Anyone fancy dissecting Alastair Johnston's statement made via RST? I started reading but stopped when I realised that they will never accept accountability no matter what. Loathsome club no matter its constitution then and now
Printable View
Anyone fancy dissecting Alastair Johnston's statement made via RST? I started reading but stopped when I realised that they will never accept accountability no matter what. Loathsome club no matter its constitution then and now
From RST
Quote:
The Rangers Supporters Trust has been in correspondence with former Rangers Chairman Alistair Johnston and he has kindly agreed that we publish a synopsis of his thoughts on a variety of salient points in order that fans can have a better appreciation of the facts.
Let me explain my personal motivation here. If in any way I can spread my sentiments, which are based on a combination of knowledge of the facts, interpretation of events, and a philosophical understanding of culpability as it relates to punishment, that in some way would cause the Tribunal that is sitting to determine the destiny of Rangers heritage to pause for thought and provide more objective consideration of the case before them, then my agenda will be to a greater extent served. I just can’t sit by on the side-lines and watch a miscarriage of justice be activated by a kangaroo court. It is not my personal objective to denigrate the football institutions of Scotland, but their actions and words go a long way to influencing public opinion as to the interpretation of the events that have taken place and how members of the public frame their own opinions as a result.
The whole process has been established to satisfy a self-serving agenda by vested interests in the SPL. The SFA, however, is the supreme governing body of Scottish football and should invoke its ultimate authority to forestall the inevitable inequity that will ensue if the capital punishment decision is left to the SPL.
The SFA is complicit in all of this because they have not at least up until now had the courage to publicly acknowledge that they either ignored or did not really understand the well-publicized structure surrounding the relationship that Rangers FC had with certain of its players.
I have been reviewing my files from around April 2011 relating to the annual routine of Rangers FC applying for and being granted a license to participate in organized football in Scotland. Because of the publicity surrounding our club at the time, the SFA wrote to us asking for more details about the public speculation concerning our financial and tax situation. The latter obviously referenced the impact of the EBT schemes as creating a potential taxation liability. The club responded accordingly and provided details, as it had done in previous years, by declaring player salaries, bonuses, benefits, etc., but also payments made to a Remuneration Trust. The SFA compliance officers must have known, both from the description and context of the reports, that such expenditures had some connection to player compensation. However, without any further investigation at the time, Rangers FC received its SFA license to compete in the 2011/2012 season. Rangers, therefore, were entitled to believe that they were not in breach of any SFA regulation requiring reporting of player compensation. If there was any question that the essence of these payments to a Remuneration Trust could have endangered the proud historical record of our team, then why was it not raised long before then.
At best, the SFA is relying on inconsistent interpretation of its own rules, and to do this retrospectively is totally at odds with underlying principles of equity in the law. A lawyer representing Celtic recently was successful in having charges against that club dropped because of the inadequacy of the SFA's prescribed rules, regulations, and sanctions. The same principle should apply here. If the SFA now decide to adopt a more focused evaluation of the data they request from its members in order to be granted a license, they should ensure that the legislation upon which they rely for enforcement and the corresponding sanctions are more transparent and predictable.
Let me also address the prevailing mood in certain quarters that seems determined to pile on to Rangers when they are vulnerable as confusion over the current structure and authority has allowed allegations and conjecture to trump reality as the institution of the club seems now to be a pawn where rhetoric, no matter how real or substantiated, prevails. Inflammatory and emotional words have been used and recited to justify this rush to judgment which I believe are fundamentally ill founded and out of proportion to the realities of the events that transpired.
First, when the previous football commission reported on EBT’s in a very high profile statement, they took the view that if Rangers was indeed guilty of structuring EBT schemes that transgressed the law or the rules of the relevant federations, then this was “close to match fixing.” This is the headline that in my opinion prompted the determination to slay Rangers with capital punishment, which in the case of our club would retrospectively alter the records of our historical achievements of which we are all so proud. “Match fixing” has connotations that correctly relate to bribery and corruption involving players and referees, fielding players that did not meet the criteria and qualifications of the governing bodies, e.g. they were over the age limit, or they were registered to another club, or they were playing while they had been banned for previous misdemeanours, etc., etc. Rangers has never been accused of or been remotely involved in any activity that would justify the terminology that whatever transgressions they might be found guilty of perpetrating was close to “match fixing.”
Secondly, and this is really important to the extent that it is a phrase that is prominent in the rhetoric of those whose objective is to crucify Rangers, and that is “financial doping.” The term as I interpret it is an attempt to relate an activity that is outlawed generally throughout the world of sport and regarded as cheating and taking undue advantage of banned stimulants and conjure up a connection with the financial mechanics of a club that has acknowledged that it in the clear light of day and very transparently embraced the use of Remuneration Trusts. Our opponents maintain, illogically, that without the use of EBT’s Rangers would have been unable to afford the quality of players that they fielded and thus gained an advantage over other clubs against which they competed. As an aside, it is interesting to recognize that there has been no complaints about Rangers fielding such players in the Champions League, the Europa League, etc., but the current accusations are being promoted not coincidentally by other members of the SPL who are now attempting to act as judge, jury and executioner against their consistently most potent rival.
