Does it signal a thawing in relations between The Rangers and the other Scottish clubs that Paul Hanlon is allowing O'Halloran to climb out of his back pocket to go to Ibrox and sign for the Gers?Quote:
Originally Posted by GlesgaeHibby
Printable View
Does it signal a thawing in relations between The Rangers and the other Scottish clubs that Paul Hanlon is allowing O'Halloran to climb out of his back pocket to go to Ibrox and sign for the Gers?Quote:
Originally Posted by GlesgaeHibby
http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/current...0-ff0000d74aa7
The Sevco Six back in High Court in Edinburgh tomorrow. Preliminary hearing only but might find out if there is a squealer amongest them.
This is the bit that really sticks in my throat with them. Two years on from their owners stealing ordinary people's savings, putting local businesses under financial strain, "borrowing" from charities all to pay players to win football matches. Despite this they do not show any shame, embarrassment or even one iota of contrition. They just get back on the "big team" bandwagon.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
They really are disgusting and the media love in with them is shameful at best. can you imagine the outcry if we or the other team from the "wrong side" of the church did this?
Pathetic comment to suggest that there are sectarian reasons behind this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max
How else do u explain the media giving them pats on the back despite what they did and we get sneared and laughed at?Quote:
Originally Posted by ACLeith
I would like to know your answer, but please don't make it a pathetic one.
"Exists only in the mind" is not exactly great support for a clubs continuing existence! And how does a company "operate" something that is only an idea in the minds of fans? In my mind, Third Lanark have just bought Messi and Ronaldo, so it must be true that they're the Champions League winners!Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
You ask imagine the outcry if it was us (taking out the pathetic sectarian reference)? It would be the same as the outcry over Third Lanark, Livi, Airdrie, Motherwell or Dundee (twice) - ie none. Sports journos just aren't interested (or perhaps capable of dealing with) the intracacies of the financial fall out of football clubs going to the wall. It's seen through the frame of sporting success and failure and the impact on the fans who rally round to save the club they love. Just like the Hands Off Hibs campaign was.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max
As AC said - it is pathetic to see this as a sectarian issue.
It ties in with my argument that a football club, unlike most businesses, is an emotional construct. None of us support Hibs for anything other than emotional reasons. To us, and most football fans, the notion of "the club" is not the stands, the balance sheet, the Board or even the current team. It's an indefinable thing which exists, as has been said, "in the mind".Quote:
Originally Posted by portycabbage
I'll say it again. Had the Rangers story happened to us, I'm sure that we would have been claiming that we were the same club.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
There are many different groups who have behaved appallingly over their demise; Edinburgh Council over Council Tax (and safety certificate), Heriot Watt over unpaid fees and yes the media - not just EEN, but national as well - who I agree, gloss over their actions. Their sympathy may be partly to do with a dodgy foreigner coming in and damaging/destroying one of our biggest clubs (let's face it they are, just like us), maybe partly they are regarded as an "Establishment" team. Not because they are a so-called "Proddy" team, as you imply.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max
The anti-Hibs bias in the media is more to do with seeing one of the traditional "big 4" teams in the country get into difficulty, playing-wise. And maybe also that we took a great delight (me included!) in seeing them obviously going down 2 years ago due to malpractice and then finding it happened to us for football reasons. We have started to change media comments though due to how we have performed this season, it will take a while longer with some in the media (RG).
Every fan I know, of whatever team and that includes Hearts - wants to get rid of sectarian filth from our game, trying to dredge up more of it with regard to a non-sectarian club and support like ours is wrong in so many ways.
:agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberal Hibby
Hearts have marketed their revival very well, and the media have covered it uncritically. It's an easy story; likewise our implosion. Laziness and lack of interest rather than prejudice.
Got to agree. The whole Rangers saga absolutely stinks and I hate the bigoted hate spewed by a large portion of their support. They will always be my least favourite club in Scotland. But to try to pretend that they don't exist is rather childish (quite funny sometimes) but childish none the less.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
[QUOTE=Liberal Hibby;4570101]You ask imagine the outcry if it was us (taking out the pathetic sectarian reference)? It would be the same as the outcry over Third Lanark, Livi, Airdrie, Motherwell or Dundee (twice) - ie none. Sports journos just aren't interested (or perhaps capable of dealing with) the intracacies of the financial fall out of football clubs going to the wall. It's seen through the frame of sporting success and failure and the impact on the fans who rally round to save the club they love. Just like the Hands Off Hibs campaign was.
