Plato’s Horse and Rangers Football Club – Guest Post by Merciatic

Arguments still and will always go on whether the current Rangers in the SFL is a new club or still the old club with 140 years history, although for me it is clear. Paul, has set out his argument using the rules of the SFA and the SPL. For me these are a red herring.

Rangers FC was formed in 1872.

SFA formed in 1873.

SPL formed in 1998.

So SFA formed year after RFC and SPL formed over 120 years later. What was RFC before formation of SFA and SPL? Ans: It was a football club. It was what it was and could already be defined. A set of rules from a later organization does not change that.

True we need definitions for participating competitors in a competition such as football clubs in league and cup football. If a club meets those definitions then fine. It can play in the competition. If it doesn’t it can’t. It may have to change something about itself to meet the rules – even so a club is still so much more than this limited definition for a specific purpose.

This brings me to Plato’s horse.

In Plato’s Theory of Forms there are two realities, the physical world and the idea of perfect forms. For Plato a horse could be a particular horse that you see in a field or the perfect form or idea of a horse that exists in another dimension.


I think it is a good analogy for the definition of a club.

We have the Physical football club existing in the real world (capable of being liquidated) and we have the form of a club a definition that exists purely for playing competitive football (but alas, never really existed). Or it may be the club that exists in the heart and mind of the fans, but of course, irrelevant.

But I would also like to look anyway at an SPL rule Paul quoted.

“Club means an association football club, other than a Candidate Club, which is, for the time being, eligible to participate in the League and, except where the context otherwise requires, includes the owner and operator of such club;”

So the owner and operator may be included in this definition of a Club. I say may be because this is “except where the context otherwise requires”. Some clubs are owned by holding companies some are not and might be “where the context otherwise requires”.

Rangers Football Club was owned by a holding company. It was Murray International Holdings.

Nowhere in the rule does it say a Club itself should be considered as two separate entities of football club and owner. Indeed a “Club including its owner” hardly separates them at all but binds them together.

Only the real world football club exists as any entity at all, legal or otherwise.

If we look at the sale agreement, the assets are listed and priced separately. Rangers football club is not on sale for £5.5 million. The assets were bought and used to form a new club, identical in almost every respect, but with a new formation date, set up by different people and no history to speak of.

The club is the company and was liquidated. Otherwise trace me the independent histories of both.

By Merciatic.



Filed under Guest Posts, Rangers

91 responses to “Plato’s Horse and Rangers Football Club – Guest Post by Merciatic

  1. Budweiser

    Interesting view.

    • Ed Paisley

      Thanks for the very interesting blog, Merciatic. Although I think the philosophical musings are lost on the Rangers crowd.

      The truth is that since 1988, David Murray has used over £100m of other people’s money in a vainglorious attempt to win the European Cup and finally emerge from Celtic’s shadow.

      It failed, he killed the club stone dead, and no amount of bleating will extinguish our moral and sporting superiority over the Sevco Rangers. The history has gone and now they are SEVCO. They cheat the public purse and claim to be patriots. They have a CEO who engages in flagrant company law breaking and thinks it is acceptable conduct. They still have a support who claim to be ra peepul in a tone redolent of “ein volk, ein Reich….”.

      No amount of petulant anger from Chris (Violet Elizabeth) Graham will change that – let him sqweem and sqweem…….. They are SEVCO.

      • cam

        Edward,i do hope that purging helped and the proof would be,that now you’ve said it you could get on with your life but trust me Ted,you’ll be back on here tomorrow obsessing,fretting,fixating and bleating.
        Its the Celtic way,always has been always will be.

        • Ed Paisley

          I’m sorry cam, but the telly is rubbish these days and I would comment on the McMurdo blog but I get tired of the disgusting (and sometimes quite scary) comments I get.
          At least here, we get to talk about Plato’s Horse and Schrodinger’s Cat and quite possibly Pavlov’s Dog (carson) will be along very soon.

        • Steven Brennan

          Shields up

  2. cam

    Nice try, but as you allude to in your Plat O mince there are two realities in operation.
    Rangers or to give them their proper legal term,,,The Mighty Glasgow Rangers the People FC are an entity beyond the ken of fans of the Eastenders.
    The Large Hadron Collider has rendered your theorem outdated due to the proof of existence of the Big Mason particle otherwise referred to as the God particle.
    I did like the use of big white horses in your article and beseech you or newtz to grant me the wisdom on how to insert those pics rather than links to pics,,,it makes the articles very professional looking and i could have mucho fun with that.
    Come now fine sir, don’t be mean of spirit,a day without learning summit new is indeed a day wasted.
    In deference to your different approach to a tired debate, i must compliment your philosophical angle but sadly i propose that this is not your Eureka moment.

  3. JimBhoy

    Dunno about plato’s nag but there could be plenty of long faces down Ibrox way this week… Could it be Chico has hoofed it with some big reddies, paying himself special bonuses… We shall see..

  4. Neeeeigh bother :mrgreen:

    As it’s happening all over again can I mention Schrodinger’s Cat purely for nostalgia of RTC and possibly to expand the philosophical approach to existance?

  5. mick

    great read the point in all this is fairness its not fair that a club can finacially dope the game for 20years then side step mils of debt just because the company house record changed rfc = the perfect definition of conning the system and sevco are no better its curtains time for both this week am hoping anyway hail hail (T minus 19hrs )
    its pointless trying to explain to a zombie anything but to try and explain its not the same club is like talking to a brick wall its a great debate before Tuesday tonto time lol

  6. Raymilland


    • JimBhoy

      Lol Horses for courses…!!!

      right away out to see some proper footie over at Kirkintilloch, 7 of our first team out, I need some of Sally’s warchest…

  7. cam

    Newtz,,,tell this old dinosaur how to insert italics and emphasise my mince in bold.
    Do i need a different toolbar or is it wordpress features i need to access.
    My thesis on Vatican price fixing in the fish market and its implications for my Sunday Subway lunch meal deal would look much better if i could give it some italiano style.

  8. @Paul.
    I have to concur with Merciatic mate. Rangers are pan breid! In both the real world, and the Scottish Fantasy Allusion world.
    Keep the pecker up though Paul Your batting average is far superior to else in the Bloggosphere.

  9. cam

    Keeping the T minus theme going,here we have another bunch of puppets dancing to the tune of Brains McConville,,,Violet has to be Lady Penelope and the Tracy island clue is a dead giveaway.

  10. Marching on Together

    “We consider that a football club is not simply the legal entity which controls it, but that it is the community formed by the fans and players working towards a common goal.” From AFC Wimbledon.

    If the fans, staff and players of Rangers say it is the same club, it is the same club. Surprised any Celtic fan would deny the rights of the fans to decide – perhaps you are all too cowed into doing what your board tells you to do.

    • So it would follow that the money due to Hector and the creditors was owed by “The Club”?

      • Marching on Together

        Wish that were so. If the Rangers fans had any moral sense about them, each season ticket holder should have ponied up an additional £100 per season, and that would have covered the indebtedness.

        • @MOT
          £100 per season!!
          I doubt that would cover the interest! Anyway, they have a majority fanbase who have no morals.

          • Marching on Together

            Say 45,000 season ticket holders at £100 per year for say 10 years = £45 million. Add similar proportionate amounts for the corporates and hospitality bods, and that’s the debt just about covered.

            Their tickets were subsidised by the taxpayer and other creditors for all this time – they should have stepped up and paid.

            • robertg

              Er, actually it is £4.5m. Multiplying by 100 means adding two zeros. 45 plus 3 zeros become 45 plus 5 zeros, or 4500000. As we move the commas about to make the big numbers easier to read – the convention being to add a comma 3 digits in from the left, we get 4,500,000. Or the “interest payment” as HMRC would have termed it had they won the whole shooting match. “£1m below from the whole purchase price.” might be another way of phrasing it. Just think, if everyobody had pitched in a further £22.22 the bears could have bought the whole lot! (£122.22 * 45,000 = £5.5m). An opportunity lost or what?

            • Marching on Together

              But they were getting subsidised tickets for 10 years, so £4.5 million per year for 10 years is £45 million. If you were a Rangers fan with a season ticket for each of those 10 years, you should be ponying up £1000, not £100.

      • Michael

        …and that is the crucial point. Well said barcabuster.

        If a CVA had been agreed then the club would have carried on and could have transferred to another legal entity with the agreement of the relevant football bodies. As the CVA was not agreed, the club ceased to exist. What we have, and as recognised by the relevant football authorities through the club known as Rangers only having Associate membership, is a new club.

