Ranger UEFA licence in 2011 still under consideration by SFA


Well-Known Member
Can they take a club to court and not break UEFA’s rules?
I’m sure this was mentioned when Rangers threatened the SFA/SFL or whoever a few years back.
Or is this another one way street?
They can go to the CAS.

However, to do so after such a lengthy period would be effectively a declaration of war on a member club.

Just a pity they don't show similar concern about another club running a child sex ring.

Blue Goose

Well-Known Member
I would sincerely hope that we pulled out of cup competitions, no photo ops, no SFA employees allowed to the club, no players released for International duty and no dealings with them unless legal representation was available. Let them try and sanction the club. We were a victim of a crime by previous incumbents. Shameful again from the association. We will however bend the knee as normal imo.


Well-Known Member
So these c.unts won’t let Resolution 12 go and after 8 years they are still wanting Rangers punished

My opinion mate and I won’t be the only one who thinks our club should fight back and the paedo ring and 50 year cover up is the bullet to fire

If you don’t think this is the way to go then you’re entitled to your view

Mine is go for their f.ucking jugular and demand action from the SFA
Fair enough mate. I don't imagine for a second anybody at Rangers is going to be bringing up the child abuse scandal, but there seem to be alot of our fans wanting them to.


Well-Known Member
The case was rejected on the basis that the club considered the matter in dispute with HMRC. It was re-opened two years ago because former directors at the Craig Whyte trial claimed the club knew the amount would be payable and that the dispute was essentially a stalling tactic. This was the basis in which the SFA reopened the investigation.

The SFA were told by their own panel that the matter would need to be dealt with by CAS under the Five-Way Agreement. They have yet to submit the matter to CAS. After two years, I think that says everything about the strength of their case.


Active Member
But I thought we died? And we weren't the same club anymore?

Odd that only seems to be the position when it suits the pedo hiding bastards.

Warren Hill

Well-Known Member
It was written somewhere just last week that Japan man was still grinding his axe regarding Rangers. Petrie comes in then then something that has been buried for years is being dug up?
Rangers should get themselves a top lawyer and approach UEFA regarding the kangaroo courts being set up in this country.
The bottom line is they are doing a lot of damage and no one is intervening. This needs to be stopped and they need to be outed.
They are also hell bent on ruining Scottish Football but no one gives a damn about that.


Well-Known Member
The Light Blues maintain that the "Five-Way Agreement" signed in 2012 by the SFA, Scottish Premier League, Scottish Football League, the old Rangers and the new club set up by Charles Green means that Scottish football's governing body has no jurisdiction in the matter.
The implication there being that the match record ended and a new one began? Which of course isn’t the SPFLs position nor the liquidators themselves. File under ramblings of a Rangers hater.

I P Freely

Well-Known Member
The deal here is simple.....we get in front of them this season and look like we’re heading for 55 they will unshelf this and aim to deduct us points to ensure Celtic get 9 in a row!!

It may sound farcical but nothing would surprise me with this shower. I honestly think they are itching and would Even be willing to create civil unrest in order to manipulate their way to 10 in a row!!!
This is the sort of tinfoil hat lunacy we used to rip the piss out the Savilled Ones .


Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
As I said last week, we should be pursuing them for the cover-up which has allowed them a huge amount of extra spending power over the last 50 years (or more), whilst they failed to settle with their victims, (thread chopped).


Well-Known Member
Mr King should demand Liewell is suspended from all duties after his attempt at denying the boys club and big(ot) club were connected. That is a blatant lie and an attempt to pervert the course of justice,( that’s still a law, right?) and bring the game in to disrepute. And that’s before you ask Pete what the cheques to the trophy centre were for, etc etc.


Well-Known Member
Mr King should demand Liewell is suspended from all duties after his attempt at denying the boys club and big(ot) club were connected. That is a blatant lie and an attempt to pervert the course of justice,( that’s still a law, right?) and bring the game in to disrepute. And that’s before you ask Pete what the cheques to the trophy centre were for, etc etc.
Dont you mean demand liewell is sacked

Sir Walter

Well-Known Member
If they try and pursue this then we better make a public statement and demand that the SFA investigate the historical abuse covered up at the bheasts and that includes whether a sporting advantage was gained

The gloves have to come off with this one.

I suspect given the revelations, the tims may not be so vocal with this nonsense as they may fear we call them and the SFA our for their club full of nonces

Wade Wilson

Well-Known Member
Rangers did not have an unpaid tax liability to HMRC in 2011. Rangers paid their tax and NI due. Craig Whyte pocketed it.

And that would be the same Craig Whyte that passed their fit and proper person test.

Also wouldn't mention the fact the sfa knew what the scumbag was doing and did nothing.

But hey, not like it's the first time they've covered something up

Jimmy Mac

Well-Known Member
We should be going to war anyway without waiting , the tarriers tried to kill us off we should be all over the SFA re their 4 decades of facilitating a child porn ring asking what punishments await Crime scene FC

If they’re going to fire bullets which they have done then we should fire back without any prompting
This in spades why wait? We should be going for the jugular with these bastards.


Well-Known Member
These troglodytes would not DARE put us in front of CAS. Absolutely no way they will want this aired at that forum.

It’ll quietly go away
The Scotsman has no credibility. Comic of a paper, more laughed at than the sun these days. Wonder what sports journalists work for them? Riddy, would rather be on the brew.


Well-Known Member
I may not be 100% on this but my recollection is at the time of application this tax liability was in dispute or under discussion with a resolution to be expected.
I understand there are other clubs who at that time were in the same position with their relevant tax authorities.
Our tax bill may have eventually gone unpaid due to some of Murray's companies including the Rangers holding company going into liquidation.
The crucial point being at the time of the UEFA application the tax bill was not unpaid but under discussion with the authorities so was perfectly ligit.
Someone like @deedle will be able to clarify but I am certain this will be about the so called ''Wee Tax Case'' wherby Murray had agreed to settle a bill with HMRC for a couple of million quid. When Craig Whyte bought the club for £1, one of the conditions of the sale was that he settled the ''Wee Tax Case'' with HMRC. Whyte got in the door, never paid a thing to HMRC right up until he put us into admin in February, all the while The Wee Tax Bill was accruing interest and penalties along with the ongoing Big Tax Case.


Well-Known Member
There's a few panty wetters in here.
Remember the facts: it would cost hundreds of thousands of pounds to take this to CAS, risking UEFA intervention in the SFA, in order to fine us a few thousand pounds.
It is NOT going to happen.

Still though, the Scotsman have done their job for the day. Rangers supporters in an online frenzy and less coverage of you know what.


Well-Known Member
100% certain.

Be it this or points deduction for our fans singing.

We are looking at a points deduction this season.
I believe only punishment open to them was a fine of £5K or expulsion. Anyway we told them to ram it because 5 ways agreement was binding that no further action could or would be taken over Whytes tenure.

But it cost them £500k to take us to CAS
Last edited:

Latest posts