Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twa Cairpets

I think this is critical, and I think you're right.

The "Document" was so appalling I find it very difficult to believe it was sanctioned by the collective SPL Chairmen. If you look a the statements put out by the majority of clubs, it is completely at odds with the tone and the content, which has generally been one of considered realism. The one issused last week was the diametric opposite. Can you really believe the 'tache would put his name to that? Have we ever seen anything even faintly similar in the years he's been at ER? I also think Regan is away at the moment. (Having seen the other stuff Regan has been invoved in within the SFA which I think is very good - the "Scotland United" plan is good, if not somewhat ironic given the current circumstances - it is also completely at odds with the considered and, for the most part, sensible stuff he has issued).

I think Doncaster is the man to blame here, fairly and squarely. It is primarily an SPL document, and I think it does bear his hallmarks of panic and tunnel vision when it comes to the Hun.

Calls for peoples heads is, as this stage premature. The only source I've seen about Petrie/Green was a report on STV without any substance as to the content of the meeting. We dont know if he was wearing a Hibs, SFA or SPL hat. We dont know what th emeeting was about, but we have rushed to 2+2 equalling 4, and condemning without sufficient evidence. I hasten to add, that if the document does turn out to have been an SFA/SPL official thing and Petrie and Regan were either driving forces behind it then their position is clearly untenable.

Despite the easy "they're all corrupt" approach, there are lots of very good people employed by the SFA at all levels, and the change has been visible in the last couple of years below the level of the Professional game, and even there the introduction of the Professional Game Board has wiped away the old committee system in a bonfire of the blazers.

If there are capable people in place, then the turmoil that will follow whatever happens to the Huns is going to need them to manage the game through.

Knee jerk reactions - even if they turn out ultimately to be right, are generally not the best for long term success in any field.

---

I've highlighted what I think are the important parts of your post.

Doncaster is apparently going to speak at the SFL meeting next week and is obviously continuing his desperate attempt to get the Huns back in the SPL asap.

As for RP's meeting with Green; the St Mirren chairman also met with Green last week ,and told him he'd be voting no to Newco in the SPL.

Of course RP was probably concocting some devious scheme that's totally the opposite of his statements so far.:rolleyes:

Well done Clyde - good statement :aok:

Regarding Regan - I think he's actually a good guy from what I've heard from him and what he is trying to do.

The other ones like Doncaster - not too sure about him :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caversham Green

Having given this some thought, it wouldn't surprise me if it emerged that the author of the document was Mr Charles Green.

I got the impression from the news reports that it was circulated by the SFL, but no-one seems to have actually put their name to it and that is very unusual - normally there would be a covering letter or foreword signed by the president/CEO/secretary or someone. It also doesn't read like a document produced by a committee like the SFL or other boards, nor does it look like it was produced by a solicitor like Doncaster or an accountant like Petrie.

What it reads like is a prospectus for a dodgy invesment 'opportunity' and I believe that is Green's stock in trade. He has also shown complete contempt towards the intelligence of anyone that isn't wearing his socks and this document is basically an insult to the reader's intelligence. Green also appears to be very, very stupid and appears to think he can gat away with blatant lies.

If it wasn't actually sent out by Charley, I'm becoming convinced that he was the author.

---

I share your scepticism about the appalling quality of the document. However, given that it has been in the public domain for long enough now, wouldn't you think that someone from the SFL (Longmuir etc.) would have denied that it came from them?

It has also crossed my mind that RP's name has been dropped in, to try and cause some split amongst the non-OF support. That part has certainly worked.... on here at least.:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seveno

I see that Newco have issued a statement saying that they have cancelled all Direct Debits for STs due to the confusion about where the money was going. It seems that they are banking with the Metro Bank. No, I've never heard of it either.

---

Supposed to be an alright bank, mostly branches in London.

Not sure about their business banking. I imagine they take people with bad credit ratings!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

I share your scepticism about the appalling quality of the document. However, given that it has been in the public domain for long enough now, wouldn't you think that someone from the SFL (Longmuir etc.) would have denied that it came from them?

It has also crossed my mind that RP's name has been dropped in, to try and cause some split amongst the non-OF support. That part has certainly worked.... on here at least.:rolleyes:

---

Yes, I would but I would also have expected some sort of comment from whoever issued it anyway and there has been a deafening silence from the authorities. To be honest I'm just gobsmacked about the whole thing and my Green theory is the only one that really makes any modicum of sense to me. Whoever produced it and authorised its distribution is not fit to be in a position of authority IMHO.

One point, if it was produced by the SFL then neither Petrie nor Doncaster is directly implicated and Regan seems to be on holiday but they seem to be getting all the flak. Shirley there's more to come on this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caversham Green

Yes, I would but I would also have expected some sort of comment from whoever issued it anyway and there has been a deafening silence from the authorities. To be honest I'm just gobsmacked about the whole thing and my Green theory is the only one that really makes any modicum of sense to me. Whoever produced it and authorised its distribution is not fit to be in a position of authority IMHO.

One point, if it was produced by the SFL then neither Petrie nor Doncaster is directly implicated and Regan seems to be on holiday but they seem to be getting all the flak. Shirley there's more to come on this.

---

According to the SFL website, they HAVE issued a briefing document. http://www.scottishfootballleague.co...-statement-52/

Whether that is the one in the media, though..... :cb

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caversham Green

Having given this some thought, it wouldn't surprise me if it emerged that the author of the document was Mr Charles Green.

I got the impression from the news reports that it was circulated by the SFL, but no-one seems to have actually put their name to it and that is very unusual - normally there would be a covering letter or foreword signed by the president/CEO/secretary or someone. It also doesn't read like a document produced by a committee like the SFL or other boards, nor does it look like it was produced by a solicitor like Doncaster or an accountant like Petrie.

