The_Kincardine Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 All that led to was me having a deep distrust of the 90 minute bigots on both sides of the sectarian divide and a passionate hatred, which remains to this day, of Newcastle United. This is disingenuous pish and a pathetic attempt to rewrite history. I was brought up in Motherwell and regularly went to Fir Park in the 1960s and early 70s. It was common for Well fans then to sing 'party songs' back then. The Billy Boys, The Sash and Derry's Walls were all regularly sung by Well fans. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Sevco paid Rangers footballing debts they were not legally obliged to pay them. No,but it was one of the conditions of transference of the SFA membership,a bit different to this scenario where the SPL are chancing their arm. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Umbungo1874 Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 No,but it was one of the conditions of transference of the SFA membership,a bit different to this scenario where the SPL are chancing their arm. This investigation was also mentioned in the 5 way agreement, how can you be sure that this is not one of the conditions of SFA membership? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 This investigation was also mentioned in the 5 way agreement, how can you be sure that this is not one of the conditions of SFA membership? I would think that if the investigation was one of the conditions,then that condition would have been invoked by now by the SPL. The SPL tried to include title stripping as part of the five way agreement initially but this was rejected by Green iirc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotbawmad Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 I think a lot of the SPL fans said that and look what's happened they've stayed away from their stadium anyway. Yet another prime example of the orcs twisting the facts to suit their own agenda. We never said we would back our clubs in big numbers if you lot were denied entry into the SPL. We simply said we would turn our backs on them for good if a new team like Rangers was allowed straight back into the top league. The real reason why attendences are falling is because there is a recession out there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 Question..... What's the difference between North Korea and The Rangers? One is a dangerous, unstable, pennyless regime teetering on the brink whilst promising Armageddon to all, led by a wee overweight deluded maniac, with legions of brainwashed followers, loyal to the party line. The other is in Asia... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 Again you're wrong about keeping the good stuff and ditching the bad. It's about being realistic that football is a business and a company that owns a club is not going to even consider paying a debt that they are not legally obliged to pay. As i've already said if the SPL Commission had stipulated that NEWCO would or could be liable for costs then perhaps there would be an argument but as they were not even involved in the investigation and therefore couldn't face any monetary penalties it would have been farcical to expect them to pay costs. Do you really think that any club owners who were in this position would have paid such costs incurred because of a case that involved a previous regime,not a chance of that but i think you know that. Only because this is Rangers is there such a furore. That is the top and bottom of it all. I'm not wrong at all - I'm really not. You're effectively saying that morality doesn't come into it - an extraordinary stance when discussing a sport. I suspect Youngsy that the football is the only sphere in your life where you're happy to discard any notion of what's consistent, right or fair; but in said context, you seem very happy indeed to do so when it suits. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 I'm not wrong at all - I'm really not. You're effectively saying that morality doesn't come into it - an extraordinary stance when discussing a sport. I suspect Youngsy that the football is the only sphere in your life where you're happy to discard any notion of what's consistent, right or fair; but in said context, you seem very happy indeed to do so when it suits. Aw come on! Don't go dragging The Rangers into 'sport' 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captain kirk Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 (edited) This is not a question about ditching the bad though, this is about costs, that the judge in the case did not award, he only issued a fine, the rest is kinda irrelevant. The SPL commission was (1) pointless, why do you need a commission to interpret your own rules? (2) a failure on the main point it set out to prove, the Rangers players were all completely properly registered and as thus eligible to play. The whole point of this commission was to find that Rangers fielded ineligible players thus gained an illegal and unfair advantage on the field, in this point it utterly failed, Rangers were found guilty yes, but only on a technicality. Deliberate non disclosure over an 11 year period is no technicality. So guilty then. Edited April 4, 2013 by captain kirk 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 Deliberate non disclosure over an 11 year period is no technicality. So guilty then. In.govan apparently deliberately breaking rules over a long period isn't cheating. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 Deliberate non disclosure over an 11 year period is no technicality. So guilty then. Only an idiot would try to claim that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 Only an idiot would try to claim that. Nah, Bennett, an idiot would claim vindication after being handed a 250k fine. Sorry, make that 500 million idiots worldwide. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 Nah, Bennett, an idiot would claim vindication after being handed a 250k fine. Sorry, make that 500 million idiots worldwide. As usual Norman ignores what was said and wings it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 Predictable WKR syndrome. It is frightening he is still here. He has been proven to be wrong on just about everything he has ever posted but still just carries on regardless of the facts. Ach well Tedi and Bennet you have more patience than me. Keep baffling the dafties with the facts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 (edited) Deliberate non disclosure over an 11 year period is no technicality. So guilty then. Only an idiot would try to claim that. As usual Norman ignores what was said and wings it. You expressed a view that believing rangers having been found to have failed to comply over a period of years amounted to guilt was idiotic. I expressed the view that having been found guilty and fined, to present this as some kind of vindication was idiotic. So, what did i ignore? The verdict was guilty. The old club cheated. Care to show me where there was any proof of innocence? Edited April 4, 2013 by WhiteRoseKillie 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 You expressed a view that believing rangers having been found to have failed to comply over a period of years amounted to guilt was idiotic. I expressed the view that having been found guilty and fined, to present this as some kind of vindication was idiotic. So, what did i ignore? The verdict was guilty. The old club cheated. Care to show me where there was any proof of innocence? You've just reinforced No8's point you prat 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 It is frightening he is still here. He has been proven to be wrong on just about everything he has ever posted but still just carries on regardless of the facts. Ach well Tedi and Bennet you have more patience than me. Keep baffling the dafties with the facts. Don't you worry, No. 8. I'll be here long after your wee pop-up Orcs, all your fairweather supporters and the rest of them are gone. Your mob cheated, lied and stole their way to oblivion. Their cloning and subsequent relapse into the behaviour and attitude of the old club is shameful to behold. Millions of pounds down the Swanee, creditors and taxpayers cheated, a country's entire national game discredited, all so that you and the rest of the Horde can continue to measure their worth by the trophy count of the dead club. I won't let you lot forget. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 Most of them have left the BRALT now, just the bile left and lets face any Rangers fan reading the WKR`s ramblings would be motivated to go and buy a ST, he is actually an asset to the thing he hates. I'd say that it's more than just hating a rival team with Norman, there is something seriously wrong with him. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 You've just reinforced No8's point you prat So what was the verdict of the SPL commission? They were innocent, but got a 250k fine? Aye, right. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 So what was the verdict of the SPL commission? They were innocent, but got a 250k fine? Aye, right. Still ignoring what was actually posted, you nver change. 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.