Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[SS-18 ICBM]

OOOOOOO a serious question from Benny

It wasn't 5 Benny it was 29 cases pleaded liability too WHY ? because they were 109 sub trusts in use and 80 got cleared but leaving 29 outstanding that were pleaded guilty too ! do the math Benny.

It's only the players the commission will look into as players appear to have had a separate contract from the club contract Rangers showed the SFA in their accounts.

Of the 80 cleared at the FTTT it is possible that all the players EBT's were cleared as there were 63 players sub trusts but highly unlikely.

Most clever people that i have discussed this with have asked: Why would Murray International Holdings which was the parent company of old Rangers FC, set up a fund to give scores of football players 'interest free' loans while MIH was several hundred million pounds in debt and toiling to survive?!

[hellbhoy]

There was admin errors with 5 EBT's relating to Rangers use of them, this is widely known. The only issue we don;t know if it was for players or non playing staff.

Unless you read Muirheads website that is.

Boomsong has publicly given evidence that these side letters were contractual ! should we include this as evidence as a whole on the side letters being contractual ?

It's all been kept hush hush at the moment on who's sub trusts were pleaded guilty too before the FTTT the 5 you mention will surely be among them.

The difference between MIH staff and board members is the inclusion of side letters to Rangers players only assuring them a set amount of money was available to them on a specified date usually after the transfer windows had closed.MIH members and Rangers board members were just paid ! well a bonus really without a side letter.

[Shades75]

So-called "common sense" is all very well but it's not the basis on which the SPL tribunal will rule. "Common sense", in this context, is just some punters' opinion.

That, FOR f**k'S SAKE, Is all I'm asking.

Stop replying to my posts if you can't grasp the basic premise of the point of them, you absolute tedious c**t.

[Bearwithme]

That, FOR f**k'S SAKE, Is all I'm asking.

Stop replying to my posts if you can't grasp the basic premise of the point of them, you absolute tedious c**t.

Calm down dear. It's only an internet forum.

[hellbhoy]

Calm down dear. It's only an internet forum.

Hearts won today he may be a touch on edge

[Shades75]

Calm down dear. It's only an internet forum.

(Most) Rangers fans on this thread are deliberately evasive, deflective and try to muddy the waters by any means possible. Thd sole purpose is to take so many topics off point that posters get tired of it. If you think that it is not obvious then you need to try harder and be more intelligent with it.

A straight answer to a straight question should not be difficult. There is also the, "decline to comment" option but you can't manage that either. It's all ifs, buts, maybes, this person said etc.....

What about thinking for yourselves on occasion and engaging in the normal human behaviour of conversation and adult debate?

[Bearwithme]

(Most) Rangers fans on this thread are deliberately evasive, deflective and try to muddy the waters by any means possible. Thd sole purpose is to take so many topics off point that posters get tired of it. If you think that it is not obvious then you need to try harder and be more intelligent with it.

A straight answer to a straight question should not be difficult. There is also the, "decline to comment" option but you can't manage that either. It's all ifs, buts, maybes, this person said etc.....

What about thinking for yourselves on occasion and engaging in the normal human behaviour of conversation and adult debate?

You go first.

[Shades75]

Hearts won today he may be a touch on edge

Yes, at our home. (Is it that obvious?.....shit).

[Shades75]

You go first.

My point, beautifully illustrated.

[Guest Kincardine]

That, FOR f**k'S SAKE, Is all I'm asking.

Stop replying to my posts if you can't grasp the basic premise of the point of them, you absolute tedious c**t.

Hello Shades. I haven't seen you post for a while but I'm not on every day. How are you?

[Bearwithme]

My point, beautifully illustrated.

All you produced was a generalised rant against Rangers fans. If that's your idea of a high quality debate, so be it.

[Shades75]

All you produced was a generalised rant against Rangers fans. If that's your idea of a high quality debate, so be it.

"SOME" Rangers fans.

[Shades75]

Me and you could go in circles all day with this, I was not evading, in fact i take umbrage with you saying I was, I was simply telling you how I expect Rangers will argue the case, the SPL case rests on the fact that all payments must be declared, Rangers of course will argue that loans are not payments.

