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

Jelle1880 · 22-09-2015 09:34PM

Bar Rangers TV I've hardly ever heard commentators 'in anguish' if Rangers are losing.

edit: Coillte Bhoy, were you watching it on the BBC ? Because no way was he willing Rangers to win...
Liam McLeod has a long history of seemingly wanting anyone playing Rangers to win.

Coillte_Bhoy · 23-09-2015 07:44AM

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Bar Rangers TV I've hardly ever heard commentators 'in anguish' if Rangers are losing.

edit: Coillte Bhoy, were you watching it on the BBC ? Because no way was he willing Rangers to win...
Liam McLeod has a long history of seemingly wanting anyone playing Rangers to win.

Ya BBC and i know he has in the past not being exactly pro rangers, just thought last night he was ott, no big deal for me either way, just something i thought i noticed.

bobbysands81 · 23-09-2015 12:42PM

Another revenue stream lost.

Jelle1880 · 23-09-2015 01:10PM

Oh no, bankruptcy is now closer than ever.

Eirebear · 23-09-2015 01:43PM

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Oh no, bankruptcy is now closer than ever.

Didn't you hear? We've went out of business 3 times already this season...

Also, apologies for the lack of Waghorn updates, I was so horrendously drunk at the weekend Carlton Cole could have bagged a brace and I wouldn't have noticed.

Intifada · 23-09-2015 02:18PM

Eirebear wrote: »

Also, apologies for the lack of Waghorn updates, I was so horrendously drunk at the weekend Carlton Cole could have bagged a brace and I wouldn't have noticed.

Figured it was just because he didn't score as a bottom-half SPL team ran riot against ye

Jelle1880 · 23-09-2015 03:26PM

Intifada wrote: »

Figured it was just because he didn't score as a bottom-half SPL team ran riot against ye

You must have missed his 2 goals in the weekend.

No worries, I'm sure Eirebear will be updating soon enough.

Eirebear · 23-09-2015 04:34PM

Intifada wrote: »

Figured it was just because he didn't score as a bottom-half SPL team ran riot against ye

They did indeed, but that's what happens when you're building a new side. Im pretty certain everyone involved will learn from it.

dundalkfc10 · 23-09-2015 04:44PM

Jelle1880 wrote: »

You must have missed his 2 goals in the weekend.

No worries, I'm sure Eirebear will be updating soon enough.

He will prob be off to a big club like Aberdeen soon, Dont think he would be good enough for Celtic as Griffiths is obvs a better player and he himself is just about good enough for Celtic

Jelle1880 · 23-09-2015 06:28PM

That's got to be the worst attempt at a wind up I've read on here

weldoninhio · 23-09-2015 06:54PM

Another lump sum leaving the club now, if Charles Green gets his way. Another set of legal fees to be paid.

Broxi_Bear_Eire · 23-09-2015 10:44PM

weldoninhio wrote: »

Another lump sum leaving the club now, if Charles Green gets his way. Another set of legal fees to be paid.

Seriously you think a judge will rule for him lol

dundalkfc10 · 24-09-2015 08:32AM

Jelle1880 wrote: »

That's got to be the worst attempt at a wind up I've read on here

Its not a wind up. Aberdeen are pbvs a bigger club, than a club only around a few years!

Dempsey · 24-09-2015 09:42AM

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Seriously you think a judge will rule for him lol

If his contract entitles him to legal cover now, then the judge will have no option but to rule in his favour. What makes you think a judge will ignore the law?

Broxi_Bear_Eire · 24-09-2015 09:46AM

Dempsey wrote: »

If his contract entitles him to legal cover now, then the judge will have no option but to rule in his favour. What makes you think a judge will ignore the law?

He is charged with fraudulently gaining control of a the cliub I somehow doubt a judge will allow payment of any money until adultery the case. And when he is found guilty all things being equal then he would not be entitled as his actions and therefore contract would be seen as fraudulent

TheCitizen · 24-09-2015 10:03AM

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

He is charged with fraudulently gaining control of a the cliub I somehow doubt a judge will allow payment of any money until adultery the case. And when he is found guilty all things being equal then he would not be entitled as his actions and therefore contract would be seen as fraudulent

You don't know for sure though do ya, the court ruling could happen next week. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-34339216

Meanwhile, as Green and Whyte are in the dock for fraudulent acquisition of the Rangers club in 2012, old moonbeams Murray who handed over the reigns appears to be in the clear. Will he even be asked to testify?

Broxi_Bear_Eire · 24-09-2015 10:07AM

TheCitizen wrote: »

You don't know for sure though do ya, the court ruling could happen next week. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-34339216

Meanwhile, as Green and Whyte are in the dock for fraudulent acquisition of the Rangers club in 2012, old moonbeams Murray who handed over the reigns appears to be in the clear. Will he even be asked to testify?

