Fight the sfa

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, backup said:

Pretty sure 98.48% of poll voters know who the hand wringer with the feather duster is, wouldn't you say so keep digging 

Given the options of the poll it's hardly a surprising result.

What would this 'fighting them in open court look like'? I mean, it's a great wee soundbite and all but what exactly would the complaint be and what would we be looking for as an outcome?

It's not a difficult question - nor a loaded one.

[gersandy 594]

7 minutes ago, Sweetheart said:

Is that the company that AJ is vice-chairman of (International Management Group)?

Must be. Unbelievable.

[Gaffbear 4,096]

Stop our players playing for Scotland.   Boycott Scottish cup games 

[Sweetheart 8,458]

19 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Yes. Green raised an issue when he was trying to cover his own back after signing away several million pounds of Rangers Football Club's money. Steven Davis transfer fee, prize money for 2011/12, TV money for 2011/12, the bulk of our TV income for 2012/13 and much more. All he ever done was make a few statements via the papers and to fans saying money was 'stolen' by the SFA and he signed it under 'duress'. Now, I'm no big-handed Yorkshireman BUT if I've just bought a football club and had to sign away several million pounds of money that was due to the club immediately then I'd be kicking up merry hell and doing much more than just making a few comments in the press. If there was a method of appealing the 5WA (and there was) I would have been straight down that path. Now tell me, did Green do that? and if not, why not? It's odd that he would make claims of theft and being foced to sign but wouldn't seek to appeal it.

So it's back to dignified silence and bridge building.

The SFA withheld our competition money, and the players had a clause in their contracts that if we didn't go down the CVA route they could leave. The 5WA was signed under duress. If Charles Green hadn't signed it the licence to play would have been withheld. In other words sign this or we’ll kill your business that is not negotiation it is extortion.

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, Sweetheart said:

So it's back to dignified silence and bridge building.

The SFA withheld are competition money, and the players had a clause in their contracts that if we didn't go down the CVA route they could leave. The 5WA was signed under duress. If Charles Green hadn't signed it the licence to play would have been withheld. In other words sign this or we’ll kill your business that is not negotiation it is extortion.

No. Not close to what I’ve said. If you add it to a pretty lengthy couple of posts I made in the earlier you would see what my suggested course would be. 

The players leavin had nothing to do with any transfer clause. 

If you’d paid any attention you’d see we’d have been able to take it to UEFA’s DRC/FIFA’s/CAS. If Green hadn’t signed it and raised a formal dispute via UEFA etc there would’ve been clubs across Scotland dying long before we would.

[Wil198 17]

4 hours ago, The Dude said:

We don't have the option to withdraw from the Scottish Cup. We refuse to play they revoke our licence to play. At all. No friendlies, no league, no Europe.

Rangers aren't legally responsible for any away fans attending games anyway so it's an utterly toothless threat.

We don't get to refuse to sign the TV deal. Clubs don't sign it. The SPFL does on our behalf. We might - if we're lucky get a vote on it but us refusing alone would do absolutely nothing. If we refuse the media partners access we just open ourself up to sanctions from the SPFL.

 

Easy solution just play our kids teams.

[The Dude 20,026]

5 minutes ago, Wil198 said:

Easy solution just play our kids teams.

They’ve got you on that one too (technically) although it’s pretty easy to avoid if you’re cute about it.

[K.A.I 36,183]

1 minute ago, The Dude said:

They’ve got you on that one too (technically) although it’s pretty easy to avoid if you’re cute about it.

I'm sure Smith done it one time up at Tannadice in a Scottish Cup fixture ... think it was in relation to a Kevin Thomson sending off, we appealed and the SFA rushed an appeal panel, got it done at 5pm the night of the game meaning he couldn't play for us that night. Seemed quite an unprecended move by the SFA scumbags and Smith made a few surprise team selections if I remember right ... like it was intentional. 

Or I might have read too much into it but I mind getting that feeling at the time. It wasn't kids he put out though, but a weakened side.

PS - this is also where someone digs up the team selection from that night and it was a pretty strong team   that seems to happen a lot to me at the moment - my memory is frazzled. 

[Wil198 17]

3 minutes ago, The Dude said:

They’ve got you on that one too (technically) although it’s pretty easy to avoid if you’re cute about it.

Your spot on, however we play kids mixed with fringe players (like the top teams in the English premier do) and it's win win for us. We lose and our kids get experience in playing in a conpetative match and the revenue for other clubs drops and if we win it's a confidence boost and an embarrassment for other teams ?

 

6 minutes ago, The Dude said:

They’ve got you on that one too (technically) although it’s pretty easy to avoid if you’re cute about it.

