Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
eskbankloyal

Daily Record

Recommended Posts


1 hour ago, j1mgg said:

Saw someone of rtv last night wearing the knockoff one with tartan on one should, and the union flag on the other.

i saw someone wearing that on Sauchiehall St last week. Horrific

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Rangers_no1 said:

Could be worse, could be going to games wearing a Chelsea, Arsenal top etc. Hate cunts that do that!

The amount of kids I see in Chelsea kits does my head in.

Have noticed kids in Liverpool kits is becoming more common.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sparkle said:

So it’s a grab of the pre print digital image they planned to run with?

Doesn’t matter away - the record is a rabid anti-Rangers paper and I can’t wait for it to die.

It would then have come from inside the record rather than the printer (as claimed) it would almost certainly have evidence (frames etc) of the editing software used to create the front page as that's clearly unfinished rather than looking like a 'finished' PDF version

Sparkle likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, eskbankloyal said:

Daily Record had a front page headline yesterday that was printed and ready for delivery when Rangers set the lawyers onto them because the story is complete bollocks. 

Ended up having to pulp the lot, which is nice. 

649D9022-B42A-4315-98F4-1557BD2A238F.jpeg

Is there an element of no smoke without fire on this ie not in relation to replica tops but in relation to Rangers legal right to use the Hummel-provided strips for this season?   The reason I ask stems straight from the first part of para 88 of the court judgement (extracted below in italics).    Part of this includes the injunction which SDIR seeks (and which, as I understand it the judge has decided to grant to them.    

88. SDIR now seeks an order for damages to be assessed, an order for declaratory relief, and an injunction in the following terms:

“... UPON SDIR agreeing that, for the 2019/2020 season, the Rangers FC teams may wear any Official Rangers Kit (as that term is defined in the Agreement between Rangers and SDIR dated 21 June 2017) that had been approved by Rangers prior to 17 April 2019

On the face of it Rangers FC teams may wear any Official Rangers Kit but is only permitted to do so if it meets the definition of Official Rangers Kit as set out in the Rangers and SDIR contract of 21 June 2017, and where that kit was approved by Rangers before 17 April 2019.      Some points that might be worth considering here are:

(I) what is the definition of Official Rangers Kit in the Rangers / SDI contract of 21 June 17;

(2) where does that definition apply in the operative terms of that contract - the point being does the definition and its application in relevant operative clauses and any other relevant related definitions also somehow confer approval rights on SDIR or require some sort of prior SDIR assent before Rangers can lawfully use the Hummel strips?; and

(3) that contract is still valid and legally binding on Rangers as far as I can discern from the recent judgment.    That being the case Rangers must still comply with the terms of that contract or risk facing further breaches of contract and resulting claims for damages from SDIR.     The very simple point is - does that contract with SDIR give any approval rights to SDIR?  

  • Its a straightforward yes or no I think.  
  • If its 'no' then there should be no bar on Rangers using the Hummel strip this season.  
  • If its a 'yes' then the question would be has Rangers complied in full with the contract it has with SDIR and complied in full with the recent judgment?   
  • If somehow there is a 'maybe' or a 'not sure' then the text about SDIR demanding approval rights may yet be a case of no smoke without fire. 

The supposed substance of the story ie the text about Rangers barred from playing in new home strip will either go away as the OP suggests and never raise its head again from SDIR, or it will surface as a court point if SDIR believe they hold some sort of approval or assent right as per the contract, or have other contractual rights about the strip that Rangers has not complied with.    If its the first the whole thing goes away very quickly.  If its the second then given SDIR's form in dealings with Rangers they would be likely to pursue a legal remedy in which case we'll hear more of this.    Just because the DR may have been discouraged from printing any story about this does not automatically mean that SDIR may not have an issue.    It all depends what the contract says (because its still legally binding on Rangers) and the extent to which Rangers is complying with it and with the court judgment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Reformation Bear said:

Is there an element of no smoke without fire on this ie not in relation to replica tops but in relation to Rangers legal right to use the Hummel-provided strips for this season?   The reason I ask stems straight from the first part of para 88 of the court judgement (extracted below in italics).    Part of this includes the injunction which SDIR seeks (and which, as I understand it the judge has decided to grant to them.    