        • Marching on Together

          Rangers cannot be a new club, as they would not have been in existence as a new club for the necessary three years before being admitted to the SFL. They were admitted, so they must have been an existing club. QED.

          • Michael

            Sorry, but you are wrong. The relevant SFL rule is:

            The League in general meeting may upon such terms and conditions as it
            may think fit admit any club as an Associate Member or Member of the
            League and may expel any Member or Associate Member or terminate such membership or may accept the retirement of any Associate Member or Member, but subject always to Rule 126 (Reversion of Transfer of
            Registration Rights). Upon admission as a Member or Associate Member,
            the club so admitted shall become bound by and be subject to these Rules
            and any other Rules or Bye-Laws made by the League for the time being
            in force.

          • merciatic

            Could they have been admitted illegally perhaps? Stop using whatever the SFA/SPL.SFL did/said to define your club. Celtic will always be Celtic regardless/in spite of the the football authorities.

            • Marching on Together


              “Celtic will always be Celtic regardless” Even if the company which owns the club went into administration, no doubt.

    • jimmy white

      Don’t suppose you ever thought why the A.F.C. comes before wimbledon, it never used to! Why are milton keynes dons not the same, after all, they are, were the same “company”, who after changing its name and location continued in their rightful league position, never cheated as far as I know, okay they relinquished the history of wimbledon where as A.F.C. wimbledon laid claim to it!…..bit weird when they didn’t even exist and were formed when wimbledon f.c. were still plying their trade! Hmmmm but what about the company? Now then, we have a company who own, bought, owned???!!! wimbledon the original, who renamed the original as mk dons… I am correct aren’t I…. keeping their place in the english league. Thats that bit… A.F.C. on the other hand have nothing to do with the company that own, bought or owned the club known as wimbledon football club, who now play under the title M.K. Dons which was wimbledon f.c., the wimbledon that beat liverpool to win the F.A. cup. Now I don’t know, but unless your absolutely desperate to believe, then the true wimbledon are the one that never ceased to exist or be newly formed and never left their place in the league, unless of course the company has nothing whatsoever to do with the club? After all it was wimbledon who changed to M.K. dons in 2004! Where as the supporters formed the “new” A.F.C. in 2002, two years before the name change, wimbledon (the one which won the F.A. cup) was still in existence! Doesn’t make sense does it, and am taking the mick while being deadly serious, your desperately parading as a leeds fan convincing no one but yourself! Yes it does matter what is in the heart of the fans, but if you lost a cup final then no amount of denial will make you winners, get what I mean? You can not change history. The truth is out there, just don’t trust to the msm. A.F.C… rangers…. M.K. Dons…. sevco….THERE IS NO COMPARISON! sevco! rangers? there can be only one, sevco it is for now.

      • jimmy white

        Leeds U.T.D erm A.F.C. or how about their predecessors Leeds city, depends whats on offer I suppose, but rangers are deid, the whole wurld knows.

        • Marching on Together

          Leeds City. Different, but connected club. Leeds United – same club since 1920.

          Alive and kicking, just like Rangers.

      • Marching on Together

        I have quoted the relevant part from the Wimbledon web-site. it is what the Wimbledon fans believe is what matters and they believe it is the same club. Just like the Rangers fans.

        “your desperately parading as a leeds fan convincing no one but yourself!” I might be a desperate Leeds fan, but at least I am not a Rangers-hating bigot.

        • jimmy white

          good impression of an X ger though, wouldn’t you say?

          • Marching on Together

            I was at Celtic’s match yesterday. Were you?

            • jimmy white

              Ross county now? wonder what you think of inverness, one club, two or three, in fact don’t go there, you got plenty to wrestle with, i,e, leeds city leeds united afc and rangers, sevco and The rangers sandwiching your new love ross county, quite like dingwall though, be better if the ex wasn’t there.

  11. Rangers fc formed in 1872 …becomes a plc in 1899..27 years of a difference ….the people support a football club formed in 1872 by the gallant pioneers ….not a business not a plc …a football club …quite simple really .

  12. josephmcgrath112001809

    If you demolish Ibrox Park and Murray Park and find all the cash has gone anyway; if you send all the players home with a note telling them not to come back; If you take away all the trophies and erase the history; Glasgow will still throng with rangers Supporters. It is not about football!
    They cry “We are the people!” because they think of themselves as a group, tribe, club – the Rangers.
    Forget logic – this is about emotion.

