Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

22-02-2015, 05:01 PM
HoboHarry

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bostonhibby

It should be a no brainer for them, as by any stretch of the rules he is banned - by the SFA themselves and UK company law regardless - theres every chance the SFA have given him the nod that another revision of the rules will occur, otherwise why is he still pushing for more control / power?

On the UK company law front my understanding is that if Ashley got his hands on even more shares it might not fit the football rules but he isn't actually breaking any company law by doing so - maybe he fancies blazing a trail by taking the blazers on? I defer to any better informed experts as not really my area.

The SFA have no control over the law - it doesn't matter what rules they change.
22-02-2015, 05:02 PM
Saturday Boy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bostonhibby

It should be a no brainer for them, as by any stretch of the rules he is banned - by the SFA themselves and UK company law regardless - theres every chance the SFA have given him the nod that another revision of the rules will occur, otherwise why is he still pushing for more control / power?

On the UK company law front my understanding is that if Ashley got his hands on even more shares it might not fit the football rules but he isn't actually breaking any company law by doing so - maybe he fancies blazing a trail by taking the blazers on? I defer to any better informed experts as not really my area.

I always wanted to get a post in before CWG and Cav. :greengrin The SFA won't do anything here yet, nobody has broken any rules. Including flexible ones.
22-02-2015, 05:07 PM
HoboHarry

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saturday Boy

I always wanted to get a post in before CWG and Cav. :greengrin The SFA won't do anything here yet, nobody has broken any rules. Including flexible ones.

What I was asking was why the SFA hadn't warned King off like he did with Ashley?
22-02-2015, 05:07 PM
Bostonhibby

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoboHarry

The SFA have no control over the law - it doesn't matter what rules they change.

:agree: Yet Craig Whyte got the Ibrox Gig - it was more subjective then as all under the SFA control, here the original issue remains valid - WTF is King doing if his criminal convictions mean he doesn't even pass the SFA test?
22-02-2015, 05:07 PM
CropleyWasGod

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cropley10

Now I might have got this completely wrong but I thought that Directors of liquidated businesses were prevented for 5 years from being a Director of another company???

If so then what does King intend to do? Break the Law?

Not entirely true.

They are banned from directorships of companies that have similar names. So, he and Murray are stuffed anyway :greengrin
22-02-2015, 05:08 PM
Bostonhibby

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoboHarry

What I was asking was why the SFA hadn't warned King off like he did with Ashley?

Is it because he is the rangers minded?
22-02-2015, 05:08 PM
HoboHarry

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bostonhibby

:agree: Yet Craig Whyte got the Ibrox Gig - it was more subjective then as all under the SFA control, here the original issue remains valid - WTF is King doing if his criminal convictions mean he doesn't even pass the SFA test?

My point is that what the SFA think or do isn't relevant. The law of the land prevents him becoming a director does it not?
22-02-2015, 05:12 PM
Bostonhibby

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saturday Boy

I always wanted to get a post in before CWG and Cav. :greengrin The SFA won't do anything here yet, nobody has broken any rules. Including flexible ones.

:thumbsup: Ashley isn't breaking any company law regardless and King &co aren't unless they get their version of control so all hypothetical until they all get together in the big tent at Ibrox.
22-02-2015, 05:16 PM
Bostonhibby

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoboHarry

My point is that what the SFA think or do isn't relevant. The law of the land prevents him becoming a director does it not?

Yep, I have been a company director so you wont find me saying any different, just incredulous that they carry on regardless. King wins the day at the meeting of shareholders and the SFA have a live issue if they haven't acted earlier to stop him doing what he is doing.
22-02-2015, 05:17 PM
Saturday Boy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bostonhibby

:thumbsup: Ashley isn't breaking any company law regardless and King &co aren't unless they get their version of control so all hypothetical until they all get together in the big tent at Ibrox.

Thanks for this. For a few minutes I was thinking I was "over thinking" , my current phrase of the moment. :aok:
22-02-2015, 05:19 PM
Bostonhibby

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saturday Boy

Thanks for this. For a few minutes I was thinking I was "over thinking" , my current phrase of the moment. :aok:

:greengrin I didn't get to where I am today by over thinking!
22-02-2015, 05:22 PM
Keith_M

Only vaguely related to this thread but, anyway......

On a tour of the Allianz Arena today, the Tour Guide explained why one corridor we walked through was painted Orange. She said that Orange is "the internationally recognised colour for Sports Journalists".

