Jump to content


Club Legend
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by backup

  1. Why would we need a statement prepared for that ?
  2. silly me, thought that was what forums were about ...opinions ..
  3. No probs, if it was up to me I would be a lot more proactive, as you say we can only wait, however budge saying she knows fuck all worries me.
  4. "one ally down" I saw also the Rangers statement of yesterday and the SPFL’s response. Once again, I have no further insight into the claims being made by Rangers. However, this is a major embarrassment for Scottish football, one which I believe could so easily have been avoided. Without openness, transparency and pragmatism we will simply keep making the same mistakes.
  5. Because once the enemy have overwhelmed the media, which they are in the process of doing, the treatment today of the ICT chair as one example...........they will come after us....get your retalition in first never applied more than it does now.
  6. It is very simple, when I see the facts I will decide my stance.
  7. To be honest KK, if todays statement is our sum total we need to rethink, why we emphasise again an independent inquiry is beyond me, we either have something more damning than the hope of an "inquiry" or we don't. Afraid to day at this moment it doesn't look great.
  8. I would hazard hearts have been headed off at the pass, in no short measure due to our own lack of urgency in getting our "evidence" out there, we can't hide behind a whistleblower for ever.
  9. I have no dispute with that at all, my bewilderment is that the spfl/leagues own rules clearly state that if you don't vote you are not deemed to have agreed with the resolution, no mention of abstainment or non cast votes being void and not countable. So why wasn't dundee's non vote not counted with PT and ICT as a no vote, I suspect they may fudge to the twenty eight day nonsense, even though they pre-empted and announced the vote, an action unknown in corporate history of present and not so present times.
  10. seriously, it doesn't say "You will not be deemed to agree, if you fail to reply" what relevance does the last sentence have to anything, other tha poa. happy to be corrected, given guidance
  11. No. It is totally irrelevant, the one I posted is perfectly clear, no vote being posted is deemed as refuting the motion
  12. We are the only ones to put our heads above the parapet, doesn’t engender much faith in our "allies" near 48 hrs after the event.
  13. That is the problem, the statement as said earlier, is not as strong as it could have been, it basically accuses of widespread incompetence, no alluding to criminality.....the spfl came straight back, I do not like our silence since then, or the non appearance of our alleged allies.
  14. Because the claimant cannot extract further benefit if enacting FM ....from the same contract, canal tv in France has already exercised FM with the French ligue, finito
  15. The old CID mantra of ABC is always worth remembering in such situations;.. Assume nothing Believe no one Check everything we can utilise A and B, we are however in no position to utilise C
  16. Like I said, if the do not have the relevant force majeure/pandemic clause in their contracts they don’t have a leg to stand on. Of course you are entitled to your opinion.
  17. Unless the tv companies have a force majeure/pandemic clause in their contracts, they haven’t a leg to stand on.
  18. Therein lies the rub, the statement from the club makes no accusation of criminality, more of widespread incompetence. The statement is not as strong as suggested, releasing damning evidence can rectify that.
  19. The evidence needs to be presented to the police, who would investigate and report to the Crown Office, anything else is conjecture.
  • Create New...