STEPPS BOY 73,890 Posted April 27, 2020 Share Posted April 27, 2020 If this is true from Jackson then you’ve got to wonder why we’ve went down this road... “They will need the support of 75 per cent of all clubs including nine from the top flight, eight from the Championship and 15 more from across League One and League Two”. Absolutely zero chance of getting 9 teams supporting us in SPFL. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blumhoilann 6,712 Posted April 27, 2020 Share Posted April 27, 2020 There's probably a set route Rangers have to take??? We can't have Rangers being accused of coersion 😉 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornabear 6,202 Posted April 27, 2020 Share Posted April 27, 2020 12 minutes ago, bluenoz said: So the 75% voting is needed from all three divisions and not an overall from 42 teams according to kj. Did I read that right? Spfl rules say 75% of 42 clubs mate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drumloyal 14,966 Posted April 27, 2020 Share Posted April 27, 2020 5 minutes ago, bornabear said: Spfl rules say 75% of 42 clubs mate. Mental that only 11 no votes out of 42 can stymie any investigative process. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Avenger 22,567 Posted April 27, 2020 Share Posted April 27, 2020 I'm just praying we are sitting on dynamite. I'm wanting something really bad that unravels corruption at the highest level that implicates Liewell and buries the bastard. Not much to ask after waiting this long, right? Fucking wetting the Pampers at the thought. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the cry was no 3,034 Posted April 27, 2020 Share Posted April 27, 2020 37 minutes ago, bornabear said: Spfl rules say 75% of 42 clubs mate. Thats what I believe. If Jackson is correct then 38 teams could vote yes and the 4 prep votes (Scum, Hamilton, Motherwell and Livingston) could veto an investigation into their own corruption ffs 10% trumps 90% ??? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroonBear 696 Posted April 27, 2020 Share Posted April 27, 2020 2 hours ago, frenv said: You can shred everything that an auditor might want to be looking at regarding it though. not having something (good or bad) an auditor would look at is just as bad. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
magic8ball 27,901 Posted April 27, 2020 Share Posted April 27, 2020 1 hour ago, Dave Hedgehog said: Keith Jackson’s piece on this tonight is fucking embarrassing and has Hollicom written all over it. Pathetic shite from a cunt that has made it clear a beast title is what he craves. His old boy won’t be proud of his fuckwit son Detective inspector Don Jackson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Shaw 30,464 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 8 hours ago, magic8ball said: There’s no need to keep them sweet ,they just offered reconstruction talks ,they have discussed it and as many already knew it was never happening and some gullible clubs fell for it There’s a need to keep them sweet and onside for any future votes, last thing the Tarriers want at this time is other teams siding with us or going against them. With us calling for an ii and an EGM called to vote on it they’ll do everything they can to keep clubs onside. Not sure they’ll push it through before the EGM but promises will be made. See what happens mate but my guess is some form of reconstruction that keeps most clubs happy will happen by hook or crook. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueThunder 8,453 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 4 hours ago, bluenoz said: You can't shred evidence already in Rangers hands. Maybe not, but you can think up an explanation in the timeframe, altering this and that to validate as necessary. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueThunder 8,453 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 BTW Has MacLennan on whatever he is called responded to the Private Eye quote yet? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingKirk 25,633 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 Telegraph saying our evidence is of maladministration that will be published in due course Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueThunder 8,453 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 Just now, KingKirk said: Telegraph saying our evidence is of maladministration that will be published in due course What the hell is that? Could be anything from writing the wrong date on the top of a document to phoning Peter for advice on how best to proceed. 😀 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingKirk 25,633 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 6 minutes ago, BlueThunder said: What the hell is that? Could be anything from writing the wrong date on the top of a document to phoning Peter for advice on how best to proceed. 😀 Something not good no need to use the big fancy word😁😁😁 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
magic8ball 27,901 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 1 hour ago, Tiger Shaw said: There’s a need to keep them sweet and onside for any future votes, last thing the Tarriers want at this time is other teams siding with us or going against them. With us calling for an ii and an EGM called to vote on it they’ll do everything they can to keep clubs onside. Not sure they’ll push it through before the EGM but promises will be made. See what happens mate but my guess is some form of reconstruction that keeps most clubs happy will happen by hook or crook. It could happen and keep the suckers of tarrier cock happy but I reckon that the financial implications for most clubs will prove a stumbling block and wait for the next problem ,Sky wanting to renegotiate the deal due to change of product “sorry guys we tried but we cant afford to lose money in this uncertain climate “ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
