Scottish league

TheBuilder

One thing we'll all agree on is this Ulysses guy is a bit of a looper.

You reek of a jealous Dundee United/hearts/Hibs fan that hates the fact that you don't get any attention and even though rangers are in division 3 you're still in their shadow.

Talking to yourself is the first sign of madness

Eirebear

Lulz.

Jelle1880

Maybe a Jambo who's angry that a 3rd Division Rangers will take Black, Beattie,...

The_Kew_Tour

Hoping Hearts get ****ed into the 3rd Division next and then we will have fair league.:D

The_Kew_Tour

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Hoping Hearts get ****ed into the 3rd Division next and then we will have fair league.:D

It's a bit too late for that for you, eh?

TheBuilder

TheBuilder wrote: »

One thing we'll all agree on is this Ulysses guy is a bit of a looper.

Cheers, guv. Just tired of your overwhelming need to talk about each other. Given your co-dependency, your obsession with each other seems perfectly rational to you. You're entitled to think that, but there are other things in life - like how you'll get on in your separate leagues, for example.

Apart from Dempsey, hardly anyone has even bothered to comment on how the SPL might go this season. I can understand why Rangers supporters might have a diminished interest in the SPL for the moment, but you'd think Celtic supporters would have something to say about it, given that they'll be playing in it.

Jelle1880

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Hoping Hearts get ****ed into the 3rd Division next and then we will have fair league.:D

To be fair, Hibs can't even beat a German second division side... :pac:

:P

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

To be fair, Hibs can't even beat a German second division side... :pac:

:P

Least they are able to play professional football!

Jelle1880

You really can't help yourself, can you ?

I'd get that checked out, it really sounds unhealthy.

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

You really can't help yourself, can you ?

I'd get that checked out, it really sounds unhealthy.

Did I hit a nerve? :rolleyes:

What professional Scottish Football Club do you support again?

TheStook

We should organize a meeting between Dempsey and Jelle in real life cause I hope to God they wouldn't say half the immature ****e they say on the internets.

I can understand the rivalry of course but saying stuff like "What professional Scottish Football Club do you support again?" is Ott. Dempsey surely you can emapathise with the man, Imagine Celtic went bust? It's not his fault his club was ran horribly so can we just discuss the league please.

Dempsey

TheStook wrote: »

We should organize a meeting between Dempsey and Jelle in real life cause I hope to God they wouldn't say half the immature ****e they say on the internets.

I can understand the rivalry of course but saying stuff like "What professional Scottish Football Club do you support again?" is Ott. Dempsey surely you can emapathise with the man, Imagine Celtic went bust? It's not his fault his club was ran horribly so can we just discuss the league please.

I cannot empathize with someone that continually mocks other Scottish clubs whilst his own is waiting to be charged with cheating, waiting for the outcome of another tax case, waiting to be liquidated once the HMRC have looked through everything to make sure that they havent pulled any other strokes and his new club arent actually a football club yet. If he wants to poke fun at other clubs, he can expect it back in spades.

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Dempsey wrote: »

I cannot empathize with someone that continually mocks other Scottish clubs whilst his own is waiting to be charged with cheating, waiting for the outcome of another tax case, waiting to be liquidated once the HMRC have looked through everything to make sure that they havent pulled any other strokes and his new club arent actually a football club yet. If he wants to poke fun at other clubs, he can expect it back in spades.

As for the so called BTC if this is what you are talking about HMRC have already made it clear that they are not after the club anymore but those individuals responsible so that would be Murray and certain directors

Dempsey

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

As for the so called BTC if this is what you are talking about HMRC have already made it clear that they are not after the club anymore but those individuals responsible so that would be Murray and certain directors

They are still holding Rangers responsible. Going after Murray & directors personally for the money because the club is being wound up doesnt excuse the club!

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Dempsey wrote: »

They are still holding Rangers responsible. Going after Murray & directors personally for the money doesnt excuse the club!

I think you will find that they have said they are no longer interested in the club and it is only the individuals they are pursuing

http://web.orange.co.uk/article/sports/taxman_to_vote_against_gers_cva

Rangers have been consigned to liquidation after Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs decided to reject an offer from Charles Green's consortium.

The decision means Green's Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) will fail to achieve the 75% backing needed from creditors.

Green will now push ahead with plans to buy the club's assets for £5.5million in the coming days with both HMRC and Ticketus, the other major creditors, not expected to challenge the newco purchase deal he has struck with administrators Duff and Phelps.

But there is no guarantee the new entity will be able to play in the Scottish Premier League.

SPL clubs would themselves decide on any application to acquire the club's share and could impose sanctions.

Dundee United chairman Stephen Thompson last week doubted whether Rangers would have enough support and some fans have been rallying their clubs to reject any proposal, although commercial interests could outweigh any principled stand, especially with no confirmation that television deals will continue without Rangers.

A 'newco' Rangers would not be allowed to play in Europe for three years and Green faces the prospect of losing players.

