Oso

Sorry but the title count is for top flight only. They would count as divisional wins but not as total league champion title wins.

I think they are chasing the employers contributions for the NI. Responsibility for tax depends on the players individual status as employed or self-employed.

You can get an injunction in a day.

Quis Custodiet Custodiem? For the non-Latin scholars, "Who guards the guards?" The SFA have declared that Craig Whyte was an unsuitable person to run a football club and have punished the club for it after they had initially sanctioned the purchase. By this logic, the SFA are guilty of not screening him properly before the purchase and have failed in their duty of care to both Rangers FC and the Scottish game in genreal. Therefore I propose that the club raises a complaint about the SFA under Articles: 2 (e) "prevent all methods or practices which might jeopardise the regularity of matches or competitions or give rise to the abuse of football;" 2 (j) "ensure that the needs of the different stakeholders in European football (leagues, clubs, players, supporters) are properly taken into account;" Furthermore I think that the undue pressure from certain areas of Scottish football could result in a charge under section 2 (b) "promote football in Europe in a spirit of peace, understanding and fair play, without any discrimination on account of politics, gender, religion, race or any other reason;" The SFA's failure to properly screen breaches 2 (e) and (j) and the way the vitriol flowing from the East End and the pressure that has been exerted on the SFA from there has influenced the SFA to a point where a case can be raised under section 2(b). 2(b) offences will be harder to prove than the 2(e) and 2(j) but there is enough evidence in the public domain, I think, for a successful case to be raised. The threat of this could be then used to negate the fines and the transfer ban, as the SFA was complicit in the alleged transgressions in the first place. Duff and Phelps, the new consortium and the various supporter's associations should attack the SFA through UEFA. The authority for this is in Article 3 of UEFA's Statutes as "UEFA, as the football governing body at European level, may recognise and involve in the consultation process in European football matters, groups representing the interests of the various stakeholders of European football (leagues, clubs, players, supporters), provided that they are: a) organised in accordance with UEFA’s Statutes, regulations and values; b) constituted in a democratic, open and transparent manner." Thank you for reading this long post. It is now time to take action against this inept and incompetent organisation.

Huh?

What's the problem? Do you object to someone taking someone elses argument apart with simple historical proof of a precedent? He declared there were no precedents, I merely refuted it.

Rangers have played under the auspices of the English FA already. FA Cup 1880-81 losing 3-0 to the Royal Engineers in the 3rd round. FA Cup 1881-1882 Scheduled to play Romford but could not attend, first round, Romford were awarded a walkover. In the 1886-87 season Rangers were put out at the semi-final stage, by the eventual winners Aston Villa, 2-0. No further involvement of Scottish teams was allowed by the SFA. May I also note that the Queens Park were the defeated finalists by Blackburn Rovers 2-1 in the 1883-84 season and 2-0 in the 1884-85 season. Also in the 1886-87 season the other Scottish teams represented were, Heart of Midlothian, Partick Thistle, Cowlairs, Third Lanark, Renton and Queens Park. There was also the Welsh team Chirk and Cliftonville of Belfast. This demonstrates that note only were other Scottish teams playing under the auspices of the FA but Irish and Welsh teams too, setting a precedent. Berwick an English team play in Scotland. Various Welsh teams play in the English set up. Proof.

On private roads, the signs can be anything you want. All the "non-standard" signs were within the fenced off area.

I was delivering 19 tonnes of gravel to the scum training ground for them sorting the pitches out. I tell you I had to resist the urge to put 32 tonnes of tipper wagon and it's load over several vehicles. One thing I noticed is that the one way direction signs are non-standard in that they are not blue and white. You can guess what colours they were, bigoted gits. OOOPS, I meant to put this in the Off topic.

Wots wrong with a skoda like. If it is a modern one, not much. If an Estelle, well it is a heap! Skoda Fabia Loyal

What about the other precedent set by the application of HASAWA and the Aberfan disaster?

