Jump to content

Club statement | Resolution not deemed competent


OceanRain

Recommended Posts

I’m seeing a lot of comments and agreements that we should go to court. Now as this seems to be administration of the rules and not criminal use of the rule book, what are we expecting a court to rule on. And what decisions, in our favour, could a court come up with. Would we not be better going to uefa, and I’m fully aware Pete is a integral  member there. I have little knowledge of corporate governance so I’m rightly fearful of what we can possibly expect should the II fail to happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 27.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The summary, provided we can provide evidence, contains tons of damming things against the SPFL and Doncaster in particular...

 

Doncaster's  failure to report to the SPFL board the alleged  bullying towards 2 Championship clubs to vote for the resolution or face financial penalties

The omission of the possible financial penalties regarding the broadcast rights if the season is ended early

The failure of Doncaster to seek board approval before releasing the briefing prior to the vote

Doncaster being prepared to renegotiate the sponsorship/broadcasting rights for next year without consent

Probably the most damming and one which highlights the corruption of the vote...

The SPFL and SFA seeking UEFA waiver to end the season early "as the majority of clubs were for it" days before the clubs voted and without any input from clubs

 

This isn't going to be enough to convince 75% of clubs to vote for a Independent investigation as positions are entrenched, it does however as other have suggested bode well for the inevitable court case. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Domthenbud said:

I’m seeing a lot of comments and agreements that we should go to court. Now as this seems to be administration of the rules and not criminal use of the rule book, what are we expecting a court to rule on. And what decisions, in our favour, could a court come up with. Would we not be better going to uefa, and I’m fully aware Pete is a integral  member there. I have little knowledge of corporate governance so I’m rightly fearful of what we can possibly expect should the II fail to happen.

CAS. Only way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ritchieshearercaldow said:

 

Is there anybody not corrupt ? Going by that we could add Ross McArthur and Ken Ferguson to the charge sheet . 

This thing is getting bigger and bigger the more we delve into it . 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, gmcf said:

Is there anybody not corrupt ? Going by that we could add Ross McArthur and Ken Ferguson to the charge sheet . 

This thing is getting bigger and bigger the more we delve into it . 

McArthur, Ferguson and Mulraney were always in the firing line for bullying. Using their status on the boards of the SPFL and SFA to force clubs into voting yes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Domthenbud said:

I’m seeing a lot of comments and agreements that we should go to court. Now as this seems to be administration of the rules and not criminal use of the rule book, what are we expecting a court to rule on. And what decisions, in our favour, could a court come up with. Would we not be better going to uefa, and I’m fully aware Pete is a integral  member there. I have little knowledge of corporate governance so I’m rightly fearful of what we can possibly expect should the II fail to happen.

Point 6 (early in the summary) - with reference to common law and statutory duties (business law)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Courtyard Bear said:

Can only think there is a procedure to take and court is the last resort. 
Let’s be honest nobody wants this in court and all the costs that incur. 

Not read the summary and no mention of the whistle blower apparently, but there seems by reading many posts over the last wee while, to be enough to warrant an Ind Inquiry, but it also seems that we will never get enough clubs to vote for it.

Speaking about the courts and last resort, would our next step not be the SFA (just onto the next cabal, and we know where that will go, nowhere) or have I got that wrong ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bluenoz said:

Are UEFA watching? Do they care? After all, it turns out they got the first piece of communication from the spfl.

UEFA don't care we are a skid mark on the football map.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Malkster said:

Will our evidence be enough to swing any club other than the ones backing us?

remains to be seen

Probably pull in a few that were sitting on the fence but the amount of tarrier backing fucks will cabosh any vote. Again Hamilton, Motherwell, St Mirren and Livingston will vote no regardless 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bears r us said:

Not read the summary and no mention of the whistle blower apparently, but there seems by reading many posts over the last wee while, to be enough to warrant an Ind Inquiry, but it also seems that we will never get enough clubs to vote for it.

Speaking about the courts and last resort, would our next step not be the SFA (just onto the next cabal, and we know where that will go, nowhere) or have I got that wrong ?

No mention of whistleblower but mention of clubs unwilling to give evidence apart to an independent inquiry due to fears of repercussion. 

Must remember that this is only the first shot in the  war.

I am not sure where we go after a failed vote. Could be the SFA, I suppose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If any of the club's who read the whole document do not vote for an independent inquiry, then they will be the ones on Pete's Payroll. 

Got them bang to rights Rangers. Brilliant. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not understanding the spfl's hasty statement. They basically said there is no evidence of bullying when we have clearly shown ample or at least suggested for an external investigation to determine.

I think they rushed to judge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Malkster said:

Will our evidence be enough to swing any club other than the ones backing us?

remains to be seen

They need to take a long hard look at themselves and ask which is better - fucking Rangers over or getting fucked over ourselves by the body that is supposed to be looking after us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheFamousPigeon said:

The document was scanned with a RICOH MP C3004 printer.

 

Actually made me think that to canary trap you don't need to include small mistakes or differences in the document text. You could in fact separately scan each time for each body you're giving it to and then use that to find out who leaked it.

It would be impossible for those in receipt of the document to know the difference and that they're being baited.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I correct in saying that 75% of each individual division need to vote in favour of the Indi Investigation to get it to pass?  Strikes me as a ridiculous level to meet that allows a small; cabal to keep things as  they are in perpetuity forever.  Makes it very easy to bribe a small number of stakeholders to get what you want. Anyone know what the old  SPL and SFL thresholds were?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GersInCanada said:

No mention of whistleblower but mention of clubs unwilling to give evidence apart to an independent inquiry due to fears of repercussion. 

Must remember that this is only the first shot in the  war.

I am not sure where we go after a failed vote. Could be the SFA, I suppose.

Thanks I did not know about the your first sentence.

I read somewhere probably in this thread a few hundred pages ago that the next step would be the SFA, but no idea if that is true or not. My reason for bringing it up is that I assume (maybe wrongly) that we need to exhaust all 'Football Authorities' first before going to court. 

Hopefully we will get more assessments during the next few hours and maybe more bits will come to the fore.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Malkster said:

Will our evidence be enough to swing any club other than the ones backing us?

remains to be seen

Probably not but what it will do is show up how bad a lot of these clubs are, rotten to the core.:drool: Imagine jeopardising your own future to pally up to that cabal who would fuck you over in a second :headwall:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Upcoming Events

    • 21 April 2024 14:00 Until 16:00
      0  
      Rangers v Hearts
      Hampden Park
      Scottish Cup

×
×
  • Create New...