rainbowrising Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 (edited) 4 minutes ago, The DA said: If Rangers think they have evidence and a likely court for their removal, what happens when they don't get enough clubs' votes to push it through? Will they take it to law themselves? This has been a key issue from the start. To say you aren't going ahead with the charges because others dont support it is a nonsense. If they think their conspiracy is fact surely they are duty bound to see it through to the end? Edited May 7, 2020 by rainbowrising 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeredbook Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 3 minutes ago, Granny Danger said: Rangers are like Donald Trump Bleach of the peace . 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pet Jeden Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 Just now, Bohemian said: 4 weeks to get this dossier together to be told in about an hour to f**k right off... classic sevco You trust somebody who puts out a statement within an hour of receiving a 200 page document (whether it’s seriously damaging or not)? Complete ersehole judgement by whoever at SPFL. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bohemian Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 Just now, Pet Jeden said: You trust somebody who puts out a statement within an hour of receiving a 200 page document (whether it’s seriously damaging or not)? Complete ersehole judgement by whoever at SPFL. Yes 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdinburghPar1975 Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 2 minutes ago, Alan Stubbs said: Have you ever read a Rangers statement? If anyone can fill 200 pages with absolutely nothing, it's them. Sorry, to be fair I should have written that the 200+ pages in the dossier is a lot of accusations to make. In no way was I assuming that any of it would be actual proof or evidence, just that it's a lot of 'potential' issues to be read over (in theory anyway..but we know it'll be nowt!) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Alan Stubbs Posted May 7, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted May 7, 2020 The quotation around 'dossier' is a nice touch. It's this kind of petty shit that makes our game so great 21 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aim Here Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 Just now, Pet Jeden said: You trust somebody who puts out a statement within an hour of receiving a 200 page document (whether it’s seriously damaging or not)? Complete ersehole judgement by whoever at SPFL. Pffft. Large reports of this sort are easy to get the gist of. The first thing you do is hit the conclusion section, find out what they're *really* saying and then track back to the bits of evidence that actually support the conclusion. And if you're able to see at a glance that those are pish, then you don't really need to trawl the details of the flimflam to denounce the report as a whole. 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 15 minutes ago, Speroni*1 said: Wait, folk are buying this as real? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludo*1 Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 (edited) 1 minute ago, DA Baracus said: Wait, folk are buying this as real? Well, considering it's been published by several of BBC, STV and other reporters, aye. Edited May 7, 2020 by Speroni*1 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross. Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 5 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said: You trust somebody who puts out a statement within an hour of receiving a 200 page document (whether it’s seriously damaging or not)? Complete ersehole judgement by whoever at SPFL. I imagine they’d have had a few folk reading sections each and reporting back together. Initial view is that it’s bog roll, but we’ll now review in detail to confirm. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
accies1874 Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 1 minute ago, DA Baracus said: Wait, folk are buying this as real? It's being tweeted by many Scottish football journalists. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aim Here Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 (edited) 2 minutes ago, DA Baracus said: Wait, folk are buying this as real? It's been quoted by at least two professional journalists on twitter, so I reckon it probably is. The one thing they're really good at is regurgitating press releases. Edited May 7, 2020 by Aim Here 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 Just now, Speroni*1 said: Well, considering it's been published by several of BBC, STV and other reporters, aye. Perhaps I'm looking in the wrong places then, but where is it actually posted? I can't see it on their site or social media. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 So just a head's up about legal advice, the old joke is "I can give you my legal opinion and if you don't like it I can give you another". For me there are 3 scenarios here: 1) They have nothing, and are "at it". 2) They have something but it's got no chance in court so they are using it as a beating stick while not needing to act upon it. 3) They have something, and it could go to court but they are hoping it's enough for other clubs to look for the removal of Doncaster - thus avoiding the costs of doing so in court. We can rule out that they have cast-iron evidence because if that was the case they would have already initiated court proceedings. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JTS98 Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 6 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said: You trust somebody who puts out a statement within an hour of receiving a 200 page document (whether it’s seriously damaging or not)? Complete ersehole judgement by whoever at SPFL. Judgements on these things are easy to form quite quickly. I'd be sceptical at the length of the document. If they have some serious proof of serious wrongdoing, then that would be easy to highlight in quite a succinct manner. 200 pages seems a bit much for something of this purpose. That said, I'd agree the SPFL would have been better holding it off for a bit longer just for the PR view of having taken longer over it. Bizarre stuff from Rangers if they've made all this fuss over nothing. Surely resignations/sackings coming up? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Archer (Raconteur) Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 19 minutes ago, Speroni*1 said: 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludo*1 Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 Just now, DA Baracus said: Perhaps I'm looking in the wrong places then, but where is it actually posted? I can't see it on their site or social media. Chris McLaughlin, Kheredine Idessane, Raman Bhardwaj, Oliver Dickinson & well here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52571770 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 1 minute ago, accies1874 said: It's being tweeted by many Scottish football journalists. Just now, Aim Here said: It's been quoted by at least two professional journalists on twitter, so I reckon it probably is. Not a strong argument! Maybe it is real, but it looks so fake. It's poorly written and terribly punctuated, and the overall presentation is amateur. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aDONisSheep Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 3 minutes ago, Aim Here said: Pffft. Large reports of this sort are easy to get the gist of. The first thing you do is hit the conclusion section, find out what they're *really* saying and then track back to the bits of evidence that actually support the conclusion. And if you're able to see at a glance that those are pish, then you don't really need to trawl the details of the flimflam to denounce the report as a whole. Also, big documents would be split into logical chunks and reviewed by several people. Assuming that Brand rangers FC have given the document some structure, 200 pages wouldn't take long at all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florentine_Pogen Posted May 7, 2020 Share Posted May 7, 2020 11 minutes ago, DA Baracus said: They've clearly delayed the release so that they can pad out their nonsense with yet more utter pish. It's a filigusty of a document. FTFY. 1 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.