Guest Dutchy Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 It looks as though Charles Green is set to accept the 'no legal challenge' clause to the SFA punishments to get into the 1st div. He obviously wants Rangers to be a promising, thus financially sound investment for a potential buyer, and to hell with sporting integrity. We could be thumped for years financially and points wise. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,834 Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 As has been pointed out, administration has been horror for us already. The sanctions dealt so far are according to the book. Rangers will not be in administration come the beginning of the season, thus, there can - by rules - be no more sanctions. Of course, Regan can ban the oldco from ever playing football again. BTW, where and when did Green admit that taking the SFA to court was wrong? Had the SFA imposed that sanction and we had accepted it, it would not only set a precedent for the all-power of a football body beyond their legal rights, but also placed a time-bomb for them for the future. For, e.g., would they come up with somethng more stupid in months to come, Rangers could have called on a legal court again, saying that amongst other things the embargo imposed was illegal and we have to be paid compensation et al for that, while the SFA needs legal punishment for stepping over the line. IMHO we did the SFA a favour when challenging their embargo. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 We should not be accepting an illegal penalty and looking at how our squad has disappeared shows how highly inappropriate it is in these kind of circumstances. I have yet to understand what we are actually guilty of to receive any punishment at all. Other clubs have not paid taxes, wages, football debts but not received extra, made up punishments and condemned as just short of match fixing cheats. There is also the complicity of the SFA in this matter by standing back and allowing a non-fit person to take over our club even though they were warned. Even the whole report of our "trial" was full of lies, mis-truth and irony. They say Rangers have been arrogant and have no contrition - where is the contrition from the SFA for attempting to break there own rules in their rush to invent a punishment for Rangers? They were proven 100% wrong, yet instead of an apology, they are supposed to "bring Rangers into line". The hypocrisy in Scottish football is a foul stench and there is no way we should accept their punishment. If they give us a bigger one then we should sue again as that would be breaking their own rules again. The reason we NEED to sue the SFA is that they are blatantly CHEATING. How ironic is that? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dutchy Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 If you read my post Der Berliner, you'll see that it was speculative, not that it did, or even was going to happen. I also remember there being the threat of 3 years of points reductions and financial fines. Time to take a break from the hair splitting semantic terrorists that exsit on forums. Everyone is entitled to an opinion my arse, clique city more like. Only an opinion!!! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 The embargo is illegal, as proven in court, and we should in no circumstances accept a transfer embargo over this club, whatever the fudge surrounding the dates are. Our fans paid good money to back the club into court to win that case, and Green would be making a big mistake if he thinks we will be happy with his capitulation over this. Pedantically the SFA paid for the court case... But it was the fans who put up the money in advance to fight it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CumbernauldGers 0 Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Once again a full story in the press with no quotes or facts to back it up. But it seems neg against the new owners so it must be true. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CumbernauldGers 0 Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 As has been pointed out, administration has been horror for us already. The sanctions dealt so far are according to the book. Rangers will not be in administration come the beginning of the season, thus, there can - by rules - be no more sanctions. Of course, Regan can ban the oldco from ever playing football again. BTW, where and when did Green admit that taking the SFA to court was wrong? Had the SFA imposed that sanction and we had accepted it, it would not only set a precedent for the all-power of a football body beyond their legal rights, but also placed a time-bomb for them for the future. For, e.g., would they come up with somethng more stupid in months to come, Rangers could have called on a legal court again, saying that amongst other things the embargo imposed was illegal and we have to be paid compensation et al for that, while the SFA needs legal punishment for stepping over the line. IMHO we did the SFA a favour when challenging their embargo. I would like to see this info too? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,834 Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Matter of fact, the Interim Report says something about this: Following the SFA disciplinary hearing the Joint Administrators successfully challenged the Transfer Embargo which would also have been extremely damaging for the Club. Ouch. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Once again a full story in the press with no quotes or facts to back it up. But it seems neg against the new owners so it must be true. you said that last time and it turned out he was offering to accept it to the spl. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheWeeBlueDevil 0 Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Derek Riordan, no thanks... lazy and inconsistent, also a bit of a mischief maker. Not the type of player we should be looking at . 0 Quote Link to post 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.