The Dude 20,026 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 Just now, Howsitgoing said: Rangers view is exactly the same as the majority on here was saying, the rules state that 38 games must be played. Your informants lied to you. How do you come to that conclusion? I've never once said what Rangers' position is on it. I've said what the SPFL's position is. You seem to be struggling to tell the difference between the two. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leftpegcoopz11 4,764 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 3 minutes ago, The Dude said: Doesn't say that anywhere in the statement. People can decipher it whichever way they choose, akin to yourself regarding how this is going to play out. You don't know anything for fact at this moment in time! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitre_mouldmaster 21,509 Posted March 16, 2020 Author Share Posted March 16, 2020 1 minute ago, The Dude said: I've never said it wasn't open to being challenged - in fact, Ive repeatedly said it almost certainly would be challenged. That appears to be what Hearts and Rangers are doing. There's literally nothing about the scenario which has changed based on either club's statements. To be fair, you did indicate that a lawyer who disagreed with the SPFL's interpretation would likely be someone akin to Saul Goodman (breaking bad). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 Just now, Leftpegcoopz11 said: People can decipher it whichever way they choose, akin to yourself regarding how this is going to play out. You don't know anything for fact at this moment in time! Absolutely they can decipher it however they choose, they can't just insert words which aren't there though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 2 minutes ago, mitre_mouldmaster said: To be fair, you did indicate that a lawyer who disagreed with the SPFL's interpretation would likely be someone akin to Saul Goodman (breaking bad). No, I said that simply going around lawyers until you find one who gives you the opinion - as was suggested I should do - you want means you can end up with Saul Goodman (or Lionel Hutz). Quote There will be one probably but it's, for me at least, got to be one of similar standing to the one I've spoken to - or the one named and quoted in the Daily Record. They'd also have to be willing to put their name to it and there's lots of people who just don't want themselves attached to the Old Firm in any sort of professional capacity. Otherwise you end up with Lionel Hutz (or Saul Goodman for the younger ones) and it does the story's credibility no good. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
weejoseph 2,773 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 17 minutes ago, The Dude said: I note Rangers make no mention of challenging any such decision in the way Hearts have. Who said anything about it being directors at Ibrox? Absolutely clutching at straws here but no surprise. Your desperation for them to be handed the title becomes more evident with every post. Flip flop Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Traive 22,809 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 2 minutes ago, The Dude said: Absolutely they can decipher it however they choose, they can't just insert words which aren't there though. Dry your eyes, sad fenian apologist Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sRcFoCt 7,668 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 This full thread FIBS BOYS FIBS Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 Just now, Colin Traive said: Dry your eyes, sad fenian apologist Why would I be upset? There's literally nothing changed. Rangers released a statement hinting they'll challenge it, Hearts have said they will. None of this is anything that wasn't expected. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitre_mouldmaster 21,509 Posted March 16, 2020 Author Share Posted March 16, 2020 4 minutes ago, The Dude said: No, I said that simply going around lawyers until you find one who gives you the opinion - as was suggested I should do - you want means you can end up with Saul Goodman (or Lionel Hutz). Or you could end up with a Mark Bilott, but you never mentioned that. Regardless, I think the SPFL will get its way. They will end up putting their proposal to a vote. By their sly removal of the play-offs, they have ensured that only two teams in the top flight will object to the proposal, where 3 are needed to object I believe. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Traive 22,809 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 3 minutes ago, The Dude said: Why would I be upset? There's literally nothing changed. Rangers released a statement hinting they'll challenge it, Hearts have said they will. None of this is anything that wasn't expected. Boo fucking hoo, ya Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howsitgoing 4,281 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 6 minutes ago, The Dude said: How do you come to that conclusion? I've never once said what Rangers' position is on it. I've said what the SPFL's position is. You seem to be struggling to tell the difference between the two. Do you agree with Rangers view or still the SPFL run by Liewells pal Murdoch MacLennan? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 Just now, Colin Traive said: Boo fucking hoo Dry yer eyes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 Just now, Howsitgoing said: Do you agree with Rangers view or still the SPFL run by Liewells pal Murdoch MacLennan? I don't agree with Rangers' view, no. But we'll soon find if they are right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Hedgehog 10,673 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 Just now, Howsitgoing said: Do you agree with Rangers view or still the SPFL run by Liewells pal Murdoch MacLennan? Did you need to ask 😂👍 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