 

[The Dude 20,026]

2 minutes ago, K.A.I said:

I'm sure Smith done it one time up at Tannadice in a Scottish Cup fixture ... think it was in relation to a Kevin Thomson sending off, we appealed and the SFA rushed an appeal panel, got it done at 5pm the night of the game meaning he couldn't play for us that night. Seemed quite an unprecended move by the SFA scumbags and Smith made a few surprise team selections if I remember right ... like it was intentional. 

Or I might have read too much into it but I mind getting that feeling at the time. It wasn't kids he put out though, but a weakened side.

PS - this is also where someone digs up the team selection from that night and it was a pretty strong team   that seems to happen a lot to me at the moment - my memory is frazzled. 

I remember the Thomson hearing actually. Can’t remember the team that followed but remember the surprise they rushed it. 

Its a really hard one to prove (especially if it was kids like Barjonas etc who’ve had a handful of starts) unless you out the 17s out 

[Howsitgoing 4,281]

38 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Given the options of the poll it's hardly a surprising result.

What would this 'fighting them in open court look like'? I mean, it's a great wee soundbite and all but what exactly would the complaint be and what would we be looking for as an outcome?

It's not a difficult question - nor a loaded one.

Fergus McCann successfully took them to court because of player registration issues only surely you don't believe that after how they are treating our club there isn't any complaints we can take them to court for. Doncaster lies for one, no surprise he has now got himself on the board of sfa.

[Sweetheart 8,458]

22 minutes ago, The Dude said:

No. Not close to what I’ve said. If you add it to a pretty lengthy couple of posts I made in the earlier you would see what my suggested course would be. 

The players leavin had nothing to do with any transfer clause. 

If you’d paid any attention you’d see we’d have been able to take it to UEFA’s DRC/FIFA’s/CAS. If Green hadn’t signed it and raised a formal dispute via UEFA etc there would’ve been clubs across Scotland dying long before we would.

I believe Green signed it because we were hours away from the season starting and we needed the licence. Also Green and Ally faced a disrepute charge for speaking out about being unlawfully booted out of the league.

A formal dispute could still be raised and we would also have the proof of the witch hunt  as I said earlier Charles Green did raise issue He said it was a witch hunt and the SFA said "Prove it". The club has only just finished going through all the complaints that they made since 2012  e,g Euro licence, not the same club. advertising standards etc. All the results have been in the club's favour. so, It's only now that Rangers can prove it was a witch hunt. 

It was a good statement from the club. I read it has they are going to fight this new complaint. My take on the statement was....

• RES12 complaint failed in respect of the submission made by the Club to the SFA at the end of March 2011 with regard to the issue of the Club’s UEFA licence for the following Season
• Rangers will make a complaint to a higher body to investigate whether the time, cost and expense of this investigation was justified and was a good use of the SFA’s resources
• A new complaint is now being pursued claiming Rangers have breached the 5way agreement
• Rangers will fight this complaint all the way and are diverting money to this cause
• The club knows Lawwell's Res12 are behind the complaint and are ready to do battle as they have evidence that shows the 5 way agreement was unlawful.

[K.A.I 36,183]

Just now, The Dude said:

I remember the Thomson hearing actually. Can’t remember the team that followed but remember the surprise they rushed it. 

Its a really hard one to prove (especially if it was kids like Barjonas etc who’ve had a handful of starts) unless you out the 17s out 

Aye I know the likes of Man United have been fined off the FA in years gone by for it - something to do with the integrity of the cup competition. But it was pretty brazen and them getting humped 3-0 off a Yoevil or something ... can imagine the sponsors threatning the FA after shite like that.

As you say there's a way of doing it guys like Barjonas, Hardie, A.Wilson etc maybe throw in a Dalcio and Dodoo ... I know a couple of them are gone, but just for example. 

[eejay the dj 31,964]

Kings silence is deafening in all these matters . Wonder why

[The Dude 20,026]

20 minutes ago, Howsitgoing said:

Fergus McCann successfully took them to court because of player registration issues only surely you don't believe that after how they are treating our club there isn't any complaints we can take them to court for. Doncaster lies for one, no surprise he has now got himself on the board of sfa.

No he didn't. It went through the same arbitration process this would go through and it was held by an 'independent' SFA commission. If there is any arguments anyone legitimately thinks we can take them to court then lets hear them - because if I can tear a hole in it then any lawyer with the ability to spell their own name should.

 

24 minutes ago, Sweetheart said:

I believe Green signed it because we were hours away from the season starting and we needed the licence. Also Green and Ally faced a disrepute charge for speaking out about being unlawfully booted out of the league.

