Magoo9uk Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 Unless it's just a preseason warm up for the big one on the Asbestos Arena.Not quite clear on the concept...... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 Reading atween the lines.... Chucky sells a million and a half shares at 42p. Easdales have agreement to buy. Easdales have six buses torched.... How much are six buses worth ? £630,000.00? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 Wean Appeals To Paedos -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 That should have been in reply to the picture of the blonde lassie earlier 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 £630,000.00? Wean Appeals To Paedos That should have been in reply to the picture of the blonde lassie earlier That's o.k., then! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotbawmad Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 (edited) Ra peeple will tell you it was obsessed green fuelled bigots, and the plastics will say it was an elaborate insurance scam by the Easdale's. Edited July 20, 2013 by Fotbawmad 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 Ra peeple will tell you it was obsessed green fuelled bigots, and the plastics will say it was an elaborate insurance scam by the Easdale's. The "P" s of Celtic and Hibs with the wherewithal get too much humour to get involved. The "D" s with the wherewithal like mirren/airdrie/dee etc apart from the Hearts have no beef. Figures match.....buses for shares. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 (edited) When Arsonists Torch Premesis Grammar And Spelling Police investigate. Edited July 20, 2013 by Jacksgranda 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 Grammar And Spelling Police investigate. Pedantic Intrusions Stifle Sarcasm On Football Forum (yeah, but 'fair cop' to the spelling police. must try harder) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Don Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 This was on the 'most embarrassing thing' thread but I think it should have been posted here. Aberdeen Bud on 20 Jul 2013 - 11.10 said: Make no mistake, social unrest was indeed a clear & present danger and rightly or wrongly, one which entered the thoughts of the Scottish Government & the SFA. Apache Don says: Correct. There were two major issues, that were considered when the authorities had their pow wow on how to handle the Rangers crisis, that would not have been considered, had the club in crisis, been a 'diddy club'. 1) The impact on the Scottish game ie 'The Armageddon Factor'. 2) The perceived potential for social unrest. I've bolded the word perceived, as it doesn't really matter, whether any of us believe or not that there was any likelihood of social unrest. Just as we (the fans of other clubs) chose to dismiss the first issue, I think it is fair to say, that we would have told our Chairmen to ignore the second issue. It is however,a fact that the authorities believed the threat of these issues to be high enough, for them to make sure, that there was a team playing in blue, out of Ibrox called Rangers. Most of us 'diddy club' fans would prefer that the SFA had come out and made it clear, that the club currently playing at Ibrox, is not - in any shape or form - the same club that played there for 140 (or would that be 139)yrs. So far, they have not done so, although I and many others believe they should. Article 12 of the uefa rule book, clearly states that 'a club shall not be entitled to apply for licence to play in UEFA comps, until they have held a licence with a member association, for at least 3x consecutive years.' This is the reason that, if Rangers International were to win The Scottish Cup this season, they would not be granted admission to next season's Europa league. It is not solely, because there has been a change to the club's legal status, although obviously this has changed. However, it is clear that UEFA doesn't consider that the club has met the above entry criteria and therefore, is considered to be a new club (less than 3x yrs old). Glasgow Rangers FC or even The Glasgow Rangers FC, some years ago, changed it's legal entity, by the process of incorporation and became a Private Limited Company limited by shares. ie 'Glasgow Rangers FC Ltd'. This change of Company structure or legal entity, had no impact at all on the right of the club, to participate in UEFA comp. Some years later, the board - or rather David Murray - decided to float the club/company on the stock exchange (to raise capital) and so, the club's legal entity was changed again, this time to a Public Limited Company (PLC) and so I believe, we had Rangers Football Club PLC (Please forgive me, if the names are not accurate and don't get hung up on it, if they are not, as that is not the point). Anyway, another change of legal entity for the company and again, no impact on it's right to participate in UEFA comps. So, what is the difference of this last (2012) legal entity change, that has led to the club being excluded from UEFA comps? I refer you to paragraph 4 of this post, citing Article12 of UEFA handbook. I personally think the new name 'Rangers International', has a modern and inclusive feel and that all fans of all clubs, should embrace it. I have and look forward to the first ever encounter between:- Aberdeen and Rangers Inter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bairney Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 Rangers media in uproar over this obviously obsessed bheasts wot dun it. Rangers media in uproar meltdown over this obviously obsessed bheasts wot