Shades75 Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 Not at all, the outcome of 1 or 2 Rangers fans giving an inch was extremely predictable. My opinion has been entirely consistent. But your opinion is not really your own. It's how it is being dressed up by others. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 I doubt that statement is correct .... and even if it is not ... it is forbidden by the rules for payments to made by a third party (MIH) and not the club ... How did you square that away with the SPL when you told them it was all hunky dory? ETA: You just made that up ... didn't you .. or did you PM the forum's resident expert on your club? It's been mentioned in articles in The Herald and The Scotsman and possibly elsewhere. As I've said before, I really don't know how the SPL tribunal will go. It's highly technical stuff and I don't have all the information. I'm not the sort to imagine I have psychic powers or pretend I have all the answers when I don't. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celtic Rebel. Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 Well thats a lie. Juninho received his EBT payment in 2005 and the money was declared in the club’s annual accounts – but not to the SFA or SPL. Wee back hander,y'know the kind that goes on at refs,oops I mean Masonic meetings. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 Most of them wouldn't know what an honest opinion was, the "lets paint Rangers in the darkest manner possible" posts never grow tiresome. I'll opt out of that. On two of the most basic issues, my stance is that Rangers can be considered the same club due to common sense but the legal argument is up for debate. The monies given by EBT were payments by common sense but legally, again it is up for debate. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 People seem to be treating 'loans' and 'payments' as entirely mutually exclusive terms. Perhaps, in a legal sense, they're correct to do so, but I suspect the people doing it lack the insight to do so confidently. I made a payment into my bank account yesterday morning. I wasn't 'giving' RBS the money. I expect to take it back out later and piss it up a wall, but I was still making a payment. Now I'm not claiming that this is the same. I'm just suggesting that lending someone money might still be interpreted as making a payment towards them, regardless of how phoney or otherwise such a loan might really be. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 People seem to be treating 'loans' and 'payments' as entirely mutually exclusive terms. Perhaps, in a legal sense, they're correct to do so, but I suspect the people doing it lack the insight to do so confidently. I made a payment into my bank account yesterday morning. I wasn't 'giving' RBS the money. I expect to take it back out later and piss it up a wall, but I was still making a payment. Now I'm not claiming that this is the same. I'm just suggesting that lending someone money might still be interpreted as making a payment towards them, regardless of how phoney or otherwise such a loan might really be. I know all of that. The purpose of using the terms in my argument are purely to differentiate the terms of the monies given. My stance is not from a legal perspective and the language used shouldn't fall under too much scrutiny, they are purely descriptive terms. "Re-payments", are made to loans. That makes it a fact that a, "Payment" is made initially. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 I know all of that. The purpose of using the terms in my argument are purely to differentiate the terms of the monies given. My stance is not from a legal perspective and the language used shouldn't fall under too much scrutiny, they are purely descriptive terms. "Re-payments", are made to loans. That makes it a fact that a, "Payment" is made initially. Agreed - I wasn't particularly aiming it at you Shades. It was targeted more at our Rangers supporting friends on here, who seem to be suggesting that because these things are considered 'loans', they can't possibly be considered 'payments'. I'm simply suggesting that there may actually be overlap between the terms in a Venn diagram type of way. Maybe the suggestion's wrong, but nobody on here has yet proved that to be the case. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 Agreed - I wasn't particularly aiming it at you Shades. It was targeted more at our Rangers supporting friends on here, who seem to be suggesting that because these things are considered 'loans', they can't possibly be considered 'payments'. I'm simply suggesting that there may actually be overlap between the terms in a Venn diagram type of way. Maybe the suggestion's wrong, but nobody on here has yet proved that to be the case. I had to modify the language I used from the beginning. Tedi told me I wasn't to use the term, "payment" when describing how the monies were given to the employees, as it was naughty. I've been having to use flowery language ever since :-). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fife Saint Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 Isn't it the case that these payments were not in any way related to the actual activity of playing football? Was there a direct correlation between payments and performance? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS-18 ICBM Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 Isn't it the case that these payments were not in any way related to the actual activity of playing football? Was there a direct correlation between payments and performance? There would have been had the players not received their payments, "interest free loans", that accounted for half of their wages during their time at the club. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 There would have been had the players not received their payments, "interest free loans", that accounted for half of their wages during their time at the club. That very clearly seemed to be the case with Sasa Papac, according to what Marc Daly was able to unearth. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 As regards the forthcoming SPL tribunal it has been suggested that the money in these cases was recorded in players' contracts which were lodged with the SPL, which would surely mean that there would be no SPL punishment for them. As for owing some tax on these cases it's not a huge deal. Celtic had to pay some tax on Juninho's EBT after all. I think you'll find the majority of observers have suggested the exact opposite. The best the berz have come up with is "fully declared in the accounts" - if a single "miscellaneous payments"* figure, with no mention of "loans", let alone individual details, can be termed "fully declared". Against this, we have statements from players which say these payments were part of their remuneration, side letters detailing the terms..... * My paraphrase.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 Eerily reminiscent of all those "Why must the awful Commie papers be so nasty about Jeffrey Archer" pieces you used to get in the Mail, before it turned out he actually had pumped that prostitute then lied about it. There's a very good reason why it's so easy to "paint Rangers in the darkest manner possible" - it's because you club was owned and operated by crooks, and because even the most charitable interpretation of events can't disguise that fact. Not to mention a lot of the most striking paintwork has been done by the clubs' own representatives and fans..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS-18 ICBM Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 AIG - they sold financial investments to punters, claiming they were good investments. Secretly though, AIG knew they were terrible investments that would blow up and that their punters would absolutely, certainly lose all their money. But that didn't bother AIG, because they'd been paid a huge amount of money beforehand by a billionaire to set up the scam, and both they and the billionaire made a fortune off it. Off-topic, but did you know that AIG was founded by an OSS (predecessor to CIA) Operative in Shanghai in 1919 with its branches across China, and in Hong Kong, Hanoi, Saigon, Jakarta, Kuala Lumpur and the Philippines. It only transferred its company headquarters to New York City in 1949 just before the Commie takeover in China? And in regards to its recent history it isn't only US citizens who are now paying for the recent $130BILLION in bail-outs that it and many others were 'given' by 'corrupt' governments in cahoots with 'the banksters'. An old American showman of around the mid 1800's is credited with the phrase "There's a sucker born every minute", today the poor b*****ds are born every second...they are us! Whatever AIG was doing in 1949 surely isn't related to what it did in 2008, since it was bought over and re-bought-over again and again and again in the intervening period. You can take your weird Illuminati theories elsewhere, as I've said before. Your bullshit would be better confined to the Lizardmen (Who May Or May Not Be Jewish Geezers, Although Of Course That's Coincidental) Ruling The World forum, and the sooner P&B's admins chase you off in that direction, the better, if you ask me. You give me the boke. You're tummy is easily upset rat, i suggest that you and any others who have such problems make appointments to speak to your doctors to get those problems sorted. You were the first to go off-topic by bringing AIG into the discussion! Would you care to elaborate on what you consider to be bullshit about my reply? LINK to who 'controls' American International Group. If you don't want anyone to know such facts i suggest that you don't provoke people into posting such facts by posting off-topic. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 (edited) You're tummy is easily upset rat, i suggest that you and any others who have such problems make appointments to speak to your doctors to get those problems sorted. You were the first to go off-topic by bringing AIG into the discussion! Would you care to elaborate on what you consider to be bullshit about my reply? LINK to who 'controls' American International Group. If you don't want anyone to know such facts i suggest that you don't provoke people into posting such facts by posting off-topic. Rocket, if you want to promulgate your conspiracy bollox, I'm sure there's a place for it. That place is not here. When even respectable posters who follow the same team as you are telling you you're a cock-end, maybe it's time to look in the mirror. Just saying, likes. Edited January 27, 2013 by WhiteRoseKillie 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS-18 ICBM Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 Rocket, if you want to promulgate your conspiracy bollox, I'm sure there's a place for it. That place is not here. When even respectable posters who follow the same team as you are telling you you're a cock-end, maybe it's time to look in the mirror. Just saying, likes. "respectable posters" you really are a "cock end" WKR, the orcs are correct in the opinions that they have of you. If you think that i care what anyone else thinks about world corruption just because they have a common interest you are sadly deluded. Now, Let me get this straight. In regards to your "conspiracy bollox"... Are you saying that men in high positions of power are not capable of criminal activity and telling lies to the general public? Are you really that naive? The media, the government, the International bankers, Hollywood, and academia are all part of the same incestuous complex. The media is part of the conspiracy, so why would you expect them to tell you the truth? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotbawmad Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 As for owing some tax on these cases it's not a huge deal. Celtic had to pay some tax on Juninho's EBT after all. Juninho never played a game and the EBT he recieved was a payoff which was non-contractual. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 Juninho never played a game and the EBT he recieved was a payoff which was non-contractual. it was with Middlesborough, and it came with signing him I think. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 Rocket, if you want to promulgate your conspiracy bollox, I'm sure there's a place for it. That place is not here. When even respectable posters who follow the same team as you are telling you you're a cock-end, maybe it's time to look in the mirror. Just saying, likes. Going off topic In your view as a Killie fan, what was Dean Shiels best /favoured position at Killie? We seem to be struggling as to where to play him. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 Juninho never played a game and the EBT he recieved was a payoff which was non-contractual. Juninho never played a game? I take it you don't mean that literally? 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.