Paolo Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 (edited) Could we chip in and get them to name it Ibrox? I'd rather play ?2 for Ibrox and name it the F**ny Pad Arena. Edited September 7, 2014 by Claudia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swavkav Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 See 99% of the guff on this thread is it all just wishful thinking? Honestly we on about Hibs wanting us dead, is this crap any different? If they go under fair enough then dish it out to them but I just don't get this w~~~ fest... still nice have an obsession I suppose? Really?, no likey no readie,,, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Could we chip in and get them to name it Ibrox? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf's Mate Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 See 99% of the guff on this thread is it all just wishful thinking? Honestly we on about Hibs wanting us dead, is this crap any different? If they go under fair enough then dish it out to them but I just don't get this w~~~ fest... still nice have an obsession I suppose? I didn't actually want them to go completely out of business last time. The fact they've got such a strong fan base yet have still managed to royally feck it up, they deserve to be wiped out! It beggars belief that here we are again (possibly) with them in serious financial trouble so soon after the last meltdown. I have absolutely no sympathy for them nor would I expect any for us if we did the same. They had a warning shot and have decided to ignore it. Any club run this way deserves to be put out of business! Your obsession comment is wide of the mark! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamboelite Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 (edited) See 99% of the guff on this thread is it all just wishful thinking? Honestly we on about Hibs wanting us dead, is this crap any different? If they go under fair enough then dish it out to them but I just don't get this w~~~ fest... still nice have an obsession I suppose? Their issues could cost them -25 points and effectively take our biggest threat out the title race so excuse me if i keep with this thread. Edited September 7, 2014 by Jamboelite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I P Knightley Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Peter & Paul Easley Fly away Peter; Fly away Paul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwaysthereinspirit Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 See 99% of the guff on this thread is it all just wishful thinking? Honestly we on about Hibs wanting us dead, is this crap any different? If they go under fair enough then dish it out to them but I just don't get this w~~~ fest... still nice have an obsession I suppose? We wouldn't have a thread like this if your team had played by the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hungry hippo Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 See 99% of the guff on this thread is it all just wishful thinking? Honestly we on about Hibs wanting us dead, is this crap any different? If they go under fair enough then dish it out to them but I just don't get this w~~~ fest... still nice have an obsession I suppose? This thread is extremely factual unlike the equivalent Hibs thread about us (since deleted due to the high level of bollocks). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sooperstar Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 This thread is extremely factual unlike the equivalent Hibs thread about us (since deleted due to the high level of bollocks). It got deleted? That's brilliant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagger Is Back Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 I reckon it will be a couple of months before Rangers go into admin. Insolvent businesses can usually stagger on for a while by robbing Peter to pay Paul before they accept their fate. I think Peters already been mugged - twice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Rangers have appealed the decision which will be heard on Tuesday. The money i assume until then is still not Imrans. I think any admin will be put off until they lose the appeal AND their share issue fails. think its Tuesday to decide if they CAN appeal, not actual appeal hearing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Usf266r Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Why does everybody rob peter?paul's the one with all the bloody money.just a thought.wake me up when they're deid will ye?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jock _turd Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 "We wouldn't have a thread like this if your team had played by the rules." That is so shallow! I have looked at your profile it tells me you were born the year after I watched my first game at Tynecastle... in which we had a draw with Clyde. I am no Rangers apologist nut some of the stuff spouted on this thread is slightly obsessed... IMO. However even as a Hearts supporter for many a year it pains me to say that "if your team had played by the rules" applies to Hearts just as much as it does to Rangers or do you do rules on a sliding scale? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobNox Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 think its Tuesday to decide if they CAN appeal, not actual appeal hearing And I would expect the money is currently ring fenced, but if Rangers are given leave to appeal, will the money be released pending the outcome of the appeal, or will it remain ring fenced until the appeal is heard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaka Demus & pliers Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 It got deleted? That's brilliant. Seems to have been 'archived' but still all there http://www.hibs.net/archive/index.php/t-158395-p-190.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobNox Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Seems to have been 'archived' but still all there http://www.hibs.net/...8395-p-190.html Deary me, what a laugh looking back at some of the utter sh1te they were posting AFTER we'd come out of administration. And where are they now? And who's fault is it this time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwaysthereinspirit Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 "We wouldn't have a thread like this if your team had played by the rules." That is so shallow! I have looked at your profile it tells me you were born the year after I watched my first game at Tynecastle... in which we had a draw with Clyde. I am no Rangers apologist nut some of the stuff spouted on this thread is slightly obsessed... IMO. However even as a Hearts supporter for many a year it pains me to say that "if your team had played by the rules" applies to Hearts just as much as it does to Rangers or do you do rules on a sliding scale? We may on occasion over the past 9 years not have played totally within the rules but we certainly weren't close to breaking them the same way Rangers did for close to 20 years. We were rightly punished for financial discrepancies and the club accepted them and took the punishment without complaint. Rangers or the other hand.................. