Another battle with SPFL

[Bad Robot 21,150]

15 hours ago, esquire8 said:

https://t.co/xg3YNZO55R

Cheers as I was looking for that last night 

[Bad Robot 21,150]

Trying to get my head around this so is this about saying Rangers don’t need to advertise Cinch as they proved DP has a contractual interest or is this about the arbitration?

 

[Hadron Collider 30,883]

17 minutes ago, Bad Robot said:

Trying to get my head around this so is this about saying Rangers don’t need to advertise Cinch as they proved DP has a contractual interest or is this about the arbitration?

 

Just looking at that mate I would say the spfl are fucked. I’m sure they will try to squirm their way to some other resolution. Cunts! 

[ianb1547 3,767]

27 minutes ago, Bad Robot said:

Trying to get my head around this so is this about saying Rangers don’t need to advertise Cinch as they proved DP has a contractual interest or is this about the arbitration?

 

Im no expert, but I think that refers to Parks' right to be at any arbitration process as an 'interested party'. Court says he does have 'interested party' status (as would Cinch, if they wanted it).

Interesting that the court also points out ther was a contract between Rangers and Parks going back to 2015 that was renewed again a month before the Cinch deal was signed by spfl..........and that is exacty what Rangers have been telling the spfl for months.....we have a pre-existing contract that cannot be trodden on by the cinch deal.

 

[GersInCanada 7,775]

https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/default-source/cos-general-docs/pdf-docs-for-opinions/2021csih61.pdf?sfvrsn=f0711814_1

Read it but only a lawyer would be able to understand it all. 

From what I gathered the SFA are fucked. Surely they have to drop arbitration as Lord Calloway states Park and Rangers have a prima facie case. In other words Park and Rangers have proven beyond doubt that they are in the right.

Parks and Rangers had a written contract from 2015 which was renewed a month before the cinch deal.

[esquire8 42,752]

1 hour ago, Bad Robot said:

Trying to get my head around this so is this about saying Rangers don’t need to advertise Cinch as they proved DP has a contractual interest or is this about the arbitration?

 

Rangers and Parks have a contract. SPFL ignored the board when they said they had one that contradicted the cinch deal and signed with cinch anyway. 

Think it now either means the SPFL continue to waste everyone's time by going through arbitration or they admit they fucked up.

Either way, it will mean the SPFL paying up to Parks/Rangers to make up for this contradiction and therefor Rangers will advertise cinch for now on or cinch somehow strangely accepting that Rangers won't be advertising them and continue on or cinch walking away entirely from the deal. Points 1 or 3 will surely see the end of Doncaster and whoever signed off on the deal costing the SPFL alot of money. 

[Bad Robot 21,150]

I think it’s saying the sfa are only admins and shouldn’t really have an opinion plus they tried to put the boot into Lord O. I think it’s saying 3rd parties can join the arbitration and the spfl should invite them. I’m also getting that they shouldn’t have signed with Cinch which is the bigger picture and hopefully cinch walk away and cunts are sacked 

[Boybluesy 3,708]

1 hour ago, GersInCanada said:

https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/default-source/cos-general-docs/pdf-docs-for-opinions/2021csih61.pdf?sfvrsn=f0711814_1

Read it but only a lawyer would be able to understand it all. 

From what I gathered the SFA are fucked. Surely they have to drop arbitration as Lord Calloway states Park and Rangers have a prima facie case. In other words Park and Rangers have proven beyond doubt that they are in the right.

Parks and Rangers had a written contract from 2015 which was renewed a month before the cinch deal.

The SFA don't need to drop arbitration, they need to include Park now in the arbitration process.   It does all however point to the SPFL being fucked. It looks a stonewaller that Rangers have an existing contractual agreement with a 3rd Party (Park) and that is a conflict of interest with Cinch agreement.  SPFL knew this, were notified by Rangers, but went ahead with Cinch anyway. 

I might be wrong though.

[Bad Robot 21,150]

and cinch get to join the arbitration 

[GersInCanada 7,775]

3 minutes ago, Bad Robot said:

and cinch get to join the arbitration 

If they want to. As usual the whole thing is an SFA mess. Their incompetence is truly staggering. 

[slimjim1690 4,534]

Can't help thinking that Rangers worked a cute one here, I'm thinking Rangers got wind of the SPFL working on a deal with cinch and quietly renewed the contract with Parks to fuck up Doncaster and co, most likely I'm out to lunch here but oh how I'd love that to be true .

[scottyscott1963 18,328]

6 minutes ago, slimjim1690 said:

Can't help thinking that Rangers worked a cute one here, I'm thinking Rangers got wind of the SPFL working on a deal with cinch and quietly renewed the contract with Parks to fuck up Doncaster and co, most likely I'm out to lunch here but oh how I'd love that to be true .

I'm hoping you're 100% spot on mate.
Would love it hinted at,that the arseh**les who run the game here were well and truly ambushed by Parks.

[The hustler 398]

Resignations time at the SPFL surely. 

[GersInCanada 7,775]

8 minutes ago, The hustler said:

Resignations time at the SPFL surely. 

You would think so but don't hold your breath. All depends on what their masters want them to do.

[the cry was no 3,034]

Doncaster could well be toast here.

IF, as seems to be the case, he went ahead and signed a commercial contract without informing Cinch that there was even just a potential conflict of interests which he had been made aware of by a member club, he has majorly fucked up.

So far the whole mess has worked out rather well for Cinch as they have gained huge amounts of additional media coverage, none of which reflects badly on their brand.

If I'm their commercial director the only reason you would currently be seeing my teeth would be the big grin on my face. Bear in mind though that this is a 5 year deal and there looks to be a distinct possibility that the biggest club in the league will not be carrying your logo at any point over the 5 year period and that the "added value" extra coverage will soon be over or, worse, may even start to cause issues. You'd definitely still be seeing my teeth, but I'd definitely not be smiling, I'd be looking for a 40%-50% reduction in my deal to reflect losing the biggest club from my coverage.

Cinch will hold all of the aces IF Doncaster signed the deal knowing there was a potential conflict of interests that he decided to hide from them.

[LochendBilly 8,413]

[Dan Deacon 55,215]

 

😂👏