The Rangers Saga and Fallout Thread
- Thread starter Ace Modder
- Start date
- Status
Here's another simple analogy
You go to a house to play poker and call that house Rangers
the owner of the house can't afford the house anymore and it's sold by the bank to someone else who restarts the poker tournament in the house called Rangers.
Everything is the same the house the furniture etc the only difference is one of the guys is replaced at the poker table is it still the same poker night?
See my previous post for the definitions in the dictionary of club and company.
A company can own a club but no matter who owns the club it's still the club.
Another analogy is if I own a car can't afford to keep it because it breaks down and I (or the bank or the administrators or the liquidators sell it to someone else) who replaces the broken parts and get's it running again is it not still a car?
You go to a house to play poker and call that house Rangers
the owner of the house can't afford the house anymore and it's sold by the bank to someone else who restarts the poker tournament in the house called Rangers.
Everything is the same the house the furniture etc the only difference is one of the guys is replaced at the poker table is it still the same poker night?
See my previous post for the definitions in the dictionary of club and company.
A company can own a club but no matter who owns the club it's still the club.
Another analogy is if I own a car can't afford to keep it because it breaks down and I (or the bank or the administrators or the liquidators sell it to someone else) who replaces the broken parts and get's it running again is it not still a car?
Last edited:
That's why the other poker players refused to play in the new tournament after being stiffed for their winnings under the old owner
Here's another simple analogy
Another analogy is if I own a car can't afford to keep it because it breaks down and I (or the bank or the administrators or the liquidators sell it to someone else) who replaces the broken parts and get's it running again is it not still a car?
It depends on whether the DVLA deem the new "cut and shut" car with a different VIN number the same car as the original
It depends on whether the DVLA deem the new "cut and shut" car with a different VIN number the same car as the original
But then any car with a different vin number would have to be treated the same.
But then any car with a different vin number would have to be treated the same.
Even a cut and shut?
I thought we had all amicably agreed that The Rangers were a new club, with zero history, zero titles, zero debt?
Thats why you applied to join the SFL !
Only if you have green tinted specs.
If that's the case then why is this so called "new" club being allowed to fight the case re: dual contracts ?? Why is this so called "new" club facing possible sanctions? Sorry you cant have it both ways. Sanctions die if the old club dies or they remain as does the old club. The SFA and SPL have also stated the the club is the same just the corporate entity running it has changed.
Actually I dont know why I'm actually bothering replying to you.
Actually I dont know why I'm actually bothering replying to you.
Associate
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2008
- Posts
- 1,575
- Location
- Glasgow
What sanctions? Stripping titles is not a sanction it's a punishment for wrong doing, IF wrong downing has happened.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 4,245
- Location
- Inverkip
Not a very big 'if' though is it? EBT's where rife at Ibrox for a considerable time, allowing Rangers to spend well above their means and effectively buy league titles. I admit to having a chuckle at the non-payment of further taxes by Mr Whyte, same old Rangers indeed.
Buy leagues? Tell me then why the year the largest amount was paid out thru EBTs nothing was won? Hardly buying leagues.
Man Utd, Man City, Chelski they dont buy leagues? Barca/ Real Madrid they don't buy leagues??
Most teams that win leagues buy them.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 7,404
- Location
- Ireland/Northern Ireland Border
Er, sorry Man Utd just bought second place.
lol
Don't get your knickers in a knot, your team won't have any titles stripped as Sevco have yet to win anything.
It's the liquidated Rangers that will face possible title stripping if a prima facie case of not lodging BOTH contracts with the football authorities is established
TBH based on the fact that Spartans where expelled from the Scottish Cup for missing a date on a player's registration, title stripping is a definite possibility
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/15672375
In answer to your question as to why the SFL & SPL have stated that the club is the same, I would hazard a guess that it's to make sure that the punters turn up for the Sevco games so that the SFL clubs get some much needed revenues.
I'd also shudder to think the level of outrage & vitriol that would come from a section of the support if the SFL/SPL stated categorically that Sevco where in fact a brand new team with no history, see Hutton, Turnbull / Drysdale, Eric
You are Lionel Hutz and I claim my fiver
Did any of the clubs you list alledgedly fail to register players correctly in their respective leagues?
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Aug 2012
- Posts
- 2,647
You are Lionel Hutz and I claim my fiver
Did any of the clubs you list alledgedly fail to register players correctly in their respective leagues?
Who knows. EBT's were rife in the EPL as well. Certainly Arsenal were using them from 99 onwards and won 2 EPL titles and 3 FA Cups during that period. Have the FA or Premier League threatened investigate and to sanction them?
Fair point, however Arsenal spoke to the HRMC and agreed a repayment schedule and unfortunately Rangers where bound by the rules of the SFA/SPL and not the EPL.
It's also important to note that EBT's and the dual contracts are two entirely separate cases (HRMC is investigating the EBT & the SPL are investigating the alleged dual contracts)
Last edited:
- Status