No point in complaining to STV. Better to direct as many complaints as possible to Ofcom. Section 5 in their document refers to Due impartiality and due accuracy and undue prominence of views and opinions.
This guidance below relates to the Ofcom Broadcasting Code (February 2011) and applies to all programmes broadcast on or after 28 February 2011.
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/bro...nce/bguidance/
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/bin...3/section5.pdf
View Poll Results: What is your attitude to a new "Rangers" entering at Div1?
- Voters
- 1016. You may not vote on this poll
-
Opposed - and will walk away from Scottish professional football
537 52.85% -
Opposed - but will continue to support the game.
454 44.69% -
In favour.
25 2.46%
Results 11,641 to 11,670 of 45185
-
15-06-2012 04:34 AM #11641
- Join Date
- Sep 2011
- Posts
- 6,402
-
15-06-2012 04:49 AM #11642
- Join Date
- Sep 2011
- Posts
- 6,402
Re The Rangers getting a vote in the decision of whether they are allowed into the SPL or not, are we sure that they will get a vote? Who has confirmed this in the media?
The reason why I ask is that Green is quoted as saying "The big challenge is that as we sit here today we are no longer in the SPL. We’re not a member of the SFA. We’re a newco who are applying – and letters have gone off already to the SPL and the SFA – asking them to consider the transfer of the shares to allow us to become members." So as I read that I would be surprised if they get a vote as they are not now in the SPL. I am sure that Rod is on the case!
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...ears-1-2353744
-
15-06-2012 05:18 AM #11643
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Posts
- 11,203
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show QuoteI started watching but could only stomach 15 mins. It was the most one side piece of blatant propaganda I think I've ever seen on TV.
-
15-06-2012 05:42 AM #11644
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Posts
- 11,203
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
15-06-2012 06:18 AM #11645This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
15-06-2012 06:25 AM #11646This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
He sounded like an old man who had downed one too many nips.
-
15-06-2012 07:27 AM #11647This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show QuoteThere is no such thing as too much yarn, just not enough time.
-
15-06-2012 07:28 AM #11648This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
15-06-2012 07:33 AM #11649This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
I've never been entirley convinced about my own interpretation here, but the Estimated Outcome Statement really couldn't be clearer - the properties are excluded from the £5.5m price. I've noticed that the bracket round the other assets is hand drawn (very professional) and is carefully drawn up short of the properties, so it's not a typo or drafting error, it's deliberate. Getting something like that wrong would be a sacking offence in most of the places I've worked, but I'm pretty sure they all had more professional dignity than Duff & Phelps. Your arguments earlier on in the thread are also very convincing but....
The fact that the proposal makes no mention of what will happen to the properties means that if my interpretation is right the document is incomplete and does not give a true picture of the choices facing the creditors to the extent that it is wilfully misleading. In addition pretty much everything that's been said so far suggests the properties have gone across and general logic would also suggest that (that's not a strong argument in this case though).
So I remain not entirely convinced either way, but if I was a creditor I would have requested clarification in writing to myself and all other creditors.
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
15-06-2012 07:34 AM #11650This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show QuoteThere is no such thing as too much yarn, just not enough time.
-
15-06-2012 07:36 AM #11651
- Join Date
- Apr 2007
- Posts
- 3,276
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Is CWG meant to handle this all by himself?
-
15-06-2012 07:47 AM #11652This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
15-06-2012 07:48 AM #11653This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
I don't get all the clamour to have them in Division Three.
They should be expelled completely or, at the very least, be suspended for three years.
I would prefer expelled, then the air we all breath would be that little bit cleaner.
-
15-06-2012 07:49 AM #11654This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
In legal terms it is a new club with no history, but as I posted on another thread in footballing terms it can be viewed in one of two ways:
- Either the newco is an entirely new club, in which case it has no history and no place in Scotland's top league because it is not a leading football, having never even played a game of football yet, or
- It is a continuation of the old club, which has been found guilty of bringing the game into disrepute to the extent that only match-fixing would be considered more serious and stands accused of fraudulent returns regarding players contracts - if proven, that's a far more serious offence in my view than the first one. Such a club has no place in Scotland's top league or indeed anywhere in Scottish football.
