Rangers FC On Field Gossip & Rumour Thread 2017 Mod Note in OP(Updated 14/08)

Eirebear

Lennonist wrote: »

No-one would accuse ye of that - operating within "the spirit of the game" I mean.

The transfer window slammed shut in Scotland last night two days before it closes in England and most other places around Europe. There are those saying that the window closed early because the SFA made an admin error when handing out a transfer ban to The The Rangers and the window closed early in order to make the embargo effective. Was wondering what your thoughts were on that?

I'll leave the conspiracy theories to others to be honest, Rangers have operated within the rules regarding the transfer embargo and the SPFL can do as they wish.

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Lennonist wrote: »

No-one would accuse ye of that - operating within "the spirit of the game" I mean.

The transfer window slammed shut in Scotland last night two days before it closes in England and most other places around Europe. There are those saying that the window closed early because the SFA made an admin error when handing out a transfer ban to The The Rangers and the window closed early in order to make the embargo effective. Was wondering what your thoughts were on that?

The only club it really harmed was your own the SFA are incompetent. UEFA recommended to them to keep it open but they chose to go their own way.

Lennonist

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

The only club it really harmed was your own the SFA are incompetent. UEFA recommended to them to keep it open but they chose to go their own way.

I know that, but that is the reason why the window shut early.

Eirebear

Lennonist wrote: »

I know that, but that is the reason why the window shut early.

Well, if you're taking the line that they deliberately harmed Celtic in order to hurt Rangers, then I'd be pretty pissed off if i were you.

The men in charge of our game are a complete and utter joke, and although you guys know that, many of you have willfully ignored it for a couple of years because of the Rangers situation.
That'll come back to haunt us all.

Lennonist

Eirebear wrote: »

Well, if you're taking the line that they deliberately harmed Celtic in order to hurt Rangers, then I'd be pretty pissed off if i were you.

The men in charge of our game are a complete and utter joke, and although you guys know that, many of you have willfully ignored it for a couple of years because of the Rangers situation.
That'll come back to haunt us all.

The Rangers situation was created by people running Rangers. The window shutting early was a stupid clerical admin error, though I don't know why they couldn't have just went back and extended the Rangers transfer embargo until the end of the window which should be Monday night.

Eirebear

Indeed, Rangers troubles were created by those running the club.
But that wasn't my point, which interestingly, your reply just adds weight to.

Jelle1880

http://www.scribd.com/doc/164607084/5-Way-Agreement-As-issued-to-all-parties-for-signature

Talk about being shafted

bobmalooka

Jelle1880 wrote: »

http://www.scribd.com/doc/164607084/5-Way-Agreement-As-issued-to-all-parties-for-signature

Talk about being shafted

Can't read it on mobile, what's the deal?

Eirebear

bobmalooka wrote: »

Can't read it on mobile, what's the deal?

Apparently a draft document outlining negotiations and agreements between
SPL, SFA, SFL, RFC Ltd and Sevco Ltd.

Not got the time to run through it at the moment though.
Any chance of a rundown Jelle?

Jelle1880

The main issues are:

1. The transfer embargo. It's still clearly obvious that it's illegal, yet Rangers were forced to accept it.

2. Rangers were forced to pay the legal costs, against the ruling of a judge.

3. Rangers were forced to stay silent on the contents of this agreement.

8.1 Neither RFC nor Sevco may make any disclosure to a third party, press release or public announcement whatsoever about, concerning or relating to this Agreement and/or the transactions contemplated by it or disclose any of the terms of this Agreement except interms which do not depart from the terms of a public statement agreed in writing by theparties or with the express prior written consent of all parties to this Agreement.

Those are just the 3 worst points for me, tons of other stuff in there that wouldn't hold up in any court.

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

The main issues are:

1. The transfer embargo. It's still clearly obvious that it's illegal, yet Rangers were forced to accept it.

2. Rangers were forced to pay the legal costs, against the ruling of a judge.

3. Rangers were forced to stay silent on the contents of this agreement.



Those are just the 3 worst points for me, tons of other stuff in there that wouldn't hold up in any court.

If the Appellate Tribunal ruling was enforced, the SFA would have been forced to suspend Rangers membership, as they didnt find any of the other punishments fitting (that was their argument in the appellate). None of them wanted that.

Contracts arent legally binding if signed under duress, Rangers and Sevco werent forced to take that deal. It shows the lengths Green was prepared to take to keep his cash cow.

bobmalooka

Jelle1880 wrote: »

The main issues are:

1. The transfer embargo. It's still clearly obvious that it's illegal, yet Rangers were forced to accept it.

2. Rangers were forced to pay the legal costs, against the ruling of a judge.

3. Rangers were forced to stay silent on the contents of this agreement.



Those are just the 3 worst points for me, tons of other stuff in there that wouldn't hold up in any court.

There's no doubt the whole agreement was a mess.

Its probably a good idea to remember the context of that agreement, and the alternative to it.