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Sifter Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 jock_turd what's the thinking behind your name mate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bilel Mohsni Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 jock_turd what's the thinking behind your name mate? http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=sturdy-turd ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flogel98 Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 And I would expect the money is currently ring fenced, but if Rangers are given leave to appeal, will the money be released pending the outcome of the appeal, or will it remain ring fenced until the appeal is heard? Monies remain ring fenced until final outcome of any appeal I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jock _turd Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 jock_turd what's the thinking behind your name mate? My take on it is a Scottish jack-shit as in I know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Monies remain ring fenced until final outcome of any appeal I think. I think this is correct, and if they lose their appeal, then it will remain that way until the court case in November. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gashauskis9 Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Immediate transfer embargo will be the worst of it unless there are consistent late payments. Yep. A ban on transfer activity until the window opens in January... Exactly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambof3tornado Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 I think this is correct, and if they lose their appeal, then it will remain that way until the court case in November. Or for even longer if there are any delays/appeals during the actual court case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf's Mate Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 "We wouldn't have a thread like this if your team had played by the rules." That is so shallow! I have looked at your profile it tells me you were born the year after I watched my first game at Tynecastle... in which we had a draw with Clyde. I am no Rangers apologist nut some of the stuff spouted on this thread is slightly obsessed... IMO. However even as a Hearts supporter for many a year it pains me to say that "if your team had played by the rules" applies to Hearts just as much as it does to Rangers or do you do rules on a sliding scale? Several people out across IMO valid reasons why they believe newco should suffer. You've decided to highlight one comment although it was still a valid comment as it wasn't just a case of oldco throwing money at a team they in order to win titles! Neither is it a shallow comment and all clubs, ourselves included, should play within the rules. It's easy to say but if we did exactly what they did then I'd be appalled as it would honestly taint every title/cup won! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 (edited) Several people out across IMO valid reasons why they believe newco should suffer. You've decided to highlight one comment although it was still a valid comment as it wasn't just a case of oldco throwing money at a team they in order to win titles! Neither is it a shallow comment and all clubs, ourselves included, should play within the rules. It's easy to say but if we did exactly what they did then I'd be appalled as it would honestly taint every title/cup won! It would be interesting how we would react if at a later date it transpired for our ?1.5m tax bill we were retaining joint Scottish and Lithuanian contracts, but only lodged the Scots ones? Excluding interest and penalty fees, on a financial pro rata, we should expect a fine in the region of ?15k. But we have self certified upon request from the SPL that we never withheld any documentation, so I'd be thoroughly peed off if we were lying. Ashamed and embarrassed? Should be. Would be? This is football. Edited September 8, 2014 by DETTY29 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf's Mate Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 It would be interesting how we would react if at a later date it transpired for our ?1.5m tax bill we were retaining joint Scottish and Lithuanian contracts, but only lodged the Scots ones? Excluding interest and penalty fees, on a financial pro rata, we should expect a fine in the region of ?15k. But we have self certified upon request from the SPL that we never withheld any documentation, so I'd be thoroughly peed off if we were lying. Ashamed and embarrassed? Should be. Would be? This is football. Fair points and it's easy to say that it's nowhere near as bad a them however where do you draw the line? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wibble Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Fair points and it's easy to say that it's nowhere near as bad a them however where do you draw the line? I would draw the line at where the National media is corrupted. Where the ruling bodies are corrupted. Where there are threats of violence against officials who don't provide favors, or against committees who impose penalties. Where fans feel justified in smashing up a major city Centre because a TV breaks down. Where public disorder is used as an excuse for not applying the rules to the biggest rule breakers. But that's just me I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 (edited) Ashley is quietly stripping the assets from right under their noses..the purchase of the retail arm, and the TUPE'ing of all it's staff, to me, is a clear indication of that... A quick Q for anyone involved in employment law. Can staff just be Tupe'd over or is there a cooling off period? I thought there was something like 90 days or redundancy terms to be offered. Reason I'm asking if the 90 day rule is still there is it just starting or has this been planned for some time? Edited September 8, 2014 by DETTY29 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jammy T Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 A quick Q for anyone involved in employment law. Can staff just be Tupe'd over or is there a cooling off period? I thought there was something like 90 days or redundancy terms to be offered. Reason I'm asking if the 90 day rule is still there is it just starting or has this been planned for some time? There should have been a consultation period pre-TUPE afaik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 There should have been a consultation period pre-TUPE afaik So this has been on the cards for months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
269miles Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 There should have been a consultation period pre-TUPE afaik Is (was) TUPE actually appropriate in this case - I don't see any "transfer" , not in any sense that I've been transferred (twice). Rangers went bust and a new company was formed so there was never any "transfer" ? Can you clarify ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jammy T Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 So this has been on the cards for months. In theory - but the requirement could be ignored, or agreed as not required. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jammy T Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Is (was) TUPE actually appropriate in this case - I don't see any "transfer" , not in any sense that I've been transferred (twice). Rangers went bust and a new company was formed so there was never any "transfer" ? Can you clarify ? I'm no expert on this by any means but when one business takes over a distinct part of another business the people that worked in that part are covered by the Tupe regs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar the Horrible Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 According to Merlin the wigs want Wallace gone, I wonder how much that will cost? I am beginning to think that Wallace is the only one who genuinely has the best interest of the club at heart and has his hands tied behind his back, every time he tries to curb the spending and reduce wage bills he gets a kick in the stains oouch. I don't think they have the power directly to sack him, without the backing of the entire board, plus I think post admin any new buyer might be wise to keep him. The thing is he is NOT a Rangers man, and right now that is an asset? as the so called Rangers men are feasting on their own carcass! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkishcap Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Their own fans never need to help them out as we did cos there is always someone out there who is willing to stick millions into the club so they get complacent. Indeed have almost always had a silver spoon in their mouths.....take for granted cup wins league wins and Europe.....celebrities attach to both ugly sisters to make them both feel smug n superior, they will never know what its like to support a normal team, they are both set up for two things...make money and stick it up each other, that`s it and the rest of us just have to stand by as a side show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allowayjambo1874 Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Their own fans never need to help them out as we did cos there is always someone out there who is willing to stick millions into the club so they get complacent. Indeed have almost always had a silver spoon in their mouths.....take for granted cup wins league wins and Europe.....celebrities attach to both ugly sisters to make them both feel smug n superior, they will never know what its like to support a normal team, they are both set up for two things...make money and stick it up each other, that`s it and the rest of us just have to stand by as a side show. And this is exactly why they are in trouble as no one is interested in doing this anymore hence they are owned by spivs and have been ripped apart. Though they cling on to king riding in their fans know its not a sure thing and that there is no plan b other than selling off the family silver. Every hun I knows accepts that they way we have done things on and off the pitch was the way they should have done things. There has been huge change in their fans attitudes 18 months ago was still listening to 'when we get back into europe' chat now they just want spivs out even if that meant going backwards for a few years. Think the penny has finally dropped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
primrose Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 A quick Q for anyone involved in employment law. Can staff just be Tupe'd over or is there a cooling off period? I thought there was something like 90 days or redundancy terms to be offered. Reason I'm asking if the 90 day rule is still there is it just starting or has this been planned for some time? 90 days consultation period is for where there are more than 100 people involved, for less than 100 people it's 30 days consultation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adi Dassler Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Has he put Newcastle United up for sale yet? Newcastle United have been up for sale for some time I believe with no takers at the current price. I don't know what the price is but given how Ashley has conducted his business at Newcastle it will be an exorbitant amount. Interestingly he has only very recently resurfaced at games after a long sabbatical. Could be something in that. Could not be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunks Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 90 days consultation period is for where there are more than 100 people involved, for less than 100 people it's 30 days consultation. Is that not for redundancy, rather than TUPE? Don't think it applies in the case of an insolvency event either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown user Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 (edited) I had a look at a TUPE pdf provided by ACAS online, it was a guideline to what needs to be done. It does mention a consultation but there was no mention of it being a mandatory minimum amount of time. http://www.acas.org.uk/media/pdf/i/h/Handling-TUPE-Transfers-The-Acas-Guide.pdf Maybe the time period was specifically for insolvency events? Edited September 8, 2014 by Smithee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Is that not for redundancy, rather than TUPE? Don't think it applies in the case of an insolvency event either. I've been querying Rangers Retail staff going to Sports Direct rather than players. I doubt Ashley will be putting Elbows on the Sports Direct payroll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunks Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 I've been querying Rangers Retail staff going to Sports Direct rather than players. I doubt Ashley will be putting Elbows on the Sports Direct payroll. Apologies - I thought it was in reference to a possible insolvency event similar to what Green done with MkII. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUTOL Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 (edited) You would think that if the retail company (which is the only profitable part of the business) was being taken over or altered significantly that there would be a stock market announcement... Edited September 8, 2014 by SUTOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.T.K Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Wallace isn't in step with the spivs way of thinking.. Ashley is the man they want, not wallace's preferred option of king (the tax cheat). Wallace was never staying long there either tbh. Only heard good things about him.. He's far better out of this altogether imo.. Let's see how feels about his position after he receives his 100% bonus. Anyone know when that is due? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 You would think that if the retail company (which is the only profitable part of the business) was being taken over or altered significantly that there would be a stock market announcement... Well either the Daily Record has got it wrong, or the RIFC and it's Nomad are pretty relaxed about what determines an AIM announcement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
primrose Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Is that not for redundancy, rather than TUPE? Don't think it applies in the case of an insolvency event either. Actually, I think you are right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Speaking to my neighbourhood Orc tonight and he seems to think Dave King has passed the fit and proper persons test and can move in anytime. He's a bright well educated guy but typically blind like the other Orcs. I said King was a convicted criminal but he assured me that was not a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottish_chicP Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Speaking to my neighbourhood Orc tonight and he seems to think Dave King has passed the fit and proper persons test and can move in anytime. He's a bright well educated guy but typically blind like the other Orcs. I said King was a convicted criminal but he assured me that was not a problem. Like the one who told me last week King had transferred 32 million. I seen him yesterday in the pub. He didn't say much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Buaben Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 I've been querying Rangers Retail staff going to Sports Direct rather than players. I doubt Ashley will be putting Elbows on the Sports Direct payroll. Unless he needs someone to stack the warehouse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts