Jump to content

The BIG strip the titles thread


Recommended Posts

So now we have the Ross County chairman joining Hearts, Hibs, Aberdeen and Kilmarnock is calling for us to 'move on'.  Sensible bloke is Roy:  http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/15531522.Roy_MacGregor__There_has_been_so_much_pain_as_a_result_of_the_Rangers_crisis___I_would_like_peace_to_reign/

ROY McGregor, the Ross County chairman and major shareholder, has appealed for “peace to reign” in Scottish football following the SFA’s decision to reject the SPFL’s call for an independent inquiry into the financial collapse of Rangers.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

It's disappointing, but these same chairmen would have come out with the same cowardly "let's move on" sentiment in 2012 if they'd thought they could get away with it.

They only took a stand of sorts then because of pressure from their own clubs' fans.  Even then, they tried hard to diddle everyone by pressing SFL clubs to admit them at second tier level.  

That the attempt failed made me proud of being a fan of a diddy club and ashamed of being a fan of my particular diddy club, in equal measure. 

Nobody should be surprised by the spinelessness of those in charge of Scottish football clubs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, nacho said:

 it took 7 years and 4 court cases to establish that the tax to establish that rangers owed money for tax, if it was so apparent that we were breaking the law why did hmrc lose the first two cases? you are talking utter bollocks, the advice that rangers recieved at the time was that side letters were fine.

Eh?

Are you saying that Rangers received advice telling them that when it came to registering players for competition, It was fine to declare only part of the payments they were receiving, due to the existence of side letters?

Who offered such advice and why?  The breach in terms of football registration issues, was very clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

It's disappointing, but these same chairmen would have come out with the same cowardly "let's move on" sentiment in 2012 if they'd thought they could get away with it.

They only took a stand of sorts then because of pressure from their own clubs' fans.  Even then, they tried hard to diddle everyone by pressing SFL clubs to admit them at second tier level.  

That the attempt failed made me proud of being a fan of a diddy club and ashamed of being a fan of my particular diddy club, in equal measure. 

Nobody should be surprised by the spinelessness of those in charge of Scottish football clubs.

This is a well-made post, of course, but lacks the crucial question: Should the tail wag the dog or the dog wag the tail? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Paralytic Critic said:

Typical bear presuming that because I do not like your club that I must be a Celtic fan. Never in all my posts have I ever declared a support to any club yet you presume that I must be a Celtic fan.

It is an irritating assumption, but it's accurate in your case.

Did you not display your club as Celtic under your avatar until just now?  Am I being whoooshed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Paralytic Critic said:

Typical bear presuming that because I do not like your club that I must be a Celtic fan.

I don't make that assumption at all so shame on you.

You post like one and share the same obsession and paranoia so if you support another team you have fucked up somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

This is a well-made post, of course, but lacks the crucial question: Should the tail wag the dog or the dog wag the tail? 

Genuinely unsure what you mean here.

Who are you identifying as the tail and who, as the dog?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Monkey Tennis said:

Genuinely unsure what you mean here.

Who are you identifying as the tail and who, as the dog?

That's the issue wrt fan power vs chairman power.  I'd reckon, from a business PoV most chairmen reckon that the fans got it wrong in 2012.  They went on a witch-hunt in 2012 and most businesses suffered.  The fans also failed to deliver on their 'sell out' shite.

Now?  It's clear that the chairmen are making their own decisions based on good business sense rather than petty rivalry.  I welcome this.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

That's the issue wrt fan power vs chairman power.  I'd reckon, from a business PoV most chairmen reckon that the fans got it wrong in 2012.  They went on a witch-hunt in 2012 and most businesses suffered.  The fans also failed to deliver on their 'sell out' shite.

Now?  It's clear that the chairmen are making their own decisions based on good business sense rather than petty rivalry.  I welcome this.

 

Untrue on different levels.

Even in the narrow terms of pretending that football clubs are mere businesses, only Celtic lost out significantly, while others actually gained.  In the wider terms of what football clubs are actually for of course, several clubs made massive - in fact historic - gains.

The "sell-out shite" is well described.  It was never part of the argument about not admitting Newco to the top flight.  That was about fans who do attend, refusing to do so in future if Rangers were allowed to continue as if nothing had happened.  They could stop going if the wrong thing was done, but couldn't spontaneously multiply in the wake of the right thing happening.

You understand this of course, but are again being dishonest.  It's to your er, demerit.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Untrue on different levels.

Even in the narrow terms of pretending that football clubs are mere businesses, only Celtic lost out significantly, while others actually gained.  In the wider terms of what football clubs are actually for of course, several clubs made massive - in fact historic - gains.

The "sell-out shite" is well described.  It was never part of the argument about not admitting Newco to the top flight.  That was about fans who do attend, refusing to do so in future if Rangers were allowed to continue as if nothing had happened.

