T_S_A_R Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Piss off TSAR , We want that cheating shower of shite to die.... thankfully people with more than one opinion are allowed to post and if you got the email from stuart mcall during the week i agree with what he has to say regarding how this effects our club. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Connolly Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 thankfully people with more than one opinion are allowed to post and if you got the email from stuart mcall during the week i agree with what he has to say regarding how this effects our club. Hi Stuart....hi pal 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeeHectorPar Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Friday, 01 June 2012 21:52 The Rangers Supporters Trust Board is calling on Stewart Regan to resign after he favoured a tweet which threatened Rangers Midfielder Lee McCulloch: "In the image provided you will see a rival fan post "I might try to find a vid to painstakingly review again...& I'd cheerfully see him hung" in conversation that started off with another fan gleefully state he would like Lee McCulloch sent off where Regan has been tweeted in. Stewart Regan subsequently hit favourite on this tweet: http://i49.tinypic.com/2v9r7mh.jpg This is a disgraceful gesture from Stewart Regan which exposes his real attitude towards Rangers Football Club. It really smacks of incompetence for the SFA Chief Executive to encourage threatening tweets at the same time the authorities are trying to clamp down on threatening behaviour online. Stewart Regan should be leading by example rather than being a cheer leader for threatening and intimidating behaviour and his position is now untenable. Rangers supporters' confidence in Stewart Regan has been diminishing for some time given his failure to address the constant singling out of referees in the final third of last season and the obstructive and difficult position he has taken during Rangers current administration process. But this is the last straw and Stewart Regan must pack his bags and go." My God! You really are scraping the shyte underneath the bottom of the barrel. Choosing "favourite" is an easy way of keeping track of something you may not agree with but want to keep in touch with to see how it develops. You are clutching at anything which may look like a straw. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 200 pages to go... Damn ya beat me to it FFS. Been slow all day then when ya go away for a split second BOOM it's you have to catch up . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T_S_A_R Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 If they're going to survive then the longer the euro ban the better, it'll make it alot more difficult for green to spend his "warchest" , not to mention the lack of income from participating and the knock on effect from sponsors. mate look at what feyenoord, juve, fenerbahce and besiktas did for their one year euro bans. a 3 year ban for rangers looks draconian in comparison. milan were allowed in the CL after being caught match fixing 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KillieJimbo Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 (edited) can anyone find a uefa member club who have had a greater punishment than a one year points deduction, one year cup ban and a 3 year euro ban? http://en.wikipedia....ue_de_Marseille In 1994, due to financial irregularities and a match fixing scandal involving then president Bernard Tapie, they suffered enforced relegation to the second division, where Marseille stayed two years before returning to the First division. Moreover, they lost their 1992–93 Division 1 title and the right to play in the UEFA Champions League 1993-94, the 1993 European Super Cup and the 1993 Intercontinental Cup. That's pretty close, however you have to look at each offence and punishment seperately. The 3 year euro ban is Rangers' own fault for going into administration (and the newco route afterwards), meaning they would only be suffering a one years points deduction and one year cup ban (assuming it's both and not just the points deduction). They have not lost their second place in the league last year - which incidentally might have been a reasonable punishment had they not scared the SFA from making more punishments that aren't explicitly mentioned in the rulebook. Edited June 2, 2012 by KillieJimbo 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T_S_A_R Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 (edited) Hi Stuart....hi pal mate if i was stuart mccall you'd see a thread on the first page saying "motherwell pay off higdon and daley" sadly i'm not Edited June 2, 2012 by T_S_A_R 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustyarabnuts Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Complacent, lazy, greedy, self-centred, prepared to throw their considerable weight around, reliant on other people's money to get from day to day, inflated opinion of self, disliked by most others... these fat jabbas support the right team, right enough. The SFA & SPL??? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T_S_A_R Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 http://en.wikipedia....ue_de_Marseille In 1994, due to financial irregularities and a match fixing scandal involving then president Bernard Tapie, they suffered enforced relegation to the second division, where Marseille stayed two years before returning to the First division. Moreover, they lost their 1992–93 Division 1 title and the right to play in the UEFA Champions League 1993-94, the 1993 European Super Cup and the 1993 Intercontinental Cup. That's pretty close, however you have to look at each offence and punishment seperately. The 3 year euro ban is Rangers' own fault for going into administration, meaning they would only be suffering a one years points deduction and one year cup ban (assuming it's both and not just the points deduction). so a one year euro ban and a relegation for bribing refs domestically and in europe. yet people want rangers expelled for non payment of paye and vat despite hmrc not issuing a winding up order (bearing in mind the sfa committee aren't looking at BTC and dual contracts at the mo) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blanco Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 so a one year euro ban and a relegation for bribing refs domestically and in europe. yet people want rangers expelled for non payment of paye and vat despite hmrc not issuing a winding up order (bearing in mind the sfa committee aren't looking at BTC and dual contracts at the mo) A 1 year suspension would be fine, seeing as expulsion from the scottish cup is nowhere near good enough. Remember rangers were let of lightly with the embargo but they chose not to see it that way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 in another country relegation would be on the cards but in this small, imbalanced country it's not an option. So you are in the "they are too big to be relegated/expelled/suspended" camp then? Personally I feel you have moved away from what is fair to what you think is commercially suitable. one year points deduction - imo a multi year points deduction would harm the league as much as relegation so isn't an option. also i can't think of an example of a multi year points deduction in any league in europe. Why would it harm the league? Certainly the 10 point deduction Rangers suffered for entering administration didn't harm it. The current rules are that each case is to be dealt with on an individual basis. Just how many points do you think are suitable? Personally, I don't feel points are the answer, either the club exists within the SPL structure or it doesn't. cup ban - a multi year cup ban would be preferable to a multi year points ban and would be a positive thing for more member clubs in that a non OF would be guaranteed in the final and greatly increased chances of a non OF winner but... i don't see the sfa damaging their premier competition and discouraging their sponsors. You argue against the SFA from implementing this punishment but wish a multi year ban. Fair enough, but I don't feel that expulsion from the Scottish Cup is a suitable punishment for the "crimes" that have been perpetrated. 