Jump to content

Club statement | Resolution not deemed competent


OceanRain

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, KeyserSoze said:


us offering to pay for it raises some other issues- I’ll repeat my post from  another thread:

our dossier sets the parameters for an independent enquiry and therefore if we set the parameters and pay for it then it becomes our investigation not an independent one surely?

i just raised this because it needs to be handled carefully and hopefully the members will also add to the scope making it more rounded and common to all 42 clubs. 
 

let’s play devils advocate for a minute 

Is the offer of paying for something a carrot to sway a vote?

and can you draw parallels to offering reconstruction to sway a vote.  
 

Im just throwing something into the mix and hopefully it’s done with proper due diligence that’s all.  

Yeah, I agree it raises issues, if we pay for an independent report, that finds in our favour it will be deemed not to have been independent. Hopefully, the offer, in itself, is enough to encourage others to vote for an investigation - which any serious organisation (I know) will be obliged to pay for itself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 27.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 minute ago, Dave Hedgehog said:

Yesterday was good, today is even better.

Lets see the comeback to Donald Park from the Hollicum brigade.

Sutton and Stewart will really struggle but the paid monies will ensure they throw all reasonable thoughts to one side.

Roger Mitchell will just be Roger Mitchell, a fucking shite talking noncey wee wank.

This truly is a Super Sunday.

Donald Park was a Hearts player from many moons ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, KeyserSoze said:


us offering to pay for it raises some other issues- I’ll repeat my post from  another thread:

our dossier sets the parameters for an independent enquiry and therefore if we set the parameters and pay for it then it becomes our investigation not an independent one surely?

i just raised this because it needs to be handled carefully and hopefully the members will also add to the scope making it more rounded and common to all 42 clubs. 
 

let’s play devils advocate for a minute 

Is the offer of paying for something a carrot to sway a vote?

and can you draw parallels to offering reconstruction to sway a vote.  
 

Im just throwing something into the mix and hopefully it’s done with proper due diligence that’s all.  

Would the investigation be compromised if the SPFL paid for it? 

Typically, in this sort of thing both parties should agree on the scope and who the investigator is 

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Swally said:

Genuinely?  

What the fuck has happened for him to decay into the dug shite he now is?

Yip 100pc ,but funny enough and this is even before he appeared in the Rhebel ,Whenever that other jump the dyke Speirs used to pop up on Scotsport I used to to think to myself he was a Keith Jackson type ,a smug smarmy cunt full of himself 

As a boy he was one of those types that nobody really liked ,he was a wee snivelling spoiled bastard ,reckon his auld man was pretty staunch too ,very very high up in the police and managed to pull a few strings ,Jackson was getting games for one of the Rangers boys clubs despite being no better a player than the rest of us who weren’t getting a sniff ,his football career took a dent when he was about 14,broke his leg in a game against one of Torbetts boys clubs and did seem bitter about that ,makes it al the more strange that he has jumped into bed with Lieswell 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We're sat heads up at the poker table with the SPFL. They have two pair, that Lawell slipped into their pocket, and thought we were bluffing so raised us.

We went all in and said we'd foot the bill for everyone else to buy back in as well.

So we've either got a straight flush or the biggest bluffing balls in history :lol: 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TEFTONG said:

It's an excellent piece and yet I can imagine that the haters and the taig placemen will be tweeting derision and clouding the issue even more in a matter of minutes rather than hours. 

But I'm pleased we have decided to be the ones picking up the tab. It will of course still probably fail. As more Clubs hate us than actually care about their own teams. 

Rangers are trying to clean up and to establish a level playing field for ALL of Scottish football just watch the amount of arseholes who prefer to stick with the status quo.

Sums up Scottish football in anutshell

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Dave Hedgehog said:

Yesterday was good, today is even better.

Lets see the comeback to Donald Park from the Hollicum brigade.

Sutton and Stewart will really struggle but the paid monies will ensure they throw all reasonable thoughts to one side.

Roger Mitchell will just be Roger Mitchell, a fucking shite talking noncey wee wank.

This truly is a Super Sunday.

The only thing Hollicom have left will be to push “there’s no smoking gun” line. They’ve went to Sutton, Stewart, Leckie and Jackson with the “water pistol” line so that’s what they’ll keep trying to say. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, KeyserSoze said:


us offering to pay for it raises some other issues- I’ll repeat my post from  another thread:

our dossier sets the parameters for an independent enquiry and therefore if we set the parameters and pay for it then it becomes our investigation not an independent one surely?

i just raised this because it needs to be handled carefully and hopefully the members will also add to the scope making it more rounded and common to all 42 clubs. 
 

let’s play devils advocate for a minute 

Is the offer of paying for something a carrot to sway a vote?

and can you draw parallels to offering reconstruction to sway a vote.  
 

Im just throwing something into the mix and hopefully it’s done with proper due diligence that’s all.  

I had the same thought mate, but Would an II not include all the other clubs info? I’m sure I read yesterday that clubs would only release their evidence of “bullying and coercion” to an II. Which would mean it wouldn’t be just be our ‘parameters’ that were set. I don’t really know about all this legal stuff, I fully trust the board to have all bases covered which seems to have been the case so far 🇬🇧

Link to post
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, eskbankloyal said:

Agree with the later. MacKenzie & McLennan absolutely despise us. Doncaster is just a patsy who must piss himself laughing everytime his wages drop into his bank. 

