David Stevenson Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 Deary me David You still hurting? Hardly "hurting", just stating facts. Teams get booted out of the Scottish Cup for playing players ineligible due to clerical errors. Old Rangers get a free pass for a calculated evasion of registration and tax. It's not as if Thistle would have gained much had your old club played fair rather than cheated for years. On the topic of the thread however, I agree with your sentiments re Hearts. The young players at Hearts are gaining experience that will be invaluable for their tilt at the Championship next season. (Assuming they aren't liquidated and aiming to win League Two of course). If they manage to get out of admin this season with Tynecastle in their portfolio they will have a good financial base from season ticket sales in the 1000s. Some fiscal sense will allow them to sign up decent pros to supplement the younger guys for next season and with financial reality (allegedly) blowing through the Blue Room at Ibrox, poor Ally will have to try getting by with a cut-price version of the squad that he's got unless he fancies trying to overcome a 15pt penalty for going into admin again! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bunny Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 If they manage to get out of admin this season with Tynecastle in their portfolio they will have a good financial base from season ticket sales in the 1000s. Some fiscal sense will allow them to sign up decent pros to supplement the younger guys for next season and with financial reality (allegedly) blowing through the Blue Room at Ibrox, poor Ally will have to try getting by with a cut-price version of the squad that he's got unless he fancies trying to overcome a 15pt penalty for going into admin again! I think you're probably right. And no doubt at least one other club will challenge them too. Even with their current problems if Rangers manage to continue they will have a problem if McCoist continues to be in charge. Even a very, very weak Rangers should have a budget to at least match Hearts but McCoist is a manager who needs big, big spending to win things, so poor is he at his job. I suspect though that he's a greedy wee B and as long as he's continued to be overpaid he would happily accept a situation where an experienced 'old head' was brought in relatively cheaply to do the real managing while McCoist got on with his real job of keeping the fans onside with any nonsense the board wants to run with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Willjag Posted January 9, 2014 Members Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 Thread hijack ahoy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda-jag Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 (edited) I agree but the company is not important is it? It's the club that's important so football admin = transfer embargo .....as punishment of the club but not the company while football liquidation = death and ceasing to exist ..... as punishment of the company but not the club ? seems legit. Why not Scotlands most successful dead club? fixed it for you ? although ..... I thought that was Celtic? After all 2 European Cup finals and a EUFA cup final, winning the European cup once is hard to beat - though Aberdeen have 2 European trophies. A certain defunct club has a cup-winners-cup (though disgrace attaches to it) and a lot of league titles but since a lot of them were won through cheating and they're out of business now anyway you can't really include them. I believe there's a new club down Govan way that's been bragging about winning bottom-division titles as if they'd won the Champions league but nobody takes them seriously. thought billko had burnt all his past shame in a funeral pyre, and come over from the dark side too. shame, was beginning to like him. Edited January 10, 2014 by yoda-jag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northernsoul Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 It would always be great coming back from Edinburgh with three points in recent times, obviously with us being the underdog on pretty much all of those occasions. What made our victory at Tynecastle all the more sweeter, for me was that we were kicking them when they were down. It must be, and seemingly it will continue to be one of their lowest ebbs in their history and I hope that continues for as long as possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billko Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 so football admin = transfer embargo .....as punishment of the club but not the company while football liquidation = death and ceasing to exist ..... as punishment of the company but not the club ? seems legit. fixed it for you ? although ..... thought billko had burnt all his past shame in a funeral pyre, and come over from the dark side too. shame, was beginning to like him. You will find the club still has all it's honours that make it Scotland's most successful club so it must be the same club is it not? Maybe you should take it up with Uefa Yoda and see if they agree with you. and if not why not use your force to try and convince them. You liking me is not of any importance to me and sure i will get on fine either way and doubt folk who hate so much would be to my liking anyway An idea for the forum would be to add Rangers to the end of every thread tittle as that way it will keep the same culprits all on topic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Peebles Tackle Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Hearts? Rangers? The Rangers? Sevco? Who gives a monkey's? Hearts should see out their punishment. 