Super ******** should be arrested and charged IMO.
Incitement to getting Buckie-swilling rat-people into a lather.
Printable View
Super ******** should be arrested and charged IMO.
Incitement to getting Buckie-swilling rat-people into a lather.
All he had to do was ask the Rangers club rep who was at the hearing. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by cabbageandribs1875
A new low even for the Record? It just might be ...
http://blogs.dailyrecord.co.uk/markh...ple-outsi.html
Who are these 3 three people, Mark? Well, that'll be 3 from 100(+?) that YOUR team (along with the rest of the SPL members) agreed should form independant enquiries. Just like this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Fanny. Cany these idiots not think for 5 minutes before writing that trash. And for the editors to let it get pubished.... ffs.
SpeechlessQuote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Now there is a prospect - however remote - that i'd never thought of....NewCo Gers apply to SFL 3 only to be pipped for the spot by Cove RANGERS.....Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
:greengrin
Imagiene the possible headline....'Rangers Win SFL spot'....'but its the Rangers with History.....
WHAT!?... when I voted I thought that was their new name...... oh well.......... :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by down-the-slope
Mark Hately has got a some brass neck! That's the biggest load of lying, mendacious tripe I have read in a long time.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
What a tool.
Can we not threaten to organise a boycott of SPL/SFA/SFL sponsors if they don't deal with Rankers severly enough. Surely the combined buying power of all other Scottish clubs would by far outweigh that of the currents? While we're at it why don't we throw in a boycott of the ****** as well?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Rangers seem up in arms about how this process works yet they were one of the clubs that voted it in unanimously last year..hmm.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/15109851
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/footbal...6908-23452024/
2 articles found from the probable loads of this type over the years, not interested in Scottish football are they but now it suits them they are vital. Quite prepared to leave without a thought, so they deserve 100% full punishment.
That rubbish got published?! What an atrocious article. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
So the SFA aren't there to punish clubs that have broken the rules then Mark?Quote:
ERIC DRYSDALE, Gary Allan and Alistair Murning. Or as I prefer to call them - Moe, Larry and Curly.
The SFA's "Three Stooges" who decided this week, in their wisdom, to hammer Rangers and threaten their existence by imposing a transfer ban on them.
A ruling that endangers the bidding process for one of Scotland's biggest clubs, which finds itself engulfed in a financial crisis. So much for the SFA servicing the Scottish game, eh?
Do you not read the paper you write for? There's an article detailing who they are.Quote:
What I want to know is, what qualifications do Drysdale, Allan and Murning have to sit on a judicial panel and dish out sanctions?
Do they have any sort of background at the top level of football?
These men have just had a major say on the future of the Scottish game. They've been asked to rule on one of the biggest decisions in the last 50 years.
Who do they think they are - and how did they get into this position of power?
Do you understand the meaning of the phrase "Independent Judiciary Panel?"Quote:
Ally McCoist came out and said this SFA ban could kill Rangers. How can a judgment like that be put in the hands of three individuals who don't even work for the SFA?
The member clubs voted for this disciplinary process, including Rangers FC. Do you know what "Independent" means?Quote:
Any decision should surely come from the governing body. It should be people within the game, who understand the ramifications of the punishments they're handing out.
Clearly, none of them have given a thought to the effect it would have on the game's future in Scotland.
I'm astonished the SFA get other people in to make their decisions.
I'm absolutely stunned by that.
Ah yes, people aware of the magnificent Glasgow Rangers and their place in the fabric of Scottish Football wouldn't have punished Rangers. Tell you what, we should have just got Campbell Ogilvie to make the decision.Quote:
If you want to run a successful business or organisation, I accept you will have independent consultants who advise you on some matters. But when you have monumental decisions to make, which could be detrimental to the game you're trying to improve, surely it has to come from within Hampden?
You'd think the SFA would have at least three men working for them with the knowledge and qualifications to make judgments like that.
People aware of the structure of Scottish football wouldn't have imposed these sanctions on Rangers.
To me this is the crux of your argument Mark, you wanted "Rangers men" to make the decision so that The Rangers weren't given the punishment they were due.
