Jump to content

Club statement | Resolution not deemed competent


OceanRain

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 27.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
11 minutes ago, Malvern said:

They all have someone below them to take over and will still get paid while sitting at home, they are accused so cannot be part of the process until they are proven innocent or guilty, well unless you are the SPFL.

Its a disciplinary process. What are they getting disciplined for? If they were disciplined based on no evidence it could lead to them claiming against the spfl! You've still not answered about if another club demanded someone be suspended for something only they knew - you agree this should happen?

I wholeheartedly agree we should be pushing for the ii.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Suspended rather than sacked but yeah, that's pretty much it in a nutshell. 

Utter push, as has already been said in this thread, there is more than enough evidence of malpractice in the public arena to justify suspensions.   Any self governing board with nothing to fear would recognise this and initiate an independent inquiry.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, STEPPS BOY said:

Why would a Hibs CEO want to be on a committee designed to avoid Hearts getting relegated.

Look. Much as we dislike these people, they are not stupid. It was obvious what that committee was for when she went on it. There is a game being played. Wondwr what happens when/if this falls apart big style? Who will get the wrath? Can only be spfl in my view. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Soldier blue said:

Utter push, as has already been said in this thread, there is more than enough evidence of malpractice in the public arena to justify suspensions.   Any self governing board with nothing to fear would recognise this and initiate an independent inquiry.  

Theres enough to justify an investigation. It's right it should be independent giving the governance and integrity issues. Who suspends Doncaster?  What exactly that has been proven (not hearsay) warrants  disciplinary action? What exactly has each of the 3 named done individually to warrant suspension prior to an investigation?

The ii is the way to establish all of this beyond doubt. Demanding suspensions but not saying why is pretty futile.

Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Not disputing that. Nor us demanding the ii.

All I've said is it's a bit daft demanding someone is suspended for information you hold but wont share with others. A view we'd mock if someone else made similar demands with info they wouldn't disclose.

It's a hard one to solve mate cause you don't want to hand over evidence to the people your accusing

We have previous with "missing" evidence

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, cascadeshrimp said:

It's a hard one to solve mate cause you don't want to hand over evidence to the people your accusing

We have previous with "missing" evidence

Agreed, and the ii is obviously the solution.  The demanding suspensions whilst withholding the evidence seems absurd, all I'm saying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bluenoz said:

Dempster has made it clear she want a job at Rangers and I've no doubt she wants to distance herself from Petrie. It wouldn't surprise me if she knows something and has told Park/Robertson.

I want her nowhere near us.

She's no friend of ours (despite people saying she comes from a Rangers family) - she's never done us any favours - nor should she I hear folk say as she's Hibs head honcho, but she's never made one decision on sporting integrity that we are involved in. 

Cutting our allocation at Easter Road on several occasions whilst not coming close to selling out the other home sections is another sore one.

Same goes for that Ian Maxwell too. Bluenose my fucking arse.

Stewart Robertson might have even been on the Motherwell board that took the decision to fire us down the leagues and refuse us automatic footballing licence transfer too.

Why rewards these pricks with jobs at Rangers?

Only one I'd take is the guy from Inverness.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Agreed, and the ii is obviously the solution.  The demanding suspensions whilst withholding the evidence seems absurd, all I'm saying.

So what do you want to do throw a whistleblower to the wolves? Who the fuck do you give the evidence to? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, bluenoz said:

Dempster has made it clear she want a job at Rangers and I've no doubt she wants to distance herself from Petrie. It wouldn't surprise me if she knows something and has told Park/Robertson.

Petrie isn’t at Hibs anymore..

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, British_Empire said:

I want her nowhere near us.

She's no friend of ours (despite people saying she comes from a Rangers family) - she's never done us any favours - nor should she I hear folk say as she's Hibs head honcho, but she's never made one decision on sporting integrity that we are involved in. 

Cutting our allocation at Easter Road on several occasions whilst not coming close to selling out the other home sections is another sore one.

Same goes for that Ian Maxwell too. Bluenose my fucking arse.

Stewart Robertson might have even been on the Motherwell board that took the decision to fire us down the leagues and refuse us automatic footballing licence transfer too.

Why rewards these pricks with jobs at Rangers?

Only one I'd take is the guy from Inverness.

Her trying to get more fans against the big two then changing her mind when she realises it doesn’t work isn’t a bad thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Its a disciplinary process. What are they getting disciplined for? If they were disciplined based on no evidence it could lead to them claiming against the spfl! You've still not answered about if another club demanded someone be suspended for something only they knew - you agree this should happen?

I wholeheartedly agree we should be pushing for the ii.

We cannot ask them to resign but we sure as hell do not need them investigating themselves.

You are not disciplined you are removed from the process and told to go home until a final decision is made, whether it be by independent investigation or legal means. Any suspicion of corruption needs to be stamped on and until it is independent it is useless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, ForeverAndEver said:

Her trying to get more fans against the big two then changing her mind when she realises it doesn’t work isn’t a bad thing.

I'm not saying it's a bad thing but why vote YES in the first place? prevention better than cure - someone who can't see that I don't want near us

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, British_Empire said:

I'm not saying it's a bad thing but why vote YES in the first place? prevention better than cure - someone who can't see that I don't want near us

I'm pretty sure Hibs did not want to vote YES. Sure, the fans wanted Hearts relegated but there may be something untold there. They have been very quiet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Upcoming Events

    • 29 September 2024 11:00 Until 13:00
      0  
      Rangers v Hibernian
      Ibrox Stadium
      Scottish Premiership
      Live on Sky Sports Football

×
×
  • Create New...