Rangers FC On Field Gossip & Rumour Thread 2017 Mod Note in OP(Updated 14/08)

TheBuilder

blahfckingblah wrote: »

from twitter

Well that's just a lot of bollocks, no doubt from a Celtic fan who's can't differentiate between club and company.

It's funny how when Celtic questioned judgements and disciplinary systems and pretty much everything else about the SFA or SPL in recent years it was for the good of the game in Scotland and they were well within their rights to defend themselves.

Now Rangers are using their rights, questioning the SPL's systems its an admission of guilt.

It's amazing, but I'm saying no more on the matter until judgements are made and evidence and defence is given from both sides, until then it's just going to go back and forward with the same nonsense from the same people.

bobbysands81

TheBuilder wrote: »

Well that's just a lot of bollocks, no doubt from a Celtic fan who's can't differentiate between club and company.

I love it!!!

bobbysands81

TheBuilder

bobbysands81 wrote: »

I love it!!!

Good for you

blahfckingblah

TheBuilder wrote: »

Well that's just a lot of bollocks, no doubt from a Celtic fan who's can't differentiate between club and company.

It's funny how when Celtic questioned judgements and disciplinary systems and pretty much everything else about the SFA or SPL in recent years it was for the good of the game in Scotland and they were well within their rights to defend themselves.

Now Rangers are using their rights, questioning the SPL's systems its an admission of guilt.

It's amazing, but I'm saying no more on the matter until judgements are made and evidence and defence is given from both sides, until then it's just going to go back and forward with the same nonsense from the same people.

cheerio until then so. never realised so much offense could be caused in less than 140 characters

lubo_moravcik

bobbysands81 wrote: »

lubo_moravcik wrote: »

The players then who left had contracts with the company and not the club? I take it the current players contracts are also with the company and not with the club??

Am lost, what's the name of the company and what's the name of the club??

I'd be very surprised if BDO didn't sort out this mess, this pantomime still has some way to run.

The club and company are most definitely different, what's their names?

bobbysands81

TheBuilder wrote: »

Good for you

The RFC EBT defence timeline - 2010: We never had EBTs -> 2011: OK we had EBTs but they're not illegal -> 2012: We're not talking to you

Stolen from TheHumanTorpedo

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

You don't get it.

Green isn't saying Rangers shouldn't be punished, he's questioning the impartiality of those appointed to hand out punishments.
And rightly so, given Lord Nimmo's past in dealing with Rangers.

Whatever happened with the infamous taxi rank system for judicial panels at the SPL ? Funny that the guy who handed out the unlawful punishment of a registration ban is now the same person leading this.

"I must make it clear that we are not questioning for a moment the integrity of Lord Nimmo Smith and his colleagues but we believe the SPL have been hypocritical in their approach to this matter.

Maybe you should read what Green said again!

TheBuilder

blahfckingblah wrote: »

cheerio until then so. never realised so much offense could be caused in less than 140 characters

I never said I was going anywhere.

edit: I said I was saying no more on this matter, and I'm not.

Jelle1880

bobbysands81 wrote: »

The RFC EBT defence timeline - 2010: We never had EBTs -> 2011: OK we had EBTs but they're not illegal -> 2012: We're not talking to you

Stolen from TheHumanTorpedo

This just proves you haven't got a clue what you're talking about.

Rangers never, ever denied the use of EBT's.

And Dempsey: I didn't say Rangers of Green openly questioned Nimmo's integrity, but I and many others do.

And I'm fairly certain so does Green, but obviously he won't come out and say that.

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Really? I look forward to you backing this up with fact then.

Are you thick or just playing stupid ?

It's been pointed out time and time again, I'm not gonna entertain you.
Google it if you're not aware of it.

Hell, there's even a Leeds thread down below, maybe you could ask them if the creation of Leeds United Football Club Limited in 2007 means that this is now a different Leeds than the one which won the First Division and the Inter-Cities Fairs Cup.

I'm sure they'd love to hear that.

Madam

Jelle1880 wrote: »

And Dempsey: I didn't say Rangers of Green openly questioned Nimmo's integrity, but I and many others do.

And I'm fairly certain so does Green, but obviously he won't come out and say that.

I don't understand:o Why would anyone question a high court judges intergrity, is he not supposed to be an impartial observer(a bit like Scottish referees:rolleyes:)?

bobbysands81

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Are you thick or just playing stupid ?