'Rangers' should think themselves lucky they still exist at all. (God knows how they kept Ibrox / Murray Park...) Right, that's that sorted out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackpool Jags Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 An idea for the forum would be to add Rangers to the end of every thread tittle as that way it will keep the same culprits all on topic Hmmmm. I wouldn't mind doing that with, let's see, 'One Word Postings'. I'll start with *******. Nah, it's never gonnae work. Drat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazy davie Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 I think Hearts should be allowed to sign players, if only to annoy the h u n s 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrantB Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 I think if I was a Sevco fan (heaven forbid), I would actually want it to be a new club. One that is free from all those tainted titles gained by years of cheating.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kni Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 I think Hearts should be allowed to sign players, if only to annoy the h u n s No way!!! I was wondering whether Hearts should be penalised more points if they fail to exit administration by the end of the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norgethistle Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Are Dunfermiline out of admin?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagfox Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Are Dunfermiline out of admin?? They sure are. Pars survived, The rAngers died Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norgethistle Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 (edited) Never knew they had came out admin Edited January 10, 2014 by Norgethistle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stillresigned Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Why not Scotlands most successful club? Is that the same as "the quintessentially British club", Christ I wonder who taught them big words? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stillresigned Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 I think if I was a Sevco fan (heaven forbid), I would actually want it to be a new club. One that is free from all those tainted titles gained by years of cheating.... And ignore 140 years of glorious history? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kni Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Never knew they had came out admin The club is out of admin but the company that owns East End Park may still be in admin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottymagoo Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 I have some sympathy with the Hearts players on this one. These are teenagers who will not be fully physically developed yet and who would ordinarily be used sparingly at this stage in their careers. They are being asked to play week in week out against fully grown men with little chance of getting substituted never mind left out for a proper rest / recovery and this could have a detrimental effect on the longevity of their playing careers (see Alex Fergusons recent comments regarding Michael Owen). The club should be punished but not to the detriment of the careers of teenage boys who had nothing to do with the clubs financial collapse. Perhaps they could let them register Billy Brown as a player? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda-jag Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 You will find the club still has all it's honours that make it Scotland's most successful club so it must be the same club is it not? Maybe you should take it up with Uefa Yoda and see if they agree with you. and if not why not use your force to try and convince them. You liking me is not of any importance to me and sure i will get on fine either way and doubt folk who hate so much would be to my liking anyway An idea for the forum would be to add Rangers to the end of every thread tittle as that way it will keep the same culprits all on topic oh dear billyboy, you're still in denial. how about fifa for starters? http://www.fifa.com/...01/7/index.html in their "12 moments that defined 2012 " they state: after 140 years of history and a world record 54 league titles, the club was consigned to liquidation in mid-June. the club died, the history timeline ceased, the club you now follow is 18 months old, thats its history. media quotes include: - The Herald: “Air of unreality as 140 years of history is formally ended in less than nine minutes” (The Herald, 15 June 2012: http://www.heraldsco...inutes.17876625). - Roddie Forsyth: “Rangers in crisis: the final whistle sounds on Rangers’ 140 years of history” (The Telegraph, 12 June 2012: http://www.telegraph...of-history.html). - Jim Traynor: “Rangers FC as we know them are dead. It’s all over. They are about to shut down for ever…They’ll slip into liquidation within the next couple of weeks with a new company emerging but 140 years of history, triumph and tears, will have ended… No matter how Charles Green attempts to dress it up, a newco equals a new club. When the CVA was thrown out Rangers as we know them died.” (Daily Record, 13 June 2012: http://www.dailyreco...be-able-1129166). and then, even Charles Green held the same categorical viewpoint [speaking to the BBC if a CVA is not accepted]: “…the history, the tradition, everything that is great about this Club, is swept aside.” many many more, outside the bigotbluebrothersbubble who do not have their heads in sand and are still trotting out the "was company not the club" deluded line, have a look for instance at scotzine or how about this from graham spiers, which includes: at least four Rangers principals, men who have been lauded by supporters, have expressed just such a view of Rangers as a new club.First, Charles Green. Prior to Rangers' descent into liquidation last year, Green was aghast at the attitude of Dave King, a long-standing Rangers director, who had urged that a CVA be voted down by the club's 276 creditors. Incredulous at this, Green