What it reads like is a prospectus for a dodgy invesment 'opportunity' and I believe that is Green's stock in trade. He has also shown complete contempt towards the intelligence of anyone that isn't wearing his socks and this document is basically an insult to the reader's intelligence. Green also appears to be very, very stupid and appears to think he can gat away with blatant lies.

If it wasn't actually sent out by Charley, I'm becoming convinced that he was the author.

---

Much as I'd love your intuition to be correct, I can't believe for a second that Green had anything to do with it. He would be well and truly out of the game if his involvement came to light.

I've kind of assumed it was from Longmuir, following discussions with SPL. I'm not sure if I came to that conclusion as a result of something I read, or if I'm just making assumptions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

According to the SFL website, they HAVE issued a briefing document. http://www.scottishfootballleague.co...-statement-52/

Whether that is the one in the media, though..... :cb

---

It's the right date so it probably is the one we've seen. I note the Clyde statement refers to a set of papers though, that would suggest there's rather more to it than has appeared in the press. Still an astonishingly bad document though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim44

Much as I'd love your intuition to be correct, I can't believe for a second that Green had anything to do with it. He would be well and truly out of the game if his involvement came to light.

---

There's nothing to prevent Green lobbying the SFL clubs, and that's really what the document we've seen does. In any case, i suspect he will be out of the game anyway if his tawdry little company has to start in SFL3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caversham Green

It's the right date so it probably is the one we've seen. I note the Clyde statement refers to a set of papers though, that would suggest there's rather more to it than has appeared in the press. Still an astonishingly bad document though.



There's nothing to prevent Green lobbying the SFL clubs, and that's really what the document we've seen does. In any case, i suspect he will be out of the game anyway if his tawdry little company has to start in SFL3.

---

Soooooo.... perhaps the one we've seen is his attempt at lobbying? :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Soooooo.... perhaps the one we've seen is his attempt at lobbying? :confused:

---

Could he have requested that his representations were included in the agenda that was sent out ahead of the meeting? :dunno:

It just looks so much like the sort of rubbish people like him produce and so little like something that would come from a football governing body.

re that many spl clubs have vetoed the newco with open arms...how strange the lesser greens are siting on the fence.Methinks, let the other members do the stuff and we'll stay neutral....bunch of phoneys...views please!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caversham Green

It's the right date so it probably is the one we've seen. I note the Clyde statement refers to a set of papers though, that would suggest there's rather more to it than has appeared in the press. Still an astonishingly bad document though..

---

Maybe it was written in crayon :dunno:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caversham Green

Could he have requested that his representations were included in the agenda that was sent out ahead of the meeting? :dunno:

It just looks so much like the sort of rubbish people like him produce and so little like something that would come from a football governing body.

---

Hmmm.. perhaps.

Longmuir has always struck me as a competent, honourable guy. Maybe his silence thus far is along the lines of the Hibs' usual model.... let the facts speak for themselves, let events play out and then comment.

Then again, if he is the author of the document, I am sure there are enough decent people in the SFL that will ask for his head.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim44

Come on CG, Much as I'd love it to be true, surely what you're suggestion is a bit far-fetched. If it was anything along the lines you're suggesting, there would have been an immediate rebuttal from the SPL,SFA and SFL. Am I suffering from some sort of irony or humour by-pass here.:greengrin

---

Not at all - I'm saying if it came from the SFL then Charles Green has advised them about what they should write. The document doesn't even attempt to be impartial or balanced, and that coming from a sports regulatory body is just plain wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caversham Green

Yes, I would but I would also have expected some sort of comment from whoever issued it anyway and there has been a deafening silence from the authorities. To be honest I'm just gobsmacked about the whole thing and my Green theory is the only one that really makes any modicum of sense to me. Whoever produced it and authorised its distribution is not fit to be in a position of authority IMHO.

One point, if it was produced by the SFL then neither Petrie nor Doncaster is directly implicated and Regan seems to be on holiday but they seem to be getting all the flak. Shirley there's more to come on this.

---

CG, you may be correct but in the end it matters little who actually wrote the document. They just become another guilty party.

Those that agreed to it being distributed to the SFL clubs, in doing so essentially put their names to it and sanctioned its contents. Longmuir (SFL) is certainly on that list.

And given that the issue of the document followed a high-level meeting between the SPL, SFA and SFL on matters such as reconstruction, then we can surmise that it had their unanimous approval. The SPL might argue that actually this part of the decision-making has nothing to do with them; but in fact they will consider that they have a vested interest in RFC's destiny and will have lobbied accordingly.

So Doncaster, Longmuir, Regan and now probably Green are all guilty by association with this document.

The Old Firm essentially come as a product and together they have bullied the rest of the clubs out of money and wealth. Now that their business partners have disappeared Celtic will be scared stiff of the changes that are about to happen in the Scottish game and most notably in the SPL. They would never vote against a Newco coming in, especially one which is a zombie Rangers, because they know it would effectively signal the reversal in their fortunes. It won't happen overnight, but it will definitely happen. Lawwell is cacking his pants.

I brought this up the other day - they have been a disgrace but not making a statement.

A while back they came out and said they don't need them to survive but they have never actually come out and said them being in the SPL is a bad thing.

I think they have got off far too lightly - considering many of their fans have such strong views about it - surely they should demand a statement from their board.

It was suggested on BBC Sportsound this afternoon that Lawell must have been hoping that all the other SPL clubs would buckle and allow RFC back into the SPL while Celtic meantime could appease their own fans by voting 'No'.

