The BIG strip the titles thread

[Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo]

56 minutes ago, nacho said:

The crux of the "Strip the Titles" argument is that without EBT, we would not have been able to afford certain players and therefore we gained a sporting advantage by having these players sign for us using EBTs. There has been various quotes from Board members who said that we used the scheme as it allowed us to buy players we “MAY” have not otherwise been able to sign. "MAY" being the most important word of course.

So lets look at that player list in greater detail.

In total 53 Rangers PLAYERS were paid a sum from an EBT trust. The total paid to those players was £33,322,308. I believe these 53 players can be split into 2 Groups.

Group 1 are players who I believe would have signed regardless. Either the EBT they received was of very low value or they were signing for their boyhood heroes or in some cases earning 5/6/7 times more than ever before. These players are:

Alan Hutton, Steven Smith, Federico Nieto, Jerome Bonnissel, Chris Burke, Dan Eggen, Ian Murray, Maurice Ross, Bob Malcolm, Tero Penttila, Billy Dodds, Kris Boyd, Marvin Andrews, Gavin Rae, Zurab Khizanishvili, Steven Thompson, Neil McCann, Alex Rae, Steven Davis, Andrei Kanchelskis, Gregory Vignal, Libor Sionko, Olivier Bernard, Michael Mols.

Group 2 are players who are either foreigners who received anything above £300k or home grown players who got more than £1m. These are:

Arthur Numan, Bert Konterman, Carlos Cuellar, Ronald Waterreus, Sotirios Kyrgiakos, Paolo Vanoli, Jean-Alain Boumsong, Julien Rodriguez, Lorenzo Amoruso, Mikel Arteta, Fernando Ricksen, Peter Lovenkrands, Nuno Capucho, Claudio Caniggia, Kevin Muscat, Pedro Mendes, Ronald De Boer, Thomas Buffel, Tore Andre Flo, Michael Ball, Christian Nerlinger, Dado Prso, Stefan Klos, Sasa Papac, Jesper Christiansen, Egil Ostenstad, Craig Moore, Nacho Novo, Barry Ferguson.

For Group 2, the total amount paid into the Sub Trust for EBT was £27,639,283.

The ruling today means that for those 29 players, Rangers would have had to pay circa £11,055,713 of tax over the period of 10 years if they wanted to pay the players the same amount net of tax.

That is £1,105,571 per year.

In order for anyone to prove Rangers got a sporting advantage, they need to prove that without EBTS, the above players would not have signed. To do this, they would need to pass 3 tests.

Test 1 – If each of the above players were purely offered the salary that was agreed with them and NO EBT, would they still have signed?

Test 2 – If any of the above players did not pass Test 1 and stated they wouldn’t have signed on the base salary, would they have agreed a salary in between what they got paid as remuneration and with the additional EBT? This would reduce the £11m liability mentioned above.

Test 3 – If any of the players failed Test 1 and then failed Test 2 and would only sign for the exact net amount they got during their time with Rangers, would Murray simply have bitten the bullet and paid it.

Given the debt he constantly put us in and given all of the signings were made prior to the Lloyds freeze, there is no doubt that the small amount of players, if any at all, that failed all 3 test would have got the money they wanted.

No senior counsel would be able to prove the above 3 tests which is why the advice given to the SFA over the last few months in advance of the decision is that there is simply no point. You will be lucky to get 1 or 2 players saying they wouldn’t have signed for anything less and even if they did say that, Murray would simply say he would have used our facility.

What the f**k is this pish?

[hellbhoy]

A club runs up tens of millions of pounds of debt buying & paying players out-with their budget and dies but won trophies only because they ran up the debt. Creditors get shafted over because the club lived way out-with it's means but no sporting advantage was gained? How does that work?

Surely there should be some association rule that if a club goes into liquidation because they ran up huge debts winning stuff should have them voided or removed if they were found to be funding the player pool by debt. If a club can service it's debt whilst winning trophies I don't see a problem but there must be some sort of fail-safe to stop clubs like The Rangers at the moment racking up tens of millions of pounds of debt reliant upon stopping ten in a row or titles number 55 if that fails.

