Rangers FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2012/2013

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Are you blind ?

IT DOESN'T WORK LIKE THAT.

You don't say 'Aye, we want this or that'.
Rangers applied for the SFL and then shut up about it (something you could learn from) and left it to the SFL.

The fact you're still trying to blame Rangers for the failings of the SPL is a joke, the fact they are depending on Sky money to pay their clubs and the SFL is either a joke, or a disgrace.

Did Charles Green not offer to agree to terms set out by the SFA/SPL in exchange for SPL/Div1 place before the SPL vote? He did but he lost the vote

The SPL pay their clubs based on what they receive from sponsors and broadcasters, all of which has been delayed because of sorting out the mess Rangers were in. Whats 4% of 0?

premierstone

Dempsey, let it go man, why bother they are just a Division 3 team of no significance, it would be like going and posting regularly in the Peterhead or the Montrose thread, why bother??

Besides you might as well be talking to the wall, there is none as blind as those who can not see!!

Jelle1880

premierstone wrote: »

Dempsey, let it go man, why bother they are just a Division 3 team of no significance, it would be like going and posting regularly in the Peterhead or the Montrose thread, why bother??

Besides you might as well be talking to the wall, there is none as blind as those who can not see!!

Says the man who comes into a 'non-significant' team's thread to say how non-significant we are

But I agree, we don't need Celtic fans to show their obsessive behaviour in our thread.

blahfckingblah

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Says the man who comes into a 'non-significant' team's thread to say how non-significant we are

But I agree, we don't need Celtic fans to show their obsessive behaviour in our thread.

*sigh* yes division 3 football is our obsession. I even have a fixtures calender on the wall in my room. i tip balamory fc to win the league.

Nah some of us just have the thread subscribed after posting in it and get notifications of new posts. Hibs thread is the same

Jelle1880

Chill out, it was a joke.

Eirebear

Unsubscribe.
We're insignificant after all.

blahfckingblah

Eirebear wrote: »

Unsubscribe.
We're insignificant after all.

the old rangers were less tetchy

Jelle1880

blahfckingblah wrote: »

the old rangers were less tetchy

What old Rangers ?

Pompey Magnus

Jelle1880 wrote: »

blahfckingblah wrote: »

the old rangers were less tetchy

What old Rangers ?

The one whose website was permitted to show archived footage of old Rangers games, games which The Rangers are not allowed show.

bobmalooka

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

Jelle1880 wrote: »

blahfckingblah wrote: »

the old rangers were less tetchy

What old Rangers ?

The one whose website was permitted to show archived footage of old Rangers games, games which The Rangers are not allowed show.

Ouch

Jelle1880

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

The one whose website was permitted to show archived footage of old Rangers games, games which The Rangers are not allowed show.

You mean the one which is still listed as founded in 1872 by the association of which they are a member ?

Eirebear

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

The one whose website was permitted to show archived footage of old Rangers games, games which The Rangers are not allowed show.

Yeah, the SPL and Broadcast Rights arent exactly the best stick to beat anyone with right now tbh.

blahfckingblah

well didnt i inadvertently open up a can of worms haha

RoryMac

Jelle1880 wrote: »

What old Rangers ?

The Rangers that booed Ian Black not the Rangers that complained about him being booed!!

Jelle1880

RoryMac wrote: »

The Rangers that booed Ian Black not the Rangers that complained about him being booed!!

Still the same Rangers, just fickle fans :P

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

The one whose website was permitted to show archived footage of old Rangers games, games which The Rangers are not allowed show.

And yet once more you feel the need to post in an insignificant teams thread.
Well insignificant in your eyes

A Dub in Glasgo

The deadline for the outstanding £1m+ to Rapid for Jelavic is looming - I wonder will Rangers pay their dues or will they skulk away from them?

Dempsey

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

The deadline for the outstanding £1m+ to Rapid for Jelavic is looming - I wonder will Rangers pay their dues or will they skulk away from them?

Nah, they'll just let the SFA/SPL/SFL retain gate receipts/prizemoney etc from them and claim that they've settled their debts :pac:

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Dempsey wrote: »

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

The deadline for the outstanding £1m+ to Rapid for Jelavic is looming - I wonder will Rangers pay their dues or will they skulk away from them?

