No8. Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 I do, he's being a WUM. Not at all. As far as i know Annan,Gretna and Ross County were all clubs with a long history..in fact i am not 100% on Gretna but anyway. ICT were a 'new club' and is exactly the reason i am using them as an example. Now we have that cleared up can somebody please answer the question. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeeperDee Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 I do, he's being a WUM.Not at all. As far as i know Annan,Gretna and Ross County were all clubs with a long history..in fact i am not 100% on Gretna but anyway. ICT were a 'new club' and is exactly the reason i am using them as an example. Now we have that cleared up can somebody please answer the question. I did, look what I posted. Sent from my GT-I9505 using Pie & Bovril mobile app 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 I'm really not sure why you are trying to draw comparison with teams such as ICT and the Rangers situation. Particularly interesting that you use the term new club since this is the one term that gets the bears on here frothing at the mouth. Maybe only new companies get the transfer embargo? The thing with precedent is that it is only used going forward, you cant retrospectively give ICT a 12 month signing embargo to be served in the 90s in 2013. I am not wanting anybody to have a transfer ban imposed on them..Not now or in the future..Let alone ICT who i admire a great deal. As i said above...I used ICT as an example of a 'new club' being admitted to the SFL who didn't have a transfer embargo imposed 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ribzanelli Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 (edited) But I thought Rangers don't accept that they are a new club? Rangers then, Rangers now, Rangers forever and all that jazz Edited May 21, 2013 by ribzanelli 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 Weren't you imposed with ban as a condition of your license? As it was a punishment on the old club for going into admin/liquidation that needed to be passed on? Sent from my GT-I9505 using Pie & Bovril mobile app OK..This is what i thought. The SFA wanted to enforce the illegal ban as a punishment and Rangers were forced to accept it or be refused their licence. Basically high level blackmail. Thank You. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 But I thought Rangers don't accept that they are a new club? Rangers then, Rangers now, Rangers forever and all that jazz I don't get too involved in the ins and outs of new club / old club. I cant get my tiny little brain round the fact we were forced to pay old cos footballing debts but the footballing debt owed to old co wasn't passed on to the new co. I gave up when i couldn't get a proper explanation for that one. I leave that to others. I am happy in myself to go along and watch Rangers playing in blue at the historic home of Rangers Football Club and continue to use my Rangers season ticket to get me into the games...the same one i have been using for many years 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ribzanelli Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 Fair doos. Out of interest, what (if any) punishment do you think should have been handed out for the sins of the father? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 Ok, I'll bite 8. 1) The illegal transfer ban was only found to illegal because RFC illegally appealed. 2) The entire 5-way agreement that has never seen the light of day was a high stakes game of poker/blackmail on all sides. Plague on all their houses. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 I don't get too involved in the ins and outs of new club / old club. I cant get my tiny little brain round the fact we were forced to pay old cos footballing debts but the footballing debt owed to old co wasn't passed on to the new co. I gave up when i couldn't get a proper explanation for that one. I leave that to others. I am happy in myself to go along and watch Rangers playing in blue at the historic home of Rangers Football Club and continue to use my Rangers season ticket to get me into the games...the same one i have been using for many years I will agree with you on this one. I actually agree with continuation between the clubs, but positions have become so entrenched that the time for any meaningful debate or argument on this issue has long passed, but I do support your looks like a Duck reasoning. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 Fair doos. Out of interest, what (if any) punishment do you think should have been handed out for the sins of the father? I said from almost day 1 that Rangers should be demoted to the SFL 3 for the non payment of tax..in fact the non payment of every outside contractor. That should have been sufficient imo. This of course is before Liquidation. At that time this was a lot more than even some on here believed they deserved IMO the transfer ban was just the SFA getting payback for the illegal transfer ban being overturned and the SFA getting their arses booted by UEFA. Ok, I'll bite 8. 1) The illegal transfer ban was only found to illegal because RFC illegally appealed. 2) The entire 5-way agreement that has never seen the light of day was a high stakes game of poker/blackmail on all sides. Plague on all their houses. The appeal was perfectly legal and that is why the illegal transfer ban was over turned. Sorry but in what way could Rangers blackmail the SFA???? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 (edited) I said from almost day 1 that Rangers should be demoted to the SFL 3 for the non payment of tax..in fact the non payment of every outside contractor. That should have been sufficient imo. This of course is before Liquidation. At that time this was a lot more than even some on here believed they deserved IMO the transfer ban was just the SFA getting payback for the illegal transfer ban being overturned and the SFA getting their arses booted by UEFA. The appeal was perfectly legal and that is why the illegal transfer ban was over turned. Sorry but in what way could Rangers blackmail the SFA???? You're right, Rangers could in no way blackmail the SFA/SPL/SFL as they were facing imminent liquidation, Sevco (5088 or Scotland) could however by to proposing to kill the Golden Goose, threatening to refuse the conditions of membership as too harsh, shut the gates at Ibrox and sell the assets on again in a firesale to the highest bidders. Yet we'll never know as details of this shady agreement have never been published. As I said, plague on all their houses. Edited May 21, 2013 by AberdeenBud 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Jack D Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 I actually agree with you 8. It should've been a transfer ban or forced to pay all footballing debts, not both. TBH I actually think the new club should've been forced to have 3 years accounts before being allowed to apply for a league position but I'm just a stickler for rules, they clearly aren't important in Scottish Football any more. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Jack D Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 I also think that transfer bans should be automatically applied to any club which has outstanding debt to a rival club. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Caplin Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 As Rangers fans seem to like marching on anyone who dares to go against the grain. Isn't it about time they marched on Ibrox and give the imposters who have hijacked their club for their own means the fright of their lives. Or will they continue to stand and watch the car crash as the patient dies ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 I'm really not sure why you are trying to draw comparison with teams such as ICT and the Rangers situation. Particularly interesting that you use the term new club since this is the one term that gets the bears on here frothing at the mouth. Maybe only new companies get the transfer embargo? The thing with precedent is that it is only used going forward, you cant retrospectively give ICT a 12 month signing embargo to be served in the 90s in 2013. Stewart Milne might think it worth a try - the Dons might finish above ICT if this was enacted. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
statts1976uk Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 I don't think you can compare ICT and the newco as two new clubs. ICT were an amalgamation of two solvent clubs with a lot of history and the ability to produce accounts for many years, rather like a smaller football version of EE (Orange and T-Mobile). Rangers, on the other hand, are in the process of liquidation having gone bust rather like Woolworths who are now trading as a new company online with the name as a link. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 Ok, I'll bite 8. 1) The illegal transfer ban was only found to illegal because RFC illegally appealed. 2) The entire 5-way agreement that has never seen the light of day was a high stakes game of poker/blackmail on all sides. Plague on all their houses. 1 :lol: What does Lord Glennie know when compared to the Jakey :lol: 2 What form of Blackmail did Rangers use on the football authorities Wullie? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weirdcal Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 Did ICT have this transfer embargo and if not why not? because it was a MERGER, both merging clubs had 3 years of accounts needed to get the licence.. the Rangers do not. even oldco didnt have the last set of accounts. OK..This is what i thought. The SFA wanted to enforce the illegal ban as a punishment and Rangers were forced to accept it or be refused their licence. Basically high level blackmail. Thank You. no, in order to bendover backwards to allow a new team entry (have a look at Gretna's refusal, the Airdrieonians reincarnation attempt before they bought clydebank) they had to show some semblence of punishment. and even then the ungrateful dead booed and hissed about it. its funny, rangers always associate their clubs (past, present and no doubt future) with dignity. the truth is, they have proven that they are as far from dignified as you can get. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 As Rangers fans seem to like marching on anyone who dares to go against the grain. Isn't it about time they marched on Ibrox and give the imposters who have hijacked their club for their own means the fright of their lives. Or will they continue to stand and watch the car crash as the patient dies ? Well this uber bun is watchful ... and posted 20 mins ago, so its alright, they are on the case. The fen ians are rousing themselves for another all-out attack...we have to be ready. They have not gone away, merely waiting and gathering more information. The result has to be us or them...of we survive again then Regan has to be removed...by force. Our massive support has to withdraw ALL support toward SFA and demand changes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bookies Love Me Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 Well this uber bun is watchful ... and posted 20 mins ago, so its alright, they are on the case. 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.