kuznetsov 0 Posted January 24, 2013 Author Share Posted January 24, 2013 As with the transfer embargo i believe only a court of law will give us a fair hearing. even then it would depend on the judge and/or jury. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,066 Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 As with the transfer embargo i believe only a court of law will give us a fair hearing. LOL, once again just admit Green called this one wrong and the RFFF are saving his face. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 LOL, once again just admit Green called this one wrong and the RFFF are saving his face. I'm not going to bow down to something that I don't agree with. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,066 Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 I'm not going to bow down to something that I don't agree with. Whether you agree will it or not it remains a fact that Green called this one wrong. Or perhaps you think that Green is correct and the extremely capable legal team are wrong? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Whether you agree will it or not it remains a fact that Green called this one wrong. Or perhaps you think that Green is correct and the extremely capable legal team are wrong? I believe they're wrong to expect a fair trial yes. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,066 Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 I believe they're wrong to expect a fair trial yes. Of course you're privy to all the information that they are? The very fact that they are representing us at the hearing is an admission from Green that his strategy was in fact the wrong one in this instance, he's admitted he was wrong but you know better than him? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComeOffit 0 Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Green's initial stance that the tribunal was" nothing to do with him", was peculiar to say the least. Surely it's better to be in there from the start, rather than wait for the inevitable guilty verdict, and then fight it through the law courts. An odd twist to this sorry affair, was Chris Graham saying in his recent article that there may have been a problem with the newco defending itself, due to liquidation rules, and something to do with the old creditors. I got the feeling he was implying that this was the reason that the RFFF had to step up and pay the legal fees. Very strange. Almost as if Green has told the RFFF this to get them to pay for the defence. Something about it all doesn't sit right with me. Why would the RFFF suddenly decide to offer to pay the expenses without any communication from Rangers? I guess they didn't, and only hope they were given the whole truth from Charles. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,066 Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Green's initial stance that the tribunal was" nothing to do with him", was peculiar to say the least. Surely it's better to be in there from the start, rather than wait for the inevitable guilty verdict, and then fight it through the law courts. An odd twist to this sorry affair, was Chris Graham saying in his recent article that there may have been a problem with the newco defending itself, due to liquidation rules, and something to do with the old creditors. I got the feeling he was implying that this was the reason that the RFFF had to step up and pay the legal fees. Very strange. Almost as if Green has told the RFFF this to get them to pay for the defence. Something about it all doesn't sit right with me. Why would the RFFF suddenly decide to offer to pay the expenses without any communication from Rangers? I guess they didn't, and only hope they were given the whole truth from Charles. Quoted to get round censorship! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Of course they decided themselves, the money was sitting gathering dust. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Quoted to get round censorship! How childish. 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.