I said this in another thread but I think this is important. What everybody seems to have missed is a small legal technicality which could make any further sanctions moot. Laws and changes in rules and any sanctions that come out of them cannot be applied retroactively. That means that if the rules were changed today tomorrow stating a whole new range of sanctions could be applied, they cannot be applied to Rangers as they are ALREADY in administration. An example of this would be changing the speed limit on a road. You get clocked by Strathclyde's finest doing 38mph in a 40 mph zone but the next day the speed limit on that road is lowered to 30mph and the same team clock you doing 29mph. The police cannot charge you for doing over the speed limit, doing 38mph in a 30mph zone, yesterday because you were in compliance with the rules in force at the time of the incident. Getting back to Rangers, the penalty is for ENTERING administration or still being in administration at the start of a season. So long as we leave administration before the start of the next season, no problem. However we should oppose this immoral change in the rules which, as far as I can see, is being aimed at Rangers in order to weaken them for future campaigns and seems to be emanating from Liewell's office. If NEW sanctions are applied then they could be challenged in the courts with Liewell and his puppet Regan being royally embarressed. I call upon all fans to point this out to the green and grey and fight the lies emanating from the piggery.

What everybody seems to have missed is a small legal technicality which could make any further sanctions moot. Laws and changes in rules and any sanctions that come out of them cannot be applied retroactively. That means that if the rules were changed today tomorrow stating a whole new range of sanctions could be applied, they cannot be applied to Rangers as they are ALREADY in administration. An example of this would be changing the speed limit on a road. You get clocked by Strathclyde's finest doing 38mph in a 40 mph zone but the next day the speed limit on that road is lowered to 30mph and the same team clock you doing 29mph. The police cannot charge you for doing over the speed limit, doing 38mph in a 30mph zone, yesterday because you were in compliance with the rules in force at the time of the incident. Getting back to Rangers, the penalty is for ENTERING administration or still being in administration at the start of a season. So long as we leave administration before the start of the next season, no problem. However we should oppose this immoral change in the rules which, as far as I can see, is being aimed at Rangers in order to weaken them for future campaigns and seems to be emanating from Liewell's office.

Let's see. The refs are in yellow, so that is out. St. Mirren are in black and white, so black and white are out. Their goalie was in flour, flures, sod it retinal burn orange. No way is a green top acceptable thus away top it is, unless you have another top he could wear? We had a wee chat about it in the Govan Rear before the game started.

He played all three positions down the middle today. Started as a centre forward,went to central midfield when Aluke went off and Lafferty came on and then dropped into Central Defender when Bocanegra was carded. How many other players in Scotland could play down the spine of a team? Very few.

Na, a Govan High School tie.

Just for Lennon and Hartson

Your spelling is a disgrace too.

I was most disappointed when I found out the rumour was Anschutz the American oil and sports tycoon and not Anshutz the German Sporting Rifle Company. Never mind the right to bear arms, I fully support the right to arm Bears

Done over a year ago at Tribe 2 in Glasgow.

If I remember the section from "The Gallant Pioneers" correctly, the badge was worn if you were an internationalist that year. Just checked the records and Tom Vallance was the only Rangers player who was an internationalist that season, against England (1-3 win for Scotland) and Wales (0-2 Win for Scotland).

Multiple penalties for going into administration is illegal as the law categorically states that you can only be punished once for any transgression. Rangers have ALREADY been penalised by being docked 10 points this season and any further penalty will fall into double punishment. End this thread now.

Now there's the problem I have with this whole article. It is being reported by that bastion of truth, honesty and high reportage standards, The Sun (for the hard of thinking in here, that was me being sarcastic).

Go ahead and fire off your distress flares however you have to realise that the byproducts from burning them are rather nasty. As some idiot has already proven, when they fail they are a significant burn hazard. Even when they work properly, using them in a wooden stand due to the heat being generated would cause another Bradford and chances are you may end up burning yourself or somebody else. The smoke that comes off of the flare, depending on the composition of the flare, can have irritants that can cause breathing distress in healthy people never mind those with heart or lung conditions and dessicants that can destroy your clothing, especially if it then rains on you, (in the sea it is not a problem as it is immediately diluted to a non-hazardous level). As other sensible heads have said, there are four or five bits of legislation that you can be done under by Mr Plod, including maritime legislation that can have you jailed and/or huge fines. Need I go on?

Obviously the only thing that eclipses your stupidity is your ignorance about the club and it's origins. The club was founded in 1872, the wee blue book stated this until the historian in chief at Rangers screwed up and couldn't get the 50th anniversary book out in time for 1922. Unequivocal proof of his perfidy, that denied Rangers winning the Cup Winners Cup in their Centenary year, is shown in the Gallant Pioneers book. The badge was originally from the Clyde Amateur Rowing Club, which is still there on the Clyde on Glasgow Green.