Youve not be assuming as much as other taigs ill give you that. Youre still a tattie munching band camp gay though.
Ah know. Whit a bunch of bastards we are for ripping the pish over a football result. We should take a lesson from every other fan in the country and desist from such highly obsessive behaviour. It's way worse than calling ye's cheats, showing ye's the proof, telling ye's we told ye's so, and then conveniently forgetting about all of that when it is ruled ye's were in the right all along. We need to have a right hard look at ourselves. I apologise on behalf of myself, and my fellow bears.
I have no problem with people ripping the pish. Mind you, wumming about losing 2-1 to Barca at their own ground is a ridiculous, even by Medro's standards. I just find it funny that some of you (not you granted) are acting like you've had some great result when in reality your club was ****ed and it turned out you didn't even do anything wrong. If that was my club I would be severely pissed off. Oh, and yer a sarky ****!
Yes, I am I do think it's a great result. Accused of cheating by financial doping and having no sporting integrity. Exonerated. No point getting angry about the way everything went down. What's happened has happened. Spilled milk an all that. The vindication of the tribunal does add a wee shine to the turd we got served, though.
ST thinks slagging timmy over stoppage winners is the same as starting threads about your rivals finances, fans blogs, chairman, owners, managers, directors, etc etc
See Whytie is having a go at HMRC for not doing a deal. This is the same guy who didn't pay a pennt tax and NI Mad bastard.
For ****'s Sake The result in the FTT doesn't mean you weren't cheating - folk from both sides are selectively quoting bits of the report they've read elsewhere (me included - **** reading that whole doc). Even if all the contested trusts were ruled to not break the law (which I don't think was 100%), it still leaves all the uncontested ones. Alistair Johnson (on the back page of today's Metro) admits that the document proves Rangers had side arrangements but plays it down by saying it was "only 1 or 2". The statements from McMillan, various Murrays and Chuckles suggesting this means the SPL probe be dropped is utter opportunism. As for why the case took 2 years to be heard, it would appear that the main reason set out in the FTT report is an MIH employee trying to stall and mislead the tribunal. Tom English does my tits in, but I've just read his blogpost there http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footb...-had-been-co-operative-from-day-one-1-2650192 Even if there's no appeal for the BTC, there's still going to be an SPL probe - there's every reason to believe that they'll take the easy route if it's offered to them but that doesn't mean it shouldn't go ahead.
****'s Sake Selective **** all. We were accused of cheating by using the BTC money to fund our playing squad. In other word buyings and paying players we would not otherwise have been able to afford. It was also called financial doping in some circles. Directly because of this accusation we were also told we had no sporting integrity. The BTC ruled in our favour. We did nothing wrong. No financial doping. What is selective about that? Nothing. Unless yer you of course. Winning isn't enough. Ah but, ah but, ah but contested blah blah. You know **** all about it. The judges who ruled on the case knew everything about it. Rangers won. There remains the outstanding matter of the SFA/SPL investigation, for which not you, me, or any **** else on here is in possesion of any of the facts or to which association rules they apply. If the investigation finds us guilty of something we will be punished - to what extent will depend on what rules were broken. Meanwhile, you carry on being selective with your ****nugets of pish. If it's wumming, fine. Otherwise, **** off.
I'm not wumming. I am busy today, though and won't be on much. Not registering your players properly will still be considered cheating. Seperate to that, paying a different rate of tax to everyone else is what would be referred to as "financial doping" and, yes, it looks like Rangers have been cleared of that in the CONTESTED cases. Rangers didn't do nothing wrong, though. Vodafone and Starbucks have operated within the law but it'll only take you a second to find commentators and members of the public's opinions on what they did regarding taxation. The BTC had a massive impact on who Rangers were sold to but it wasn't the sole reason Rangers were liquidated (it and Craig Whyte's refraining from tax payments weren't even the only two reasons). In 2002, a Rangers director said that the only road Murray was taking Rangers on would lead to administration. In 2009, Rangers were declared to be in "virtual administration" when the bank (who later said they were misled by the previous bank to the toxic nature of Rangers debts) attempted to recover some of their losses from a business that CONTINUED to be loss making and to stop them going under - this was the period where people now triumphantly claim that the debt was decreased - the club itself did all of this under duress. 2010 - Big tax case started. Rangers were already on the skids. As a result of MIH's victory in the BTC, the amount owed due to the clawback, penalties and interest from tax irregularities is being reduced. It is not being quashed or overturned - it is being re-evaluated and reduced. Rangers are still due to pay fines from the original HMRC findings in 2010. Rangers did not "do nothing wrong"