But they do know law, and they are independent. Lawyers and QC's are well trained and used to setting aside personal opinion to do their job, the same cannot be said for people who "know the game." whatever that means. Are you just jealous that you didn't get asked to be on the panel. I suppose you "Know the game?"Quote:
And it disturbs me when I hear that it's lawyers, QCs and journalists who are part of these judicial panels. That's incredible. We're talking about football business here, which is run completely differently to any other. These people don't know the game.
Why?Quote:
I just can't understand it. Since Stewart Regan was appointed chief executive at Hampden, he's been banging on about getting their house in order. But this typifies what everyone is battling against. This ruling has taken the SFA back two decades.
When would have been the right time to hand out punishment? Should they have waited till after the sale had been completed? Or maybe they should have waited till after the next transfer window to allow Rangers to put together a decent squad for next season?Quote:
They've made a balls-up of a relatively simple decision. Of course, Rangers and Craig Whyte deserved to be punished. But the timing of it - and the failure to recognise the repercussions which would follow - is staggering.
I'm sure they do recognise the repercussions which would follow. But if someone is guilty of drink driving should the police not charge them because it might mean they lose their job as a lorry driver? If someone is caught looking at child porn should they be let off because it would mean they couldn't work in a nursery any more? Before anyone jumps down my throat, I'm not comparing what Rangers have done to either of these crimes, but I have taken Mark's logic to the extreme here to highlight how silly it is. The punishment should fit the crime, not be changed to suit the criminal.
If they weren't aware, they are now after receiving threats. Articles like this are sure to help calm the Rangers fans down though.....Quote:
They've opened up a huge can of worms and I'm not sure they're aware of the backlash that could follow.
What possible relevance does this have?Quote:
I've heard Murning's last involvement on an SFA panel was ruling on a red-card appeal by an Albion Rovers player.
He managed to rescind the sending off from a game against Brechin. Now, I'm sorry, but how can he go from making decisions on a Second Division game to ruling on the potential future of Rangers FC? It's unbelievable.
Same old "Scottish football needs Rangers" rubbish. Becuase we've been doing so well with Rangers over the last wee while Mark haven't we?Quote:
That's what the Three Stooges did.
After all, it was announced on the day the club's administrators wanted to name a preferred bidder and that process has now stalled as a result.
But nothing surprises me about the SFA any more. They talk of taking the game forward. Well, God help us.
Everything Regan has said since he took the job has been about improving the game. But this decision, if it means killing off Rangers, will completely knock the stuffing out of Scottish football.
After everything they've been working on in the last few years, they've managed to score another own goal. They take two steps forward then 10 back with some of their decisions.
Nope, Ally was wrong. He knows the Rangers support and he knows the stuff an element of the support get up to, threats, bombs in the post etc. So he should have been more sensible in what he said. Instead of calming the situation down and urging restraint until the justification for the decision is published and the appeal process is through, he questions the independence of the panel, asks for the panel to be named and urges the Rangers fans that it is time to "fight back." Completely irresponsible.Quote:
Ally was right in demanding to know who was on the panel. Drysdale, Allan and Murning must be accountable, surely?
The same process exists in England actually. But you are right, this sort of thing wouldn't happen in England as the media in England do not have the same love in with two clubs that we have here, so much so that when one of these clubs is properly punished we get hundreds of articles criticising our governing body for having the audacity to use the proper (agreed upon by member clubs) disciplinary process to punish said club.Quote:
They're supposed to be anonymous - but that's why the SFA should have made the decision themselves, instead of getting others to do it for them.
This type of thing just wouldn't happen in England. You have to ask, what are we getting from the SFA, what are clubs paying for?
Haha. Maybe they will be big enough to stand up to the media bullying and admit their decision was correct?Quote:
If they can't make a ruling on the biggest story to hit Scottish football what chance do we have? They are the game's governing body.
I would like to think Regan and Co will back down after an appeal. They should be big enough to hold their hands up and admit their mistake.
I'm sure Vauxhall are quaking in their boots at the thought of Rangers fans not buying their cars......Quote:
Because if they think they can attract sponsors for their tournaments, when they're making decisions which could liquidate one of their top clubs, they're having a laugh.
Already, Rangers fans are planning to boycott some of the SFA's big commercial partners. These deals are huge earners for them.
And if they under-estimate fan power, they'll be in an even bigger mess than they currently find themselves in.
This is exactly the sort of behaviour that you see with organisations that have a monopoly. It's quite sickening to watch actually.
