the cry was no

Surprise, surprise............... FLARE UP Leigh Griffiths facing five-game ban for booting smoke bomb at St Johnstone fans but is free to face Rangers Hampden compliance officer Andrew Phillips is still studying images and reports on the incident during the Premier Sports Cup quarter-final. Studying images???? GTF it should be taking the CO 10 seconds to decide to hammer this fuckwit, any longer and he's not fit for purpose

Hit 9 instead of 0, fat fingers

10

We play them in 19 days time

Given that there's no official comment from the Compliance Officer and no fast track investigation into this scandalous situation, can we assume that the thumb will be free to play against us on Saturday with any action proceeding next week? I might be in a minority but I honestly believe he should be facing a significant punishment for this and the action should have been immediate. It's one of the most reckless acts I can recall in Scottish football. He should be missing at least 10 games imo, with a further 5 for breathtaking, shameless lies in his non-apology

Fans have been banned for anything between 6 months and 3 years for throwing a flares ONTO a pitch To boot a lit flare full strength INTO a crowd should see a very significant ban To lie in your apology by saying you were only trying to move it off the pitch should add to any ban IMO. He could have flicked it 2 feet and it was off the pitch, under no circumstances should he have launched it back into the stand. Leigh is a liar who acted like a ned cunt because that's precisely what he is.

Deloitte https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjWjrbGnP_yAhUHAcAKHabkBTkQFnoECAMQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.heraldscotland.com%2Fsport%2F18404005.independent-deloitte-investigation-spfl-vote-finds-no-improper-conduct-officials%2F&usg=AOvVaw2Cvhkhq-itnALRjAcNhr9U Bound to be wide ranging, hard hitting and transparent Next you'll be telling me you could hold a FULL enquiry into Child Sex Abuse and exclude sports clubs and religious organisations........ oh wait!! What a fuckin country

Naw KS, that's the global interpretation your thinking of as used the world over but it's really a lazy "catch all" Luckily enough in Scotland some independent, non-biased groups done some deeper evaluations and confirmed that only catholics are affected by this. It was previously thought that Jews, Protestants, Seikhs, Muslims etc were affected but it looks like everyone was wrong. On a positive note Scotland's sectarianism problem (which used to be quite significant) has almost been eradicated overnight and all energies and resources can now by concentrated on solving the one remaining problem which is anti-catholic sectarianism

This is gold dust Time to involve our beloved first minister to seek her view on a historical tweet from the face of ScotGov's current TV campaign to "Stop the spike" and all round "friend of the family" celebrity (I use the word celebrity in a Z-list fashion)

So, long day at a family funeral, but let's look at your "missing steps" scenario.... Dude's assertion..... You missed a step or two in here SPFL notify clubs via written resolution that they have a new sponsor. Rangers tell SPFL there is an issue SPFL ask Rangers for evidence of any issue Rangers fail to provide evidence of issue SPFL say "we don't give a fuck, we're doing it anyway" Rangers (as is their right) don't display the new sponsor's logos Possible alternative with Dude's "missing steps" You missed a step or two in here SPFL notify clubs via written resolution that they have a new sponsor. Rangers tell SPFL there is an issue SPFL say "we don't give a fuck, we're doing it anyway" Rangers (as is their right) don't display the new sponsor's logos SPFL ask Rangers for evidence of any issue Rangers say "too late to start wanting to talk like professional people now Specky, by the way did you tell Cinch and/or the agency that we had an issue before you signed the deal?" From the public information available we KNOW that Rangers informed the SPFL they had an issue pretty much straight away We also know that the SPFL claim to have asked Rangers for evidence of the issue. What we don't know is if this was before or after they signed the deal and this is potentially a very critical point, especially for Doncaster and even more so if he signed the deal knowing there was an issue raised by one of the most important parties to the deal without telling Cinch or the agents (evidenced or not) Any sponsorship/commercial deal for the SPFL derives most of it's value from 2 clubs. To hide/ forget to mention/ ignore a potential issue with one of the big two is, at best, incompetent, and potentially much worse, especially for the bespectacled fellows professional integrity and reputation. Despite Rangers and Parks stating categorically there is an issue due to existing contractural commitments you seem pretty adamant that there is none, or certainly no evidence that you can see I'm not exactly sure how these things work but I would be surprised if a judge would grant an interim interdict halting an arbitration process until a party was involved if that party couldn't show they were entitled to be involved Anyway the timing and context of your "missing steps" may or may not be important but IMO the disclosure (or non-disclosure) of a flagged issue by a crucial party to the deal will be extremely significant

