The Rangers soap opera goes on and on.

[1971fozzy]

20 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

Answers on a postcard

 

 

 

Should they accept this bid 

Oh let me think about it 

 

[DETTY29]

So once again the only individual at fault in this whole debacle is Craig Whyte, who they have given up on.

 

No one else.  No one from the Murray Group, none of the other ex directors, current directors, ex and current key football operations staff or anyone at the SFA.

[Jambo-Fox]

What really frustrates me with this whole Sevco / Rangers thing is that we are both members of the same organisation.

 

Anywhere else, workplace, pub, restaurant, golf club etc., either those that ‘misbehave’  are asked / forced to leave or if not the good people tend to leave.

 

Why are Hearts prepared to tolerate these ‘people’ that ‘misbehave’? For how much longer will Hearts be prepared to accept being members of the same organisation as Sevco Rangers?

 

 

[Beast Boy]

28 minutes ago, Jambo-Fox said:

What really frustrates me with this whole Sevco / Rangers thing is that we are both members of the same organisation.

 

Anywhere else, workplace, pub, restaurant, golf club etc., either those that ‘misbehave’  are asked / forced to leave or if not the good people tend to leave.

 

Why are Hearts prepared to tolerate these ‘people’ that ‘misbehave’? For how much longer will Hearts be prepared to accept being members of the same organisation as Sevco Rangers?

 

 

 

Problem is, many of the other members of the golf club live in the same village as this boorish lout and they don't want their heads kicked in at closing time in the car park, or their front door vandalised. We could protest all we want, do you think Kilmarnock and co will side with us?

[Hagar the Horrible]

I love the bit where they said the wee tax case was under dispute and that was allowed, except they all agreed it was to be paid in full, so disputing it was only a delaying mechanism.   Its time this 5WA was brought to light, and take down the corruption in our game.  I think Uefa have told the SAF to sort it or else, and I wonder if this years licence is now in doubt, lets face it they are behaving in the exact same way

[Lovecraft]

15 minutes ago, Hagar the Horrible said:

I love the bit where they said the wee tax case was under dispute and that was allowed, except they all agreed it was to be paid in full, so disputing it was only a delaying mechanism.   Its time this 5WA was brought to light, and take down the corruption in our game.  I think Uefa have told the SAF to sort it or else, and I wonder if this years licence is now in doubt, lets face it they are behaving in the exact same way

 

Seems pretty strange timing for the new "charge" tbh

 

I'm guessing UEFA must be asking for proof that Rangers have their finances in order, and not a total lie like the last time.

 

I'm also guessing it is the SFA covering their own backs in case/when Rangers go to shit again.

 

Can you imagine if Scottish teams were banned from UEFA competitions because the SFA lied to them?   Twice!

 

 

[N Lincs Jambo]

Just now, Lovecraft said:

 

Seems pretty strange timing for the new "charge" tbh

 

I'm guessing UEFA must be asking for proof that Rangers have their finances in order, and not a total lie like the last time.

 

I'm also guessing it is the SFA covering their own backs in case/when Rangers go to shit again.

 

Can you imagine if Scottish teams were banned from UEFA competitions because the SFA lied to them?   Twice!

 

 

 

Whilst the bit in bold probably wouldn't be a bad things in the overall scheme of things as it would prevent Celtic from adding another £30 Million plus advantage to their resources it really would stink if it was all down to the corrupt governing body at home yet again doing everything to bend/break the rules in favour of one club.

[Lovecraft]

6 minutes ago, N Lincs Jambo said:

 

Whilst the bit in bold probably wouldn't be a bad things in the overall scheme of things as it would prevent Celtic from adding another £30 Million plus advantage to their resources it really would stink if it was all down to the corrupt governing body at home yet again doing everything to bend/break the rules in favour of one club.

 

My understanding of it, is that it is up to the SFA to make sure teams stick to the rules created by the SFA for national leagues.  Even if they break the rules, the SFA could still put them forward for a UEFA license.

 

UEFA only then get involved when the SFA put forward the teams for a licence to play in UEFA competitions, and this is when they put in their own rules that MUST be obeyed.  Like no outstanding tax, FFP and the like.    I'm guessing it is to save UEFA the embarrassment if a club goes bust and cannot complete their fixtures.   Fit and proper, if you will.  :-)

 

Unless there has suddenly been an emptying of all the Rangers minded guys at the SFA, their latest actions today are..... a little strange.  Especially as it is once the league has finished and the clubs will be applying for their license to play next season in OOFA competitions.

