of what you're told you're just going to throw shit at the walls.

You understand how ridiculous your point looks given that, for the last year, the stock response from the majority on here to intelligent, true and now vindicated points from rangers fans was "seething"? You see the irony don't you?

[wunfellaff]

Rangers (now in liquidation) were guilty of invalidly registering

players for a period of 11 years, but it was not the outcome expected.

The Commission decided against imposing sporting sanctions, based on the

evidence of Alexander Bryson, Head of Registrations at the SFA.

His evidence stated that “once a player had been registered with the

SFA, he remained registered unless and until his registration was

revoked. Accordingly, even if there had been a breach of the SFA

registration procedures, such as a breach of SFA Article 12.3, the

registration of a player was not treated as being invalid from the

outset, and stood unless and until it was revoked”.

So Rangers failed to properly register players, withheld information

which allowed this to be discovered, but as the information was not

discovered, the Mr Bryson regards the registrations to be valid. With

this evidence from the SFA, the Commission were unlikely to come to any

other conclusion.

Mr Bryson’s evidence directly contradicts Uefa’s ruling from 2011 in

relation to Sion, who registered players with the Swiss FA. The Swiss FA

and Uefa subsequently ruled that these registrations were made

incorrectly, and that registrations were invalid from when they were

submitted, not when they were discovered.

The Commission can only rule on evidence before it and the entire

outcome turns on Mr Bryson’s evidence. Mr Bryson’s evidence is also

inconsistent with all previous SFA player registration errors

now cast your mind back to when the 3 Amigos meant more than 3 deluded bears..................

Those who employed Farry had decided they couldn't back someone who was blatantly wrong.

The lengthy delay in Cadete's registration going through was entirely his fault - but it is unclear what part registration chief Sandy Bryson may have played in this debacle

hmmmmmmmmmmmm

[timomouse]

Because like it or not it was all above board, the scheme was legal, accept it move on, I really do not care, its not going change anything now, feel free to keep providing the laughs tho.

That's debatable.

Lord Nimmo Smith has not said that the Dual contract scheme was legal, simply that the SFA's rules were written in a manner that makes it not possible to apply them retrospectively. Were dual contracts still ongoing, registration could and would be revoked. Therefore, it was not possible for a competitive advantage to be gained because the law cannot be applied.

But, most importantly, any question on legality of the scheme has to be postponed until the FTT appeal is heard. LNS has based his judgement on the FTT verdict which could be overturned. Were it overturned, then it would invalidate LNS' reasoning if, perhaps, not his overall judgement.

Anyway, vastly expanded thoughts on that are here: http://www.thefootballlife.co.uk/post/44235765513/the-most-humiliating-day-in-the-entire-history-of

[No8.]

Is that what yer son said when he seen the lower league grounds...

Moan the orange toaps yeah sayyy...

Tbh you have an unhealthy interest in my son.

Anyway like most Rangers supporters we have had a fantastic time travelling aroynd the country. Shame SPL supporters have not shown the same level of loyalty to their clubs as my 16 Year old son has shown to his.

54 Titles and still going strong....FACT!!!!!

[wunfellaff]

Tbh you have an unhealthy interest in my son.

Anyway like most Rangers supporters we have had a fantastic time travelling aroynd the country. Shame SPL supporters have not shown the same level of loyalty to their clubs as my 16 Year old son has shown to his.

54 Titles and still going strong....FACT!!!!!

Your son Tupe'd over...... if he was 'loyal' he would have given up football at the end of last season.

Will he still go when he doesn't get the, what is it, £60? season tickets??

[Bendarroch]

There has already been 5 different people including me who have not only said "an unfair competitive advantage was gained", but more more importantly unlike LNS have actually went into detail as to how an unfair competitive advantage would have been gained.

So, we have five punters on P&B explaining why The Rt Hon Lord Nimmo Smith, Nicholas Stewart QC and Charles Flint QC got it wrong?

Your going to have to accept why Rangers supporters are laughing at you.

[No8.]

Your son Tupe'd over...... if he was 'loyal' he would have given up football at the end of last season.

Will he still go when he doesn't get the, what is it, £60? season tickets??

His ticket is actually more than that and considerably more than the £50 celtic were charging young bhoys only a couple of seasons ago for SPL football

I have seen this nonsense posted a few times. Every season ticket holder i know renewed. Every season ticket holder in my immediate area of the ground renewed.

[Half Rice Half Chips]

Went on to an English forum where they are taking the thieves blog as fact. This is why corrupt agenda driven bloggers like this are dangerous and exactly why the club should take legal action

That's because real football fans, Scottish, English or wherever, know cheating when they see it, and they know rangers cheated despite what LNS says. The same way everyone knows west ham cheated with Carlos Tevez, but instead of being deducted points as they should have been, got a fine instead. Exact same with rangers.