They were falsified as part of "Operation stop the ten" which was a global effort involving all FAs, every internet provider, all media, the CIA, FBI, MI6 and the UN all of whom were controlled by the "all seeing eye" of Steven Gerrard

Absolutely SPFL notify clubs via written resolution that they have a new sponsor. Rangers tell SPFL there is an issue SPFL say "we don't give a fuck, we're doing it anyway" Rangers (as is their right) don't display the new sponsor's logos Auld Murdo tells everyone Rangers are bad and SPFL are good guys Rangers tell everyone, "no we're not, these useless, bullying cunts have made a complete arse of this....... by the way did they tell Cinch there was an issue?? Naw???? Oh well Specky needs to go (slowly, slowly catchy monkey ya incompetent, Rangers hating cunt) Specky and Murdo call their pal Mulraney to sort these H** bastards out (in an independent, transparent and honest arbitration process of course) Mulraney says "looks like you've made a cunt of this ya Specky clown, but don't worry we'll just bin the transparent and honest bit and tell them they'll need to comply and that's final" Parks says "no chance ya shower of incompetent, useless, corrupt bellends, this is getting done properly, see you in court" Some of the above is paraphrased and some of the quotes may be slightly inaccurate but otherwise it's more honest and accurate than anything Specky, Murdo and Mick (sounds like a seventies cartoon but they're actually less competent) might spout. For a slightly more professional summation Stewart Robertson put things a little differently......... Robertson has written: “We have been in private dialogue with the SPFL Executive since 8 June on this topic but, given that they have sought to make the issue public, it is appropriate for you to be aware of the circumstances involved. “For the avoidance of doubt, Rangers continues to comply with the rules of the SPFL. “One of the key rules that protects the commercial interests of all members is Rule I7. “When the SPFL Executive put forward the written resolution with regards to the new sponsorship contract, Rangers immediately notified Neil Doncaster that, in line with Rule I7, we would be unable to provide the new sponsor with many of their rights due to a pre-existing contractual obligation. “We cannot breach an existing contract. This is a legal principle which is founded in Scots Law and is the reason that the SPFL has Rule I7 within its rules. “Rangers has complied with and will continue to comply with the SPFL rules and fulfil all sponsorship obligations which do not conflict with our pre-existing contractual obligations. “However, this situation has raised some questions which the members may well wish to ask of the SPFL Executive: Given the possibility of Rule I7 being relied upon by members, did the SPFL Executive/legal advisors include a clause in the contract with cinch, which allows the SPFL not to provide rights to cinch where members rely upon Rule I7? If not, why not? Given that the issue was raised by Rangers (when there is no need under the rules for Rangers to do so) immediately after the written resolution was raised, why did the SPFL Executive proceed to sign the contract when they knew there was an issue and without further checking with Rangers as to its extent? Did the SPFL Executive inform cinch prior to the contract being signed that it could not provide all of the rights it was contracting to provide due to SPFL Rule I7? It was interesting that the Chairman provided the Chief Executive with the credit for closing the deal when it was introduced to the SPFL by an agency that will receive c.£100,000 pa in fees for each of the 5 years of the deal. That is c.£500,000 of cash that will be leaving the Scottish game. Is this the best use of Scottish Football’s limited resources? Could this money have been better spent by employing a full time Commercial Director? “I trust that this clarifies the position. Best regards. Stewart Robertson Managing Director.”

