Monkey Tennis Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 To be fair you did repeat it when you were struggling to get yer point across in later replies, never mind after a bit of coaching you did mange convey what you meant at the 3rd or 4th attempt. I didn't repeat it. I quoted the post in which it appeared in order to address your inability, or unwillingness, to recognise context. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 I'll accept this £65 million overall liability 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 Why should it matter was religion his parents are? It would've gave credence to the rumour I was going to post... You really don't think before posting , do you ? Irish Catholic parentage, wow, that will upset the sporting integretists. Anyone who believes that bunkum needs sectioned The guy is a Plant, out to harm us from the inside Funny how in 2008 He seems to have been a life long Die hard Man Utd fan This guy has a distict smell about him. The fact that he is in bed with the Rebel tells me all I need to know. And, since when is a 1% shareholding of any real significance? My jury went out, came back in. Not a friend. Bears aren't convinced..... -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 (edited) You didn't read or probably couldn't read my last post properly through your alcohol infested rant where I said I found out where the communication problem lay ! They are not called trialists but non registered players you moron now drink up sonny Which is why they can play as trialists. Please for the love of God, cease and desist. Edited June 15, 2013 by bennett 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 Rangers FC, may they rest in peace, were participating in frauds and deceptions long before The Whyte Knight appeared on the scene. You people have short memories when it suits you. You do love those suits and the bullshit that they talk you do. Hows the Supercasino and the hovercraft pitch coming along? What fraud was this then? The EBTs, they were legal at the time, in fact if i remember correctly the PLC had a 2-1 majority found in their favour, rule of law applies, no fraud committed. SPL Commissions; no sporting advantage gained, therefore no titles or honours removed. Too bad if that doesn't sit well with you but that's the reality. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 (edited) Mmm, the Bears seem to be up against it for the moment, desperate semantic nit-picking in order to claim a small victory seems to be the order of the day. It's at times like this I almost feel sorry for them, as if seeing their once proud institution become a laughing stock is not enough, it must take a special kind of character to be able to front up to the daily humiliation and taunts Rangers fans have to endure. Only almost though, because if nothing else, Hertz current struggles have shown us that the seethecovians remain without doubt the most bitter and angry group of fans in this country. Edited June 15, 2013 by AberdeenBud 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 I thought we agreed yer wording was all wrong, are we going back on this admission now? beginning to think you are Hellbhoys alias. There was no such admission Ted. I did accept however that: "Slackness in my wording opened the door to daft wee redundant quips." Not the same, and not an alias - but then, you already know that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weirdcal Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 It would've gave credence to the rumour I was going to post... You really don't think before posting , do you ? Bears aren't convinced..... he carries himself well in the interview, pokes fun at the comments made about him on forums, proves he has a human side and a business side and he also seems like a decent bloke... No wonder they don't like him, he's human haha. This lot liked sdm, Craig whyte (initially) and chucky, Yet not this guy cause of his parents religious background. Anyways. Just to add to the tedi / hell boy thing, the whole playing signed players as trialists to get round embargo, honestly I think if they have a predated contract/ registration ready thats still able to be cancelled then I don't see it as an issue. If they have a contract yet it's the registration that's yet to go through, they aren't really trialists by definition, but you can't exactly blame a club for trying to use our rules own loopholes if it allows for this. Sent from ma phone using Pie & Bovril mobile app 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 So are you agreed that the net debt was £27 million, joey? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingrodent Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 What fraud was this then? The EBTs, they were legal at the time, in fact if i remember correctly the PLC had a 2-1 majority found in their favour, rule of law applies, no fraud committed. SPL Commissions; no sporting advantage gained, therefore no titles or honours removed. Too bad if that doesn't sit well with you but that's the reality. OJ Simpson getting it right up everyone because a court found him innocent type post IMO 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 OJ Simpson getting it right up everyone because a court found him innocent type post IMO I wasn't aware that this thread was in relation to anything to do with O.J. Simpson. Another analogy from yourself instead of dealing in the specifics. Is it correct that the EBT case was found in the PLCs favour? A yes or no answer will suffice. Is it correct that the SPL Commission found that no sporting advantage was gained due to the PLC implementing the use of EBTs? Again a yes or no answer will suffice 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 It would've gave credence to the rumour I was going to post... You really don't think before posting , do you ? Bears aren't convinced..... I've read that thread and as you are well aware the vast majority who posted on it are speaking mainly in positive terms about Kieran Prior. So your contention that the Bears aren't convinced is false. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 Is it correct that the EBT case was found in the PLCs favour? A yes or no answer will suffice. Is it correct that the SPL Commission found that no sporting advantage was gained due to the PLC implementing the use of EBTs? Again a yes or no answer will suffice This wish to deal only in absolutes, when discussing something nuanced and complex is bizarre, and peurilely simplistic. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 This wish to deal only in absolutes, when discussing something nuanced and complex is bizarre, and peurilely simplistic. So is that a yes or no to both questions? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 So is that a yes or no to both questions? Neither. It's an answer too subtle for your purposes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingrodent Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 I wasn't aware that this thread was in relation to anything to do with O.J. Simpson. Another analogy from yourself instead of dealing in the specifics. Is it correct that the EBT case was found in the PLCs favour? A yes or no answer will suffice. Is it correct that the SPL Commission found that no sporting advantage was gained due to the PLC implementing the use of EBTs? Again a yes or no answer will suffice We've been over this a bajillion times, to no avail. Once again: an action is either right or wrong in itself. It's either right to cheat and steal, or it isn't. This belief that an act can be right and just if a court finds that it isn't criminal, is the mindset of criminals. Only criminals believe in enriching themselves by doing whatever they can get away with, without getting caught. Ordinary people don't spend their days poking and probing around the edges of legality, looking for ways to profit by skirting this law or bending that rule. In fact, ordinary people correctly perceive that kind of behaviour as deliberate and intentional criminality. This is why your club are fvcked in the court of public opinion; it's the reason why you're regarded now and forever as cheats and robbers. The fact that your lawyers have helped you slime and sleaze your way out of taking responsibility for your club's actions for the time being cuts no ice whatsoever with the general public. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 We've been over this a bajillion times, to no avail. Once again: an action is either right or wrong in itself. It's either right to cheat and steal, or it isn't. This belief that an act can be right and just if a court finds that it isn't criminal, is the mindset of criminals. Only criminals believe in enriching themselves by doing whatever they can get away with, without getting caught. Ordinary people don't spend their days poking and probing around the edges of legality, looking for ways to profit by skirting this law or bending that rule. Come, come Rodent. A moral dimension to how people and organisations can be expected to behave? Don't be ridiculous. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 I've read that thread and as you are well aware the vast majority who posted on it are speaking mainly in positive terms about Kieran Prior. So your contention that the Bears aren't convinced is false. The fact there is suspicion, means they are not convinced. Try the other thread on it.....plenty more there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K Dodd Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 I have just been flicking through the last few pages so I might of missed this. If the transfer embargo finishes on the 1st sept, and the transfer window closes on the 31st aug. will these players be eligible to play before the jan window opens? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 I have just been flicking through the last few pages so I might of missed this. If the transfer embargo finishes on the 1st sept, and the transfer window closes on the 31st aug. will these players be eligible to play before the jan window opens? Yes, from first game. 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.