Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[stonedsailor]

Ah so not only did you forget what you had just posted but you had no interest in the player registration thing, you were really angling to have yet another old club new club argument.

Really? Struggling to see where yer motivation comes from to continue with this subject over a year later, its boring.

I never forgot what I posted. You, as per usual mis-comprehended and/or mis-read, I am not angling at an old/new argument only wanting a discussion on this specific issueI have already conceded that there is continuation.

[aofjays]

'seem to be'

seem meaning appear

the wording was chosen carefully so as to avoid the Rangers fans penchant for pedantry, Idid not express definitively that Tedi was an expert.

Ever thought of switching your allegiance to Sevco? That's hair splitting at an Olympic level. You'd fit right in.

[Bendarroch]

Straight back!! Deluded.

Interesting use of the word deluded - we'll have straight promotions until we are in whatever is left of the top league. I know you mhanky b*****ds will be there, but I'm far from certain about any of the rest.

[Bendarroch]

Sent from my C5303 using Pie & Bovril mobile app

Filed alongside other diddy clubbers opinions in the folder marked 'irrelevant'.

[johncolegrady]

Interesting use of the word deluded - we'll have straight promotions until we are in whatever is left of the top league. I know you mhanky b*****ds will be there, but I'm far from certain about any of the rest.

That's different. I agree you will likely achieve straight promotions to the top flight. It was the term 'back' that I took issue with.

And as for the last part of your post: I am neither mhanky nor a b*****d. But, hey, great debating skills.

[stonedsailor]

Ever thought of switching your allegiance to Sevco? That's hair splitting at an Olympic level. You'd fit right in.

Aye, to use a footballing metaphor, you've got to play them at their own game.

Whenever a difficult question arises they use pedantry to way lay the discussion and bury the point, like Tedi tried with the 'where did I say?' retort.

Since Tedi claims to have no interest in, perhaps, FIFA's only public declaration on the Rangers matter would you like to join me in the discussion?

[stonedsailor]

I do not think so, more like pedantry of the lowest order.

and you are at it again, if you are not wanting another old club new club debate why write this?

Looks like old club new club debate to me so no thanks.

Tedi you turned into a new/old debate, I never mentioned it nor connected the two debates, since you have though I am happy to roll with it.

Edit, it was me who connected the two, apologies.

Edited July 31, 2013 by stonedsailor

[AberdeenBud]

So Dunfermline fans are better supporters than Rangers fans?

Yes, but we knew that anyway.

Genuine question, given their huge numbers that they never fail to remind us of, why instead of their embarrassing and threatening behaviour was there absolutely no moves from the fans to organise and buy the club ala hertz and dunfermline?

Sent from my C5303 using Pie & Bovril mobile app

[Bendarroch]

That's different. I agree you will likely achieve straight promotions to the top flight. It was the term 'back' that I took issue with.

And as for the last part of your post: I am neither mhanky nor a b*****d. But, hey, great debating skills.

If you're struggling with what 'back' means then you're probably right in that I could have done better than mhanky - I should have used thick.

[Apache Don]

Paying old footballing debt in full while the footballing debt that was owed was withheld was not a punishment? The fine was not a punishment?

Hearts not paying HMRC and not paying players on time was bringing the game into disrepute...What punishments have they received?

For not paying wages on time they were given a transfer embargo.

EDIT to apply boldness

Edited July 31, 2013 by Apache Don

[Apache Don]

I really am not offended by football fans singing songs period, if I was then I would not have made a hobby out of attending football matches for the past 30+ years, do not get me wrong I hear all the "in this day and age" arguments but If I was ok with these songs 20 years ok then it would be a bit fake to pretend to be offended by them now.

Singing songs about stadium disasters or other such fairly recent tragic events is distasteful.

My main concern has always been the club getting into trouble over singing songs, its easy just not to sing them.

Your first point - in bold - is exactly why, in the last 20yrs, nothing has changed with regard this issue.

Your 2cnd point, I wholeheartedly agree with. It's shocking & should be stopped.

Your 3rd, just makes me lament the lack of face/palm smillie.

[AberdeenBud]

 

Filed alongside other diddy clubbers opinions in the folder marked 'irrelevant'.

 

Hate to have to spell this out for you, but your tear stained posts have reduced you to a figure of mirth and pity on here. I think MT was correct, supporting a successful football team is the be all and end all for you, that why the liquidation of your club and the Newco's placing in the bottom tier has had such a profoundly traumatic effect on you.

I'm guessing even the decent bears are embarrassed by you, not that they would say so given the circle the wagons mentality present in your support.

It really is time to let go. It's over a year FFS, at least try to enjoy the journey.

Seemingly you used to capable of sensible posts, but much like Becky I find that incredibly hard to believe, but I'll try to engage you.

Just out of interest, do you actually have any arguments why the Newco should have started life in the SPL?

If you want all teams apart from the OF to die, do you think that would leave a thriving and viable Scottish game?

