Forever_blueco Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 5 hours ago, bennett said: Rubber masks? That's a thought i really don't want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 3 minutes ago, bennett said: Not ducking it all, Rangers acted after receiving financial/legal advice which they believed was in the rules. LNS i believe mentioned this at the time, it basically wasn't administrated properly. At the time i doubt that anyone thought that the ebt scheme would come to haunt them. Stop the nonsense. You're completely ignoring the question of why false information regarding the sums paid to players, was submitted when players were being registered to compete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 You say ignoring, i say explaining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wastecoatwilly Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 3 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: Stop the nonsense. You're completely ignoring the question of why false information regarding the sums paid to players, was submitted when players were being registered to compete. You are battering your head against a brick wall there is no moral compass in their heads the govern bodies have stitched up the rest of Scottish football to protect one club because it's a cash cow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 5 minutes ago, wastecoatwilly said: You are battering your head against a brick wall there is no moral compass in their heads the govern bodies have stitched up the rest of Scottish football to protect one club because it's a cash cow Well finding us guilty and punishing us is hardly 'stitching up' but I accept the cash cow bit. Now tell me, who were desperate to see the end of the SFL in order to gain financially? Who bullied, cajoled and blackmailed the SFL clubs in to liquidating their own league so they could gain access to our media rights? If you want to talk about 'stitch ups' and 'cash cow' then great. Let's have a healthy discussion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 If you are right I'll leave the thread. If you're wrong then please leave the Sevco threads as you contribute nothing. The argument is that, " the assertion that no sporting advantage was accrued " was made by LNS. Accept my offer and prove it? http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/judge-rules-rangers-can-keep-1736850 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 1 minute ago, Ken Fitlike said: http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/judge-rules-rangers-can-keep-1736850 A Daily Record quote from a Daily Record level of poster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wastecoatwilly Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 5 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said: Well finding us guilty and punishing us is hardly 'stitching up' but I accept the cash cow bit. Now tell me, who were desperate to see the end of the SFL in order to gain financially? Who bullied, cajoled and blackmailed the SFL clubs in to liquidating their own league so they could gain access to our media rights? If you want to talk about 'stitch ups' and 'cash cow' then great. Let's have a healthy discussion... and deflecting maybe another time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimboyjones1976 Posted July 15, 2017 Author Share Posted July 15, 2017 4 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said: A Daily Record quote from a Daily Record level of poster. I read the article properly, but didn't read it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 38 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said: Second only to match fixing, remember? 35 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said: That post needs more "scams", imho. I'm sure Dave King is in the process of scamming these mutants as we laugh at them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 1 minute ago, Jimboyjones1976 said: I read the article properly, but didn't read it all. Exactly as I did. I skipped the headline and stopped when I saw they made a baws of it. This is usually how sensible people read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 27 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: Stop the nonsense. You're completely ignoring the question of why false information regarding the sums paid to players, was submitted when players were being registered to compete. The more you keep pushing, the more you are looking like a thick c**t by the way. Just saying like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimboyjones1976 Posted July 15, 2017 Author Share Posted July 15, 2017 2 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said: Exactly as I did. I skipped the headline and stopped when I saw they made a baws of it. This is usually how sensible people read. Not as you did. I read the whole thing, even the shite bits. A bit like reading the pish you post on here. Makes for a more balanced and fully informed opinion reading something in full, even if you think it's shite or not worth reading. It's called due diligence, something missing from the constitution of Rangers and its fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 11 minutes ago, Ken Fitlike said: http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/judge-rules-rangers-can-keep-1736850 My favourite quote in that. Quote Nimmo Smith’s independent commission concluded that there had been “no question of dishonesty”, but that “non-disclosure” to the SPL and SFA of payments to players had been “deliberate”. How can you put "no dishonesty" and "deliberate" into the same sentence ffs. Rangers were asked if these side letters existed and actively took measures to keep them deliberately hidden, but there is no dishonesty in that at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 11 minutes ago, Jimboyjones1976 said: I read the article properly, but didn't read it all. 2 minutes ago, Jimboyjones1976 said: I read the whole thing I see why you get on so well with the moonhowlers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimboyjones1976 Posted July 15, 2017 Author Share Posted July 15, 2017 1 minute ago, The_Kincardine said: I see why you get on so well with the moonhowlers. I get on with everyone Kinc. It's good though to see that you've been selective with the context of my posts in order to prop up your deluded argument, just like your club. How do you do it? Sit there with scissors and glue and cut and paste shite together? Or is it, as I suspect, a natural ability to talk pish, probably because you don't read things properly and only see what you want to see? 0/10 Try again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 Just now, The_Kincardine said: I see why you get on so well with the moonhowlers. I you actually feel that Rangers were punished correctly and fairly, why don't you get as many The Rangers fans together and get Dave King to appeal the initial SPL commission ruling. The club itself can have the commission opened and re-examined with the latest Supreme court ruling. All panel & commission rulings or outcomes can be subject to appeal by the club in question. They are only final & binding if the club in question wishes not to challenge the ruling, after that then who da fuq cares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimboyjones1976 Posted July 15, 2017 Author Share Posted July 15, 2017 6 minutes ago, hellbhoy said: My favourite quote in that. How can you put "no dishonesty" and "deliberate" into the same sentence ffs. Rangers were asked if these side letters existed and actively took measures to keep them deliberately hidden, but there is no dishonesty in that at all? Simple answer HB is you can't. That's why Bent, Kinky and Nacho have no moral argument. Instead they hide behind a flawed technicality like a shitebag at school who hurls insults at others and hides behind his big brother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 Just now, Jimboyjones1976 said: Simple answer HB is you can't. That's why Bent, Kinky and Nacho have no moral argument. Instead they hide behind a flawed technicality like a shitebag at school who hurls insults at others and hides behind his big brother. It's another classic bending of the rules if you know what's going to happen then make the necessary changes before the event happens to rig an outcome after the fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wastecoatwilly Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 29 minutes ago, Ken Fitlike said: http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/judge-rules-rangers-can-keep-1736850 Fecking hell the only people that read that rag are self-servient plebs that's why it's called the daily rangers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.