went on television and said: "What he [King] is suggesting is that, rather than get a CVA through that retains all the history and tradition, that instead we should vote against it and go down the newco route. I mean…why would a true Rangers fan suggest that?" In this, the view of Green, the man to whom many Rangers fans swooned, appears none too different to that of BBC Scotland and others. Arguably, no Rangers figure in this debate finds himself in a more excruciating position than James Traynor, the club's Director of Communication. Time and space here doesn't allow for the sheer number of times that Traynor, in his previous role as a journalist, emphatically pronounced Rangers to be a new club once liquidation became a reality. Yet he has the temerity now to argue the complete opposite. Of the numerous times Traynor weighed in on this subject, just two quotes here will have to suffice. With liquidation looming, Traynor wrote in the Daily Record: "Some Rangers fans believe the club's history, which would end with liquidation, must be protected. But any newco should make it clear that a new beginning means exactly that: a new club open to all from the very beginning." Later on, with the Rangers CVA being rejected, Traynor wrote: "Rangers FC as we know them are dead." Caustically, he added: "No matter how Charles Green attempts to dress it up, a newco equals a new club. When the CVA was thrown out, Rangers as we know them died." Reading this type of stuff, I would urge Rangers to exercise supreme caution in railing against anyone who dares to call their club a new club; none other than their own Director of Communication has made his view perfectly clear on the subject. Many a Rangers fan expressed the view that the club died with the descent into liquidation. Typical of this was Ibrox debenture holder Stewart Boal who, having stumbled out of the CVA meeting of June 2012, was quoted by Richard Wilson in The Herald as saying: "We're in shock. The club is gone. We've got to start again and move on." Wilson, a fine reporter, himself wrote of that nine-minute creditors' meeting where the CVA was rejected: "In those few minutes 140 years of history had been rubbed out." I could go on and on here. Richard Gough, one of Rangers' greatest ever captains, wrote in a newspaper column: "The club I gave blood, sweat and tears for is dead." Walter Smith, one of the greatest figures in Rangers' history, and now the club's chairman, said of Green's consortium taking over: "I wish the new Rangers Football Club every good fortune." This is a painful subject. Many Rangers fans are agonised at the thought of their club being new - they simply rule it out. "It's the company, not the club," became the mantra. Other Rangers observers - like me - find it hard to escape the view that the current club is a new club. or how about looking at it from the insolvency law angle? when a company is liquidated its business activities cease to exist. The business of Rangers FC Plc was football. When Rangers FC Plc was wound up, so were the football activities of Rangers FC Plc i.e. the football club and associated merchandising etc. The BBC recognised this fact when they observed that “The Rangers Football Club PLC is a public limited company registered in Scotland (company number: SC004276) and was incorporated on 27 May, 1899. When the current company is officially liquidated, all of its corporate business history will come to an end.” furthermore, if a new company is formed – using assets bought from the old, liquidated company, for the purposes of operating the same type of business – it is not only a new company that has come into being but also the start of a new business venture, irrespective of the nature of that business. In the context of Rangers, the Rangers FC plying its trade in the SFL is a new football club and not the same club as that which played in the SPL. To deny otherwise is contrary to insolvency law. If it were otherwise then insolvency law would be a meaningless legal instrument. or how about looking at it from the insolvency act angle? legal matters can be determined by statute (Acts of Parliament) or case law. In terms of statute, there is no law that permits a liquidated company’s history to continue unbroken after liquidation: on the contrary, there is one to prevent such an event taking place – The Insolvency Act 1986. In terms of case law, there is no legal precedent to justify the claim that a liquidated company’s history can legitimately resurface under the guise of another company. Once a company is liquidated, its name, historical timeline and associated business activities immediately cease. In the case of a football club, there is no club in the UK that has been liquidated and resurfaced, after liquidation, with its history intact. In Scotland for example, Airdrieonians, formed in 1878 (under the earlier exotic name of Excelsior Football Club) went into liquidation in 2002. In the same year Airdrie FC was formed but because of insolvency law could not lay claim to the history of its previous incarnation, which to their credit they accepted with good grace. Other examples include Gretna and Clydebank. Rangers’ fans erroneously point to the case of Leeds United FC as evidence of a club that has a continuous historical timeline intact after liquidation. In 2007, Leeds United AFC Ltd, under the threat of liquidation, was sold to Leeds United FC Ltd, but with the important proviso that HMRC would agree to a CVA. HMRC did eventually agree to a CVA and Leeds was saved from compulsory liquidation. The club suffered a points deduction and after paying off the creditorsand the proper and orderly transfer of assets from Leeds United AFC Ltd to Leeds United FC Ltd, the old club company was voluntarily wound up. If a CVA had not been agreed and Leeds United AFC Ltd had been forced into compulsory liquidation then Leeds United FC Ltd (i.e. the new company) would not