Why do you mock the top flight if you were so desperate to be placed there? Surely you can understand how this looks like a simple case of sour grapes?

Ps, like me I'm sure you'll be pleased hear that season ticket sales are up at both St Mirren and 'the land of milk of honey'!

[AberdeenBud]

For not paying wages on time they were given a transfer embargo.

Shhh, don't let the facts get in the way of a good brainwashing AD.

The fact hearts have been treated harsher for lesser offences gets in the way of their victim mentality drivel so they won't recognise it.

[aofjays]

Aye, to use a footballing metaphor, you've got to play them at their own game.

Whenever a difficult question arises they use pedantry to way lay the discussion and bury the point, like Tedi tried with the 'where did I say?' retort.

Since Tedi claims to have no interest in, perhaps, FIFA's only public declaration on the Rangers matter would you like to join me in the discussion?

It's fairly simple as far as I can see. McGregor had a contract with the old company, not with the new one. While he could have chosen to move his contract to the new company, he could not be forced to do so (due to it being a new company).

According to LNS "This is not to say that a Club has legal personality, separate from and additional to the legal personality of its owner and operator. We are satisfied that it does not, and Mr McKenzie (the SPL’s lawyer) did not seek to argue otherwise."

If the club has no separate legal personality then player contracts must be held by the company. So all in all just some simple employment law. Unless I'm missing something I cannot see how this shows one way or the other that Sevco are a new club (they are though, Rangers -a current at the time SPL member club- voted yes to Sevco -not an SPL member club- getting SPL entry - only clubs have votes so they must be two separate clubs).

[Apache Don]

You might have noticed but i don't always tow the party line and i am not interested in who agreed to the new disciplinary procedure. I am saying that it is wrong to bring in a new so called fairer and more open procedure and then keep the names of the panel passing judgements secret.

I love the way you all conveniently forget that the judgement was later shown to be illegal. Instead of attacking Rangers and their support you should aim your anger at those that abused their positions and tried to force this through. Thank God my club stood tall against such intimidation and saw it through to the end!

It has also been conveniently forgotten, that the explanation for the panel attempting to impose an unlisted sanction, was that the listed sanctions - other than a severe ticking off - were considered potentially too devastating, ie. suspension or termination of License. They were trying to do old Rangers a favour ffs.Face/palm.

[Dindeleux]

Did Wisbit put you up to this? That was covered last week or the week before..

No, I'm rarely on this thread as its not really fit for purpose anymore.

Have you changed your mind since that statement?

[No8.]

No, I'm rarely on this thread as its not really fit for purpose anymore.

Have you changed your mind since that statement?

Yeh...about a day after i made it...I hope that clears it up.

[Mad Capsule]

Off topic, but I get the tube to work every day and I thought I'd just say what a good job Rangers have done with advertisements around the subway for season tickets. Good work.

[Apache Don]

Is that an answer?

Ted, you're not Bennett. You don't need to behave like him.

I reckon you want to give up on this insistence that there are a group of fine fellows amongst the 'old rangers'' support on here. Look at the response you get from them, they certainly don't seem to appreciate the regard you hold for them and I haven't noticed any more respect accorded to you than the rest of us. Sure on their day, a few of them can put up a decent and well delivered argument but when hit with the stark reality of the main issues, they just resort to type and show themselves to be cut from the same cloth, as the worst examples of the gang. If it were to be revealed by Div, that the whole gang are in fact Bennett, I for one wouldn't be falling off my chair.

[stonedsailor]

It's fairly simple as far as I can see. McGregor had a contract with the old company, not with the new one. While he could have chosen to move his contract to the new company, he could not be forced to do so (due to it being a new company).

According to LNS "This is not to say that a Club has legal personality, separate from and additional to the legal personality of its owner and operator. We are satisfied that it does not, and Mr McKenzie (the SPL’s lawyer) did not seek to argue otherwise."

If the club has no separate legal personality then player contracts must be held by the company. So all in all just some simple employment law. Unless I'm missing something I cannot see how this shows one way or the other that Sevco are a new club (they are though, Rangers -a current at the time SPL member club- voted yes to Sevco -not an SPL member club- getting SPL entry - only clubs have votes so they must be two separate clubs).

Except that we are not discussing employment law, we are discussing transferral of player registrations which is covered by the SFA's articles of association. Player registrations are attributed to the club according to the SFA's articles of association.

The club entered into a process of arbitration with the SFA via an independent panel over the transferral of Rangers players' registrations, this panel said that the process of arbitration did not transfer with the transferral of assets from one company to the other back in January.

What puzzles me is if the registrations were attributed to the club and the club began the process of arbitration and the club is a continuation then why does an independent panel say that according to the SFA's articles of association the arbitration process did not follow with the club.

FIFA also made a ruling which allowed the player's registrations to be transferred without compensation to the club.

Football rules seem show a new club in this case, both the SFA's and FIFA's. As far as I am aware these are the only official judgements by either body on the subject of continuation.