|
Who will win the league this year This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Celtic |
|
9 | 18.75% |
| Aberdeen |
|
7 | 14.58% |
| Hearts |
|
2 | 4.17% |
| The Rangers |
|
5 | 10.42% |
| Hibs are shite |
|
25 | 52.08% |
| Total: | 48 votes | ||
|
I can't imagine a less prestigious trophy you could possibly have on your record than one where you came well second in a dying league but then made a bunch of weepy threats to the SFA about the unfairness of bad accounting practices until they gave you a trophy to go away Well, I mean, unless the team that beat you had just been turfed out of Europe in July by a plastic free-kick wall and three children in an overcoat - that'd probably be less prestigious
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 21:46 |
|
|
BisonDollah posted:If you don't believe this has any chance of happening then you should make peace with it because the way everything is going for the Rangers fans this is a loving dead 'cert. I mean, I don't actually care where old scottish trophies end up, but sometimes it's nice to go to the zoo. That said, the problem you're going to have here is that from a technical perspective, Rangers haven't broken the law, they've just underpaid tax. If the club in question was Manchester City, they'd just cut a cheque for £30m or so in the lobby and then be done with the whole thing. Still cheaper than loving Mangala. It's not that unusual for a major company to have tax disputes with HMRC and to come to some settlement later. HMRC haven't been chasing this so that they can lock up the people involved, they've been chasing it because it sets a precedent for similar schemes elsewhere. Of course, in the fact that Old Rangers immediately collapsed like a hot air balloon full of farts and bigotry as soon as it was challenged pretty much implies that they gained a major on-field advantage from doing it, but unless the SFA has a rule on the books that says "thou shalt not run up clownish and unpayable debt while chasing the dream of being able to beat teams from countries that exist in my dad's Atlas", you've got nothing really to charge them with.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
jre posted:From a technical perspective Rangers played 48 ineligible players in these games because they submitted fake contracts to the SFA as part of defrauding the tax man. I can't see that you can make an argument around fraudulent contracts, unless Rangers specifically engineered the contracts to be fraudulent. In which case, that was the case the first time the SFA investigated, the contracts were always fraudulent and the Supreme Court ruling doesn't make a difference to that. If you go down the line of saying that the judgement makes the contracts retrospectively fraudulent, in a way that they wouldn't have been had it been perfectly fine to make non-taxable payments through loans, that seems a fairly suspect claim. Assuming that the contracts had some boilerplate about players having access to a Big Gay Loan Pot, then most employment contracts I've ever seen don't need to make any declarations regarding tax. Again, this isn't to say that Rangers didn't murder fitba and now fitba is dead, but I don't see why it surprises anyone that the SFA spoke to a lawyer and the lawyer made a face
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2017 21:51
|
|
|
jre posted:They did, they submitted fake ones that had made up salary amounts and differed from the one's actually given to players and their agents I don't know why I'm in any fashion surprised at the idea of scottish football being run on the same basis as the burmese junta, but there you go
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2017 22:34
|
|