WCPRANGERS1 2,997 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 So according to reports the SFA are set to ratify his move to own a 10% stake in Rangers as long as it is no more tban this and that he has no say in the running of the club.Now pardon my stupidity but hasnt Green already stated that investors would have a low stakehold in the club and also what right to the SFA have to say what his role and invsstment level is in the club, i thought they were there tto assure that investors are "fit and proper" no to decide that persons role in the club.Also if this has anything to do with being a major stakeholder in another club then why is Romanov allowed to have a stakehding in 3 clubs Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogzy 31,195 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 i have been asking this for days, corrupt to the core. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM1872 3,776 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 They're never going to know if he has a vote on decisions, so they can away and fuck themselves. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeeWallaceRFC 3,920 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 The level that he's involved, is due to not being able to own more than one club outright/majority in football. It's a FIFA rule or something. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hutchy WATP 462 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 I've long since realised that every single potential good piece of news/business is going to have attempts to stop them from the sorry mess that is the sfa.The sooner the sfa has a clear out the better. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCPRANGERS1 2,997 Posted August 12, 2012 Author Share Posted August 12, 2012 The level that he's involved, is due to not being able to own more than one club outright/majority in football. It's a FIFA rule or something.what about romanov though???? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogzy 31,195 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 The level that he's involved, is due to not being able to own more than one club outright/majority in football. It's a FIFA rule or something.no mate, the sfa said they want ashley to tell them he will have NO involment in the day to day club business.also to not have more than 15% ( whch is fair enough) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBheastHunter 6 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 So according to reports the SFA are set to ratify his move to own a 10% stake in Rangers as long as it is no more tban this and that he has no say in the running of the club.Now pardon my stupidity but hasnt Green already stated that investors would have a low stakehold in the club and also what right to the SFA have to say what his role and invsstment level is in the club, i thought they were there tto assure that investors are "fit and proper" no to decide that persons role in the club.Also if this has anything to do with being a major stakeholder in another club then why is Romanov allowed to have a stakehding in 3 clubsWTF???If that is indeed true then they are obviously shitting themselves at us having anyone who may be able to wield a wee bit of power - involved within our club.This needs to be nipped in the bud or taken to court.Shower of corrupt bastards. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCPRANGERS1 2,997 Posted August 12, 2012 Author Share Posted August 12, 2012 i have been asking this for days, corrupt to the core.so whats your take on it mate???? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricksen_da_best 2,034 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 what about romanov though????Romanov owns hearts.Romanovs bank owns Kaunas. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
glesgabear81 24 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 He won't be buying a stake in the club so whats the SFA problem? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCPRANGERS1 2,997 Posted August 12, 2012 Author Share Posted August 12, 2012 Romanov owns hearts.Romanovs bank owns Kaunas.im sure he has "an interest" in 3 clubs??? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricksen_da_best 2,034 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 im sure he has "an interest" in 3 clubs???The bank that he is a chairman off owns Kaunas and some basketball team.Romanov owns hearts though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuart54 218 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 He won't be buying a stake in the club so whats the SFA problem?'WE' are the sfa's problem.As Gogzy said - corrupt to the core. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCPRANGERS1 2,997 Posted August 12, 2012 Author Share Posted August 12, 2012 some side from belarus though im sure???you would think though that given hes the man in charge of that bank then the link is there for all to see.....and if it works as easily as that shouldnt Ashley just put sports direct as out investors after all they just have the naming rights of st.jamesl Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogzy 31,195 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 so whats your take on it mate????they are shit scared of us doing well and someone like ashley would definitley help accomplish that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCPRANGERS1 2,997 Posted August 12, 2012 Author Share Posted August 12, 2012 they are shit scared of us doing well and someone like ashley would definitley help accomplish that.its strange how only investors at Rangers are open to such scrutiny....... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Carpintero 546 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Scottish Football desperate for us to stay down and unable to provide any contest to Celtic. What a fucking disgrace this country has become. Corrupt to the core. They have us right where they want us. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saddam Ghandi 17 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 WTF???If that is indeed true then they are obviously shitting themselves at us having anyone who may be able to wield a wee bit of power - involved within our club.This needs to be nipped in the bud or taken to court.Shower of corrupt bastards.What the fuck is the idea with that avatar? This forum is magic but trivialising stuff like that makes me ashamed and sick, poison for the mind joking about that and it appears to be endorsed here at times due to the frequency of the subject being raised, for some it is a habit, if you can't beat a dhim in debate or wind him up without resorting to that guff you are a poor imitation of a Rangers man.Rangers Media should be the leading light in Rangers discussion, debate and taking the club forward in a time we are crying out for maturity and leadership, this crap does us no favours at all.Ashley getting involved may not be a bad thing for us but once again its a guy with a chequered past, would be great just to get a more solid citizen on board like Tom Hunter or McColl. Saying that, Murray's portrayal of a rich, tough but fair businessman bluffed him a knighthood and years of grace with us fans so what do I know? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
beattie72 170 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Too many catholics in this counrty. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comeoffit 152 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Too many catholics in this counrty.Gie Sandanza a chance fck sake Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
markem 7,333 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 The SFA are showing interest in Ashley yet curiously weren't that keen on looking at Whyte whilst suggestions were flying around he was a crook. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBheastHunter 6 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 What the fuck is the idea with that avatar? This forum is magic but trivialising stuff like that makes me ashamed and sick, poison for the mind joking about that and it appears to be endorsed here at times due to the frequency of the subject being raised, for some it is a habit, if you can't beat a dhim in debate or wind him up without resorting to that guff you are a poor imitation of a Rangers man.Rangers Media should be the leading light in Rangers discussion, debate and taking the club forward in a time we are crying out for maturity and leadership, this crap does us no favours at all.Ashley getting involved may not be a bad thing for us but once again its a guy with a chequered past, would be great just to get a more solid citizen on board like Tom Hunter or McColl. Saying that, Murray's portrayal of a rich, tough but fair businessman bluffed him a knighthood and years of grace with us fans so what do I know?It's far from trivialising it - far from it. Complete opposite in fact. With regards to Ashley having a chequered past, I can understand their stance on checking out anyone involved with us after the Whyte debacle, but for them to have a say in level of investment etc is total bollox and something that a court would overturn in a minute - as I would almost guarantee that such draconian censure would breach some European trading / competition laws Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saddam Ghandi 17 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 It's far from trivialising it - far from it. Complete opposite in fact. With regards to Ashley having a chequered past, I can understand their stance on checking out anyone involved with us after the Whyte debacle, but for them to have a say in level of investment etc is total bollox and something that a court would overturn in a minute - as I would almost guarantee that such draconian censure would breach some European trading / competition lawsI think there was some issue with Robert Maxwell investing in various clubs in the 80's and certain procedures were put in place.Perhaps that is UK wide, I'm not really sure. Totally agree these clowns should have no say in levels of investment etc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
teddybear1771 2 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Too many catholics in this counrty. 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.