It's been pointed out time and time again, I'm not gonna entertain you.
Google it if you're not aware of it.

That's all quite harsh.

You made the assertion now back it up with fact mo chara.

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

And Dempsey: I didn't say Rangers of Green openly questioned Nimmo's integrity, but I and many others do.

And I'm fairly certain so does Green, but obviously he won't come out and say that.

When you're in a hole, dig up! :rolleyes:

Jelle1880

Madam wrote: »

I don't understand:o Why would anyone question a high court judges intergrity, is he not supposed to be an impartial observer(a bit like Scottish referees:rolleyes:)?

He was the one that imposed the registration ban, which was later found to be unlawful.

Hence...

And bobby: Google it, or look through the old thread.
It's been said time and time again, those clubs are the proof that changing the holding company has no influence on the club's history, they are still the same clubs as before.

lubo_moravcik

At the risk of being accused of trolling, Am wondering does anyone genuinely know the name of the company and the name of the club please?

LiamoSail

Genuine question for the Rangers fans. If it still is the same club, and just the holding company went bust, by the same logic does that mean no club can ever go bust, once they have a holding company, as I believe all clubs do?

I'm genuinely not trying to start a sevco/rangers debate here, just querying the above

Jelle1880

LiamoSail wrote: »

Genuine question for the Rangers fans. If it still is the same club, and just the holding company went bust, by the same logic does that mean no club can ever go bust, once they have a holding company, as I believe all clubs do?

I'm genuinely not trying to start a sevco/rangers debate here, just querying the above

It can always happen, but only if there is absolutely no new owner found.

So let's say Green never stepped in and the bids of Brown, Walter Smith,... never happened.

In that case at one point the administrators would have had to make the decision of shutting everything down and selling all the assets to the creditors.

Clubs with holding companies can still go bust, if the holding company that holds the licenses and contracts for players goes bust, and no replacement is found/created.
If that happens what you basically have is a club with no league to play in and no players.

lubo: The club name is still Rangers FC, the new holding company changed it's name from Sevco Scotland Ltd to The Rangers Football Club Ltd.

bobbysands81

Jelle1880 wrote: »

If that happens what you basically have is a club with no league to play in and no players.

Which is exactly what happened when Sevco were formed. Seriously mo chara, talk to anyone with a legal background, it'll all come out in the wash (EBT, dual contracts and finally when BDO take over from Duff and Phelps).

Jelle1880

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Which is exactly what happened when Sevco were formed. Seriously mo chara, talk to anyone with a legal background, it'll all come out in the wash (EBT, dual contracts and finally when BDO take over from Duff and Phelps).

Nonsense, when Sevco were formed the original holding company still existed, it was in liquidation but still hasn't been liquidated as of yet.

The assets were then transferred to Sevco.

Several players may have refused to transfer their contract, but the club was never without any players.

As for the dual contracts, I still haven't seen any of these so-called letters.

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Nonsense, when Sevco were formed the original holding company still existed, it was in liquidation but still hasn't been liquidated as of yet.

The assets were then transferred to Sevco.

Several players may have refused to transfer their contract, but the club was never without any players.

As for the dual contracts, I still haven't seen any of these so-called letters.

Rangers are still in administration, as administrators are currently appointed. When liquidators finally get appointed, the process of liquidation begins. Just because liquidators have been formally lined up doesn't mean that they are in liquidation

Eirebear

McCleod, McKay and Crawford signed up until 2017.
brilliant news for the club imo - especially McLeod and McKay who have featured in every game so far this season.

bobbysands81

Charles Green - "We've never been a member of the SPL"

BOOM!!!

"We bought the titles", "We bought them, we paid for them and nobody is going to take them away from us"

http://soundcloud.com/celticresearch/cg-gms/s-ya9Uz

bobbysands81

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Nonsense, when Sevco were formed the original holding company still existed, it was in liquidation but still hasn't been liquidated as of yet.

The assets were then transferred to Sevco.

Several players may have refused to transfer their contract, but the club was never without any players.

As for the dual contracts, I still haven't seen any of these so-called letters.

The new club was clearly without players at one stage.

Eirebear

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Charles Green - "We've never been a member of the SPL"

BOOM!!!

