aofjays Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Not to the extent that the players were improperly registered which was always the point. "serious and long-term rule-breaking over Rangers' use of Employee Benefit Trusts" Cheats, simple as that. Spin it however you want, you are only deluding yourself. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 (edited) Where's that quote from? It's not like we could've made cuts in other areas to sign players. It's a mispread inaccuracy that we literally wouldn't have had the players we had without EBT's which other clubs also used.The UTTT. Sorry Max, I value your opinion and all that, but I'll have to defer to the knight of the realm here, oldco Rangers used the EBT scheme to sign players they could otherwise not afford. Sorry here's the full quote from Andrew Thornhill, the lawyer representing the Murray Group, “Because the whole point of the remuneration trust was it enabled the club to take on players that it otherwise couldn’t afforded (sic) to pay if it had to pay the grossed up wage. “This was Sir David Murray’s way of putting it. It was a way of getting hold of players you otherwise couldn’t afford. “So the last thing the club would do is say to a player: now, if you don’t like having remuneration trust we will pay you gross instead. It just couldn’t afford to do it. It wasn’t an option.” They recruited players they otherwise couldn’t afford. Edited May 23, 2014 by AberdeenBud 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Are you taking the piss? There's much worse on here on a daily basis, i've seen Rangers being compared to the Nazi's and it's not classy for me to tell someone who's harassed me whilst insulting me on every quote that i'd prefer it if he wasn't here. It's the truth, my life, minorly would be better if he was a failed baby, why the fake sensitivity? A guy on a fitba forum should have no impact on your life whatsoever. Minorly(is that even a word) or not. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Did you get an EBT? make sure and pay it back. Thought you were shite at golf? Rangers are shite at football but they still win most of their games. It happens 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aofjays Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Yet the players were still properly registered and no competitive advantage was gained, it is in the same report, no amount of cherry-picking will ever change this. So what? Exactly what is your point? It was still "serious and long-term rule-breaking over Rangers' use of Employee Benefit Trusts". Rangers cheated, no amount of cherry-picking will ever change this. If I swap my opponents cards in pontoon to an ace and a king - guess what, that would make me a cheat - even though I gained no advantage. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lobsterious Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 (edited) OK I shall double my earlier wager. IF HMRC win the appeal and 'cheating; is mentioned then I'll give another charity donation just for you. The diddies, eh? What are they like? just a bunch of fitba fans who despise arrogance and cheating Edited May 23, 2014 by lobsterious 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxsta Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 A guy on a fitba forum should have no impact on your life whatsoever. Minorly(is that even a word) or not. Well reading an opinion you find horrid can even on a minor scale affect your emotions. I must clarify i'm not bothered in the slightest, in the same way it shouldn't bother anyone if i dislike someone, be it an online moniker or real life acquaintance. I saw the red line and thought f**k it even if it's not a word it very well could be. I kinda like it made up or not. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxsta Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 The UTTT. Sorry Max, I value your opinion and all that, but I'll have to defer to the knight of the realm here, oldco Rangers used the EBT scheme to sign players they could otherwise not afford. Sorry here's the full quote from Andrew Thornhill, the lawyer representing the Murray Group, “Because the whole point of the remuneration trust was it enabled the club to take on players that it otherwise couldn’t afforded (sic) to pay if it had to pay the grossed up wage. “This was Sir David Murray’s way of putting it. It was a way of getting hold of players you otherwise couldn’t afford. “So the last thing the club would do is say to a player: now, if you don’t like having remuneration trust we will pay you gross instead. It just couldn’t afford to do it. It wasn’t an option.” They recruited players they otherwise couldn’t afford. Yeah i fully understand why my viewpoint is in the minority, just think though how much money Murray had and how much he spunked on Rangers, do you not find it plausible that without EBT's he still would've overspent and signed players that were detrimental to the balance sheet but still manageable. Before whyte we were managing our debt, it was a huge amount and without the EBT's it still would've been huge, maybe different faces but i don't think that without EBT's Murray would have been more responsible financially, living within our means and signing "shitey" players. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloomogganners Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 They obviously do share each others opinions, we have the Peterhead fan claiming that LNS an expert in football rules is not really entitled to give his opinion on sporting advantage, due to the fact he does not happen to be a Scotland Legend and does not really understand what it is like to be a player, now we have a United fan claiming that HMRC are the experts on gaining an advantage on the field of play, perhaps we should pick a team from within their ranks, we might actually qualify for a change. "that he ruled on something that was outwith his competence".............is fit yon loon says min, nae fit yer stoatirn wi "an expert".....Fitbaa expert ? Far hiv ye bin min, LNS kens aboot rinnin inquires an nathin aboot fitbaa, richt min mind. Dinna fash yersel wi facts noo ye doited claikin weegie. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 So when's the next insolvency even then? Has that fud with the made up name told us yet? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aofjays Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 (edited) The word 'cheat' or 'cheating' was never mentioned, this is just your head in the sand opinion, so I agree, so what? it is irrelevant. No unfair competitive advantage gained was however in the report, which is completely relevant. So you are just going to lie? Pathetic little troll. ETA I know you are a bit simple so just to clarify. The lie is that "No unfair competitive advantage gained", is in any way relevant to the label of cheating scum. It is not. Rangers are cheating scum. Edited May 23, 2014 by aofjays 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxsta Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 So when's the next insolvency even then? Has that fud with the made up name told us yet? There won't be one. Ibrox will be in the King's hands by start of new season. Life is good. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 So when's the next insolvency even then? Has that fud with the made up name told us yet? About 6 weeks ago. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Yeah i fully understand why my viewpoint is in the minority, just think though how much money Murray had and how much he spunked on Rangers, do you not find it plausible that without EBT's he still would've overspent and signed players that were detrimental to the balance sheet but still manageable. Before whyte we were managing our debt, it was a huge amount and without the EBT's it still would've been huge, maybe different faces but i don't think that without EBT's Murray would have been more responsible financially, living within our means and signing "shitey" players. He 'spunked' absolutely nothing on Rangers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 So you are just going to lie? Pathetic little troll. ETA I know you are a bit simple so just to clarify. The lie is that "No unfair competitive advantage gained", is in any way relevant to the label of cheating scum. It is not. Rangers are cheating scum. is the phrase "No unfair competitive advantage gained", the number one piece of absurd lunacy in the whole Death of Rangers / Birth of Sevco (DORBOS) sequence of events? I can picture Deep Thought in Hitch Hikers Guide to the The Galaxy being baffled by that concept.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Yet the players were still properly registered and no competitive advantage was gained, it is in the same report, no amount of cherry-picking will ever change this. Can you find me the definition within the SFA rules that define what a competitive advantage is? As LNS is not and has never been a professional footballer he is not qualified to make this determination. Can you provide the expert evidence that there was no competitive advantage otherwise his opinion is no more valid than any other layperson. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BossHogg Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 The point is that the tax avoidance scheme was just that a tax avoidance scheme, tax avoidance is not illegal, reckless from Murray yes but not illegal. The point is that despite deliberately failing to fill in the proper paperwork the rules were not broken and the players were correctly registered, thus not cheating. The point was this whole conversation started because you chose to cherry-pick parts out from a report that was over a year old, the problem is that the same report clear stated no unfair competitive advantage was gained, did you think we would just forget? Tax avoidance can be used illegally thats the whole point of HMRC case against MIH, and being under appeal Its not yet decided if it is or not, so you cant say Rangers tax dodging was legal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aofjays Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Wow, anger, snot and tears, you really are an an angry little man. There was no lie, again let me repeat, just so it sinks in (if that is possible with you) The word 'cheat' or 'cheating' was never mentioned, no unfair competitive advantage gained was however in the report, ignore it all you wish, rage at me all you wish (i especially like this part) Double Yawn. Back to your "so angry" nonsense. Is that your default: no response - tell a lie. Why would I care if the word cheat was mentioned? Do you not understand English? Rangers are guilty of deliberate sustained rule breaking. Cheating. Rangers are cheats. It must be hard to admit you supported cheating scum I suppose, it would be quite a dent in your own self respect. Much much easier to lie and pretend you don't understand eh? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 The point is that the tax avoidance scheme was just that a tax avoidance scheme, tax avoidance is not illegal, reckless from Murray yes but not illegal. The point is that despite deliberately failing to fill in the proper paperwork the rules were not broken and the players were correctly registered, thus not cheating. The point was this whole conversation started because you chose to cherry-pick parts out from a report that was over a year old, the problem is that the same report clear stated no unfair competitive advantage was gained, did you think we would just forget? the whole EBT scheme = cheating. 'failing to fill in the correct paperwork' clubs have been thrown out of tournaments for the slightest inadvertent slip of the pen in registration paperwork. Was it 5 or 6 titles that were tainted by Old Rangers assembly line cheating? -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Tax avoidance can be used illegally thats the whole point of HMRC case against MIH, and being under appeal Its not yet decided if it is or not, so you cant say Rangers tax dodging was legal. Avoidance ≠ Evasion 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.