TBH I always liked old Ronnie - could fair deliver a one liner, and was always good for a laugh.....
oh, wait, you mean REGAN (as is reeeegan)
ooopppsss, my bad.
What issue do you have with Regan, seriously this whole thing has been blown way out of proportion!
Henrik
Other than presiding over a body that makes up rules and sanctions unheard before and applies them without providing the reasons from a secret body?
The panel has always been independent and anonymous and it is not unheard of before, the English FA gave Portsmouth similar sanctions because of their footballing debts.
My issue with regan is that since joining sfa he's been all about transparency, now he wants secrecy?
You can't have both. If these guys are so sure they made the right decision , they should have the cajones to put thier names to it
Henrik, all bluster aside....the timing. The timing was vidnictive and destructive and unnatural. If the SFA, who should SUPPORT member organisations, had felt an investigation was appropriate....they choose when Rangers have no owner, no voice.....stinks to high heaven and neutral in England are puzzled by this aspect; it looks from the outside the SFA are doing their best to find fault and punish at the worst time. Why?
The SFA should also CENSURE member clubs when they have erred.
Not once have I detected any humility emanating from Ibrox.
It seems to be everybody else's fault.
The measures taken against Rangers were wholly proportionate for what they have done. They have made a mockery of the game in Scotland. They have went bust mid-season for goodness sake.
Try to pin it on a wicker man all you like. But luckily most of us do not live in toy town.
comment by Henrik's_Forehead-Twists and Turns Tommy Burns. (U6171)
posted 35 minutes ago
What issue do you have with Regan, seriously this whole thing has been blown way out of proportion!
==
No issues
Though keeping your family background secret when stating he knew nothing about Rangers and Celtic aint transparent.
Not advising publicly previous working and personal relationships with ie with Mr Lawell
Failing to advise that Mr Eric Reilly asked you to apply for the SFA position a chap he had never met
All very transparent, and completely unfounded, well part of it.
Why is Regan's family background relevant, Duke?
The SFA should support member clubs.
That is why they are supporting the likes of Dundee United who are owed money by another club at this point in time. The National Association cannot allow one club to stop paying other clubs, that's why you have been punished.
Does the SFA only have 1 member?
Rangers have brought shame onto the Scottish game, Minty and Whyte have, in your name, brought worldwide focus onto our game, if the SFA were seen to pander because you are one of our country's biggest names we would be an even bigger laughing stock than we already are.
-
Careful what you wish for hector. If you think we are a laughing stock now, wait to you see what people think if rangers disappear
Duke
Duke, what about Regan's family background? You are not talking from the 1690s I hope.
IE,
The gun to the head line is getting boring now.
Take your dibs.
Dundee United are as much a member club as Rangers and United are the club who are owed money by another club. United are the club who may have to sacrifice player contracts and signings through no fault of their own. So should it be right that the club who will not pay them what they are owed, should be able to sign players without paying anything to United? When you tell me how that is justice, then we can start discussing who the real victims are.
Henrik - um sure united will be payed. Why didn't the make it an embargo which runs until they pay off other scots teams in that case?
Tim o
Ibrox Elite, completely agree.
I think this will be the reduced punishment once the appeal is heard.
My point is hypothetical obviously, but let's say some multi-billionaire came in bought Rangers liquidated them and then decided to spend £30million in the summer, whilst Dundee United are still waiting on the £100,000 or whatever it is that could decide whether they set their budget on a top six finish or avoiding relegation.
I don't think the SFA can apply that sanction on Rangers. Administration is a legal process, the SFA may feel they can change the rules as they see fit to hammer Rangers, they can't change the rules to change administration law.
Portsmouth were handed the same sanction because of there footballing debts. The punishment is a bit harsh, but it is legally standing.
then Henk
Perhaps a no fee transfer should be OK.
Its also worth noting that Rangers have spent over 30 million on players from SPL clubs in the last 15 years.
Henrik - I know what your saying , let's hope it doesn't come to that
Duke, how many of these transfers have been on a buy now pay later scheme, then erm forget to pay
Gow - I would hazard a guess at one, lee Wallace. Tho there's different stories on even that one whether rangers should have made another payment yet
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
Fear or Favour; who writes Reagans speech?
