Media mischief making of the highest order.
If the courts say different then thats what United will pay.
Personally speaking, I would have said pay the money and take the moral high ground.
Although we have a club who claim to be a new venture when refusing to pay debt from an old regime although want to maintain their previous status when receiving monies.
They also had major earners released from contracts as they claimed the Rangers was a new business.
Theres an element of damned if you do damned if you dont. Dont see the sense in going to court and paying hundreds of thousands to lawyer bstards instead of settling up.
Although if you think theres a dislike between the Rangers and United fans, it seems the boardroom dislike is stuff of tv documentaries !
Im a great believer in karma.
The old regime used to pick off talent from other clubs who raised the players from scratch and used to see precious little from it.
They didnt want to offer the kid a contract and he's gone.
Suck it up.
However, Id still have liked to have seen my club settle.
Maybe by saying you owe us .......... you want ........ we think we owe you .......... Lets deal.
But respect the chairman and in who's guidance things are going well.