![]() |
SPFL2 Tuesday, 01/03/2016 : Rangers v Raith Rovers, KO 19:45 hours. - Printable Version +- Sports Babble - sports forum (https://www.sportsbabble.co.uk) +-- Forum: Football (https://www.sportsbabble.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Scottish Football League (https://www.sportsbabble.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=24) +---- Forum: Scottish Premiership (https://www.sportsbabble.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=26) +----- Forum: Rangers (https://www.sportsbabble.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=131) +----- Thread: SPFL2 Tuesday, 01/03/2016 : Rangers v Raith Rovers, KO 19:45 hours. (/showthread.php?tid=3814) |
RE: SPFL2 Tuesday, 01/03/2016 : Rangers v Raith Rovers, KO 19:45 hours. - TheWorthinGer - 29-02-2016 Trusevich Wrote:As time goes on, it's becoming clear - transparently clear - that the punishments handed out were completely out of scale with what actually went on. The complete over-reaction of senior figures in Scottish football - particularly in claiming that Rangers' actions were akin to match-fixing (a claim that now seems, frankly, obscenely idiotic considering that EBTs are, and always have been an entirely legal framework for entirely legitimate tax avoidance) along with the media shit-storm and the publication of illegally obtained tax documents that ultimately proved nothing - led to the painting of one of the most grossly over-exaggerated pictures of misdeed ever seen. Jehovah. RE: SPFL2 Tuesday, 01/03/2016 : Rangers v Raith Rovers, KO 19:45 hours. - Fredstersafool - 29-02-2016 What punishments?? how can you punish a new club?? The last court hearing that Hector won would suggest the EBT's are not legal Trus. RE: SPFL2 Tuesday, 01/03/2016 : Rangers v Raith Rovers, KO 19:45 hours. - TheWorthinGer - 29-02-2016 EBTs were legal - what is being decided is whether or not Murray International used them correctly. Why do you insist on making comments and forming opinions grown in the manure of your ignorance? RE: SPFL2 Tuesday, 01/03/2016 : Rangers v Raith Rovers, KO 19:45 hours. - Fredstersafool - 29-02-2016 EBT's were legal?? so are they not now?? Ignorance from me?? yer post suggest you have no idea if they are or not,what is to be Worthless?? RE: SPFL2 Tuesday, 01/03/2016 : Rangers v Raith Rovers, KO 19:45 hours. - Trusevich - 29-02-2016 (29-02-2016, 14:37)TheWorthinGer Wrote: EBTs were legal - what is being decided is whether or not Murray International used them correctly. His views and opinions were formed willingly by the rhetoric. RE: SPFL2 Tuesday, 01/03/2016 : Rangers v Raith Rovers, KO 19:45 hours. - Fredstersafool - 29-02-2016 And you know that how?? RE: SPFL2 Tuesday, 01/03/2016 : Rangers v Raith Rovers, KO 19:45 hours. - Trusevich - 29-02-2016 Because they're too stupid to be anything else. RE: SPFL2 Tuesday, 01/03/2016 : Rangers v Raith Rovers, KO 19:45 hours. - Fredstersafool - 29-02-2016 See Worthless yer stupid. RE: SPFL2 Tuesday, 01/03/2016 : Rangers v Raith Rovers, KO 19:45 hours. - Trusevich - 29-02-2016 Do you even know who you're responding to? RE: SPFL2 Tuesday, 01/03/2016 : Rangers v Raith Rovers, KO 19:45 hours. - TheWorthinGer - 29-02-2016 Fredstersafool Wrote:EBT's were legal?? so are they not now?? Can you imagine a situation where something that is legal becomes illegal? You know, when something comes to the attention of the parliamentary authorities and they act to either make something completely illegal or tighten the laws to limit the use or availability of something? Let's face it, most of your opinions are based on the over activity of your imagination so this might not be too much of a leap for you. Is it not possible for you to realise the difference between validity and legality? The dispute in question was whether or not the EBTs had been properly constructed and were therefore valid. Had EBTs been illegal there would have been criminal charges brought relating to tax evasion. Imagination time again: can you imagine a group of individuals being accused of illegally evading 50+ million in tax and associated penalties not being charged with a criminal offence? To be called stupid by you is a complement. It's a Freudian thing. |