SPFL Shambles

[Howsitgoing 4,281]

2 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

What specifically have they said on that point?

 

Just now, Copland bear said:

Well why have they not started any legal action  against him ?  If they have the evidence then start legal proceedings and get rid of the cunt asap.

That's what we fans want.  Action not words as the boards words are always cheap and let us down. . 

“In summing up, Rangers claim their legal advice is that they have a ‘reasonably good prospect of obtaining, from the court, an order for Mr Doncaster’s removal as director and Chief Executive.’“

The board fail to take this legal advice then they have let us down, again.

[Copland bear 7,966]

Just now, Howsitgoing said:

 

“In summing up, Rangers claim their legal advice is that they have a ‘reasonably good prospect of obtaining, from the court, an order for Mr Doncaster’s removal as director and Chief Executive.’“

The board fail to take this legal advice then they have let us down, again.

They should have started legal proceedings against him before they were gifted the title.    

Once again our board sitting on their hands left wanting.  

But then again the board won't put their hands in their own pockets.  

[magic8ball 27,901]

17 minutes ago, eejay the dj said:

Yeah weak as piss . He knows if he said this , he would definitely not be getting anymore of the big games 

From our perspective he definitely can’t get anymore games nevermind big ones ,We all know that the taigs get their cages rattled if we get anything in any game we play ,The cup game against Hamilton with the Goldson hand ball incident the cunts were spewing and filling the phone ins 

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,610]

2 minutes ago, Copland bear said:

They should have started legal proceedings against him before they were gifted the title.    

Once again our board sitting on their hands left wanting.  

But then again the board won't put their hands in their own pockets.  

What, like by offering to pay for independent investigations?

[Howsitgoing 4,281]

3 minutes ago, Copland bear said:

They should have started legal proceedings against him before they were gifted the title.    

Once again our board sitting on their hands left wanting.  

But then again the board won't put their hands in their own pockets.  

I disagree with you there, think they are doing the right thing going through all available procedures. Maybe they are currently continuing this via SFA and that’s holding up the court case, it would be good to hear a statement from them informing us of what’s going on. It’s not as if we can rely on the media to keep us up to date.

[magic8ball 27,901]

4 minutes ago, Copland bear said:

They should have started legal proceedings against him before they were gifted the title.    

Once again our board sitting on their hands left wanting.  

But then again the board won't put their hands in their own pockets.  

We don’t know if they have or haven’t started any process yet 

[GersInCanada 7,775]

Nothing more than hope from me but if the board are waiting for Hearts to challenge the Dundee vote (from which all stems) then at that point they may take legal action to have certain officials forcibly removed.

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,610]

6 minutes ago, Howsitgoing said:

 

“In summing up, Rangers claim their legal advice is that they have a ‘reasonably good prospect of obtaining, from the court, an order for Mr Doncaster’s removal as director and Chief Executive.’“

The board fail to take this legal advice then they have let us down, again.

That was said in relation to getting the independent investigation resolution supported. It failed.

It may well be the case that there is still sufficient evidence to proceed with court action, but it's as likely that the findings from an independent investigation are crucial to support such action.

The club have tried to move it away from being a Rangers v spfl fight, I'd imagine theres strength in numbers complaining about company law issues. As soon as we as a club take action that so few others support, we're in a weaker legal position and the club will be aware of this. I hope they take action but doing it alone with only a reasonably good prospect of success is a dangerous strategy.

[B1872 20,648]

Don’t know if I’m late to the party in all of this but folk on FF are saying Rangers and Hearts rejected the proposal to end the season early.

However as we are all aware the SPFL released a statement saying it was unanimous.

Rangers need to come out and clarify what their stance was and if they in fact did vote to end the season ASAP.

[sRcFoCt 7,639]

If the board agree to this there will be no way back, they screwed us over then they come swaggering back to change fixtures to help out.

Tell them to FUCK OFF

 

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,610]

20 minutes ago, Howsitgoing said:

They have quoted that they have enough evidence to remove Doncaster from his role via court proceedings. 

We have said we have a reasonably good prospect. That is distinctly different from saying we have enough evidence to remove Doncaster.

[GersInCanada 7,775]

1 minute ago, B1872 said:

Don’t know if I’m late to the party in all of this but folk on FF are saying Rangers and Hearts rejected the proposal to end the season early.

However as we are all aware the SPFL released a statement saying it was unanimous.

Rangers need to come out and clarify what their stance was and if they in fact did vote to end the season ASAP.