A formal dispute could still be raised and we would also have the proof of the witch hunt  as I said earlier Charles Green did raise issue He said it was a witch hunt and the SFA said "Prove it". The club has only just finished going through all the complaints that they made since 2012  e,g Euro licence, not the same club. advertising standards etc. All the results have been in the club's favour. so, It's only now that Rangers can prove it was a witch hunt. 

It was a good statement from the club. I read it has they are going to fight this new complaint. My take on the statement was....

• RES12 complaint failed in respect of the submission made by the Club to the SFA at the end of March 2011 with regard to the issue of the Club’s UEFA licence for the following Season
• Rangers will make a complaint to a higher body to investigate whether the time, cost and expense of this investigation was justified and was a good use of the SFA’s resources
• A new complaint is now being pursued claiming Rangers have breached the 5way agreement
• Rangers will fight this complaint all the way and are diverting money to this cause
• The club knows Lawwell's Res12 are behind the complaint and are ready to do battle as they have evidence that shows the 5 way agreement was unlawful.

Most of the complaints you mentioned had little involvement from the club - and certainly weren't more pressing issues than the the Scottish FA "stealing" several million pounds and forcing to sign the 5WA "under duress" not to mention some of them took place well after the event (like the ASA complaint). I've no idea why but you keep throwing in completely unrelated things.

The Euro licence thing only returned as of last year when evidence was given during Craig Whyte's fraud trial contradicted earlier info given by us to the sfa. I've absolutely no idea how that had any influence on us not appealing the 5wa in 2012.

Christ knows where you've deduced any of that bullet point nonsense from either.

The complaint that was being investigated (before we were charged) had nothing to do with Res 12. other than they wanted an investigation into something else related to that tax bill.

Rangers have vaguely threatened to take it further. There's no outright statement that it will be taken anywhere else.

The new complaint is unrelated to the 5WA. It is related to the evidence given during Craig Whyte's trial last year which contradicted statements give by the club over whether the "wee tax case" was an overdue payable or a disputed figure. The 5WA doesn't come into it in any way, shape or form.

Rangers aren't diverting money 'to' this cause but are complaining that money is being diverted AWAY from others to deal with this frivolous bullshit. It's not a threat but a complaint.

The ASA complaint was made in June 2013 - a year after the 5wa agreement was signed so again, I've absolutely no idea how that had any influence on us not appealing the 5wa in 2012.

Not the same club was never something the club have had to 'deal' with to any meaningful degree. I've absolutely no idea how that had any influence on us not appealing the 5wa in 2012.

If the club have evidence the 5WA agreement is unlawful then that should have been raised three years ago when they were elected to the board. Not now because they need something

[The Dude 20,026]

14 minutes ago, eejay the dj said:

Kings silence is deafening in all these matters . Wonder why

Wasn't there a statement released yesterday on it?

[eejay the dj 31,964]

5 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Wasn't there a statement released yesterday on it?

From JT. sanctioned by King perhaps . It's never enough . Not surprising you think it would be

Not a jot from the man that is running our club and it's totally unacceptable for me ,after the time he has been here

[Sweetheart 8,458]

3 minutes ago, The Dude said:

No he didn't. It went through the same arbitration process this would go through and it was held by an 'independent' SFA commission. If there is any arguments anyone legitimately thinks we can take them to court then lets hear them - because if I can tear a hole in it then any lawyer with the ability to spell their own name should.

 

Most of the complaints you mentioned had little involvement from the club - and certainly weren't more pressing issues than the the Scottish FA "stealing" several million pounds and forcing to sign the 5WA "under duress" not to mention some of them took place well after the event (like the ASA complaint). I've no idea why but you keep throwing in completely unrelated things.

The Euro licence thing only returned as of last year when evidence was given during Craig Whyte's fraud trial contradicted earlier info given by us to the sfa. I've absolutely no idea how that had any influence on us not appealing the 5wa in 2012.

Christ knows where you've deduced any of that bullet point nonsense from either.

The complaint that was being investigated (before we were charged) had nothing to do with Res 12. other than they wanted an investigation into something else related to that tax bill.

Rangers have vaguely threatened to take it further. There's no outright statement that it will be taken anywhere else.

The new complaint is unrelated to the 5WA. It is related to the evidence given during Craig Whyte's trial last year which contradicted statements give by the club over whether the "wee tax case" was an overdue payable or a disputed figure. The 5WA doesn't come into it in any way, shape or form.

Rangers aren't diverting money 'to' this cause but are complaining that money is being diverted AWAY from others to deal with this frivolous bullshit. It's not a threat but a complaint.