The reality of the situation is that Sir David Murray, who was intimately involved in the architecture of these efforts to organize the business in a way to mitigate taxation which is totally legitimate and acceptable under all tenets of the law, would have signed and paid for these very same players whether or not EBT schemes were in effect or not. The only difference being one which only has a financial consequence, i.e. it would have increased Rangers reliance on bank debt. During most of the period under investigation by the upcoming SPL Tribunal, he as well as his company enjoyed a very mutually productive relationship with the Bank of Scotland. The Rangers Board, of which I was a member, consistently believed that if and when the debt reached a level where the bank became uncomfortable, Sir David as he did in 2004 when he underwrote a subscription for Rangers shares and thus eliminated much of the bank debt, would be able and willing to repeat this recovery effort. Whether or not he ultimately would have done so is now irrelevant, but what is clear is that “financial doping” is not and could never be construed as describing a situation where a club extends its credit facilities with a recognized financial institution. The level of the debt that a club is willing to tolerate, whether you are Celtic or Manchester United, is determined by that club in conjunction with the lender. Whether the amount involved is £10 million or £600 million is irrelevant to the principle.
On the other hand, I have to acknowledge that the malfeasance created by Craig Whyte when he manifestly used funds that did not belong to Rangers, i.e. taxes withheld from employees’ wage checks that rightfully should have been transmitted to HMRC, which avoided him having to invest his own money contrary to his expressed commitment to the Rangers stakeholders to do otherwise, and being either unwilling or unable (or both) to raise any credit to invest into Rangers, exposed our club as a victim of what could be loosely determined as “financial doping.” Thus, Whyte was able to pay the club’s operating expenses including player wages, but it was Rangers which suffered by being ultimately forced into liquidation.
Keep in mind, which is not always clear in the molasses of misinformation that is currently circulating, Rangers went into liquidation and suffered all the penalties and sanctions of which we are now aware, solely because of Mr. Whyte’s failure to pay HMRC the withholding tax that the club collected during the short term of his disgraceful proprietorship.
Finally, I would hope that the panel which has been charged with investigating Rangers' activities will draw a large circle around a universe of relevant reference points that should be considered in assessing the magnitude of the allegations made against the Club. For example, was the accepted practice of mitigating players overall tax liability utilized by several of the biggest clubs in Europe by drawing up separate contracts segregating off their image rights, which essentially denied that any compensation related thereto was a function of their obligation to play football, any different in principle than the alleged actions of Rangers FC?
And of course, the little matter of £24m of unpaid tax on the EBT payments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnston
I am not sure they have been treated differently than anyone else would have been Spike, what more could have been done on the evidence so far available? They have certainly not gotten what they wanted other than merely surviving in the SFL so I cant see where any of the outcomes reached thus far have been desirable to them.Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
The liquidators have still to look at things and the Tax tribunal is still to report back, about which HMRC may still have something to say and I would say Old Rangers have not walked away from this yet. Add in the investigation into the breach of SFA/UEFA/FIFA rules and this may still get more uncomfortable for the Hun yet.
I'll pick out this little paragraph ..Quote:
Originally Posted by moff1875
"I have been reviewing my files from around April 2011 relating to the annual routine of Rangers FC applying for and being granted a license to participate in organized football in Scotland."
So you're ignoring the 10 previous years where you were pulling the wool over everyone's eyes then ..
"Because of the publicity surrounding our club at the time, the SFA wrote to us asking for more details about the public speculation concerning our financial and tax situation."
So once the game was up ...
"The latter obviously referenced the impact of the EBT schemes as creating a potential taxation liability."
No s**t Sherlock ..
"The club responded accordingly and provided details, as it had done in previous years, by declaring player salaries, bonuses, benefits, etc."
Fair enough ..
"but also payments made to a Remuneration Trust."
Hang on .. this sounds like you hadn't previously mentioned these payments ..
"The SFA compliance officers must have known, both from the description and context of the reports, that such expenditures had some connection to player compensation."
So you are basing this assumption on the fact that an inept SFA (your words, not mine) were able to make a connection between player salaries and a previously unannounced Trust Scheme .. a bit presumptious to say the least ..
"However, without any further investigation at the time, Rangers FC received its SFA license to compete in the 2011/2012 season."
Hold on there bald eagle .. are you complaining about the SFA bending the rules for Rangers ..
"Rangers, therefore, were entitled to believe that they were not in breach of any SFA regulation requiring reporting of player compensation."
Ah, the old "I thought it was okay to do it" defence .. best of luck with that one ..
"If there was any question that the essence of these payments to a Remuneration Trust could have endangered the proud historical record of our team, then why was it not raised long before then."
Errr .. see previous response regarding the "SFA" and "bending over backwards" ..
:agree: So the downside of outright cheating is loss of the swag they acquired ? If they applied this logic to burglars there would be anarchy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiser1962
IMHO Green making such a song and dance about stripping of titles just forces the hand of the SPL. Cos, if they didn't strip them after all this, they would be seen as backing down or being influenced by the forces of darkness :confused: The Huns have signed their own warrant :greengrin
I fear the worst when they're back in the SPL or come visiting in the Cup. They're being whipped up into a right old frenzy by Green and the manky hordes will feel they have a few scores to settle. It's gonna be ugly.
Will be the same when they visit Pittodrie and Tannadice aswell id imagine :agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiberlin
That will be nothing though compared to what Glasgow will be like if they play Celtic in the cup this year. Would be absolute chaos before/after that.
"player compensation" sounds suspiciously like employee renumeration. How thick actually are these people? Compensation is not a loan by any definition.
SFA rules of registration state "All payments made to a player relating to his playing activities must be clearly recorded upon the relevant contract and/or agreement. No payment for his playing activities may be made to the player through a third party."
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevieC
Johnston is also being disingenous when he says that the payments by Huns RIP to the EBT were declared in their accounts. The issue here is not those payments, but the subsequent payments by the EBT to players and whether those payments were part of their wages for playing for Huns RIP.
With the FTT decision to be announced in October, I'd guess that the SPL enquiry conclusion and punishment will be delayed until after then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pitlochry hibee
It's going to be fun.
Rangers Tax-Case@rangerstaxcase For all the PR 'fight back' in the mainstream media from the ex-RFC establishment- Traynor, Johnston etc. the key facts remain clear...
Rangers' directors knew their implementation of EBT scheme was illegal and went to great lengths to hide how it worked from SPL & govt.
That Charles Green interview is staggering. Talks about how they were never an SPL club, and five minutes later talks about taking Rangers "back to the top".
Don't forget that they own all the titles as well.............Quote:
Originally Posted by Northernhibee
I hear there could be stripping of knight hoods and poss jail time!!
They must have thought it legal at some point or else why use it? Brown paper bags would have been safer.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
They were advised by Murray International's tax people that EBT's were a legitimate tax avoidance measure. IIRC, that advice was based on a scheme devised by..... (his name is somewhere in the dark depths of this thread)... who had had "success" with them elsewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by sahib
Tax avoidance schemes are devised all the time (see Carr, J. ). Some are legitimate, some are challenged by HMRC. Part of the reason they do spring up is that UK Tax Law is ridiculously complex; it then becomes a game between highly-paid experts on the one side, and civil servants on the other.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Is it not reasonably straightforward in that such a "loan" is a benefit in kind and should be declared as such?
All Rangers statements have admitted this, despite in the same breath also claiming that they did nothing wrong. English clubs had already settled and binned this scheme years ago. You would think that the Hun would take a hint from this.
Normally, if an employer makes a loan to an employee, there is deemed to be a benefit in kind if the interest rate is less than the "official" or market rate. The employee is taxed on the difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiser1962
However, a loan is of course repayable, which is not what happened here. It's complicated by the fact that the Trust made the loan to people who were probably not its employees.
So... to answer your question, it's not straightforward :greengrin
It would be straightforward, though, if the loanees repaid the money.......:cb
If the loan is "written off" does it not then become taxable and incumbent on the individual who recieved the "loan" to settle the tax liabilities?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
I do think that the statements of Dodds, Boumsong and now Johnson's comments that payments were "compensation" renders the discussion regarding whether the payments were legitimate EBT loans largely irrelevant. Also why did Johnson claim that the SFA were made aware for season 2011-2012 (coincidently only weeks after Murray sold to Whyte) and not ten years earlier, when they actually began using the scheme?
It appears to this poster that they have taken a very complicated and intricate tax avoidance sheme and made a total breek arse of it.
Same as the old monkey with his paw in the jar of peanuts...too greedy and stupid to let go of the loot to get his paw out and scarper before he was caught :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Kaiser1962
It would do if they were employees. That's part of the issue, though. Were they employed by the trust?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiser1962
And, your professional opinion, as expressed in your final paragraph, is right on the freaking button.....:top marks
What do you think has caused the delays in the tax case verdict?
1. every instance of "EBTising" would have to be reviewed by the Tribunal. That takes time.Quote:
Originally Posted by s.a.m
2. OldCo's tax advisers would have stopped working for them some time ago, as they wouldn't have been paid. That would delay, even stop, the dialogue that needs to happen in these situations.
Thanks for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
He references the tribunal finding their use of ebt's as close to match fixing. That's incorrect, that particular charge, iirc, was aimed at the deliberate non-payment of tax by Craig Whyte.
:agree: I don't think that the EBTs have been scrutinised by anybody "official", other than HMRC.Quote:
Originally Posted by matty_f
He goes on to sayQuote:
Originally Posted by matty_f
Quote:
Rangers went into liquidationand suffered all the penalties and sanctions of which we are now aware, solelybecause of Mr. Whyte’s failure to pay HMRC the withholding tax that the clubcollected during the short term of his disgraceful proprietorship.
so he knows full well that the tribunal (which he inaccurately claims was a 'commission') didn't consider the EBTs.
Like Green's comments his statement is full of inconsistenies and half-truths - that's the real reason why they won't appear before the tribunal, because they'd get found out.
Was'nt part of the deal struck between Green and the S F A, to get the OldCo license transferred to NewCo, that they would assist any SFA/SPL investigations, accept their findings and not challenge any sanctions in the Courts ?
It is all about playing to the gallery of demented bears who believe their Club should be untouchable ! - They are,of course, right in that respect. :greengrin
I gave up on this thread ages ago but noticed today that they've said the tax case will be done by next month. My question is, does it really matter now? If they are found guilty and owe the tax man 50 million are the newco liable for it. As far as I knew they aren't and they have already gotten away with it.
matters for a couple of reasons I think, one it will set a precedent to go after other clubs with and they may also decide to pursue the directors of the company at the time i.e. SDM.Quote:
Originally Posted by DH1875
Hopefully soon to be simply DMQuote:
Originally Posted by bighairyfaeleith
Attachment 8688
I thought that we were refering to him simply as Minty Moonbeams now? :confused:
On pt 2: the Huns were represented by a lawyer representing the Murray Group. In fact it was a condition of the deal between Whyte and Murray that all dealings with the tax tribunal would continue to be via Murray Group reps.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Paul Baxendale-Walker, a porn star lawyer *** tax adviser. Oo-er etc. ....Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Can you explain that one? I've never understood what it means!Quote:
Originally Posted by alfie
Just before he appointed Paul Le Guen, Murray gave an interview saying "a massive moonbeam of success" was coming to Rangers. That worked out well then. :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by steakbake
What I can't understand is given their impecunious circumstances is how they have managed to launch a new children's toy range?
Blue nose toys
This thread's fair dyin' eh?
Ha Ha - I thought it was called 'taxman teddy' when i first listened. :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Liberal Hibby
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Green Goblin
Quiet for now, but not for long.
:devil:
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnrebus
Orcs were clinging on to the Juninho EBT in the whatabooterry stakes , that's that cuddly toy taken off the cheating inbreds! :aok: Not long now! EBT tribunal, Nimmo... the Sally and Gween whine won't stop what's coming.
Heh heh. Yup.... ;-)Quote:
Originally Posted by johnrebus
I hate the way Swally and "The Rangers" fans keep saying they are getting punished for the EBTs. They are not they are being investigated for cheating by not disclosing the earnings from dual contracts. As far as the SPL are concerned any club could have done EBTs as long as they declared them.Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
At this time the EBT problem is with Hector and no one else.
Latest in Sevco's inexorable rise back up the ranks of Scottish football...
Five games into the season, an amateur team is currently sitting higher in the Scottish Leagues than Sevco.
:agree:
Thanks for improving an awfy good day. Wee text round the huns coming upQuote:
Originally Posted by Nailrod
Shame about Simpleton...:greengrin If I was a Div 3 window cleaner I'd be throwing hammers at them too! :aok:
http://scottishfootballmonitor.wordp...#comment-10738
Good wee post on the above link.
http://kumb.com/forum/viewtopic.php?...8488&p=3517202
Good wee read on that WHU forum tae. Hammers also must be anti-prod bigots aswell, eh Mr Green... :rolleyes:
Excellent post by a Hammer poster Wembley66. Sums it up very well, especially the Green shenanigans over the word EBT and newc/oldco when it suits them.
http://kumb.com/forum/styles/prosilv...ost_target.gifby Wembley1966 on Thu Sep 13, 2012 10:39 am
dub wrote:Cheats who perverted the course of the game in Scotland, and indeed in Europe via playing these players v every team they met in the period in question. a scandal unmatched in British football history via tax dodging on a huge scale. And now this, dual contracts stuff!! FFS???The main cheating that they have so far been found guilty of was not down to tax dodging - it was Rangers not paying income tax and VAT that had already been collected from employees and customers and not remitted to HMRC during last season. This resulted in the former owner, Craig Whyte being found guilty of bringing the game into disrepute (and fined which he hasn't paid) and Rangers prohibited from registering any players over the age of 18 for 12 months (Note that this is the ONLY punishment that Rangers has received throughout this whole fiasco, everything else is as a consequence of their own actions - 10 point deduction for going into administration, no longer eligible to play in the SPL as they announced that they are going into liquidation, ineligible to play in Europe for 3 years as they are a new company).
The potential tax dodging through the use of EBTs is still not decided - that is known as The Big Tax Case and is currently awaiting the results of Rangers appeal to the First Tier Tribunal (Tax) that concluded hearing the evidence at the beginning of this year and whose judgement is still awaited (expected sometime in the next month, but not definite). The Dual Contracts is related to the use of EBTs in that the EBT payments in order to be tax efficient and legal had to be in the form of discretionary payments (i.e. not fixed payments each month and not related to any performance criteria such as appearances, win bonuses, etc.) and that these payments were paid as a loan. No footballer, or their agents, would accept a considerable chunk of their income being discretionary and only a 'loan' so they had side letters (which were contractual) specifying the additional payments to them through the EBTs. These side letters had to be kept from HMRC and as a result they were also not disclosed to the SFA/SPL. SFA (and FIFA) rules require that all payments made to players, managers, etc must be declared to them - if they're not the player is deemed not to be properly registered.
So the dual contracts has been known about for a few years, but only after the BBC documentary in May that detailed the EBT payments and which players had side letters did the the SPL get around to investigating them. They asked all their clubs back in May to submit details of their use of EBTs and Rangers (or Duff & Phelps who were the administrators of Rangers at the time) didn't bother providing any information. It was only when they were threatened with expulsion that they provided the information. Independent lawyers then decided that there was a primae facia case for Rangers to answer and now the independent inquiry to investigate Rangers use of dual contracts will be heard in November.
This has nothing to do with the Big Tax Case decision and nothing to do with whether the EBTs were legal or not. Sevco are trying to muddy the waters and continually refer to the investigation as being about EBTs when it is not, it's about undisclosed dual contracts. You'll see comments from Sevco with all sorts of references that the use of EBTs are not illegal; that the EBTs were shown in the Company accounts and therefore the SFA knew about them and did nothing about them; that it was the old club and not us; that they won't cooperate with the investigation (how can they if it was the old club and not them) and also that Celtic paid Juninho through an EBT and why are they not being investigated (they're not, because all the documentation relating to the EBT payments was lodged with the SFA and they also paid the tax on it).
devonshire flu wrote:Sevco Franchise are going to lose their titles. Oldco directors will be going to jail.Sevco are now arguing that they 'bought' the titles (similar to the Daves' offereing Citeh a few bob to buy last season's Premier title from them so we can claim it as ours?), and cannot have any that were wonby Rangers when playing illegally registered players taken away from them - Charles Green has also said that they have never played in the SPL so any decision of the SPL cannot affect them. Well if they never played in the SPL then they are a brand new club and have no history at all.