    • cam

      Correct Joseph, there are too many non people trying to intefere with the motions of the real people.People should be more mindful of playing people politics and keep their noses out of other people’s business.
      For the avoidance of doubt,,,that stands for Walter,Ally,true people.
      20,000 people seemingly turned up to watch the Hammer and Super thrash the mighty Man Utd.
      More blue pounds for charity,,,,its good to be a Bear.
      I’ll be getting the Camster’s name up on the Brian Laudrup wall,,i’m well in with the foundations.

    • Monti

      yeah I’m really emotional for them :D. Haha

  13. jjbhoy

    @rioting on together,yeah you can keep tellin yourselves what you want but we are talking about facts and you lot don’t deal with those or truths now do you,tell yourself you won the world cup,wimbledon or the open golf championship but it aint true just cos you say it,next thing you and the scottish media will be printing that you have broken another world record for say,attendances,wrong again,that real true fact goes to a south american team and your capacity(50k)does not exceed theirs,fact. this was in the msm at the weekend obviously those old rangurrz hacks didn’t do their home work,again,fact.

    • Marching on Together

      You seem to have me confused with a Rangers fan.

      As for the facts, the facts are that Rangers, the same club as was founded in 1872, according to the rules of the SFA, and SFL, are playing in SFL3. No matter how much it must pain you to see it every week.

      The question the Celtic fans who claim otherwise must answer, why should the rules of British football be rewritten to make Rangers a special case, as whenever clubs have continued after an insolvency event, nobody has ever claimed it was a new club.

      • Michael

        Have you checked the rules of “british football”?

        Check out 2.9.2 of the english FA rules for the National League System (

        or the Football Conference (

        If I had more time I’d check the Premier League, Championship and Football League rules, but generally they follow a template devised by the FA.

        • Marching on Together

          I am a Leeds United fan. I know the rules of the Football league backwards as it applies to administrations etc.

          My club is the same as it was pre-administration and pre-liquidation of the company which once owned it. No difference in the essentials to Rangers.

          • Michael

            Ok , as you know it backwards, quote the relevant sections.

            The Leeds Utd situation is in fact very different.

            • Marching on Together

              No it’s not, not in its essentials. Leeds Utd oldco goes into administration (same as Rangers), Leeds Utd oldco attempts to do a CVA but fails due to the objections of HMRC (same as Rangers), all the assets which make up the club Leeds United are sold by Leeds Utd oldco to Leeds Utd newco (same as Rangers), Leeds Utd oldco eventually goes into liquidation (same as Rangers).

              The only material differences are that the Football league rules required all football debts to be paid 100%, and the Football League could decide to impose whatever conditions it wished on transferring the golden share in the Football League from oldco to newco, which golden share is necessary to play in the Football League.

              The essentials are the same though.

              And if you post a reply claiming that the Leeds United history is different from what I have outlined (as countless others have tried to do on here over the months), I will ignore it.

            • Daniel O'Connell

              Leeds United’s CVA was accepted after HMRC failed to block it.

            • Marching on Together

              Utter shite. Rangers won the European Cup in 1967, Celtic went bust in 1994, and Celtic used EBTs to cheat all of Scottish football.

  14. mick

    heres something we can all agree on sevco oldco newco are the worlds most tainted club and the joke of sport any where mentioned its lol hahahahahahahahaha what are we going to call the new club when green and whyte liquidate the holding company they floated rangers the 3rd its like a nightmare production that you hate but every year a new 1 pops up

  15. Michael

    I won’t attempt to argue at this point against your philosophical argument.

    More prosaically, it is clear that the SFA recognise the club currently known as Rangers as a new club. They might not state it publicly, but a look at their articles of association show this to be the case.

    There is a progression of membership:
    (1) Registered – gained by being a member of a recognised league
    (2) Associate – at discretion of SFA
    (3) Full – at discretion of SFA after 5 continuous years of being an Associate member

    The club known as Rangers, or sevco fc, or zombie fc or whatever have associate membership. Once they have existed for 5 continuous years as an Associate member then they can apply for Full membership.

    The relevant extract is below:
    6.3 A club or association desiring to qualify for full membership of the Scottish FA must first be admitted as an associate member. A club cannot be admitted as an associate member unless it meets, and commits to continuous compliance with, the Membership Criteria and amendments thereto as shall be promulgated by the Board from time to
    time in connection with the membership of the Scottish FA.