[flyingrodent]

So, we have five punters on P&B explaining why The Rt Hon Lord Nimmo Smith, Nicholas Stewart QC and Charles Flint QC got it wrong?

Your going to have to accept why Rangers supporters are laughing at you.

Rangers fans are laughing because they're intentionally pretending not to understand the Commission's conclusions.

The conclusion was "guilty", by the way, as in "Rangers deliberately broke the rules then deliberately concealed evidence that they had done so from the authorities".

You're not celebrating because you were found innocent, because you weren't found innocent. You're celebrating because you got off without receiving the maximum punishment on a technicality.

It's not like you have to be a razor-sharp legal eagle to spot this. It's being reported in all the papers as we speak, even in the ones that are leading with Charlie Green's ridiculous comments.

I don't blame any of you for taking this "Ah dinnae ken what you're talkin aboot" attitude - most would, in your position. But you ken fine.

Edited March 1, 2013 by flyingrodent

[Bendarroch]

The fact that the stock response from Sevco fans has been this kind of patter and 'seething' and 'crying' etc rather than any kind of comeback or reasoned, intelligent debate on the subject merely reinforces my point. You're like monkeys. Regardless of what you're told you're just going to throw shit at the walls.

You sound incredibly bitter so I can see why you would think that. However, in the spirit of reconciliation, here's my considered response to diddy clubbers like you - 'Roon ye!

[No8.]

That's because real football fans, Scottish, English or wherever, know cheating when they see it, and they know rangers cheated despite what LNS says. The same way everyone knows west ham cheated with Carlos Tevez, but instead of being deducted points as they should have been, got a fine instead. Exact same with rangers.

Eh what cheating?

Cleared of using LEGAL tax avoidance scheme

Cleared of gaining any sporting advantage by the SPLs handpicked Kangaroo court.

When i think of cheating i think of the miners families still waiting for their money. He never did answer that question. I know you are looking in Paul..put their minds at rest..when can the families expect the money they are lawfully due?

[Bendarroch]

I don't blame any of you for taking this "Ah dinnae ken what you're talkin aboot" attitude - most would, in your position. But you ken fine.

Ah ken fine that the panel concluded that no advantage was gained. And, indeed: "for this and other reasons no sporting sanction or penalty should be imposed upon Rangers."

I don't blame any of you for taking this 'Ah canne fucking believe it' attitude - most would, in your position. Ah ken fine.

[flyingrodent]

Ah ken fine that the panel concluded that no advantage was gained. And, indeed: "for this and other reasons no sporting sanction or penalty should be imposed upon Rangers."

I don't blame any of you for taking this 'Ah canne fucking believe it' attitude - most would, in your position. Ah ken fine.

Focusing on the technicality that allowed you to escape the maximum sentence, rather than the conclusion on the question the panel was convened to answer. Why focus on your escape from the maximum sentence, and not on the conclusion?

Because the conclusion was "guilty".

[Bendarroch]

Focusing on the technicality that allowed you to escape the maximum sentence, rather than the conclusion on the question the panel was convened to answer. Why focus on your escape from the maximum sentence, and not on the conclusion?

Because the conclusion was "guilty".

I wonder how many more attempts there will be from you (and countless others suffering petted lip syndrome) to try and turn 'Rangers FC did not gain any unfair competitive advantage' into meaning something else.

I can just as easily ask you why you focus on anything but that reality. But, ah ken fine why. And that you do, too.

[captain kirk]

No cheating...No outstanding tax issues.

This Thread is over..Why don't you go home(own forums)

Still got the HMRC appeal to come ,so probably another good 2 years to go on this thread. Edited March 1, 2013 by captain kirk

[flyingrodent]

I wonder how many more attempts there will be from you (and countless others suffering petted lip syndrome) to try and turn 'Rangers FC did not gain any unfair competitive advantage' into meaning something else.

I can just as easily ask you why you focus on anything but that reality. But, ah ken fine why. And that you do, too.

I would've thought fair-minded observers would notice that it's me who's accurately reflecting the substance of the report, and you who is repeatedly hammering a single line in that report, because you find it convenient to do so... Hammering that single line while repeatedly pretending not to understand simple concepts like the evaluation of evidence, in fact.

People are free to make up their own minds, but I imagine that most would recognise that nobody in the history of sport has ever been fined £250,000 for being found not guilty of cheating.

[~~~]

Went on to an English forum where they are taking the thieves blog as fact. This is why corrupt agenda driven bloggers like this are dangerous and exactly why the club should take legal action

You're sounding very bitter No8.

Just for a laugh, sent a link to this blog.

[No8.]

Please WRK at very least PM. just to let me know that you are OK.