The Old Northerner Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 Yes. It happened once. That's OK, then I think everyone has lost count of the number of times Livi (cheating scum) have gone into administration. No, they haven't 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantoms-livi-lass Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 Yes. It happened once.I think everyone has lost count of the number of times Livi (cheating scum) have gone into administration. Once more than your scummy club? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Master Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 That's OK, then No, they haven't Once more than your scummy club? I sense anger. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantoms-livi-lass Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 I sense anger. That figures, as you have no sense. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Master Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 That figures, as you have no sense. Yes, because that makes complete sense. I am in awe of your utterly brilliant debating skills. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantoms-livi-lass Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 Yes, because that makes complete sense. I am in awe of your utterly brilliant debating skills. As I am in awe of your utterly brilliant mathematical skills. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Northerner Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 I sense anger. I sense deflection 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin_Nevis Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 You were one of the few that didn't want us to die, I'll give you that! You need to put TM after the word mongs as it belongs to Duncan Freemason, you really don't want him on his high horse again Was it me that came over all precious? I have been partial to the odd strop on this damned neverending monstrous thread. I hope it was me as I quite like the sound of that. Actually, i think Reynard (St Mirren poster) possibly has the word "swampy" copyrighted. Apologies for nicking it While you may believe that Duncan is a pain in the arse, i can perfectly well understand why he's on Livi's cases here. Remember, Livi stiffed him out of money last time round, quite a bit IIRC, not only that, i believe when not being paid, he turned up at Almondvale and they wouldn't even give him his gear back. Quite frankly if i was DF, i'd have been a LOT harsher than he's been. I'll give you your due PLL, at unlike most of the other Livi fans (and LL crowd) you at least accept your club has behaved badly both pre-season, and since. Sadly, unless yourself and the seemingly few sceptical Livi fans start asking some serious questions, you're club is fucked. This time permanently. At the Q&A did Livi5 go into any details about the extent to which they'll be running at a loss? Was the answer meekly accepted? Livi cannot possibly be full-time and run at a profit until they are in the First. Even then i'd doubt it on crowds rarely reaching 1500. Ask yourself therefore, why Livi5 are prepared to lose money for AT LEAST 2 or 3 seasons. What's in it for them? Now ask yourself, if you wanted some land, which was worth a lot of money in terms of housing etc development, but had the inconvenience of a football stadium sitting on it, what do you do? Let's say you then discover said club is virtually on its last legs with a madman in charge and a local Council willing to do anything to keep it going for whatever reason. Now, if you were to say take over this club (lets face it, you won't have any competition) for buttons, you could then let it run at a loss for a while, wait till it goes tits up, then get the stadium off a local authority willing to accept virtually anything to save face for a nice price. Bingo. You now have some very valuable ground, for minimal outlay. Can anyone think of a club that fits this bill? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Master Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 As I am in awe of your utterly brilliant mathematical skills. And so you should be. Actually, I'm surprised you know what mathematics is. I sense deflection Dundee went into administration. We cheated. Woohoo. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willie Gray Ate My Hamster Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 Yes. It happened once.I think everyone has lost count of the number of times Livi (cheating scum) have gone into administration. I believe you wrote off more the one time you were in admin than Livi have in the three times they have been.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Master Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 I believe you wrote off more the one time you were in admin than Livi have in the three times they have been.... You speak as though that's worse. Evidently, you haven't thought about this logically. Which is actually understandable, I suppose...not everyone can be as clever as me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin_Nevis Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 I believe you wrote off more the one time you were in admin than Livi have in the three times they have been.... Mind you, £7million of it was due to the two geniuses who instigated the whole piece of nonsense in the first place. Serves me right for thinking we couldn't get a worse chairman than Angus Cook. Or Andrew Drummond. Or Ron Dixon. C**ts 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 (edited) They've got a brass neck (yet again) haven't they? If they're caling for McMaster's resignation as on the Beeb there, then what about Rankine and his dealings at East Fife and now Livingston? It's almost as if they're trying to deflect attention away from their due punishment for scratching a game, so they can get off scot-free. Almost. No wait that's exactly it. Edited September 24, 2009 by vikingTON 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin_Nevis Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 They've got a brass neck (yet again) haven't they? If they're caling for McMaster's resignation as on the Beeb there, then what about Rankine and his dealings at East Fife and now Livingston? It's almost as if they're trying to deflec attention away from their due punishment for scratching a game, so they can get off scot-free. Almost. No wait that's exactly it. From what i can see, unless East Stirling kick up a significant enough shit-storm and force a meeting of the LMC, Livi WILL get off scot-free. I don't even know if there's an avenue for ES to make this happen. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 They've got a brass neck (yet again) haven't they? If they're caling for McMaster's resignation as on the Beeb there, then what about Rankine and his dealings at East Fife and now Livingston? It's almost as if they're trying to deflect attention away from their due punishment for scratching a game, so they can get off scot-free. Almost. No wait that's exactly it. Someone made an interesting point to me yesterday, which was that the SFA and SFL can't take action against Rankine and his niece/granddaughter or whatever the hell she is, because she is a minor... You can't haul her up before any committee to explain yourselves, in fact you can't even fulfil the legal requirement to ascertain they're related to each other, due to Child Protection law. This might be b*llocks, but Rankine must surely be confident his dealings are cast-iron safe, IMO. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantoms-livi-lass Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 Someone made an interesting point to me yesterday, which was that the SFA and SFL can't take action against Rankine and his niece/granddaughter or whatever the hell she is, because she is a minor... You can't haul her up before any committee to explain yourselves, in fact you can't even fulfil the legal requirement to ascertain they're related to each other, due to Child Protection law.This might be b*llocks, but Rankine must surely be confident his dealings are cast-iron safe, IMO. As far as I'm aware the girl is not a relative of Rankine. I don't know the rules as well as you do but does it not have to be a family member to breach the rules? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 As far as I'm aware the girl is not a relative of Rankine. I don't know the rules as well as you do but does it not have to be a family member to breach the rules? You may be right. Regardless, minors shouldn't be allowed to sharehold in football teams full stop. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin_Nevis Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 You may be right. Regardless, minors shouldn't be allowed to sharehold in football teams full stop. Couldn't the SFL, say at the next AGM, bring in a rule barring the controlling interest in any club being held by Under-16s? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 Couldn't the SFL, say at the next AGM, bring in a rule barring the controlling interest in any club being held by Under-16s? Of course. In fact they could probably do it now, if they have a fit and proper persons clause, as it's quite clearly not "fit" for any shareholder/board member to be unanswerable to scrutiny of the SFL committee; legally liable for club liabilities; not attend SFL meetings; or in general be a kid...!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantoms-livi-lass Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Of course. In fact they could probably do it now, if they have a fit and proper persons clause, as it's quite clearly not "fit" for any shareholder/board member to be unanswerable to scrutiny of the SFL committee; legally liable for club liabilities; not attend SFL meetings; or in general be a kid...!! Out of curiousity & because I haven't a clue about the rules on these things, which clubs do have minors as shareholders? What rules are in place at the moment regarding shareholders? 0 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.