Another battle with SPFL

[ScottBF2 3,540]

3 minutes ago, born a blue nose said:

😂😂😂😂

Absolutely fuming 

Aye, absolute rage inducing patter from you. Shat it IMO

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,510]

3 hours ago, The Dude said:

Think the SPFLs view is that Parks aren't a member of the SPFL so have no part in a dispute over the SPFL rules 

Are Cinch a member of the SPFL because they wanted them included did they not?

Also If we have a legal contract with Parks, then I think we are on pretty strong ground, but might be wrong. They clearly act as a sponsor as their bus is never off the telly pre match when they are dropping the team off.

One thing im not sure about is if the contract will have an exclusivity clause in it. If they have missed this, then that could be the angle the SPFL/SFA try to get round it.

None of us know at the end of the day. We might win, we might lose. If we lose though, I doubt much will happen other than us being forced into a bit of a climb down and the shame that comes with that.

[Malkytfp1 18,801]

4 minutes ago, MisterC said:

Fuck me it's a bad night when admin swaps the ban hammer for salted popcorn 🤣

[born a blue nose 91,244]

2 minutes ago, Malkytfp1 said:

Fuck me it's a bad night when admin swaps the ban hammer for salted popcorn 🤣

😂

I'd have accepted a ban tbh (48 hour max) attitude has been despicable tonight 

Thankfully Rabs just took me right off the hotseat tho 

 

 

 

 

[ScottBF2 3,540]

Just now, born a blue nose said:

😂

I'd have accepted a ban tbh (48 hour max) attitude has been despicable tonight 

Thankfully Rabs just took me right off the hotseat tho 

 

 

 

 

Glad you’ve admitted you were wrong, happy to accept your apology and draw a line under it for it now.

[born a blue nose 91,244]

Just now, ScottBF2 said:

Glad you’ve admitted you were wrong, happy to accept your apology and draw a line under it for it now.

Naw mate av quoted you in another thread ya turn coat bastard 😂😂

[ScottBF2 3,540]

Just now, born a blue nose said:

Naw mate av quoted you in another thread ya turn coat bastard 😂😂

I accept your apology.

[born a blue nose 91,244]

Just now, ScottBF2 said:

I accept your apology.

Reply on the other thread Judas 

[ScottBF2 3,540]

3 minutes ago, born a blue nose said:

Reply on the other thread Judas 

You’re becoming fair creepy.

[The Dude 20,026]

13 minutes ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

Are Cinch a member of the SPFL because they wanted them included did they not?

Also If we have a legal contract with Parks, then I think we are on pretty strong ground, but might be wrong. They clearly act as a sponsor as their bus is never off the telly pre match when they are dropping the team off.

One thing im not sure about is if the contract will have an exclusivity clause in it. If they have missed this, then that could be the angle the SPFL/SFA try to get round it.

None of us know at the end of the day. We might win, we might lose. If we lose though, I doubt much will happen other than us being forced into a bit of a climb down and the shame that comes with that.

That means they also sponsor Celtic, who have been able to comply with the cinch deal without breaching their contract with Parks 

[ScottBF2 3,540]

Just now, The Dude said:

That means they also sponsor Celtic, who have been able to comply with the cinch deal without breaching their contract with Parks 

That’s another angle I hadn’t considered, suppose it’s not unreasonable to suggest maybe our agreement with Parks might be different to that lot’s, but who knows really

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,510]

46 minutes ago, The Dude said:

That means they also sponsor Celtic, who have been able to comply with the cinch deal without breaching their contract with Parks 

Maybe Celtic would have been willing to cancel the deal with Parks if they had an exit clause, or maybe they knew Rangers were objecting so did not want to get involved when we were already were taking the fight.

Could be a number of reasons why they would not get involved, number one being not wanting to be seen as siding with the Chairman of their biggest rivals against the authorities.

[scottyscott1963 18,689]

5 hours ago, 10pshortof17pound said:

Is arbitration still proceeding?

When it get's under way the cunts might have to deal with a senior level car salesman,and i don't fancy that bunch of clowns of doncaster,mucklennan and petries chances.....toot toot 

[Davy Vandenbroucke 26,499]

Just heard that @ScottBF2 has requested an interim interdict against @born a blue nose

[Blue Nosed Babe 21,058]

4 hours ago, maverick1200 said:

I just hope we have something to back up our claims otherwise we are going to look like twats. 

The media will have feeding frenzy. 

Rangers pay lawyers a lot of cash to ensure we do.

Parks group would not have raised the action if there was no chance of success. Court of Session actions are very expensive.

I am glad we are continuing to batter them through the courts. Doncaster et al should have gone after the 8.75 debacle.

[Blue Nosed Babe 21,058]

6 hours ago, ScottBF2 said:

If you think the SFA and the SPFL aren't on the same wavelength then yes.

 

Unfortunately history tells us that isn't true, and one tends to protect the other even when they're wrong.

I do believe courts can still be the final arbiter.

Arbitration is a mechanism to resolve disputes as an alternative to courts. Ultimately legal action is always an option if nothing can be resolved. 

[We Will Follow Rangers 13,033]

3 minutes ago, Blue Nosed Babe said:

I do believe courts can still be the final arbiter.

Dont think so, UEFA Court of Arbitration for Sport probably is, UEFA take a dim view of clubs who take their associations to court.

[Blue Nosed Babe 21,058]

2 minutes ago, We Will Follow Rangers said:

Dont think so, UEFA Court of Arbitration for Sport probably is, UEFA take a dim view of clubs who take their associations to court.

This is a contractual dispute not a sporting one. If arbitration fails, we go to court.

[We Will Follow Rangers 13,033]

1 minute ago, Blue Nosed Babe said:

This is a contractual dispute not a sporting one. If arbitration fails, we go to court.

  UEFA statutes, Article 60 - Obligation to Refer Disputes to Court of Arbitration. Any Dispute be referred in the last instance to an independent and impartial court of arbitration, to the exclusion of any ordinary court. The club cant take an association to local law court.

Article 59 states that In order to play in Europe, every year, we have to confirm to UEFA in writing that the club, its players and officials have acknowledged and accepted these obligations.

 

[Blue Nosed Babe 21,058]

1 minute ago, We Will Follow Rangers said:

  UEFA statutes, Article 60 - Obligation to Refer Disputes to Court of Arbitration. Any Dispute be referred in the last instance to an independent and impartial court of arbitration, to the exclusion of any ordinary court. The club cant take an association to local law court.

Article 59 states that In order to play in Europe, every year, we have to confirm to UEFA in writing that the club, its players and officials have acknowledged and accepted these obligations.

 

Nothing to stop Parks the company from raising court actions.

Furthermore one may question just how independent and impartial SFA arbitration would be.

[We Will Follow Rangers 13,033]

7 minutes ago, Blue Nosed Babe said:

Nothing to stop Parks the company from raising court actions.

Would have to step down from as chairman if he wanted to fight our corner but as yesterday showed, he's perfectly clear to fight his own.

 

[Blue Nosed Babe 21,058]

1 minute ago, We Will Follow Rangers said:

Would have to step down from as chairman if he wanted to fight our corner but as yesterday showed, he's perfectly clear to fight his own.

 It may happen, who knows. Parks the company can do as they please. He has a fiduciary duty to Parks as well as Rangers, something Doncaster has but never seems to follow it. He may still stay on the Rangers board even if he steps down but he may have to go to court on behalf of Parks.

The SFA and SPFL are in a precarious position.

[We Will Follow Rangers 13,033]

1 minute ago, Blue Nosed Babe said:

 It may happen, who knows. Parks the company can do as they please. He has a fiduciary duty to Parks as well as Rangers, something Doncaster has but never seems to follow it. He may still stay on the Rangers board even if he steps down but he may have to go to court on behalf of Parks.

The SFA and SPFL are in a precarious position.

Indeed, I'm taking the clubs agreement to abide by local arbitration as the club being pretty confidant about its position, a wee bit of fighting only the battles you know you can win, its also pretty clear its part of a wider agenda to cleanse the SFA and SPFL.

[ScottBF2 3,540]

4 hours ago, Blue Nosed Babe said:

I do believe courts can still be the final arbiter.

Arbitration is a mechanism to resolve disputes as an alternative to courts. Ultimately legal action is always an option if nothing can be resolved. 

I hope you’re right, just our track record on these sorts of cases seems to suggest we’re going to lose. Maybe we’ve finally learned our lesson.

[Sparkle 53,909]

9 hours ago, Malkytfp1 said:

Fuck me it's a bad night when admin swaps the ban hammer for salted popcorn 🤣

That’s a good night