88. SDIR now seeks an order for damages to be assessed, an order for declaratory relief, and an injunction in the following terms:

“... UPON SDIR agreeing that, for the 2019/2020 season, the Rangers FC teams may wear any Official Rangers Kit (as that term is defined in the Agreement between Rangers and SDIR dated 21 June 2017) that had been approved by Rangers prior to 17 April 2019

On the face of it Rangers FC teams may wear any Official Rangers Kit but is only permitted to do so if it meets the definition of Official Rangers Kit as set out in the Rangers and SDIR contract of 21 June 2017, and where that kit was approved by Rangers before 17 April 2019.      Some points that might be worth considering here are:

(I) what is the definition of Official Rangers Kit in the Rangers / SDI contract of 21 June 17;

(2) where does that definition apply in the operative terms of that contract - the point being does the definition and its application in relevant operative clauses and any other relevant related definitions also somehow confer approval rights on SDIR or require some sort of prior SDIR assent before Rangers can lawfully use the Hummel strips?; and

(3) that contract is still valid and legally binding on Rangers as far as I can discern from the recent judgment.    That being the case Rangers must still comply with the terms of that contract or risk facing further breaches of contract and resulting claims for damages from SDIR.     The very simple point is - does that contract with SDIR give any approval rights to SDIR?  

  • Its a straightforward yes or no I think.  
  • If its 'no' then there should be no bar on Rangers using the Hummel strip this season.  
  • If its a 'yes' then the question would be has Rangers complied in full with the contract it has with SDIR and complied in full with the recent judgment?   
  • If somehow there is a 'maybe' or a 'not sure' then the text about SDIR demanding approval rights may yet be a case of no smoke without fire. 

The supposed substance of the story ie the text about Rangers barred from playing in new home strip will either go away as the OP suggests and never raise its head again from SDIR, or it will surface as a court point if SDIR believe they hold some sort of approval or assent right as per the contract, or have other contractual rights about the strip that Rangers has not complied with.    If its the first the whole thing goes away very quickly.  If its the second then given SDIR's form in dealings with Rangers they would be likely to pursue a legal remedy in which case we'll hear more of this.    Just because the DR may have been discouraged from printing any story about this does not automatically mean that SDIR may not have an issue.    It all depends what the contract says (because its still legally binding on Rangers) and the extent to which Rangers is complying with it and with the court judgment. 

dingwall has said  after inquiries(his)“no one from the club contacted anyone” would he know ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Moody Blue Legend said:

The other day on the same online page they had:

Rangers due Ashley millions

Rangers fans abuse Griffiths

Rangers fans to get rehab for sectarianism

Rod Stewart flies celtic flag on luxury yacht.

And today they have Frank Skinner loved the Lisbon Lions ffs. :lol:

(It is in the selick thread in GS) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, backup said:

are the jhaikies attempting a very unsuccessful tango.....

I was surprised that MD seemed to think Rangers had not contacted the DR (from the link you put up from ff). :hmmm:

Edit: Just seen your other post. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bears r us said:

I was surprised that MD seemed to think Rangers had not contacted the DR (from the link you put up from ff). :hmmm:

Thread has slipped away now, the chap here who writes for the rheb, gave it no credence either, very strange.

Any sensible company would have let them publish and then have sued, wouldn’t you have thought...... taig tango attempt ? ((not the OP I hasten to add).

bluedart1952 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, backup said:

Thread has slipped away now, the chap here who writes for the rheb, gave it no credence either, very strange.

Any sensible company would have let them publish and then have sued, wouldn’t you have thought...... taig tango attempt ? ((not the OP I hasten to add).

Very strange for Esky to have duff info but this does seem to be confusing. 

I agree about let them print and then sue and make a killing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, .Williamson. said:

Love seeing that top at games. Noticed it again last night 

Only proper loyalists wear it 

Saw a whole fucking family wearing them in Blackpool a couple of weeks ago....Riddy of the highest order.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ForeverAndEver said:

You do realise he hasn’t said that, that is the front page eh?

Aye, but there's one or two other wee bits on the real one that jump out to make me think the other is fake (newspaper of the year isnt aligned properly) 

ForeverAndEver likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, ForeverAndEver said:

You do realise he hasn’t said that, that is the front page eh?

Page nine allegedly. chap on FF said he had one of the 300 editions in circulation, again allegedly, but couldn't supply any pics as it was a matter of confidentiality, or such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Moody Blue Legend said:

The other day on the same online page they had:

Rangers due Ashley millions

Rangers fans abuse Griffiths

Rangers fans to get rehab for sectarianism

Rod Stewart flies celtic flag on luxury yacht.

I used to buy the DR but you're spot on-every Rangers story over the last few years is negative and the "feel-good" stories are all about celtic.

A bit of peer pressure on here also helped me kick the DR habit.

Get the "i" newspaper now but no doubt someone will tell me why I can't buy that either!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Dude said:

Aye, but there's one or two other wee bits on the real one that jump out to make me think the other is fake (newspaper of the year isnt aligned properly) 

Do you work in the media?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...