williemillersmoustache Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 What courts would those be, then? Oh, and btw, the vast majority of us haven't spent a penny for the pleasure of watching you lot squirm as shyster after crook after spiv carves up the stinking corpse of your old club - funded by all those "dignified" fans who aren't going back if those gangsters get in and won't buy a ST until the spivs are out... Best free entertainment ever. In fact it is pretty clear that the wee lost 'think-they're-still-rangers-fans' have in fact funded the hilarity for the rest of us. Thanks No.8 and pals! And as cringe-worthy and admittedly tragic as the celtic ad is, if they want to spend 3 grand enhancing my chuckle, they who am I to argue? As an aside how much have sevco spent on banners and other advertising which says "Now, Then and Forever" on it? More or less than 3k? No, not at all bothered then. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 As an aside how much have sevco spent on banners and other advertising which says "Now, Then and Forever" on it? More or less than 3k? No, not at all bothered then. Very, very very good point there WMM. Never even thought of that. 'Rangers, Now, Then, Forever'.... Yes, definitely not bothered. Trying to convince themselves that is quite cute though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Well that's me convinced 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Well that's me convinced Still not reacting, then? Good lad. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shizzlemanizzle Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Very, very very good point there WMM. Never even thought of that. 'Rangers, Now, Then, Forever'.... Yes, definitely not bothered. Trying to convince themselves that is quite cute though. Hmmm. After reading this I seem to be changing my mind - I think they are bothered. Come on No.8, we need another not bothered type post to re convince us. Say it ain't so Joe. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Very, very very good point there WMM. Never even thought of that. 'Rangers, Now, Then, Forever'.... Yes, definitely not bothered. Trying to convince themselves that is quite cute though. I liked the "Battle Fever" one... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shull Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Well that's me convinced That's good. We are all in agreement now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BinoBalls Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) Regarding the new club thing, at best it's a highly, highly debatable topic. I am amused when people quote UEFA or ASA.... if either body said it was a new club, would No 8 etc have taken their word as gospel? No of course not. Likewise us diddies wouldn't normally accept the word of Donald Findlay, but it's used because it aligns with what the prevailing opinion is. People quote from a source because it suits their viewpoint, not because they unequivocally accept everything from that source. It's a huge can of worms if UEFA say it's a new club. I can imagine why it's much simpler for them to say a club is independent of the company. If a club can't pay it's debts then it gets liquidated, does that mean they could do that every season and still be "the same club" with the same history? It's a huge grey area. There are many intelligent journalists and fans, and also (non-intelligent) people associated with Rangers who have said quite clearly that Rangers died. To dismiss them all as WUMs or bampots is to deliberately smear them in order to discredit their message. Which is in itself means people are bothered by the claims. Rangers fans are entitled to think it's the same club. But others are entitled to say different and the two sides will never agree, regardless of what UEFA says (same club). Or what Richard Gough said (they died). Or what ASA says (same club). Or what Donald Findlay says (they died). Or what James Traynor said (opinion varies depending on employer). Edited January 26, 2015 by BinoBalls 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Regarding the new club thing, at best it's a highly, highly debatable topic. I am amused when people quote UEFA or ASA.... if either body said it was a new club, would No 8 etc have taken their word as gospel? No of course not. Likewise us diddies wouldn't normally accept the word of Donald Findlay, but it's used because it aligns with what the prevailing opinion is. People quote from a source because it suits their viewpoint, not because they unequivocally accept everything from that source. It's a huge can of worms if UEFA say it's a new club. I can imagine why it's much simpler for them to say a club is independent of the company. If a club can't pay it's debts then it gets liquidated, does that mean they could do that every season and still be "the same club" with the same history? It's a huge grey area. There are many intelligent journalists and fans, and also (non-intelligent) people associated with Rangers who have said quite clearly that Rangers died. To dismiss them all as WUMs or bampots is to deliberately smear them in order to discredit their message. Which is in itself means people are bothered by the claims. Rangers fans are entitled to think it's the same club. But others are entitled to say different and the two sides will never agree, regardless of what UEFA says (same club). Or what Richard Gough said (they died). Or what ASA says (same club). Or what Donald Findlay says (they died). Or what James Traynor said (opinion varies depending on employer). Well put - although the biggest sign for me is that, of all the minutiae those at ibrox have deemed worthy of setting m'learneds loose on, the one thing they've avoided like the plague is that one simple question. Oh, sure, they'll quote LNS ad nauseam, but he was giving an opinion to an employer. They'll quote the ASA like they're sitting in The Hague. My favourite is when they say "all football authorities" recognise continuation, conveniently ignoring that "all football authorities" simply take the SFA's word for it - yep, Brother Campbell's Old Boys' Club and EBT Recipient's Rest Home. That SFA. As far as I'm concerned, rangers died and were replaced with something resembling the old club closely enough to convince the Horde (who are, after all, desperate to retain meaning in their lives), but not closely enough to withstand several logical flaws in their belief. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsr Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Poor Sevconians. The knowledge that their club died will never go away. Already they're starting to feel ashamed to be called "Rangers" supporters. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenockRover Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) To be fair No.8 it is a debate worth having... if only to expose the insidious nature of how it has been allowed to fester by the games governing authorities. 