That scenario has been well and truly blown out of the water by the intervention of non-OF supporters and their clubs responding accordingly.

Moreover change in the SPL voting system and income distribution now looks odds on as Club 12 will be likely to vote with the non-OF 10 to give an 11-1 majority on any new proposals to that end.

Celtic FC are now therefore in a bit of a quandary.

They are both subsidiaries of the parent company Bigots Inc. They have the same identity (The Old Firm) the same sponsor (Tennants) and have done for years, same business strategy (leave Scotland) and the same vile type of cretins who inhabit their stadiums. Why would Celtic want to see Rangers fold as their future financial stability relies on them even more so than most other Scottish clubs.

Remember Celtic have got shareholders to appease. They'll vote for whatever provides them with a better return. Or they could prove they are spineless by abstaining.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BEEJ

CG, you may be correct but in the end it matters little who actually wrote the document. They just become another guilty party.

Those that agreed to it being distributed to the SFL clubs, in doing so essentially put their names to it and sanctioned its contents. Longmuir (SFL) is certainly on that list.

And given that the issue of the document followed a high-level meeting between the SPL, SFA and SFL on matters such as reconstruction, then we can surmise that it had their unanimous approval. The SPL might argue that actually this part of the decision-making has nothing to do with them; but in fact they will consider that they have a vested interest in RFC's destiny and will have lobbied accordingly.

So Doncaster, Longmuir, Regan and now probably Green are all guilty by association with this document.

---

I quite agree - I started out thinking that the document might not have come from the SFL at all, but the statement on their website linked by CWG suggests that it did. I still find it very odd that there doesn't appear to be a name on it though. As I say, it's just the quality and nature of the document that has me puzzled. If the author is someone from the SFA/SFL/SPL they have fatally compromised their own position IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steakbake

Amen to that. Once/if this all gets sorted out, Ogilvie, Doncaster and Regan should consider their positions. As administrators, they've proved themselves inept.

---

At the moment I might be willing to give Reagan the benefit of the doubt, as he has seemed reasonable in some of his previous interviews.

So are they signing Cousin or what?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weecounty hibby

They are both subsidiaries of the parent company Bigots Inc. They have the same identity (The Old Firm) the same sponsor (Tennants) and have done for years, same business strategy (leave Scotland) and the same vile type of cretins who inhabit their stadiums. Why would Celtic want to see Rangers fold as their future financial stability relies on them even more so than most other Scottish clubs.

---

People forget that the Old Firm (can you still call them that if Rangers are dead?) have always wanted to leave Scotland and make no secret of it. Then they claim they are doing their part for Scottish football in Europe etc.

Both of them are as bad as each other :sick:

Yeah I must admit I was hoping the clubs would keep schtum until the vote...that way we would see where celtc's loyalties lie. I fear they will say that the other clubs have decided, and as such no need for a vote anymore.
I have no doubt celtc supporters will say NO, but I think celtc's board would say yes, but fear the backlash of their support.
Desperately hope they all vote and we see the breakdown.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NJ Hibee

People forget that the Old Firm (can you still call them that if Rangers are dead?) have always wanted to leave Scotland and make no secret of it. Then they claim they are doing their part for Scottish football in Europe etc.

Both of them are as bad as each other :sick:

---

Yup. Different cheeks of the same spotty botty.

Totally agree with what someone mentioned above, celtic must have been banking on the thought that the other SPL clubs would vote "YES" so they could come out with a NO to please their supporters but know that their vote didn't make a difference. Celtic board are a bit frightened now I reckon because if they vote YES, the supporters will be up in arms yet they need rangers. I reckon though that because the other clubs have assured rangers will not get SPL status, without celtic making clear what their option is, celtic will vote NO aswel as it now doesn't matter, their vote, whichever way will make no difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Desperate Dan

I agree about it being scandalous but if doncaster is out there on his own agenda with this then I'd like tae ken why we've heard nothing from the SPL chairmen after the issue of that outrageous document came tae light and why he hasnae been brought tae book by the people he's supposed tae be working for. If the SPL clubs have nae involvement in this then then I'd like tae hear that (otherwise the suspicion remains) and they should get that **** tae **** out the door.

---

In total agreement with this DD. It looks very like either a lone gunman is responsible or there is a wider conspiracy. Whichever it is, those involved have not just shown appalling misjudgment, they are in my view acting actively against the interests of the Scottish game. They need to go.

A 'no' from Celtic will solve Celtic's short term problem, that of appeasing their own fans but will highlight the longer term problem of upsetting their special relationship with the huns. A yes vote will cause short term problems with their fans (nothing that the conniving Lawwell can't handle, however) but will maintain their bond with their ugly sister, facilitating the re-marriage after the forthcoming enforced separation. They could vote either way (I have a sneaking suspicion they will vote yes) but one thing is certain ....... they won't bother one tiny bit how their vote is received by the other clubs.

Sellick will vote "no" to appease their fans. Voting "yes" will achieve nothing at this stage beyond annoying their own fans.

However once they know who the long term owners of New Huns are, they'll have a cosy little chat to smooth this over with the sweetener of offering to help New Huns get back to where Rangers RIP used to be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caversham Green

Having given this some thought, it wouldn't surprise me if it emerged that the author of the document was Mr Charles Green.

I got the impression from the news reports that it was circulated by the SFL, but no-one seems to have actually put their name to it and that is very unusual - normally there would be a covering letter or foreword signed by the president/CEO/secretary or someone. It also doesn't read like a document produced by a committee like the SFL or other boards, nor does it look like it was produced by a solicitor like Doncaster or an accountant like Petrie.