    6.4 Applicants for associate membership shall use such printed forms as shall from time to time be prescribed by the Board. All applications for associate membership shall be considered and decided by the Board and the Board’s decision on the matter shall be final. Applications for associate membership shall be lodged with the Secretary and must be accompanied by a copy of the applicant’s constitution or rules and any
    other information concerning the applicant which the Board may require, together with a remittance for the amount of the entrance fee. The entrance fee for associate membership shall be £1,000.

    6.5 A club or association accepted as an associate member shall thereafter receive from the Secretary a copy of the Memorandum and these Articles, and such other rules and regulations of the Scottish FA as the Board may from time to time direct. These publications, in particular the Memorandum and these Articles, shall be placed in a convenient place so that any official, Team Official or player of such associate member, on application, may have access thereto.

    6.6 An associate member which has been an associate member for 5 complete successive years may apply at the expiry of that period to become a full member. All applications for full membership shall be considered and decided by the Board and the Board’s
    decision on the matter shall be final.

    Q.E.D. or as you might prefer, Merciatic, ὅπερ ἔδει δεῖξαι.

    • Its useful to view a further duality here …

      The SFA office bearers/administrators of the game can hold an opinion on the new/same club issue, but act differently when it comes to applying their rules.

      Rangers at the moment can be referred to as the ‘same’ Rangers in various reports of what is saide here and there, but when it comes to what has been done, its clear that the SFA has them as not the same club as the one that finished second in the SPL in season 2011/12.

  16. jjbhoy

    @joseph mcgrath,
    joe don’t forget the most important thing here,thur deid,but thats only me thats saying it so don’t tell anyone or there will be threats,bullying,intimidation,terrorist threats,rioting etc etc etc. shhh it’s a secret,haunshake haunshake,cover yir work,git the goat oot,paaarty!

  17. mick

    ibrokes broke another record that weekend the world record of the most clowns in 1 place sevco clowns lol fleece me 1s fleece me twice fleece me 3times lol fleeced by spivs hay but its ok its all for the good of the club lol

  18. mick

    remember the kitkat analogy by jabba there brainwashed with it still to this day lol

    • cam

      We’re an Orange club trying to form a Breakaway league.Hob nobbing with some smart cookie’s hasn’t really helped your educational needs.So two Fingers to you and your Taxi is outside.

    • Monti

      We had a party when Rangers died
      We had a party when Thatcher died
      Jelly & Ice Cream in the Champions League
      Doing the Huddle in the Champions League!
      😀 hahaha girfuy! Dead, deed, pan breed, over & it was funny! Craigey,craigey Whyte,craigey Whyte,craigey craigey Whyte…….aaaaashhhhhaaa heeee DEEEED!:D 😀

  19. jjbhoy

    True people,walter smith WALKED away from the Scotland job,fact,and the fat controller at ayebrokes,swally,has been knocked out of any cup or tournament he entered and won the mighty third division(3rd)with the second highest wage bill in Scotland,impressive or what. are you also saying these TRUE people you are banging on about knew nothing of what was going on,true my a##e,yir aw cheats that have gotten away with it for years,true.

  20. Monti

    What’s that sitting beside Francis
    What’s that stored up in the urn
    It’s Margaret Thatcher & the Huns
    All dead & burned apiece
    Sitting proudly on our popes mantlepiece

    • Marching on Together

      You don’t get a mantlepiece in hell. Especially popes.

      • Ed Paisley

        @marching on together
        Are you saying all the Popes go to hell?
        I have no strong religious faith myself, but it sounds like an anti-Catholic statement. Might we infer an anti-Celtic cognitive bias also? No problem with that – it’s just good to make these things plain.

        • Marching on Together

          No, just popes who cover up child abuse.

          And no, although a Leeds Utd fan, I was brought up with Celtic as my diddy team, due to the style of football they played.

          • For one thing your first statement implied All Popes. Another thing Celtic stuck it to the best side you’re crap version of a city has ever produced. Been on the sauce today? Like the Dead Oldco Bluenoses dreaming of a time your team will never see again. Diddy team, has history been rewritten where you are? Does everyone in Yorkshire live in their own wee world where history has a different meaning than anywhere else? You buggers have everybody conned that you’re down to earth pragmatists, when in fact you’re all away with the goalie. Since there is a Greek feel to the topic today, you could say you’re all in cloud cuckoo land.