HMRC, whom Rangers are listed as owing more than £21million, believe their decision allows them to pursue individuals in the courts.

The tax authority forced Rangers into administration in February over millions of pounds of unpaid tax under Craig Whyte and could also pursue former owner Sir David Murray over a tax case, which could result in a £75million bill.

A statement from the tax authority read: "A liquidation provides the best opportunity to protect taxpayers, by allowing the potential investigation and pursuit of possible claims against those responsible for the company's financial affairs in recent years.

"A CVA would restrict the scope of such action.

"Liquidation will enable a sale of the football assets to be made to a new company, thereby ensuring that football will continue at Ibrox.

"It also means that the new company will be free from claims or litigation in a way which would not be achievable with a CVA.

"Rangers can make a fresh start."

Rangers administrators Duff and Phelps said Green's consortium would move to acquire the club's assets immediately after the CVA is formally rejected at a meeting of creditors on Thursday morning.

"That transaction will be completed within a few days," joint-administrator Paul Clark added.

"The sum payable to creditors will be £5.5million, most of which has already been paid over to us by the Green consortium."

Clark added: "It was with HMRC's approval that a proposal was placed before creditors for consideration.

"However, it is the commercial view that the level offered within the CVA was not enough to merit departure from their normal policy of seeking a detailed investigation via a liquidator.

"However, we have been left in no doubt by HMRC the fundamental reason for the rejection of the CVA proposal is the historical non-compliance with tax liabilities by the former owners and directors of the club."

Green claimed HMRC's decision would result in less revenue for the taxpayer, but it also means his group will have to pay less.

Dempsey

That article doesnt contradict anything I said. There is a distinction between Rangers and Sevco. Rangers fans continually fail to grasp the difference :rolleyes:

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Dempsey wrote: »

That article doesnt contradict anything I said. There is a distinction between Rangers and Sevco. Rangers fans continually fail to grasp the difference :rolleyes:

Nah I think its you has a touch of wishful thinking its clear that they are only going after the individuals responsible but once again we will leave it there and see what happens as you have your viewpoint and I have mine and never the twain shall meet

Dempsey

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Nah I think its you has a touch of wishful thinking its clear that they are only going after the individuals responsible but once again we will leave it there and see what happens as you have your viewpoint and I have mine and never the twain shall meet

Not really, the outcome of the tax case will be judged against Rangers, using a part of the law to go directly after its directors doesnt mean that the club isnt responsible. Try to shift the blame in your head all you like though

A Dub in Glasgo

Which is the reason why the SFA & SPL want the ability to apply punishements to Sevco if they take the Rangers share. If Sevco were not going after the Rangers share, they would not have to worry about it.

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Really what part of the new company will be free of litigation etc
Rangers can make a fresh start

It's there on black and white

Dempsey

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Really what part of the new company will be free of litigation etc
Rangers can make a fresh start

It's there on black and white

HMRC are going after Rangers for unpaid tax. When they hold Rangers accountable, they will use some rarely used part of that law to make the former directors and owners liable.

Sevco are not liable for the BTC even with the transferred share but they are liable for any football rules that have been broken, illegal player payments, not paying taxes and any other footballing punishments that Rangers get from the SPL & SFA will transfer with the membership to Sevco, if successfully transferred.

You have to distinguish between Rangers and Sevco also you have to distinguish between the 'legal' liabilities of the 2 companies vs. the footballing liabilities. Transfer the SFA membership, you transfer the football liabilities but not the legal ones.

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Dempsey wrote: »

HMRC are going after Rangers for unpaid tax. When they hold Rangers accountable, they will use some rarely used part of that law to make the former directors and owners liable.

Sevco are not liable for the BTC even with the transferred share but they are liable for any football rules that have been broken, illegal player payments, not paying taxes and any other footballing punishments that Rangers get from the SPL & SFA will transfer with the membership to Sevco, if successfully transferred.

You have to distinguish between Rangers and Sevco also you have to distinguish between the 'legal' liabilities of the 2 companies vs. the footballing liabilities. Transfer the SFA membership, you transfer the football liabilities but not the legal ones.

No one mentioned anything other than the BTC and HMRC in that case Rangers are not being pursued.
If you have trouble distinguishing between that and all the other things going on thats your problem

Dempsey

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

No one mentioned anything other than the BTC and HMRC in that case Rangers are not being pursued.
If you have trouble distinguishing between that and all the other things going on thats your problem

Rangers are being chased in the BTC. Only when the company is found guilty can they pursue the directors and owners for the company's tax liability. You seem to be misinformed about the whole situation. I only brought up the other stuff because you started producing articles highlighting Sevco's end of things when we are talking about Rangers. Dont get ratty with me because your bubble is burst. :P

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Dempsey wrote: »

Rangers are being chased in the BTC. Only when the company is found guilty can they pursue the directors and owners for the company's tax liability. You seem to be misinformed about the whole situation. Dont get ratty with me because your bubble is burst. :P

Not getting ratty with you over anything you aren't of any importance I think it funny that HMRC release a statement but you read something different oh well

patmac

Meanwhile in Division 3

Dempsey

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Not getting ratty with you over anything you aren't of any importance I think it funny that HMRC release a statement but you read something different oh well

That article you quoted was about what happens if a CVA is agreed. A CVA was not agreed which makes what you think based on that statement redundant.