The Oldco directors won't go to jail over dual contracts - but they might over fraud relating to the whole fiasco over the running of Rangers for the last 10 years. If the Big Tax Case goes against Rangers then HMRC and Strathclyde police will be digging deeper. Will the players be forced to repay their loans or pay the tax due if they were not loans!! Why did Graeme Souness benefit from EBT payments many years after he left Rangers whilst managing other clubs that were having transfer dealing with Rangers. Also once old Rangers are formally liquidated then BDO as liquidators will start to unravel how £100+m worth of assets were sold to Sevco for £5m (the gratuitous alienation!).
More from Alex Thomson
http://blogs.channel4.com/alex-thoms...fall-book/2681
Quote:
Rangers: Why I endorsed Downfall book
One or two Rangers supporters have been asking in recent weeks why I decided to write the foreword for Phil Mac Giolla Bhain’s book on Rangers, Downfall.
There’s been rather a lot of noise about this so let me stick to some clear facts which illustrate why I endorse the book and why it is telling that – as far as the publisher is aware – not one MSM newspaper in Scotland has reviewed the book as yet. Which is odd, since it is currently into a third print-run. It is billed as Scottish Book of the Month in WHSmith and has been high in the Amazon bestseller lists. It is also (small detail lost in ear-spitting hysteria) the truth about Rangers.
I’ve had the usual endearing tsunami of abuse from a small number of Rangers fans for endorsing a book most claim not to have read (yes, I know…) But not one single communication taking issue with the facts, substance and truth of Downfall. The book is the truth – and no Rangers fan reading it will disagree with that. This is why I endorsed it. I have never met Mr Mac Giolla Bhain. He was not the source for any of the major stories about Rangers Channel 4 News broke this year. He wishes to see Rangers FC obliterated as far as I can discern.
I wish to see Rangers in the Champions League again. Mr Mac Giolla Bhain supports Celtic. I (let me say this just one more time) don’t. He writes about Rangers’ downfall with undisguised glee and mirth. I write, saddened for their legions of loyal fans so badly sold out by the suits.
But as a journalist and an outsider to this cauldron I simply want the facts of Rangers’ implosion in the public domain and those responsible held to account. That is why I made this clear in my foreword. And made it clear I do not, could not, share the Celtic-driven motivation of Mr Mac Giolla Bhain and other notable bloggers.
However, though the author and I may be in very different places, we want the truth about what happened. So all those interested should have one simple question in mind – is the book the truth of the Rangers fiasco? That, ultimately, is all that matters. I believe it is. I also believe the bizarre adventures of Downfall en route from the printers to the bookshelves prove an important dimension of the book and of my investigations into Rangers. Namely, the way in which the MSM in Glasgow have been outflanked by the bloggers and their distaste for handling the truth the bloggers have consistently delivered. Time and again the bloggers got the story first, and they mostly got it right. With some notable exceptions, Glasgow’s MSM were left playing catch-up and even now, handed the story on a plate, bizarre things happen.
The Scottish Sun’s u-turn and refusal to serialise, having done a double-page spread promoting the author and the coming serialisation-that-never-was will long remain a baffling and scarcely explained episode. Apparently it was not worries about a boycott. Apparently it was not the result of intimidation. But didn’t The Sun publish two pages on the author being threatened by Rangers fans in their own pre-serialisation splash? Didn’t The Sun approach the publisher asking for serialisation rights and not the other way round? Curiouser and curiouser…
So a man comes along plainly telling the truth about Rangers. Nobody disputes that. The Sun un-serialises and starts apologising. No other paper publishes so much as a review. And a review of a book which charts many things and one is – guess what? Yup – the strange, historic reluctance of the MSM in Glasgow to handle the truth of what happened at Ibrox. Many thought that culture was something of the past, gone with Sir David and Craig, history. Many thought that things are different now in Glasgow. The bizarre conduct of the MSM over Downfall suggests to some that the fear, the deference, is alive and well. Others will say Scotland’s newspapers completely ignoring the inside story of the nation’s biggest-ever sporting business catastrophe and near ruination of a gigantic footballing culture, was, well, just coincidence.
Nothing to see here. No story. Move along please.
More cr@p from Fatty Traynor
Whether or not they’ve suffered enough is a debate which will still rage, mostly in the cyber domains of the deranged, but it’s nonsense to suggest they haven’t been damaged.
I take it he means people like us :rolleyes:
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/f...-years-1327563
And a reminder that Ticketus haven't entirely gone away
http://local.stv.tv/glasgow/190615-e...over-27m-deal/
Quote:
Ex-Rangers owner Craig Whyte faces court date with Ticketus over £27m dealTicketus is expected to begin court proceedings in the coming weeks against former Rangers owner Craig Whyte over a £26.7m deal he used to fund his takeover.
The ticketing firm is pursuing Mr Whyte after he used future season ticket sales to wipe out the Ibrox club’s £18m debt to Lloyds Banking Group last May. Ticketus, which is a subsidiary of Octopus Investments, is taking legal action against Mr Whyte after administrators Duff and Phelps failed to agree a company voluntary arrangement (CVA) with creditors in June. It is unclear whether Ticketus will launch the action in Scottish or English courts, while most of Mr Whyte’s business interests are linked to the British Virgin Islands-registered firm, Liberty Capital Ltd, including Rangers FC Group, the company he used to buy Sir David Murray’s 85% stake for £1. The civil action raised by the investment company is not likely to be heard until next year.