Revisionism at its worst.  To quote: https://thisisfutbol.com/2012/08/blogs/why-sell-out-saturday-wasnt-the-success-that-the-aberdeen-and-the-spl-wanted-it-to-be/

"According to the Daily Record, Sell Out Saturday, the campaign started by Aberdeen fans to fill out every SPL ground in the wake of Rangers move to the third division was a roaring success. The Record declared that “Crowds were up in a number of matches”. In fact there were only four Premier League games played on Sell Out Saturday, of which none were a sell-out.

The Record’s statistics do not cover the Edinburgh Derby played on the Sunday, which recorded its lowest ever attendance for an opening season fixture between the clubs. Celtic did not play this weekend, as they were off in America losing a pre-season friendly to Real Madrid in a half-empty stadium in Philadelphia.

Only Aberdeen saw an increase in attendance, though the ground was nowhere near sold out against Ross County. The turnout from fans of the SPL was so poor the Record had to include Scottish Football League One attendances to boost figures. If Sell Out Saturday was supposed to be about the Scottish Premier League rallying to offset the loss to the game of Rangers playing in Division Three, then why include the Football League teams?

It seems the Daily Record story of Sell out Saturday is Jackanory at its best. The reality of the state of the game in Scotland is that most of the SPL games played on Saturday had lower than average attendances."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

Revisionism at its worst.  To quote: https://thisisfutbol.com/2012/08/blogs/why-sell-out-saturday-wasnt-the-success-that-the-aberdeen-and-the-spl-wanted-it-to-be/

"According to the Daily Record, Sell Out Saturday, the campaign started by Aberdeen fans to fill out every SPL ground in the wake of Rangers move to the third division was a roaring success. The Record declared that “Crowds were up in a number of matches”. In fact there were only four Premier League games played on Sell Out Saturday, of which none were a sell-out.

The Record’s statistics do not cover the Edinburgh Derby played on the Sunday, which recorded its lowest ever attendance for an opening season fixture between the clubs. Celtic did not play this weekend, as they were off in America losing a pre-season friendly to Real Madrid in a half-empty stadium in Philadelphia.

Only Aberdeen saw an increase in attendance, though the ground was nowhere near sold out against Ross County. The turnout from fans of the SPL was so poor the Record had to include Scottish Football League One attendances to boost figures. If Sell Out Saturday was supposed to be about the Scottish Premier League rallying to offset the loss to the game of Rangers playing in Division Three, then why include the Football League teams?

It seems the Daily Record story of Sell out Saturday is Jackanory at its best. The reality of the state of the game in Scotland is that most of the SPL games played on Saturday had lower than average attendances."

 

Why are you saying this stuff as if it's remotely relevant?

You stated that most clubs lost out.  The only evidence you seem capable of mustering in support of this claim is that gates didn't particularly climb on a given weekend.

The stuff you come out with these days is truly pathetic.  Your arguments don't hang together at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

The stuff you come out with these days is truly pathetic.  Your arguments don't hang together at all.

As opposed to, "That was about fans who do attend, refusing to do so in future if Rangers were allowed to continue as if nothing had happened" for sell out Saturday?  I think not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Monkey Tennis said:

It is an irritating assumption, but it's accurate in your case.

Did you not display your club as Celtic under your avatar until just now?  Am I being whoooshed?

You are certainly being somethinged here Monkey as I have never displayed any club ever since I joined. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The_Kincardine said:

I don't make that assumption at all so shame on you.

You post like one and share the same obsession and paranoia so if you support another team you have fucked up somewhere.

You didn't make that assumption but then continue to comment on why you assume I was one. Deary me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Paralytic Critic said:

You didn't make that assumption but then continue to comment on why you assume I was one. Deary me. 

You are confirming your status as a wearer of the grey and green hoops with this reply.

I did not assume that, because you don't like Rangers, you're automatically a Celtic fan.  Many who post on here claim a dislike for us and I know they support wee clubs.  This is business as usual on the Sevco threads.

I assume you're a Celtic fan because you're a bitter fool who posts like one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

You are confirming your status as a wearer of the grey and green hoops with this reply.

I did not assume that, because you don't like Rangers, you're automatically a Celtic fan.  Many who post on here claim a dislike for us and I know they support wee clubs.  This is business as usual on the Sevco threads.

I assume you're a Celtic fan because you're a bitter fool who posts like one.

You quoted waistcoatwilly and claimed me to be a fellow fan of his team, is this the norm for you to assume every poster who shows dislike to your club and what they have gotten away with as being a Celtic fan. Oh I forgot, you don't make assumptions, well not that many, only 2 or 3 a reply. 

Seems to me there is only one bitter fool here and it isn't me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Eh?

Are you saying that Rangers received advice telling them that when it came to registering players for competition, It was fine to declare only part of the payments they were receiving, due to the existence of side letters?

Who offered such advice and why?  The breach in terms of football registration issues, was very clear.

ebts were were never hidden and always declared in the audited accounts under the term Remuneration Trust, both the SFA and SPL were fully aware of them. stop lying about them not being declared, its tedious

rangers were advised that EBTs are discretionary loans, or bonus payments, and not contractual. so not dual contracts with no need to declare. The SFA and SPL saw the annual accounts, saw the EBT and allowed Rangers to carry on regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...