EDIT

Explain how the taxman goes after directors and owners for a company's unpaid taxes without actually finding the company guilty of unpaid taxes?

bobmalooka

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Dempsey wrote: »

Rangers are being chased in the BTC. Only when the company is found guilty can they pursue the directors and owners for the company's tax liability. You seem to be misinformed about the whole situation. Dont get ratty with me because your bubble is burst. :P

Not getting ratty with you over anything you aren't of any importance I think it funny that HMRC release a statement but you read something different oh well

I think you and Dempsey have your wires crosses my understanding of that statement is that sevco will not be persued for the tax liability but rangers(in administration) will. As sevco have decided they want to have rangers sfa license they will be liable for any punishments that the sfa will be handing out over the big tax case. Just to clarify hmrc will be treating sevco and rangers separately but sfa will be treating ye as one. Pretty much Best case scenario for ye really.

Dempsey

bobmalooka wrote: »

I think you and Dempsey have your wires crosses my understanding of that statement is that sevco will not be persued for the tax liability but rangers(in administration) will. As sevco have decided they want to have rangers sfa license they will be liable for any punishments that the sfa will be handing out over the big tax case. Just to clarify hmrc will be treating sevco and rangers separately but sfa will be treating ye as one. Pretty much Best case scenario for ye really.

I explained that but all I got was a "If you have trouble distinguishing between that and all the other things going on thats your problem" response. I dont think he even read the post properly tbh

patmac

It will be interesting to see what average crowd Rangers get. The first round of matches will be a novel day out for the away teams going to Ibrox, hard to see them averaging 30,000, it will be great for all the other teams involved in Division 3 and especially the side that gets promoted with them, so not all doom and gloom.

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Dempsey wrote: »

I explained that but all I got was a "If you have trouble distinguishing between that and all the other things going on thats your problem" response. I dont think he even read the post properly tbh

You gave me your explanation I prefer the statement HMRC released

bobmalooka

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Dempsey wrote: »

I explained that but all I got was a "If you have trouble distinguishing between that and all the other things going on thats your problem" response. I dont think he even read the post properly tbh

You gave me your explanation I prefer the statement HMRC released

Yes that sevco can play ball safe in the knowledge that hmrc only want rangers directors

GavRedKing

Can we keep the Rangers off field stuff in the Rangers in administration thread please folks?

Thanks

Dempsey

Agonizing injury time deflect goal for Dynamo Moscow to grab a 2-2 draw @ Tannadice. Always gonna be a uphill battle because they are midseason but DUTD should throw the kitchen sink at them in Moscow and see what happens.

Apparently there was a massive brawl in the corporate end, about 40 people going to town on each other, pushing stewards out of the way to continue kicking people on the ground in the head etc. No doubt this incident will be left to the football authorities unlike the handbags that happened at CP where politicians were climbing over each other to set their agendas.

TheBuilder

Dempsey wrote: »

Agonizing injury time deflect goal for Dynamo Moscow to grab a 2-2 draw @ Tannadice. Always gonna be a uphill battle because they are midseason but DUTD should throw the kitchen sink at them in Moscow and see what happens.

Apparently there was a massive brawl in the corporate end, about 40 people going to town on each other, pushing stewards out of the way to continue kicking people on the ground in the head etc. No doubt this incident will be left to the football authorities unlike the handbags that happened at CP where politicians were climbing over each other to set their agendas.

Uefa official not including it in his report 'it's a police matter'.

According to the bbc

Dempsey

TheBuilder wrote: »

Uefa official not including it in his report 'it's a police matter'.

According to the bbc

Strange, no?

Thats a police matter but something like a "Fúck UEFA" banner has them up in arms! :pac:

TheBuilder

Dempsey wrote: »

TheBuilder wrote: »

Uefa official not including it in his report 'it's a police matter'.

According to the bbc

Strange, no?

Thats a police matter but something like a "Fúck UEFA" banner has them up in arms! :pac:

You'll see UEFA take very little action involving Russian sides between now and the world cup in my opinion.

Most corrupt organisation in the world with FIFA.

Jelle1880

Well well well, seems like the sheep don't like it when there is a private vote:

Re: Calder Park Binned
The discussion and vote were in private. Why? I thought we lived in a democracy. I voted at the last cooncil election and would like to know how my cooncilor voted so I can decide if they get my vote next time. This stinks.

re: Calder Park Binned
Agreed, we need to know who exactly voted against this so come the next election we can get rid of the hoors!

But lo and behold if a Rangers fan wants to know who is judging his/her club

Dempsey

But Aberdeen FC do know, its Aberdeen City Council :rolleyes: