Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by davy malcolm

Douglas park

Sent from my LG-H815 using Tapatalk

---

In view of the new club/old club debate, that'll be New Douglas Park.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hibee87

That's interesting, I googled that Charlotte fakes and first thing was a daily record article saying this account leaked tapes and documents a year or 2 back which is being used as evidence in some cases against rangers.

If it's the same Twitter account they may actually have the name

---

IIRC, Charlotte Fakes is due in Court himself soon.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

Whatever way you slice it we've won it at least once:

Hibs - club formed 1875, <win cup>, disbanded 1891, reformed 1892, <win cup>, incorporated 1905, continues to present

So the legal entity from 1892 to present is the same and has 1 cup win in that period. Whether you view the 1892 Hibs as the same as the 1875-1891 Hibs is murky but there isn't a definite end as per a liquidation.

cf the Huns - club formed 1873 (or some claim 1872), incorporated 1899, consigned to liquidation 2012

---

I'm not sure Hibs were "disbanded" in 1891 (that would also imply a "definite end"), but they couldn't have been liquidated as they weren't a company then. I think the term "legal entity" itself is murky (to me anyway!), but Hibs were essentially a Church team in the early days, so perhaps they were an "entity" which later became a "legal entity".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

I agree.

I've ditched the Tax Return. This is great entertainment.

Is it due to be decided today?

---

Hope you didn't forget to go to the O2 tonight. Good gig and I am wondering where the dhol drummer got those shoes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

IIRC, Charlotte Fakes is due in Court himself soon.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

---

'The' CharlotteFakes account is suspended. This account in use now seems to use a capital 'i' for the l. Time will no doubt tell if it is a phoenix or a dud.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

In view of the new club/old club debate, that'll be New Douglas Park.

---

That's the one... :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by magpie1892

No, not at all. Try editing a newspaper or magazine in the Middle East - copy gets changed by the owners on a regular basis and in my extensive experience, editorial resignations do not follow as a matter of course. I've never seen it happen, and I've been about.

Here in Scotland, when I was working at the Scotsman, then editor Iain Martin had a piece pulled by the editorial director. Martin was furious, but he didn't walk and he didn't endorse the decision.

'The fact that the editor has not resigned indicates he endorses the apology' is a total non sequitur, certainly in the 18 years I've been involved in journalism in about ten markets on three continents.

---

If Martin didn't walk in your example then, de facto, he endorsed the decision.
He's the editor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Golden Fleece

Hope you didn't forget to go to the O2 tonight. Good gig and I am wondering where the dhol drummer got those shoes.

---

Was barry, eh? :-)


Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prof. ****gy

If Martin didn't walk in your example then, de facto, he endorsed the decision.
He's the editor.

---

Like I say, your argument simply doesn't follow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bishop Hibee

The Herald and Sunday Herald newspaper are worse than The Sun or the Record. The latter do not pretend to be serious newspapers. Total disgrace to drop Spiers and Haggerty due to bluenose pressure.

---

"Subscription cancelled
Your subscription has been cancelled. You will continue to have access until Wednesday 24th February 2016."

no longer a Herald subscriber

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by magpie1892

Like I say, your argument simply doesn't follow.

---

I think he's harking back to the days of 100% employment and personal integrity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geo_1875

I think he's harking back to the days of 100% employment and personal integrity.

---

That's a reasonable point. The editor of The Herald is already overseeing a paper which, like The Scotsman, is dying on its arse. He gets a call from upstairs on an editorial point, complies with it and doesn't walk? That somehow means he 'endorses' the decision? Today, it's a non-argument. Fantasy stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by magpie1892

That's a reasonable point. The editor of The Herald is already overseeing a paper which, like The Scotsman, is dying on its arse. He gets a call from upstairs on an editorial point, complies with it and doesn't walk? That somehow means he 'endorses' the decision? Today, it's a non-argument. Fantasy stuff.

---

Depends how strictly you look to define 'endorse'. Wider meaning is just perhaps putting your name to something (eg endorsing a cheque) which the editor has effectively done by allowing the apology to be published while staying in post.

I would argue Thommo did much the same when he continued to allow nonsense to appear under his name while taking cash from the Direly Rancid. At least Thommo had his poor mum to think about, in mitigation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geo_1875

I think he's harking back to the days of 100% employment and personal integrity.

---

I'm thinking back to the days of not having it both ways.
Integrity is a matter of what someone does when there's a conflict between personal principles and corporate decisions. Integrity is a matter for an editor.

I once had a long, and quite fierce exchange of views with Magnus Linklater, when he was Scotsman Editor. He made it quite clear that he took responsibility for what was printed in his paper - no matter how disingenuous that was. I don't know what has changed.

If Llewelin disagrees with the publication of the apology whether he resigns or not is a matter of integrity. That's up to him. It doesn't change the fact that he is responsible for the publication of the apology because he is the editor of the newspaper. He cannot remain as editor and claim the apology is nothing to do with him.

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/2016...e059f62574.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good article here, including Spiers' original message.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/hullo-h...he-bully-boys/

It also includes an example of just how tiny that tiny minority is. [Warning: video may contain traces of Fenian blood.]
https://youtu.be/dBTsCP9zLm4


Perhaps the parties involved with The Rangers International Football Club should asked to provide the court with their definition of "tiny minority"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by O'Rourke3

What are the odds it's Park. Why would you risk a business reputation and try and blackmail a paper into a retraction for a friend? Pretty sure they get no business from the Celtic minded but there will be many others where they do, this is the type of move Ratner made......

