Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[flyingrodent]

Rather than dancing around the technicalities of the verdict lets try to get to the crux eh?

Do you accept Nimmo`s findings and punishment?

If no, why would an independent judge come to an incorrect decision? what would his motive be?

As best I can tell, it's correct within the rules of the game.

Which is why I keep pointing out that it finds you guilty of such serious, deliberate rule breaking over the course of a decade and that the only reason it didn't strip titles is that you dodged that punishment on a technicality.

Like I say, this is all in the report.

[The_Kincardine]

Raised this point many times on here yet all rangers fans on here still see no problem singing it as long as it doesnt have the f word in it. Klan indeed.

So just explain what point you raised many times. While you're at it please point out just where, "all rangers fans on here still see no problem singing it"

Just to make it clear I have been on here for 6 years. During that time I have never seen one single Bear trying to justify a sectarian song: quite the opposite.

Now if you truly disagree then please give supporting evidence. You can't.

[flyingrodent]

Sorry but you just did

You know very well that I meant this was a loophole and not an intended feature.

[Celtic Rebel.]

Raised this point many times on here yet all rangers fans on here still see no problem singing it as long as it doesnt have the f word in it.

Klan indeed.

Was on ZombieZombie earlier this evening,the majority of them are cursing Chuckles name upside down,very angry berzz.

[flyingrodent]

As is the fact that we never had any sporting advantage either sought or gained.

Cherry pick the parts you like.

Given that every single one of you is flat out denying the reasoning behind the verdict, you have a fair bit of gall to accuse anyone of cherry picking.

Night all.

[The_Kincardine]

Given that every single one of you is flat out denying the reasoning behind the verdict, you have a fair bit of gall to accuse anyone of cherry picking.

Night all.

Cheerio

[The_Kincardine]

I accept everything in the verdict so that is a flat out lie.

Sleep tight.

It's not just The Rat that needs put to his bed. This thread has run its course and should be retired.

[As We Rise Again]

Who did Sevco get as their new jersey maker??

Imagine even photoshopping ya riddy.

[The_Kincardine]

I agree, said as much in the gold forum.

There will be nothing else happening in the next 18 months and that is all oldco stuff.

Go vote, it only needs 5 nominations and has already had 3

Done

The fact that it was you, Bennet, Youngsy, Bearwithme and me who posted most tonight just shows how much the worm has turned.

[Celtic Rebel.]

To be fair a few Rangers fans are upset and quite rigthly.

Charles Green bought Rangers, he is not a stupid man and it is certainly no secret that we still have a sectarian problem and that this will be a tough nut to crack.

To now threaten to walk away if fans do not stop singing certain songs is by far the weakest statement he has ever made.

I expect my chairman to have much more fight in him.

Im gonna be honest Tedi,i think hes looking for an escape route,his spat with Murray wont go away either,i reckon hes heading for pastures new come the end of the season.

[The_Kincardine]

Was on ZombieZombie earlier this evening,the majority of them are cursing Chuckles name upside down,very angry berzz.

I just had a quick look at the FF thread you alluded to.. Those many P&B folk who also belong to FF can see the thread here:

http://forum.followfollow.com/showthread.php?t=942757

Looks to me like most folk agree with the contemt of what Chuck said but disagreed with his attitude.

[Bendarroch]

guilty on almost every count; heavily criticised and handed a £250,000 fine for deliberate, serious and sustained rule-breaking, but avoided the ultimate sanction via a jaw-droppingly insane technicality - namely, that Rangers couldn't be found guilty of improperly registering players, because they didn't tell anyone that they were improperly registering players. Basically - so long as you keep your cheating secret, it isn't cheating.

Or, even shorter - guilty. Serious, sustained and deliberate rule breaking. Avoided title-stripping only via a ludicrous technicality

You're not over the verdict at all.

[Bendarroch]

Klan is good name for rangers fans

As good a name as Terrorists is for the plastics I'd say.

[Bendarroch]

Why couldn't they find you had gained an advantage?

Choking like f**k.

[BigBadSaint]

But it's not up to the SPL to think of every way that a club can break the rules, then find ways to prevent it.

The Rangers down by a goal after 90 minutes at Stenhousmuir in next year's title battle.... win a corner and substitute on Lee McCulloch in a pair of these to head home the equaliser from 11 feet in the air.

......"Ahh but the SFA haven't specifically written no Kangoo Boots."

[youngsy]

The sum total of what you've said there is that if you ignore the Commission's explanation of its verdict, then it sounds far less damning.

