Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[Cookies71]

will not 100% accept the verdict but will 100% deflect away from the question.

I never expected better from the likes of you, your hurt is obvious, hope my pleasure is equally clear to you.

Sorry mate I don't do deflecting away. Don't need to. "The likes of me" only wish it finished. Yes your misplaced pleasure is obvious to me.

Once the appeals have been finalised and an indisputable decision reached will all revert back to some sort of normality.

Until then Old Rangers are neither guilty or innocent of anything as the process is not completed. This is indisputable.

I can't believe that any Rangers or Sevco fan would find a temporary (i.e not finalised) decision as an excuse for vindication.

No true fan anyway.

[barrysnotter]

Can't people just accept LNS's verdict?

I accept LNS's verdict 100% here and now. But, should Rangers lose the Upper Tier Tribunal appeal this decision will need to be revisited. The nuance of the case is that if these "payments" are not deemed to be "loans", Rangers would have evaded millions of pounds in tax and NI contributions. It would then follow that they did indeed "gain a sporting advantage" and "employ players they could not afford".

I am not suggesting that they will lose the appeal, but it is a possibility. Do you accept that? Do you accept that LNS's decision would need to be revisited in that eventuality? Do you accept that in that eventuality Rangers would have "gained a sporting advantage"?

So, like I said, the appeal hearing is vitally important in more ways than one, don't you agree?

[Bendarroch]

And many,myself included,like him.

Hawd on - you actually like the IRA loving bigot?

[Cookies71]

Sorry mate I don't do deflecting away. Don't need to. "The likes of me" only wish it finished. Yes your misplaced pleasure is obvious to me.

Once the appeals have been finalised and an indisputable decision reached will all revert back to some sort of normality.

Until then Old Rangers are neither guilty or innocent of anything as the process is not completed. This is indisputable.

I can't believe that any Rangers or Sevco fan would find a temporary (i.e not finalised) decision as an excuse for vindication.

No true fan anyway.

haha Sevco feckin beeling you are.

Ignores the question, ignores the facts of our justice system, ignores the reality of the verdicts.

I never pretended we were vindicated, accepting the verdicts 100% as I do means accepting the bad bits too, you want to accept the bad bits and wait 2 years on some slim chance the good bits will dissapear, transparent anti rangers hater you are.

There is nothing misplaced about my pleasure in your obvious hurt, you can smell how genuine it is.

As for the true fan part? diddy fan, posting about Rangers and f**k all to do with Football.

Calm down son.

The "facts of our justice system" includes the right to appeal does it not?

Or do you think that the Old Rangers are above the justice system you obviously know so much about.

Diddy team? Nice one.

[AUFC90]

Guilty of cheating.

Not proven whether the cheating gave the club an advantage

[Bearwithme]

Calm down son. The "facts of our justice system" includes the right to appeal does it not? Or do you think that the Old Rangers are above the justice system you obviously know so much about. Diddy team? Nice one.

So much fuss about a club they claim is dead and gone.

The appeal period for the LNS verdict is over. I seriously doubt it will be "revisited" in the fairly distant future.

[Bendarroch]

I accept LNS's verdict 100% here and now. But, should Rangers lose the Upper Tier Tribunal appeal this decision will need to be revisited. The nuance of the case is that if these "payments" are not deemed to be "loans", Rangers would have evaded millions of pounds in tax and NI contributions. It would then follow that they did indeed "gain a sporting advantage" and "employ players they could not afford".

I am not suggesting that they will lose the appeal, but it is a possibility. Do you accept that? Do you accept that LNS's decision would need to be revisited in that eventuality? Do you accept that in that eventuality Rangers would have "gained a sporting advantage"?

So, like I said, the appeal hearing is vitally important in more ways than one, don't you agree?

In reality you don't accept the LNS decision at all.

And that's before any debate on HMRC winning the appeal only for Murray to appeal that decision if it ever happens.

There is no comeback to the LNS decision as I understand it, because there is nothing in the SPL rules that allows for players registrations to be revoked retrospectively.

[AUFC90]

I accept LNS's verdict 100% here and now. But, should Rangers lose the Upper Tier Tribunal appeal this decision will need to be revisited. The nuance of the case is that if these "payments" are not deemed to be "loans", Rangers would have evaded millions of pounds in tax and NI contributions. It would then follow that they did indeed "gain a sporting advantage" and "employ players they could not afford".

I am not suggesting that they will lose the appeal, but it is a possibility. Do you accept that? Do you accept that LNS's decision would need to be revisited in that eventuality? Do you accept that in that eventuality Rangers would have "gained a sporting advantage"?

So, like I said, the appeal hearing is vitally important in more ways than one, don't you agree?

Do you seriously think that if the UTTT goes against rangers that the LNS enquiry will be re visited? The Scottish footballing authorities have already. Shown they do not have the stomach for it. Doesn't matter anyway. We all know they are cheats. Loans my arse

[Cookies71]

I said I would accept 100% this verdict, I have, an appeal changes nothing of this acceptance, it is still 100%

If someone is guilty they are 100% guilty, the fact they decide to appeal does not change this fact, the verdict stands, they are still 100% guilty.