What it reads like is a prospectus for a dodgy invesment 'opportunity' and I believe that is Green's stock in trade. He has also shown complete contempt towards the intelligence of anyone that isn't wearing his socks and this document is basically an insult to the reader's intelligence. Green also appears to be very, very stupid and appears to think he can gat away with blatant lies.

If it wasn't actually sent out by Charley, I'm becoming convinced that he was the author.

---

I think that's a good shout. It certainly fits with the mix of lies and garbage that spills out of his mouth every time he opens it. I wouldn't put it passed Rod to have agreed to it going out in the full knowledge of the reaction that it would provoke.

I'd be a lot happier with a brief statement from Hibs confirming that Petrie met with Green on behalf of the SFA and not the club, and that we are not in favour of the proposal.

Right now either Petrie has lied to us about sporting integrity, or he's hiding behind the SFL clubs who have spoken out against Sevco 5088 joining Division One. Neither is acceptable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by One Day Soon

In total agreement with this DD. It looks very like either a lone gunman is responsible or there is a wider conspiracy. Whichever it is, those involved have not just shown appalling misjudgment, they are in my view acting actively against the interests of the Scottish game. They need to go.

---

Apparently, it was marked with a stamp 'Texas Book Depository' so I'd go for the lone gunman theory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eyrie

I'd be a lot happier with a brief statement from Hibs confirming that Petrie met with Green on behalf of the SFA and not the club, and that we are not in favour of the proposal.

Right now either Petrie has lied to us about sporting integrity, or he's hiding behind the SFL clubs who have spoken out against Sevco 5088 joining Division One. Neither is acceptable.

---

There is, of course, the possibility that the alleged meeting didn't take place.

Just had a look at Stirling Albion website and they have a link to the document issued by SFL which they are asking their members to comment on. Content is as already seen and in powerpoint format - tacky. It seems quite clear to me that this is an SFL document because it sets out what SFL is being asked to do and then sets out the conditions under which the SFL would agree to Rangers in SFL Division 1 (subject to the clubs agreeing). Here's a link http://www.safctrust.org.uk/wp-conte...our_Future.pdf

Well that's Andy Murray won again. If he doesn't win Wimbledon, that's me finished with fitba.

:confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seveno

Well that's Andy Murray won again. If he doesn't win Wimbledon, that's me finished with fitba.

:confused:

---

:tee hee:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The_Exile

Remember Celtic have got shareholders to appease. They'll vote for whatever provides them with a better return. Or they could prove they are spineless by abstaining.

---

They are going to vote no. I'm not saying it's how they'd like the vote to go but as it's already a given that rangers won't be getting back in, it would be suicidal for them not to. Would have been interesting to see what they'd have done if we only had 4 clubs voting no.

There is nothing astonishing about their silence. Despite what their fans think Celtic are the definition of an 'establishment' club.

I think they wanted to wait so their vote wasn't seen as decisive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big Frank

Without appearing rude, isn't it the case that you don't actually turn up to watch Hibernian? -but you will attend when we visit Tannadice - (not a dig at not turning up by the way - each to their own) - the point I'm making is that insufficient punishment to rangers being unacceptabel to you makes absolutely not a jot of difference to Hibernian FC?



Sorry SMAXXA :greengrin

---

I think you got the sequence of my posts wrong. FTR, I'll be at Tanna if Rangers are suitably punished and there's integrity in the game - otherwise I won't be there (or ER).

When are UEFA and FIFA going to step in and tell the heads of the SFA and SPL to get the **** away from Scottish football as they are corrupt and incompetent?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seveno

Well that's Andy Murray won again. If he doesn't win Wimbledon, that's me finished with fitba.

:confused:

---

Quality

Sent from my GT-I9001 using Tapatalk 2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TQM

I think you got the sequence of my post wrong. FTR, I'll be at Tanna if Rangers are suitably punished and there's integrity in the game - otherwise I won't be there (or ER).

---

Sorry don't get your argument.....Rod has already stated that Hibs will not vote for Newco in the SPL, and that it's for the SFL to determine what happens to Newco, why would you punish the club you support and love? If the vote from the SFL clubs goes for Rangers in the 1st division when Hibs have no influence on this decision?

There's not a team called Glasgow Rangers, no not one, and their never will be one:greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

There's not a team called Glasgow Rangers, no not one, and their never will be one:greengrin

---

There never was, they were Rangers, now they are The Rangers, so any other team can actually start themselves up as Glasgow Rangers. God help them if they do though it would be a fate worse than death.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Salt & Sauzee

When are UEFA and FIFA going to step in and tell the heads of the SFA and SPL to get the **** away from Scottish football as they are corrupt and incompetent?

---

They wont. Because unfortunately, so are UEFA and FIFA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskyhibby

Sorry don't get your argument.....Rod has already stated that Hibs will not vote for Newco in the SPL, and that it's for the SFL to determine what happens to Newco, why would you punish the club you support and love? If the vote from the SFL clubs goes for Rangers in the 1st division when Hibs have no influence on this decision?

---

That will depend where the idea came from :wink: and besides I hope the SFL sides have the sense to see the offer is a shallow bribe.

Unless the Huns are suitably and equitably punished the Scottish game will be gubbed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wee_hibee

They wont. Because unfortunately, so are UEFA and FIFA.

---

Alex Thomson seems to think a UEFA investigation is forthcoming. Remember Italian football was dealt with and no club was left untouched, I wait in hope.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Salt & Sauzee

There never was, they were Rangers, now they are The Rangers, so any other team can actually start themselves up as Glasgow Rangers. God help them if they do though it would be a fate worse than death.