Page 1 of 1
posted on 26/4/12
TBH I always liked old Ronnie - could fair deliver a one liner, and was always good for a laugh.....
oh, wait, you mean REGAN (as is reeeegan)
ooopppsss, my bad.
posted on 26/4/12
What issue do you have with Regan, seriously this whole thing has been blown way out of proportion!
posted on 26/4/12
Henrik
Other than presiding over a body that makes up rules and sanctions unheard before and applies them without providing the reasons from a secret body?
posted on 26/4/12
The panel has always been independent and anonymous and it is not unheard of before, the English FA gave Portsmouth similar sanctions because of their footballing debts.
posted on 26/4/12
My issue with regan is that since joining sfa he's been all about transparency, now he wants secrecy?
You can't have both. If these guys are so sure they made the right decision , they should have the cajones to put thier names to it
posted on 26/4/12
Henrik, all bluster aside....the timing. The timing was vidnictive and destructive and unnatural. If the SFA, who should SUPPORT member organisations, had felt an investigation was appropriate....they choose when Rangers have no owner, no voice.....stinks to high heaven and neutral in England are puzzled by this aspect; it looks from the outside the SFA are doing their best to find fault and punish at the worst time. Why?
posted on 26/4/12
The SFA should also CENSURE member clubs when they have erred.
Not once have I detected any humility emanating from Ibrox.
It seems to be everybody else's fault.
The measures taken against Rangers were wholly proportionate for what they have done. They have made a mockery of the game in Scotland. They have went bust mid-season for goodness sake.
Try to pin it on a wicker man all you like. But luckily most of us do not live in toy town.
posted on 26/4/12
comment by Henrik's_Forehead-Twists and Turns Tommy Burns. (U6171)
posted 35 minutes ago
What issue do you have with Regan, seriously this whole thing has been blown way out of proportion!
==
No issues
Though keeping your family background secret when stating he knew nothing about Rangers and Celtic aint transparent.
Not advising publicly previous working and personal relationships with ie with Mr Lawell
Failing to advise that Mr Eric Reilly asked you to apply for the SFA position a chap he had never met
All very transparent, and completely unfounded, well part of it.
posted on 26/4/12
Why is Regan's family background relevant, Duke?
posted on 26/4/12
The SFA should support member clubs.
That is why they are supporting the likes of Dundee United who are owed money by another club at this point in time. The National Association cannot allow one club to stop paying other clubs, that's why you have been punished.
posted on 26/4/12
Does the SFA only have 1 member?
Rangers have brought shame onto the Scottish game, Minty and Whyte have, in your name, brought worldwide focus onto our game, if the SFA were seen to pander because you are one of our country's biggest names we would be an even bigger laughing stock than we already are.
-
posted on 26/4/12
Careful what you wish for hector. If you think we are a laughing stock now, wait to you see what people think if rangers disappear
Duke
posted on 26/4/12
Duke, what about Regan's family background? You are not talking from the 1690s I hope.
posted on 26/4/12
IE,
The gun to the head line is getting boring now.
Take your dibs.
posted on 26/4/12
Dundee United are as much a member club as Rangers and United are the club who are owed money by another club. United are the club who may have to sacrifice player contracts and signings through no fault of their own. So should it be right that the club who will not pay them what they are owed, should be able to sign players without paying anything to United? When you tell me how that is justice, then we can start discussing who the real victims are.
posted on 26/4/12
Henrik - um sure united will be payed. Why didn't the make it an embargo which runs until they pay off other scots teams in that case?
Tim o
posted on 26/4/12
Ibrox Elite, completely agree.
I think this will be the reduced punishment once the appeal is heard.
My point is hypothetical obviously, but let's say some multi-billionaire came in bought Rangers liquidated them and then decided to spend £30million in the summer, whilst Dundee United are still waiting on the £100,000 or whatever it is that could decide whether they set their budget on a top six finish or avoiding relegation.
posted on 26/4/12
I don't think the SFA can apply that sanction on Rangers. Administration is a legal process, the SFA may feel they can change the rules as they see fit to hammer Rangers, they can't change the rules to change administration law.
posted on 26/4/12
Portsmouth were handed the same sanction because of there footballing debts. The punishment is a bit harsh, but it is legally standing.
posted on 26/4/12
then Henk
Perhaps a no fee transfer should be OK.
Its also worth noting that Rangers have spent over 30 million on players from SPL clubs in the last 15 years.
posted on 26/4/12
Henrik - I know what your saying , let's hope it doesn't come to that
posted on 26/4/12
Duke, how many of these transfers have been on a buy now pay later scheme, then erm forget to pay
posted on 26/4/12
Gow - I would hazard a guess at one, lee Wallace. Tho there's different stories on even that one whether rangers should have made another payment yet
Page 1 of 1