[JackLadd]

26 minutes ago, N Lincs Jambo said:

 

Whilst the bit in bold probably wouldn't be a bad things in the overall scheme of things as it would prevent Celtic from adding another £30 Million plus advantage to their resources it really would stink if it was all down to the corrupt governing body at home yet again doing everything to bend/break the rules in favour of one club.

 

A UEFA ban might be a price worth paying as long as we get it confirmed Sevco are a new club (as they will have to plead this to avoid fines and punishment) and the dodgy transferred titles are finally stripped for Rangers fielding ineligible players and paying no social taxes for a decade - setting aside the disgraceful Nimmo Smith con.  

[Jambo-Fox]

59 minutes ago, Bez said:

 

Problem is, many of the other members of the golf club live in the same village as this boorish lout and they don't want their heads kicked in at closing time in the car park, or their front door vandalised. We could protest all we want, do you think Kilmarnock and co will side with us?

Probably best to join another golf club then, but not in Ayrshire!

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

I see rangers have again admitted they're a new club.I

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-44126217

[sac]

Their history stopped when they died, & yes, they did die. They know it, we know it. They should always be reminded of it & never allowed to forget it.

Their siege mentality attempting to defend that they are still the same entity shows that it hurts them. 

 

**** them.

[itsnomarooned]

2 hours ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

I see rangers have again admitted they're a new club.I

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-44126217

Leaving aside any argument about new club/old club etc., this is pretty awful stuff.  Maybe it's technically correct that a duty of care lies with a previous owner but surely that's irrelevant.  The normal and decent thing to do would be to apologise, offer support and investigate.  What a bunch of sh1ts !!

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

9 minutes ago, itsnomarooned said:

Leaving aside any argument about new club/old club etc., this is pretty awful stuff.  Maybe it's technically correct that a duty of care lies with a previous owner but surely that's irrelevant.  The normal and decent thing to do would be to apologise, offer support and investigate.  What a bunch of sh1ts !!

Aye, pretty much told them to get to Falkirk, we're not interested in your bleating. 

 

Particularly scummy when people from oldco are now representing newco. 

Edited May 16, 2018 by Joey J J Jr Shabadoo

[Mikey1874]

I've always seen Rangers as the same club. 

 

But this is them categorically saying they are a new club. Over a matter that trumps most other matters - the duty of care to children. 

 

They should be chased and hounded for this. If I was Dave King or Stewart Robertson I'd be on the phone this morning sorting this out and doing a press conference  offering to take full responsibility. 

 

Of course there are other people implicated here. 

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/our-region/edinburgh/claims-abuse-allegations-were-hushed-up-by-club-1-4315299/amp

[Mikey1874]

26 minutes ago, itsnomarooned said:

Leaving aside any argument about new club/old club etc., this is pretty awful stuff.  Maybe it's technically correct that a duty of care lies with a previous owner but surely that's irrelevant.  The normal and decent thing to do would be to apologise, offer support and investigate.  What a bunch of sh1ts !!

 

Its potentially a big story. 

 

See how the media handle it. Child protection v protecting The Rangers. 

 

We can guess which side people are on. 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

14 minutes ago, itsnomarooned said:

Leaving aside any argument about new club/old club etc., this is pretty awful stuff.  Maybe it's technically correct that a duty of care lies with a previous owner but surely that's irrelevant.  The normal and decent thing to do would be to apologise, offer support and investigate.  What a bunch of sh1ts !!

 

I would think you could count on one hand the number of clubs in the UK who still have the same owners as they did in the 70's, 80's & 90's, yet none of them have trotted out the 'nothing to do with us, see the previous owners' line when it comes to claims of sexual abuse.

 

If newco want to claim to be the same club, then they can't be selective in what bits of history they want to adopt from the old club, it's either all or nothing.

[Mikey1874]

14 minutes ago, Barack said:

A new low.

 

Who'd have guessed...

 

As I hope Dave King is asking this morning, who at Rangers is responsible for this stating this position?

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Just now, Mikey1874 said:

 

As I hope Dave King is asking this morning, who at Rangers is responsible for this stating this position?

Is King actually in Scotland?

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

BTW, I was reading about this new term of abuse, "gammon". To me, Jabba is the epitome of a "gammon"!

[Nookie Bear]

4 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

BTW, I was reading about this new term of abuse, "gammon". To me, Jabba is the epitome of a "gammon"!

 

Racist

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

7 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

 

Racist

Jabbaist ?

