Crimson Dynamo 128 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 How would things like bonuses work? Over the years I can think of lots of examples where the headline will say: "players on 40 grand a man to qualify for the next phase" Are these sort of things factored into contracts? I wonder because the headlines seem random at the time like it is a glorious gesture by the owner etc... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 the only side letter I've seen said. we run an ent scheme let us know if you want to join it. be as well stripping titles for teams with pensions. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Dynamo 128 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 the only side letter I've seen said. we run an ent scheme let us know if you want to join it. be as well stripping titles for teams with pensions. Indeed, I agree the side letters will say something like that or along those lines It certainly won't say this is your second contract. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,330 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 How would things like bonuses work? Over the years I can think of lots of examples where the headline will say: "players on 40 grand a man to qualify for the next phase" Are these sort of things factored into contracts? I wonder because the headlines seem random at the time like it is a glorious gesture by the owner etc... That's a point I've been thinking about as well. I'm sure the bonuses for our UEFA cup run were negotiated between Ferguson and Bain, and therefore surely could not be included in any contract? There may have been mention of them but I doubt that there are specific amounts mentioned. I presume other clubs must be the same as well? Another example of hypocrisy in Scottish football. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchellenman 0 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 This is getting on my tits now - HURRY UP! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 bonuses are negotiated at the start of the season and notified to the sfa. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 This line that anyone who has an issue over the EBT saga is merely falling for timmy propaganda is out of order. People have different views based on different ideas - but I doubt a single one of us takes our party line from Parkhead. Ok, but the Timmy propaganda is there which twists the truth in a negative way, fudging the issue with stuff that isn't relevant and finding Rangers guilty without trial. My problem then is why are our own fans twisting the truth in a negative way, fudging the issue with stuff that isn't relevant and finding Rangers guilty without trial? At least Timmy has an excuse. It's a bit like saying people are falling for Nazi propaganda, and someone replying, "How dare you, they can be anti-semitic by making up their own mind you know." People can have different views based on ideas but why aren't they defending them then? Where is a proper rebuttal of my posts? When all people come out with is anti-Rangers rhetoric which they can't or won't back-up, and when it is little different from what the enemy is saying, then how is suggesting that they are falling for the enemy's propaganda so bad? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinker 870 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Ok, but the Timmy propaganda is there which twists the truth in a negative way, fudging the issue with stuff that isn't relevant and finding Rangers guilty without trial. My problem then is why are our own fans twisting the truth in a negative way, fudging the issue with stuff that isn't relevant and finding Rangers guilty without trial? At least Timmy has an excuse. It's a bit like saying people are falling for Nazi propaganda, and someone replying, "How dare you, they can be anti-semitic by making up their own mind you know." People can have different views based on ideas but why aren't they defending them then? Where is a proper rebuttal of my posts? When all people come out with is anti-Rangers rhetoric which they can't or won't back-up, and when it is little different from what the enemy is saying, then how is suggesting that they are falling for the enemy's propaganda so bad? It's not a case of deciding we're guilty without a trial - it's more believing that we need a trial - a fair one - and to abide by its results so that the matter is laid to rest. Do I believe Rangers have deliberately broken any rules? I don't think so - I hope not but wouldn't put it past SDM. Do I believe Rangers have commited a crime worthy of the most servere punishment ever handed out in football? No, I don't. Do I have all the facts necessary to confidently make these calls? No. Do I want Rangers to go through a fair disciplinary process and abide by the results? Absolutely. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 As far as I know declaring all payments has always been a rule to register players. I was under the impression that you declare all CONTRACTS. The EBT's were officially (at least to Rangers board) NOT contracts. Why would they declare contracts where they don't think there are any? Anyway, even going by your version, Rangers didn't make the payments you are referring to. An off-shore trust gave the players discretionary loans... But while certain people are no doubt pushing for this, I think it's deluded to think there is no valid reason for the investigation at all. Hugh Adam started it off with his comments. Why do we need an investigation? It's pretty obvious what has happened. Rangers thought EBT's were a legitimate way of avoiding tax. To run them properly they had to be discretionary, paid by a trust and NOT contractual. The SPL and HMRC knew all about it and they were published every year in the accounts. Niether the SPL or HMRC complained. NOW, 12 years later, they want to punish us for it with ultimate sanctions. HMRC wanted to put us out of business and the SPL want to strip our titles. Not only is that an immensely extreme punishment for a paperwork dispute which is far too far after the fact to be relevant, it seems they have already found us guilty. I say you are deluded if you think that's anything like fair justice. Rangers should have been told it was unacceptable at the time so they could rectify it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Calscot, you're saying that we definitely have nothing to answer for at all. I totally agree with what you say about being guilty before trial, but I believe the possibility of wrong doing is there, not because of Timmy propaganda, simply because I don't trust David Murray one bit. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.