Article in the Express yesterday basically stating that the vote was not unanimous as the SPFL claimed.

[Copland bear 7,966]

9 minutes ago, magic8ball said:

We don’t know if they have or haven’t started any process yet 

Well,we should know. 

[Howsitgoing 4,281]

1 minute ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

We have said we have a reasonably good prospect. That is distinctly different from saying we have enough evidence to remove Doncaster.

 They have a ‘reasonably good prospect of obtaining, from the court, an order for Mr Doncaster’s removal as director and Chief Executive.’ If we go to court and fail then that’s one thing but if we ignore advice that I believe has come from a QC saying that we have a reasonable good prospect of removing Doncaster then they have let us down. 

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,610]

2 minutes ago, GersInCanada said:

Article in the Express yesterday basically stating that the vote was not unanimous as the SPFL claimed.

I'm guessing that we agreed there was no likelihood of getting games played within a certain timescale (fair enough if it was in the next month or so) and the spfl manipulated this to say we and others unanimously supported the scum getting awarded the title. We didn't as we voted against that.

It's a play on words pur Board could easily clarify. Not that it'll change anything.

[GersInCanada 7,775]

2 minutes ago, Copland bear said:

Well,we should know. 

Agree. Unless there are strong legal reasons for keeping silent then they should have come out by now and said something like 'we are not letting this rest'. No need for detail.

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,610]

1 minute ago, Howsitgoing said:

 They have a ‘reasonably good prospect of obtaining, from the court, an order for Mr Doncaster’s removal as director and Chief Executive.’ If we go to court and fail then that’s one thing but if we ignore advice that I believe has come from a QC saying that we have a reasonable good prospect of removing Doncaster then they have let us down. 

So because we dont know what the club are doing in a legal context about a matter we have a prospect of winning (not the same as saying we have sufficient evidence and it's a categorical certainty) then it's a fair assumption we've shat it?

[magic8ball 27,901]

5 minutes ago, GersInCanada said:

Article in the Express yesterday basically stating that the vote was not unanimous as the SPFL claimed.

I don’t know how they can come out with something that is an obvious lie ,Even an idiot would know that Hearts wouldn’t vote to relegate themselves ,Just another example of the SPFL doing and saying what they want because they believe they are untouchable 

[Howsitgoing 4,281]

Just now, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

So because we dont know what the club are doing in a legal context about a matter we have a prospect of winning (not the same as saying we have sufficient evidence and it's a categorical certainty) then it's a fair assumption we've shat it?

No never said that, did say they could do better to keep us in the loop, it’s not as if we can trust the media to do so.

I’m pinning my hopes on Rangers currently continuing the complaint via the SFA and once they inevitably turn that complaint down it’ll then be time for litigations. 

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,610]

2 minutes ago, Howsitgoing said:

No never said that, did say they could do better to keep us in the loop, it’s not as if we can trust the media to do so.

I’m pinning my hopes on Rangers currently continuing the complaint via the SFA and once they inevitably turn that complaint down it’ll then be time for litigations. 

So folk saying the Board have shat it are right or wrong?

[Howsitgoing 4,281]

1 minute ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

So folk saying the Board have what it are right or wrong?

Folk saying it are right. If Rangers were better in keeping us informed then they won’t be saying it. Why the silence, a simple statement saying this is not finished and we are continuing going through the channels is all that’s required. 

[GersInCanada 7,775]

4 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

So folk saying the Board have shat it are right or wrong?

We just don't know and the jury is out with some voting for 'shat it' and others are of a different opinion. I remain cautiously optimistic.

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,610]

2 minutes ago, Howsitgoing said:

Folk saying it are right. If Rangers were better in keeping us informed then they won’t be saying it. Why the silence, a simple statement saying this is not finished and we are continuing going through the channels is all that’s required. 

Guess you're right if your default position is to criticise 

[eejay the dj 31,964]

58 minutes ago, Dickie1963 said:

Board has stated categorically that the Status Quo cannot be maintained

That was before the result of the second vote . Not heard a peep since 

[Dickie1963 2,352]

3 minutes ago, eejay the dj said:

That was before the result of the second vote . Not heard a peep since 

I am not sure second vote changes much. It was a vote to agree season couldnt be concluded. 

Waiting to see what Hearts, Partick, Stranraer and Kelty do I presume. 

Really surprised they havent given Doncaster a new 4 year contract to make it more expensive to get rid of him unless we can get him sacked.