BlueThunder 8,640 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 I just hope no employee of ours has a spouse who currently works for the BBC. There would be some tough decisions ahead Can Mr.Whyte actually legally sack someone for talking to the BBC though? I'm not up on my employment law, bizarrely, but I'd think they'd have to sign a new contract or at least some other legal document. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuiemac 16 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 good interview. should have done it ages ago.i agree totally.... i think he was a little bit naive when he first took over but as time goes on he is impressing me more and more Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluepeter 5,627 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Good interview Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dennis 1,011 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 I just hope no employee of ours has a spouse who currently works for the BBC. There would be some tough decisions ahead Can Mr.Whyte actually legally sack someone for talking to the BBC though? I'm not up on my employment law, bizarrely, but I'd think they'd have to sign a new contract or at least some other legal document.When I worked in a glasgow hotel, I had to sign a contract, that said I couldn't talk to the press about the Hotel. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarcheVinny 1,003 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Folk have a choice so maybe my suggestion of RM banning those posting BBC links is too far. But for me I'll be choosing not to view the BBC website and will get my news elsewhere. That's my democratic right Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommy2212 151 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 When I worked in a glasgow hotel, I had to sign a contract, that said I couldn't talk to the press about the Hotel.But you cannot specify one broadcaster, it is completely unworkable and it is a stupid statement to make. You cannot put a legal document telling a player not to speak to a beeb journalist however you can put a legal document in front of a player not to speak to the media as a whole. The only power he has is to restrict the beeb movements inside ibrox, don't invite then to press conferences etc But if a player is speaking to stv and a beeb mic gets put in he is going to get the sack for that?!Whyte seems to do whatever he wants and hell to the consequences which is a dangerous philosophy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris182 6,534 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 "Other than a regrettable event in our history I don’t think it would be as bad as people think it might be."im not sure im happy at this quote , does administration not mean we would technically no longer be glasgow rangers and we would need to reform as another club ? ( i might be wrong) but if im right we would then loose out history and that would be devestating.i think the way his interviews have changed over the few months he has been in charge , he is gearing us up for administrationNah your thinking of Liquidation - administration is different, it's more of a rescue mechanism before Liquidation to allow the business to continue functioning. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueThunder 8,640 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 I admire the stance, but I don't think he will see it through completely. For example, let's say Jelavic spoke to the BBC against Whyte's wishes. Would we then sack him and rip up his contract? We all know that won't happen. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edmiston Drive 3,846 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 £5.7m spend? The agents and lawyers must be on some screw.Indeed we ooops! they are Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edmiston Drive 3,846 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 £5.7m spend? The agents and lawyers must be on some screw.Indeed we ooops! they are Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandyboyblue 227 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 But you cannot specify one broadcaster, it is completely unworkable and it is a stupid statement to make. You cannot put a legal document telling a player not to speak to a beeb journalist however you can put a legal document in front of a player not to speak to the media as a whole. The only power he has is to restrict the beeb movements inside ibrox, don't invite then to press conferences etc But if a player is speaking to stv and a beeb mic gets put in he is going to get the sack for that?!Whyte seems to do whatever he wants and hell to the consequences which is a dangerous philosophy.Tommy, I would imagine the guy is pretty pissed about the situation. I know I would be, and I would certainly do all within my power to restrict their (BBC) access. It worked for a certain SAF, you have to use what weapons you have, I for one after reading this article will back him. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralCartmanLee 313 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Good to see him answer some questions but he is till far to evasive about his business dealings. The way he structures his companies and the way he tries to hide how earns his money is concerning.Not paying lawyers because you don't like them representing other people is petulant. You can't do that when you are chairman of rangers.He's spot on about one thing though e more you hear about Bain the more sickening it is. 45k a man for the uefa run and he was cut in on e deal. We made a loss out the run apparently and for that alone he should have been sacked. AJ asking for expenses and flying first class isn't comparable to that.Like the journo I will be interested to see court papers lodged that he will be suing them, he knows he opens himself up to more investigation if he does that so lets see how that pans out Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edmiston Drive 3,846 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 history is written by the victor. don't forget when sdm stepped aside we were in over 40 million of debt and aj smith bain etc cut that in half while still winning. the fact they are now wanting money legally owed to them should be no big surprise. take the part about bains bonuses. some might consider it a good thing he got bonuses based on team success after all lawell gets huge bonuses everytime he reduces celtcs debt and wage bill. look what that's done to them. but good luck to Mr whyte as I say he won he's put up his cash and we are still doing well.Would have thought it was the performance by the players and management over the last 3 years or so ,t hat brought the cash in to provide the capital to reduce or debts. Didn't see Johnston or Bain scoring or any last ditch tackles to help us win games. Bain saying he is owed money this has yet to be proved Have I just done myself out of any other recipes from you Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuartM6 279 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 "Every time they show something on sectarianism, it's rangers fans"I fucking love craig whyte!No surrender! Fuck the bbc! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack The Flipper 5,936 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Mr Whyte said "fuck" :isay: lol Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Briton 394 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 does administration not mean we would technically no longer be glasgow rangers and we would need to reform as another club ? Maybe we'll reform as 'Glasgow Rangers'. Seriously...what would worry me is whether we'd lose Ibrox. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
2daludaludalu 390 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 if by any chance we ever had to re-name our club it should just be :the rangers:a new badge with a sword and shield and below the words :no surrender:Yes marmalade the British broadcasting for Catholics would have a hissy fit. Get it right up em Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TravelingWilBEARy 4,319 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 I think we should call ourselves the GR Bears and move to East Kilbride. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creampuff 22,630 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Wish Whyte had given this interview on day 1.It's a fantastic interview, which pulls no punches whatsoever.It’s outrageous. I actually can’t believe that they went with the allegations they went with. We told them. We sent lawyers letters all week, warning them that these things aren’t true and warning them what would happen if they ran with these allegations. They’ve run with things that are totally, completely and utterly untrue. It just proves the case that they are a biased organisation, biased against Rangers. They’ve done it several times this season. They’re completely biased. They did it to Ally McCoist. Every time they show something on sectarianism it’s Rangers fans. One has to wonder if there’s institutionalised bias in there. It’s outrageous what they’ve done. Absolutely outrageous. To accuse me on national TV of criminality is an outrage. I’m suing and maybe the BBC are going to be paying the (HMRC) tax bill.That's a fucking beast of a quote. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creampuff 22,630 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Call ourselves the "FTP Rangers". Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLawMan 6,240 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 As one of his biggest critics and dissenters, the interview with English is to date the best thing i have read from him. It still leaves a number of questions, but i hope he is true to his word on the legal battles against BBC and i feel some sympathy in regards to taking on former Directors in what they are looking for(still feel he could have avoided all the shite though and saved money)This is NOT going to stop me being critical of him as things stand, but I still hope all my fears turn out to be a lot of sheit and that he turns out to be a great leader for us. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creampuff 22,630 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 I might read this interview again later, it's fucking brilliant. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLawMan 6,240 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 As one of his biggest critics and dissenters, the interview with English is to date the best thing i have read from him. It still leaves a number of questions, but i hope he is true to his word on the legal battles against BBC and i feel some sympathy in regards to taking on former Directors in what they are looking for(still feel he could have avoided all the shite though and saved money)This is NOT going to stop me being critical of him as things stand, but I still hope all my fears turn out to be a lot of sheit and that he turns out to be a great leader for us. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuartM6 279 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 I would love it if the bbc end up paying the tax bill. :lol: Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edmiston Drive 3,846 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 As one of his biggest critics and dissenters, the interview with English is to date the best thing i have read from him. It still leaves a number of questions, but i hope he is true to his word on the legal battles against BBC and i feel some sympathy in regards to taking on former Directors in what they are looking for(still feel he could have avoided all the shite though and saved money)This is NOT going to stop me being critical of him as things stand, but I still hope all my fears turn out to be a lot of sheit and that he turns out to be a great leader for us. I just dreading that if you are proved to be wrong about him, that you do not turn your attention in my direction Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.