have been able to claim the history of the old club. Rangers FC is a very different case indeed and Rangers fans cannot point to the example of Leeds FC as an exemple of club survival after liquidation. or how about sfa membership and eufa licence? when Charles Green bought the assets of Rangers FC Plc he also purchased the old club’s SFA membership and SPL share. Prior to liquidation, Rangers had full membership status within Scottish professional football. After liquidation, the club playing in SFL Division 3 was allocated associate membership status. The reason for that was very simple: the Rangers playing in the SFL was a different club than the one which previously played in the SPL. Importantly, the new Rangers applied to join the SPL but their application was rejected, despite a mysterious 5-way agreement. If Rangers was the same club pre and post liquidation then an application would have been completely unnecessary, particularly since they claimed to purchase the old club’s SFA membership and SPL share. Of course, Rangers was legally dissolved after liquidation – hence the need for a fresh application from the new club. Similarly, the new Rangers then applied to join the SFL and this time their application was successful. Remember, if an existing SPL club changes ownership or its holding company changes from a Ltd to a Plc, it has no bearing on the club’s membership status and therefore there is no requirement to re-apply for SFA or SPL membership – it is liquidation that forces that event. Furthermore, because Rangers post-liquidation is a new club, it is unable to compete in European competition for three years. It is a stipulation of EUFA that a license to play in Europe can only be given to a club that has been a member of a national association for three consecutive years. The old Rangers did have a EUFA license but the new Rangers do not. When Rangers FC expired, so did their EUFA license. The fact that the SFA has allowed The Rangers FC to pretend that their history is continuous, contrary to insolvency law, has no bearing on the facts of the case and will forever remain a stain on the SFA’s reputation. there are dozens upon dozens of other examples and legal precedence that could be quoted to highlight the fact that Rangers FC died in 2012, thats the club, its history and everything associated with it. the club you and others who hang on to the false notion it is not, is ultimately a sad reflection of your collective denial and inability to accept reality and truth. in the cold light of day, it is indisputable that the club and company currently operating out of murray and ibrox park is a new club and company. in closing (as i have no intention of continuing to debate the facts and reality, you and other bears steadfastly and stupidly ignore, and instead cling to the denial and completely false belief that the club you now follow is a new club, with a 18 month history, no more no less), i will say hat off to you for your jags reports, updates and enthusiasm for ptfc youths, please keep up that excellence (which is valued and appreciated by many Jags fans), but when it comes to other clubs you supported and now support, we will have to agree to disagree until such a time as you escape the dark side and accept the truth, as unpalatable as it may still be to you and others like you (the grief of losing someone or something close to you, can take a while to come to terms of acceptance that they have indeed died and gone forever). 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sunnylaw Jag Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 oh dear billyboy, you're still in denial. how about fifa for starters? http://www.fifa.com/...01/7/index.html in their "12 moments that defined 2012 " they state: the club died, the history timeline ceased, the club you now follow is 18 months old, thats its history. media quotes include: - The Herald: “Air of unreality as 140 years of history is formally ended in less than nine minutes” (The Herald, 15 June 2012: http://www.heraldsco...inutes.17876625). - Roddie Forsyth: “Rangers in crisis: the final whistle sounds on Rangers’ 140 years of history” (The Telegraph, 12 June 2012: http://www.telegraph...of-history.html). - Jim Traynor: “Rangers FC as we know them are dead. It’s all over. They are about to shut down for ever…They’ll slip into liquidation within the next couple of weeks with a new company emerging but 140 years of history, triumph and tears, will have ended… No matter how Charles Green attempts to dress it up, a newco equals a new club. When the CVA was thrown out Rangers as we know them died.” (Daily Record, 13 June 2012: http://www.dailyreco...be-able-1129166). and then, even Charles Green held the same categorical viewpoint [speaking to the BBC if a CVA is not accepted]: “…the history, the tradition, everything that is great about this Club, is swept aside.” many many more, outside the bigotbluebrothersbubble who do not have their heads in sand and are still trotting out the "was company not the club" deluded line, have a look for instance at scotzine or how about this from graham spiers, which includes: or how about looking at it from the insolvency law angle? when a company is liquidated its business activities cease to exist. The business of Rangers FC Plc was football. When Rangers FC Plc was wound up, so were the football activities of Rangers FC Plc i.e. the football club and associated merchandising etc. The BBC recognised this fact when they observed that “The Rangers Football Club PLC is a public limited company registered in Scotland (company number: SC004276) and was incorporated on 27 May, 1899. When the current company is officially liquidated, all of its corporate business history will come to an end.” furthermore, if a new company is formed – using assets bought from the old, liquidated company, for the purposes of operating the same type of business – it is not only a