forlanssister 3,061 Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Wilson with a good grasp of the brief, Spiers floundering all over the place. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,458 Posted November 10, 2015 Author Share Posted November 10, 2015 Wilson with a good grasp of the brief, Spiers floundering all over the place. Yet I believe he is on twitter saying the debate went 50-50!................. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,186 Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 An informed contribution from Richard as always. Spiers attempts, as usual, to try and play devil's advocate and paint himself as on Rangers side but is happy to say they cheated and understands why some want honours stripped - although disingenuously saying he doesn't want that. OK then... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueMazza 0 Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Hahaha, just listening to this now. He's a complete fud. Wilson ties Spiers in knots. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno55 0 Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Yet I believe he is on twitter saying the debate went 50-50!................. I don't believe it oh wait wrong Richard Wilson 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anchorman 0 Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 What point in the recording should I tune into for Wilson v Spiers? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,186 Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 What point in the recording should I tune into for Wilson v Spiers? It starts around 12mins IIRC... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Where does Spiers get the 25m from? From what I've read the financial "benefit" seems to be less than half that for the players. At least he's not continuing to deliberately pull the wool over the public's eyes by implying it's 46.5m, like many so called journalists. As usual, I found the contribution from former Rangers players (McCall) very weak to start with and just based on honour and winning on the pitch, which kind of misses the point, but then he chimed in later with the "legality" argument. Good on him. O'Dea is just a fud, and like most Celtic minded seem to have totally missed it that Celtic used at least one EBT too - they continue to tacitly admit they believed it was cheating and they deliberately and knowingly did it anyway. The fact it wasn't cheating doesn't take away their open intention to cheat. Spiers does not understand tax laws but has been in contact with Jo the tax guy, and so might start toning it down soon. The main point from Jo is that Rangers broke no rules - you can't "break" tax laws as long as you submit a true return. All it means is that, if you get it wrong, your tax liabilities are higher - as may be the case. If Rangers finally lose the case then it's just a tax bill that becomes due, and until the case is complete, that bill is not substantiated. Where is the cheating? Spiers was about as bad a propagandist as you can get, trying to bring Lance Armstrong into it and so on, which is just totally different - and more akin to Celtic's behaviour. He also said that you'd have to be an idiot or something to argue the EBTs were illegal and then kept implying they were illegal... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,458 Posted November 10, 2015 Author Share Posted November 10, 2015 Where does Spiers get the 25m from? From what I've read the financial "benefit" seems to be less than half that for the players. At least he's not continuing to deliberately pull the wool over the public's eyes by implying it's 46.5m, like many so called journalists. As usual, I found the contribution from former Rangers players (McCall) very weak to start with and just based on honour and winning on the pitch, which kind of misses the point, but then he chimed in later with the "legality" argument. Good on him. O'Dea is just a fud, and like most Celtic minded seem to have totally missed it that Celtic used at least one EBT too - they continue to tacitly admit they believed it was cheating and they deliberately and knowingly did it anyway. The fact it wasn't cheating doesn't take away their open intention to cheat. Spiers does not understand tax laws but has been in contact with Jo the tax guy, and so might start toning it down soon. The main point from Jo is that Rangers broke no rules - you can't "break" tax laws as long as you submit a true return. All it means is that, if you get it wrong, your tax liabilities are higher - as may be the case. If Rangers finally lose the case then it's just a tax bill that becomes due, and until the case is complete, that bill is not substantiated. Where is the cheating? Spiers was about as bad a propagandist as you can get, trying to bring Lance Armstrong into it and so on, which is just totally different - and more akin to Celtic's behaviour. He also said that you'd have to be an idiot or something to argue the EBTs were illegal and then kept implying they were illegal... Way too much common sense in that post mate! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,186 Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Spiers wont change opinion after speaking to the tax QC - he'll just do what he did with Neil Patey and mock him while referring to anonymous tax experts that agree with his opinions. 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.