Podcast Episode 3 – David Low

Avatar By

Burghbhoy says: May 2, 2014 at 1:11 pm If I read you …

Comment on Podcast Episode 3 – David Low by thirdmanrunning.

burghbhoy says:
May 2, 2014 at 1:11 pm

If I read you right, you are saying that when staff employed by RFC ‘TUPED’ across this proves that the ‘business undertaking’ did too. Ergo it’s the same business etc etc?

My understanding is that TUPE is short for Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) and is designed to transfer (an employee or group of employees) to another employer.

Without such regulations your contract of employment relating to your own terms and conditions would be meaningless.

Are you suggesting that the fact that the employees TUPED across means that the business simply continued?

thirdmanrunning Also Commented

Podcast Episode 3 – David Low
Sugar Daddy says:
May 5, 2014 at 1:27 pm

I think you forget SD, McCoist said at the time that the reason these players were signed was because the fans ‘deserved’ to watch the ‘best’ players possible. Therefore there was no way McCoist could sign average players.

Similarly the reason they stay in 5 star hotels before EVERY game is because Rangers players DESERVE the very best.

And right there you have the mentality that will plunge the whole omnishambles back in to further crisis.


Podcast Episode 3 – David Low
RyanGosling says:
May 3, 2014 at 9:49 am

Very well put Sir.


Podcast Episode 3 – David Low
RyanGosling says:
May 1, 2014 at 10:33 pm

Yes Ryan – but the forum/blog also is moderated to avoid the same level of glee when Rangers lose a football game.

What’s been posted over the last few days could be seen as banter, good natured, quite satirical humour.

Yes, you might see that as making it exclusive, or un-inclusive – but it’s hard to find anywhere else where the ‘hatred’ and ‘bile’ is absent, and there’s the occasional witty gag or two.


Recent Comments by thirdmanrunning

LNS – A Summary
Smugas 6th December 2015 at 8:02 PMG 
Not sure I follow you at all Smugas, I’m afraid!
Sure King could bring down the SFA, but just as FIFA officials find themselves looking at the inside of a Swiss police cell at this time of year, this is because of the unholy mess they and (The) Rangers have got themselves into, together.  As JJ says, it’s mutually assured destruction.
If my thinking is wishful then it’s only that the SFA is on borrowed time; either Ashley will expose them or King will.  And I don’t think anyone has seriously considered what *might* happen if every ST holder across Scotland, said sort the SFA or there isn’t any football next season…
Our new governing body should represent every Club in Scotland, and would have to make it a priority to ensure that Rangers fans are able to rebuild and move forward too, without the spivs, crooks, PR cronies and placemen at Hampden contriving to ignore the truth.


LNS – A Summary
King was passed fit and proper and that was absolutely no surprise to any of us.
When he was caught outside Hampden the other day he said that he’d never met the SFA.  While that was probably a lie – it was also a public pronouncement, said for a reason.
What JJ is pointing to is King’s knowledge, intimate, explicit knowledge from Oldco days, through the whole Swiss meetiing around the Sevco time, to today. He knows what the SFA have said, done and – more importatly – not done, over the years.
The SFA are hopelessly, permanently and fatally compromised.  King is a crook and it will be his crookedness, that the SFA have been drawn in to, that come April and a judicial review will – finally – expose what’s been going on.
King can no more make Ashley go away as Canute could turn back the tide. 


LNS – A Summary
The Ungrateful Dead 6th December 2015 at 2:39 pm 
He’s not been sued, and nor has PMG, because a) as you can’t be slandered in a Court of Law why would Regan, or King want the role of Plaintiff IF, b) the allegations were based on a truth?
The very last thing Regan and/or King want is time in Court where their previous actions can come under real scrutiny… from very intelligent people, with a great grasp of the facts?
However, ladies and gentlemen, does anyone else feel if James Doleman can reach his crowd-sourced target of £1,000 in about 40 mins, then the day when a crowd-sourced judicial review of this whole sordid business takes another step to becoming a reality?
I saw that Chris Graham, the 48 hour Director and committed Islamaphobe made a(nother) sneering remark about crowd-sourcing on Twitter.  What he doesn’t have the intelligence to realise is that either a genuine, bona fide, real billionaire will either expose the collusion between the SFA and especially King, or the rest of us will.  The SMSM will esssetially become a total irrelevance in all of this; they have an agenda and they have Level5 but I doubt that will save either of them.
King is a crook, a convicted crook.  He’s just attempted to try and rip off one of the Easdale brothers, which is, even by his standards, a very, very stupid thing to do.  Having also tried to rip off MA… which is reckless even by his own standards.
In any war of attrition the side with the greater resources will eventually win.  Which therefore pits Sevco/RIFC/TRFC against Mike Ashley and/or supporters of any and every Club in Scotland.


A Sanity Clause for Xmas?
Sorry, but I can’t let this go, having just read the excellent blog over at https://dfr10.wordpress.com/2014/12/27/rangers-nil/. A few commentators above seem prepared to give the piece qualified praise, with the following remark appearing to cause the most contention:

“. . . I now think it would have been preferable for the club to have ceased to exist before it entered the lower leagues.”

Now, I may have this wrong but I seem to recall a number of different people consistently suggest exactly the same thing, over the past few years; that ‘Rangers’ took some time out before re-forming and working its way up the League ladder.

Of course the ‘offensive’ words in that sentence are ‘ceased to exist’ and it can be inferred that as it ‘would have been preferable’, ergo, his view is that Rangers have not ‘ceased to exist’.

I’m not going to attempt to summarise the logic for both sides of the OC/NC debate, however I would offer the following, on this the last day of 2014; Rangers have ceased to exist while simultaneously continuing to exist.

The Rangers we all knew are gone, gone for a very long time, if not, most likely, for ever. The ‘continuity Rangers’ created by Charles of Normandy (I do love that moniker!) are not a continuation of the old, despite wearing its clothes and living in its house, but the danger was always if Rangers as a Club, as a team, did NOT cease to exist and, by association, its fans and supporters didn’t ‘do walking away’ then as the saying goes, ‘all it takes for evil to prosper is for good men to do nothing’.

The very thing that Rangers fans, the majority of the SMSM (it would seem) and, of course, the SFA/SPL wanted – a return to the comfort of the long-held ‘Old-Firm’ status quo cannot now be achieved precisely because of the way RIFC/TRFC was created.

Blogs like the one linked to here are the ‘end of the beginning’ in my view. Sane, articulate people are starting to realise what has happened and what the implications of this are.

The only constant in life is change and Scottish Football as a whole has changed since Rangers went bust.


A Sanity Clause for Xmas?
Quite off topic I know but can anyone enlighten me as to why Leggoland isn’t doing the blog thing anymore??


About the author

Avatar