Nah, they'll just let the SFA/SPL/SFL retain gate receipts/prizemoney etc from them and claim that they've settled their debts :pac:

You mean if we have a letter confirming payment will be made to them, as we have confirming payment will beade to. DU of course the SPL won't default on it will they

Eirebear

Dempsey wrote: »

Nah, they'll just let the SFA/SPL/SFL retain gate receipts/prizemoney etc from them and claim that they've settled their debts :pac:

The last few days have been the biggest laugh i've had for ages on Boards.
Dempsey's went from rewriting history in order to have a got at the footballing authorities in scotland, to rewriting history to defend the footballing authorities in scotland.

Amazing stuff.

Dempsey

Eirebear wrote: »

The last few days have been the biggest laugh i've had for ages on Boards.
Dempsey's went from rewriting history in order to have a got at the footballing authorities in scotland, to rewriting history to defend the footballing authorities in scotland.

Amazing stuff.

So Rangers going with hat in hand to the SPL, then the SFL, didnt delay broadcasting rights renegotiations? The SPL were suppose to pay out money based on a contract that was defunct? They are suppose distribute money that hasnt been given? I think it would have been more inept to pay clubs based on a broadcasting contract that Sky/ESPN were reneging on and still not paying the SPL for. No surprise that bitter Sevco fans have their own slant on everything now.

Whats all this rewriting history ****e, point out what you think I'm rewriting history on? Better yet, why dont you google the stuff I'm saying to jog the auld memory, eh? Yer all doing alot of sweeping under the carpet here so dont start accusing me of rewriting history when I point out what actually happened only a few weeks ago.

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Dempsey wrote: »

Eirebear wrote: »

The last few days have been the biggest laugh i've had for ages on Boards.
Dempsey's went from rewriting history in order to have a got at the footballing authorities in scotland, to rewriting history to defend the footballing authorities in scotland.

Amazing stuff.

So Rangers going with hat in hand to the SPL, then the SFL, didnt delay broadcasting rights renegotiations? The SPL were suppose to pay out money based on a contract that was defunct? They are suppose distribute money that hasnt been given? I think it would have been more inept to pay clubs based on a broadcasting contract that Sky/ESPN were reneging on and still not paying the SPL for. No surprise that bitter Sevco fans have their own slant on everything now.

Whats all this rewriting history ****e, point out what you think I'm rewriting history on? Better yet, why dont you google the stuff I'm saying to jog the auld memory, eh? Yer all doing alot of sweeping under the carpet here so dont start accusing me of rewriting history when I point out what actually happened only a few weeks ago.

Ah google is your friend amazing how when there is prood in the form of a letter ti Rangers from the spl you stull choose to ignore it

Jelle1880

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Ah google is your friend amazing how when there is prood in the form of a letter ti Rangers from the spl you stull choose to ignore it

Ah but BBE, you don't get it, the fact that the SPL promised something in writing and can't honour that agreement is our fault.

Do keep up please. :pac:

Anyway, today Rangers expect to break the 35.000 season tickets mark, and this will still rise over the next few days.

Dempsey

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Ah google is your friend amazing how when there is prood in the form of a letter ti Rangers from the spl you stull choose to ignore it

I havent ignored it, the letter stated that the outstanding amount would be taken from the next amount payable to Rangers by the SPL. Did the SPL pay Rangers any amount of money since the letter was written?

As I said when this story broke, its all abit different to Charles Green's original claim that they paid everything when in fact one debt was being paid because of a forced deduction long before he got involved with the club.

Ah, tis gas all the same to see Rangers fans get up on their high horse about paying debts though.

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Dempsey wrote: »

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Ah google is your friend amazing how when there is prood in the form of a letter ti Rangers from the spl you stull choose to ignore it

I havent ignored it, the letter stated that the outstanding amount would be taken from the next amount payable to Rangers by the SPL. Did the SPL pay Rangers any amount of money since the letter was written?

As I said when this story broke, its all abit different to Charles Green's original claim that they paid everything when in fact one debt was being paid because of a forced deduction long before he got involved with the club.

Ah, tis gas all the same to see Rangers fans get up on their high horse about paying debts though.

And you the very boy that would know all about high Horses

Jelle1880

More 'gas' to see Celtic fans who previously were up in arms about Rangers not paying debts now acting as if it's perfectly normal for the SPL not to pay theirs.

blahfckingblah

Jelle1880 wrote: »

More 'gas' to see Celtic fans who previously were up in arms about Rangers not paying debts not acting as if it's perfectly normal for the SPL not to pay theirs.

