Super Cooper 0 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 It's ridiculous. We won't be allowed to call tims tims soon. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 It's ridiculous. We won't be allowed to call tims tims soon. It is slightly different tbh 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Cooper 0 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 It is slightly different tbh Surely a spade is a spade, no? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Would it be inappropriate to call him a convicted tax fraudster then?, just asking!. I'm actually not sure Ian, but I would assume that if someone posts accurate factual comments, then there would be no laws getting breached. If someone has been convicted of a crime and you accurately state that they've been convicted of that crime, then you would perhaps be on solid ground. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Surely a spade is a spade, no? The S word is more a matter opinion and it turned into a buzzword after SOS used it in their tagline. I'm not a businessman myself so I don't really know how damaging these things could be to Easdale's reputation, other ventures etc. I just think many people need to take a step back, i'm guilty of going too far myself sometimes. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Davison 0 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Frankie is correct in advising caution but I guess that not many would find it easy to find a suitable word of commendation for Sandy Easdale. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real PapaBear 0 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Did Mr Easedale's lawyer provide a list four letter words which can be used to describe him? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 I'm actually not sure Ian, but I would assume that if someone posts accurate factual comments, then there would be no laws getting breached. If someone has been convicted of a crime and you accurately state that they've been convicted of that crime, then you would perhaps be on solid ground. If the Herald can say "Sandy was jailed in 1997 for VAT-related offences" I don't see why anyone else can't since it's a fact. http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/new-fears-over-past-of-brothers-trying-to-join-rangers-board.20948689 Or this: "Easdale was jailed for 27 months in 1997 for a VAT fraud involving computer parts. The judge ruled he made £1.5million. A Rangers spokesman made it clear last night that the Ibrox hierarchy are relaxed about Easdale’s criminal history. He said: “We are fully aware of Mr Easdale’s past and take the view that this was a long time ago. He served his time and paid his debt. “Our view of Mr Easdale is that he is a respected figure in Scottish business circles and an employer of 1000 people across the country."" http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/ibrox-chiefs-roll-out-red-1460777 Or this: "Sandy Easdale was sentenced to 27 months in prison for non-payment of VAT in 1997. "" http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24091694 You just can't call him names that imply he is some kind of bad person now, when it is obvious that he is fully reformed. Just my personal opinion of course and not the opinion of this web site or its owner. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 BH is right. I think we should be grateful that we have a tireless campaigner for good manners, respect and polite behaviour holding the reins of power at Ibrox. Previous incumbents, who shrugged off criticism, especially of a personal nature, to demonstrate by their actions what they could do, were men of straw compared to this lad. Those who would repeatedly highlight such issues as being jailed for tax fraud really do need to see the bigger picture. Just because you have demonstrated in the past that you are an untrustworthy criminal who ended up slopping out your own shite on a daily basis doesn't mean that you can't, at some point in the future, take control of a multi-million pound business or strike deals with 30% rates of interest for sharegolders. How on earth is he supposed to get on with the business of creating a successful Rangers when people harp on about his criminal past, when he was jailed for 27 months for tax fraud? It's really most unfair. Just because he was jailed for 27 months for tax fraud is no reason for this bad manners on the part of posters here and elsewhere, it really isn't. It ought to stop right away! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,283 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 That was 16 years ago, BTW. If you read some of he stuff you could get the idea it was rather months ago. Do people change? Who knows. I sure don't know him and out of principle I'd give him the benefit of the doubt today (sic!) rather than drone constantly about this stuff and thus force him into action against freely-flak'ing people essentially hiding behind usernames on boards owned by others. And the icing on that cake is that people have a go at him because he reacts to the flak. How dare he! 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.