stonedsailor Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Legal standing!? Only you care, We're on the hunt and f*ckin loving it!! Legality is all that matters in the real world. In the real world the club calling themselves Rangers are only 3 and a bit years old. What was it that was said in court the other day? Something along the lines of "continuation only happened in the minds of diehard supporters". ICT have 3 lower division championships, a challenge cup and a Scottish cup. "Rangers" have 2 lower division titles. We welcome the chase. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever_blue Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 nope...funny how Rangers fans love quoting judges if its something they agree with...all very quiet today though? ..must have been that judge laughing at the entity, idea concept of club shit then! The same can be said for the role reversal , their are countless other court proceedings which have had statements made or words arguin the notion rangers are still the same club , these seem to be ignored by the obsessives on here though -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 The same can be said for the role reversal , their are countless other court proceedings which have had statements made or words arguin the notion rangers are still the same club , these seem to be ignored by the obsessives on here though Those weren't court procedings. Those were rulings made on the interpretation of SFA rules, made on the hoof since it was known Rangers were going tits up. What's happening now are rulings on the law of the land. Last I looked the law takes priority over a members association. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever_blue Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Those weren't court procedings. Those were rulings made on the interpretation of SFA rules, made on the hoof since it was known Rangers were going tits up. What's happening now are rulings on the law of the land. Last I looked the law takes priority over a members association. There was one as late as last week which I quoted in here at a courtroom , don't ask me which court case because I am frankly lost with them all 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 (edited) There was one as late as last week which I quoted in here at a courtroom , don't ask me which court case because I am frankly lost with them allI smell shite.ETA it wasn't the one where the judge HYPOTHETICALLY suggested that the club and company might be seperate? Edited February 5, 2016 by stonedsailor 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insaintee Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-35504189 Rangers motherwell or the cup final to Alloa. Not falling for that one 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever_blue Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 I smell shite. ETA it wasn't the one where the judge HYPOTHETICALLY suggested that the club and company might be seperate? He also stated that club did not just emerge as of July 2012 or words to that effect 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 He also stated that club did not just emerge as of July 2012 or words to that effect Lies 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever_blue Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Lies Feel free to trawl the thread if you like , cos I can't be fucked but my quote is there 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 The same can be said for the role reversal , their are countless other court proceedings which have had statements made or words arguin the notion rangers are still the same club , these seem to be ignored by the obsessives on here though Which proves the point I've been arguing for ages. There's evidence that says the current Rangers are new; there's evidence to say they're old. The reality is a bit of both. There's been a continuity of sorts, but it's not been seamless. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 (edited) Which proves the point I've been arguing for ages. There's evidence that says the current Rangers are new; there's evidence to say they're old. The reality is a bit of both. There's been a continuity of sorts, but it's not been seamless. Nor the same entity. Edited February 5, 2016 by strichener 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 He also stated that club did not just emerge as of July 2012 or words to that effect No he floated that as an idea in response to one of the legal beagles line of rhetoric. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Nor the same entity. The UEFA definition of a football club is the entity which runs the team on the park. UEFA rules allow the legal entity to change but not in the case of insolvency and shedding debt, as seen by the CAS ruling on Timişoara. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 The UEFA definition of a football club is the entity which runs the team on the park. UEFA rules allow the legal entity to change but not in the case of insolvency and shedding debt, as seen by the CAS ruling on Timişoara. It is not within the gift of UEFA to define a football club that has went through the process of incorporation. It is no longer a club but is a legally trading entity subject to the normal laws of the land in which they are incorporated. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 It is not within the gift of UEFA to define a football club that has went through the process of incorporation. It is no longer a club but is a legally trading entity subject to the normal laws of the land in which they are incorporated. UEFA can define a football club within their rules. Law supercedes the rules of a members association, as I stated before. The point I am getting at is that in the real world Rangers have been running for less than 4 years, in the football world Rangers have been members of the SFA, ergo UEFA, uninterrupted for less than 4 years. No matter how you look at it or spin it, Rangers are a 3 and a bit year old club. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 https://lefthooked.wordpress.com/2016/02/05/rangers-a-parable/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 The same can be said for the role reversal , their are countless other court proceedings which have had statements made or words arguin the notion rangers are still the same club , these seem to be ignored by the obsessives on here though Even stoney can't think that this hearing was about old cub and new club lol, more to do with the general trying to claim the SFA has no jurisdiction over the holding company. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 https://lefthooked.wordpress.com/2016/02/05/rangers-a-parable/ The parable is flawed. The product which was award winning was the pies. The pies have f**k all to do with the café, the pies won the titles. Go rewrite it with the café owner making his own pies then a new owner coming in with a new recipe. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 https://lefthooked.wordpress.com/2016/02/05/rangers-a-parable/ WordPress lol 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Even stoney can't think that this hearing was about old cub and new club lol, more to do with the general trying to claim the SFA has no jurisdiction over the holding company. That is true but it is the reasons behind the claims and the judges views on these which show the new club/old club truth. Collateral damage for you guys, the answers to a three year debate are about to arrive. Thanks to Mike the hero. 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.