"We bought the titles", "We bought them, we paid for them and nobody is going to take them away from us"

http://soundcloud.com/celticresearch/cg-gms/s-ya9Uz

Boom! Entirely.

Whatever came out of Rangers, be it defunct or not - is a continuation of what came before.
I, as much as i respect your opinion Bobby, do not give a flying **** what other people say.
Yes, we went out of business - but what came after is very much in line with what came before.

Jelle1880

Nine Scottish Premier League clubs, and Rangers, have received a slice of a €100m payout by UEFA for their contributions to Euro 2012.

Celtic will receive the most, €568,226 (£453,325), after having both Mikael Lustig and Georgios Samaras involved in the final tournament. Rangers meanwhile will receive the second highest payment, netting €339,623 (£270,948).

Aberdeen, Dundee United, Hearts, Inverness CT, Kilmarnock, Motherwell, Ross County and St Johnstone have also profited, as UEFA rewards clubs for releasing players to feature in both the qualifying and final stages of the European Championships.

The solidarity payments were made to 575 European clubs, in conjunction with European Club Association.

For the qualifying rounds, if a club had a player who was involved in a country's match day squad for eight matches, they will receive €5,241. For national teams which played ten qualifiers, €4,192 is paid out per player and €3,494 is being given if a nation played up to 12 qualifying matches.

For the final tournament, played in Poland and Ukraine in the summer, clubs were rewarded on a per player, per day basis. Scottish clubs received €4,530 on that basis for players who were in a Euro 2012 squad.

Michel Platini, President of UEFA, said: "I am delighted that we are able to provide clubs with financial benefits from UEFA EURO 2012 to reward their contribution to the competition.

"We witnessed a truly fantastic UEFA European Football Championship final round this summer, and I am pleased that the clubs can now also be associated with the event."

FULL LIST OF PAYMENTS TO SCOTTISH CLUBS

Aberdeen €14,675 (£11,707) Celtic €568,226 (£453,325) Dundee United €33,543 (£26,760) Rangers €339,623 (£270,948) Heart of Midlothian €76,520 (£61,046) Inverness Caledonian Thistle €20,964 (£16,724) Kilmarnock €33,543 (£26,760) Motherwell €20,964 (£16,724) Ross County €20,964 (£16,724) St Johnstone €8,386 (£6,690)

But, but, but,... you are dead

Soups123

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Nine Scottish Premier League clubs, and Rangers, have received a slice of a €100m payout by UEFA for their contributions to Euro 2012.

Celtic will receive the most, €568,226 (£453,325), after having both Mikael Lustig and Georgios Samaras involved in the final tournament. Rangers meanwhile will receive the second highest payment, netting €339,623 (£270,948).

Aberdeen, Dundee United, Hearts, Inverness CT, Kilmarnock, Motherwell, Ross County and St Johnstone have also profited, as UEFA rewards clubs for releasing players to feature in both the qualifying and final stages of the European Championships.

The solidarity payments were made to 575 European clubs, in conjunction with European Club Association.

For the qualifying rounds, if a club had a player who was involved in a country's match day squad for eight matches, they will receive €5,241. For national teams which played ten qualifiers, €4,192 is paid out per player and €3,494 is being given if a nation played up to 12 qualifying matches.

For the final tournament, played in Poland and Ukraine in the summer, clubs were rewarded on a per player, per day basis. Scottish clubs received €4,530 on that basis for players who were in a Euro 2012 squad.

Michel Platini, President of UEFA, said: "I am delighted that we are able to provide clubs with financial benefits from UEFA EURO 2012 to reward their contribution to the competition.

"We witnessed a truly fantastic UEFA European Football Championship final round this summer, and I am pleased that the clubs can now also be associated with the event."

FULL LIST OF PAYMENTS TO SCOTTISH CLUBS

Aberdeen €14,675 (£11,707) Celtic €568,226 (£453,325) Dundee United €33,543 (£26,760) Rangers €339,623 (£270,948) Heart of Midlothian €76,520 (£61,046) Inverness Caledonian Thistle €20,964 (£16,724) Kilmarnock €33,543 (£26,760) Motherwell €20,964 (£16,724) Ross County €20,964 (£16,724) St Johnstone €8,386 (£6,690)

But, but, but,... you are dead

Does this money not go into the same pot that pays the Creditors?