3 year euro ban - this hurts them in terms of earning - home euro games are worth roughly at least £1m (40,000 xs 20 plus tv, radio, prize money, catering) so missing 3 years worth could be cost them £10m at least. it also hurts their player recruitment and carries the stigma until 2017. Again, this is nothing to do with the SFA and everything to do with UEFA. You claimed that this punishment would be for a NewCo which we all know cannot compete in Europe without having 3 years worth of accounts. That is not a punishment, but the actual rules. compared to the calcioppoli punishments, the recent turkish punishments, the leeds punishment and the non response to payments of much more tax in spain i think this is appropiate. You started your reply by referencing the issue in an exclusively Scottish position (too big to go down malarkey) and at the end you start referencing other FA's punishments meted out. You can't have it both ways. You claimed in your initial post that you thought that certain punishments were fair or not, yet all your arguments seem to be not about Rangers but about other clubs. The bottom line is this is about breaking the rules and the sanctions that should be meted out for that. If clubs have tied themselves so tightly to the skirt tails of one or other club then that is a fault of the club, and should not interfere when that other club is punished. That's fairness and if Motherwell (for example) go into debt because of that, that is entirely the problem with Motherwell and not the structure and equity within the league. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambos Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Anyone got a link to Super Ally's full statement on his EBT payment yet? I can't seem to find it on the web? I know it must exist because Super Ally is a big believer in "transparency". He would want the Rangers fans to know the FULL details of the transaction, so they don't need to worry. Anyone got a link to Super Ally's lengthy and detailed statement to the Rangers support? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KillieJimbo Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 so a one year euro ban and a relegation for bribing refs domestically and in europe. yet people want rangers expelled for non payment of paye and vat despite hmrc not issuing a winding up order (bearing in mind the sfa committee aren't looking at BTC and dual contracts at the mo) Marseille - One year euro ban (in effect at least a 2 year ban due to relegation), losing their league title and being relegated. Rangers - who's offences were "probably second only to match fixing" were given a 12 month transfer ban and £100k fine - which they then appealed against and took the SFA to the civil court (another offence). Starting to figure out why your Scottish Cup ban is pure wishful thinking? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeeHectorPar Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 http://en.wikipedia....ue_de_Marseille In 1994, due to financial irregularities and a match fixing scandal involving then president Bernard Tapie, they suffered enforced relegation to the second division, where Marseille stayed two years before returning to the First division. Moreover, they lost their 1992–93 Division 1 title and the right to play in the UEFA Champions League 1993-94, the 1993 European Super Cup and the 1993 Intercontinental Cup. That's pretty close, however you have to look at each offence and punishment seperately. The 3 year euro ban is Rangers' own fault for going into administration (and the newco route afterwards), meaning they would only be suffering a one years points deduction and one year cup ban (assuming it's both and not just the points deduction). They have not lost their second place in the league last year - which incidentally might have been a reasonable punishment had they not scared the SFA from making more punishments that aren't explicitly mentioned in the rulebook. And this was just for offering brown envelopes full of cash to 2 players in a league match a few days before the European final so they would take things easy and not injure any Marseille players.. Can somebody remind me of what Rangers are supposed to have done? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Leighton Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Highlights of the last ever Rangers game on C4 just now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 can anyone find a uefa member club who have had a greater punishment than a one year points deduction, one year cup ban and a 3 year euro ban? Loads. Plenty of teams have been relegated across Europe, which is obviously a greater punishment than a points deduction. Derry City would be the most obvious recent example. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p&b is a disgrace Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 thankfully people with more than one opinion are allowed to post Piss off TSAR , We want that cheating shower of shite to die.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Well Well Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 mate if i was stuart mccall you'd see a thread on the first page saying "motherwell pay off higdon and daley" sadly i'm not Nothing like paying off your highest scorer... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T_S_A_R Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 (edited) A 1 year suspension would be fine, seeing as expulsion from the scottish cup is nowhere near good enough. Remember rangers were let of lightly with the embargo but they chose not to see it that way. as i said earlier the only reason suspension and expulsion are both options is because of amatuer teams. to a senior team they both mean the same thing (as is explained in the sfa statement) Edited June 2, 2012 by T_S_A_R 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T_S_A_R Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Loads. Plenty of teams have been relegated across Europe, which is obviously a greater punishment than a points deduction. Derry City would be the most obvious recent example. the sfa don't have the power to relegate teams and i don't think the spl will (something to do with one of the clubs being £9 million in debt) any multi year points deductions? 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.