As far as I'm concerned there is no middle ground, but the second option would allow them to keep their history at least in philosophical terms. They would no longer be a football club though.
-
15-06-2012 07:56 AM #11655
[QUOTE=Caversham Green;3263827]
The fact that the proposal makes no mention of what will happen to the properties means that if my interpretation is right the document is incomplete and does not give a true picture of the choices facing the creditors to the extent that it is wilfully misleading. In addition pretty much everything that's been said so far suggests the properties have gone across and general logic would also suggest that (that's not a strong argument in this case though).
If the bit in bold is correct, who do you think D&P would have been trying to mislead and why?
-
15-06-2012 07:56 AM #11656This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Funnily enough there were a couple of fellow professionals in the company and one is just getting up to speed on the Rangers case, so guess what the main topic of converation was.
-
15-06-2012 07:59 AM #11657
[QUOTE=Paisley Hibby;3263850]
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
15-06-2012 08:08 AM #11658
Property?
Is it conceivable that Craig Whyte will own the property upon liquidation and he had entered into a pre-liquidation agreement with Green? Ticketus have also taken a step back which leads me to believe, rightly or wrongly, that they may have some sort of post liquidation deal for season tickets if there is some sort of Green & Whyte collaboration?
It just seems strange that there is so much uncertaintity surrounding the ownwrship of Ibrox, especially given how cozy the relationship between D&P and Green and Whyte seems to have been.
-
15-06-2012 08:46 AM #11659
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- Edinburgh
- Age
- 67
- Posts
- 238
Why don't Rangers just apply to join the English Conference North? Everyone wins then, we get rid of them and they fulfill their dream of playing in Engerland.
Last edited by AllyT; 15-06-2012 at 08:55 AM.
-
15-06-2012 09:13 AM #11660This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
15-06-2012 09:20 AM #11661
[QUOTE=Caversham Green;3263852]
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
I can't believe that D&P would think they could get away with that or that the main creditors' advisers would be taken in by it - especially as Green has been claiming since before the CVA vote that the Newco would still play at Ibrox.
-
15-06-2012 09:22 AM #11662
- Join Date
- Nov 2006
- Posts
- 2,896
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
15-06-2012 09:28 AM #11663This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote55° 57' 42.5'' N 3° 9' 55.1'' W
-
15-06-2012 09:33 AM #11664
[QUOTE=Paisley Hibby;3263916]
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote.... is indicative of how crucial this question is. No Fricker has asked the question publicly yet!!
I do hope that my former employers at BDO are on this. They will be, won't they? We can't be the only ones talking about his, can we?
-
15-06-2012 09:37 AM #11665
- Join Date
- Jan 2008
- Posts
- 6,458
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
15-06-2012 09:38 AM #11666
[QUOTE=Paisley Hibby;3263916]
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
15-06-2012 09:39 AM #11667
Just watched the Newsnight Scotland programme, unfortunately we never learnt anything new, although, thankfully, it was a lot more professional and balanced than the STV nonsense.
Jim Spence at least had his finger on the pulse re fans of other SPL teams, the big question is Will we be listened to?Last edited by HUTCHYHIBBY; 15-06-2012 at 09:42 AM.
-
15-06-2012 09:40 AM #11668
[QUOTE=Caversham Green;3263931]
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
BUT... and this is the most frustrating thing for me... NO ONE is asking the question!!
-
15-06-2012 09:41 AM #11669
- Join Date
- Nov 2006
- Posts
- 2,896
[QUOTE=CropleyWasGod;3263925]
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Is this what the Scottish fans (excepting huns) want??
-
15-06-2012 09:44 AM #11670
[QUOTE=ancienthibby;3263936]
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Log in to remove the advert |
Bookmarks