A spokesman for the firm said on Monday: "Ticketus is continuing to pursue, through the courts, the terms of the corporate and personal guarantees agreed with Craig Whyte at the time of the original contract between Ticketus and Rangers FC in May 2011." After being appointed in February, Duff and Phelps sought guidance from the Court of Session over the contract Mr Whyte had agreed with Ticketus to effectively fund his takeover of the Ibrox club. Lord Hodge found that Ticketus did not, under Scots law, own future season ticket sales at Rangers as it had claimed. He established that the company owned "personal contractual rights" to around 100,000 season ticket sales in a deal that could be breached by administrators if it was deemed to be in the interests of the creditors overall.
In May, Duff and Phelps gave Ticketus formal notification that the deal was being terminated, which was not opposed by the London firm. As a result, the company was listed as a creditor worth £26.7m in the failed CVA, which consigned the 'oldco' Rangers to liquidation under the control of neutral insolvency firm BDO. Following the failure to strike a deal with creditors, the administrators sold the Charles Green-led Sevco consortium the club's assets in a £5.5.m deal that saw them transferred to a newco.
On Monday BDO, which will be put in place on the insistence of Rangers’ largest creditor, HM Revenue and Customs, said it did not have a date for its appointment confirmed yet. In May, Ticketus announced that it had made demands for repayment from Mr Whyte and also from his wholly-owned company Liberty Capital. Rangers were plunged into administration in February owing up to £134m, including £18.3m in unpaid VAT and PAYE during Mr Whyte's nine-month reign at the club. Previously, Mr Whyte said: "The only person at risk from the deal is me personally because I gave Ticketus personal and corporate guarantees underwriting their investment; the club and the fans are fully protected. In terms of exposure, I am personally on the line for £27.5m in guarantees and cash."
:bye:
A thing not mentioned is that they (MSM) can still publish excerpts from a bigotted, wife beater ex-Rangers player without any qualms. Double standards without a doubt.
He's utterly pathetic - still protecting David Murray to this day.Quote:
Originally Posted by poolman
Tube.
Also tries to write with authority on EBTs but just seems to either have been genuinely suckered in by Green's pish, or is trying manipulate the idiots as cynically as Green is.
Yes - still seeking the succulent lamb. On the Radio Scotland phone in on Saturday evening he was also supporting another misconception - that Rangers were not in any financial trouble when Whyte took over from Murray as their debt was sustainable. They could service the debt, but that was less important than the underlying trading model which depended on being the Champions' League every season. As soon as Malmo beat them a multi-million pound loss for the season was on the way and the debt was soaring again. I think Whyte actually said he should have put them into administration the day after the Malmo defeat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevie Reid
This goes back to the reason why no smart Rangers-supporting business man wanted to hand David Murray a pound to take control of Rangers. They all knew that they would either have to find many more millions to support a loss-making club or make a level of spending cuts that would leave them as the Orcs' public enemy number 1 with all the hassle that would cause.
Traynor's article is a disgrace. Seems the Huns and their mouthpieces will spout any old incendiary nonsense to back up their argument, regardless of whether or not it's true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevie Reid
Alex Thomo's criticism of the Scottish media is spot on - they have a lot to answer for.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ballengeich
The guy is an absolute joke. At least Cosgrove is there to lend some impartial credibility, but please just get rid of Traynor BBC! You can also add the fact they knew, pre Whyte, that they had the wee tax bill to pay and the much bigger tax bill also despite the claims that their legal advice said otherwise. "Legal advice" from the same porn dude that set it up for them I'll guess. Shameless club.
Saw photo in one newspaper Today from Annan match.....
Was a knuckle-dragger with clenched fist, with union jack draped on barrier....The words painted on it were "SFA & SPL CORRUPT TO THE CORE"..
Amazing that it is everyone's fault bar their own Club....... And they wonder why they are hated throughout the Country :faf:
Had anyone seen Jim Traynor and Charles Green at the same time ?
Thought not. :cb
Continuing the 'it's never our fault them' they are putting the Templeton injury down to the plastic pitch, saying these pitches should not be used at that level. Several identical surfaces are used by Champions League clubs.
"At that level". You've got to laugh at that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim44
Correct. At their level. Wonder why the rest of the outfield players never picked up injuries caused by the pitch.Quote:
Originally Posted by green glory
Chris McLaughlin@BBCchrismclaug#SFA issue complaint against Charles Green. Charge - bringing game into disrepute by saying SPL investigation into EBT's already decided.
Chris McLaughlin@BBCchrismclaug Second Green charge - not acting in best interest of the game by calling into question the integrity of #SPL commission. #Rangers #SFA
I've done nothing wrong :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by StevieC
Someone once posted stats for teams average attendances with Rangers fixtures included and without.
Does anyone know where this is? Or even where I coud get the data from to recreate these statistics.
Thanks. :thumbsup:
So after tonight's embarrassing defeat, how long before Chuck fires Sally ?
That defeat will cost them hundreds.
HAHAHAHA loved thisQuote:
Originally Posted by matty_f
Is it really such a shock when a higher league team see off lower league opposition?
No Orcs in Ramsden! Oh they'll be no Orcs in Ramsden...
i'm confused - i hate rangers so much, but they keep on doing things that make me really, really happy. :confused:
NEVER forget what McCoist and Green did to this club!!!!!!
:faf:
I'm the googlebot, only guests see me.
