Club statement | Resolution not deemed competent

[Malkster 4,849]

8 minutes ago, SpidermansGaffer said:

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

small amendment

[gmcf 34,085]

2 minutes ago, graeme_4 said:

Lack of evidence IMO.

Not exactly the smoking gun I was hoping for. More just a series of probable but unproven accusations. 

Have you read the document ? 

Very thorough imo and shows why we need an independent inquiry.  

[Courtyard Bear 41,357]

24 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 ?

Don’t think the SFA have any say on what the clubs and the SPFL are arguing about. 
In a sensible world you would maybe go to the SFA to hold the enquiry but do any of us believe they could be impartial and above board. 
 

As for the points raised there is more than enough for an enquiry. 

[gmcf 34,085]

14 minutes ago, bluenoz said:

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.

I think a lot of people have been to hasty in judging . I think it a very good dossier .

[GersInCanada 7,775]

An English journalist will read it, digest it, assess the implications and then form an opinion on it before going public with their comments.

All Scottish clubs and the SPFL themselves ought to be doing the same.

[KingKirk 25,571]

Any update troops

[Malkster 4,849]

12 minutes ago, thebluedoo said:

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

reminiscent of 2012 

[bluenoz 30,580]

Just now, gmcf said:

I think a lot of people have been to hasty in judging . I think it a very good dossier .

Me included. On my first review, I felt there was nothing in it I didn't already know. When I read it again, it carried more weight. The board has presented a great dossier even though it won't be enough.

[bornabear 6,197]

43 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.

Corporate law mate, which has many powers.

Company House could be all over this like a rash.

 

[bornabear 6,197]

29 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 ?

The whistleblower thing is Rangers' ace card, no need to use it just yet.

[esquire8 42,232]

A short thread for those who can't be arsed reading the 19 page dossier. Does miss alot of other stuff in it too.

[Malkster 4,849]

just hope some body is willing to take it on

[Hadron Collider 30,742]

The fucking galling thing about all of this is that they all fucking need us. They need us to keep them relevant. No Rangers, no decent money for tv. No proper coefficient for Europe. Scottish football = toilet. 

[BoydsFavouriteDonut 230]

Clubs think they are clever leaking this but it is full of references to (formerly) privileged legal advice. Sure Sky and others are reading with interest. 

[Malkster 4,849]

1 minute ago, Hadron Collider said:

The fucking galling thing about all of this is that they all fucking need us. They need us to keep them relevant. No Rangers, no decent money for tv. No proper coefficient for Europe. Scottish football = toilet. 

addendum: tarriers rake it in

[Parlaneloyal 353]

Any reactions from any of the other clubs?(obviously no them)

We really need others to come out and join us in this.

[esquire8 42,232]

2 minutes ago, Malkster said:

just hope some body is willing to take it on

Somebody by which you mean a QC? The independent investigation will not happen. CAS is needed.

[Hadron Collider 30,742]

Just now, Malkster said:

addendum: tarriers rake it in

Rake what in mate?  What sponsor will put money into it?  

[esquire8 42,232]

1 minute ago, BoydsFavouriteDonut said:

Clubs think they are clever leaking this but it is full of references to (formerly) privileged legal advice. Sure Sky and others are reading with interest. 

Not one actual reporter is quoting the dossier. They are just saying it's out there. They'll have to tread carefully when reporting on this. I'm positive the number marker on the document reveals the club who it was sent to.

[Malkster 4,849]

Just now, esquire8 said:

Somebody by which you mean a QC? The independent investigation will not happen. CAS is needed.

company house, QC, CAS, right must prevail!

[bornabear 6,197]

Just now, Hadron Collider said:

Rake what in mate?  What sponsor will put money into it?  

Not now they won't, not even with a barge pole.

[Swally 6,289]

All I can do is give my opinion which basically echos what others have said. 

First, Rangers have a right to ask for a more in-depth investigation, as a member club we should be able to bring our concerns to the SPFL and have them listened to without bias or agenda driving the outcome. Although I would say we have shown a strong presence during all of this, we have not pushed our own agenda - like some other "clubs" ie Lennon and Brown saying they should get the title. We have been professional, and respectful throughout. The media and the SPFL have not.

We are asking for an investigation, this investigation will lead to more evidence being collected - this is all we're asking for. We are wanting an independent, unbiased person to look for new evidence and collect the evidence we already have - they can then take this forward. After reading the document I am sure it did say we had evidence but due to the sensitivity could not release it in this document. I could be wrong on that point, but I am sure I read it somewhere, for example the Whatsapp messages and member clubs contacting us with their concerns.

It is clear the SPFL was trying to hide important information from member clubs, and trying to derail another solution in order to push through there solution. This was being done in haste at a time of unprecedented  financial pressure impacting its member clubs due to the Coronavirus. Surely due to the current crisis, all solutions should have been properly reviewed and the correct procedures followed in order to ensure the correct decisions were being made? Otherwise due to the uncertainty  Scottish football now faces, it could see the death of many of its member clubs?

Even in this world of covering your own arse the SPFL have not done a good job of it, they have put themselves at risk by not following their own rules of corporate governance and have left threads everywhere ready to be picked up and pulled on.

Our aim was to provide a dossier to put to all other member clubs in order to force through a true external investigation, it would be lunacy to give the evidence now. It would simply give the SPFL a heads up and allow them to cover it up as much as they could.

Finally, I would say that we have wanted our board to fight our cause for years now. Now they're starting to do it, and they're doing it in a professional manner. So I would ask people to think about that before complaining.  It is very difficult to find evidence of corruption etc, because the people who are part of it make damn  sure no evidence can be found, or that it cannot be pinned on them.

[gmcf 34,085]

5 minutes ago, bluenoz said:

Me included. On my first review, I felt there was nothing in it I didn't already know. When I read it again, it carried more weight. The board has presented a great dossier even though it won't be enough.

I don't think it will pass the 75% of clubs , but who knows , enough clubs may call for a vote of no confidence in the spfl hierarchy . Certainly cards have been marked and eyes opened . 

[Essandoh 21,157]

7 minutes ago, esquire8 said:

A short thread for those who can't be arsed reading the 19 page dossier. Does miss alot of other stuff in it too.

“Rangers go on to say they’ve ‘been advised by several member clubs that they have additional information that they would like to disclose concerning these events but that they would only do so with the protection of an independent investigation.”

End of debate surely? They simply have to open this up

[the old guard 2,312]

2 minutes ago, Parlaneloyal said:

Any reactions from any of the other clubs?(obviously no them)

We really need others to come out and join us in this.

Especially the two guys from dundee and Inverness who were bullied by the Dunfermline chairman and that arshole mulraney from alloa, they should be outed, this would open it up a fair bit further.