WhiteRoseKillie Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Aye keep sooking the previously banned Kingy's boaby and referencing quotes that never were. A. Dave King? B. "Exeunt"? Dear me, you're a dribbling mess these days. Maybe best have a word with Div to see if he could put this incarnation out of its misery like your last one. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Why would I? You and your racist pal may be in FF's thrall but I post on P&B to get away from that idiotic shite. Yet you rarely engage the discussions being more content to comment on the members who provide their views? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Yet you rarely engage the discussions being more content to comment on the members who provide their views? Maybe it's because, on the rare occasions he does attempt sensible discourse, he gets his Supremely Northern protestant arse handed to him? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Offff! I seem to have upset The_Cuntcardine again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mythstoliveby Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Just a quick question re- Dave King. How could King be rated fit and proper if he'd previously been on the board of the old rangers that broke the rules? - was it just a time past thing or soemthing? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Just a quick question re- Dave King. How could King be rated fit and proper if he'd previously been on the board of the old rangers that broke the rules? - was it just a time past thing or soemthing? Well, they passed Green and Whyte as fit n proper. But that was probably to prevent rioting in the streets. You know what the minority are like, when they don't get their way. It's the poor majority of rangers fans I feel sorry for. Name dragged through the mud by all these various minorities. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mythstoliveby Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Well, they passed Green and Whyte as fit n proper. But that was probably to prevent rioting in the streets. You know what the minority are like, when they don't get their way. It's the poor majority of rangers fans I feel sorry for. Name dragged through the mud by all these various minorities. Yeah - but I thought that the authorities got sooooo much flack for passing Green and Whyte that they were forced to tighten up the rules a lot on what is considered "fit and proper". So makes you wonder how King with his previous connections to the old rangers and also his corruption problems in SA was somehow passed. I know this was covered at the time, but I didn't really get it it. Anyone know a succinct explanation for it?? thanks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 (edited) Yeah - but I thought that the authorities got sooooo much flack for passing Green and Whyte that they were forced to tighten up the rules a lot on what is considered "fit and proper". So makes you wonder how King with his previous connections to the old rangers and also his corruption problems in SA was somehow passed. I know this was covered at the time, but I didn't really get it it. Anyone know a succinct explanation for it?? thanks. Large scale organised crime? Edited September 8, 2015 by stonedsailor 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Well, they passed Green and Whyte as fit n proper. But that was probably to prevent rioting in the streets. You know what the minority are like, when they don't get their way. It's the poor majority of rangers fans I feel sorry for. Name dragged through the mud by all these various minorities. Me too. Just simple fitba' fans, wantin' tae watch the fitba'. (Emphasis on the "simple", natch) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aDONisSheep Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 (edited) So he's saying Aberdeen isn't a club, eg. How happy are you with this?Legally Aberdeen FC isn't a club. So I agree with Judge Bishopp. Clubs are called clubs for primarily historical and convention reasons. The term 'club' also engenders brand loyalty in individuals (how many of us are members of Tesco via their club card). Emotionally; I reconciled myself to my rather illogical loyalty many moons ago (certainly I was very aware of it during the period of studying for my professional exams circa 15 years ago). That having been said, after all this time I still invest both money and emotion on a particular company that employs a group of people to kick a bag of wind around. My wife quite correctly points out that i'm just a customer and that any other investment is just a bit of self-delusion. I still choose to partake of the illusion. Kinky, I'm not one of those that wants titles stripped etc. I have always said that the new entity bought the assets and chattels and has a right to use them. It's the mental gymnastics that go with the "ethereal entity with no legal personality v company" shyte that grips my tits. The old club was a company and it went bust. The new club has every right to claim titles etc, they bought those rights. To me, this new Rangers is emotionally the natural successor (old clumpany died new one bought assets, we move on). Yours aDONis Edited September 8, 2015 by aDONisSheep 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Legally Aberdeen FC isn't a club. So I agree with Judge Bishop. Clubs are called clubs for primarily historical and convention reasons. The term 'club' also engenders brand loyalty in individuals (how many of us are members of Tesco via their club card). Emotionally; I reconciled myself to my rather illogical loyalty many moons ago (certainly I was very aware of it during the period of studying for my professional exams circa 15 years ago). That having been said, after all this time I still invest both money and emotion on a particular company that employs a group of people to kick a bag of wind around. My wife quite correctly points out that i'm just a customer and that any other investment is just a bit of self-delusion. I still choose to partake of the illusion. Kinky, I'm not one of those that wants titles stripped etc. I have always said that the new entity bought the assets and chattels and has a right to use them. It's the mental gymnastics that go with the "ethereal entity with no legal personality v company" shyte that grips my tits. The old club was a company and it went bust. The new club has every right to claim titles etc, they bought those rights. To me, this new Rangers is emotionally the natural successor (old clumpany died new one bought assets, we move on). Yours aDONis http://www.hostilemonkey.co.uk/weekend-at-bernies/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Scary thought - is it possible that The_Kinkardigan actually BELIEVES this Same Club fiction and isn't just bantering on a forum? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Scary thought - is it possible that The_Kinkardigan actually BELIEVES this Same Club fiction and isn't just bantering on a forum? He should check with Lord Nimmo... This is not to say that a Club has legal personality, separate from and additional to the legal personality of its owner and operator. We are satisfied that it does not.“ [13] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mythstoliveby Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Scary thought - is it possible that The_Kinkardigan actually BELIEVES this Same Club fiction and isn't just bantering on a forum? I suspect plenty rangers fans do believe it - it's easier that way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever_blue Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 The same diddy roasters still posting the same boring shite day after day 54 and counting 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Koop Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Wow! Happy birthday. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 The same diddy roasters still posting the same boring shite day after day 54 and counting Great, another day of forver_thick telling us all how much he doesn't care. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 The same diddy roasters still posting the same boring shite day after day 54 and counting Keep working hard, I'm sure you'll get that IQ up one day. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robo2 Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 (edited) Legally Aberdeen FC isn't a club. So I agree with Judge Bishop. Clubs are called clubs for primarily historical and convention reasons. The term 'club' also engenders brand loyalty in individuals (how many of us are members of Tesco via their club card). Emotionally; I reconciled myself to my rather illogical loyalty many moons ago (certainly I was very aware of it during the period of studying for my professional exams circa 15 years ago). That having been said, after all this time I still invest both money and emotion on a particular company that employs a group of people to kick a bag of wind around. My wife quite correctly points out that i'm just a customer and that any other investment is just a bit of self-delusion. I still choose to partake of the illusion. Kinky, I'm not one of those that wants titles stripped etc. I have always said that the new entity bought the assets and chattels and has a right to use them. It's the mental gymnastics that go with the "ethereal entity with no legal personality v company" shyte that grips my tits. The old club was a company and it went bust. The new club has every right to claim titles etc, they bought those rights. To me, this new Rangers is emotionally the natural successor (old clumpany died new one bought assets, we move on). Yours aDONis the only mental gymnastics come from the new club delusionals, the facts are, what has happened to rangers has happened to other clubs before, they are the same clubs and no-one made a peep about this new club pish regarding them, officially we are the same club according to every footballing organisation home and abroad, legally we are the same club according to the evidence available. That "ethereal entity with no legal personality v company" stuff you have trouble with has been backed by two judges who have more knowledge about the law than you a thicko on a message board could ever dream of, they say it makes perfect sense and also that is what happened in rangers case, added to that hmrc, the stock market and all other business organisations who have commented on it says we have surived. in opposition to that backing the new club stuff, you have some newspaper headlines + some ex pros offering their opinion (both examples of non experts, who have since stated that we are the same club) and a mythical law that not one of you can provide and a few crackpot theories that dont stand the slightest scrutiny and are contradicted by the available credible evidence - the whole new club strategy is based on ignoring that absolutely every single bit of evidence backs the stonewall fact that we are the same club, then repeating various flawed arguments over and over again until someone points out your stupidity and then you move onto the next one until you get back to the start Edited September 8, 2015 by robo2 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever_blue Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 And when we get promotion we are going for 55 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.