[Hagar the Horrible]

How can they use the argument that the wee tax case was a previous regime?  CW inherited that debt, King and SDM ran it up and failed to pay it because the big tax case was so massive.   It was the same regime, just a different club, Still if it end up in court at least that argument would be clarified, If its the same club, then why is the wee tax case and the big tax case not still active?  Also their statement reeks of we will smash yer windaes in Euefa?

 

 

Side note:  that sex abuse scandal is pretty harrowing,  PR disaster all round,   Its got Jabba all over it,  if not then what a waste of money.  See the liquidators.  wow.  At least offer an apology

[Boris]

3 minutes ago, Hagar the Horrible said:

How can they use the argument that the wee tax case was a previous regime?  CW inherited that debt, King and SDM ran it up and failed to pay it because the big tax case was so massive.   It was the same regime, just a different club, Still if it end up in court at least that argument would be clarified, If its the same club, then why is the wee tax case and the big tax case not still active?  Also their statement reeks of we will smash yer windaes in Euefa?

 

 

Side note:  that sex abuse scandal is pretty harrowing,  PR disaster all round,   Its got Jabba all over it,  if not then what a waste of money.  See the liquidators.  wow.  At least offer an apology

It's the smoke and mirrors of "same club, but different owners", and it's bullshit. 

 

Yet no one will call them out on it.

[Fort Vallance]

10 hours ago, Lovecraft said:

 

My understanding of it, is that it is up to the SFA to make sure teams stick to the rules created by the SFA for national leagues.  Even if they break the rules, the SFA could still put them forward for a UEFA license.

 

UEFA only then get involved when the SFA put forward the teams for a licence to play in UEFA competitions, and this is when they put in their own rules that MUST be obeyed.  Like no outstanding tax, FFP and the like.    I'm guessing it is to save UEFA the embarrassment if a club goes bust and cannot complete their fixtures.   Fit and proper, if you will.  :-)

 

Unless there has suddenly been an emptying of all the Rangers minded guys at the SFA, their latest actions today are..... a little strange.  Especially as it is once the league has finished and the clubs will be applying for their license to play next season in OOFA competitions.

Timing might not be so strange as it wouldn't even begin to be heard until June. By which time Europa preliminary draws would be made.

[Deevers]

14 minutes ago, Boris said:

It's the smoke and mirrors of "same club, but different owners", and it's bullshit. 

 

Yet no one will call them out on it.

Spot on. Certainly the media here will sit on their hands and do or say nothing that might upset them. Says so much about them. 

[BelgeJambo]

In light of this new scandal and his role in the previous version of Rangers, can the SFA now decide that GLIB is not Fit to run a club?

[Des Lynam]

3 hours ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

I see rangers have again admitted they're a new club.I

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-44126217

 

 They have no shame. 

[TyphoonJambo]

4 hours ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

I see rangers have again admitted they're a new club.I

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-44126217

Cherry picking the bits of their history that they want to keep again.

[Don Dan]

Shamefully side stepped responsibility by pointing the finger at the old owners who are being liquidated. Only when it suits the narrative do they jump between Old and New club.

[Homme]

A golden opportunity to earn some respect by doing the right thing and they **** it up.

[Tasavallan]

4 hours ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

I see rangers have again admitted they're a new club.I

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-44126217

Not quite what it says.  They state that the company that owned Rangers went into liquidation, not Rangers itself.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

13 minutes ago, Tasavallan said:

Not quite what it says.  They state that the company that owned Rangers went into liquidation, not Rangers itself.

 

It's the same thing to everyone but a Hun who wants to muddy the waters

[Seymour M Hersh]

2 hours ago, Barack said:

A new low.

 

Who'd have guessed...

 

I know! You would have thought the bar had been on the ground years ago and getting lower was impossible! 

[Rods]

I am not strictly sure what Rangers have done wrong with this one. The money issues should be an aside on what happend and technically they are correct. I am not sure how claiming compo from Oldco or Newco would make a great deal of difference. Seeing the perpatrator brought to justice would be at the forefront of my mind. I do notice that Rangers offered him help on his issues but that would not create headlines. Point scoring on this type of thing should be banned.

Edited May 16, 2018 by Rents

[redjambo]

3 hours ago, itsnomarooned said:

Leaving aside any argument about new club/old club etc., this is pretty awful stuff.  Maybe it's technically correct that a duty of care lies with a previous owner but surely that's irrelevant.  The normal and decent thing to do would be to apologise, offer support and investigate.  What a bunch of sh1ts !!