            • Marching on Together

              “Celtic stuck it to the best side you’re crap version of a city has ever produced” Only because Leeds had to play something like 21 games in a week, whereas the Scottish Football League bent over backwards to ensure Celtic were fresh. With the same preparation, Leeds would have mullered that Celtic team.

          • What a poor excuse from pragmatist central. I’ve got an image of Uncle Mort complaining that if it was’nt for Cynthia Cattermole’s granny’s pet ferret catching Mr Arkwright in his combinations, while he was,……..yawn,yawn,yawn. Charlie Green was good at making up excuses too, but like Leeds United, he was not good enough in the end.

            • Marching on Together

              We’ve been champions of the premier league in the UK, the league that Celtic are desperate to get into but are not even considered good enough to get an entry at the lowest possible level.

            • For one thing you may have been champions of the English premiership , there is no UK league, but you are not now Celtic are champions of the premier league in Scotland. And to put you completely straight Celtic have a very very good track record against the best teams that England produce. You like living in the past, just have a wee look at what Celtic have done to the best you’ve got. Exhibition cup, Coronation cup, how many so called Battles of Britain have we won. Leeds United is not the only ‘Best English team’ we’ve put to the sword. So stop being so condescending. The stats and truth just shrug off your silly excuses and insults.

            • Marching on Together

              Diddy team in a diddy league, that you are desperate to get out of.

              “You like living in the past,” and then you talk about the Coronation Cup and Exhibition Cup to make your point? ROFLMAO. If the Scottish league is so much better, then why were Celtic desperate to flog Jimmy McGrory to an English league team against his will?

            • I only brought up these past achievements, to show that Celtic have a long track record of besting supposedly superior English opposition, which pretty much runs into recent times, a lot more recent than anything Leeds United have done anyway. And your best reply is a bit whataboutery with Jimmy McGrory, your excuses get pettier and pettier. Celtic may be in a small fish bowl, but the English premier league is bolstered by products of this diddy football nation. Let me tell you something about bragging, you should only brag when you have something to brag about. Celtic have a lot more to brag about than Leeds United ever will. English football owes a lot to Celtic and Scottish football players and managers. If no one is listening to your inane idea that oldco and newco are the same club, please do not try to belittle a team who has achieved many noteworthy successes against opposition who have always look down their snottery beaks at Celtic the diddy team only to have the self same snottery beaks put out of joint, by a good doing from the hoops. If you can’t come up with better than a Jimmy McGrory (a relation to my father’s side of the family by the way) story please don’t think it rude of me if I do not reply. I can sense there is a certain anguish in your tone that comes from supporting a team that could never hope of even emulating Celtic’s footballing success. Oldco died and Newco have no history, so if you want to brag about your team try bothering that lot, your sage advice may help them immensely.

            • Marching on Together

              “Celtic stuck it to the best side you’re crap version of a city has ever produced” You were the first to play this petty game, not me, so don’t start whining about it if I respond in kind.

              “Celtic have a lot more to brag about than Leeds United ever will” Diddy trophies in a diddy league. A league your club is desperate to leave to come to play with the big boys.

              “English football owes a lot to Celtic and Scottish football players and managers” True. All the best ones left and went south – apart from Mr McGrory, who wouldn’t let himself be sold by a penny-pinching board – if you are actually related to him, you should be ashamed of the club he served for the way he was treated.

              “If no one is listening to your inane idea that oldco and newco are the same club” If we are talking about my club, then no one in football agrees with you. If you are talking about Rangers, only the Rangers-haters agree with you, and certainly not the football authorities.

        • Monti

          🙂 deeeeeeeeeeeed

  21. This is way beyond the ken of Cam the Bam.

    He thinks Philosophy is a place in Essex.

  22. This use of Plato’s Forms is very unsettling, it means out there, there is a perfect form of which oldco and newco are poor copies, it is in the imagining of this form that I have problems. It could be the stuff of nightmares, whose idea of perfection would it be? Does this mean that the perfect form differs from the ideal form? You have set up a catharsis, with which I may have such difficulty that I may never be bothered to think of it again.
    Although I am of the opinion that the average bear may think Plato’s Forms has to do with a new initiative at the buroo.

  23. merciatic

    Plato has had philosophers arguing about this for over 2000 years.
    Roll over Plato I think there’s a new question in town!