Register to remove me.
NEVER forget what the Queen (of the South) did to this club.
:tee hee:
Attendance last night - 23000. Fair enough, it was the diddiest of diddy cups, but the defiance may just be starting to fade. :wink: Spiers in the Herald is openly questioning Fat Sally's position today. Meanwhile, I missed this last week, a nice summary from Roger Mitchell, former heid bummer at the SPL:
Quote:
Does Green actually buy this stuff? Let's take a look
Roger Mitchell
For someone who claimed the Scottish Premier League was a really bad idea a few weeks ago, I found myself surprised that I felt the strong urge to defend my former organisation in the face of the bombast from Charles Green.
I truly hope by the time that this is read, someone officially representing the SPL will have done likewise. I ask myself, does Green actually buy this stuff? Let's take a look:
Claim 1 Rangers ceased to be subject to the SPL's rules when they were ejected from their league.
Fact Rangers oldco was not ejected from the SPL. The fact that Rangers went into liquidation automatically expelled them from the league. The SPL shareholders then decided not to make an exception and let them back in. Two very different things.
Claim 2 The outcome of the SPL's process will have no legal effect.
Fact What the SPL are deciding upon is whether their tournament and their trophy was assigned to the correct club in the years in question.
The SPL have every right to examine whether participants in their competition behaved within the rules. And if they find they haven't, they can apply their rule book as recourse. More Green nonsense.
I do, however, agree with him that "whatever decision they reach is a decision of the SPL". Indeed. But the SPL should be proud of that, and not hide behind the Law Lords.
The SPL are examining the conduct of the participants in their competition well before Rangers went into liquidation, in particular the conduct of the club then owned by Sir David Murray, with the club secretary role (in charge of those player registrations) held by Campbell Ogilvie (whatever happened to him?). Charles Green and Sevco have nothing to do with this. Whatsoever.
Claim 3 The new owners purchased all the business and assets of Rangers, including titles and trophies.
Fact Green said on June 2012 that if his CVA proposal was to fail (which it did) and Rangers were to be liquidated (which they are), "the history, the tradition, everything that's great about this club is swept aside".
Therefore he admits he has not purchased titles and trophies. Sevco has no titles and trophies.
By the way, Charles, I would not provoke commentators like me to dig this up, because what you said is not what the Rangers fans want to hear now, as you now correctly realise. Let it lie, Charlie, let it lie.
So, even one with a leaning towards Govan would argue that, under the most superficial scrutiny, Green's attack is less than robust. But sometimes you have to chuck a dog a bone. So, to be fair, Charlie is right with his complaint on the SPL's lack of consistency,
Green states: "The SPL took part in discussions regarding the new company's league status, where 'the EBT issue' would be dealt with as part of a package of sanctions which would be implemented in return for membership.
"We do not accept that people who are willing to come to an agreement on such matters then have a right to instigate a full-blown inquisition when matters do not unfold as they thought they would."
Sadly this falls into the general shambles of the management of the affair by the SFA/SPL. I made my own view clear on the leadership of both bodies in the summer. But I cannot see how the credibility of the current process on a simple point of law over false registration of players with Employee Benefit Trusts (being handled by independent top QCs) can be derailed by claims that the prosecutor behaved incoherently months earlier.
Good debating point, Charles, but it's not enough. Instead, all of us who love the game and who hold true sporting values in our hearts have a simple question: Did Rangers oldco gain unfair advantage by registering players on a basis where their full employment conditions were not declared to the SPL/SFA?
In my mind the answer is undoubtedly 'yes'. But let's not forget the lessons of Versailles: bloodlust rebounds.
The SPL enquiry punishment doesn't arouse great passion in me. And it shouldn't either for Celtic fans. For them I'd argue the victory is in the fact that their greatest rival died.
The 125-year long struggle ended with the collapse of the adversary. The war was won. Achilles vanquished Hector.
In closing, from Mark Anthony onwards history tells us that well-crafted oratory can influence the mob.
While Charles Green is no great speaker or statesman, I must admit, he is no dummy. And there is no doubt that his audience is the mob, whose money and favour he needs in order to exit the Rangers investment project with a financial return.
Stoking up hatred has always energised "the base", another example of which we saw in the Republican convention in these days.
Well done, Charles. Initial Public Offering of shares here we come.
For Scottish football, the days of enlightenment around the Tommy Burns funeral are long gone, and I fear the worst.
Was thinking the exact same last night? :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Capt Mainwaring
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
"I've spent years at Ibrox on such midweeks covering big European ties against Manchester United, Barcelona, Valencia and Inter Milan.
But not this: a grim Rangers struggle against Queen of the South which ended 2-2 after 90 minutes and a 4-3 win on penalties for the visitors, leaving mutterings again about the ability of Ally McCoist as Rangers manager.
These are times of severe humble pie at Rangers – causing great mirth for some and pain for others – and there is plenty more of it to come over the next three years.
But this game caused some to ask once more: can McCoist prevail as manager?
McCoist is adored at Ibrox, and has been a sheet-anchor in this self-inflicted fiasco at Rangers, but even he cannot remain immune from the critics you hear around this club.
On this night one voice from the main stand shouted down: “Ally, yer coat’s on a shaky nail, son!”
With Rangers stumbling in their new environment, and failing to beat such teams as Peterhead, Berwick Rangers, Annan Athletic and Queen of the South, a fresh focus has been brought to bear on McCoist’s ability.
There are many things in his favour but, right now, statistics cannot be cited among them.