I trust the SPL with money about as much as I trust a pyramid scheme ran by David Murray and Craig Whyte.

to be honest im losing interest in all this talk of the spl tv rights money and rangers. every day there's something new and the blame is being pushed from one side to the other. the bottom line is the big hoose must stay open corruption is rife in Scottish football.

A Dub in Glasgo

This is from yesterdays Herald. Jellee et all, do you think Rangers should pay the money they owe Rapid Vienna for Jelavic?

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

More 'gas' to see Celtic fans who previously were up in arms about Rangers not paying debts now acting as if it's perfectly normal for the SPL not to pay theirs.

Maybe if Rangers didnt want to see DUTD go through any cash flow problems they should have paid the debt themselves? Oh wait...

The SPL said in the letter, that ye all keep banging on about, they will pay the money when they have something to pay to Rangers i.e. take it directly out of an amount due to Rangers. Have they broken that agreement? No.

Jelle1880

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

This is from yesterdays Herald. Jellee et all, do you think Rangers should pay the money they owe Rapid Vienna for Jelavic?

Obviously we should pay this, but if it's the same as the Dundee Utd case...

As for Dempsey: Who cares if it will be paid later when they have the cash, this is not Rangers' responsibility anymore and anyone trying to paint it like it is is wrong.
But aye, this is all out of spite :rolleyes:

Desperate to find a stick to beat us with.

A Dub in Glasgo

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Obviously we should pay this, but if it's the same as the Dundee Utd case...

I very much doubt the SPL or SFA are daft enough to agree to pay all the football debts owed by Rangers.

BBC wrote:

English clubs are owed more than £700,000. This breaks down as: Manchester City (£328,248), Chelsea (£238,345) and Arsenal (£136,560).

European clubs are also owed more than £1.6m, including the £1,011,763 due to Rapid. St Etienne are owed£252,212, Palermo are due £205,513 and there is a £150,000 debt to Orebro

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

As for Dempsey: Who cares if it will be paid later when they have the cash, this is not Rangers' responsibility anymore and anyone trying to paint it like it is is wrong.
But aye, this is all out of spite :rolleyes:

Desperate to find a stick to beat us with.

Not desperate to find a stick at all. Charles Green had it painted different to reality, I said that from the start. The fact that letters and subsequent statements by DUTD and himself proves this.

No its not Rangers responsibility anymore but to claim all this integrity ****e about the SPL when they stated clearly when they would pay this amount is desperate stuff by Rangers fans looking for a stick to beat them with. To say that broadcasting contracts have been reneged because of the Rangers fiasco is true, to say that new broadcasting contracts have been delayed because of the Rangers fiasco is true. Rangers havent received a payment from the SPL since before the 18th May and no club have received a payment since the broadcasting contract was agreed because Sky/ESPN havent paid up yet. The SPL seem to be chasing after others too, all because of the Rangers fiasco.

Now if stating the truth about the situation is trying to beat you with a stick then I think you need to get a thicker skin.

Pompey Magnus

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

The one whose website was permitted to show archived footage of old Rangers games, games which The Rangers are not allowed show.

And yet once more you feel the need to post in an insignificant teams thread.
Well insignificant in your eyes

For the record that wasn't me that said that, personally I find it disrepectful to call lower division teams such as East Fife, Arbroath or The Rangers insignificant.

Jelle1880

Dempsey wrote: »

Not desperate to find a stick at all. Charles Green had it painted different to reality, I said that from the start. The fact that letters and subsequent statements by DUTD and himself proves this.

No its not Rangers responsibility anymore but to claim all this integrity ****e about the SPL when they stated clearly when they would pay this amount is desperate stuff by Rangers fans looking for a stick to beat them with. To say that broadcasting contracts have been reneged because of the Rangers fiasco is true, to say that new broadcasting contracts have been delayed because of the Rangers fiasco is true. Rangers havent received a payment from the SPL since before the 18th May and no club have received a payment since the broadcasting contract was agreed because Sky/ESPN havent paid up yet. The SPL seem to be chasing after others too, all because of the Rangers fiasco.

Now if stating the truth about the situation is trying to beat you with a stick then I think you need to get a thicker skin.

When exactly did they specify a time or date again ?

Or is 'When Sky signs the deal' their timeframe (not that it would surprise me from these inept idiots in charge) ?

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

When exactly did they specify a time or date again ?