  24. Niall Walker

    There was another Greek Philosopher Aristotle who gave us the Law of Identity, A is A, It states that: “each thing is the same with itself and different from another” and consequently, ” things that have the same essence are the same thing, while things that have different essences are different things”. A car cannot be both blue and yellow, it only has one identity.

    May I suggest that the Rangers that existed before the formation of the SFA did not possess the same essence as Rangers under the SFA. The Rangers that existed before had an informal history and informal membership, every club today has a formal history and formal membership administered by the SFA. This informal essence was terminated as soon as it became formalized, and it adopted a different essence.

    Logically your argument is flawed I can trace Rangers FORMAL history back to its FORMAL membership, and that is the identity we are denying.

    A is not B.

    To say Rangers loses its formal identity because of its informal identity is illogical, since it lost its informal identity in 1873.

    • Aristotle also had a pathological obsession with the size of the male anatomy and would be laughed out of town nowadays with his disdainful attitude to using experimental scientific methodology to find about the world. Although I do not understand your argument, Aristotle’s idea of essence comes from Plato’s theory of forms. The point about Newco is they were only given an ‘associate’ membership of the SFL, because they were a new club with no accounts, they were also disallowed from playing in European competition for three years, because that is the rules when a new club joins any football association. You can throw Kant, Kierkegaard, Descartes and Jimmy Logan at this. There is your actual physical evidence.

    • merciatic

      My argument is the rules have no bearing here As you say A is A regardless. To suggest that your club changed its very essence with a membership is not a road I think you want to go down. Surely its essence changed again on liquidation. Does it change with every revision of the rules? How many newco’s have there been? I equate your essence with Plato’s ideal forms which do not exist in the real world and no argument against a formally liquidated entity.

  25. joseph agnew

    THE member ship you refer to as i think you’r admitting is already decided as self explanatery:pregression of membership-(1,2,3)tells me sfa already knows thier decitions before any meetings are put into place.You have exemployees on the board from a certain club defently a blue tinted bias.JUST a cover up all so called regulations & p/work.ONE other point brought up regaurding the natinal the WALK away wsmith allegedly put all player from castlegray skull into natinal team to boulster his& thier EBT’S so the hole sfa & scottish football rotten to the core. HH KTF

  26. If a creditor were to make a case against the current Rangers as the legal entity responsible for the debt of last season’s Rangers, I doubt very much that Aristotle’s Law of Identity or Plato’s Theory of Forms would be relied upon in any way.

    In reality the current Rangers are not the same club as the one that finished 2nd in the SPL last season. The Rangers spirit, common themes, cultural background, ethos and (dare I say it) history is inherited and is carried on by the fans of Rangers today. But it remains undeniable that last season’s Rangers went bust.

    It is to the common benefit of the owners and other employees of the current Rangers to hold that they are the same Rangers – and this is also true of the fans, the SPL (including Celtic), the SFL, the SFA, the media and various other peripheral cottage industries. Personally, I see it as clear that company law and football rules must be ignored, circumvented or at least bent out of shape, to accommodate this view.

    Contrary to this, I believe the whole of Scottish Football would be better off if they could accept the truth of the matter – in reality Rangers went bust in 2012 and the current club is not the same one.

  27. A lot is made of the club duality issue – that within a club there is a Clubco and a clubFC – allowing for the continuation of Rangers. But the thing about that is it does not ‘prove’ the case for a continuing Rangers. All it does is make a case for the possibility of continuation.

    Part of the logic, and its set out in the LNS opinion, is that the Rangers FC (clubFC) is an entity without legal personality that does not need to be defined in terms of which assets and to which extent each asset influences its make-up [I paraphrase]. But if so, and if we are discussing, then, the spirit and ethos of the club that is embodied in this clubFC…
    … how does the current clubFC compare to that of last season?

    Would last season’s Rangers considered any worth or achievement in winning SFL3? Did they view Alloa as their peers the previous season? Is the current seige mentality (evidenced by a few Rangers press releases) the same ethos and mentality as was? Would any previous manager have stated ‘we are the people’ (or felt the need to) in post-match interview?
    The list goes on …

    Is the essence, ethos and spirit that of the same club?

    I dont recognise it.

  28. Niall Walker

    A lot is made of the club “duality” issue …………………………….

    First Plato, then Aristotle and now Descartes.

    I am impressed.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s