dun it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 More made up bullshit Any appeal to the SFL would not get very fucking far, they do not exist. FRAN SANDAZA faces more uncertainty over when he’ll be able to resurrect his career — because of league changes.The Spaniard is in the process of appealing against his sacking by Rangers after he was duped into revealing contract details by a hoaxer. Sandaza has been told he has a strong case for unfair dismissal by the SPFA and his legal team but lost an internal Ibrox appeal. ????? His lawyers have turned their focus to the next level, which should be the SFL. But with the game moving to one governing body, the 28-year-old will now have to wait on the new SPFL being formed before his case can be heard. With the SPL and SFL set to be formally merged later this week, it could take months for Sandaza’s case to finally be heard. Sandaza, who has returned to Spain, opened his heart to SunSport last week, telling of his anguish at not knowing when he’d kick a ball again. He has been out of the game for over three months. He does not have months to wait on some SPFL appeal, he has a new club, once again you are making it up as you go along. The Spanish striker – who scored only two goals following his signing last summer - reached an agreement earlier this week to formally terminate his Ibrox contract and avoid a further legal wrangle. He was effectively sacked by former chief executive Charles Green in April, after being tricked into revealing details of his contract by an internet hoaxer posing as an agent. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2370846/Ally-McCoist-sympathises-Fran-Sandaza-contract-confusion.html#ixzz2ZXD0iy00 This is from Rangers rumours Tedi . Fran Sandaza's contract terminated? Yeah at a cost of how much? Would maybe have been better off keeping him and selling him at a very minimal cost of £20-25k or even less and that would have got him off the wage bill at a cost of nothing! Btw I ain't crazy lol, but getting a bit more concerned every day now! And the star prize goes to this guy Its being reported as "Rangers reach an agreement with Fran Sandaza to terminate his contract". So he has without doubt been paid off. Won't be the full value of what his deal was, maybe not even half but he will definitely have been weighed in. If he was advised he had no grounds to appeal he would have just dropped his claim and it would have been reported as "Fran Sandaza drops legal claim against Rangers over unfair dismissal". Its not rocket science. Another huge sum of money between signing-on fee, wages for nearly a season and then a pay off. For little return (was it 2 he scored). We must get "stung" like this, more times than a lot of other teams. He was sacked for misconduct so would have got nothing, think you will find that the Rangers were thinking they were going to get humped mate, otherwise going with your statement, why pay out Tam Like I said dum dum Sandaza has been paid off because Rangers must have surely been told he was unfairly dismissed because Tommy is not a registered football agent. As with the above bears in them quotes they know the score but you're so thick to keep arguing your stupid point . Like the star prize quote Sandaza was already sacked/contract terminated so there would have been no need for Rangers to agree to terminate his contract for a second time if Rangers had terminated his contract back in April with legitimate reasons for dismissal and Sansaza could have just dropped his appeal and signed on for the new club. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 Hellbhoy will be pleased, after all he says that everything on the CF website is total shite. Frankly I couldn't give a fcuk Tedi as it hasn't been verified as real but if it was then I'd be all over it 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 Why do you do it Ted? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 Do what? Get involved in these daft squabbles. We all know that the likelihood is that some financial settlement has been reached. We don't know this for sure of course and we've no idea what sums might be involved. However, you wish to have a fight over the self-evident absence of conclusive proof. It's daft. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 x 2 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 Get involved in these daft squabbles. We all know that the likelihood is that some financial settlement has been reached. We don't know this for sure of course and we've no idea what sums might be involved. However, you wish to have a fight over the self-evident absence of conclusive proof. It's daft. Tedi's daft for refuting the P&D fantasies you claim - but the cat's got your tongue for everyone else? Again. Tedi's absolutely on the money with this insight on you: 'Just because you think something is self evident in your twisted anti Rangers mind does not mean that I will subscribe to it'. I doubt there's a Rangers supporter on here who would disagree. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weirdcal Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 Frankly I couldn't give a fcuk Tedi as it hasn't been verified as real but if it was then I'd be all over it To be verified on twitter you must prove who you are... Don't think it's in CF's best interests to do that ... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny van Axeldongen Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 £500,000 bus? I take it the valuation was done by the same person(s) that did Ibrox? 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.