Being the lying, shameless c*nt that he is Doncaster even spun this as the biggest deal in the SPFL history. He failed to admit that the £8m (£7.5m nett) was over 5 years (£1.5m per season) as opposed to the Ladbrokes deal before it which was £5m over 2 years (£2.5m per season. So as well as claiming the credit for a deal done by a third party, he accepted 40% less than the previous deal and allowed the deal to run for 5 years with no uplift built in. Incompetent Lying Bullying Untrustworthy Unprofessional A man of many talents is Mr Doncaster

Doncaster and McLellan are a pair of arrogant pricks who should have been shown the door last year for their inept, underhand, disgraceful treatment of all clubs in order to hand a tainted title to their pet club. They would have been but incredibly the same clubs voted against an independent review in the face of blackmail and bullying. to go into last season with two of the biggest supported clubs in Europe going head to head in a momentous season without a league sponsor should have seen Doncaster sacked for poor performance but he got a wage increase instead. now to have the chairman knowingly lying about his CEO winning a deal that appears to have been secured by a third party, while simultaneously failing to inform the sponsor that the biggest club in the league would be unable to fulfill their obligations should see these two lying, bullying, arrogant , useless pricks sacked for negligence and incompetence. you couldn’t make this shit up

RIP Ally, a very good man

They're giving Ray a plane of his own........ Swinney's in charge of Covid recovery ffs

It's like letting Stevie Wonder fly a jumbo jet

Eilidh Barbour suggested (Devil's advocate she called it) that although there was no contact the fact he had to avoid the "lunge" caused him to go down so should the ref have considered that? O'neill decided to agree so that he could disagree with Boyd who he said had "his blue collar on today" to which big Boydy beamed "I've had it on for months Martin" O'neill spent the rest of the day trying to be a condescending smart arse and generally succeeding only in making himself look like the bitter prick he is. Boydy just smiled and laughed at him in a way that shouted "Keep making a cunt of yourself ya silly auld bastard" It was priceless and all that was missing was Boydy asking him "Martin, how can you see looking through those tears" with his biggest cheeser ever.

Apologies to BIB, I'm sure he's a top scout.

Ruud Gullit will be pleased BridgeIsBlue wasn't a scout in the 80s

The breeches were very clear. 1. The trip itself - Under the protocols you can only stay in a hotel for essential reasons - their trip was absolutely not essential. They came out and said EVERYONE - SPFL, SFA, Gov ok'd it. Each of those individually said they didn't and passed the parcel on to the others - the parcel never stopped and (as per my scribblings at the time) Mr Nobody sanctioned it. Tarriers get out - it was ok'd 2. The photos from the pool and the bar - under the protocols if it is essential to stay in a hotel (it wasn't as per the above) then where possible it should be exclusive use. If exclusivity isn't possible then where possible separate entrances/ lifts etc and meeting rooms should be available on an exclusive basis. Even when exclusive use applies all wellbeing areas, receptions, bars etc should be closed and not used. Close contact is only at training or team meetings and 2m rule should be observed where possible. They shouldn't have been in the bar area or the pool area. Tarriers get out - photos are illegal (don't dare use them as evidence) and what about Scotland players???(don't dare punish us) TLB's rant was not a meltdown, it was a series of not so veiled threats to all and sundry that they would not accept any punishment whatsoever for their breeches. By the precedent established in the cases of Jones and Edmundson at least 8 first team players SHOULD be serving 7 game bans and they were not going to have that. If that meant all out war with the SFA, SPFL, Gov then that's what they'd do. TLB knew precisely what was to be said and who was to be warned, playing the victim and denying everything come natural to him. He is the most poisonous person ever to darken Scottish football imo. They returned from Dubai almost 6 weeks ago, Maxwell confirmed that possible breeches were being looked at a day or two later and the bump in the carpet is bigger and hee-haw has happened. There's a dead body, a video of the man doing the killing and he's saying you can't use that video because I didn't give you permission to film me. To be honest I'd rather be like us, admit the offences, punish the offenders internally and accept the punishments from the authorities. I would however condemn in the strongest terms the continual inconsistencies. Winning 55 with TLB still there to suffer the pain and shame of losing the 10 is reward enough