McCoist’s record as Rangers manager in competitive games now reads: Played 55, Won 33, Drawn 10, Lost 12.
The Rangers boss is one of the most popular figures in the history of the club but some fans are not overly enamoured at these statistics, especially as they include 10 recent matches among the lower divisions.
Indeed, since losing to Kilmarnock in the SPL at Ibrox in February, the record of McCoist and Rangers reads: Played 22, Won 13, Drawn 4, Lost 5.
How good is all this? Not good enough for Rangers, and McCoist knows it. Having already witnessed his team being ditched from four cup competitions over 14 months – the Champions League and Europa League qualifiers, the League Cup and the Scottish Cup – McCoist’s players have shown a fragility which has continued, even now in the Ramsdens Cup.
Against Queen of the South that brittleness was evident to all. The visitors looked superior to McCoist’s team for an hour, and, even having gone 2-1 behind, they hounded and harassed Rangers and caused the home fans to become flustered at 2-2.
This was another bad moment for McCoist. For some reason Rangers, even with their batch of SPL players, are toiling in the lower regions of Scottish football. At the very least it must gnaw at the Ibrox manager.
It is absurd just now to think of Charles Green removing McCoist, just as it seems inconceivable that at some stage Rangers will not advance to the top of the Third Division and win it in comfort.
But just imagine if this laboured football continues….what then? McCoist has been central to Green’s rejuvenation at Rangers, in converting the fans’ hearts and minds to the Yorkshireman, but the manager cannot be viewed as immovable.
Green needs Rangers to be a success if he is to make money – his stated aim – from his Ibrox intervention. For that to happen, a successful Rangers manager will be the key. In this context, McCoist somehow needs to hoist himself and his team away from these months of on-field stumbling.
On the plus side, the Rangers support seem to be grinning and bearing all this through gritted teeth. The truth is, being out of Europe for four years and ploughing through the Third Division is the last place any of them want to be, yet the club’s faithful are doggedly sticking at it.
The attendance against Queen of the South was 23,932: not stellar, but it was the Ramsdens Cup. And Champions League football involving Manchester City and Real Madrid was live on television.
Not so long ago these illustrious teams might have been here at Ibrox on the European stage. But a scandal has robbed Rangers of such status and prestige.
McCoist hopes to be the man to lead Rangers back to the summit in three years’ time. Right now, though, that looks anything but certain."
Well well well...
Dumped out the SPL. Nae history. Nae trophies. Nae decent players. Nae future. Nae mair Ramsdens Cup. Fourth in the THIRD division behind the mighty Elgin and Peterheid no less.
Scrounging about for points.
Even less people like them, universally.
And they are more skint than ever before.
Such a huge ****ing shame.
Carlsberg dont make monumental **** ups and falls from grace but if they did.......:na na:
And finally...
NAE ****ING JOY ! :na na::na na::na na:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :na na:
ENDOF
Major LOL!! The mighty Montrose visit Castle Greyskull at the weekend I wonder if Der Hun will manage to scrape a point!
:lolrangers:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bad Martini
:top marks
Allow me to be next to stick the boot in.
:lolrangers:
:top marksQuote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
Rangers are to reinstated into the Ramsdens Cup following news that QOTS players have dual contracts!!!! One is a brickie, one is a butcher and one is a lollipop man...........boom boom!
:lolrangers:
Two things:
1. Please can it be changed to 'The Rangers FC 2012' in the thread title?
2. For some laughs, here is the match thread from the game last night: http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/inde...owtopic=238411
:lolrangers: :nanafunk:
can i just remember all you's in the east that Radio Clyde still have a football phone in at 6 each week day evening :greengrin
:top marksQuote:
Originally Posted by AberGreen
Plenty of laughter threads from the orcs on here as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Salt & Sauzee
http://www.pieandbovril.com/forum/in...rs-in-the-sfl/
:greengrin
The best thing about reading the match thread is the amount of their fans who are saying 'FFS the crowd is awful, I might just switch to Real vs Man City' and their location is Glasgow or the surrounding area haha. They don't do walking away because none of them have to walk back to their house because they're already there.Quote:
Originally Posted by wee_hibee
Yes but Rangers have at least one part-time painter and decorator on the staff.Quote:
Originally Posted by AberGreen
Cue the Rolling Stones: "Paint it Black".
So why do I still see you then? :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by frazeHFC
This is just terrific.
Do you love it?
That match thread was amazing. From misplaced dickish arrogance to despair all captured in writing. Brilliant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Salt & Sauzee
''sally maccoist has been chosen to boost the town's struggling team''
life imitating art at hunbrox now
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97ax8T7RPMs
although mercifully in real life sally does'nt get the holywood ending
:lolrangers:
:giruy:
I have it on good authority that Rangers have been in high level meetings all of today and tonight and managed to get QOS thrown out and themselves reinstated in Ramsdens cup. There has been a leaked photo from this meeting
Evidence
Carlsberg have you been on the carlsberg??Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlsberg
I know. I heard an army of Rangers fans marching down my street chanting "God bless dirty cheats".Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlsberg
I'll get ma coat. :hide:
An update courtesy of DG on hibs-list
Sky Sports breaking news The Rangers are to be reinstated into the Ramsden Cup following an investigation into Queen of the South players having duel contracts, one was found to be a brickie another one a plasterer and one a lolliepop man
McCoist has been in touch with Kate Middleton's lawyers. Apparently he doesn't want his tits seen again in public either.
:greengrin