Jump to content

Dave king statement


KWBear

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, coopsleftboot said:

Did Ogilvie or Smith have business links with Rangers or a majority shareholder at the time of their employment with the SFA or is this simply a bit of muddying water in a "yous hud your guys in top jobs before an aw" kind of way?  Different situations and I recall the hounding from all and sundry until Smith was driven from his post.

Not read spiers about turn but Jackson's seems to me to be a damage limitation exercise. Its an isolated incident and anyone saying otherwise are just conspiracy theorists with big bad Rangers having had top jobs before.

He admits his little rant had nothing to do with the point but felt the need to add it in there anyway, what a twat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 597
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, Howsitgoing said:

It's through gritted teeth that he has to admit to it. Part of today's article confirming Dave King has a point. 

"Demand he cease or throw the book at him on a charge of disrepute or whatever else is in your power. Because in terms of perception their lack of action points to a guilty conscience.That’s not to say MacLennan has been nobbled by celtic’s biggest shareholder and his long-term business ally.Nor is it confirmation for the conspiracy theorists convinced celtic have grabbed the game in this country by the short and curlies.It also opens the gates to a toxic swamp of whataboutery – especially given the roles Campbell Ogilvie and Gordon Smith once held within the SFA. The truth of the matter is MacLennan’s CV and background in media would most probably have had him on the shortlist for a role at a company like INM whether he was head of the table at the SPFL or not. But that’s not the point either."

"The truth of the matter is MacLennan’s CV and background in media would most probably have had him on the shortlist for a role at a company like INM whether he was head of the table at the SPFL or not."

Again, an article touching on what matters without realising it or digging any deeper. MacLennan's experience at The Telegraph Group makes perfect sense in regards to his suitability for the role at INM.

What nobody seems to be asking is how on earth did it make him suitable for the role of Chairman of the SPFL?

It reeks of placeman. This is supported by his subsequent appointment at INM, which actually joins the dots.

Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, TheMotor said:

"The truth of the matter is MacLennan’s CV and background in media would most probably have had him on the shortlist for a role at a company like INM whether he was head of the table at the SPFL or not."

Again, an article touching on what matters without realising it or digging any deeper. MacLennan's experience at The Telegraph Group makes perfect sense in regards to his suitability for the role at INM.

What nobody seems to be asking is how on earth did it make him suitable for the role of Chairman of the SPFL?

It reeks of placeman. This is supported by his subsequent appointment at INM, which actually joins the dots.

There's an article written in here 6 years ago about the connection of Gordon Reid's son and the owner of Nolan partners (The Mysterious Past And Recruitment Of Stewart Regan). They have been recruiting people into top positions in Scottish football for a long time now. The only suitability he has is that he is a lap dog for who runs Scottish football, lieswell. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Moody Blue Legend said:

No comment from any other club?  Might be pissin against the wind here.

It does seem they are all happy with the taigs running the game here, probably because they hate us so much.

Hope we do not give up on this like many other things on the past. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see king letting this go and he shouldn't. As others have pointed out on here and even Rangers hater Jackson said it today. 

If the SPFL didn't have anything to hide why isn't king being hit with charges. They haven't been shy in the past doing this. 

It's looking clear that Robertson and others on the SPFL board weren't giving the full details. Despite the claims from the SPFL. King need to take this further now and look to take action. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, dummiesoot said:

Ogilvie and Smith, both hounded out of their SFA roles, just like the poor chap from the SFL that backed us, David Livingstone? 

David Longmuir.

David Livingstone was an explorer. :tu:

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, TheMotor said:

"The truth of the matter is MacLennan’s CV and background in media would most probably have had him on the shortlist for a role at a company like INM whether he was head of the table at the SPFL or not."

Again, an article touching on what matters without realising it or digging any deeper. MacLennan's experience at The Telegraph Group makes perfect sense in regards to his suitability for the role at INM.

What nobody seems to be asking is how on earth did it make him suitable for the role of Chairman of the SPFL?

It reeks of placeman. This is supported by his subsequent appointment at INM, which actually joins the dots.

Quite right. Ogilvie and Smith had a wealth of experience within football before taking on their roles. Ogilvie had worked at Hearts as well as us and Smith's only connection to us, at the time he took the SFA role, was that he once played for us.

