hellbhoy Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 I think the SFA are going to maybe possibly have a second hearing with the very same outcome. 1, The EBT payments to the players will still be seen as legal loans to the players from the EBT scheme, this is the key point here. At no point in any judgement has the loans ever been declared as any other than a loan. 2, The club, Rangers FC PLC have only been charged with tax avoidance from the HMRC's Supreme Court decision. This has f**k all to do with players registrations. 3, The SPL commission gave the company and not the club the highest punitive measure within the rigged rulebooks it could possibly give for not declaring the second contract/side letter. 4, Conclusion!, won't matter one f**k if this is reinvestigated because the sum of nothing has changed since 2012 other than Rangers FC PLC est1872/3 have been found guilty of tax avoidance. So brace yourselves people, and be prepared to be fucked over again thinking they will be found guilty of a bigger breach or breaking of association rules. Sad but true I fear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 2 hours ago, Jim McLean's Ghost said: For people pro title stripping. Should Hearts have their 2006 and 2012 Scottish Cups stripped? They won those trophies on the back of unsustainable debts of over £25m that the club was unable to pay back. Does that level of debt not amount to the same financial doping that happened with Rangers? No. If this was actually about the complete and utter red herring that is 'financial doping' then a case for punishing Hearts would exist. It's not though. It's about deliberately providing deceitful information when registering dozens of players over several years. I can't believe quite how many people don't seem to get this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 24 minutes ago, hellbhoy said: I think the SFA are going to maybe possibly have a second hearing with the very same outcome. 1, The EBT payments to the players will still be seen as legal loans to the players from the EBT scheme, this is the key point here. At no point in any judgement has the loans ever been declared as any other than a loan. 2, The club, Rangers FC PLC have only been charged with tax avoidance from the HMRC's Supreme Court decision. This has f**k all to do with players registrations. 3, The SPL commission gave the company and not the club the highest punitive measure within the rigged rulebooks it could possibly give for not declaring the second contract/side letter. 4, Conclusion!, won't matter one f**k if this is reinvestigated because the sum of nothing has changed since 2012 other than Rangers FC PLC est1872/3 have been found guilty of tax avoidance. So brace yourselves people, and be prepared to be fucked over again thinking they will be found guilty of a bigger breach or breaking of association rules. Sad but true I fear. "Charged with tax avoidance" Rangers weren't charged with anything you maniac. The SPl made the commission binding, do you understand the word binding? "Found guilty of tax avoidance" you're really something else... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Grass Is Greener. Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 Just now, bennett said: "Charged with tax avoidance" Rangers weren't charged with anything you maniac. The SPl made the commission binding, do you understand the word binding? "Found guilty of tax avoidance" you're really something else... Something else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever_blueco Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 15 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: No. If this was actually about the complete and utter red herring that is 'financial doping' then a case for punishing Hearts would exist. It's not though. It's about deliberately providing deceitful information when registering dozens of players over several years. I can't believe quite how many people don't seem to get this. You seem to also forget that we have already been punished for this . We were fined . Also did the Nimmo smith verdict not pre date the first tax case result ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 32 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: It's the fact that Rangers players weren't properly registered. Brother Nimmo Smith and learned council investigated this thoroughly and disagree with you. Our players were all properly registered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Grass Is Greener. Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 They're all here, this'll be good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever_blueco Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 33 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: It's the fact that Rangers players weren't properly registered. That didn't happen at the other clubs. Do you honestly not even know what this is about? I don't think the majority on the strip the titles side have a scooby what this is about . For some it's the tax avoidance they want punished , for some it's improper registration , for some its spending outwith our means . There seems to be no common consensus on what the f**k you are all wanting to punish . The only thing that's coming across is a huge amount of frothing and excitement at the thought of punishing rangers for something , no matter what it actually is . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 1 minute ago, The_Kincardine said: Brother Nimmo Smith and learned council investigated this thoroughly and disagree with you. Our players were all properly registered. Well it obviously wasn't Glasgow City... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 4 minutes ago, The Grass Is Greener. said: Something else? A common enough saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 Just now, Bairnardo said: The arrogance of the "Celtics titles are tainted because Rangers wurny there" is actually astounding. The truly astounding thing is that you don't realise it's tongue-in-cheek, bud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 1 minute ago, Forever_blueco said: You seem to also forget that we have already been punished for this . We were fined . Also did the Nimmo smith verdict not pre date the first tax case result ? Of course I haven't forgotten it. However, I consider the penalty wildly inadequate. I base this on how genuine, minor errors in player registration have traditionally been treated. LNS ruled at a time when the decision lay in Rangers' favour. Apparently, he was able to act on the basis of how it stood then, acknowledge that it might change, but dismiss that as having an impact. I know - that really does sound incredibly unjust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever_blueco Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 Just now, Monkey Tennis said: Of course I haven't forgotten it. However, I consider the penalty wildly inadequate. I base this on how genuine, minor errors in player registration have traditionally been treated. LNS ruled at a time when the decision lay in Rangers' favour. Apparently, he was able to act on the basis of how it stood then, acknowledge that it might change, but dismiss that as having an impact. I know - that really does sound incredibly unjust. What was the date of LNS enquiry and the first tax case ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 1 minute ago, Forever_blueco said: I don't think the majority on the strip the titles side have a scooby what this is about . For some it's the tax avoidance they want punished , for some it's improper registration , for some its spending outwith our means . There seems to be no common consensus on what the f**k you are all wanting to punish . The only thing that's coming across is a huge amount of frothing and excitement at the thought of punishing rangers for something , no matter what it actually is . Indeed. I particularly love the 'financial doping' 'Lance Armstrong' moon howlers. They actually believe that to be an offence. They are convinced in their empty-headed, pyoor offended way that there's an exact analogy here. Complete muppets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Grass Is Greener. Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 You know you're doing something right when Kinky is reduced to calling everyone and everything by a cute nickname. Keep it up, lads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 8 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said: Brother Nimmo Smith and learned council investigated this thoroughly and disagree with you. Our players were all properly registered. That's not true. The registration was not proper, hence the huge fine. However, the players were deemed eligible, on the dubious premise that they couldn't be retrospectively found not to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever_blueco Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 2 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said: Indeed. I particularly love the 'financial doping' 'Lance Armstrong' moon howlers. They actually believe that to be an offence. They are convinced in their empty-headed, pyoor offended way that there's an exact analogy here. Complete muppets. Only Celtic can be what looks like a cantering towards however many in a row and still in a rage over Rangers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 3 minutes ago, Forever_blueco said: What was the date of LNS enquiry and the first tax case ? The FTT predated LNS but that's an irrelevance. That an appeal could be won by HMRC was factored in to the enquiry. More significantly, said enquiry found us guilty on a couple of points and levied an appropriate fine. However, the MHs still want it reopened? Why? So they can find us guiltier? I've asked this a few times and haven't had a satisfactory response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 8 minutes ago, Forever_blueco said: I don't think the majority on the strip the titles side have a scooby what this is about . For some it's the tax avoidance they want punished , for some it's improper registration , for some its spending outwith our means . There seems to be no common consensus on what the f**k you are all wanting to punish . The only thing that's coming across is a huge amount of frothing and excitement at the thought of punishing rangers for something , no matter what it actually is . I'm very clear on what the grounds are. It's all about player registration. I agree that there's a lot of confusing nonsense surrounding this though. The lack of clarity is frustrating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever_blueco Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 Just now, Monkey Tennis said: I'm very clear on what the grounds are. It's all about player registration. I agree that there's a lot of confusing nonsense surrounding this though. The lack of clarity is frustrating. So you want us punished for something we have already been punished for with all circumstances taken into account ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.