Why aren't the associations worried that The Rangers might go tits up like the last Rangers? I think it is a safe bet that the club is being improperly managed and is appearing to live well beyond it's means this season with the egotistical megalomaniac King spending big chasing the dream. Might or might not end badly for The Rangers but things are on a knife edge financially, no success or Progres, then they are truly fucked.

[hellbhoy]

2 minutes ago, Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo said:

What the f**k is this pish?

Copy and paste job he didn't read first.

[Monkey Tennis]

12 hours ago, nacho said:

The crux of the "Strip the Titles" argument is that without EBT, we would not have been able to afford certain players and therefore we gained a sporting advantage by having these players sign for us using EBTs. There has been various quotes from Board members who said that we used the scheme as it allowed us to buy players we “MAY” have not otherwise been able to sign. "MAY" being the most important word of course.

So lets look at that player list in greater detail.

In total 53 Rangers PLAYERS were paid a sum from an EBT trust. The total paid to those players was £33,322,308. I believe these 53 players can be split into 2 Groups.

Group 1 are players who I believe would have signed regardless. Either the EBT they received was of very low value or they were signing for their boyhood heroes or in some cases earning 5/6/7 times more than ever before. These players are:

Alan Hutton, Steven Smith, Federico Nieto, Jerome Bonnissel, Chris Burke, Dan Eggen, Ian Murray, Maurice Ross, Bob Malcolm, Tero Penttila, Billy Dodds, Kris Boyd, Marvin Andrews, Gavin Rae, Zurab Khizanishvili, Steven Thompson, Neil McCann, Alex Rae, Steven Davis, Andrei Kanchelskis, Gregory Vignal, Libor Sionko, Olivier Bernard, Michael Mols.

Group 2 are players who are either foreigners who received anything above £300k or home grown players who got more than £1m. These are:

Arthur Numan, Bert Konterman, Carlos Cuellar, Ronald Waterreus, Sotirios Kyrgiakos, Paolo Vanoli, Jean-Alain Boumsong, Julien Rodriguez, Lorenzo Amoruso, Mikel Arteta, Fernando Ricksen, Peter Lovenkrands, Nuno Capucho, Claudio Caniggia, Kevin Muscat, Pedro Mendes, Ronald De Boer, Thomas Buffel, Tore Andre Flo, Michael Ball, Christian Nerlinger, Dado Prso, Stefan Klos, Sasa Papac, Jesper Christiansen, Egil Ostenstad, Craig Moore, Nacho Novo, Barry Ferguson.

For Group 2, the total amount paid into the Sub Trust for EBT was £27,639,283.

The ruling today means that for those 29 players, Rangers would have had to pay circa £11,055,713 of tax over the period of 10 years if they wanted to pay the players the same amount net of tax.

That is £1,105,571 per year.

In order for anyone to prove Rangers got a sporting advantage, they need to prove that without EBTS, the above players would not have signed. To do this, they would need to pass 3 tests.

Test 1 – If each of the above players were purely offered the salary that was agreed with them and NO EBT, would they still have signed?

Test 2 – If any of the above players did not pass Test 1 and stated they wouldn’t have signed on the base salary, would they have agreed a salary in between what they got paid as remuneration and with the additional EBT? This would reduce the £11m liability mentioned above.

Test 3 – If any of the players failed Test 1 and then failed Test 2 and would only sign for the exact net amount they got during their time with Rangers, would Murray simply have bitten the bullet and paid it.

Given the debt he constantly put us in and given all of the signings were made prior to the Lloyds freeze, there is no doubt that the small amount of players, if any at all, that failed all 3 test would have got the money they wanted.

No senior counsel would be able to prove the above 3 tests which is why the advice given to the SFA over the last few months in advance of the decision is that there is simply no point. You will be lucky to get 1 or 2 players saying they wouldn’t have signed for anything less and even if they did say that, Murray would simply say he would have used our facility.

Gosh, I feel almost bad about you having wasted such time on the above.  

The crux of title stripping doesn't require any proof that Rangers wouldn't otherwise have signed certain players at all.  It requires proof that Rangers registered players in deceitful terms and that this rendered them ineligible.  LNS decided the second part wasn't in place.

Did Celtic need to prove that they'd have scored a swift half dozen goals, had Legia Warsaw not brought on that sub for the last four minutes?  

