hellbhoy Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 Selective quoting will not save you, this statement makes it clear that Sandaza now agrees. Rangers have reached an agreement with former striker Francisco Sandaza to terminate his contract. Aw ffs it just gets worse for you doesn't it . Sandaza was a free agent back in April when his contract was TERMINATED by the club ! so in order for Rangers to terminate or agree to terminate it for a second time means that ??? in your own time Tedi because I know you have the memory of a goldfish n all that. The only way to terminate Sandaza's contract for a second time is by unfair dismissal or Rangers didn't have sufficient cause by the SFL appeal and folded over avoiding public humiliation and then the media would be reporting something altogether different don't you think if Rangers won the appeal ?,and definitely not terminating a contract for the second time if Rangers were in their legitimate rights to terminate his contract the first time round back in April. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 More made up bullshit, he lost his only appeal and the only route open was through the new SPFL which would take months, during which he would not be eligible to play, this was already covered in another article. He does not have months, he has a new club, he needs to agree to move on that is why the latest article now says both parties agree. Goodnight Dopey . Ask yourself this Tedi ! why would Sandaza agree to terminate his contract with Rangers now when it was already terminated back in April by the club ???. Why would Sandaza need to agree to terminate a contract that has already been terminated back in April by the club to sign onto another club if he was already a free agent ???. Your argument has no substance to agree to terminate a contract that has already been terminated by the club ie he was sacked and his contract ripped up for Sandaza to sign onto another club and no need to terminate it for a second time unless Rangers lost their appeal or were going to lose it ???. Because if Rangers back in April were quite right to terminate Sandaza's contract then there is no need for Sandaza to agree to terminate his contract because the club were quite right to sack him back in April and that would be the end of that and Sandaza could sign for any club without having to agree to terminate his contract because he was already sacked by the club back in April !!!. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saor Alba Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 Rangers thought they were right, Sandaza thought differently, that is why he appealed.......he lost. He wanted to appeal again but was told by his lawyers it would take months, months he did not have. Why? he has a new club and already admitted he could not play for them while any appeal was ongoing. You sure do post a lot of shoite on this thread Tedi. Sandanza will have justice one way or another if he hasn't already been settled out of court in a secret deal behind closed doors. Ibrox never ever escapes from from karmic justice. You should know that by now unless you really are a zombie. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 sure do post a lot of shoite on this thread karmic justice The zionists are gonnae get you, zionists are gonnae get you... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 best stick to fantasising about masons following you about in vans. He's got a karma-stick for dealing with masons I heard. Karma doesn't effect vans - soulless, you see. Stick useless. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 I am guessing now that Sandaza has found a new club Rangers have at the very least paid him for sitting on his erse since he had a wee chat with Tommy. After all he would be entitled to his contracted renumeration until the termination of said contract? The cpntract Rangers claimed to have terminated unilaterally weeks ago. either way Sandaza will have been paid off and Rangers will have wasted more money. The amount we will never know. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 I shook hands with Bernard Manning as well in the Edmiston club. Just out of interest when did shaking somebody by the hand constitute associating? You went on a rant and made an arse of it...again Nice auto-whataboutery. "Never mind the drug-dealing terrorist - I shook hands with a racist comedian". You want to have a word with Bennett - he's a bit better at this deflection lark. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 Honestly, WRK you're becoming a worry for me. You and I have always got on well and you know I respect your earlier posts. Your are, though, becoming more angry than one should be on an internet forum. Don't be worrying about me, Kincardine, I'm fine. Domestic life's more settled, looks like I'll be getting the chance to get to a couple of games in the autumn, and it's only a matter of time before we get rid of MJ. Angry? Nah, bewildered. All through this thread, a common theme amongst some of your less-bright fellow-fans has been condemning the other cheek as "terrorist-sympathisers": Yet when one of your own blatantly posts that he drank in a terrorist's pub, shook him by the hand, and even had a nickname for the shitbag - nothing. Not a chirp. I'm not going to ask the rhetorical "why is that?", but the way that, far from condemning No. 8, we get the standard "have a go at the non-berr by twisting his posts and putting words in his mouth" doesn't reflect well. I must admit, though, I got a chuckle with No.8's deflection attempt. I'll keep on having the banter with yourself and those (of any affiliation) who can string coherent sentences together, but there really are some loonballs attached to your team on here. Don't tell me they don't embarrass you at times. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 Saw him there twice..2 great night. Also a scottish comedian. I think he was caled Alex Howden. Goes to see racist comedian - might not have known how offensive the show would be. Goes to see racist comedian again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 Dunno? Leaves more questions than answers tbh, I'm sure us P&D's would like to believe sandancer has been given a hefty pay off to drop his legal action, whilst I imagine it would be more comfortable for the sevconians to believe than TRFC have released him for free as he has found a new club. This. Why Hellboy and Ted adopt totally entrenched positions on a subject they can't know the details of, I've no idea. FWIW, I'd imagine that the term "reached agreement" means a compromise of sorts has been achieved, which formally ends his Rangers contract enabling him to sign a new one somewhere else, and sees some money change hands to ease the process. Remember, It was Green's regime that 'sacked' him, a regime no longer in charge. I don't think anyone can state with certainty that money hasn't been paid to Sandaza and I don't think anyone can speculate with confidence about it being half his remaining salary. I think though that the questionable nature of the dismissal in the first place, coupled with this ambiguous statement, suggests that it's been more than simply a release from a contract that we all already thought had been torn up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tio Pepe Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 This. Why Hellboy and Ted adopt totally entrenched positions on a subject they can't know the details of, I've no idea. FWIW, I'd imagine that the term "reached agreement" means a compromise of sorts has been achieved, which formally ends his Rangers contract enabling him to sign a new one somewhere else, and sees some money change hands to ease the process. Remember, It was Green's regime that 'sacked' him, a regime no longer in charge. I don't think anyone can state with certainty that money hasn't been paid to Sandaza and I don't think anyone can speculate with confidence about it being half his remaining salary. I think though that the questionable nature of the dismissal in the first place, coupled with this ambiguous statement, suggests that it's been more than simply a release from a contract that we all already thought had been torn up. The normal handling of employment disputes would suggest that Sandaza has been compensated. It may not be a significant sum, but I think it is clear that something has been agreed to keep the matter out of Employment Tribunals, which could be embarrassing for one or both parties. It's no big deal really. Standard. Isn't it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 A couple of announcements this morning: "Following the appointment of James Andrew Easdale as a Non-executive Director of the Company, the Company confirms that, pursuant to AIM Rule 17, Mr Easdale currently holds 357,143 ordinary shares in the Company, representing approximately 0.55% of the Company's issued share capital". "On 16 May 2013, the Company announced that it had received a notice requisitioning a General Meeting of shareholders ("Requisition"). Following discussions with the requisitioning shareholder, the Company is pleased to announce that the requisitioning shareholder has now withdrawn the Requisition". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 A couple of announcements this morning: "Following the appointment of James Andrew Easdale as a Non-executive Director of the Company, the Company confirms that, pursuant to AIM Rule 17, Mr Easdale currently holds 357,143 ordinary shares in the Company, representing approximately 0.55% of the Company's issued share capital". "On 16 May 2013, the Company announced that it had received a notice requisitioning a General Meeting of shareholders ("Requisition"). Following discussions with the requisitioning shareholder, the Company is pleased to announce that the requisitioning shareholder has now withdrawn the Requisition". Requisition! Nobody was expecting that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLip69 Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 I have to say he was going on stage and i feared the worst but i got of lightly I shook hands with him as I came off the stage at the Embassy club, he then went on the stage and ripped me apart. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 Sorry, I've distanced myself from all things Scottish football over the summer. Have Sevco paid all their creditors yet? You know, the debt they took over with all their honours? The new company hasn't paid all the debts of the old company. And it's worth remembering that companies which go into administration and come out of it via CVAs also shed debts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowanthebluenose Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 :lol: WALTER SMITH last night admitted he doesn’t have the business brain to take Rangers to the next level. Smith, who made history by becoming the first person for 140 years to manage the club and then be appointed chairman, insists he doesn’t want the job long-term. He insists he doesn’t have the financial nous to do the job properly and is only there to sort out the infighting that has blighted the board. Smith said: “There’s a level of finance we need to find to progress and I’m not suited to that kind of work. “I’m not conversant with business or legal matters and that’s why I can’t be a long-term appointment as chairman. “My focus of attention is getting this club back to the days when the talk was about the team on the park and not who does what in the boardroom. That’s my goal. “We’ve made huge strides as a club and now we have to find a level of finance to go even further. “And I’m under no illusions about the kind of contribution I have to make at this time.” Meanwhile, the Ibrox club last night confirmed they have reached a mutual agreement with Fran Sandaza to terminate his contract. The Spanaird was dismissed by Rangers after he discussed his contract terms in a hoax call with the caller posing as an agent. Sir Watty the dignified "Walking Away" McWalter of the EBT Cardiganshire with the brown brogues: “There’s a level of finance we need to find to progress and I’m not suited to that kind of work." “We’ve made huge strides as a club and now we have to find a level of finance to go even further." Translation: "We're skint and I want oot before ra peepul realise whats going on " Oh and 140 years I forgot all the baddies thought they were financial experts. Even the pretend ones can't even read a simple article that says Smith isn't a business man. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saor Alba Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 (edited) Hmm... You sure do post a lot of shoite on this thread Tedi. Sandanza will have justice one way or another if he hasn't already been settled out of court in a secret deal behind closed doors. Ibrox never ever escapes from from karmic justice. You should know that by now unless you really are a zombie. :lol: WALTER SMITH last night admitted he doesn’t have the business brain to take Rangers to the next level.Smith, who made history by becoming the first person for 140 years to manage the club and then be appointed chairman, insists he doesn’t want the job long-term.He insists he doesn’t have the financial nous to do the job properly and is only there to sort out the infighting that has blighted the board.Smith said: “There’s a level of finance we need to find to progress and I’m not suited to that kind of work.“I’m not conversant with business or legal matters and that’s why I can’t be a long-term appointment as chairman.“My focus of attention is getting this club back to the days when the talk was about the team on the park and not who does what in the boardroom. That’s my goal.“We’ve made huge strides as a club and now we have to find a level of finance to go even further.“And I’m under no illusions about the kind of contribution I have to make at this time.”Meanwhile, the Ibrox club last night confirmed they have reached a mutual agreement with Fran Sandaza to terminate his contract. These bigoted Tedi's and Benny's sure do cry very often at the truth being posted about their old and new clubs. Very easily upset sensitive bigots they are. Whatever happened to the old "No one likes us, we don't care" bigot chant? Edited July 19, 2013 by Saor Alba 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saor Alba Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 A couple of announcements this morning: "Following the appointment of James Andrew Easdale as a Non-executive Director of the Company, the Company confirms that, pursuant to AIM Rule 17, Mr Easdale currently holds 357,143 ordinary shares in the Company, representing approximately 0.55% of the Company's issued share capital". "On 16 May 2013, the Company announced that it had received a notice requisitioning a General Meeting of shareholders ("Requisition"). Following discussions with the requisitioning shareholder, the Company is pleased to announce that the requisitioning shareholder has now withdrawn the Requisition". Shocker eh? Not really. No. Easdale on the board owning only '0.55%' of the new club, after the media had said he owned 6.00%. It now looks like some of the fake journalists of the mainstream media's daily rags just take the emails sent to them by Sevco and print the bullshit contained within without asking any serious questions. Walter Smith taken on board the new club to sell shares and season tickets to gullible and naive bigots. Other than that, what has he done behind the scenes? It's all out of his hands now. Nice. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aofjays Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 I forgot all the baddies thought they were financial experts. Even the pretend ones can't even read a simple article that says Smith isn't a business man. Baddies? Who are the baddies? Did they steal your Ice cream and Jelly? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 Requisition! Nobody was expecting that. Spanish ? 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.