Jump to content

Regan Must Walk Now!


DarcheVinny
 Share

Recommended Posts

Regan Must Walk Now! Post written by JCS

Rangers have successfully appealed against the 12-month transfer embargo unlawfully imposed by the SFA after contesting the Scottish Football Association's ruling in the Edinburgh Court of Session!

The presiding judge, the Hon. Lord Glennie, clearly and unreservedly, stated that the SFA had “NO RIGHT” to impose such an embargo and that the sanction was not available to the original SFA Disciplinary panel, and should not have been upheld by the Appellate Tribunal when it considered the appeal submitted by Richard Keen QC on 16th May 2012 on behalf of Rangers administrators, Duff & Phelps and the Rangers' Fans Fighting Fund.

The SFA have maintained throughout that its Disciplinary and Appellate Tribunals were well within their rights to impose and uphold such an embargo, and were, simply, applying a sanction that was permissible within its rules. They were ‘at pains’ to tell the world that, “It was competent for the Disciplinary Tribunal to impose the additional sanction of prohibiting registrations of any new players of 18 years or older for a period of 12 months.”, and, surprisingly, that view was endorsed by Lord Carloway the chairman of the SFA Appellate tribunal.

However, in his judgement today, Lord Glennie stated unequivocally that the SFA interpretation of its rules at section 94 and 95.1, were erroneous and the original Disciplinary panel and the, subsequent Appellate tribunal, did not have the right to impose any punishment they deemed appropriate, and he dismissed Lord Carloway’s arguments in support of the transfer embargo by stating politely, but firmly and forcefully, that “I regret that I cannot accept that (Lord Carloway’s) view.”

Now we have official confirmation of what we suspected all along - that the SFA, its Disciplinary panel and its Appellate tribunal were INCOMPENT and acting illegally!

But thank goodness there is still someone in the judiciary with a hefty dose of common sense, and a desire to do what is RIGHT rather than what is expedient! Thank goodness for someone with the legal experience, the moral courage and the interpretive ability to read the SFA’s tortuous rule book, and make a decision that is based upon the facts and NOT the fallacy that the SFA, its Disciplinary Tribunal and Appellate tribunal have sought to foist on an unsuspecting public formonths.

A huge thanks must go to the hard working men at the Rangers' Fans Fighting Fund and all who have donate their hard earned cash. Without this money, QC Richard Keen could not have been appointed, to fight our corner!

Whilst this decision goes some way to restoring the faith of legions of Rangers fans that right always prevails, we cannot, and must not, assume that it will usher in a more responsive and empathic regime at the SFA. It will not! This illegal decision may have been overturned, but it will only be a temporary respite from the sanctions that many think will inevitably follow.

I suspect there is not a Rangers fan out there who believes that the SFA will now ‘fold its tents” and let the matter rest without further punishment. Not likely!

Ranger’s fans are wise to the ways of Stewart Regan and his cohort of fellow travelers at the SFA and, like me, they are doubtless already conjuring visions of Regan and his failed legal advisors frantically searching the rule books in the hope of finding legal precedent for further sanctions that will bring the impudent and rebellious Rangers to heel. Might those punishments be?

•Suspension

•Expulsion from participation in the game

•Ejection from the Scottish Cup

•Termination of membership.

These are already being touted by a hostile media as possible alternatives to the transfer embargo. But does the SFA have those specific sanctions available to it and can it apply any of them? Well Lord Glennie’s interpretation of the SFA’s Judicial Panel Protocol raises some important questions.

In his judgment today, Lord Glennie made reference to rule 62 in the SFA Judicial Panel Protocol which lays down a maximum fine of £1m and termination of membership for paying a match official more money than they are due. He then went on to draw a comparison between rule 62 and rule 66 which is the rule specifically dealing with the charge of bringing the game into disrepute – the charge under which the transfer embargo was imposed. He said, “There is no mention of suspensions, expulsions or ejection from the cup, and it makes no sense to have these sanctions spelled out in rule 62 but omitted from rule 66 if they were available.”

These are hardly palatable alternatives! These are draconian in the extreme and grossly inappropriate for the alleged offence of bringing the game into disrepute. I doubt if any impartial observer would concur that either sanction would be fair and reasonable in all the circumstances – unless, of course, you are Stewart Regan and his merry bunch of Rangers haters at the SFA!

We have been punished and pilloried enough, and its now time to call a halt to this Rangers baiting and Rangers hating vendetta. But that is unlikely to happen. As I pen this piece reports are circulating in the media that FIFA may well now exert pressure on the SFA to punish us for daring to go to court in the first place! Quite incredible! Now we are likely to be punished for being illegally punished by the SFA. You really couldn't make this up.

But we should not lose sight of the fact that Lord Glennie’s judgment has clearly demonstrated just how incompetent Regan and his SFA actually are. Rather than listen to sound, reliable legal argument, Regan and his SFA have been more concerned to punish; punish again, and keep on punishing until their collective ‘bloodlust’ is satiated and Rangers are emasculated and cowed.

Many people already believe that Stewart Regan’s tenure as Chief Executive of the SFA should come to a swift and ignominious end, and Lord Glennie’s judgment may, perhaps, hasten that day. To be told that your tribunals are not competent – tribunals that Stewart Regan, the Chief Executive of the SFA inaugurated himself – must surely render his position untenable.

It’s time to go Mr. Regan, and the sooner the better!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets face it, would the other card shops be demanding that Clintons are only allowed to sell birthday cards for people under 18, or that they can't sell me to you teddys for a year as punishment for going into Administration?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great OP 00000042.gif

Re: Lord Carloway .

Pick from the following:

a) Incompetent,

b) Biased,

c) Just plain stupid

d) Corrupt,

e) All of the above

How the f*ck could he get it so very wrong? I'm delighted by the result of course.. but I'd like someone put that question to him. WHY did you really uphold that ridiculous transfer ban? Just tell the truth Carloway .

edit: btw: This part of the OP speaks volumes..

Quite incredible! Now we are likely to be punished for being illegally punished by the SFA. You really couldn't make this up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In his judgment today, Lord Glennie made reference to rule 62 in the SFA Judicial Panel Protocol which lays down a maximum fine of £1m and termination of membership for paying a match official more money than they are due. He then went on to draw a comparison between rule 62 and rule 66 which is the rule specifically dealing with the charge of bringing the game into disrepute – the charge under which the transfer embargo was imposed. He said, “There is no mention of suspensions, expulsions or ejection from the cup, and it makes no sense to have these sanctions spelled out in rule 62 but omitted from rule 66 if they were available.”

This bit confuses me greatly, all these things are mentioned next to rule 66 aswell (unless the SFA have jumped on and altered their documents since the judgement)

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/SFAPublications/ScottishFApublications2011-12/Scottish%20FA%20Judicial%20Panel%20Protocol.pdf

Page 102 is Rule 66

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great OP 00000042.gif

Re: Lord Carloway .

Pick from the following:

a) Incompetent,

b) Biased,

c) Just plain stupid

d) Corrupt,

e) All of the above

How the f*ck could he get it so very wrong? I'm delighted by the result of course.. but I'd like someone put that question to him. WHY did you really uphold that ridiculous transfer ban? Just tell the truth Carloway .

edit: btw: This part of the OP speaks volumes..

I suppose in his defence you could argue that the panel weren't being asked to judge the legality of the punishment but whether it was appropriate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Upcoming Events

    • 21 January 2022 19:45 Until 21:45
      0  
      Rangers v Stirling Albion
      Ibrox Stadium
      Scottish Cup
×
×
  • Create New...