All your stuff about particular players, specific sums of money and little tests, is tragically, almost touchingly redundant.

Rangers operated the system as both Murray and King have said, in pursuit of an advantage.  Otherwise, they wouldn't have done it.  

They either achieved that advantage, or somehow failed to in a spectacular and puzzling display of sustained ineptitude.

Either way, it doesn't matter.  That's because false information was deliberately provided when players were registered.

[Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo]

2 minutes ago, hellbhoy said:

A club runs up tens of millions of pounds of debt buying & paying players out-with their budget and dies but won trophies only because they ran up the debt. Creditors get shafted over because the club lived way out-with it's means but no sporting advantage was gained? How does that work?

Surely there should be some association rule that if a club goes into liquidation because they ran up huge debts winning stuff should have them voided or removed if they were found to be funding the player pool by debt. If a club can service it's debt whilst winning trophies I don't see a problem but there must be some sort of fail-safe to stop clubs like The Rangers at the moment racking up tens of millions of pounds of debt reliant upon stopping ten in a row or titles number 55 if that fails.

Why aren't the associations worried that The Rangers might go tits up like the last Rangers? I think it is a safe bet that the club is being improperly managed and is appearing to live well beyond it's means this season with the egotistical megalomaniac King spending big chasing the dream. Might or might not end badly for The Rangers but things are on a knife edge financially, no success or Progres, then they are truly fucked.

Let's not forget they managed to go bust without the EBT debt ever crystallising. Yet according to this fruitloop Murray could have just paid the EBT savings out of Rangers' 'facility' anyway. Christ almighty.

[hellbhoy]

Just now, Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo said:

Let's not forget they managed to go bust without the EBT debt ever crystallising. Yet according to this fruitloop Murray could have just paid the EBT savings out of Rangers' 'facility' anyway. Christ almighty.

I know, that's what I find so funny about it. A measly £12,5K a week he tried to save, he could have just had one man less in the playing squad and kept it legit. But we all know what The Rangers fans are like!, they do like having tons of debt because they can see worse players on the park they initially first thought were international superstars.

[Monkey Tennis]

12 minutes ago, hellbhoy said:

Copy and paste job he didn't read first.

Aw, don't spoil it.

[Jacksgranda]

15 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Gosh, I feel almost bad about you having wasted such time on the above.  

The crux of title stripping doesn't require any proof that Rangers wouldn't have signed certain players at all.  It requires proof that Rangers registered players in deceitful terms and that this rendered them ineligible.  LNS decided the second part wasn't in place.

Did Celtic need to prove that they'd have scored a swift half dozen goals, had Legia Warsaw not brought on that sub for the last four minutes?  

All your stuff about particular players, specific sums of money and little tests, is tragically, almost touchingly redundant.

Rangers operated the system as both Murray and King have said, in pursuit of an advantage.  Otherwise, they wouldn't have done it.  

They either achieved that advantage, or somehow failed to in a spectacular and puzzling display of sustained ineptitude.

Either way, it doesn't matter.  That's because false information was deliberately provided when players were registered.

Correct, imho

[BobWilliamson]

29 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

And yet you can't tackle it at all.

You are beyond help I'm afraid. 

I just hope to God you don't talk like this in the real world.

Its ok in the safety of your wee clique but in the real world...,

The wee bit that keeps me amused is you didn't even realise you are the moon howler to end all moon howlers. A complete joke blinded by your hatred of all things Rangers

[Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo]

1 minute ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Aw, don't spoil it.

Copy and paste or not, somebody took the time to write that. I'm guessing a 14 year old or someone who's never visited the planet Earth. It's actually pretty funny if you go through it a couple of times. My favourite bit is the 'No senior counsel' bit at the bottom as if he's uncovered some magical '3 tests' that would be used in a High Court case. The magnificently arbitrary split of the players into 2 groups is pretty special too. And calculating the amounts to the pound is an excellent addition. He's forgotten NI Contributions so it's wrong anyway. 

[Monkey Tennis]

Just now, BobWilliamson said:

You are beyond help I'm afraid. 

I just hope to God you don't talk like this in the real world.

Its ok in the safety of your wee clique but in the real world...,

The wee bit that keeps me amused is you didn't even realise you are the moon howler to end all moon howlers. A complete joke blinded by your hatred of all things Rangers

Nothing specific then.