1. Do Rangers fans believe they follow the same club ? Of course they do. 2. Do their detractors and critics believe they are a different club ? Of course they do 3. Will either group change their beliefs because the other side wants them to ? Nope. So, where to get some clarity on the whole debacle I wonder? Faced with the self-induced implosion of RFC Ltd, the SFA had 50% of their only (perceived) marketable product suddenly disappear. The media concurred as their headlines clearly proclaimed. The panic at the offices in Hampden was palpable. TV deals were at risk of revocation. Written, as they were, with only one certain fixture in mind showed the short sightedness of both SPL/SFA and the TV Execs. Once the penalty of expulsion from the SPL had been agreed, strenuous efforts were made by the SFA/SFL to minimise the impact with a proposal to put them into the then 1st Division. Nothing to do with appropriate penalties you understand. This was solely to try and protect the TV deal by having them return as swiftly as possible. Running in parallel to all this was the thorny, and massively problematical issue of the potential for the actual demise of RFC Ltd (as incorporated) should Administration become Liquidation. What to do? Well, the idea was floated that the SFA could rewrite their rules to somehow circumvent Company Law concerning Admin/Liquidation events by viewing the "Footballing Club" as a seperate and continuous entity not subject to its' owners financial shortcomings. The only fly in their ointment here is the pesky Law. It forbids companies "phoenixing" from the ashes of failed businesses by purporting to be the "same" as the defunct one. Sure, if the assets can be utilised to run a similair business, no problem, after all, it protects the "industry" from reckless "companies". However the "new" company cannot lay claim to be the "old" company so as to protect customers past and future. So you see No.8. The self protectionists of the SFA/SPFL have had to find a way of maintaining your Clubs' continuation and, (in conjunction with their rewriting of definitions in their rules) will always be sufficiently ambiguous as to the status of the club now referred to as The Rangers Football Club (As opposed to Rangers Football Club Ltd) so as not to fall foul of the law regarding company failures. So, in reality BOTH sides can be seen to be correct in their own view and the very fact that the SFA/SPFL are actively seeking the continuity really allows people like the ASA to say that it exists because the governing body say its ok. The non-believers point to Company Law, the subtle (but lawfully enforced) name change and point and laugh. In all of this of course, Ibrox houses a football team in blue followed by that wondrous mix of socio-political weirdos, glory hunters and football fans of all ages. So nothing new at all there. Rangers F.C. or The Rangers F.C. matters not to them.....They are Rangers, no one likes them, they (say) they don't care. Yet they do. Very very much. Edited January 26, 2015 by GreenockRover -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Excellent post, GR. Do you not get the feeling, though, that there's one body of opinion willing to have this debate, and another just wishing we'd all shut the fück up and let them get on with their "journey"? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenockRover Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Excellent post, GR. Do you not get the feeling, though, that there's one body of opinion willing to have this debate, and another just wishing we'd all shut the fück up and let them get on with their "journey"? Oh of course! I mentioned elsewhere, I think, that the ongoing and continual scrutiny they now attract will be a constant source of both annoyance to them and a restrictive presence in any future attempts to have the protected species status utilised in the manner it was over the last twenty years or more. Maybe the song should go: We're The Rangers The Super Rangers No one likes us, Leave us alone Just give us money, loads of money We canny do it, on our own 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Brees Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 I simply would never dream of reacting in any way to this utter nonsense. Unless it was on the cover on The Celtic View, then, as we've seen, you'd go mental. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Oh of course! I mentioned elsewhere, I think, that the ongoing and continual scrutiny they now attract will be a constant source of both annoyance to them and a restrictive presence in any future attempts to have the protected species status utilised in the manner it was over the last twenty years or more. Maybe the song should go: We're The Rangers The Super Rangers No one likes us, Leave us alone Just give us money, loads of money We canny do it, on our own "Roll up and 'invest' your last dime"? "Simply invest - as long as you pass the test, Richer than anyone, dumber than can be assessed. We're stuck with the spivs, can't believe a word they say, They've torn us apart, even though we're already dead" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Brees Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Herald statement on the advert yesterday “As with all commercial customer advertising, Herald & Times group adhere to all legal requirements and guidelines with regard to the suitability & accuracy of the actual adverts we carry in our titles. With regard to the advert placed by a group representing themselves as ‘Celtic Supporters’, we reviewed the initial copy supplied and passed this to the Advertising Standards Authority and our own group lawyers and, as a result rejected the supplied copy on various legal grounds and requested substantial changes and substantive evidence before we would consider for approval for publication. “On completion of this process, we then submitted final provided artwork and accompanying evidence and received clearance from the Advertising Standards Authority and our own group legal team to ensure compliance on all legal grounds. We then supplied this same copy and took advice from Police Scotland who confirmed they had no concerns as to its publication.’’ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P45 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Rangers fans know it's a different club or this shit would be laughed off. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) Celtic fans claim the ASA approved their £3k advert..... https://mobile.twitter.com/asa_uk For clarification, we did not clear the ad. We respond to concerns about ads once they're in the public domain. Many thanks A certain journalist from the drum being put in their place by the ASA. Edit for spacing. Edited January 26, 2015 by bennett 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Rangers fans know it's a different club or this shit would be laughed off. It is being laughed at. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Celtic fans claim the ASA approved their £3k advert..... https://mobile.twitter.com/asa_uk For clarification, we did not clear the ad. We respond to concerns about ads once they're in the public domain. Many thanks A certain journalist from the drum being put in their place by the ASA. Edit for spacing. Ben, the clue is: "Lets All Laugh At Rangers Thread" Talk to you next week. 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.