Dave king statement

[Bristoe1872 2,551]

4 minutes ago, markem said:

To be fair they have clearly fully investigated this in that time.  

Peter is this true?

You know it’s true  

What will we say?

Say it’s not true  

Okay then. 

 

Surely they haven’t already said that?

On the radio Jacobite Twitter feed. An SPFl spokesman. 

[markem 7,285]

 

Rangers chairman Dave King calls for Murdoch MacLennan suspension over Dermot Desmond links

But the SPFL say the entire SPFL board knew about it and there's no conflict of interest. 

A spokesman for the SPFL said: “It’s not surprising that Murdoch, having stepped down as deputy chairman of Telegraph Media Group, should be approached by other businesses in that sector. 

“The members of the SPFL board were each informed of Murdoch’s appointment on January 19 2018, the same day it was publicly announced in a press release from Independent News & Media PLC. That release was also circulated to the entire SPFL board that day.

 

“The appointment was widely reported in the national media at the time, including in the Sunday Times, Belfast Telegraph and Sunday Independent. No director raised this issue subsequently and it was not the subject of any board discussions.

“To be definitive, a non-executive position on a PLC does not constitute a business relationship between that individual and a minority shareholder in the company and therefore no investigation is warranted.”

Earlier today King said: "The club notes with concern the latest disclosure through the media regarding a business relationship which the chairman of the SPFL has with leading shareholders of a fellow SPFL club.

"This has given rise to allegations of non-disclosure and it is now imperative we discover exactly the nature of the information supplied to the SPFL regarding this relationship.

"It is equally important that any conflicts of interest, or even the perception of such, whereby positions within the Scottish football authorities could be undermined, or abused, must be aggressively rooted out of our game.

[Blue Avenger 22,567]

Pretty serious statement.

Well done David King

[Copland bear 7,966]

It's about bloody time we fought fire with fire.   Weed the anti Rangers out of the Spfl and the SFA , this is just the tip of the iceberg, be a few squeaky bums now as they know we are coming for them 

[Blue Rino 1,215]

1 hour ago, WCPRANGERS1 said:

Nice to see the club starting to do what we've all been screaming out for!

This is my take on it too mate, we have been pilloried as a club and fan base and it’s time to meet these cunts head on.

[Hilly86 701]

I hope this doesn't ruin all the good work that was being done to better relations between us and the rest of the Scottish football. It seems unnecessarily risky to invite the wrath of giants like Hibs, Jackson and Radio Clyde.

We need these people and the generous encouragement they've shown so selflessly while we get back to winning ways.

And what if it only serves to turn SPFL fans' hearts against us, or worse, stops them bringing much needed revenue to Ibrox?

[K.A.I 36,183]

12 minutes ago, Bristoe1872 said:

Just heard the SPFl have said there is no conflict of interest and there will be no investigation. Over to you Mr King.

That's also fine by me provided that's us finally getting the ball rolling (and one step closer) to withdrawing as much co-operation as contractually possible with Scottish football.

If any fenian or indeed anyone in Scottish football is annoyed as us being concerned about conflicts of interest on this scale, then it shows them up even further for the Rangers-hating wee cabal they are. Rangers stand alone in Scotland and have done since 2012, we have nothing to lose anymore.

[markem 7,285]

Allowing time to prepare that statement it would seem they investigated that for about 90 minutes. 

Someone is going to end up looking stupid here.  

[Bakbear 3,586]

4 minutes ago, markem said:

 

Rangers chairman Dave King calls for Murdoch MacLennan suspension over Dermot Desmond links

But the SPFL say the entire SPFL board knew about it and there's no conflict of interest. 

A spokesman for the SPFL said: “It’s not surprising that Murdoch, having stepped down as deputy chairman of Telegraph Media Group, should be approached by other businesses in that sector. 

“The members of the SPFL board were each informed of Murdoch’s appointment on January 19 2018, the same day it was publicly announced in a press release from Independent News & Media PLC. That release was also circulated to the entire SPFL board that day.

 

“The appointment was widely reported in the national media at the time, including in the Sunday Times, Belfast Telegraph and Sunday Independent. No director raised this issue subsequently and it was not the subject of any board discussions.

“To be definitive, a non-executive position on a PLC does not constitute a business relationship between that individual and a minority shareholder in the company and therefore no investigation is warranted.”

Earlier today King said: "The club notes with concern the latest disclosure through the media regarding a business relationship which the chairman of the SPFL has with leading shareholders of a fellow SPFL club.

"This has given rise to allegations of non-disclosure and it is now imperative we discover exactly the nature of the information supplied to the SPFL regarding this relationship.

"It is equally important that any conflicts of interest, or even the perception of such, whereby positions within the Scottish football authorities could be undermined, or abused, must be aggressively rooted out of our game.

As expected they have given it short shrift. And what is King going to do about it?

Back to my original point if you just make a statement with no consequence then it will be swatted away like a fly. 

Thats exactly what happened with our outrage about the cup final which was ignored, it’s exactly what happened two days ago and it’s what has happened in the above statement. 

Gnashing of teeth and wailing is pointless if you can’t back it up in some way. 

If King is going to really make any headway into this then he is going to have to do a lot more than strongly worded letters. 

 

[markem 7,285]

1 minute ago, Bakbear said:

As expected they have given it short shrift. And what is King going to do about it?

Back to my original point if you just make a statement with no consequence then it will be swatted away like a fly. 

Thats exactly what happened with our outrage about the cup final which was ignored, it’s exactly what happened two days ago and it’s what has happened in the above statement. 

Gnashing of teeth and wailing is pointless if you can’t back it up in some way. 

If King is going to really make any headway into this then he is going to have to do a lot more than strongly worded letters. 

