stonedsailor Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 they were jettisoned into sfl3 unopposed so they should be thankful they`re playing anywhere offering Rangers a deal with regards to titles etc is just the same a plea bargaining is not? admit it and they wont investigate and we'll go easy on you Plea bargaining is an American thing but the Scottish courts will lessen a sentence for an early plea of guilty. Your analogy is correct though, Sevco are trying to make the normal process look like shenanigans. They have been playing mind games from the start. If it wasn't for his reported history with the previous club, bought by Sevco from Rangers, Alex Ferguson would fit right in there as manager. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Is there any other team who refer to their rivals as their enemies, or who rattle on about their cause? Its football FFS! Oh, I can think of one..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingrodent Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Former chairman Alastair Johnston believes Rangers are being vilified for what he calls a "breach of procedure" over past player payments. A tribunal set-up by the Scottish Premier League is investigating claims of alleged dual contracts at Ibrox. Two weeks' ago, Johnston described the probe as "a kangaroo court". And Johnston insists the Glasgow club's prior use of employee benefit trusts cannot be considered "cheating or financial doping". The independent tribunal, headed by Lord Nimmo Smith, is investigating the period 2000-2011 and will convene in November. BBC Scotland has seen evidence, which was submitted to the courts, suggesting that 53 Rangers players and staff had side-letters giving undertakings to fund their sub-trusts with cash. Scottish FA and SPL rules state that all payments made to players in respect of their earnings from football must be declared by their club. In a lengthy statement, Johnston repeated many of his earlier misgivings about the investigation but added that he was "not concerned about the impartiality of the learned gentlemen who will adjudicate on this matter". Rather, Johnston is worried by the "directives that have been provided to them by the SPL which in itself is constituted by competitors of the club who have a vested interest in the outcome of the proceedings". If found guilty of rule-breaking, one possible sanction is the stripping of league titles won during the period under investigation. "Justice must be served, but the punishment must fit the crime," implored Johnston. "Use of EBT schemes were broadly adopted by a variety of businesses during the era prior to them being specifically outlawed by designated legislation introduced only a couple of years ago. "Also, as has been widely reported, Rangers made absolutely no attempt to disguise or deny their adoption." Johnston also asserts that the use of EBTs was "openly discussed" with those running rival SPL clubs. On this, he adds: "I suspect that the commission will not pursue this avenue of investigation, but it would be interesting whether or not 'selective amnesia' would be exhibited by those executives/directors called to testify under oath about their ongoing familiarity with the Rangers scheme. "It is ironic to reflect on the fact that the longer they maintained strategic silence on these conversations, the more extensive the number of titles that could be stripped if and when the opportunity arose subsequently to neutralise the successes that were earned by Rangers on the pitch." The EBT scheme run by former Rangers owner Sir David Murray is the subject of a separate tax investigation by HMRC, which is due to release its conclusions next month. Meanwhile, the SFA is expected to issue a statement shortly regarding Rangers' alleged use of dual contracts. ^^^ sounds like an admission of guilt. But don't punish them, it was just a small mistake Only two possible options here. Either 1) Johnston is NOT aware that Rangers are accused of intentionally misusing EBTs to avoid tax that they weren't entitled to avoid, in which case the writer should make him aware of this fact and refuse to publish his misguided statements without a clear response on that point or 2) Johnston IS aware that Rangers are accused of intentionally misusing EBTs to avoid tax that they weren't entitled to avoid, in which case the writer should refuse to publish his intentionally misleading statements without a clear response on that point. In neither case should Johnston get away Scot free with stating that "everyone was using EBTs". Many people did, but Rangers were among the very few who intentionally misused their EBT scheme to avoid paying the taxes they were required to pay. Nor should he be able to claim that Rangers "informed the authorities that they were using an EBT scheme", without a reporter clearly stating that Rangers ABSOLUTELY DID NOT inform the authorities that they were intentionally misusing their EBT scheme to avoid paying taxes they were required to pay. What's happening here is that the media are punting this press release into circulation without subjecting it to any kind of critical process, which is how we wound up with the likes of David Murray, Alastair Johnson and Craig White filling the airwaves with nonsense in the first place. Which is why Rangers are dead, innit? Glad to see the Succulent Lamb days are gone, eh? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 who wrote the article? which paper printed it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 who wrote the article? which paper printed it? I got it from the BBC website, had to cut and paste it from my mobile, thats why lack of link. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanky_ffc Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 BBC Football website 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killingfloorman Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 (edited) the punishment must fit the crime," implored Johnston. But I thought that torture followed by death was illegal in Scotland Edited September 25, 2012 by killingfloorman 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Before any court case starts, the judge knows what the range of possible punishments are, should the defendant be found guilty. That, however, doesn't mean that the defendant WILL be found guilty. Judge doesn't wait for a guilty verdict before then hurriedly searching out what sentence he can pass. Identical to this scenario here. Really? The panel have been invited to judge on the Rangers EBT case by the SPL. The same organisation who colluded in finding Rangers guilty before they appointed the panel. And, with their amazing brass-neck, will have the SFA as the appeal board for Rangers. Despite the SFA being an active participant in asking Rangers to accept guilt prior to the SPL setting up the panel. Mibbe Nimmo and the QC's don't know all this -10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingrodent Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Really? The panel have been invited to judge on the Rangers EBT case by the SPL. The same organisation who colluded in finding Rangers guilty before they appointed the panel. And, with their amazing brass-neck, will have the SFA as the appeal board for Rangers. Despite the SFA being an active participant in asking Rangers to accept guilt prior to the SPL setting up the panel. Mibbe Nimmo and the QC's don't know all this Everyone in Scotland except you lot know full well the SPL were trying to bend the rules to get you back into the league setup as high as possible, with only a slap on the wrist. Sure, they were all looking after their own interests, but make no mistake - the SPL/SFA were trying to cut corners so you'd face as few damaging consequences for your cheating as possible. And yet, to the lunatics of Govan, this is a conspiracy to damage and defraud Rangers. A real glimpse into your mindset, this. The whole world sees the authorities bending over backwards to help you dodge your richly merited implosion, and not only are you ungrateful for it - you all start wanking it up into a Celtic-orchestrated scandal and demanding that heads roll. I mean, you do realise that if anyone has a right to be annoyed about this, it's every group of football fans in the country *except* you, right? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Everyone in Scotland except you lot know full well the SPL were trying to bend the rules to get you back into the league setup as high as possible, with only a slap on the wrist. Sure, they were all looking after their own interests, but make no mistake - the SPL/SFA were trying to cut corners so you'd face as few damaging consequences for your cheating as possible. If you think that adjudging guilt and subsequent title stripping equates to 'only a slap on the wrist' then you'll find zero agreement from anyone bar those already spectacularly prejudiced against Rangers. Green was absolutely correct to tell them where to ram it. The SPL/SFA are demonstrably corrupt and not fit for purpose. -10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Had a read through the document and found this quite interesting: 5.1 Confers membership of the SFL onto Sevco and Section 7 prevents the assignation of that membership. Surely then Sevco would be the associate member - so much for club and company argument. More proof that in a legal sense, the club does not exist, with rights, in any legal framework. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingrodent Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 If you think that adjudging guilt and subsequent title stripping equates to 'only a slap on the wrist' then you'll find zero agreement from anyone bar those already spectacularly prejudiced against Rangers. A word of advice, Benny - if you're defending yourself against an accusation that you are mental enough to see conspiracies and plots in even the most obvious attempts to bend the rules in your favour... ...It's probably a good idea to avoid the words "spectacurlarly prejudiced against Rangers" in your response, isn't it? Otherwise, you risk proving the accuser's point for them, you see. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 If you think that adjudging guilt and subsequent title stripping equates to 'only a slap on the wrist' then you'll find zero agreement from anyone bar those already spectacularly prejudiced against Rangers. Green was absolutely correct to tell them where to ram it. The SPL/SFA are demonstrably corrupt and not fit for purpose. is there an upcoming pish talking Olympic Event that you are in 'only 4 years to Rio' training for. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 (edited) Just saw the sports news, FIFA have announced that Naismith could be banned from international duties for three matches. How very dare they announce possible sanctions before he is found guilty? It's like they have made up their minds that he's guilty already. Edited September 25, 2012 by stonedsailor 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 A word of advice, Benny - if you're defending yourself against an accusation that you are mental enough to see conspiracies and plots in even the most obvious attempts to bend the rules in your favour... ...It's probably a good idea to avoid the words "spectacurlarly prejudiced against Rangers" in your response, isn't it? Otherwise, you risk proving the accuser's point for them, you see. No thanks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martian86 Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Apologies if this has been posted already... http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/2291-charles-green-statement CHARLES GREEN, Rangers' Chief Executive, issued the following statement today: He said: "Lord Nimmo Smith, chairman of the Commission set up by the SPL, has highlighted an extremely important issue in his recent judgement regarding the Commission. "Lord Nimmo Smith has said that Rangers FC is a recognisable entity which continued in existence notwithstanding the change in ownership. "He also stated that Rangers FC, the club, includes its owner and operator. The Commission has in effect ruled that Rangers and its history did not die on 14 June despite numerous reports to the contrary. "This means that Rangers FC and its owner, i.e. me and my consortium, remained a member of the SPL even after the change of ownership. "The bemusing part is that no-one at the SPL or SFA appeared to realise that. The SPL made the club (including its owner and operator) reapply to be a member of a league that the Commission says it was in already. "If the Commission is right then the change of ownership was frankly irrelevant to SPL status. Nevertheless we duly applied and that application was rejected. "We were also informed by the SFA that Rangers FC had never in its long existence been a member. That really left us scratching our heads because pride of place in the Boardroom at Ibrox is a framed and mounted certificate of membership signed by Jim Farry confirming that "Rangers FC is a full member of the Scottish Football Association". "So taking the Commission's reasoning and our newly acquired framed membership certificate you would have thought, not unreasonably, that Rangers FC and its owners were in the Scottish Football family. "You would have thought wrong. No we were told. We needed to apply for oldco's membership! The SFA didn't officially recognise Lord Nimmo Smith's recognisable entity. "That recognisable entity, Rangers FC, then re-appeared suddenly when the SFA demanded that we pay oldco's debts despite there being no legal obligation to do so. "The SPL then wanted Rangers FC and its new owners to admit guilt in relation to EBT breaches that had never been framed and accept five stripped titles. "Rangers FC suddenly vanished again when UEFA informed the SFA that Rangers FC were due in excess of 300,000 euros for player participation in the Euro 2012 qualifiers, the SFA have refused to confirm that the monies are due to Rangers FC despite obligations placed on them from UEFA that these monies should be distributed to member clubs. "If the Commission is correct about this recognisable entity then the SPL and SFA must be wrong in making that entity apply to join bodies it was already in. "Maybe they should both appoint Lord Nimmo Smith to form a Commission to investigate and tell them who their member is. "In our view the Commission chaired by Lord Nimmo Smith has been placed in an invidious position by the SPL. "The establishment of the Commission is the most striking example of the chaotic way the fate of Rangers has been handled by the football authorities. "As we stated previously, it is impossible for us as a club to participate in a process we firmly believe is fundamentally misconceived. "We believe that most people would not think it right that a football authority that was willing to horse-trade league titles and cups for league status, should then embark on the course of action it has chosen in setting up a Commission. There is no clearer case of moving the goalposts." Is it just me or is this just complete pish and he knows it. What he's saying is that Rangers never ceased to exist, they just 'changed ownership'... so clearly they should just have continued as usual... except with no debt ?!?!? He surely knows fine well that's bullshit? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martian86 Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Just notice it's been posted in a separate thread. Meh 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Everyone in Scotland except you lot know full well the SPL were trying to bend the rules to get you back into the league setup as high as possible, with only a slap on the wrist. I certainly accept that. Without doubt the SPL would have liked us to simply drop down a division and then be promoted the following year and if that required rule-bending then it would happen. Now there are 2 possible reasons for this: 1. The SPL is institutionally biased towards Rangers and want us treated more favourably 'just because'. 2. The SPL is desperate for TV revenue so wanted to make sure that we got back in the top league ASAP. In either case the whole, "sporting integrity" phrase does not apply to The SPL. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoriginalhedge Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 I certainly accept that. Without doubt the SPL would have liked us to simply drop down a division and then be promoted the following year and if that required rule-bending then it would happen. Now there are 2 possible reasons for this: 1. The SPL is institutionally biased towards Rangers and want us treated more favourably 'just because'. 2. The SPL is desperate for TV revenue so wanted to make sure that we got back in the top league ASAP. In either case the whole, "sporting integrity" phrase does not apply to The SPL. Both of the above are correct !! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Both of the above are correct !! What? Both of the 3 points that I made? 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.