What experience of football administration does Shifty McGifty have?

Neither Ogilvie nor Smith were employed in any other of the business interests of major shareholders of Rangers when they worked for the SFA.

To accept that there exists no conflict of interest you have to accept that it is entirely coincidental that together they own roughly 45% of Celtc and 45% of INM (effectively controlling both companies). Furthermore, the people who have gone on oath talking about their business relationship are lying. Finally you have to believe that the Moriarty tribunal is a work of fiction. They didn't work together lying and cheating, not to mention bribing the Irish PM.

But none of that matters of course, because, well Gordon Smith played for Rangers between 1977 and 1980. Then again in 1982. Then he worked for the SFA between 2007 and 2010. So clearly there can't possibly be a conflict of influence with O'Brien, Desmond and MacLennan

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, BlueFrewExile said:

Quite right. Ogilvie and Smith had a wealth of experience within football before taking on their roles. Ogilvie had worked at Hearts as well as us and Smith's only connection to us, at the time he took the SFA role, was that he once played for us.

What experience of football administration does Shifty McGifty have?

Neither Ogilvie nor Smith were employed in any other of the business interests of major shareholders of Rangers when they worked for the SFA.

To accept that there exists no conflict of interest you have to accept that it is entirely coincidental that together they own roughly 45% of Celtc and 45% of INM (effectively controlling both companies). Furthermore, the people who have gone on oath talking about their business relationship are lying. Finally you have to believe that the Moriarty tribunal is a work of fiction. They didn't work together lying and cheating, not to mention bribing the Irish PM.

But none of that matters of course, because, well Gordon Smith played for Rangers between 1977 and 1980. Then again in 1982. Then he worked for the SFA between 2007 and 2010. So clearly there can't possibly be a conflict of influence with O'Brien, Desmond and MacLennan

Smith and the SFA were hounded by Lawell, Lennon and Paul McBride. We all remember how vociferous their campaign was in these years, compiling briefs against referees all in the name of "seeking clarification". Every decision that went against them, they pursued it to the highest order in the media and at SFA meetings threatening legal action. Leading eventually to the referees strike.

It was an orchestrated campaign of lies, negative publicity and perceived victimhood - that has led us to here.

 

What's good for the goose, is good for the gander now - high time our board should be looking at every fine detail and calling them all out. They would do well not to forget that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Terry Hurlock Loyal said:

Smith and the SFA were hounded by Lawell, Lennon and Paul McBride. We all remember how vociferous their campaign was in these years, compiling briefs against referees all in the name of "seeking clarification". Every decision that went against them, they pursued it to the highest order in the media and at SFA meetings. Leading eventually to the referees strike. What's good for the goose, is good for the gander now - high time our board should be looking at every fine detail and calling them all out.

difference being the media backed themto the hilt

th3 mhedia will just call our board petty 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, magic8ball said:

difference being the media backed themto the hilt

th3 mhedia will just call our board petty 

I forget to add that bit, remember the amount of air time on Newsnight Scotland that McBride reptile seemed to take up during that period. It was really the precursor to 2012.

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Terry Hurlock Loyal said:

I forget to add that bit, remember the amount of air time on Newsnight Scotland that McBride reptile seemed to take up during that period. It was really the precursor to 2012.

move over pink boy in moves Sarwar

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Terry Hurlock Loyal said:

I forget to add that bit, remember the amount of air time on Newsnight Scotland that McBride reptile seemed to take up during that period. It was really the precursor to 2012.

very suspicious that he should die so suddenly and with no investigation of any note .maybe he knew too much 

Link to post
Share on other sites

With the scums impending storm coming due to their peadophile ring could this chairman have been appointed with this in mind. He has previously protected government officials said to be peados by withholding emails. His knowledge in this area is fundamental to Doncaster/lieswell in trying to continue the coverup which will be more important to them than any footballing issues.

“Withholding Child Abuse Emails Further Damages Tarnished Telegraph

By Tom Watson”

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6736094

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Upcoming Events

    • 30 March 2024 15:00 Until 17:00
      0  
      Rangers v Hibernian
      Ibrox Stadium
      Scottish Premiership

×
×
  • Create New...