Or is 'When Sky signs the deal' their timeframe (not that it would surprise me from these inept idiots in charge) ?

They said they'd take the outstanding amount out of the next payment due to Rangers. I thought you read the letter? :rolleyes:

Jelle1880

I take it you missed the part where it was specifically stated that Rangers waived any prize money for last season, which amounts to 2.5m

There are no payments to Rangers waiting.

So if we follow your logic the only thing holding this money being paid to Dundee Utd up is Sky.

So why are people blaming Rangers again ?

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

I take it you missed the part where it was specifically stated that Rangers waived any prize money for last season, which amounts to 2.5m

There are no payments to Rangers waiting.

So if we follow your logic the only thing holding this money being paid to Dundee Utd up is Sky.

So why are people blaming Rangers again ?

The letter was written long before Sevco agreed terms for SFA membership.

Thats not my logic. I'm simply stating the conditions of payment as stated in this letter that you keep going on about but seems that you havent actually read properly!

Lord Nimmo-Smith to chair SPL Independent Commission, Charles Flint QC and Nicholas Stewart QC are the other two tribunal members. Let the muckraking begin!

A Dub in Glasgo

Dempsey wrote: »

Lord Nimmo-Smith to chair SPL Independent Commission, Charles Flint QC and Nicholas Stewart QC are the other two tribunal members. Let the muckraking begin!

A pre-emptive strike from the SPL against Super Ally

Jelle1880

Maybe we could hire a psychologist to determine their mental state.

Can you guys recommend one ?

As for 'pre-emptive strike against Super Ally', maybe they finally realized that it's unlawful to keep the identity of these people hidden:

http://therangersstandard.co.uk/index.php/articles/current-affairs/154-natural-justice-but-not-for-rangers

A Dub in Glasgo

http://www.athletealive.co.uk/

Jelle1880

That the one Celtic hired to investigate Hugh Dallas ?

Anyway, I take it they got rid of the so-called 'taxi rank process' then, since Lord Nimmo-Smith is the same man who sat in the first commission.

What conflict of interest ?

Coillte_Bhoy

Even by the diaboloical standards of much of the scottish football media, this takes the biscuit. Do some fans really lap up this kind of ****?

http://www.scottishsundayexpress.co....en-to-snub-SPL

(THE) GERS THREATEN TO SNUB SPL

RANGERS may look to stay in the Scottish Football League even if they win three successive promotions.

There have already been informal talks inside Ibrox about snubbing a return to the SPL as feelings continue to run high over the perceived treatment of the club. And last night's announcement on the make-up of the tribunal to investigate alleged employee benefit trust payments between 2000 and 2011 has added fuel to the fire.

Lord Nimmo Smith, Charles Flint QC and Nicholas Stewart QC will look into possible rules breaches and determine any sanctions. While this has been expected, it has not improved the "persecuted, not punished" feeling within the club or the perception that Rangers have been the subject of a witchhunt. As a result, the prospect of taking some sort of revenge has been mooted. Staying within the SFL and having nothing more to do with the SPL has been talked about.

"People at the club will have long memories, "Express Sport was told."They will remember exactly how they have been treated and by whom." Staying within the SFL and having nothing more to do with the SPL has been talked about." Clearly, there would be huge issues involved in that, but by considering putting their weight behind the SFL, the club feel the SPL could be left isolated in the future. " it could be that the SFL turn out to be the more powerful body".

By staying outside of the SPL, there would be no prospect of European football for Rangers but the fact rebellion is being discussed within the corridors of power at Ibrox demonstrates the depth of feeling within the club.

Several cash-strapped SPL clubs as well as the SFA will be watching the situation closely.

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

Even by the diaboloical standards of much of the scottish football media, this takes the biscuit. Do some fans really lap up this kind of ****?

http://www.scottishsundayexpress.co....en-to-snub-SPL

(THE) GERS THREATEN TO SNUB SPL

RANGERS may look to stay in the Scottish Football League even if they win three successive promotions.

There have already been informal talks inside Ibrox about snubbing a return to the SPL as feelings continue to run high over the perceived treatment of the club. And last night's announcement on the make-up of the tribunal to investigate alleged employee benefit trust payments between 2000 and 2011 has added fuel to the fire.