new company that has come into being but also the start of a new business venture, irrespective of the nature of that business. In the context of Rangers, the Rangers FC plying its trade in the SFL is a new football club and not the same club as that which played in the SPL. To deny otherwise is contrary to insolvency law. If it were otherwise then insolvency law would be a meaningless legal instrument. or how about looking at it from the insolvency act angle? legal matters can be determined by statute (Acts of Parliament) or case law. In terms of statute, there is no law that permits a liquidated company’s history to continue unbroken after liquidation: on the contrary, there is one to prevent such an event taking place – The Insolvency Act 1986. In terms of case law, there is no legal precedent to justify the claim that a liquidated company’s history can legitimately resurface under the guise of another company. Once a company is liquidated, its name, historical timeline and associated business activities immediately cease. In the case of a football club, there is no club in the UK that has been liquidated and resurfaced, after liquidation, with its history intact. In Scotland for example, Airdrieonians, formed in 1878 (under the earlier exotic name of Excelsior Football Club) went into liquidation in 2002. In the same year Airdrie FC was formed but because of insolvency law could not lay claim to the history of its previous incarnation, which to their credit they accepted with good grace. Other examples include Gretna and Clydebank. Rangers’ fans erroneously point to the case of Leeds United FC as evidence of a club that has a continuous historical timeline intact after liquidation. In 2007, Leeds United AFC Ltd, under the threat of liquidation, was sold to Leeds United FC Ltd, but with the important proviso that HMRC would agree to a CVA. HMRC did eventually agree to a CVA and Leeds was saved from compulsory liquidation. The club suffered a points deduction and after paying off the creditorsand the proper and orderly transfer of assets from Leeds United AFC Ltd to Leeds United FC Ltd, the old club company was voluntarily wound up. If a CVA had not been agreed and Leeds United AFC Ltd had been forced into compulsory liquidation then Leeds United FC Ltd (i.e. the new company) would not have been able to claim the history of the old club. Rangers FC is a very different case indeed and Rangers fans cannot point to the example of Leeds FC as an exemple of club survival after liquidation. or how about sfa membership and eufa licence? when Charles Green bought the assets of Rangers FC Plc he also purchased the old club’s SFA membership and SPL share. Prior to liquidation, Rangers had full membership status within Scottish professional football. After liquidation, the club playing in SFL Division 3 was allocated associate membership status. The reason for that was very simple: the Rangers playing in the SFL was a different club than the one which previously played in the SPL. Importantly, the new Rangers applied to join the SPL but their application was rejected, despite a mysterious 5-way agreement. If Rangers was the same club pre and post liquidation then an application would have been completely unnecessary, particularly since they claimed to purchase the old club’s SFA membership and SPL share. Of course, Rangers was legally dissolved after liquidation – hence the need for a fresh application from the new club. Similarly, the new Rangers then applied to join the SFL and this time their application was successful. Remember, if an existing SPL club changes ownership or its holding company changes from a Ltd to a Plc, it has no bearing on the club’s membership status and therefore there is no requirement to re-apply for SFA or SPL membership – it is liquidation that forces that event. Furthermore, because Rangers post-liquidation is a new club, it is unable to compete in European competition for three years. It is a stipulation of EUFA that a license to play in Europe can only be given to a club that has been a member of a national association for three consecutive years. The old Rangers did have a EUFA license but the new Rangers do not. When Rangers FC expired, so did their EUFA license. The fact that the SFA has allowed The Rangers FC to pretend that their history is continuous, contrary to insolvency law, has no bearing on the facts of the case and will forever remain a stain on the SFA’s reputation. there are dozens upon dozens of other examples and legal precedence that could be quoted to highlight the fact that Rangers FC died in 2012, thats the club, its history and everything associated with it. the club you and others who hang on to the false notion it is not, is ultimately a sad reflection of your collective denial and inability to accept reality and truth. in the cold light of day, it is indisputable that the club and company currently operating out of murray and ibrox park is a new club and company. in closing (as i have no intention of continuing to debate the facts and reality, you and other bears steadfastly and stupidly ignore, and instead cling to the denial and completely false belief that the club you now follow is a new club, with a 18 month history, no more no less), i will say hat off to you for your jags reports, updates and enthusiasm for ptfc youths, please keep up that excellence (which is valued and appreciated by many Jags fans), but when it comes to other clubs you supported and now support, we will have to agree to disagree until such a time as you escape the dark side and accept the truth, as unpalatable as it may still be to you and others like you (the grief of losing someone or something close to you, can take a while to come to terms of acceptance that they have indeed died and gone forever). I might like this but I can't be arsed reading it, it's too long. Can't you just say the h*ns are cheating bestards in a shorter version? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sb1876 Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 (edited) I think everyone agrees that the club was dissolved and the version that we have now is a new being entirely (surely every sensible person accepts that?) and if not..... I'm sure the creditors would be knocking on the door looking for any monies which may still be due from the original (& therefore still current club?). Not that it matters all that much although I'd be interested to know what's on their club badge, crest or letterhead etc. Also what's in the inside bit of the programme where club honours are listed? I'm not all that interested in looking myself (or even knowing the answers) as I subscribe to the belief above that the club no longer exists, although I do wonder how far the new body are going in order to cling to the bits that they want to from the old version> What do the current custodians and officials proudly display as their year of inception and registration? 1876 and all that! Edited January 11, 2014 by sb1876 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda-jag Posted January 12, 2014 Report Share Posted January 12, 2014 You will find the club still has all it's honours that make it Scotland's most successful club so it must be the same club is it not? Maybe you should take it up with Uefa Yoda and see if they agree with you. and if not why not use your force to try and convince them. You liking me is not of any importance to me and sure i will get on fine either way and doubt folk who hate so much would be to my liking anyway An idea for the forum would be to add Rangers to the end of every thread tittle as that way it will keep the same culprits all on topic the h*ns are cheating bestards © sunnylawjag & every non-h*n Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda-jag Posted January 12, 2014 Report Share Posted January 12, 2014 I think everyone agrees that the club was dissolved and the version that we have now is a new being entirely (surely every sensible person accepts that?) i can think of one poster and rest of his kind who don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billko Posted January 12, 2014 Report Share Posted January 12, 2014 I think everyone agrees that the club was dissolved and the version that we have now is a new being entirely (surely every sensible person accepts that?) and if not..... I'm sure the creditors would be knocking on the door looking for any monies which may still be due from the original (& therefore still current club?). Not that it matters all that much although I'd be interested to know what's on their club badge, crest or letterhead etc. Also what's in the inside bit of the programme where club honours are listed? I'm not all that interested in looking myself (or even knowing the answers) as I subscribe to the belief above that the club no longer exists, although I do wonder how far the new body are going in order to cling to the bits that they want to from the old version> What do the current custodians and officials proudly display as their year of inception and registration? 1876 and all that! Rather than get involved in tit for tat with folk who copy and paste any old crap as long as it suits their personal agenda even if it's inaccurate (Scotzine and the discredited journalist Spiers ) i would only like to add that when Rangers win their next major honour it will be acknowledged as adding to the gloroius history already in place. Rangers will officialy continue to be the most successful club in Scotland and only folk in this backwater of a country who have a personal agenda based on jealousy or just plain old hatred (or something more sinister) towards Scotland's most successful club will ever disagree with that. These folk are no marks and have had 2 yrs of trawling over blogs written mainly by bigot's who have spouted all sorts of nonsense with regard EBT's etc etc to get their anti Rangers fix. It's all got ridiculous now and rather than let Rangers get on with it and move up the leagues they don't let go. In the not too distant future Rangers will add to the 54 already won and title 55 will be officialy recognised. Apologies for going off topic and to all the Jag fans who couldn't give a feck but the same old posters will keep posting their pi5h until i reply. No more on this subject from me and i will sit back with my popcorn and enjoy the fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garscube Road End Posted January 12, 2014 Report Share Posted January 12, 2014 Rather than get involved in tit for tat with folk who copy and paste any old crap as long as it suits their personal agenda even if it's inaccurate (Scotzine and the discredited journalist Spiers ) i would only like to add that when Rangers win their next major honour it will be acknowledged as adding to the gloroius history already in place. Rangers will officialy continue to be the most successful club in Scotland and only folk in this backwater of a country who have a personal agenda based on jealousy or just plain old hatred (or something more sinister) towards Scotland's most successful club will ever disagree with that. These folk are no marks and have had 2 yrs of trawling over blogs written mainly by bigot's who have spouted all sorts of nonsense with regard EBT's etc etc to get their anti Rangers fix. It's all got ridiculous now and rather than let Rangers get on with it and move up the leagues they don't let go. In the not too distant future Rangers will add to the 54 already won and title 55 will be officialy recognised. Apologies for going off topic and to all the Jag fans who couldn't give a feck but the same old posters will keep posting their pi5h until i reply. No more on this subject from me and i will sit back with my popcorn and enjoy the fun. For your next administration? Or is it your first? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.