Title Stripping - the simple debate

[Deanzmeanzheinz 4,312]

There's been loads of blogs, articles and opinions on this title stripping, financial doping, cheating, etc etc - some of these arguments have been very lengthy from both sides. However, as i understand it, the crux of the debate is this - did Rangers gain a sporting advantage by running this EBT Scheme? 

To break it down further, the argument is that Rangers gained players over these years (2001-11) - well, to all dhims, Aberdeen, dundee utd, hibs fans - prove it? It's the central point of this whole debate. Who's to say we would have been unable to sign Eggen, Ostenstad, Namouchi - however unless you have convincing evidence that such players would not arrived at Ibrox then, well, with the greatest of respect, shut the fuck up. 

Personally, I've always filed this argument with the refs, masons, establishment, dunfermline lay down conspiracy theories.

Prove that the players we signed wouldn't have ended up at Ibrox? Not 'they pyoor wouldn't have' - proper evidence and argument Timmy, Sheepy or shut up. 

[Dazzler 2,428]

If a player costs less than you budgeted for, then you have extra money to spend. That will be the thinking of the haters.

Murray was running the club at a loss, so what difference does it make whether it's another half mil to the debt or not.

He would have signed the same players, the amount of debt we would have been in would have been higher.

[Dazzler 2,428]

Also if it hadn't been an EBT it would have been something else.

I pay my pension and childcare before tax is taken to reduce the amount of tax I pay. It's called salary sacrifice and I'd imagine anyone who pays into a company pension will be in a similar scheme. At the end of the day is done to reduce the amount of tax I pay.

 

[.Williamson. 82,031]

There is no debate. It's not happening

[siddiqi_drinker 14,635]

Not going to happen so who fukking cares, already been done to death, so fuk the taigs and their apologists.

[Amato 3,016]

Why perpetuate the discussion by creating yet another thread about it?

 

[Dazzler 2,428]

Just now, Amato said:

Why perpetuate the discussion by creating yet another thread about it?

 

Why post in it?

[Amato 3,016]

2 minutes ago, Dazzler said:

Why post in it?

[Dazzler 2,428]

Just now, Amato said:

The tension! Don't know what you've posted due the filters offshore. 

Should I be ragin or laughing?

[Amato 3,016]

Just now, Dazzler said:

The tension! Don't know what you've posted due the filters offshore. 

Should I be ragin or laughing?

? You'll need to wait until you're back on land to find out

[Dazzler 2,428]

Just now, Amato said:

? You'll need to wait until you're back on land to find out

[Amato 3,016]

1 minute ago, Dazzler said:

It's quite possible people will be wondering for years to come how a single gif could have been so crushing

[FSM 20,892]

Think we need to move on from this now.

[TMB 14,167]

18 hours ago, Dazzler said:

If a player costs less than you budgeted for, then you have extra money to spend. That will be the thinking of the haters.

Murray was running the club at a loss, so what difference does it make whether it's another half mil to the debt or not.

He would have signed the same players, the amount of debt we would have been in would have been higher.

Rangers never benefitted financially from the use of EBTs.  It was the players that received that tax benefits.  Rangers would've spent the same amount of money with or without EBTs.  The question is would they have still signed had they not been given an EBT.  Well, we signed Gazza, Laudrup, and many other top players without the need of EBTs. 

[K.A.I 36,183]

It's done, dusted mate.

let the dust settle, it to die a death and leave the taigs with a wee selection of Dundee United and Aberdeen fans to seethe in it for all eternity.

[eejay the dj 31,964]

2 hours ago, Deanzmeanzheinz said:

There's been loads of blogs, articles and opinions on this title stripping, financial doping, cheating, etc etc - some of these arguments have been very lengthy from both sides. However, as i understand it, the crux of the debate is this - did Rangers gain a sporting advantage by running this EBT Scheme? 

To break it down further, the argument is that Rangers gained players over these years (2001-11) - well, to all dhims, Aberdeen, dundee utd, hibs fans - prove it? It's the central point of this whole debate. Who's to say we would have been unable to sign Eggen, Ostenstad, Namouchi - however unless you have convincing evidence that such players would not arrived at Ibrox then, well, with the greatest of respect, shut the fuck up. 

Personally, I've always filed this argument with the refs, masons, establishment, dunfermline lay down conspiracy theories.

