If the SPL claim they misregistered players & results, then they should be sued.

[gogzy 31,195]

Cheers Oleg, Enough to bankrupt the spl no doubt, it remains to be seen if the motivation is there by these sponsors to really take the spl to task but i feel they would have a case.

tbh a decent sized phobe bill could bankrupt the SPL. I genuinley believe that they are close to broke.....and way past broken.

[TheLawMan 6,240]

Also do not forget

FUCK THE PO.......Oh sorry; I forgot, that is considered bigotry in Scotland at the moment

It's bigotry no matter what country you are in

[Gregor Stevens Fan Club 42]

Exactly. If they had any questions, they should have asked them then.

If they retrospectively decide to punish us and therefore render all our results invalid, they are responsible for allowing it to continue year on year.

Can you please show me in the Accounts where it gives a breakdown of which players were recipients of a payment(s)/loan from the EBT, how much that payment(s)/loan was for and when it was expected to be paid back ??

While there is an identifiable link between the EBT issue and the SPL investigation - we should not be falling into the trap that just because we inserted a paragraph or two about the EBT in the Accounts means were are some way admonished from any responsibility for correctly registering our players' contracts.

[GMac 1,405]

One other point, after Heysel, it was the English FA that were punished and all clubs suffered. If Rangers are found to have illegal players playing at International level and in European competition then the SFA will suffer the consequences. Rangers are not members of UEFA and can't be punished directly. The rules are clear, if any member objects to a result on the grounds of an ineligible player taking part, then the match becomes a 3-0 defeat the coefficient is adjusted and a punishment dished out. If this was found to be the case in say 30 European and International matches then the SFA would be truly fucked.

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

Can you please show me in the Accounts where it gives a breakdown of which players were recipients of a payment(s)/loan from the EBT, how much that payment(s)/loan was for and when it was expected to be paid back ??

I never said there was such a breakdown. Indeed, there shouldn't even be such a breakdown, given that EBTs are non-contractual discretionary payments.

While there is an identifiable link between the EBT issue and the SPL investigation - we should not be falling into the trap that just because we inserted a paragraph or two about the EBT in the Accounts means were are some way admonished from any responsibility for correctly registering our players' contracts.

No such paragraph is or was necessary. If the SPL were aware of the mere existence of an EBT scheme, how much went into it and which players were registered by them (the SPL) along with their contract details, then it is incumbent upon them as the governing body to investigate that at the time of these players attracting fans and TV contracts.

They profited too, and were thoroughly happy to do so. They can't ride on the Rangers gravy train for free as effectively the ticket inspector if they're not checking the tickets properly.

[Bad Robot 21,513]

Can you please show me in the Accounts where it gives a breakdown of which players were recipients of a payment(s)/loan from the EBT, how much that payment(s)/loan was for and when it was expected to be paid back ??

While there is an identifiable link between the EBT issue and the SPL investigation - we should not be falling into the trap that just because we inserted a paragraph or two about the EBT in the Accounts means were are some way admonished from any responsibility for correctly registering our players' contracts.

Iv got to agree with this that it was up to DM to notify properly and if he didn't the blame will be squarely put on us and not the SPL who should and probably will be to blame only partially due to their checks not being suitable. The SPL have only acted on new information which has came to light since the HMRC investigation and they certainly won't make themselves a scapegoat.

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

Iv got to agree with this that it was up to DM to notify properly and if he didn't the blame will be squarely put on us and not the SPL who should and probably will be to blame only partially due to their checks not being suitable. The SPL have only acted on new information which has came to light since the HMRC investigation and they certainly won't make themselves a scapegoat.

No.

They are responsible for registering the players according to the(ir) rules.

If the players were supposedly ineligible, why did they register them?

If there was an EBT issue, then they should have dealt with it at the time.

You seemed to be brainwashed by the media and their timmy agenda.

Had they not registered the players, we clearly would not have played them.

Match after match, year after year, players appeared in high profile televised matches and not one thing was said.

It's not Rangers who are responsible for registering players.

Match after match, year after year,the SPL OK'd it.

They were used with full approval as evidenced by the players being registered.

[Bad Robot 21,513]

No.

They are responsible for registering the players according to the(ir) rules.

If the players were supposedly ineligible, why did they register them?

If there was an EBT issue, then they should have dealt with it at the time.

You seemed to be brainwashed by the media and their timmy agenda.

Had they not registered the players, we clearly would not have played them.

Match after match, year after year, players appeared in high profile televised matches and not one thing was said.

It's not Rangers who are responsible for registering players.

Match after match, year after year,the SPL OK'd it.

They were used with full approval as evidenced by the players being registered.

I want them to be 100% responsible but playing devils advocate here maybe they are saying the players were ineligible due to us not providing them with accurate information.

I'm trying to work out what rule changed in 2005, have you got any idea what it was?

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

I want them to be 100% responsible but playing devils advocate here maybe they are saying the players were ineligible due to us not providing them with accurate information.

I'm trying to work out what rule changed in 2005, have you got any idea what it was?

This is where they would be in error. There should be no such information other than perhaps retrospectively listing loan payments.

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

I think it was Boss and Ricky who were the experts on that rule change.