weejoseph 2,773 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 2 minutes ago, The Dude said: Why would I be upset? There's literally nothing changed. Rangers released a statement hinting they'll challenge it, Hearts have said they will. None of this is anything that wasn't expected. As desperate as you are for the above to be true, Rangers releasing a statement like the one above a flies in the face of everything you have said today, which I won’t lie, is rather nice. You have told us all day your super duper facts are just the way it is going to be and we all have to accept it. Now that’s 2 clubs statements flying in the face of your lawyer pal. 2 clubs so far happy to present a case regardless of how cut and dry you make it out to be. you are a fucking crank. That’s about the only fact in this whole thread. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluenoz 30,901 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 Just now, The Dude said: Dry yer eyes. Why are you not commenting in the Rangers statement thread if you are such a multi-talker? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leftpegcoopz11 4,764 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 7 minutes ago, The Dude said: Absolutely they can decipher it however they choose, they can't just insert words which aren't there though. Could it be that he interpreted "we will not be found wanting" as such. So that's his opinion of that part of the statement, or for want of words, an "opinion piece" which you've mentioned plenty on this thread. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howsitgoing 4,281 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 Just now, The Dude said: I don't agree with Rangers' view, no. But we'll soon find if they are right. Fair enough, I suggest you refrain from writing about your own opinion on any Rangers publications then. By the way there’s no shame in saying you got it wrong, we all get it wrong every so often. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Traive 22,809 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 3 minutes ago, The Dude said: Dry yer eyes. Tears of joy, my club has found a spine at last and your lot might not get the nice, easy coronation they have schemed for. GIRUY ya sad fenian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 7 minutes ago, Howsitgoing said: Fair enough, I suggest you refrain from writing about your own opinion on any Rangers publications then. By the way there’s no shame in saying you got it wrong, we all get it wrong every so often. Have Rangers confirmed the SPFL aren't planning to push ahead and award titles? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howsitgoing 4,281 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 Just now, The Dude said: Have Rangers confirmed the SPFL aren't planning to push ahead and award titles? What they’ve confirmed is that playing 38 games is written into the contract and if this can’t happen then the spfl have no authority whatsoever to gift their team a title. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 9 minutes ago, Leftpegcoopz11 said: Could it be that he interpreted "we will not be found wanting" as such. So that's his opinion of that part of the statement, or for want of words, an "opinion piece" which you've mentioned plenty on this thread. So it's not whats in the statement then? If that's how he interpreted it, great but as he admitted himself it didn't actually feature anywhere. I guess time will tell if they are left wanting. I'm still waiting for the statement that was coming after the Morelos/Traynor stuff mind you Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 Just now, Howsitgoing said: What they’ve confirmed is that playing 38 games is written into the contract and if this can’t happen then the spfl have no authority whatsoever to gift their team a title. They ve said that's their belief, which I agreed many many pages ago would likely make up part of any challenge. They've not said however that the SPFL aren't planning to push on with awarding trophies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howsitgoing 4,281 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 4 minutes ago, The Dude said: They ve said that's their belief, which I agreed many many pages ago would likely make up part of any challenge. They've not said however that the SPFL aren't planning to push on with awarding trophies. Either have the SPFL strangely enough, they’ve not long released a joint statement with SFA 4. What are the implications for championships, promotions and relegation? The Joint Response Group is engaged in a contingency planning phase that will assess all possible options for the remaining season and beyond. It would be inappropriate and unhelpful to speculate on any future decisions to be taken by competition organisers. We will, however, commit to updating clubs, supporters and other key stakeholders when appropriate in this fast-moving landscape. Not much there stating they’ve made up their mind and that’s what they’ll be doing, no doubt though that’s what they want to happen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.