Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[Monkey Tennis]

for the 54th time, I do not care

Superb Tedi.

Now I can readily accept Bennett and No8 saying that they're not too hung up on the continuation debate. I feel much the same way as do many others on here.

You however, have no right whatever to claim you don't care about it. You and HB have whiled away many, many, many happy nocturnal hours firing articles at one another to prove your version. Don't be so bloody ridiculous.

[Henrik's tongue]

Even now i still can't believe just how bitter towards us they are.

At the end of the day it's only a game.

It's a good job Rangers treated it as 'only a game' or they'd have ended up in an awfy state.

Oh wait................

[aofjays]

Please to not infer your obvious fuckwittery on to me, you were obviously born with this affliction, I therefore blame your parents.

My point was the plastics were upset and bitter, you then introduced a march in defence of your obvious beloved plastic friends, the plastics are well know for organising an illegal march, I simply said at least ours was legal.

So you were deflecting, I thought so but thanks for confirming.

[Monkey Tennis]

That is not what i've done though, is it?

It's most certainly what you implied when you described the outcome as a "fail" for those who raised questions. It's also implied by your very selective quoting of the parts of the ruling which decided that action wasn't necessary. It's further implied by your omission of the very damning parts of the judgement.

I'm therefore quite happy to conclude that effectively, you've claimed these highly damning conclusions represent some sort of victory for Rangers.

Edited August 6, 2013 by Monkey Tennis

[~~~]

At the end of the day it's only a game.

And yet rangers fans threatened to burn down Starks Park after McCoist demands

[stonedsailor]

The SFA made it painfully obvious in their statement in July 2012, I have posted it about 54 times, should be easy enough for you to find.

Did not read yer links, no interest sorry stoney.

full of shit, the BBC link supercedes any erroneous statement from July of last year as it refers to the SFA appointed panel making a judgement on the SFA's rules on the matter, you keep burying your head in the sand though.

[Henrik's tongue]

It must be really, really, really shit being a Rangers fan.

[captain kirk]

Tut tut being investigated for cheating a charity http://m.stv.tv/news/west-central/235201-rangers-charity-foundation-breached-rules-on-ac-milan-friendly/

What a vile club.

[killingfloorman]

Same old tricks from the Ranger ripping off their won charity.

The Scottish Charity Regulator has now ruled that the decision-making of the trustees "constituted misconduct".

However, it decided not to take action against any of the trustees.

The regulator's report states that the Rangers Charity Foundation had three trustees at the time of the game - all of whom were employed by or held senior positions at the club.

Why has the regulator decided not to take any action. If they have decided that the decisions making constituted mis-conduct why are they not pursuing this?

The OSCR are a taxpayer funded service. Why are they not acting on our behalf to follow this up. Must be a conspiracy as well.

Something to do with bricks and windaes I assume

[bennett]

It's most certainly what you implied when you described the outcome as a "fail" for those who raised questions. It's also implied by your very selective quoting of the parts of the ruling which decided that action wasn't necessary. It's further implied by your omission of the very damning parts of the judgement.

I'm therefore quite happy to conclude that effectively, you've claimed these highly damning conclusions represent some sort of victory for Rangers.

It's nothing of the sort, only your jaundiced view on it which is as usual warped beyond belief.

[captain kirk]

Is there no depths this cesspit of a club will sink?

"The charities watchdog has strongly criticised trustees of the Rangers Charity Foundation after cash raised at a match went to the football club.

The fundraising game between Rangers Legends and AC Milan Glorie took place after the club entered administration.

A complaint was raised after it emerged that almost £200,000 went to the club rather than the charity.

The Scottish Charity Regulator has now ruled that the decision-making of the trustees "constituted misconduct".

Stealing from charity .

[Monkey Tennis]

Glad you liked it.

Its the way I feel, call it boredom after a year of arguing the same old tired points, anyway I have always maintained people are entitled to their own opinion, to suggest anything else would be a lie.

No argument on this.

I can accept continuation (if not a seamless one) myself.

The joke involves your pretending you're not actually too fussed about something you've devoted incredible time and attention to.

It would be like us claiming not to be obsessed.

[Apache Don]

But you keep commenting on it. A bystander without any preconceived notions would find you protestations of indifference hard to swallow. People familiar with the thread will just laugh.

Happy to oblige

[Monkey Tennis]

It's nothing of the sort, only your jaundiced view on it which is as usual warped beyond belief.

What were you saying then, when first posting on the ruling?

[bennett]

What were you saying then, when first posting on the ruling?

Seeing as you quoted the post and then replied to it, you obviously know what i posted. Only you decided to try and put words in my mouth.

[stonedsailor]

You are that, we can agree.

Go and write another letter to the CAB if you think it was so erroneous, make sure you keep us all informed now.

I would but it seems the ASA have reopened their investigation, no doubt the CAB/TS will follow suit, or at least take stock of their new findings. No point in multiple bodies investigating. I do feel a little vindicated in my actipns seeing as how Lord Smith appears to agree.

[ribzanelli]

Seeing as you quoted the post and then replied to it, you obviously know what i posted. Only you decided to try and put words in my mouth.

Bennett, it certainly appears that you see this decision as some kind of victory for Rangers, perhaps you could clarify what you meant if this isn't the case?

[Monkey Tennis]

Seeing as you quoted the post and then replied to it, you obviously know what i posted. Only you decided to try and put words in my mouth.

I know what you posted - I'm curious to learn what you actually meant however, as my inyerpretation is obviously wide of the mark.

Could you help me clear it up?

[bennett]

I know what you posted -

Then don't ask such stupid questions again.

Bennett, it certainly appears that you see this decision as some kind of victory for Rangers, perhaps you could clarify what you meant if this isn't the case?

If i saw it that way then i would have posted that.

[aofjays]

You are correct, I was following your example.

You poor soul, you really are that stupid. There there. Let me explain.

1) you said the plastics were bitter

2) I agree but such pot/kettle name calling deserves being called out.

3) I post about a bunch of idiots marching to the bbc, this you will note is still on topic. ie. You say celtic are bitter because they phoned a few thousand times - you idiots were so bitter you marched on the place.

4) You post about your silly little march being legal. This has nothing to do with anything. This is deflection.

Hope that helps.