---

I think I said their never was a team called Glasgow Rangers:greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

I think I said their never was a team called Glasgow Rangers:greengrin

---

Either way, they're goosed :lolrangers:

Even by the standards of this saga, this is ****ing dynamite. One of the documents supposedly sent out by the Scottish Football League (NOT the SPL) to its clubs on Thursday was last edited by none other than Neil Doncaster.

http://kerrydalestreet.co.uk/single/...8516&t=8700235

This has to be a resigning matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Part/Time Supporter

Even by the standards of this saga, this is ****ing dynamite. One of the documents supposedly sent out by the Scottish Football League (NOT the SPL) to its clubs on Thursday was last edited by none other than Neil Doncaster.

http://kerrydalestreet.co.uk/single/...8516&t=8700235

This has to be a resigning matter.

---

I want him to go, but why is it dated for the 4th of April?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Part/Time Supporter

Even by the standards of this saga, this is ****ing dynamite. One of the documents supposedly sent out by the Scottish Football League (NOT the SPL) to its clubs on Thursday was last edited by none other than Neil Doncaster.

http://kerrydalestreet.co.uk/single/...8516&t=8700235

This has to be a resigning matter.

---

It is not conclusive however.

Someone in the SFL could have bought an old computer off Doncaster and forgotten to change the properties.?

Well I have heard that excuse before!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jgl07

It is not conclusive however.

Someone in the SFL could have bought an old computer off Doncaster and forgotten to change the properties.?

Well I have heard that excuse before!

---

Maybe you are Doncaster and he has paid for your .net account? :cb Mystery solved :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Salt & Sauzee

Maybe you are Doncaster and he has paid for your .net account? :cb Mystery solved :wink:

---

Drat, how did you find that out!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jgl07

Drat, how did you find that out!

---

Tam McCourt gave me the scoop

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Salt & Sauzee

I want him to go, but why is it dated for the 4th of April?

---

Sometimes when I've written a word or PowerPoint I've used an existing doc and saved it as something else - on Taft case the 'created date' will show as an earlier date to my modification.

Neil Doncaster must resign

Celtic & Rangers - just the same?

Lots of people going on here about Rangers and Celtic being the same. I've read hundreds of posts by various Celtic fans that suggest otherwise the past couple of months, the last 2 paragraphs here being an example #justsayin


ROCCOSFATDA
30 Jun 2012, 11:43 PM
JamesM
30 Jun 2012, 11:37 PM
ROCCOSFATDA
30 Jun 2012, 11:32 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
The significance is that this was supposedly a document sent by the Scottish Football League to its members (1st, 2nd and 3rd division clubs), suggesting how they should handle the "Rangers situation". It appears to have been edited by Neil Doncaster, who is the chief executive of the Scottish Premier League and therefore should have nothing to do whatsoever with an SFL document. It's effing dynamite. Assuming the MSM don't brush it under the carpet it's a resigning matter.

..................Thanks James WoW the plot gets deeper every day now the governing body's could have saved themselves a lot of trouble by throwing the huns out of Scottish football in the first place instead of going to extraordinary and corrupt lengths to keep them going

Really the plot doesn't get any deeper. The huns are dead. The Sevco will do extremely well to put a team on the park come August 4th, and the authorities will do even better to let enable it.

There are about 4 weeks til the start of the Scottish season. My guess is that Green's Sevco, assuming it has a team, will be in administration by the end of the year.

Fretting about Ogilvie still being head of the SFA is like fretting about a dead corpse ridden with maggots still having its left ring finger intact. Every one of these guys are charlatans and crooks. We have known this for a long time. However, unlike previously, the fundamental focus of their chicanery is now deid.

The only consideration for me is Celtic's position in a post "old Firm" world. If losing cups and leagues to what have been historically smaller teams is a result of this new era of Scottish football, then I am only too happy for it to be so. Unlike the huns, Celtic have never announced or promoted themselves as some infallible institution of Scottish society. I think that our supporters in the main realise that life is about both winning and losing, and each have their benefits.

If the non-existence of the huns means a smaller budget for Celtic, 30,000 crowds but a more competitive league (and hopefully under good governance a higher standard of football) then that is fine by me. In fact, I look forward to it
Edited by nakasgirl, Today, 12:14 AM.

That Doncaster edited document transpires to be an accompanying document rather than the one that's full if threats so not so explosive after all

"for the record this is the document in question:

http://www.clydefc.co.uk/news/upload...d_voting_1.doc

it's not the more widely publicised one that we've all seen

and it would kind of make more sense for Doncaster's paws to be on it as it seems to have come from the SPL anyway"

Rangers find fresh support from Ron Scott of the Sunday Post. Taken from FF but presumably the actual article.


Re: Ron Scott - Sunday Post Football Editorial (a must read!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan Fabel
Sums upthe situation almost perfectly.

Ron Scott – The Voice of Experience – Sunday Post - July1 2012

"The way the Scottish football authorities have allowed the Rangers scenario to unravel is nothing short of disgraceful.

The whole sorry episode should have been nipped in the bud.

Instead we're now in the situation where it's not just the survival ofRanges that's at stake, but the Scottish game itself.

As the fans and clubs become hysterical about how the Light Blues should be punished, it's worth remembering the Ibrox club has done nothing unlawful.

Employment Benefit Trusts are legal. That's why HMRC wants to close this particular loophole.
Informed sources suggest, at worst, Rangers will receive fine, and there appears no danger of having to pay back-tax on the system Sir David Murray implemented.