Lord Nimmo Smith, Charles Flint QC and Nicholas Stewart QC will look into possible rules breaches and determine any sanctions. While this has been expected, it has not improved the "persecuted, not punished" feeling within the club or the perception that Rangers have been the subject of a witchhunt. As a result, the prospect of taking some sort of revenge has been mooted. Staying within the SFL and having nothing more to do with the SPL has been talked about.

"People at the club will have long memories, "Express Sport was told."They will remember exactly how they have been treated and by whom." Staying within the SFL and having nothing more to do with the SPL has been talked about." Clearly, there would be huge issues involved in that, but by considering putting their weight behind the SFL, the club feel the SPL could be left isolated in the future. " it could be that the SFL turn out to be the more powerful body".

By staying outside of the SPL, there would be no prospect of European football for Rangers but the fact rebellion is being discussed within the corridors of power at Ibrox demonstrates the depth of feeling within the club.

Several cash-strapped SPL clubs as well as the SFA will be watching the situation closely.

What a load Of crap
Of course the SPL may not excist in a few years but that is a different matter.

A Dub in Glasgo

Jelle1880 wrote: »

As for 'pre-emptive strike against Super Ally', maybe they finally realized that it's unlawful to keep the identity of these people hidden:

http://therangersstandard.co.uk/index.php/articles/current-affairs/154-natural-justice-but-not-for-rangers

Can you explain why not releasing the names to the wider public is unlawful?

Dempsey

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

What a load Of crap
Of course the SPL may not excist in a few years but that is a different matter.

The SPL & SFL should be one body by the time. That will be awfully confusing for Rangers fans! :pac:

Jelle1880

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Can you explain why not releasing the names to the wider public is unlawful?

Have you read the article ?

The second line.

Dempsey wrote: »

The SPL & SFL should be one body by the time. That will be awfully confusing for Rangers fans! :pac:

As long as Doncaster and Regan are out and Longmuir is in charge all will be good

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

As long as Doncaster and Regan are out and Longmuir is in charge all will be good

Its not just the head of the snake you have to chop off, there are other influential people in less high profile positions influencing the figure heads of the game that need to kicked out. e.g. Ogilvie would be the highest profile of those and should not be in the SFA. The likes of Longmuir would be at loggerheads with those cúnts rather than getting on with the job.

A Dub in Glasgo

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Have you read the article ?

The second line.

Yes I did read the article, is it this line you refer to?

'There is a right to know who sits in judgement, and denial of that right is unlawful, unwarranted and inimical to the proper administration of justice, further that there is no such person known to Law as 'the anonymous JP'.

If so, can you explain to me why not releasing the names of the independent panel to the wider public is unlawful?

Jelle1880

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Yes I did read the article, is it this line you refer to?

'There is a right to know who sits in judgement, and denial of that right is unlawful, unwarranted and inimical to the proper administration of justice, further that there is no such person known to Law as 'the anonymous JP'.

If so, can you explain to me why not releasing the names of the independent panel to the wider public is unlawful?

“Open justice is vital to a democracy. If justice is done in secret, the public can have no confidence in it because the secrecy may hide injustice. Open justice lets in the light and allows the public to scrutinise the workings of the law, for better or for worse.”

“It (open justice) is necessary because the public nature of proceedings deters inappropriate behaviour on the part of the court. It also maintains the public’s confidence in the administration of justice. It enables the public to know that justice is being administered impartially. It can result in evidence becoming available which would not become available if the proceedings were conducted behind closed doors or with one or more of the parties’ or witnesses identity concealed. It makes uniformed and inaccurate comment about the proceedings less likely.”

Or are you saying that those at Rangers who are involved in this should know the identities of the people investigating, but nobody else should ?

A Dub in Glasgo

A couple of things

1. That case is in English law not Scottish law (there is a difference between the two), does it even apply in Scotland? I don't know but I think it is irrelevant beause of number 2, 3 & 4 below;

2. The SPL panel is not part of the legal system therefore 1. cannot apply

3. The members were known to Rangers before McCoist done his public entitlement routine. It is reasonable to state that McCoist even knew the name of the members before hand

4. The SPL clubs (including McCoist's Rangers) agreed that the panel names would only be known to the clubs involved in the investigation. This answers your question. Now one of mine, why did Rangers agree to this and then McCoist issue his entitlement statement?

Based on the above, it is rubbish to say that it is illegal for the SPL not to make the panel member names public. You have shown some article which tries to claim it is illegal but manifestly fails to show how the claim is valid.