And we thought it was just Scotland :wink:
22-02-2015, 05:40 PM
CropleyWasGod

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoboHarry

It seems curious to me that the SFA haven't warned King off for that very reason given that they warned off Ashley from increasing his stake.....

The last time this was in the media, Regan (or maybe DK)went on record as saying that the SFA had had a meeting with DK. Don't think he disclosed the content. However, he did go on Sportsound and set out the procedure.

1. DK becomes a director.

2. RFC disclose that to the SFA, together with a declaration of "fit and proper".

3. SFA decide if he is "f&p".

4. if not, they take action.

In other words, there's SFA the SFA can do until he's appointed.
22-02-2015, 05:47 PM
HoboHarry

Quote:

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

The last time this was in the media, Regan (or maybe DK)went on record as saying that the SFA had had a meeting with DK. Don't think he disclosed the content. However, he did go on Sportsound and set out the procedure.

1. DK becomes a director.

2. RFC disclose that to the SFA, together with a declaration of "fit and proper".

3. SFA decide if he is "f&p".

4. if not, they take action.

In other words, there's SFA the SFA can do until he's appointed.

I wasn't really meaning official action. I am just wondering why, if he is barred by law from becoming a director, they haven't had a quiet word with him? If he is barred by law then it doesn't make a blind bit of difference what decision the SFA come up with in regard to being a fit and proper person... Or am I missing something?
22-02-2015, 05:59 PM
CropleyWasGod

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoboHarry

I wasn't really meaning official action. I am just wondering why, if he is barred by law from becoming a director, they haven't had a quiet word with him? If he is barred by law then it doesn't make a blind bit of difference what decision the SFA come up with in regard to being a fit and proper person... Or am I missing something?

Not missing anything, I think.

Other than what appears to be DK's tendency to run rough-shod over any laws and regulations, and deal with the consequences later.:greengrin
22-02-2015, 06:03 PM
Bostonhibby

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoboHarry

I wasn't really meaning official action. I am just wondering why, if he is barred by law from becoming a director, they haven't had a quiet word with him? If he is barred by law then it doesn't make a blind bit of difference what decision the SFA come up with in regard to being a fit and proper person... Or am I missing something?

I see your point, You should be right about the SFA but they are that inward looking and reactive to events that it wouldn't surprise me if they've told Dodgy Dave that so long as he can fiddle a way round UK company law, they will hide behind that, thus keeping the rangers horde happy for now and giving the SFA a cop out either way.
22-02-2015, 06:40 PM
HoboHarry

Quote:

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Not missing anything, I think.

Other than what appears to be DK's tendency to run rough-shod over any laws and regulations, and deal with the consequences later.:greengrin

Now that would be fun to watch. My money would be on the the crusty old guy in the wig.......... :greengrin
22-02-2015, 06:56 PM
Ronniekirk

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoboHarry

I wasn't really meaning official action. I am just wondering why, if he is barred by law from becoming a director, they haven't had a quiet word with him? If he is barred by law then it doesn't make a blind bit of difference what decision the SFA come up with in regard to being a fit and proper person... Or am I missing something?

From memory there were Reports the King had met privately with Reagan to talk through some issues so you have to assume that he would have been looking to see what S F A position would be further down the line if certain situations arose .more recently Ashley's Lawyers were able to speak with S F. A S Lawyers in preparation for the Hearing that was put back till March .Presumably we will never get any detail of these meetings re what was discussed ,but if there are any loop holes or ways to interpret rules in different ways both King and Ashley must know what they think they can get away with as a result of these meetings
22-02-2015, 07:00 PM
Ozyhibby

I actually think the SFA might have to play this by the book and knock King and Murray back. The last thing they want is a visit from Mike Ashley's lawyers asking why he is prevented from taking a place on the board because of one rule but other rules are ignored to allow King in.
Although trying to predict anything with the SFA or New Rangers is a mugs game.
22-02-2015, 08:16 PM
southern hibby

Quote:

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Not entirely true.

They are banned from directorships of companies that have similar names. So, he and Murray are stuffed anyway :greengrin

So a company that has claimed to every fool who will listen THAT THEY ARE THE SAME CLUB and nothing changed couldn't possibly have king I'n charge then as that would obviously mean they are very very different entity.