To be honest rangers are probably the last people who should have a gripe with that agreement

A Dub in Glasgo

Rangers signed because they wanted to be make money , they were not forced as they had a choice. The signing choice might not to be their/your liking but that does not mean it was forced

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Think the main reason it was signed was so Rangers could play football. To be honest for me that is in the past time to move on but if someone from the SFA tells me it's Sunday night I will be double checking

Jelle1880

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Rangers signed because they wanted to be make money , they were not forced as they had a choice. The signing choice might not to be their/your liking but that does not mean it was forced

Erm, either sign it or no football next season ?

Some choice that is.

Green tried to spin it back then (for example getting rid of the stripping of trophies) as a victory, but this shows just how far they bent over to the SFA.

bobmalooka

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Erm, either sign it or no football next season ?

Some choice that is.

Green tried to spin it back then (for example getting rid of the stripping of trophies) as a victory, but this shows just how far they bent over to the SFA.

Lucky to have the choice, sevco didn't meet the requirements to play football so the SFA had to come up with some 'punishments' as a compromise.

Transfer embargo- sure ye have managed to assemble a squad at such an expense that the future of rangers is in doubt again.

Legal costs- did ye want the SFA to pay for this cozy arrangement?

Confidentiality clause- do you remember Charles green and his mouth?

Overall ye did very well out of it

Jelle1880

From the London Stock Exchange:

Further to the announcement on 4 September 2013, the Company confirms that whilst the Board's discussions have continued with representatives of the group who requisitioned (together the "Requisitioners") a general meeting to consider the proposed resolutions ("Requisition") detailed in the announcement on 2 August 2013 ("General Meeting"), the Board is disappointed to announce that no agreement has been reached.

Unless an agreement can be reached prior to 13 September 2013, as set out in the announcement on 2 September 2013, the Company will be required to send a notice to shareholders to convene the General Meeting by no later than 13 September 2013.

So basically if it stays the same an EGM can be called by this Friday.

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Jelle1880 wrote: »

From the London Stock Exchange:



So basically if it stays the same an EGM can be called by this Friday.

Good this has been dragging on long enough.

weldoninhio

Ian Black gets 3 match ban, another 7 games suspended and E7500 for breaching the rules 160 times including betting against his own team 3 times, betting on his team 10 times and another 147 occasions.

Scottish football is a joke. A 1 game ban for every time you bet against the team you play for.

Broxi_Bear_Eire

weldoninhio wrote: »

Ian Black gets 3 match ban, another 7 games suspended and E7500 for breaching the rules 160 times including betting against his own team 3 times, betting on his team 10 times and another 147 occasions.

Scottish football is a joke. A 1 game ban for every time you bet against the team you play for.

Your right it is a joke and if he was caught betting against Rangers they should fire him.
Bur we also have to look at the SFA rules which say Betting on any football matches worldwide is banned. So I expect to see the SFA take action against the many footballers in Scotland who bet every week

premierstone

weldoninhio wrote: »

Ian Black gets 3 match ban, another 7 games suspended and E7500 for breaching the rules 160 times including betting against his own team 3 times, betting on his team 10 times and another 147 occasions.

Scottish football is a joke. A 1 game ban for every time you bet against the team you play for.

That is absolutely mindblowing tbh, it defies all logic quite frankly I'm lost for words. Now maybe I ccan understand Jackie Mac's frustration at he's player getting a 3 match ban for kicking out a player :rolleyes:

TheBuilder

The only game he bet on his own team in that he actually played in, he scored as we won 4-2! He bet on us to draw.

The rest were just coupons, you see footballers posting there coupons on twitter every week, I look forward to them all being pulled up for it.

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Rangers v Arbroath

RANGERS (4-4-2): Bell; Faure, McCulloch, Mohsni, Smith; Peralta, Macleod, Law, Little; Daly, Clark
SUBS: Simonsen, Foster, Cribari, Templeton, Crawford, Shiels, McKay
REF: Crawford Allan

Seven of the new signings start though Foster must be wondering why Faure has been moved to accommodate McCulloch while he sits on the bench

Broxi_Bear_Eire

0-0 at half time and a few minutes into the second half Arbroath took the lead. Rangrs look like a team who haven't played together..Rangers win a free kick and Mohsni puts by the keeper to make it 1-1

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Ball into the box and McCulloch rise above everyone to head it in 2-1 in the 64th minute

Broxi_Bear_Eire

And in the 75th minute McCulloch makes it 3-1 with a well struck shot from outside the box

Broxi_Bear_Eire

And Little makes it 4-1 in the 86th minute afte a nice through ball from Templeton

Broxi_Bear_Eire

And McCulloch gets his second hat trick in as many weeks with a header from a corner

Jelle1880

Horrible first half, but well done to Ally for making the necessary changes, far better second half with a deserved scoreline.

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Queen of the South v Rangers QF Ramsdens cup

RANGERS: Bell; Foster, McCulloch, Mohsni, Wallace; Crawford, Peralta, Law, S Smith; Little, Daly.
SUBS: Simonsen, Clark, Faure, Templeton, McKay.

Interesting line up should be a Rangers win but of course Rangers were put out at the same stage last year by QotS