The SFA then decided to impose severe sanctions on Rangers after awakening to the fact that Craig Whyte was not a fit and proper person to own the club.
Yet the independent Ibrox board set up to look into Whyte while he was still negotiating with Murray decided themselves that [he] wasn't fit and proper to own the club.
They told the SFA that at least fifteen months ago,but the powers-that-be decided in their wisdom to take no action at that time.
Now the situation is like a runaway train full of explosives that's about to be derailed and blow up the whole of Scottish football.
Let's face the obvious here. Not even Celtc will be able to sustain their present level for long without Rangers.
So if they end up having to make cuts, how is the rest of Scottish football going to survive?
There are already whispers that other SPL clubs will be forced into administration.
There is even talk of part-time football at the highest level, never mind the First Division.
It's all very well to bleat on about sporting integrity. But why risk the entire future of Scottish football especially when the facts clearly show Rangers have done nothing wrong.
At the end of the day, the main villan of the piece remains Whyte, with Murray a close second.
It's totally wrong to run the risk of losing Rangers altogether and sending down the entire game with them.
It is especially wrong when the facts show there is absolutely no need for the authoeities to treat Rangers the way they appear hell-bent on doing."
Thank You Ron Scott.

Rangers Tax-Case‏@rangerstaxcaseRon Scott's Sunday Post article is ill-informed rubbish that reads like it used FollowFollow as its only research resource

Not only that but The Independent of all people are giving a platform to Hun fanzine writers...

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/f...9.html?afid=af

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim44

Rangers find fresh support from Ron Scott of the Sunday Post.

---

I think we can safely ignore someone who thinks that Hibs signing some players on loan is more of a breach of sporting integrity than anything Rangers have done in the last 15 years.

No, really, he wrote that on the day after the cup final (because Petrie had made sporting integrity remarks in the week before).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joe breezy

Not only that but The Independent of all people are giving a platform to Hun fanzine writers...

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/f...9.html?afid=af

---

Just Victor Meldrew having a bit of a chortle on a Sunday morning. Not in the same league as the execrable piece in the Sunday Post.

"The A ordinary shares and B ordinary shares would have different class voting rights. As at present, proposals for amendments to the Articles of Association of the Company and to Section C of the Rules (financial and commercial matters) as well as other strategic matters, which are defined as Qualified Resolutions, would require to be supported by not less than 11 clubs holding A ordinary shares."

So this big change we are to get excited about in the voting rights would be...no change at all? One season out the top flight, they hope, and then Sevco, when promoted, can swap their one B share for the relegated club's A share and we're back to their nice wee cosy self preservation pact with Celtc? I must be reading that wrong...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim44

Rangers find fresh support from Ron Scott of the Sunday Post. Taken from FF but presumably the actual article.


Re: Ron Scott - Sunday Post Football Editorial (a must read!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan Fabel
Sums upthe situation almost perfectly.

Ron Scott – The Voice of Experience – Sunday Post - July1 2012

"The way the Scottish football authorities have allowed the Rangers scenario to unravel is nothing short of disgraceful.

The whole sorry episode should have been nipped in the bud.

Instead we're now in the situation where it's not just the survival ofRanges that's at stake, but the Scottish game itself.

As the fans and clubs become hysterical about how the Light Blues should be punished, it's worth remembering the Ibrox club has done nothing unlawful.

Employment Benefit Trusts are legal. That's why HMRC wants to close this particular loophole.
Informed sources suggest, at worst, Rangers will receive fine, and there appears no danger of having to pay back-tax on the system Sir David Murray implemented.

The SFA then decided to impose severe sanctions on Rangers after awakening to the fact that Craig Whyte was not a fit and proper person to own the club.
Yet the independent Ibrox board set up to look into Whyte while he was still negotiating with Murray decided themselves that [he] wasn't fit and proper to own the club.
They told the SFA that at least fifteen months ago,but the powers-that-be decided in their wisdom to take no action at that time.
Now the situation is like a runaway train full of explosives that's about to be derailed and blow up the whole of Scottish football.
Let's face the obvious here. Not even Celtc will be able to sustain their present level for long without Rangers.
So if they end up having to make cuts, how is the rest of Scottish football going to survive?
There are already whispers that other SPL clubs will be forced into administration.
There is even talk of part-time football at the highest level, never mind the First Division.
It's all very well to bleat on about sporting integrity. But why risk the entire future of Scottish football especially when the facts clearly show Rangers have done nothing wrong.
At the end of the day, the main villan of the piece remains Whyte, with Murray a close second.
It's totally wrong to run the risk of losing Rangers altogether and sending down the entire game with them.
It is especially wrong when the facts show there is absolutely no need for the authoeities to treat Rangers the way they appear hell-bent on doing."
Thank You Ron Scott.

---

Dear oh dear - where do you start.

If ever there was an endorsement for that saying about keeping quiet and letting the world think you're a fool....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reallapsedhibee

Just Victor Meldrew having a bit of a chortle on a Sunday morning. Not in the same league as the execrable piece in the Sunday Post.

---

I expect it in the Sunday Post though...not the Independent

There should be no further debate - they're dead - SFL application should be rejected and Spartans get into Division 3

I've been enjoying it but a bit bored of it now - looking forward to the conclusion of them playing nowhere next season them maybe Division 3 next season

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibs7_0

Yeah I must admit I was hoping the clubs would keep schtum until the vote...that way we would see where celtc's loyalties lie. I fear they will say that the other clubs have decided, and as such no need for a vote anymore.
I have no doubt celtc supporters will say NO, but I think celtc's board would say yes, but fear the backlash of their support.
Desperately hope they all vote and we see the breakdown.

---

Not a chance of this happening now. Why would any club openly vote YES when it would have no impact on the result (Newco rejected) but would infuriate 95% of their fans and probably lose them ££££ in gate receipts, boycotts, protests ?? Their shareholders would sue them for gross incompetence.

