Jump to content

Club statement | Resolution not deemed competent

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 27.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

WE have been presented with evidence via a whistleblower that raises serious concerns surrounding the SPFL’s processes relating to its stewardship of the voting on the resolution presented to member C

Hope you dont mind mate but thought I'd give the Hornets nest a wee stir...  

Posted Images

2 minutes ago, gogzy said:

It's a stick on.  We are going to come out of this looking bad, and those teflon covered bastards will get away with it.

Have some faith ffs man. There is plenty of evidence that suggests otherwise and that is before the club submit the evidence they hold from the whistleblower.

This board is stronger and more resolute than previous boards mate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, BlueThunder said:

I though we suggested using the current placing a and altering layer if needed.(pay back cash or gain more if places change)

It was that the season couldn't be over until all 38 games had been played but use the current placinga a to distribute the funds to financially help all of the clubs out and then like you said pay back or gain if places changed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Companies Act 2006 Section 296

Procedure for signifying agreement to written resolution

(1)A member signifies his agreement to a proposed written resolution when the company receives from him (or from someone acting on his behalf) an authenticated document—

(a)identifying the resolution to which it relates, and

(b)indicating his agreement to the resolution.

(2)The document must be sent to the company in hard copy form or in electronic form.

(3)A member's agreement to a written resolution, once signified, may not be revoked.

(4)A written resolution is passed when the required majority of eligible members have signified their agreement to it.

SPFL Statement:

Further, it has been suggested that all Ladbrokes Championship club votes were cast on Friday night. One Ladbrokes Championship club attempted to submit a voting slip, which did not reach the SPFL until late that evening. Earlier, at 6pm on Friday, that club had confirmed in writing to the SPFL that any attempted vote from that club should not be considered as cast. We have had a number of conversations with the chairman of that club over the weekend, in which he reiterated that his club had not yet voted on the SPFL resolution. The SPFL has proceeded on the basis of the unequivocal instruction from that club received at 6pm


Where in the Act does it allow for a submitted vote being revoked at any time whether before or after receipt? 

For me, once received the action is complete, no intervening attempt to cancel it can do so as all criteria are met the moment it is received.

kelvd1873 and Howsitgoing like this
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Prso's headband said:

They have no idea what we have on them so their squirming like fuck😂. Literally tying themselves up in lies now

It would be the best bluff in history if the SPFL came out and admitted wrongdoing and Rangers came out and said they actually don't have any evidence.

HG5, B1872, bornabear and 1 other like this
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, KingKirk said:

Cunts digging his own crave. My bother works in CID. Those people he interviews don't say shit on the basis of legal advice.

Why cause the chances are if they do they'll incriminate themselves just like this plumb 😁😁😁😁

Said in an earlier post, this group have had things all their own way for so long they get over confident and think they are beyond reproach,  ultimately this will be their undoing👍

HG5 likes this
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, bluenoz said:

Many others, not just me, read that as you can't change your YES vote but you can change your NO vote. I assume specifically meaning Dundee.

I have no dispute with that at all, my bewilderment is that the spfl/leagues own rules clearly state that if you don't vote you are not deemed to have agreed with the resolution, no mention of abstainment or non cast votes being void and not countable.

So why wasn't dundee's non  vote not  counted with PT and ICT as a no vote, I suspect they may fudge to the twenty eight day nonsense, even though they pre-empted and announced the vote, an action unknown in corporate history of present and not so present times.

Howsitgoing and Blumhoilann like this
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Rangers should keep as much of their powder dry as possible for now and not try and respond too much and get involved in a tit-for-tat war of words in the media and drive people who might get onside with us, against us or at least put them off getting involved - especially when I detect a hint of curiosity in the media to cover this too.

However, I'd release a statement addressing some of the points in that letter (to stop the SPFL getting to control the narrative)

Saying ;

1- It's not misinformation as it stands. This not damaging to Scottish football. The content within our evidence is.
2- Who is the director mentioned in paragraph 2 that wanted more time.
3- The "clear and unoquivocal" guidance from a QC that helped reject our resolution. Who is he and what's his connections? 
4- Make it clear why working with their own lawyer Roddie McKenzie would be an absolute waste of time (due to his connections to one club)
5- Why do celtic have to be handed a title in order for prize monies to be released? why, as a group that can come together and make their own rules (for their own money) have to have a binary take it or leave scenario, essentially forcing people to make a decision they might be uncomfortable with in order to get their own money that they are due to them.
6- Why was Dundee's vote not cast, where did it go? who's fault was it? if it was sent but didn't arrive, why not? 
7- Dundee, why can't you shed some light on this? do not hide behind this 28-days when you made a statement, filled out a vote, signed, dated and sent it off.
8- Why were the results announced when all the votes weren't in, therefore putting immense pressure on the teams who's votes had not arrived.
9- lastly and most importantly we can not and will not hand over evidence that we have due to it compromising our aims for an independent enquiry and the desired outcome we have in mind. Doing this at this stage will allow you to form an unfair defence that may prejudice our case and claims, akin to how trials and police investigations work in every day life. We cannot and will not compromise our position. 

kelvd1873, HG5 and eejay the dj like this
Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Create New...