If not its clear the footballing authorities see this 'New' Rangers as the 'Old' Rangers!

Jelle1880

There's a chance that the SPL will keep the money to pay creditors, but that's not sure yet.

And depending on what football authorities you mean it's crystal clear, the SFL know it's still the same club

Dempsey

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Charles Green - "We've never been a member of the SPL"

BOOM!!!

"We bought the titles", "We bought them, we paid for them and nobody is going to take them away from us"

http://soundcloud.com/celticresearch/cg-gms/s-ya9Uz

Remember when he was talking to the BBC about the CVA and the prospect of Rangers being liquidated??

"the history, the tradition, everything that's great about this club is swept aside"

Now he says that he's bought that! I'm off to put a bid in for Andy Murray's Olympic Medal!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19550517

Rangers are to boycott the initial meeting of the Scottish Premier League commission to investigate the club's alleged use of dual contracts.

"The club ceased to be subject to the SPL's rules when it was ejected from its league"

Rangers not being able to satisfy SPL licensing criteria got them kicked out. The SPL shareholders not allowing Rangers share to be transferred to whoever they liked kept Sevco out of the SPL. There is a difference. Also, the SPL can review who they assigned titles to whenever they like and apply changes based on their rulebook whenever they like.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19564493

Former Rangers chairman Alastair Johnston has questioned whether the Scottish Premier League's probe into allegations of dual contracts can be trusted to deliver justice.

"The whole process has been established to satisfy a self-serving agenda by vested interests in the SPL," he said.

"I just can't sit by on the sidelines and watch a miscarriage of justice be activated by a kangaroo court."

"The SFA 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," said Johnston.

"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-publicised structure surrounding the relationship that Rangers FC had with certain of its players."

So Johnston wants the SFA involved to make it fair....who is he fooling! That wouldn't be because the club secretary during the EBT period is now the president of the SFA?? Rangers fans will berate the SFA till the cows come home but if the SFA get involved and this probe somehow gets derailed then they will all be claiming that justice was served!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19556304

Rangers chief executive Charles Green claims "more than two" Scottish Premier League clubs have used employee benefits trusts.

Green would "rather not say" which other clubs he was aware of that had used EBTs, but added: "I have put my hand up and they should do the same."

Why not name them unless he wants something from the SPL or those clubs.

What has he put his hand up for exactly?? Utter nonsense from Green again.

"Unless the SPL welcome us with open arms why would we go back there," he added.

"Ten clubs voted Rangers out of that league, what makes you think they would want Rangers back in.

"It begs the question will the league still be there in three years' time."

He's really playing up to the mob now!

Again, he's knowledge of league rules and history is distorted like alot of Rangers fans. Rangers unable to satisfy the criteria for an SPL licence is what got them kicked out of the league. SPL clubs voted on allowing Rangers to transfer their share to Sevco, which was rejected.

It begs the question will Charles Green be still at Sevco in 3 years time!

Jelle1880

You really can't help yourself, can you :pac:

Obsessed, still.

As for the question whether Green will still be at Rangers in 3 years: Maybe, maybe not, he never hid the fact that this is a short term something for him.

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

You really can't help yourself, can you :pac:

Obsessed, still.

As for the question whether Green will still be at Rangers in 3 years: Maybe, maybe not, he never hid the fact that this is a short term something for him.

Discussing Scottish Football does interest me alright, you got a problem with that?

Jelle1880

There's discussing, and there's ranting.

But hey, if the shoe fits.

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

There's discussing, and there's ranting.

But hey, if the shoe fits.

Green is claiming things that flies in the face of what actually happened. He's also claiming that more than 2 clubs have used EBT's. We all know that Celtic had one, Rangers had dozens, who is the others especially since all clubs were asked for full disclosure.

Its hard to ignore Green when he's making unsubstantiated claims, contradicting himself and generally talking ****e. When it was any other chairman/owner in Scottish Football, it is brought up and none of this obsessed tripe is mentioned. Ye seem to trot out the obsessed line when ye dont want to discuss something that could reflect badly on your club. Its pathetic really.

What do you make of Johnstons comments? Ogilvie has a conflict of interest in this investigation yet he wants the SFA involved. Surely Ogilvie would have to be gone from the SFA before they could be involved. Im surprised that the media havent picked up on his agenda.

Jelle1880

I only use the 'obsessed' thing with 2 or 3 posters on here, make of that what you want.

lubo_moravcik

Roger Mitchell in the Herald Scotland
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/does-green-actually-buy-this-stuff-lets-take-a-look-does-green-actually-buy-this-stuff-lets-take-a-look.18857922

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.

Any thoughts on this? or just more bullsh!t??

Dempsey

Green always said that his strategy was to exit Sevco after a fans share flotation. Although it seems that he's trying to get it done quicker than he 1st said.

lubo_moravcik

BBC Scotland has learned that a verdict on the First Tier Tax tribunal between Rangers and HM Revenue & Customs is expected in October.
In 2010, the previous owners of Rangers contested an unpaid tax relating to the use of Employee Benefit Trusts, believed to be in the region on £49m.
The club entered administration in February 2012 over a separate tax issue and applied for insolvency in July.
The Scottish Courts Service said an announcement will be made next month.

Jelle1880

The same Roger Mitchell who ****ed the SPL by holding Sky ransom, and then going with Setanta ? :pac:

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

The same Roger Mitchell who ****ed the SPL by holding Sky ransom, and then going with Setanta ? :pac:

9 SPL clubs voted to take the Setanta contract.

Jelle1880

No, he tried to play hardball with Sky and lost.

Sky were raking in the money from all sides and everybody could have made a deal like that.

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

No, he tried to play hardball with Sky and lost.

Sky were raking in the money from all sides and everybody could have made a deal like that.

Sky had an offer on the table, 9 clubs voted for Setanta over Sky

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/c/celtic/8154830.stm

John Reid wrote:

Last year's decision to reject the Sky bid and opt for Setanta - arrived at against the strong opposition of Celtic, Rangers and Aberdeen - has proved to be the disastrous misjudgement we indicated it might be, with Setanta now in administration

Jelle1880

Dempsey wrote: »

Sky had an offer on the table, 9 clubs voted for Setanta over Sky

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/c/celtic/8154830.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/scotland/2495351.stm

Mitchell had already rejected a new Sky TV deal in December 2001 to embark on this ambitious project





He was convinced that the venture would attract enough subscribers to make the projected revenue more than the satellite broadcaster's deal.

But the need to harness more than a third of the entire number of satellite subscribers in Scotland appeared unfeasible.
And in the end, with Sky out of the picture, the SPL were left with a deal with BBC Scotland and Setanta, worth a third of the original satellite company's offer.

There was no 'Either Sky, or Setanta'.


This are two different deals, the Setanta deal I'm talking about was in 2002, your article seems to be about the renewal in 2008.

Dempsey

But we didnt go with Setanta that time that you stated earlier, the SPL signed a 2 year deal with the BBC when the Sky deal collapsed. The SPL's 1st deal with Setanta didnt happen until Q1 of 2004.

Jelle1880

Ah yes, I thought that the deal with BBC and Setanta kicked in at the same time.

lubo_moravcik

so now we've established that sky deals never happened and that, what about these comments

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.

Did Rangers oldco gain unfair advantage by registering players on a basis where their full employment conditions were not declared to the SPL/SFA???

Did they?

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.

Broxi_Bear_Eire

lubo_moravcik wrote: »

so now we've established that sky deals never happened and that, what about these comments





Did they?

Well if Rangers are to be believed these parties did know about them through the accounts which stated them clearly.

Dempsey

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Well if Rangers are to be believed these parties did know about them through the accounts which stated them clearly.

Having EBT's is not the issue, neither is receiving money from them.

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Dempsey wrote: »

Having EBT's is not the issue, neither is receiving money from them.

The question asked was did the SPL/SFA know about them

Dempsey

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

The question asked was did the SPL/SFA know about them

Surely they could ask Ogilvie to check if the SFA knew?!

Anyways, D&P should have all the offending paperwork destroyed by now. What else would they be doing at this stage! :pac:

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Dempsey wrote: »

Surely they could ask Ogilvie to check if the SFA knew?!

Anyways, D&P should have all the offending paperwork destroyed by now. What else would they be doing at this stage! :pac:

Honest I know tic fans aren't paranoid

Dempsey

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Honest I know tic fans aren't paranoid

Martin Bain wouldnt be the only person handy with a shredder! :eek: :P