GGTTH
22-02-2015, 08:23 PM
CropleyWasGod

Quote:

Originally Posted by southern hibby

So a company that has claimed to every fool who will listen THAT THEY ARE THE SAME CLUB and nothing changed couldn't possibly have king I'n charge then as that would obviously mean they are very very different entity.

GGTTH

You're missing the point. :)

It's nothing to do with the new club/same club argument. It's to do with the name.
22-02-2015, 08:25 PM
Deansy

Reagan, Doncaster & Co must be on fantastic money considering the amount of stress ONE club has continually caused them (and the entire game) over the last 3-4 years - it's surprising one or both haven't wrapped by now. They must be getting some tremendous 'support' from somewhere ..........

Either way, the SFA will be forced to address this issue sooner, rather than later and, going by their previous 'form', I fully expect their decision will be a totally immoral, cowardly and outrageous one !!
22-02-2015, 08:47 PM
greenginger

Quote:

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

You're missing the point. :)

It's nothing to do with the new club/same club argument. It's to do with the name.

Yeah, but they could get round it by calling themselves Sevco F C. and Sevco International F C.
22-02-2015, 08:57 PM
southern hibby

Quote:

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

You're missing the point. :)

It's nothing to do with the new club/same club argument. It's to do with the name.

I understand that, but that's what I'm on about ( sarcastically ) they say it's still rangers not the rangers.

GGTTH
22-02-2015, 09:52 PM
grunt

Quote:

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

1. DK becomes a director.

2. RFC disclose that to the SFA, together with a declaration of "fit and proper".

3. SFA decide if he is "f&p".

4. if not, they take action.

In any system anywhere, I'd have to say that's a daft way to go about something. To let something happen then decide if they want to allow it. Especially in this case when it's in the papers every day. The SFA should get off its behind and proactively comment on the stuff in the media.
22-02-2015, 10:48 PM
Viva_Palmeiras

Quote:

Originally Posted by grunt

In any system anywhere, I'd have to say that's a daft way to go about something. To let something happen then decide if they want to allow it. Especially in this case when it's in the papers every day. The SFA should get off its behind and proactively comment on the stuff in the media.

Like the Hearts takeover? Buffoons the lot o them.
23-02-2015, 07:48 AM
Jim44

Quote:

Originally Posted by grunt

In any system anywhere, I'd have to say that's a daft way to go about something. To let something happen then decide if they want to allow it. Especially in this case when it's in the papers every day. The SFA should get off its behind and proactively comment on the stuff in the media.

Possession is 9/10 ths of the law.
23-02-2015, 05:01 PM
Granton Stanton

Good in depth discussion on Spanish TV re current situation with The Rangers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMF5...be&app=desktop
23-02-2015, 05:27 PM
bringbackbenny

Telegraph preview of friday fixture! Yet another boycott on the cards?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...this-week.html

Our weekly chance to check on what chaotic nonsense has befallen Rangers and what havoc Mike Ashley has managed to wreak north of the border in the last seven days carries us to a Friday night in Falkirk. Inevitably all the coverage, and most of the crowd, will be interested in the UK's most farcical club (settle down fans of Leeds and QPR, you've got nothing on these guys) but spare a thought for Falkirk who used to yo-yo up and down out of this league quite a bit before they suddenly found Hearts, Hibs and Billy Smart's Travelling Circus joining them at the second tier.
Currently fifth, Falkirk have a great chance to claim a famous win here given how abysmally Rangers are playing football, conducting their business, treating their wives, tending to their gardens, behaving on the way home from the pub and everything else besides.
23-02-2015, 05:33 PM
Malthibby

Quote:

Originally Posted by bringbackbenny

Telegraph preview of friday fixture! Yet another boycott on the cards?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...this-week.html

Our weekly chance to check on what chaotic nonsense has befallen Rangers and what havoc Mike Ashley has managed to wreak north of the border in the last seven days carries us to a Friday night in Falkirk. Inevitably all the coverage, and most of the crowd, will be interested in the UK's most farcical club (settle down fans of Leeds and QPR, you've got nothing on these guys) but spare a thought for Falkirk who used to yo-yo up and down out of this league quite a bit before they suddenly found Hearts, Hibs and Billy Smart's Travelling Circus joining them at the second tier.
Currently fifth, Falkirk have a great chance to claim a famous win here given how abysmally Rangers are playing football, conducting their business, treating their wives, tending to their gardens, behaving on the way home from the pub and everything else besides.

:greengrin I detest the Telegraph's politics, but that's funnnae.
GG

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:46 AM.