---

...yes,that's what i heard last night

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prof. ****gy

I once had a long, and quite fierce exchange of views with Magnus Linklater, when he was Scotsman Editor. He made it quite clear that he took responsibility for what was printed in his paper - no matter how disingenuous that was. I don't know what has changed.

---

A very great deal has changed, especially in Scotland. You must know this.

I don't wholly reject the point you're trying to make, I'm saying it's completely anachronistic and fantastic when the current state of print media and levels (or lack of therein) of employment in journalism, especially in Scotland, are examined.

The argument you present almost comes across as a little quaint - it's at least 20 years out of date, especially when you mention Magnus Linklater (whose tenure as editor of TS ended 22 years ago); I went to school with one of his sons (not the mental one)...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/2016...e059f62574.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

...which, IMO, backs up the argument that the "club" continues. If it's an idea that exists in the mind of its supporters, that idea still exists, no matter the legal status of the company that operates it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim Herriot

Good article here, including Spiers' original message.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/hullo-h...he-bully-boys/

It also includes an example of just how tiny that tiny minority is. [Warning: video may contain traces of Fenian blood.]
https://youtu.be/dBTsCP9zLm4


Perhaps the parties involved with The Rangers International Football Club should asked to provide the court with their definition of "tiny minority"?

---

The tiny minority was so small, I couldn't see it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

...which, IMO, backs up the argument that the "club" continues. If it's a concept that exists in the mind of its supporters, that concept still exists, no matter the legal status of the company that operates it.

---

I actually don't care much about the old club new club stuff but it annoys them so much I'll never stop using the word Sevco. [emoji23]
What I do care about is the stripping of the titles for cheating. Until that happens there will never be peace for the SFA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by magpie1892

No, not at all. Try editing a newspaper or magazine in the Middle East - copy gets changed by the owners on a regular basis and in my extensive experience, editorial resignations do not follow as a matter of course. I've never seen it happen, and I've been about.

Here in Scotland, when I was working at the Scotsman, then editor Iain Martin had a piece pulled by the editorial director. Martin was furious, but he didn't walk and he didn't endorse the decision.

'The fact that the editor has not resigned indicates he endorses the apology' is a total non sequitur, certainly in the 18 years I've been involved in journalism in about ten markets on three continents.

---

To be fair, in the Middle East, it's not just common for journalists and editors to resign over such things, but they tend to leave the region. Although it's more common for them to be sacked before it gets to that stage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cilla Black

To be fair, in the Middle East, it's not just common for journalists and editors to resign over such things, but they tend to leave the region. Although it's more common for them to be sacked before it gets to that stage.

---

I was sacked by ITP in Dubai and had a new, vastly superior job within four days - at double my ITP salary.

That's not really relevant to the central point though - an editor not resigning over editorial influence from above does not represent 'endorsement'. Not in the Middle East, and especially not in Scotland.

Caught Off the Ball on the radio on the way home - Cosgrove was talking about the Huns latest O Halloran bid - saying how derisory the offer was, was based on not only being paid in installments but also if the Huns qualified for the Champions League!! Hunbelievable.

Let's keep this in the spotlight.


http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2016/01...ilure-exposed/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by portycabbage

I'm not sure Hibs were "disbanded" in 1891 (that would also imply a "definite end"), but they couldn't have been liquidated as they weren't a company then. I think the term "legal entity" itself is murky (to me anyway!), but Hibs were essentially a Church team in the early days, so perhaps they were an "entity" which later became a "legal entity".

---

There wasn't any thought of Hibs being disbanded back then. Hibs ran into trouble with the lease of ER, which led to the purchase of the land where the ground is now. At the same time the CYMS suspended "all sporting activity" due to political views held by it's members. As soon as that and the issue of where to play Hibs were "resuscitated" (the word used in the letters to various club members.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Benny Brazil

Caught Off the Ball on the radio on the way home - Cosgrove was talking about the Huns latest O Halloran bid - saying how derisory the offer was, was based on not only being paid in installments but also if the Huns qualified for the Champions League!! Hunbelievable.

---

Is it any wonder them and that lot over at the PBS are known as 'Brothers' ?? Over on 'Fudback', one of them's posted a fanciful idea to ensure they win the league ??. Can't be bothered going into details but it involves 10,000 of them paying £150 EACH so they can get a decent enough squad that will do it - simple, eh .......................

STILL the fanciful ideas, STILL the huge amounts of money and STILL 'Reality' avoids them - yup, there's absolutely NO DIFFERENCE between both !!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Deansy

Is it any wonder them and that lot over at the PBS are known as 'Brothers' ?? Over on 'Fudback', one of them's posted a fanciful idea to ensure they win the league ??. Can't be bothered going into details but it involves 10,000 of them paying £150 EACH so they can get a decent enough squad that will do it - simple, eh .......................

STILL the fanciful ideas, STILL the huge amounts of money and STILL 'Reality' avoids them - yup, there's absolutely NO DIFFERENCE between both !!

---

Try suggesting the 10,000 Fudbackers should each pay £ 10,000 each and payback the £ 100 million or so Vlad blew on them.

O'Halloran now expected to sign. Good signing, but our defence coped with him no bother at all at the weekend.

Think the Yams should definitely bankrupt themselves to give Levein what he wants.

After all, if the year ends in a 6, the Double is on!