IMHO they will just have show of hands, count them and then reject the resolution. No names, no pack-drill :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joe breezy

I expect it in the Sunday Post though...not the Independent

---

True. Not sure that any UK broadsheet has looked in to the Huns fiasco properly yet, so maybe the Indie's jocular piece is the start of something.

Still shocked to reflect that if it wasn't for the intervention of a single English journo, who just happened to be interested in fitba (well the barcodes anyway), none of this trauma would have come to any of our attentions. Rangers would still be in business, in the SPL, churning out their PR through our utterly ****ty MSM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caversham Green

Having given this some thought, it wouldn't surprise me if it emerged that the author of the document was Mr Charles Green.

I got the impression from the news reports that it was circulated by the SFL, but no-one seems to have actually put their name to it and that is very unusual - normally there would be a covering letter or foreword signed by the president/CEO/secretary or someone. It also doesn't read like a document produced by a committee like the SFL or other boards, nor does it look like it was produced by a solicitor like Doncaster or an accountant like Petrie.

What it reads like is a prospectus for a dodgy invesment 'opportunity' and I believe that is Green's stock in trade. He has also shown complete contempt towards the intelligence of anyone that isn't wearing his socks and this document is basically an insult to the reader's intelligence. Green also appears to be very, very stupid and appears to think he can gat away with blatant lies.

If it wasn't actually sent out by Charley, I'm becoming convinced that he was the author.

---

Interesting take on it:agree:. You can see a situation where over the last week or so it's become clear that the SPL are going to vote NO, so Doncaster/Green/SFL get together and Green says "look lads, would it help if I drafted up some rough bullet points on the reasons for Sevco going straight into Div 1?". Doncaster, "sounds like a plan, go for it".

When the whole thing has back-fired, you can see why no one wants to take responsibility for the document. You just couldn't admit that someone else had produced it !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

There is, of course, the possibility that the alleged meeting didn't take place.

---

True, but then it would a simple matter for Hibs to issue a statement to that effect. The ongoing silence points in the opposite direction.

The Sunday Post? My granny used to read that, if she was alive today she would be 120. Says it all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eyrie

True, but then it would a simple matter for Hibs to issue a statement to that effect. The ongoing silence points in the opposite direction.

---

Indeed, the silence after that disgraceful document has been in the open as long as it has IMO means somebody sure has something tae hide.

I see three possibilities

Somebody out with the SPL has done it (green maybe?) without their permission in which case why have the SPL said nothing? Unless of course they are secretly happy it's been done which would be shameful.

Somebody withing the SPL has done it (doncaster maybe?) without the permission of the member clubs. In which case why have none of the clubs who claimed sporting integrity came out and said anything and brought whoever it was tae book? again shameful and giving rise tae suspicion.

The SPL board and member clubs are totally complicit in the issuing of the document in which case they are liars trying tae con their fans in tae believing they are trying tae dae the right thing so they will pay up for tickets while doing dirty deals under the table. Again shameful and the worst of the lot and their continued silence does them nae favours.

Somebody is at it, or they're all at it.

Andrew Smith in the Scotsman on Sunday

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...sage-1-2386605

Quote:

---

The “lucrative” package of reconstruction proposals – with a new Rangers thrown in – was cooked up by SFA chief executive Stewart Regan, vice-president Rod Petrie, SPL chief executive Neil Doncaster and SFL chief executive David Longmuir.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BarneyK

"The A ordinary shares and B ordinary shares would have different class voting rights. As at present, proposals for amendments to the Articles of Association of the Company and to Section C of the Rules (financial and commercial matters) as well as other strategic matters, which are defined as Qualified Resolutions, would require to be supported by not less than 11 clubs holding A ordinary shares."

So this big change we are to get excited about in the voting rights would be...no change at all? One season out the top flight, they hope, and then Sevco, when promoted, can swap their one B share for the relegated club's A share and we're back to their nice wee cosy self preservation pact with Celtc? I must be reading that wrong...

---

:agree: Exactly.

And how can the recommended structure set out in that appendix be something that only the SFL clubs can decide upon? Unless the SPL clubs have already approved it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Andrew Smith in the Scotsman on Sunday

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...sage-1-2386605

---

Well if Petrie is involved he can GTF, his position at the SFA is clearly incompatible with his position at Hibs and the wishes of the supporters of that club.

And the rest of them can GTF as well, nae wonder naebody has said anything, whae'd want tae own up tae piece of disgusting garbage. Twisted *******s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Andrew Smith in the Scotsman on Sunday

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...sage-1-2386605

---

If this is true Petrie's position at Easter Road is untenable - absolutely, 100% he has to resign

Need more proof perhaps but if it's not true he can easily categorically deny it, not a difficult thing to do

More in the same article

Quote:

---

Gone is any pretence that the SPL clubs’ “no to newco” was a principled stand, borne out of listening to their supporters. The fact is the First Division proposal for the new Rangers was sold as a cert to them weeks ago, making these chairman seem even more scheming and dubious than if they had came out and said “look, it is wrong but we need Sky television and any Rangers in the SPL to guarantee we get it”. The latest turn of events is particularly embarrassing for Hibernian chairman Petrie. It has been reported he met new Rangers owner Charles Green to discuss plans to ease Rangers back into the First Division, despite his claim that “sporting integrity was beyond purchase”.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Andrew Smith in the Scotsman on Sunday

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...sage-1-2386605

---

Simply terrible if this has Rod's hand in it, we really need a ststement from the club about it as its simply out of touch with what the fans want. I accept his duties to the club as a director extend to the financial but its not that simple if he alienates enough fans it will hit Hibs in the pocket too.