Just some indiscriminate insults.

[TheCelt67]

4 minutes ago, BobWilliamson said:

You are beyond help I'm afraid. 

I just hope to God you don't talk like this in the real world.

Its ok in the safety of your wee clique but in the real world...,

The wee bit that keeps me amused is you didn't even realise you are the moon howler to end all moon howlers. A complete joke blinded by your hatred of all things Rangers

Out of curiosity, what would happen to MT were he to "talk like this in the real world"?

[Monkey Tennis]

2 minutes ago, TheCelt67 said:

Out of curiosity, what would happen to MT were he to "talk like this in the real world"?

I'm intrigued by this too.

I'm so aggressive, sweary and sectarian that I can't imagine lasting long on Dumfries' mean streets, were I to take this sinister persona out my front door.

[TheCelt67]

1 minute ago, Monkey Tennis said:

I'm intrigued by this too.

I'm so aggressive, sweary and sectarian that I can't imagine lasting long on Dumfries' mean streets, were I to take this sinister persona out my front door.

Things that rile up the Berzz.  TV's breaking down, goading and Monkey Tennis.

[Monkey Tennis]

8 minutes ago, Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo said:

Copy and paste or not, somebody took the time to write that. I'm guessing a 14 year old or someone who's never visited the planet Earth. It's actually pretty funny if you go through it a couple of times. My favourite bit is the 'No senior counsel' bit at the bottom as if he's uncovered some magical '3 tests' that would be used in a High Court case. The magnificently arbitrary split of the players into 2 groups is pretty special too. And calculating the amounts to the pound is an excellent addition. He's forgotten NI Contributions so it's wrong anyway. 

It actually is a joyful outpouring of bonkerdom when you read it all.

I'm not sure whether or not Steven Thompson and Neil McCann are being claimed to have joined their boyhood heroes in signing for Rangers.

Perhaps the author could advise us.

[Insaintee]

On 12/07/2017 at 20:26, hellbhoy said:

Lord Nimmo sat down with the SPL handbook of rules & regulations and was hired by the SPL to give the commission some sort of legal credence. All he did was adjudicate for the SPL using their rigged set of rules in their newly rewritten rules if Rangers FC had broken any of them, which they did. Lord Nimmo was completely and utterly bound by the association rulebook and couldn't hand out any more than he could have because the SPL handbook was written in such a manner the outcome was already set long before they even asked Nimmo to chair the commission.

Also in the latest SPFL & SFA handbook of rules & regulations it has a clause that binds any decision made by a panel or commission to be final unless!. The Rangers FC do the right thing and ask for an appeal based on the latest ruling from the Supreme Court which they won't for a plethora of reasons no one has even considered because they just want the cheating b*****ds to have titles & trophies stripped from them.

They can't reopen the LNS inquiry because it is in the rules that any panel or commission outcome is final, done, ended or any other word that applies in this manner. If they did reopen the case or investigate into the commissions ruling with the latest Supreme court outcome, The Rangers can have it blocked by appeal citing the SPFL's rule J22. The associations made sure the first verdict sticks legally unless challenged by the club member itself who was given the fine for breaching the rules which got called an administrative error FFS?

You're missing the point, the Final verdict means that Rangers are guilty of a completely different offence to the one that LNS ruled on. So it's not really reopening. 

There are plenty of rulings that have been challenged and there fore there are plenty of precedents for re opening the case. 

[Insaintee]

2 hours ago, nacho said:

you got pumped by the red imps last year and still won the league

Call that a pumping I pity your Mrs

PS this is a pumping

 

[Paralytic Critic]

2 hours ago, nacho said:

yawn, the only charade is you lot continuing to kid on we are a new club

Unlike your lot continuing to believe your own bullshit. 

[bennett]

23 minutes ago, Insaintee said:

Call that a pumping I pity your Mrs

PS this is a pumping

 

Has it got big Mohsni taking on the Motherwell team and staff?

 

[HeWhoWalksBehindTheRows]

8 minutes ago, bennett said:

Has it got big Mohsni taking on the Motherwell team and staff?

 

Imagine mocking people that died in a disaster, what a dirty, creepy scumbag.