As We Rise Again Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 No P & Bers will demand it stays in SFL3 and claim they know better than the big bad real world. More than likely. I just think us having a sub forum has caused people to be more obsessed and make more posts about us than what they would if we didn't have the sub forum. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captain kirk Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Seems no invoice has been presented according to shoo, the SPL have asked LNS who should be paying the costs. That is the end of that then. Something for the P & Bers to get excited about for a few hours, its funny watching them foam at the mouth. I'm afraid it was a Bear (leggo)who started the SPL chase rangers for money story backed up by jabba so the only foaming at the mouth has come from rabid bears ,,as usual. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
As We Rise Again Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 I thought the club was found guilty of not declaring the EBTs but, since it had not gained a material advantage on the field, no punishment was deemed necessary? Since the club was found guilty, they should pay the costs. Or is this another case of the company not declaring the EBTs? I get so mixed up Found guilty of a little thing called an ADMINISTRATION ERROR, hardly anything big now is it? The SPL are skint and looking for anyway to get money so they think they can blackmail us into handing over money even though they kept our money for finishing second in the SPL and cost us millions on players. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captain kirk Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Found guilty of a little thing called an ADMINISTRATION ERROR, hardly anything big now is it? The SPL are skint and looking for anyway to get money so they think they can blackmail us into handing over money even though they kept our money for finishing second in the SPL and cost us millions on players. Admin error as in deliberate non disclosure? And the only mob skint here are Sevco hence to mounting sackings from the debt dome. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 I thought the club was found guilty of not declaring the EBTs but, since it had not gained a material advantage on the field, no punishment was deemed necessary? Since the club was found guilty, they should pay the costs. Or is this another case of the company not declaring the EBTs? I get so mixed up Lord Nimmo smith fined the oldco £250k. He did not award costs against them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 I thought the club was found guilty of not declaring the EBTs but, since it had not gained a material advantage on the field, no punishment was deemed necessary? Since the club was found guilty, they should pay the costs. Or is this another case of the company not declaring the EBTs? I get so mixed up Thanks for showing you don't know you arse from your elbow. Most Diddies try and obfuscate. Nice to see someone who is openly ignorant. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Ok No8, I'll admit to not fully grasping this aspect of the story. As you present it, it does indeed sound unfair and if it's called for, believe me, I'll be very happy to criticise the SPL. I thought it was a case of witholding funds in order to repay football debt, rather than trust Rangers to do it themselves. This sounds eminently sensible, but I'm not entirely clear on this and if I've got it wrong, please advise me. Can you then return my courtesy by answering my question about how you reconcile the whole 'Oldco/Newco only when it suits' thing? I've already said that P&Ds can't legitimately do this either. How, in a moral sense, can Rangers get away with it? Doncaster was asked that question on Radio Scotland on saturday and refused what happened to the funds which whould have been paid to the oldco. Apparently it's time to move on. We can speculate ofcourse, my guess would be that they've already spent the cash. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fife Saint Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Where has this come from? The Newco facing legal costs, I mean? That seems completely daft. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Admin error as in deliberate non disclosure? And the only mob skint here are Sevco hence to mounting sackings from the debt dome. In contrast to the moneybags SPL? Hey you're a fan of an SPL club. How happy are you to pay £50K towards the tawdry and needless SPL enqiry? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 I am struggling to make sense of your post though Bhairn. Clame? A party? where? are there many chicks going? free booze? Not.laws? Is this a website or something? Charles green yous are? Mocking someone's spelling and grammar, Tedi? Oh dear, make sure you don't lapse into hybole, now, won't you? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Where has this come from? The Newco facing legal costs, I mean? That seems completely daft. SPL can't afford to pay fat Rod, so they're trying to force Rangers to pay it. I wouldn't be surprised if theres a wee deal done for SPL2. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 I am struggling to make sense of your post though Bhairn. Clame? A party? where? are there many chicks going? free booze? Not.laws? Is this a website or something? Charles green yous are? Wow, what a wonderful reply. 2 sentences of highlighting typos. And 2 sentences of drivel Oh and aye, football rules not laws. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Found guilty of a little thing called an ADMINISTRATION ERROR, hardly anything big now is it? The SPL are skint and looking for anyway to get money so they think they can blackmail us into handing over money even though they kept our money for finishing second in the SPL and cost us millions on players. An ADMINISTRATION ERROR? Sounds so honest and cuddly and 'little', doesn't it? What the enquiry actually found Rangers guilty of was 'deliberate non-disclosure' over 11 years. An ADMINISTRATION EROR is when you forget to submit the papers or don't realise you have to. When you deliberately withold the papers, knowing that you shouldn't, it's no longer an ADMINISTRATION ERROR. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Wow, what a wonderful reply. 2 sentences of highlighting typos. And 2 sentences of drivel Oh and aye, football rules not laws. You can take the boy out of the Jabba but you can't take the Jabba out of the boy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fife Saint Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 SPL can't afford to pay fat Rod, so they're trying to force Rangers to pay it. I wouldn't be surprised if theres a wee deal done for SPL2. Where has the story originated from? I've not seen anything other than web talk. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 SPL can't afford to pay fat Rod, so they're trying to force Rangers to pay it. I wouldn't be surprised if theres a wee deal done for SPL2. It would seem odd, since they didn't ask the new company for the fine, if they then ask the newco for the expenses related to it. We'll see what happens. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Where has the story originated from? I've not seen anything other than web talk. The guys on Radio Scotland were asking Doncaster on saturday about Green ranting at him over a letter he recieved at a meeting with SFL clubs and what it was all about - Doncaster kept quiet and never answered. Yesterday stories started ciculating that the SPL had billed Rangers £500k (STV website, SKY etc) and today it was in most of the papers. Tonight Keevins tried to downplay it by saying it was still to be decided who paid up on RC. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fife Saint Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 I heard the interview but I've completely missed the legal costs bit. Utterly bizarre. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 You can take the boy out of the Jabba but you can't take the Jabba out of the boy. There's a surprise, Bennett straight in with a totally pointless post That didn't take long. How's the business Bennett ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 I am struggling to make sense of your post though Bhairn. Clame? A party? where? are there many chicks going? free booze? Not.laws? Is this a website or something? Charles green yous are? Hey Ted, it's a fitba forum. Spelling police etc. 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.