The bottom line is that you really accept neither verdict or at least you are only willing to cherry pick what you accept, the LNS verdict will never be revisited it is 100% over so tell me do you accept the verdict or not? A simple "yes" or "no" is all that is needed.

100% acceptance of an, as yet, unfinalised verdict means nothing. (UTT etc)

And yes I do accept the LNS verdict. It said Old Rangers cheated and they were punished accordingly. I don't buy into conspiracy theories or try and warp findings to suit my own agenda.

Do you accept that Old Rangers cheated as you seem to 100% accept the verdict. Simple yes or no (apparently) will do.

Edited March 8, 2013 by Cookies71

[barrysnotter]

In reality you don't accept the LNS decision at all.

And that's before any debate on HMRC winning the appeal only for Murray to appeal that decision if it ever happens.

There is no comeback to the LNS decision as I understand it, because there is nothing in the SPL rules that allows for players registrations to be revoked retrospectively.

In reality I can assure you I do accept LNS's decision. His decision is correct based on the present circumstances, Rangers are guilty of administrative breaches.

Should those circumstances change significantly, the case needs revisited. As LNS has pointed out, he was effectively looking into a case of "administrative errors" (I.e. failure to fill out the forms correctly), should Rangers be found to have evaded millions of pounds worth of tax, their "crime" in the footballing sense changes from being administrative to something significantly more serious. If that was found to be the case it would need to be investigated. Don't you agree?

I asked Bennett a few questions in my last post, would be interesting to know your answers as well.

I suspect there is a potential route to revisit this but in reality I sense that those in positions of power will have no appetite for it, that does not make it right though.

Nothing is settled until the UTT is settled.

[Fotbawmad]

In reality you don't accept the LNS decision at all.

And that's before any debate on HMRC winning the appeal only for Murray to appeal that decision if it ever happens.

There is no comeback to the LNS decision as I understand it, because there is nothing in the SPL rules that allows for players registrations to be revoked retrospectively.

Moonbeams is virtually broke. There is no reason he would appeal. He'd rather live out the rest of the days in his vineyard in France.

[Fotbawmad]

There were sanctions which could be imposed in terms of the Rules which were capable of affecting Rangers FC as a continuing entity now owned and operated by Newco.

So will you be having a party when Dunfermline die in the coming weeks?

[Cookies71]

No I dont but then as you know the word cheating was never used, piss poor attempt from you.

The word cheating was never used I accept this. do you? yes or no is fine.

Rangers FC did not gain any unfair competitive advantage from the contraventions of the SPL Rules, I accept this do you? yes or no?

and Nimmo also said.

There were sanctions which could be imposed in terms of the Rules which were capable of affecting Rangers FC as a continuing entity now owned and operated by Newco.

Do you accept this yes or no?

Calm down son. All that changing of font size and bolding of letters will give your fingers cramp.

To answer your questions in an adult manner.

Cheating was wrong wording. I'll give you that. Guilty verdict - do you accept that?

As for the rest.......as said above "Nothing is settled until the UTT is settled". If Old Rangers are found guilty of this on appeal then LNS verdict is rendered meaningless - do you accept that?

Nimmo saying "continuing entity" is only his opinion. He was not there to rule on the continuingness of Rangers / Sevco. Do you accept that?

[No8.]

Jelly and ice cream time.

[Cookies71]

Answer my questions then I will answer yours.

I already have..........

Yes, No, No

Now answer mine so clearly (I sincerely doubt this will happen)

Edited March 8, 2013 by Cookies71

[Cookies71]

I'll accept the "finalised" verdict on the 2 points I said No to as, until the UTT case has been completed, this verdict means nothing. If Old Rangers are found guilty on appeal with the UTT case it renders the LNS investigation meaningless.

I answered your questions as you asked. Be a man and do the same in kind.

[Celtic Rebel.]

Hawd on - you actually like the IRA loving bigot?

Aye,so what.?

[Bendarroch]

If that was found to be the case it would need to be investigated. Don't you agree?

Nothing is settled until the UTT is settled.

No, I don't agree. Not least because the SPL rules don't allow for retrospective changes.

And the UTT would settle nothing if either of the losing sides decided to launch any additional appeal. I'm not sure if this stops eventually at the Supreme court or some other court above even that in Europe.

I can be sure I wont be here discussing it for decades to come.

[Bendarroch]

Aye,so what.?

So, it wasn't enough that you already come across as the complete tool.

[Bendarroch]

If Old Rangers are found guilty of this on appeal then LNS verdict is rendered meaningless - do you accept that?

Nimmo saying "continuing entity" is only his opinion. He was not there to rule on the continuingness of Rangers / Sevco. Do you accept that?

Awesome straw-clutching. Well worthy of dolly.