You led by asking me; What does common sense tell you about the payments? Were they loans or payments

That was naughty imo, I tried to be honest as I could with my very limited knowledge and even called into the question of the morality of the loans but not the legality, if I called them payments (even in common sense) then you would simply jump on this, your leading question was a clear attempt at this, for me to admit they were payments would be in direct contradiction with the legal argument I think Rangers will use.

It's just waffle Tedi.

I've made the point that I'm only asking an opinion based solely on common sense.

Call it financial recompense, call it monies given, call it remuneration, whatever. I did toy with using a different term but it was in no way supposed to be leading to use the word "payments". It seemed but the most concise way of wording it and seemed to describe the act.

I wish you would have just said that you'd rather not answer. I only asked your opinion, I didn't seek the peripherals and tried to outline that from the very start of the question. More than once.

[Shades75]

Hello Shades. I haven't seen you post for a while but I'm not on every day. How are you?

Apart from the horrors from the West of our city sullying our stadium with their presence and, more importantly, winning - I'm absolutely dandy. How are you?

I look in but don't post much any more. Get tired of the circular arguments and it becomes an exercise in futility. My time can be better spent elsewhere.

As it's gone that way again, I'll probably duck out again for a bit. Some might claim that as a minute victory!

[Bearwithme]

I'll give my broad, big-picture views, on the off-chance anybody wants them.

I really don't know if the SPL tribunal will find against Rangers.

In terms of very broad, natural justice, should it? In my view, no. We're not talking about brown envelopes here or money in boots. What happened wasn't concealed. Indeed it was publicly declared in the accounts, which were submitted to the footballing authorities. They were told what was happening, every year. (I'll emphasise again that this is my broad view on the matter and not about technicalities etc.)

[Guest Kincardine]

Apart from the horrors from the West of our city sullying our stadium with their presence and, more importantly, winning - I'm absolutely dandy. How are you?

Aye I'm pretty dandy thanks - although I haven't dared open the 3rd Div forum after today's result.

My time can be better spent elsewhere.

Well my weans are watching reruns of Miranda on iPlayer although I'm about to hunt them to bed. Even The BRALT is a happy place compared to Miranda!

So you seemed grumpy that you didn't get a straight answer. Care to ask me?

Edited January 26, 2013 by Kincardine

[Bendarroch]

That gaggle of waggling wallopers would get beaten like a redheaded stepchild in half their games if they were in the SPL right now

You think we'll not improve our players as we rise back to the top?

[Monkey Tennis]

I'll give my broad, big-picture views, on the off-chance anybody wants them.

I really don't know if the SPL tribunal will find against Rangers.

In terms of very broad, natural justice, should it? In my view, no. We're not talking about brown envelopes here or money in boots. What happened wasn't concealed. Indeed it was publicly declared in the accounts, which were submitted to the footballing authorities. They were told what was happening, every year. (I'll emphasise again that this is my broad view on the matter and not about technicalities etc.)

As a broad view, it's broadly fair.

You must concede however that when teams like Spartans and Brechin had results in individual matches overturned because of player registration irregularities, no brown envelopes were involved either?

[Bearwithme]

As a broad view, it's broadly fair.

You must concede however that when teams like Spartans and Brechin had results in individual matches overturned because of player registration irregularities, no brown envelopes were involved either?

I find some of these things pretty harsh. No doubt the SFA or SFL would say rules are rules. But if somebody signs a form twice instead of three times or the like my broad view would be give them a slap on the wrist. Like I said, I don't know what the technicalities will produce in the Rangers case.

[Shades75]

Aye I'm pretty dandy thanks - although I haven't dared open the 3rd Div forum after today's result.

Well my weans are watching reruns of Miranda on iPlayer although I'm about to hunt them to bed. Even The BRALT is a happy place compared to Miranda!

So you seemed grumpy that you didn't get a straight answer. Care to ask me?

Miranda? You wonder if any man ever has eh?

I'm not going to push it any further K, I think I'll take my belligerence and go and play some poker online with it. Because that always relaxes me, never gets me ratty and I never get ratty at the fish....nope not me....never ever. Grrrrrrrr