We're pretty much on the same page with this. Where I disagree, and I get the feeling our club do too, is the bit about sitting back, accepting double standards and allowing the corruption to continue unchallenged. Our recent comments via SG about inconsistencies and what we can do to help the authorities with this issue have been professional and consistent. At some point, when 55 is won and when it suits us to do so, I get the feeling a dossier (hate that word after last year, but it fits the bill) of decisions, events, inconsistencies needing clarification will be produced with another offer to fund an enquiry into the running of the game in our beautifully corrupt little country. Last year they sneered sour grapes, this year we can smile and say "we've won this by a distance, breaking records along the way but for the good of the game we think things need looked at to establish if the current set up is fit for purpose" We all know the answer to that. The starting point should be binning the CO role and system. It's a joke and has been abused from day one to the benefit of one club. Our dossier on the inconsistencies of the CO process fro this season alone, even just for incidents involving us and them would kill a few trees to print out. Just my opimion though mate

Couldn't disagree more sorry Valance. They were given permission to go, not permission to breech the rules and if anything they should have been above and beyond They weren't allowed to use the bar area or the pool area (even if they had exclusive use of the facilities) in the same way that Jones and Edmundson weren't allowed to go to a party. 7 game bans v radio silence is inconsistent and wrong. 8-10 of their players have played in matches over the past 5 weeks when they should have been sitting in the stand suspended like Jones and Edmundson were. Because the authorities gave them permission to go to Dubai doesn't mean they can do what the fuck they want when they're there

The level of media reporting on this is a red herring imo. What we should be focussing on is what, if any, action the SFA/SPFL take. As someone else suggested in the cases of Jones and Edmundson when we acted swiftly, suspended the players and brought it out in the open, the result was by far the harshest punishment dished out for Covid breeches and this highlights, again, the inconsistency that exists with the disciplinary system in Scotland. Perhaps the delay is due to us deciding the best course of action that allows us to deal with this without giving the SFA/SPFL rope to hang us. When the multiple Dubai breeches were acknowledged in the media and confirmed by Kennedy on the Saturday I'm sure our club and (everyone else) expected similar significant bans for the players involved. Our statement when Jones and Edmundson were banned for 7 games essentially stated that we accept this and note the precedent - "Rangers accepts the outcome of the Scottish FA judicial panel which has demonstrated the seriousness with which covid protocol breaches will be dealt with. This penalty is a reminder to all of the expectations upon football. "Football is in a privileged position and we recognise the responsibility that we all must uphold within the national sport. "The outcome of today’s hearing brings the standard and expectations set by the Scottish FA into sharp focus." Two days laterTLB denied any wrongdoing and (this is the important bit imo) essentially stated that the photos from the bar and pool were taken without permission, this was a criminal offence in Dubai and imo basically warned the SFA/SPFL not to use this as evidence. 5 weeks ago Maxwell confirmed the the SFA were looking into the breeches, since then there's been not a peep. Either all breeches get treated the same or all get ignored, the double standards need to stop Bolingoli - flies to Spain, returns, trains for 3 days, PLAYS off the bench on the Sunday ............ 5 games (2 of which are suspended) Aberdeen players - 3 games (all suspended) Dundee Utd Connoly - 2 games (suspended) Griffiths party - "no biggie" TLB - where's that brush, can someone lift that carpet please Dubai - 'we had a few minor breeches" JK, "naw we didnae, we dun nuffin wrong, we were exemplary" TLB - radio silence Jones and Edmundson - 7 games, none suspended No wonder we're biting our tongues

Brilliant, cheers About 20 years ago there was a colleague from Birmingham who would visit the Scottish office once a quarter or so. He was a director of a medium sized competitor bought out by our American owners and made a fair few quid (£2-3million according to some in the know) and as part of the deal he also got a cushy number with a good salary and benefits package. Anyway I would usually pick him up at the airport as we were good mates through conferences etc and on arrival at the office he would politely ask for everyone's attention and announce " It's always great to visit you in Scotland and, in case there's anyone new, can I just remind everyone that I'm considerably richer than you" H was actually a gem of a guy, hugely popular and it was completely tongue in cheek. Sadly he passed away a few months short of retirement with a massive heart attack despite being lean, fit and active. Any time I see these sketches I remember old Dave