magic8ball 27,901 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 3 hours ago, the cry was no said: Thats what I believe. If Jackson is correct then 38 teams could vote yes and the 4 prep votes (Scum, Hamilton, Motherwell and Livingston) could veto an investigation into their own corruption ffs 10% trumps 90% ??? Wasn’t that long ago that the fake 15pc were holding the SPFL to ransom ,😀 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drumloyal 14,966 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 1 hour ago, BlueThunder said: What the hell is that? Could be anything from writing the wrong date on the top of a document to phoning Peter for advice on how best to proceed. 😀 I'm no expert but I'm fairly sure that for any private company trying to raise funds via sponsorship, corporate malpractice is like going on tinder and advertising yerself as having aids. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottyscott1963 18,293 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 1 hour ago, magic8ball said: “sorry guys we tried but we cant afford to lose money in this uncertain climate “ What a fucking Royal Flush hand that would be Can actually hear the bastards running around the HQ opening cupboard doors looking for places to hide Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottyscott1963 18,293 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 2 hours ago, KingKirk said: Telegraph saying our evidence is of maladministration that will be published in due course Think that was along the same lines as the word THEY used when the jammy bastards progressed in the CL,after getting their arses felt 6-2 and the home leg result was overturned because of an unregistered player was used??. If so....then KARMA indeed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcbear 10,913 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 4 hours ago, KingKirk said: Telegraph saying our evidence is of maladministration that will be published in due course I really hope they meant madministration which we can certainly tag them with🙂 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeparateEntityMyArse 53,715 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 8 hours ago, Dave Hedgehog said: Keith Jackson’s piece on this tonight is fucking embarrassing and has Hollicom written all over it. Pathetic shite from a cunt that has made it clear a beast title is what he craves. He'll already be penning articles trivislising the evidence, or casting it against us somehow. All ready to go to print the moment the first club says it's been received and without him even setting eyes on it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Jela 20,361 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 37 minutes ago, pcbear said: I really hope they meant madministration which we can certainly tag them with🙂 2 seconds just tae a google that 👀 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeparateEntityMyArse 53,715 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 Article 46. "The Board shall be entitled to call General Meetings and shall normally convene General Meetings on four occasions during each Season on dates to be fixed by the Board. Additionally on the requisition of any three (3) Members, the Board shall as soon as reasonably practicable proceed to convene a General Meeting of the Members for a date not less than thirty five (35) days after receipt of the requisition" Just reviewing aspects of the vote structure from the spfl Articles of Association. Seems an anomaly in when the meeting can be arranged for. The set date (12th May) isnt even 35 days from the last vote (10th April) let alone any receipt of resolution. So unless theres another article I've yet to read the GM shouldn't be until a date more than 35 days from the resolution being received. Strange. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brackley 1,401 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 In the interests of #sporting corruption, will it be a secret ballot so we don't know who votes against. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
murzo 7,446 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 18 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said: Article 46. "The Board shall be entitled to call General Meetings and shall normally convene General Meetings on four occasions during each Season on dates to be fixed by the Board. Additionally on the requisition of any three (3) Members, the Board shall as soon as reasonably practicable proceed to convene a General Meeting of the Members for a date not less than thirty five (35) days after receipt of the requisition" Just reviewing aspects of the vote structure from the spfl Articles of Association. Seems an anomaly in when the meeting can be arranged for. The set date (12th May) isnt even 35 days from the last vote (10th April) let alone any receipt of resolution. So unless theres another article I've yet to read the GM shouldn't be until a date more than 35 days from the resolution being received. Strange. Aye seems to contradict itself a wee bit. Is it a GM or an EGM, don’t know if that makes any difference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.