0
    0

    Comment on Bonkers OCNC Thread by TheLawMan2.

    Auldheid 23rd August 2018 at 01:27  

    Very interesting comment at Point 9.  I wonder if this was shown to the court in the Craig Whyte case ?

     

    As for selling as a Going concern ?  Selling as a going concern with no debt is different from the position at February 2012. 

     

    TheLawMan2 Also Commented

    Bonkers OCNC Thread
    So, UEFA have given another indication today of their view on things.

     

    https://www.uefa.com/uefaeuropaleague/news/newsid=2569819.html

     

    Matchday one: 20 September

    Steven Gerrard has taken Rangers into the #UEL©Getty Images

    • Beşiktaş welcome first-timers Sarpsborg, playing their first group stage fixture
    • 2012/13 UEFA Europa League winners Chelsea kick off at PAOK
    • Rangers returning to group stage after an eight-year absence at Villarreal
    • Arsenal enter post-Arsène Wenger European era at home to Ukraine's Vorskla
    • AC Milan visit group stage debutants Dudelange in Luxembourg
    • Fenerbahçe, Sevilla, Celtic, Marseille and Leverkusen also primed for action

    Bonkers OCNC Thread
    Reiver – Humble apologies as i did not mean it to come across that way. 

    I was taking your own words on it which i have recreated below in which i am "firmly in the same camp" 

    "Club/Company IS ambiguous unless the letter to Res12 carries a legend that defines the "/". The slash in documentation is most commonly used to mean "or", as in "him/her". You cannot take it to mean "and", in Traverso's letter, just because it is what he should mean if he is using the Articles as his guide.

    Because of this Traverso's letter is one of our weakest pieces of documented evidence on OC/NC. To correct that we need to get Traverso to define what he meant.

     

    I dont believe i misrepresented you but apologies if i did.

     

    Does that mean i need to take back the DM i sent you ? enlightened


    Bonkers OCNC Thread
    I had a similar issue Paddy and admin sorted it in the background.  Im sure they will spot it and fix.


    Recent Comments by TheLawMan2

    Stevie G – The Real Deal?
    easyJambo 25th October 2018 at 00:57

    If you look at the transcript of the hearing, then you will see that Justice Teare intervened much more often during Mr Holmayer's submission than that of Mr Hussain. That suggested to me that he was having much more difficulty in understanding exactly the arguments being put forward and sought clarification on several occasions.

    I took that as him being more comfortable with SD's submissions, rather than Rangers.

    _____________________________________________

    A very fair and alternative view that comes across from experience EJ and one which clearly makes sense.

     


    Stevie G – The Real Deal?
    Barcabhoy.  Can we just clarify.

    Does the following statement "For the avoidance of doubt, im not saying we have won or anything like that, im only stating what our case/argument is" translate in your opinion to me concluding "no case to answer , SD would be sent packing , tail between legs . "

    That is your claim.  Which i hope you are fair enough to admit you got completely wrong.

    I made no such conclusion whatsoever.


    Stevie G – The Real Deal?
    Barcabhoy 24th October 2018 at 21:11

     

    And yes , he was the guy on twitter who had read all of the case releases and concluded no case to answer , SD would be sent packing , tail between legs . 

     

     

    Its unlikely this will see the light of day but i hope out of fairness, you allow the right to reply.

    I said nothing of the sort about SDI been sent packing.

    I simply stated what Rangers defence was against SDI and that it appeared from the judges answering that he understood the argument followed by “which of course, means nada until he rests.”

    I also stated elsewhere the following:

     

    "That happens in court cases.  1 side argues black and the other side argue white.  The judge then decides who is right.  

    For the avoidance of doubt, im not saying we have won or anything like that, im only stating what our case/argument is and i do believe the judges responses to RFC were more positive and understanding than the responses to SDI. 

    Still a coin flip."

     

    Not a fair picture being painted here.


    Fantastic Voyage ..
    This proof of pro Rangers bias. Does it involve sending off a player 10 minutes into a difficult away tie then refusing to send of an Aberdeen player for denying a clear goal.scoring opportunity? 

     

    Does it also involve sending off a player at Ibrox after 30 minutes for a tackle which could have resulted in a yellow due to ball direction? 

     

    Also, Jimbo, who are these referees that talk of rangers bias at dinner speeches. I hope your not falling for the lies of a John James here. Tut tut. 


    Fantastic Voyage ..
    First we had Allyboy inferring i was dim, Barcabhoy acting as the Grammar Police and now John trying to dictate what people can and cannot write about. 

     

    The Chairman of the SPFL will be under investigation through his links to a company "owned" by Celtics shareholders and its deemed not worthy of discussion.  LOL.  You really couldnt make this up.