Jump to content

Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!


Recommended Posts

Can't say I'm bothered about a letter (which comes from a dubious source) apparently from one official, which ambiguously mentions a “club/company”. UEFA have not issued a ruling on the specific matter and even if they had we would of course be free to dispute it. Have you agreed with every decision or utterance of UEFA or a UEFA official?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bearwithme said:

Can't say I'm bothered about a letter (which comes from a dubious source) apparently from one official, which ambiguously mentions a “club/company”. UEFA have not issued a ruling on the specific matter and even if they had we would of course be free to dispute it. Have you agreed with every decision or utterance of UEFA or a UEFA official?

Can you remember Rangers FC going into administration?

I'm sure you do.

Can you advise the date they came out of administration?

To save you looking they did not. The CVA failed and Rangers FC are currently being liquidated.

Therefore, the cowboy outfit currently playing out of Ibrox Stadium must be a new club.

Why deny it?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bearwithme said:

Can't say I'm bothered about a letter (which comes from a dubious source) apparently from one official, which ambiguously mentions a “club/company”. UEFA have not issued a ruling on the specific matter and even if they had we would of course be free to dispute it. Have you agreed with every decision or utterance of UEFA or a UEFA official?

Truth hurts, especially when it's staring you right in the face...lol

 

Zero and counting!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bearwithme said:

Can't say I'm bothered about a letter (which comes from a dubious source) apparently from one official, which ambiguously mentions a “club/company”. UEFA have not issued a ruling on the specific matter and even if they had we would of course be free to dispute it. Have you agreed with every decision or utterance of UEFA or a UEFA official?

This just confirms mys suspicion that, even if UEFA were to come out and say, 'To clear things up in Scotland, yes, The Rangers are a new club with no continuation of history from the previous Rangers,'  your average bear would just ignore and it find some other incontrovertible source.  Like the ASA or The Record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What have those "Celtic shareholders" blanked out of the letter? Why the need to censor it? Does the censored part show that sporting records can be transfered from one club to another?

Still not convinced until I see the full, uncensored letter although this does swing the evidence largely into the UEFA viewing Rangers as a new club argument. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 05/08/2016 at 12:32, aussiedee said:

Then asking if you would have sex with the underage girl in the pic! Even you know that is wrong

It is a bit odd. They must have know apologists would latch on to that like a barnacle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely a new club then.

Not going to trawl this thread for every time UEFA has been quoted as proof of now, then, forever but, I will take a moment to say GIRFUY to:

Every bear that every there was
That's rippin his knittin all because
UEFA confirms the Teddy Bears are
A new club.


 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MoshiniBellend said:

To the deluded bears.

It's not a random utterance by an official at UEFA.

The letter is a legal missive and part of EUFA's legal response to the conduct of the SFA licencing authority in regards to issuing a licence to Rangers.

It simply confirms a fact which everyone, bar the most deluded of bears, know to be the truth.

 

What's the footballing body from Sensible Soccer on the Megadrive got to do with anything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bennett said:

Yes, uefa sent some a Celtic fans a letter saying that Rangers are a pure new club by the way. It even had a / in it and who could possibly argue with that.

 

 

 

 

It's easy to argue with. Half the letter is censored.

I would be delighted if this was the final proof in the new club debate but the fact that half the letter is hidden, coupled with the length of time taken to publish it makes me think that the hidden portion shows tha UEFA recognise continuation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stonedsailor said:

It's easy to argue with. Half the letter is censored.

I would be delighted if this was the final proof in the new club debate but the fact that half the letter is hidden, coupled with the length of time taken to publish it makes me think that the hidden portion shows tha UEFA recognise continuation.

 

Ach well I s'pose they've got to show something for the £20k they spent on adverts lol

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stonedsailor said:

It's easy to argue with. Half the letter is censored.

I would be delighted if this was the final proof in the new club debate but the fact that half the letter is hidden, coupled with the length of time taken to publish it makes me think that the hidden portion shows tha UEFA recognise continuation.

 

That's not arguing. That's nudging and winking while saying things like, "there's a lot goes on we don't get told". It's pretty much the opposite of an argument.

The letter states the old club went into administration and a new club/company (which is the same thing according to UEFA's rules) was ineligible to apply for a license.

 

What on earth do you believe could be in the censored part that somehow twists the summing up to mean it's the same club?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, MoshiniBellend said:

They had previously stated they were not printing the letter until all possible legal action against the SFA was exhausted. They released a redacted version. A new club is a new club. UEFA's rules are also clear on the matter that a club can only be a legal entity. That entity/club went down the shitter, back to where they belong.

Aw come on.....!

surely the club is an ethereal concept masquerading as a basket of assets which were boldly pioneered when Queen Vicky was ruling the Empire and then boldly re-pioneered by Charles de Normandie and his Merry men.

 

'Gallant' not 'Bold'

tsk imagine mucking up on the history of the Rangers -  and The 'Rangers'

Edited by Ken Fitlike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, aofjays said:

 

That's not arguing. That's nudging and winking while saying things like, "there's a lot goes on we don't get told". It's pretty much the opposite of an argument.

The letter states the old club went into administration and a new club/company (which is the same thing according to UEFA's rules) was ineligible to apply for a license.

 

What on earth do you believe could be in the censored part that somehow twists the summing up to mean it's the same club?

It is possible, unlikely but possible, that UEFA recognise the sporting continuation. The ASA have already said they have correspondence from UEFA stating the possibility.  I think the Italian FA have rules in place saying that so long as all debts are paid and a club springs up in the same city that a new entity can have they sporting history transferred to it.

I am just not wanting to jump the gun on this one, regardless of how clear cut it seems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

The Diddies getting excited about The Yoofa Slash?  Again?

Question: What new input have you compared to the previous Yoofa Slash debate?

The new input, Kinky, is that the evidence has been published that yoofa do view Rangers as a new club. The only sticking point is that there has been some of the evidence held back for some reason.

Your hopes that the slash is of relevance are of no concern to the debate, it is just more deflection from you. Yoofa see Rangers as a new club, the honours of old Rangers may or may not be transferred but Rangers are a new club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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