Jump to content

EssexBear69

Reserve Team
  • Content count

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8 Neutral

About EssexBear69

  • Rank
    New Signing

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Essex

Previous Fields

  • Level of Support
    No Information
  1. Cummings

    Press reports at the time he came to us said we've got the option to buy, but put the figure at around £1m - so presumably we're not willing to pay that and trying to negotiate a lower figure.
  2. Davy's Left Peg

    Yep, King and Murray were named in the claim in their capacity as directors of RRL. The club was also named. "SDI Retail Services, a company in the Sports Direct group, has been given permission to continue its derivative claim against Rangers Football Club. The claim relates to Rangers' purported termination of its contract with Rangers Retail Limited, a company owned by Rangers and SDI that produces and sells Rangers replica kit and other products featuring Rangers' brands. SDI's claim, brought on behalf of RRL, seeks to uphold the validity of that contract. SDI is also claiming against David King and Paul Murray, directors of RRL whom (SDI says) were involved in TRFC's decision to purportedly terminate the contract and in so doing acted against the best interests of RRL."
  3. Davy's Left Peg

    The Sports Direct action (on behalf of Rangers Retail) was against King, Murray and the club.
  4. Rangers starting to hang their fans out to dry

    I disagree. Simply being arrested, especially away from the ground, isn't "detrimental to [the club's interests" or "likely...to bring...the Club into disrepute" (from the ST T&Cs, behaviour that can lead to a ban and/or removal of ST). In arrests where there are ultimately no charges, the name of the arrested person is not supposed to be released - that only happens when charges are laid. Unless it happened on TV, or the club has been given the nod (unlawfully) by the cops, they should be completely unaware of anyone being arrested over such matters, as the arrest didn't lead to a charge. As far as I know, the letters sent out are to people charged with offences that day, so I'm nitpicking a bit - but for the letters to say an arrest is all that is needed is out of order, in my opinion.
  5. Rangers hanging their fans out to dry (part 2)

    Follow With Pride dealt with a limited number of things like songs, banners, etc. so your quote of it's potential penalties doesn't really apply. The Season Book T&Cs that I think apply are: "Misconduct by the holder and /or failure to adhere to these conditions or the ground regulation or the holder acting in a manner which the Club considers is detrimental to it interests or it likely in the reasonable option of the Club, to bring football or the Club into disrepute shall permit the Club to confiscate or forfeit (in each case without compensation) this card and /or ban the holder from attending future matches or other events at the stadium for such period of time as the Club deems appropriate." So, nothing specific specified (like arrest), and also no commitment to do anything ("shall permit"). So, I'd say they didn't know they wouldn't be able to use them. I'm not sure how much small claims would be able to do unless it could be shown that the club had already decided to remove the ST prior to taking their money, or other unusual situations like this years ST being their first one, or being arrested but no charged, but might be worth a try, depending on the situation of individual cases. Out of everything here, the timing in relation to ST renewal is the most disgusting. (Hi. First post, be gentle. More of a reader than a poster, but this has me raging)
×