The ASA complaint was made in June 2013 - a year after the 5wa agreement was signed so again, I've absolutely no idea how that had any influence on us not appealing the 5wa in 2012.

Not the same club was never something the club have had to 'deal' with to any meaningful degree. I've absolutely no idea how that had any influence on us not appealing the 5wa in 2012.

If the club have evidence the 5WA agreement is unlawful then that should have been raised three years ago when they were elected to the board. Not now because they need something

You don't seem to acknowledge that there has been and continues to be a witch hunt on Rangers and we are being held hostage to the 5WA. Res12 have made it clear it is them doing the attacking when they published that advert in the paper. As for the club statement, that was my take on it. now it's time to see if they act on it.

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, eejay the dj said:

From JT. sanctioned by King perhaps . It's never enough . Not surprising you think it would be

Not a jot from the man that is running our club and it's totally unacceptable for me ,after the time he has been here

That's why we have him. Like him or not - and I've made my feelings very clear on JT - we're never going to have King personally comment on everything. It's not his way of doing things really and is why we have L5 in the first place. While it's not personally king, it's as good as we're going to get and tbh pretty much anything we do get from King that's released as a written statement goes through JT anyway and gets Kings name attached.

[Howsitgoing 4,281]

9 minutes ago, The Dude said:

No he didn't. It went through the same arbitration process this would go through and it was held by an 'independent' SFA commission. If there is any arguments anyone legitimately thinks we can take them to court then lets hear them - because if I can tear a hole in it then any lawyer with the ability to spell their own name should.

 

Most of the complaints you mentioned had little involvement from the club - and certainly weren't more pressing issues than the the Scottish FA "stealing" several million pounds and forcing to sign the 5WA "under duress" not to mention some of them took place well after the event (like the ASA complaint). I've no idea why but you keep throwing in completely unrelated things.

The Euro licence thing only returned as of last year when evidence was given during Craig Whyte's fraud trial contradicted earlier info given by us to the sfa. I've absolutely no idea how that had any influence on us not appealing the 5wa in 2012.

Christ knows where you've deduced any of that bullet point nonsense from either.

The complaint that was being investigated (before we were charged) had nothing to do with Res 12. other than they wanted an investigation into something else related to that tax bill.

Rangers have vaguely threatened to take it further. There's no outright statement that it will be taken anywhere else.

The new complaint is unrelated to the 5WA. It is related to the evidence given during Craig Whyte's trial last year which contradicted statements give by the club over whether the "wee tax case" was an overdue payable or a disputed figure. The 5WA doesn't come into it in any way, shape or form.

Rangers aren't diverting money 'to' this cause but are complaining that money is being diverted AWAY from others to deal with this frivolous bullshit. It's not a threat but a complaint.

The ASA complaint was made in June 2013 - a year after the 5wa agreement was signed so again, I've absolutely no idea how that had any influence on us not appealing the 5wa in 2012.

Not the same club was never something the club have had to 'deal' with to any meaningful degree. I've absolutely no idea how that had any influence on us not appealing the 5wa in 2012.

If the club have evidence the 5WA agreement is unlawful then that should have been raised three years ago when they were elected to the board. Not now because they need something

"St Johnstone Football Club Limited v Scottish Football Association Limited 1965 SLT 171

St Johnstone brought an action against the SFA seeking declarator that a censure and fine which had been imposed upon the club was ultra vires and of no force and effect. St Johnstone were successful in their judicial review application."

Why is the extra sanctions that Rangers have received not ultra vires as St Johnstone successful proved against the sfa.

[The Dude 20,026]

7 minutes ago, Howsitgoing said:

"St Johnstone Football Club Limited v Scottish Football Association Limited 1965 SLT 171

St Johnstone brought an action against the SFA seeking declarator that a censure and fine which had been imposed upon the club was ultra vires and of no force and effect. St Johnstone were successful in their judicial review application."

Why is the extra sanctions that Rangers have received not ultra vires as St Johnstone successful proved against the sfa.

St. Johnstone were never given an opportunity to present an argument against the charges.

Here's a section of Lord Kilbrandon's judgement explaining it here:

Quote

"mere irregularity in procedure was not enough; it must be so fundamental that it goes beyond a mere matter of procedure and is something so prejudicial to a fair and impartial investigation of the question to be decided as to amount to a denial of natural justice. Examples would include conviction for an offence taking place without an accusation being made, or without allowing the person accused a reasonable opportunity to defend himself against the allegations."

