WCPRANGERS1 2,997 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 The sfa have today stated that they could attach "discretionary" conditions to our application for member ship and IMO that would include the transfer embargo.Given that thia decision has akready been dexlared illegal by the COS and by the EU would the courts isep up if o'rhegans regime attempted to force this on us. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
legalbeagle 3,734 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 The sfa have today stated that they could attach "discretionary" conditions to our application for member ship and IMO that would include the transfer embargo.Given that thia decision has akready been dexlared illegal by the COS and by the EU would the courts isep up if o'rhegans regime attempted to force this on us.My understanding is that we are going for no sanctions, and the SFA are saying that we either accept the embargo, or go back to the appelate tribunal, which is what we won in court. So, there isn't really much to challenge. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCPRANGERS1 2,997 Posted July 17, 2012 Author Share Posted July 17, 2012 My understanding is that we are going for no sanctions, and the SFA are saying that we either accept the embargo, or go back to the appelate tribunal, which is what we won in court. So, there isn't really much to challenge.so surely then if they are trying to enforce an illegal embargo they leave themselves wide open....... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef 436 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 I wonder what green or if green will mention any off this underhand goings on the morro, and if it would make a difference Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCPRANGERS1 2,997 Posted July 17, 2012 Author Share Posted July 17, 2012 I wonder what green or if green will mention any off this underhand goings on the morro, and if it would make a differencei think that this is exactly what green was alluding to in his statement after the sfl decision was made Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucyBlue 2,278 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 No.It's effectively like joining a club...you've no rights.Reject us tho and it's Pandora's box.Sanctions and their legalities are another matter... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
legalbeagle 3,734 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 so surely then if they are trying to enforce an illegal embargo they leave themselves wide open.......I don't believe they are trying to enforce it, I think they are giving us the choice, accept it, or send it back to the tribunal, who may come back with a greater or lesser punishment, effectively, it is up to us, but they won't accept just dropping the matter altogether, which is what we really want. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
samenzi 7 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 once green gets in i think he will go after oreghan Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef 436 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 i think that this is exactly what green was alluding to in his statement after the sfl decision was madeSurely got too, or I atleast hope they are kept in the loop here because the lack of people questioning it all is pretty much that non existent. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
foghorn leghorn 608 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Did Livingston or Gretna have sanctions against them when they were punted into division 3 ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCPRANGERS1 2,997 Posted July 17, 2012 Author Share Posted July 17, 2012 I don't believe they are trying to enforce it, I think they are giving us the choice, accept it, or send it back to the tribunal, who may come back with a greater or lesser punishment, effectively, it is up to us, but they won't accept just dropping the matter altogether, which is what we really want.havnt the courts already reffered it back to the tribunal therefore we should have no decision to make there..... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCPRANGERS1 2,997 Posted July 17, 2012 Author Share Posted July 17, 2012 Did Livingston or Gretna have sanctions against them when they were punted into division 3 ?livi no gretna well just died..... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
legalbeagle 3,734 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 The courts did refer it back, basically, I think we are getting a chance to withdraw our complaint basically, which is the way that I am reading the unofficial rumour that came out yesterday. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavieCoopersLeftFoot 56 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Greens got 2 options.1. Accept the embargo and try and win the 3rd with a team of boys. Not totally out of the question, full time super fit 18 year olds vs part time plumbers and hairdressers.2. Refuse the decision in the hope that the SFL teams, who by now should be anticipating the revenue and what not of playing Rangers oust Rhegan and install someone with a bit more sense.To be honest I'd go for option 1. All the more GIRFU bragging rights when we win the league with a team full of boys. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucyBlue 2,278 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Sometimes...you answer a question and just think others around you are fuckwits. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill moles 0 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 livi no gretna well just died.....Did Livi not need to put about £1m of a bond up ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCPRANGERS1 2,997 Posted July 17, 2012 Author Share Posted July 17, 2012 Surely got too, or I atleast hope they are kept in the loop here because the lack of people questioning it all is pretty much that non existent.this imo is what ee shouldnt back down on we have put up with enough no more shit...... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCPRANGERS1 2,997 Posted July 17, 2012 Author Share Posted July 17, 2012 Sometimes...you answer a question and just think others around you are fuckwits. your to kind....... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blumhoilann 6,712 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Did Livingston or Gretna have sanctions against them when they were punted into division 3 ?Exactly,there is NO precedent for these punishments(legal or otherwise).The bassas are trying to cripple The Rangers for a VERY long time,this is victimisation and no doubt about it.Could Green begin a court case which would prevent the league kicking off? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
southcoastbear 1,639 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Should definately go back to the tribunal as Carloway and co have already stated that a ban or suspension is to severe and they have maxed out the fine so consequently the only option open to them is the cup exclusion as implementation of the other two sanction could surely be construed as malicious upon any challenge. Should also refuse to accept losing our right to challenge given that sfa appear to think they are a law unto themselves recently and they have said the intend to progress with the alleged dual contracts case. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupret 223 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 I though Leggo nailed it last week, appears true so far:-Stewart Regan’s SFA gets nasty and aims three loaded guns at the head of Rangers.The first pistol is cocked by demanding that Rangers confirm they will accept such sanctions as are proposed by the SFA in relation to current proceedings.Which looks suspiciously as though Regan wants Rangers to agree to ignore the Court of Session judgment delivered by Lord Glennie and accept the transfer ban which the learned Judge has declared unlawful.Is that not unlawful in itself?Or does Stewart Regan believe being a pal of Celtic supremo Peter Lawwell sets him above the law?The second gun is a loaded revolver which demands confirmation from Rangers re EBT sanction position at SPL level and subsequent appeal to the SFA.That looks like Rangers are being ordered by Stewart Regan to sign up to any punishment which may be imposed on them by the vindictive bigots of the SPL who refused them entry, as well as giving up any right of appeal to the SFA.But it is the third gun which is the weapon of mass destruction.It demands that Rangers confirm that they will accept responsibility for any breach of the Articles etc by the OldCo which has not so far come to light.That means any other dodgy deals, any more cash scams, pulled off by that ace conman, twister and huckster, Craig Whyte, will lead to Stewart Regan being able to hand down to Rangers whatever punishment takes his fancy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
footygeek301 20 Posted July 18, 2012 Share Posted July 18, 2012 The fact is if Green wanted to he would have no problem raising legal proceedings against the SFL and SPL over both recent decisions given the public statements made prior by many clubs. But that would cause "armageddon", especially when both would almost certainly be successful. Rangers already have compelling grounds for judicial review, but we have suffered the indignities and charade of the recent processes and just got on with it. Legal action would just prejudice the game in general and slow down our rebuilding process.HOWEVER, he should not accept any additional sanctions whatsoever, perhaps save accepting prior football debt, which I believe he has previously intimated the consortium would. The whole EBT thing is a joke, everything was made public and freely available at the time, and nobody cared then, but now Whyte screws the whole thing up suddenly we have been the most corrupt club in world football for the last decade - absolutely gutter pish.Green must make a stand, and if that means legal proceedings then so be it. No transfer embargo, nothing. It is in no-one's interests to punish us further and from the message boards and comments in other places even a lot of other clubs fans seem to agree we have been done in enough. Ultimately the SFA have made it clear that they need us, so I am sure a face-saving compromise will be reached, but it wouldn't surprise me if they try and ban us from the scottish cup for three years or something, just so that it is impossible to be in europe the year we arrive back in the SPL (achievable if we win the cup the year before).We must start clean. Everyone must be resolute on this. The witch-hunt stops now. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry handsome 629 Posted July 18, 2012 Share Posted July 18, 2012 It's their Baw, if they don't want to they don't need to. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Robot 21,513 Posted July 18, 2012 Share Posted July 18, 2012 Did Livingston or Gretna have sanctions against them when they were punted into division 3 ?we're in div 3 because we're a newco and the embargo was for not paying taxes Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray 105 Posted July 18, 2012 Share Posted July 18, 2012 we're in div 3 because we're a newco and the embargo was for not paying taxesWe aren't a newco. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.