aofjays Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Yes. I know. Calling me angry doesn't make me angry. Nor do schoolboy level wind up attempts. Carry on though by all means, it's a slow morning for me today. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aofjays Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 You do realise you're debating with a complete moron? Yip. I'm a bit bored today. Nothing has broken yet so I've not got much to do. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever_blue Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Yes. I know. Calling me angry doesn't make me angry. Nor do schoolboy level wind up attempts. Carry on though by all means, it's a slow morning for me today. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aofjays Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 (edited) That is awesome. Can we have gif avatars here? ETA. File too large. Bugger. Now there is a need to be upset. Edited May 23, 2014 by aofjays 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kildog Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Yet the players were still properly registered and no competitive advantage was gained, it is in the same report, no amount of cherry-picking will ever change this. Aye but Rangers cheated, then they died. Not happy with being famous for institutional sectarianism and bigotry. They will now also be remembered as cheats. The worst thing is, we will never truly know the full extent of the cheating that occured. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 I like to wind people up seemingly. Yes, you also told me you were shite at golf. Aye...that's what i told the guy deciding on the handicaps as well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Typical Rangers, always trying to gain an unfair advantage. Fixed n' that 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Typical Rangers fan, always trying to gain an advantage. You will be getting whipped round the head with that olive branch when the Killie fan reads this. Nah, Tedi - that would be humour, not pig-headed, willful ignorance. You should try it sometime. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Aye...that's what i told the guy deciding on the handicaps as well. ^^^ Bandit. Sporting advantage definitely gained. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 (edited) ^^^ Bandit. Sporting advantage definitely gained. You see Tedi i knew it would get this response. The handicapper was a Buddie and gave me three shots LESS than my official handicap but like Rangers i overcame this injustice to triumph. Edited May 23, 2014 by No8. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Don Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 The point is that the tax avoidance scheme was just that a tax avoidance scheme, tax avoidance is not illegal, reckless from Murray yes but not illegal. The point is that despite deliberately failing to fill in the proper paperwork the rules were not broken and the players were correctly registered, thus not cheating. The point was this whole conversation started because you chose to cherry-pick parts out from a report that was over a year old, the problem is that the same report clear stated no unfair competitive advantage was gained, did you think we would just forget? What actually happened, was the case against fell to bits when it was pointed out to SPL law team, that the rules did not allow for retrospective action on improper player registration, outwith the current season. The players' registrations had to be challenged in the relevant season. In other words, although there was no doubt cheating had occurred, no action could be taken unless they were caught at the time of the offence. Therefor LNS had no option but to rule accordingly. Essentially, they got off with a wee slap due to a technicality. A bit like getting off with a criminal offence because the crucial evidence had been obtained outwith proper procedure. A fkg technicality. Everyone knows they were guilty as charged. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 aofjays raging that rangers were found not guilty congrats no 8 Aofjays is always angry, you can just picture him stomping about with a permanent scowl on his mug. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 What actually happened, was the case against fell to bits when it was pointed out to SPL law team, that the rules did not allow for retrospective action on improper player registration, outwith the current season. The players' registrations had to be challenged in the relevant season. In other words, although there was no doubt cheating had occurred, no action could be taken unless they were caught at the time of the offence. Therefor LNS had no option but to rule accordingly. Essentially, they got off with a wee slap due to a technicality. A bit like getting off with a criminal offence because the crucial evidence had been obtained outwith proper procedure. A fkg technicality. Everyone knows they were guilty as charged. Lord Nimmo Smith doesn't agree. Worthy Brother William did his duty. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 You have bodies in your back garden don't you? Poor old Norman lol 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 So the D's and P's are still greeting about EBT's and the No cheating verdict I see. I blame the fat low level paper gatherer, if hadn't misread the rules then the D's and P's wouldn't have gotten their hopes up. No cheating just an honest admin error, an honest admin error which still has the likes of Norman and Densboy absolutely raging. Splendid.... -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aofjays Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 So the D's and P's are still greeting about EBT's and the No cheating verdict I see. I blame the fat low level paper gatherer, if hadn't misread the rules then the D's and P's wouldn't have gotten their hopes up. No cheating just an honest admin error, an honest admin error which still has the likes of Norman and Densboy absolutely raging. Splendid.... More lies from a sevco fan. You guy's really can't help yourselves can you? Cheats and liars. Well suited for each other I suppose. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Then why attempt to send me on it?, you disengenoine. Yes their are competitive advantages gained in sport all the time, If I played AM at tennis he would have a competitive advantage over me, however no matter how much I wished it that competitive advantage would not be 'unfair' LNS was specific. Your tennis analogy is quite poor TBH. This is probably better: You are due to play in a competition at our tennis club for the "best doubles" award. I don't want you to win this and know that there are no players locally that can beat you and your doubles partner, I therefore pay for Nadal to come and play on my side against you (with cash that I "borrowed" from the Cricket Club). As there is nothing in the rules about professionals taking part then his inclusion is OK, however the fact he is taking part at all is only due to the Cricket Club paying him. No sporting advantage gained???? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Jack D Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 I thought the crux of the competitive advantage debate was that second contracts are not permitted. However the SFA rules stated that it was the clubs responsibility to tell them if players had second contracts. Rangers didn't therefore the players were properly registered. Hence no advantage. Whether they could afford them wasn't even considered. Fuckin SFA, next we'll be paying tv companies to show games.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aofjays Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Aofjays is always angry, you can just picture him stomping about with a permanent scowl on his mug. Lol. 3 sevco fans telling me I'm angry now. Pretty sure someone's upset, but it ain't me. 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.