It was nothing to do with it being outwith their jurisdiction or competence to do so

[eejay the dj 31,964]

9 minutes ago, The Dude said:

That's why we have him. Like him or not - and I've made my feelings very clear on JT - we're never going to have King personally comment on everything. It's not his way of doing things really and is why we have L5 in the first place. While it's not personally king, it's as good as we're going to get and tbh pretty much anything we do get from King that's released as a written statement goes through JT anyway and gets Kings name attached.

fair comment

[Copland bear 7,966]

3 hours ago, The Dude said:

The bank wouldn't ever call our debt in and we'd never go into admin. and we definitely wouldn't go into liquidation. and we really, really wouldn't end up playing in Scotland's third division after being kicked out of the top flight. and Scottish clubs really, really really, wouldn't vote not to even let us play in the first division and we really, really, really, really wouldn't be hit with a transfer embargo that a court would describe as "unlawful".

These sort of things would never happen so I guess you're right. They'd never take our licence.

Aye, you're right we should just grow a set and let them hit us with more disciplinary sanctions. That'll fucking show em!

EDIT: I don't how to make this clearer - we have no mechanism to refuse to participate in the TV deal. We agreed to allow cameras in by being a member of the SPFL. Don't want the cameras in then we have to resign our membership of the league.

What a load of shite, all that happened to us because Murray wanted us gone to any cunt and a cunt  bought us when the SFA failed to protect our club against someone who had been previously banned as a director, that's why we were demoted, the SFA had their part to play also by failing to do their jobs once again  

And no they won't take our licence as only a fool would think that, it's like all the bluff from the EU, just walk and give them fuck all and watch them come crawling on their knees begging for our help, we do it right then they will be begging us to save Scottish football. 

I would even pull out it next season and let them negotiate a new revised deal with sky and by  without us, as no Rangers no Stevie G then pennies or no contract is what they will get , then starve them of the blue pound while we full Ibrox every home game   

As I said see them in a court of law and highlight how the last time we were in a court of law and won against an illegal transfer embargo they they still  forced us to accept the illegal transfer embargo while forcing us to pay their lawyers fees when the court ruled they should pay for ours. Now they are not biased against us are they ? There's your proof,then throw the 5 way agreement in for good measures and it's game set and match .  Yep we are not treated unfairly by these corrupt cunts but I think you might find a court stating otherwise on these things alone ,

How about you do a piece on how the BBC missed out the fact Hibs covered up Neeley abusing boys then passed him on to us and we contacted the police? Neely  and us where the main headlines , a guy who has never been found guilty in a court of law , Never  once did they do this regarding Torbett and he was found guiltyfgs and is going up again, why are you not doing a piece on possible sanctions against celtic for covering the abuse up like Hibs but what was worse they let him fucking back in to abuse again , or why not a piece on was there a sex ring working within celtic park?  

Your a journalist so do your job and stop telling us they will do this and that and how we must take it a baw deep and continue to be every cunts cash cow and bitch  As a reporter why are you not asking these questions ? Because the tarriers within your organisation don't miss us and have not since 2012, the fact that Torbett was let back in when Big Stein left says it all, then the Hibs chairman who told his mate the reporter in confidence about Nelley?  What's happening to any of them as if they reported him then the boy would never have met Neeley at Ibrox never mind being abused by him .

As I said I fucking dare them to take our licemce as they will need the fucking army in this country as it will go boom, as I said do a piece on Torbett, the ex directors at celtic who were also directors at the trophy centre , then the Labour Party and their lord provost Kelly who helped cover it up and stood up for Torbett during the case , or what about a piece in the last Protestant lord provost of Glasgow something like 1972 or something crazy.

 

Now I have just given you a few good articles to get on with and make a good few quid at the bargain ?

 

  

[The Dude 20,026]

14 minutes ago, Sweetheart said:

You don't seem to acknowledge that there has been and continues to be a witch hunt on Rangers and we are being held hostage to the 5WA. Res12 have made it clear it is them doing the attacking when they published that advert in the paper. As for the club statement, that was my take on it. now it's time to see if they act on it.

Of course we're being held to the 5WA. That's typically how contractual agreements work. Everybody involved agrees their involvement and fulfills it. Part of ours is that we would accept liability for things that happened at the club prior to the transfer of membership (such as this)

[Howsitgoing 4,281]

8 minutes ago, The Dude said:

St. Johnstone were never given an opportunity to present an argument against the charges.

Here's a section of Lord Kilbrandon's judgement explaining it here:

It was nothing to do with it being outwith their jurisdiction or competence to do so

Lord Kilbrandon opined that mere irregularity in procedure was not enough; it must be so fundamental that it goes beyond a mere matter of procedure and is something so prejudicial to a fair and impartial investigation of the question to be decided as to amount to a denial of natural justice. 

Many Rangers fans would be of the belief that a denial of natural justice is happening here.