 

This. Deplorable behaviour.

[Boris]

Rangers are saying that the club was owned by Oldco, and they are responsible for compo.  Given that the person seeking redress is a former player, one can then follow that all previous players were the responsibility of the Oldco (as shown by the TUPE deals with McGregor and Naismith for example).

 

Therefore anything won by these players were the Oldco's.

 

Oldco is liquidated.

 

Therefore all those trophies belong to a dead company.

 

Not sure where the club actually fits in to this...

[Mikey1874]

12 minutes ago, Rents said:

I am not strictly sure what Rangers have done wrong with this one. The money issues should be an aside on what happend and technically they are correct. I am not sure how claiming compo from Oldco or Newco would make a great deal of difference. Seeing the perpatrator brought to justice would be at the forefront of my mind. I do notice that Rangers offered him help on his issues but that would not create headlines. Point scoring on this type of thing should be banned.

 

Unfortunately the message given is

 

"Rangers wash hands of child abuse"

 

"Nothing to do with us" 

[Mikey1874]

4 minutes ago, Boris said:

Rangers are saying that the club was owned by Oldco, and they are responsible for compo.  Given that the person seeking redress is a former player, one can then follow that all previous players were the responsibility of the Oldco (as shown by the TUPE deals with McGregor and Naismith for example).

 

Therefore anything won by these players were the Oldco's.

 

Oldco is liquidated.

 

Therefore all those trophies belong to a dead company.

 

Not sure where the club actually fits in to this...

 

Correct

 

But Rangers still claim all the trophies 

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

1 hour ago, Tasavallan said:

Not quite what it says.  They state that the company that owned Rangers went into liquidation, not Rangers itself.

Cherry picking when it suits them, I suppose.

[JackLadd]

Sexually abused when? Not us son, contact BDO. We're The Sevco 2012, going for 55. 

[Don Dan]

In reading the Scotsman comments section I noticed a reference and post made to this abuse issue. The Scotsman has deleted it in what would appear to be a censorship attack probably at the behest of Level 5. Its another example of the SMSM being scared of the Rangers.

[The Old Tolbooth]

A new club...............when it suits! 

 

Vermin! 

[The Gasman]

6 hours ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

I see rangers have again admitted they're a new club.I

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-44126217

 

As he was abused by an employee of the Club (not the holding company) I can’t see how ownership of the Club actually has any bearing on this at all.?

[Spellczech]

It is very normal when you take a company over, especially tech companies, to buy just the assets not the company itself. Reason is that you want the brands, the customers etc but you do not want the liabilities, particularly unknown liabilities at the date of purchase. The tricky thing for Rangers is that they want all the intangibles, the history and achievements alongside the brand, badges, stadium etc but they want none of the tax bills, historic sex abuse cases etc. Usually with football clubs the only way you can get the history is to buy the whole club, the company. This is why Ann bought Hearts out of administration, not just cherry-picking Tynecastle, badges etc Vlad lost control of the whole shebang, and Ann bought everything. Our history remains intact. This is not the case with Rangers, regardless of whatever shoddy deal was done with whomever was at the SFA at that time. King paid Ashley a few million for the badges when he learned White had mortgaged them, what price 50+ League titles? 

 

Interesting technical question would be, if an historic sex abuse claim arose at Hearts tomorrow, how would our club deal with it? I personally have no doubt whatsoever that our owner would face up to it even if it cost the club £1m...

 

To me this sex abuse case is proof positive that Rangers have no titles higher than the Championship...

[James1874f]

25 minutes ago, JackLadd said:

Sexually abused when? Not us son, contact BDO. We're The Sevco 2012, going for 55. 

[Deevers]

7 minutes ago, The Gasman said:

 

As he was abused by an employee of the Club (not the holding company) I can’t see how ownership of the Club actually has any bearing on this at all.?

Exactly. Going to make all the "Big Jock Knew" malarkey that they come away rather redundant for the knuckle draggers.

[Sexton Hardcastle]

The fall out on Twitter is hilarious. They actually believe there is some sort of bbc conspiracy against them and many of the replies are just mental.

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

37 minutes ago, The Gasman said:

 

As he was abused by an employee of the Club (not the holding company) I can’t see how ownership of the Club actually has any bearing on this at all.?

From memory, the father contacted souness about it, who then sacked the abuser, without contacting the authorities. Much like the celtic case that ally Brazil gave evidence in court about (and led to BJK). 

[jambovambo]

https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2018/05/15/the-importance-of-not-giving-up/