Prove that the players we signed wouldn't have ended up at Ibrox? Not 'they pyoor wouldn't have' - proper evidence and argument Timmy, Sheepy or shut up. 

Could you not have made your point without that heading 

Like I said .There are too many bears getting caught up in beggar speak .We are forgetting ourselves 

My Heading would have been 

"Fuck those rhancid corrupt papish bastards "

[Deanzmeanzheinz 4,312]

59 minutes ago, eejay the dj said:

Could you not have made your point without that heading 

Like I said .There are too many bears getting caught up in beggar speak .We are forgetting ourselves 

My Heading would have been 

"Fuck those rhancid corrupt papish bastards "

Pedantic or fuckin what??? ??

[FlippinEck 3,702]

I asked a hearts fan last night why they aren't campaigning for lost revenue in prize money as a result of a team finishing higher than they should have have due to a 'sporting advantage', instead of stripping titles of course. No reply. 

[cushynumber 25,178]

Aye that's what  I said in my financial dopes topic in the boardroom section.

 

Plagiarist. 

 

 

[Alves70 393]

Saw something online about celtic spending almost £50m more on wages, costs etc than Rangers did during the EBT years. FFS that kind of financial guff over us but we still won trebles and titles against them.

Also how is it financial doping when our rivals outspent us by millions every year?

[Sweetheart 8,458]

4 hours ago, Deanzmeanzheinz said:

There's been loads of blogs, articles and opinions on this title stripping, financial doping, cheating, etc etc - some of these arguments have been very lengthy from both sides. However, as i understand it, the crux of the debate is this - did Rangers gain a sporting advantage by running this EBT Scheme? 

To break it down further, the argument is that Rangers gained players over these years (2001-11) - well, to all dhims, Aberdeen, dundee utd, hibs fans - prove it? It's the central point of this whole debate. Who's to say we would have been unable to sign Eggen, Ostenstad, Namouchi - however unless you have convincing evidence that such players would not arrived at Ibrox then, well, with the greatest of respect, shut the fuck up. 

Personally, I've always filed this argument with the refs, masons, establishment, dunfermline lay down conspiracy theories.

Prove that the players we signed wouldn't have ended up at Ibrox? Not 'they pyoor wouldn't have' - proper evidence and argument Timmy, Sheepy or shut up. 

I think this debate is over for forum debates. The governing bodies can't strip titles. Imho, I think Club 1872 should now get a meeting with Doncaster for his review of the governing bodies and put forward Rangers case as this has been another 'witch hunt' from CFC.

[Leeds_Bear 8,103]

5 hours ago, Deanzmeanzheinz said:

There's been loads of blogs, articles and opinions on this title stripping, financial doping, cheating, etc etc - some of these arguments have been very lengthy from both sides. However, as i understand it, the crux of the debate is this - did Rangers gain a sporting advantage by running this EBT Scheme? 

To break it down further, the argument is that Rangers gained players over these years (2001-11) - well, to all dhims, Aberdeen, dundee utd, hibs fans - prove it? It's the central point of this whole debate. Who's to say we would have been unable to sign Eggen, Ostenstad, Namouchi - however unless you have convincing evidence that such players would not arrived at Ibrox then, well, with the greatest of respect, shut the fuck up. 

Personally, I've always filed this argument with the refs, masons, establishment, dunfermline lay down conspiracy theories.

Prove that the players we signed wouldn't have ended up at Ibrox? Not 'they pyoor wouldn't have' - proper evidence and argument Timmy, Sheepy or shut up. 

Why do you even bother giving this shit oxygen? 

[Leeds_Bear 8,103]

4 hours ago, Amato said:

Why perpetuate the discussion by creating yet another thread about it?

 

Definition of a weapon. A danger to himself and everyone around him. 

[Helicopter Sundae 5,967]

You have to keep is simple for the celticunts.

They have a few of their flock who are as sharp as fuck, but then the rest of them are like complete fucking sheep, and for those you must use words with as few syllables as possible, or they start frothing at the mouth.

 

[Craiggybear 6,192]

3 hours ago, eejay the dj said:

Could you not have made your point without that heading 

Like I said .There are too many bears getting caught up in beggar speak .We are forgetting ourselves 

My Heading would have been 

"Fuck those rhancid corrupt papish bastards "