strichener Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 you argue the points! you made a couple of statements with no argument in your previous post and expect me to guess what your argument is ? halfwit the players play for the club and are contracted to the company, the trophies were owned by the company but won by the club - not a difficult concept to understand except for you You are an imbicile. What contractual arrangement exists for the club to use the employees of another organisation? Also when you stated that the club consisted of trophies, you actually meant the company??? Note that I have not argued that the club did not win trophies, just not the current club. What you are describing here is a straight forward purchase of assets. However, football results are not an asset, neither is the competing and winning a tournament nor taking part in a sporting activity. None of these things you attribute to the club are assets and therefore were not sold. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 (edited) no i am talking about evidence, expert state that club and company can be separated without any major issues in scottish law - thats evidence my respect for the evidence is based on its quality, im sure even you can admit that the evidence for the same club is vastly superior to anything the new club argument can dredge up? im sure you can also agree that officially we are the same club seperated into what? I would like to see the legal process under which this seperation of legal personalities can take place. And you call me a halfwit. Edited March 25, 2016 by strichener 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottxs Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 you argue the points! you made a couple of statements with no argument in your previous post and expect me to guess what your argument is ? halfwit the players play for the club and are contracted to the company, the trophies were owned by the company but won by the club - not a difficult concept to understand except for you so what your saying is the company owns the trophies and the company is now being liquidated. so no more 54 and counting pish as the company must own those titles too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 no i am talking about evidence, expert state that club and company can be separated without any major issues in scottish law - thats evidence my respect for the evidence is based on its quality, im sure even you can admit that the evidence for the same club is vastly superior to anything the new club argument can dredge up? im sure you can also agree that officially we are the same club Football's governing bodies in Scotland have recognised them as the same club. I however, regard it as far less clear cut. Now sadly, I lack any authority here, but that doesn't make my view invalid, based as it is on evidence. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Ok, but what about what the gates say? Jings! Talking gates, another first for us. gates 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 no i am talking about evidence, expert state that club and company can be separated without any major issues in scottish law - thats evidence my respect for the evidence is based on its quality, im sure even you can admit that the evidence for the same club is vastly superior to anything the new club argument can dredge up? im sure you can also agree that officially we are the same club Here is a document detailing legal forms. Point to the one that describes your club. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/31676/11-1399-guide-legal-forms-for-business.pdf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BinoBalls Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Football's governing bodies in Scotland have recognised them as the same club. I however, regard it as far less clear cut. Now sadly, I lack any authority here, but that doesn't make my view invalid, based as it is on evidence. Accepting evidence and coming to your own conclusions, even if it differs from the SFA, is perfectly reasonable. Denying certain evidence even exists because you don't like what it says - now that takes a proper flat earther. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Can someone explain why I as a fan, should see Rangers as a different club? ...and yes monkey I know about the gates lol -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 (edited) Can someone explain why I as a fan, should see Rangers as a different club? ...and yes monkey I know about the gates lol I know that, as a Rangers fan, you are accustomed to ignoring legalities... ETA: You cannot have your club run as a business and then try to conveniently ignore the fact when it suits. Edited March 25, 2016 by strichener 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Can someone explain why I as a fan, should see Rangers as a different club? ...and yes monkey I know about the gates lol It's entirely up to you dear Bennett. If you wish to be intellectually honest though, you'll recognise that the thing you used to call Rangers went tits up. Now, the thing that still plays there appears much the same and as far as I'm concerned, pretty much is. That thing happened though that required a re-start in the bottom tier and enabled good players to walk away. Title stripping is more important in my view, than debate over new club/old club. It's there that a real injustice has been allowed to remain in place. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 It's entirely up to you dear Bennett. If you wish to be intellectually honest though, you'll recognise that the thing you used to call Rangers went tits up. Now, the thing that still plays there appears much the same and as far as I'm concerned, pretty much is. That thing happened though that required a re-start in the bottom tier and enabled good players to walk away. Title stripping is more important in my view, than debate over new club/old club. It's there that a real injustice has been allowed to remain in place. Anyone else want a go? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
energyzone Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 It's entirely up to you dear Bennett.If you wish to be intellectually honest though, you'll recognise that the thing you used to call Rangers went tits up. Now, the thing that still plays there appears much the same and as far as I'm concerned, pretty much is.That thing happened though that required a re-start in the bottom tier and enabled good players to walk away.Title stripping is more important in my view, than debate over new club/old club. It's there that a real injustice has been allowed to remain in place. Surely you know better than to try to engage bennett in a serious conversation!!! The guy is incapable. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 because some fine fine chaps and norman have spent the past 4 years telling you it's a different one, we should do it for them. Whilst nacho has actually been arguing a case, offering sources etc, it's very noticeable that long standing posters like yourself and Bennett have just contributed juvenile little asides. It would be silly enough, if we didn't have pleas from the likes of Kincardine that the issues get an airing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Surely you know better than to try to engage bennett in a serious conversation!!! The guy is incapable. I don't think he is. He's done it before and he can be alright. He's a lazy git who enjoys playing up to the other Rangers posters. He's not quite the idiot he adopts the posture of though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 All this proof yet no one can tell me why as a fan I should see Rangers as new club..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 the numerous clubs who went through the same process in england and scotland without any mention of them being a new club gives you numerous examples pre 2011. if the club and the company are one and the same, how did they all manage to separate their club from the oldco and continue on as the same club without a peep from you lot, you accepted hearts as the same club for over a hundred years before the rangers situation arose What a long winded way to say, no, I can't provide any evidence. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 clubs can die if no one buys them during the liquidation process, an obvious point that you fail to grasp What's the window a company must work within before they miss the chance to buy the club? -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Can someone explain why I as a fan, should see Rangers as a different club? I suppose they must look the same to you. From the house. *lol* *bloggers* 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 No.mention of the company here... http://stv.tv/news/west-central/283984-rangers-fc-reveal-first-annual-accounts-since-craig-whyte-takeover/ Follow follow article quotes the chairman mentioning the financial status of the club... http://www.followfollow.com/news/tmnw/brock_stokers_initial_thoughts_on_rangers_accounts_2009__tell_us_something_new_472283/index.shtml 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Poster on Gersnet says the club made a profit. No one corrects him to say it's the company running the club... http://www.gersnetonline.co.uk/vb/showthread.php?16670-Review-of-Rangers-interim-accounts-2009 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.