It's astounding, well, it shouldn't be, given that rags form, but still.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Totally whitewashing over the facts:
1. A Rangers rep was there, they know fine who the three where.
2. These panels are in the rule book THEY signed up to.
3. These three guys were on an approved list. Approved by the clubs, Rangers included.
Hateley and McCoist need hung out to dry for this one.
Just the usual - focusing on how the punishment is doing the damage, not the crimes that led to the process in the first place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergio sledge
:agree:
Rangers existence is threatened, not by the SFA, but by the dishonest, illegal, immoral and unsporting actions of Rangers Football Club and its greedy, selfish employees.
McCoist should do the decent thing and resignQuote:
Originally Posted by ScottB
and whoever allowed Hateleys comments should resign
Agree 100% :top marksQuote:
Originally Posted by Carlsberg
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlsberg
I hope the English are paying to attention to how both these clubs managers, and by extension the clubs they represent, conduct themselves when the waters get a bit choppy.
In reality, just about every sports 'journalist' in the country should be tendering their resignation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalkeith
The Rangers fans seem not to have realised their part in this mess, presumably why the press is doing its best to blame all and sundry for it.
For years, the press in Scotland has went blindly along for the ride, printing Rangers PR as if it was solid journalism, anything from the current 'Three Stooges' nonsense, to Whyte's 'untold, off the radar billions' or any other of the hundreds of pure fabricated nonsense that has poured out of the Glasgow media over the years. This willingness to take the succulent lamb and carry on has caused a failure that has played as big a role in this saga as anyone else. A press that functioned normally would have been asking questions about Whyte from day one, it would have been all over the EBT scandal like a rash, it would have questioned Murray's spending practices, it wouldn't be currently doing its level best to whip the fans up against the governing body...
Eventually, when the dust settles, people calm down and start to really think about this, surely the likes of Traynor, Young, Jackson and the rest's positions will be basically untenable?
I love it when they start to squeal, well squeal away bum boys of the Rangers order.
Feel the pain that all other supporters have felt while paying their honest hard earned cash to watch their honest wage paying football club get pumped season after season after season from a bunch of sectarian, knuckle dragging, cheating horrible ****s
:top marksQuote:
Originally Posted by ScottB
(Not that anything will change, of course.)
A bit of light relief.....
http://youtu.be/qz9stPeGbn4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wat Dabney
:top marksDid they ever manage to sign Cousin? :faf:
I just seen this in the Scotsman re. the Lafferty thing.
Why are the administrators spending money on hotels for a match that's an hour from Ibrox?Quote:
McCoist explained: “He was in the squad to travel [to Edinburgh] and we were due to leave on Friday to go through to Tynecastle. But there was a failure to show for the travelling party.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peevemor
Because it's quite clear that they, from day 1, have not been operating in the best interests of the creditors but doing all they can to retain a business as usual approach for the football team.
I hope the potential buyers of this club do the right thing and walk away in very public disgust at the behaviour of the people who attach themselves to the name of rangers football club. What self respecting buisnessman could possibly want to be associated with an institution that cannot and will not distance iteself from this poisonous, disgusting and criminal behaviour.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiser1962
And at the same time maybe it is time for the dafties that attach themselves to most senior clubs in Scotland, regretfully includung our own, to take a long hard look at themselves and the damage they have done and continue to do to Scotland and Scottish footbll
Have to disagree.Quote:
Originally Posted by SiMar
The best interests for creditors and shareholders, as at day 1, were served by maintaining a "business as usual" approach and trying to sell the club as a going concern.
It's all very well to say, in hindsight, that such an approach was not the best. However, let's not forget that, as at Day 1, no-one outside of CW knew the extent of the losses, the exact nature of the Ticketus deal, the amount of the creditors, and the number of law-suits that would be required.
In most administration cases, the interests of creditors and shareholders ARE best served by maintaining the business as it is, and safeguarding some sort of future for the business, its staff and its trading partners.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Travelling from Glasgow to Edinburgh the day before the match would have cost a few grand of creditors' money that could easily have been saved. I'd imagine most SPL clubs travelling to play a game 50 miles or so away from home will travel the same day. Why should the creditors pay for the huns to do otherwise? :confused:
Sounds like marriage divorce and settlements.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peevemor
You've got to keep the bitch in the manner to which she's accustomed.