As AC said - it is pathetic to see this as a sectarian issue.[/QUOTE
That's right just accept it as shoddy journos.
Just keep your ears open on Sunday to the songs being sung, then listen for the deafening silence from the media about it. No religious issues at all in Scotland or the media....aye right.
Until people start properly challenging this and ignore the liberal (I believe what I am fed) silent majority, then it will go on for ever. It's only been going on for 100s of years after all.
A lot of the media delight in our demise is to do with Petrie and his poor public relations. He treats them like dirt so it's hardly surprising that they laughed as we tumbled.Quote:
Originally Posted by ACLeith
Leeann has improved relations with the press but there is a way to go.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Campbell Ogilvie and David Self-sufficient Southern are not dodgy foreigners. Well I know for a fact they're not foreigners. They got an easy time in the media while everybody else could see what was happening. No media outlet cried foul when self-sufficiency became insolvency the day after the season finished and Dundee were relegated in place of them. They get an easy ride for some reason and I know what I think it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by ACLeith
Hearts went into administration almost a month after the season ended, not the day after.Quote:
Originally Posted by Geo_1875
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
Officially into admin. They stopped paying everybody the day after the league was completed.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Yes but wasn't that the cut-off date after which they could avoid relegation.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
I totally get the argument that, emotionally, The Rangers is a continuation of all that has gone before.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Doesn't change the fact that, legally and financially, they were created in 2012. That is why their shrieks about punishment and demotion are unfounded.
No-one's denying there aren't issues about religious sectarianism in Scotland - but it is a mighty leap to go from that to say Hearts are being protected by a compliant media because they're a protestant institution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max
:top marksQuote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Well we would have been wrong. Our attachment to the club might be sentimental/emotional but a football club is still a real tangible entity, either as a sports club for members (as they almost all started out) or incorporated as a limited company. If they have incorporated and are liquidated, as per Third Lanark or the old Airdrie, they cease to be. Nobody questioned that or came up with any alternative way of looking at it until the SFA and SPFL were staring down the barrel of what they perceived as a short term black hole in their finances due to losing Rangers and with them, the Old Firm cash cow.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
In the real world, the old Rangers is dead and the new Rangers is a new club, whatever fictional fudge the SFA/SPFL come up with.
Today's Sevco Six hearing postponed until tomorrow.
https://johnjamessite.wordpress.com/
Thats's why I'm with CWG on this.Quote:
Originally Posted by jacomoseven
Legally and financially Hibs were created on 11 April 1903.
We were still a professional football club for ten years before that and an amateur church club from 1875 to 1891.
Hearts went bust in 1905 and were bought over by a New Company and re-registered.
Wrong. The members' club, Hibernian, was incorporated as a limited company. It is the same financial and legal entity.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyM_1875
Edit: hmmm, you're more right than I thought, actually (apols). Here is an explanation:
http://www.morton-fraser.com/knowled...ciations-facts
If we were a professional club before 1903, then we would have had legal personality, as unincorporated associations can't employ staff. There's nothing to stop amateur clubs becoming professional ones, but when something becomes a business, then it can go out of business.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyM_1875
Don't know what the law was back then, but unincorporated associations can employ staff. Virtually anyone, or any body, can be an employer.Quote:
Originally Posted by portycabbage
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyM_1875
If we were an unincorporated association prior to 1903 we could not have gone out of business as we were not a " business ".
Just because we stopped playing football for a few months the unincorporated association continued as long as some of those who acted as the association remained active.
It was the same association that became incorporated in 1903.
Between 1893 and April 1903 we were most certainly both a professional football club which paid players and staff and a business.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Prior to 1893 we were an amateur club that didn't pay players (cough!:greengrin)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyM_1875
But if we were unincorporated it must have been the committee members as individuals who paid the players.
Like I say, an unincorporated organisation can be an employer.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
What the law was back then, though.... no idea. Ask JonnyBoy. :greengrin