Me - I don't want the stigma of somehow being complicit in a deal that the rest of the non hun fans rightly don't like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Andrew Smith in the Scotsman on Sunday

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...sage-1-2386605

---

Quote:

---

Clearly, the powerbrokers have misjudged the public mood again. There is every chance that the raft of proposals, which include play-offs to the SPL, £1 million being filtered through the three tiers of the SFL, merger of the two league bodies and a pyramid system below the senior set-up, oh and Green’s Rangers starting off life just outside Scottish football’s highest level, won’t garner the necessary support. Even when the threshold figure for forcing through this “special case” scenario seems to have dropped from 23 clubs out of 30, to 16 clubs.

---

I hadn't picked up that the rats had also rigged the voting system in their favour? :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joe breezy

If this is true Petrie's position at Easter Road is untenable - absolutely, 100% he has to resign

Need more proof perhaps but if it's not true he can easily categorically deny it, not a difficult thing to do

---

100% correct :top marks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joe breezy

If this is true Petrie's position at Easter Road is untenable - absolutely, 100% he has to resign

Need more proof perhaps but if it's not true he can easily categorically deny it, not a difficult thing to do

---

Yep, unless he can truthfully and categorically deny involvement in that piece of nonsense then his head, along with that of those other ********s mentioned, must roll.

Is there anybody at the top level of the game in this country that can actually lie straight in bed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bostonhibby

Simply terrible if this has Rod's hand in it, we really need a ststement from the club about it as its simply out of touch with what the fans want. I accept his duties to the club as a director extend to the financial but its not that simple if he alienates enough fans it will hit Hibs in the pocket too.

Me - I don't want the stigma of somehow being complicit in a deal that the rest of the non hun fans rightly don't like.

---

still cant quite beleive its all as corrupt as its being made out ive called rod many things over the years but in no way did i ever imagine him a liar and conman like is being made out, id rather beleive that this is all blowing up in his face because he has took such a stand against rangers and its the media involving him in more rangers biased reporting to unsettle the rest of the SPL clubs and fans

BUT

the silence from Easter Road is worrying

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Desperate Dan

Is there anybody at the top level of the game in this country that can actually lie straight in bed.

---

They should have plenty of time to practice once they have all been emptied from their jobs.

Warning: this is from the Daily Record. Don't read it if you're squeamish or hungover.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/footbal...6908-23903059/

Quote:

---

Craig Burley column: Sending newco Ranger to Division Three will KILL Scottish game

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matty_Jack04

still cant quite beleive its all as corrupt as its being made out ive called rod many things over the years but in no way did i ever imagine him a liar and conman like is being made out, id rather beleive that this is all blowing up in his face because he has took such a stand against rangers and its the media involving him in more rangers biased reporting to unsettle the rest of the SPL clubs and fans

BUT

the silence from Easter Road is worrying

---

:agree: I am pro Rod, always have been, just concerned. It doesn't feel right. Still, at least I have my question for the next AGM!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Warning: this is from the Daily Record. Don't read it if you're squeamish or hungover.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/footbal...6908-23903059/

---

If I was in perfectly fine health and fit as a fiddle I wouldnae read that.

RP's problem is his mantra "sporting integrity is beyond purchase". If he is even so much as a co author of the proposal document to the SFL his hypocricy will haunt him for a very long time.

Like many other situations that have arose in this whole Rangers debacle, fans clamour through social media will force him in to some kind of comment to explain himself or he's finished.

I've solved the problem.

Send both Newco and Celtic to the 3rd division .... the SKY deal is for SPL matches and 4 SFL matches a season .. bobs yer uncle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Warning: this is from the Daily Record. Don't read it if you're squeamish or hungover.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/footbal...6908-23903059/

---

I once sat through "The Thing" without looking away or blinking.

I can't bring myself to read this...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Warning: this is from the Daily Record. Don't read it if you're squeamish or hungover.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/footbal...6908-23903059/

---

i dont know why i clicked on that link but 2 paragraphs nearly had me passing out

RP - if any of this is correct then he should resign; at least a massive error of judgment, at worst deceitful. However, the smell of a **** stirring hun loving media seeking to divide and conquer hangs over the whole story. As SL is no doubt at Easter Road today it should be no problem to have the truth told through the official web site :flag:

There is no way Craig Burley wrote that!

Anyone who has had their teeth smashed oot thir face like he has, would know to shut up when they don't know what they're talking about!

Does anyone know what SFL clubs have already said no the Rangers in the 1st division?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Desperate Dan

Indeed, the silence after that disgraceful document has been in the open as long as it has IMO means somebody sure has something tae hide.

I see three possibilities

Somebody out with the SPL has done it (green maybe?) without their permission in which case why have the SPL said nothing? Unless of course they are secretly happy it's been done which would be shameful.

Somebody withing the SPL has done it (doncaster maybe?) without the permission of the member clubs. In which case why have none of the clubs who claimed sporting integrity came out and said anything and brought whoever it was tae book? again shameful and giving rise tae suspicion.

The SPL board and member clubs are totally complicit in the issuing of the document in which case they are liars trying tae con their fans in tae believing they are trying tae dae the right thing so they will pay up for tickets while doing dirty deals under the table. Again shameful and the worst of the lot and their continued silence does them nae favours.

Somebody is at it, or they're all at it.

---

You forgot the other possibility that a big boy did it then ran away

off the top of my head
Dunfermline, Morton, Raith Rovers, Peterhead, Clyde,
i did hear Partick Thistle but not sure if they have confirmed their no vote?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by At The Edge

off the top of my head
Dunfermline, Morton, Raith Rovers, Peterhead, Clyde,
i did hear Partick Thistle but not sure if they have confirmed their no vote?

---

I wonder what kind of vote they need to save them.