And indeed, it's true! If you ignore the fine and the sustained, deliberate rule breaking and the reasons why the the words "sporting advantage" are even in the document, it all looks much, much better for Rangers.

The sum total of what i've said is the fact that the SPL Commission found the club guilty of non-disclosure of payments over a period of time,that's indisputable and accepted. However what you patently ignore is the fact that the club was found to not have broken any rules as regards playing players that were ineligible to play. That's a fact of the Commission findings, something which pains you very much to accept.

The whole crux of this case was about finding Rangers guilty of playing ineligible players and the removal of honours,that did not happen,rendering every point you try to make otherwise completely null and void. I suggest that you try and get over this because it seems to be eating away at you.

Edited March 6, 2013 by youngsy

[captain kirk]

That's the word that makes it "sectarian" any other part of it is fair game and isn't banned.

Again I love the irony of a Celtic fan trying to take the moral high ground here you little peasant.

There's one for you who sees nothing wrong with TBBs , a song about a sectarian anti semetic racist gang of murders , the gang that introduced the kkk to Glasgow according to him it's ok to sing about being TBBs as long as you don't use the f word.

I look forward to you condemning him although I wont hold my breathe.

Ps I'll dig out other bears who ok this song too if you need it?

So just explain what point you raised many times. While you're at it please point out just where, "all rangers fans on here still see no problem singing it"

Just to make it clear I have been on here for 6 years. During that time I have never seen one single Bear trying to justify a sectarian song: quite the opposite.

Now if you truly disagree then please give supporting evidence. You can't.

[flyingrodent]

The sum total of what i've said is the fact that the SPL Commission found the club guilty of non-disclosure of payments over a period of time,that's indisputable and accepted. However what you patently ignore is the fact that the club was found to not have broken any rules as regards playing players that were ineligible to play. That's a fact of the Commission findings, something which pains you very much to accept.

The whole crux of this case was about finding Rangers guilty of playing ineligible players and the removal of honours,that did not happen,rendering every point you try to make otherwise completely null and void. I suggest that you try and get over this because it seems to be eating away at you.

Having a quick look through this thread from last night, a few things jump out pretty starkly.

First, you can't credibly accuse me of "ignoring" the Commission's finding that Rangers players were legally registered, when I repeatedly acknowledge that and then recite the Commission's reasoning in reaching that decision.

The Commission itself stated that players were legally registered because under the then-existing rules, a player is regarded as properly registered unless he was found to be improperly registered *at the time*. That's a giant, glaring loophole and it's the reason why your titles weren't stripped. It's not in doubt that you were deliberately breaking the rules on player registration, because you were found guilty of serious and intentional rule breaking.

This isn't up for debate, by the way. It's an accurate summary of the Commission's findings.

Secondly, isn't it interesting that a bunch of guys who have no trouble wrapping their heads around Italian business law and so on when it suits them, are suddenly overcome with confusion when it comes to such a comparatively simple issue?

I mean, you seem to be fine with people noting the Commission's conclusions, but outraged when anyone explains the reasons why they say they came to those conclusions.

You can say "no sporting advantage", but the second you look at *why* they said that, it's all calls to close the thread, and pretending not to understand and accusations of obsession and so on and on and on.

Isn't that odd? It looks a bit like it's me who understands this report, and you lot who are desperately trying to avoid its conclusions. But I thought this report was correct in all ways, unimpeachable and unquestionable?

Now, that is strange.

[10 CC ICT]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-21652353

Probably old news but lolololololololololololololololololol

[thelegendthatis]

The sum total of what i've said is the fact that the SPL Commission found the club guilty of non-disclosure of payments over a period of time,that's indisputable and accepted. However what you patently ignore is the fact that the club was found to not have broken any rules as regards playing players that were ineligible to play. That's a fact of the Commission findings, something which pains you very much to accept.

The whole crux of this case was about finding Rangers guilty of playing ineligible players and the removal of honours,that did not happen,rendering every point you try to make otherwise completely null and void. I suggest that you try and get over this because it seems to be eating away at you.

Youngsy, as one of the few "The Rangers" supporters here with a brain (one that works) I would like your opinion on the EBTs.

If we agree that the old Rangers gained no advantage in attracting better players than they could have done otherwise, why did Murray bother with EBTs?

They obviously came with an overhead in setting up, administering and reporting etc. There was also the risk of them being found unacceptable by the SFA, SPL or HMRC. This concern is shown in their non disclosure at the time.

Why then go to all that bother if no advantage was to be gained?

I could ask Tedi or No 8 but I know would only get a same old, same old garbled Rab C Nesbitt style answer.