 

Agree mate, I’d rather make no statement than one that is followed by 

[Howsitgoing 4,281]

"To be definitive, a non-executive position on a PLC does not constitute a business relationship between that individual and a minority shareholder in the company and therefore no investigation is warranted."

 

Balls back in Dave King’s court, surely the lawyers would of had that covered if it is indeed the case and not allowed the chairman to make that statement. 

[kingtom80 166]

 

                          not before time,its long overdue.

[Hilly86 701]

4 minutes ago, Bakbear said:

As expected they have given it short shrift. And what is King going to do about it?

Forget that he was livid for all of a minute, return to not paying attention, fund the same clubs with away tickets and player purchases?

[Laudrup1984 25,100]

 

[markem 7,285]

6 minutes ago, Howsitgoing said:

"To be definitive, a non-executive position on a PLC does not constitute a business relationship between that individual and a minority shareholder in the company and therefore no investigation is warranted."

 

Balls back in Dave King’s court, surely the lawyers would of had that covered if it is indeed the case and not allowed the chairman to make that statement. 

If we’ve put that out there and it’s denied and shut down with that ease?  The mind boggles. 

 

[Bakbear 3,586]

2 minutes ago, Howsitgoing said:

"To be definitive, a non-executive position on a PLC does not constitute a business relationship between that individual and a minority shareholder in the company and therefore no investigation is warranted."

 

Balls back in Dave King’s court, surely the lawyers would of had that covered if it is indeed the case and not allowed the chairman to make that statement. 

It’s theoretically correct. An Non Executive Position on the board of a PLC does not constitute a business relationship with a minority shareholder. But NE positions are in my experience almost always relationship based.

So who decided to offer the Chairman of the SPFL a NE position? In whose interests might that be? As King said even the perception of conflict of interest must be investigated. The absolute fact is that serving as a non exec is a cushy wee gig reserved for jobs for the boys. And if someone gets such a gig from someone who is in a position to benefit from his goodwill then it is a conflict of interest.

He should step down from one of the roles immediately. 

[Robmc1 4,741]

1 minute ago, markem said:

Agree mate, I’d rather make no statement than one that is followed by 

The way forward will be to bring other clubs on board with the call for an independent enquiry, which I honestly don’t know is going to happen. That aside, I believe King knew exactly what he was doing with the release of this statement and anticipated the further refrutement from SPFL. Hoping he has a strategy in place as in my mind there is no doubt of a conflict of interest which needs independent review...

[Bakbear 3,586]

Just now, Robmc1 said:

The way forward will be to bring other clubs on board with the call for an independent enquiry, which I honestly don’t know is going to happen. That aside, I believe King knew exactly what he was doing with the release of this statement and anticipated the further refrutement from SPFL. Hoping he has a strategy in place as in my mind there is no doubt of a conflict of interest which needs independent review...

Things is other clubs are dancing to this tune. Have been for 7 years now. 

They all voted Rangers out with the exception of Kilmarnock. Don’t expect any other clubs to question this conflict of interest. 

We stand alone. The only support we will get would be from outside our game 

[Howsitgoing 4,281]

4 minutes ago, Bakbear said:

It’s theoretically correct. An Non Executive Position on the board of a PLC does not constitute a business relationship with a minority shareholder. But NE positions are in my experience almost always relationship based.

So who decided to offer the Chairman of the SPFL a NE position? In whose interests might that be? As King said even the perception of conflict of interest must be investigated. The absolute fact is that serving as a non exec is a cushy wee gig reserved for jobs for the boys. And if someone gets such a gig from someone who is in a position to benefit from his goodwill then it is a conflict of interest.

He should step down from one of the roles immediately. 

There must be no way that King wouldn’t have known that this was theoretically correct if it is so. He must have expected that answer.

[Escobar 13,676]

Actually canny wait for going to war with these cunts next year. Full songbook out aw year.

[Bakbear 3,586]

1 minute ago, Howsitgoing said:

There must be no way that King wouldn’t have known that this was theoretically correct if it is so. He must have expected that answer.

King knows fine well how NE positions work. Fuck knows what he thought his statement would yield or what his next move is. 

 

[Colin Traive 22,776]

They run the SPFL board, the Compliance Department and have another proven bigot on the SFA board exposed last week. About fucking time someone said “haud the bus!”

Need to have follow up action planned or we’re just huffing and puffing like a diddy team. Legal challenge has to be next step.

Times like this that King’s “colourful“ career is a real pest because those happy with this corrupt cabal point to King and say say: “who’s he to talk about transparency and corruption?”

[K.A.I 36,183]

6 minutes ago, Bakbear said:

Things is other clubs are dancing to this tune. Have been for 7 years now. 

They all voted Rangers out with the exception of Kilmarnock. Don’t expect any other clubs to question this conflict of interest. 

We stand alone. The only support we will get would be from outside our game 

Exactly. 

Even our own inside the game since 2012...

George Adams - whistleblower on EBT's/side letter's and stuff to that effect
Campbell Ogilvie - Lawwell can slag off a fellow member club (us) at celtic's AGM, lie about us and smear us - we need to grow up when we complain about it
Leanne Dempster - cut our allocation several times, may or may not have been part of the set-up when voting us down the leagues
Stewart Robertson - at Motherwell, happily voted us down the leagues without a second thought, pause or fight.

Even Rangers people still aren't enough, we need special types of Rangers people. Proper Rangers people, not ones who are whores to paymasters and put us second. These people are rare these days.

[KingKirk 25,647]

I believe all the dignified silence went against everything king believes in anyway

He gave it a bash then thought fuck this it seems about time to

[WCPRANGERS1 2,997]

Almost like the SPFL had a response at the ready....