Lord Glennie

[Mick.mcg 1]

Does Lord Glennie still have jurisdiction over the transfer embargo ruling? Surely he cannot allow sfa to blackmail the club and try to re enforce it after he deemed it illegal and the sfa waived their right of appeal?

[carrickblue 322]

Does Lord Glennie still have jurisdiction over the transfer embargo ruling? Surely he cannot allow sfa to blackmail the club and try to re enforce it after he deemed it illegal and the sfa waived their right of appeal?

you could be on to something there

[will_1974 204]

Does Lord Glennie still have jurisdiction over the transfer embargo ruling? Surely he cannot allow sfa to blackmail the club and try to re enforce it after he deemed it illegal and the sfa waived their right of appeal?

Extortion is when someone uses illegal means to enforce a legitimate demand. In other words, it may be legitimate for the SFA to punish rangers but they cannot use illegal means.

[Sweeney 241]

illegal is a strong word and not what he said. He said based on their rules and statutes that the punishment handed out was not one which was available to them, and he refered it back to them. They were never required to remove the ban, but for sporting integrity to rule supreme, it should be lifted.

[will_1974 204]

illegal is a strong word and not what he said. He said based on their rules and statutes that the punishment handed out was not one which was available to them, and he refered it back to them. They were never required to remove the ban, but for sporting integrity to rule supreme, it should be lifted.

Fair point, what word would you use then

[Mick.mcg 1]

Yes but surely the sfa are commiting cotempt of court by trying to re-inforce the punishment. He said it was out with their powers, and he has the highest law of the land, Scots Law. Therefore they surely cannot be allowed to ignore his ruling.

Is it possible to notify a judge of a possible Contempt of Court?

[legalbeagle 3,734]

As far as I can tell, at this point, they are continuing to hold this as the punishment, but they will allow us to insist that the matter be referred back to the appelate tribunal, where a greater or lesser punishment would be considered.

The bigger question is in whether the club should be held responsible for these actions or whether it was specifically the oldco as a company.

[sprotson11 147]

As far as I can tell, at this point, they are continuing to hold this as the punishment, but they will allow us to insist that the matter be referred back to the appelate tribunal, where a greater or lesser punishment would be considered.

The bigger question is in whether the club should be held responsible for these actions or whether it was specifically the oldco as a company.

Well said, some sensible words for a change on this subject.

Yes regan is a pr1ck, but all the Sfa are saying is choose between the ban or go back to the tribunal. Not too far away from glennie saying go back to the tribunal

[Alnic3856 358]

It's not only the ban it's the acceptance without appeal of any future, as yet undecided sanctions that should be illegal.

[sprotson11 147]

It's not only the ban it's the acceptance without appeal of any future, as yet undecided sanctions that should be illegal.

Agreed, this concerns me more than a registration ban

I still think rangers should of contested the decision rather than the punishment

[markem 7,327]

1342470998' post='1060229312']

It's not only the ban it's the acceptance without appeal of any future, as yet undecided sanctions that should be illegal.

Absolutelly right.

[delamonty 992]

Was the ban illegal -- or just not one of the 'punishments' they were allowed to hit us with? In any event... I think relegation to the fourth level in Scotland would seem quite enough?

[bigblueyonder 11,158]

Accept it, it won't stick Reagan will be gone before the transfer window shuts... just get the registration..

[bornabear 6,224]

Accept it, it won't stick Reagan will be gone before the transfer window shuts... just get the registration..

True, get the registration first then hit O'regan with contempt and EU rights to work directive.

[delamonty 992]

Accept it, it won't stick Reagan will be gone before the transfer window shuts... just get the registration..

But.. are we also accepting that we cannot contest 'anything'? That surely is a non starter.

[bigblueyonder 11,158]

But.. are we also accepting that we cannot contest 'anything'? That surely is a non starter.

Take that to court too, not being able to contest a punishment would never hold in any court..

[Kaiser Wull 203]

Was the ban illegal -- or just not one of the 'punishments' they were allowed to hit us with? In any event... I think relegation to the fourth level in Scotland would seem quite enough?

Imposing a transfer ban was beyond the SFA's powers and therefore could not be imposed against us against our will. If we agreed to it then it'd be a different matter.

Personally, I think we should refuse to accept a transfer ban. The club has been hit hard enough as a direct result of our financial woes - dropping to division 3, no European football for three years and having to watch most of our best playing assets walk out of the door without (so far) getting a penny in return. An impartial governing body would have to take all of that into account. Anyone think the SFA will?

[Bad Robot 21,513]

we've had an oldco and now we are a newco but all along we're still the same club. this is why they can do this and we can't have it both ways.

[Kaiser Wull 203]

we've had an oldco and now we are a newco but all along we're still the same club. this is why they can do this and we can't have it both ways.

It's because we're a newco that we've been punted out of the SPL and had to apply for membership of the SFA. The SFA can't have their cake and eat it unless we let them.

Anyway, newco or not, the SFA should not be trying to impose sanctions that they know are outwith their powers. We should not be lying down to this.

[Ranger9 17]

F*ck regan. His position is untenable

[Bad Robot 21,513]

It's because we're a newco that we've been punted out of the SPL and had to apply for membership of the SFA. The SFA can't have their cake and eat it unless we let them.

Anyway, newco or not, the SFA should not be trying to impose sanctions that they know are outwith their powers. We should not be lying down to

the oldco, the newco and the club are now and forever intertwined. I don't agree with the embargo and we should never accept it but I can see why they wanted to punish the newco. I don't know if they gave us the maximum fine so their running out of options to deal with us.

[bill moles 0]

Yes but surely the sfa are commiting cotempt of court by trying to re-inforce the punishment. He said it was out with their powers, and he has the highest law of the land, Scots Law. Therefore they surely cannot be allowed to ignore his ruling.

Is it possible to notify a judge of a possible Contempt of Court?

That is not what is happening - they are not enforcing the embargo - they are asking us to accept it - the alternative is they treat us as a new applicant to the SFA and you need 3 years accounts for that.

[nachothelegend 1,932]

Agreed, this concerns me more than a registration ban

I still think rangers should of contested the decision rather than the punishment

And me.

[nachothelegend 1,932]

That is not what is happening - they are not enforcing the embargo - they are asking us to accept it - the alternative is they treat us as a new applicant to the SFA and you need 3 years accounts for that.

But we already recieved a 3 year euro ban for not producing said accounts so if thats as you say they would be punishing us twice for that.

[Blumhoilann 6,712]

Get the registration and then let the RFFF sue the fhuckers