As for the former, he’s been Chairman for a number of years now and survived. There’s been no appetite to remove him 

My guess .He is ever so nice to their faces .A salesman if you like .Yet in reality an errand boy for his real paymasters 

All the others will mostly buy into his one to one charm most likely .He is the facade of the Spfl .Yet the other 2 will most likely be doing most of the bullying ,all under zee orders .

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, KeyserSoze said:


us offering to pay for it raises some other issues- I’ll repeat my post from  another thread:

our dossier sets the parameters for an independent enquiry and therefore if we set the parameters and pay for it then it becomes our investigation not an independent one surely?

i just raised this because it needs to be handled carefully and hopefully the members will also add to the scope making it more rounded and common to all 42 clubs. 
 

let’s play devils advocate for a minute 

Is the offer of paying for something a carrot to sway a vote?

and can you draw parallels to offering reconstruction to sway a vote.  
 

Im just throwing something into the mix and hopefully it’s done with proper due diligence that’s all.  

I can see your point regarding the offer to pay for it, however if we have zero input into who conducts the investigation then it couldn't be called into question as to whether it independant  or not,  i'm hoping that feedback from other clubs is that they would vote in favour but are concerned about costs, that just takes any excuse away from clubs trying to vote against, for the other 41 clubs an investigation is now a complete win win

Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Dickie1963 said:

What skills did the SPFL Board think McLennan had to lead SPFL.

He had none and that tells it's own story.

He was bumped previously .He had the most important feature anyone could have 

He is on record saying he despised Rangers 

That is good enough to get him the job on Puedo Petes cabal 

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, left winger said:

Yeah, I agree it raises issues, if we pay for an independent report, that finds in our favour it will be deemed not to have been independent. Hopefully, the offer, in itself, is enough to encourage others to vote for an investigation - which any serious organisation (I know) will be obliged to pay for itself.

The thing is it’s going to need to be 75pc of the clubs to vote for the inquiry to go ahead as it stands ,Even with our firm stance and information bringing some clubs onside to our way of thinking it’s unlikely to be enough ,
 

But supposing enough clubs vote for it that will be a very large body of clubs wanting an investigation ,Of course the spin would be its the “Rangers” investigation but it would still be something the vast majority of the clubs wanted 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The independent investigation company will need to be from the other side of the world. They will be scrutinised like no other and employees will have background checks done by our MSM that will put the checks done by HMG to shame. 

MSM will try and derail as much as they can if they are not being fed the little digs and info as they currently do. 

Whoever gets the job will need to ensure the report is secured better than a submarine hatch until finalised and published.

Not on twitter or fud book it will be an interesting day for those yahoos  (Stewart, Sutton) and the likes. Wonder what narrative Holicom will push out.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, B1872 said:

The only thing Hollicom have left will be to push “there’s no smoking gun” line. They’ve went to Sutton, Stewart, Leckie and Jackson with the “water pistol” line so that’s what they’ll keep trying to say. 

Nothing to fear from a ‘free’ inquiry then

Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Dickie1963 said:

What skills did the SPFL Board think McLennan had to lead SPFL.

He had none and that tells it's own story.

That is a good point,

The job comes with prestige and  without knowing the salary I assume it will be a handsome package, this will be a job that would have been pretty sought after and cv's from many highly qualified individuals would have landed at the SPFL,

So just how would this job position end up being filled by this man?

I am sure all the interviews and application paperwork will still be available to  view, and the process that allowed this man to get the big leather chair.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fucking kid you not Davie Provan has an article and he states “Peter Lawwell’s handling of all this has given him the moral high ground”

Peter ‘tour of Japan’ Lawwell?

Peter ‘tax dodger’ Lawwell?

And most disgusting of all.

Peter ‘separate entity’ Lawwell?????

Just WOW!

Link to post
Share on other sites

After a long lie in this morning I've come to the conclusion, with reading the whole notes from Park, that I'm no longer caring about the EGM. Everything he has said is gearing towards something bigger than the EGM. He knows the vote will fail but is going to fight this until justice is done.

The crooks at SPFL may see this EGM vote as a win but if around 40-50% vote against them then we've won and are fighting the good fight.

No fucking surrender for our board and us fans backing them against the tarrier hoard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a great way to start the day. Every member of the board is playing a blinder on this.

Offering to pay for the inquiry removes their biggest objection. "Cost should never be a barrier to proper governance. If our resolution is passed on Tuesday we will be willing to fund the costs of an Independent Investigation covering the scope outlined in our resolution."

A couple of posters have asked about the end game. Just my 2 cents worth but I think it is with the aim of restoring parity within Scottish football and ending it being run by and for only one club.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, B1872 said:

Fucking kid you not Davie Provan has an article and he states “Peter Lawwell’s handling of all this has given him the moral high ground”

Peter ‘tour of Japan’ Lawwell?

Peter ‘tax dodger’ Lawwell?

And most disgusting of all.

Peter ‘separate entity’ Lawwell?????

Just WOW!

How does he know how Lawwell is handling this? The fat jap has said zero publically. Unless he is meaning how he is handling his puppets......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...