I along with just about every bear I know want him arrested that been made clear on here more than once
No one can say for sure but if that were to happen I am pretty sure the club would fight it at the highest levels. Be a strange way to run s judicial system to give a guy money from somewhere he is accused of acquiring dishonestly don't you think &#55357;&#56841;

TheCitizen · 24-09-2015 10:10AM

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

I along with just about every bear I know want him arrested that been made clear on here more than once

Any reasons given for him not being charged, that you know of or heard of?

Broxi_Bear_Eire · 24-09-2015 10:14AM

TheCitizen wrote: »

Any reasons given for him not being charged, that you know of or heard of?

No real fact about it but there are whispers he has turned on his cronies who knows

Dempsey · 24-09-2015 10:51AM

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

He is charged with fraudulently gaining control of a the cliub I somehow doubt a judge will allow payment of any money until adultery the case. And when he is found guilty all things being equal then he would not be entitled as his actions and therefore contract would be seen as fraudulent

The judge cant prejudice an ongoing case. He'll most likely ring fence the funds pending the outcome if his contract stipulates his cost are to be covered

Eirebear · 24-09-2015 11:59AM

TheCitizen wrote: »

Any reasons given for him not being charged, that you know of or heard of?

As I mentioned earlier, it could be argued that by bringing Murray into the issue at this point then they would have to look at Lloyds TSB and their representatives who at the time could be seen to have at the very least pushed the sale forward, if not forced it through entirely.
Not to mention the 'useful idiots' in the media world.

Maybe a solid conviction against Green/Whyte would make it easier to take it further along the line?

Broxi_Bear_Eire · 24-09-2015 02:25PM

Dempsey wrote: »

The judge cant prejudice an ongoing case. He'll most likely ring fence the funds pending the outcome if his contract stipulates his cost are to be covered

They may do so but I neither Green or his lawyers won't get their hands on it as I said. And when found guilty this will just compound his guilt and show him up for what he is a complete lowlife

Dempsey · 24-09-2015 03:01PM

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

They may do so but I neither Green or his lawyers won't get their hands on it as I said. And when found guilty this will just compound his guilt and show him up for what he is a complete lowlife

You're assuming a guilty verdict will handed down in the fraud case.

Knowing something to be true and proving it in court are two different things.

Intifada · 24-09-2015 03:09PM

They might find that even though they are completely guilty, it didn't give them a competitive advantage so in fact they're innocent

weldoninhio · 24-09-2015 03:14PM

Intifada wrote: »

They might find that even though they are completely guilty, it didn't give them a competitive advantage so in fact they're innocent

Or they could be found guilty of only some of the charges rendering them innocent.

Broxi_Bear_Eire · 24-09-2015 04:23PM

Dempsey wrote: »

You're assuming a guilty verdict will handed down in the fraud case.

Knowing something to be true and proving it in court are two different things.

I said in a previous post IF but you are just nit picking for the sake of it now

Broxi_Bear_Eire · 24-09-2015 04:25PM

Intifada wrote: »

They might find that even though they are completely guilty, it didn't give them a competitive advantage so in fact they're innocent

Talking pish again

Intifada · 24-09-2015 05:41PM

Well off-topic posts are against the rules after all

Jelle1880 · 24-09-2015 09:03PM

http://www.inhouselawyer.co.uk/index.php/insurance/7403-directors-and-officers-liability-insurance-problems-and-pitfalls

A director would not be entitled to an indemnity in respect of any fraud, dishonesty or similar morally culpable behaviour, both as a matter of common law and under s55(2)(a) of the Marine Insurance Act 1906. Usually a D&O policy will expressly state as much, requiring a judicial or arbitral finding to this effect before the exclusion will apply. Problems arise when allegations involving dishonesty are settled, because there is then no adjudication enabling insurers not to indemnify, although if an insurer were to feel sufficiently strongly it could simply refuse to pay and then try to prove that the director had been dishonest in any proceedings brought by the director against the insurer for the indemnity. The director should insist upon a clause requiring a firm finding that they had been dishonest (or reckless) and particularly that costs should be advanced until such a finding, at which point they would be repayable.

Green can claim whatever he wants, it's pretty clear that he won't get a penny.

Not a surprise that it's being leaked to the press by Media House's favourite BBC journalist.

Dempsey · 24-09-2015 09:11PM

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

I said in a previous post IF but you are just nit picking for the sake of it now

Your language in the post i quoted was 'and when...' like it was a formality. Its not nit picking, you said it! :rolleyes:

I suppose the details dont matter to Rangers fans, just the net result. :P

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

Comments