I think I said their never was a team called Glasgow Rangers:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Salt & Sauzee
Printable View
I think I said their never was a team called Glasgow Rangers:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Salt & Sauzee
Either way, they're goosed :lolrangers:Quote:
Originally Posted by ronaldo7
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
It is not conclusive however.Quote:
Originally Posted by Part/Time Supporter
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 jgl07
Drat, how did you find that out!Quote:
Originally Posted by Salt & Sauzee
Tam McCourt gave me the scoopQuote:
Originally Posted by jgl07
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Salt & Sauzee
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
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim44
No, really, he wrote that on the day after the cup final (because Petrie had made sporting integrity remarks in the week before).
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by joe breezy
"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...
Dear oh dear - where do you start.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim44
If ever there was an endorsement for that saying about keeping quiet and letting the world think you're a fool....
I expect it in the Sunday Post though...not the IndependentQuote:
Originally Posted by reallapsedhibee
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
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs7_0
IMHO they will just have show of hands, count them and then reject the resolution. No names, no pack-drill :wink:
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by joe breezy
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.
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".Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
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 !
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
The Sunday Post? My granny used to read that, if she was alive today she would be 120. Says it all.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eyrie
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.
:agree: Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by BarneyK
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?
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
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
If this is true Petrie's position at Easter Road is untenable - absolutely, 100% he has to resignQuote:
Originally Posted by grunt
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”.