stewarty

Or, maybe he's taken on board what many people felt that the way to get fans on side is not to have daily leaks to the press documenting every move he is making. The reason we have heard about Ng and Miller is because they have been been trying to raise their profile with the support. I just hope the Duff and Duffer and the bidders themselves allow the options appraisal to be known publicly so that we can make some sort of assessment for ourselves. I suspect we wont and that the PR war will continue.

Could all of this be a strategy by the Gang of 10 to force our Admins to agree to their revised voting structure proposals? i.e. if we (the Admins on the club's behalf) agreed to the revised voting structure, other clubs will water down the proposed punishments that might affect us if we are forced down the newco route? I just hope we can exit administration via CVA before the start of next season, or whatever the deadline imposed.

The contrast to the governing bodies down south compared with those in Scotland is quite startling. Portsmouth are actively given assistance as they work through administration yet the SPL/SFA are actively seeking to hinder us as we work through administration. Surely member clubs should be looking after each other within reason? Surely governing bodies can see that our current plight is due to the mismanagement of a small number of individuals and that they are also culpable, in part, in not governing the game effectively to prevent this from happening. I'm at a loss as to how we go forward to be honest.

If willing to commit to a twitter Q&A then there's a greater chance some of the guard will slip and we'll get some juicy info. Via a moderated Q&A then Gersnet would certainly get quite a lot of interest and hits as a result but that really hasn't been what its about for me. Its about getting the info out there for all fans - and if Gersnet benefits from it, all the better. Well in, Frankie!

Have noticed that the 'New Posts' button doesn't seem to be working since the server move.

Whyte is without doubt a wee Shyte, but he merely accelerated this debacle with his actions. We wouldn't be here if it wasn't for Sir Minty.

Great news. Caps off a thoroughly enjoyable evening.

When laid out in such a fashion it does seem shocking but did we expect anything else? Seems good fodder for the media frenzy but nothing has changed it seems to me.

Welcome back Cammy. Looking forward to your first rant already!

Keeping an open mind for now. Maybe PM has negotiated repayment terms as otherwise we are crippled financially with almost no income that hasn't been mortgaged by Whyte

Whilst it appears contradictory to the aims of the RFFF, I support this payment as the reasons and the decision have been clearly stated. With the players having agreed wage cuts, I'm imagining the immediate future of the club is less threatened in respect of us having enough money to keep us going to the end of the season. Then when you add in the sterling work of the Red and Black campagin in ensuring tickets are bought for upcoming games, as well as the legends game on Friday, I'm cautiously optimistic about things.

Hawthorn: Right Mr Lawell, starting from the row your in, from the far end... Wank, wank, wank....

There is some negotiation on fees between the company, it's creditors and the admins themselves. But if no agreement is reached, the admins can apply to the court for judgement on the actual fees that need to be paid.

I've followed l&g in the past and don't think he is a Tim, for what it's worth.

Seems a bit fanciful and hysterical. I have no doubt that should we be found guilty then punishment will be reserved for us, not anyone else.

I agree entirely with the transparency comments regarding Harper McLeod. As I've said on other matters, transparency is not just about avoiding conflicts and full disclosure of material events and information, it is also about the appearance of transparency. As such, the above statement about is spot on.

Their first tweet of "hard evidence" is a link to Wikipedia and, supposedly, more folk attending a match than were officially recorded. Must try harder.

Is this some kind of amnesty on non-contractual payments?

I can't get over the fact that Adam has been allowed to make these allegations and for them to be given column inches in the Daily Mail, and prime time news coverage on Channel 4. Where is the evidence? Where were the specific examples of incidents that happened which can then be investigated. I am actually astounded at this.

Where is the evidence? If it exists then lets see it. This just looks like the unsubstantiated opinions of agenda-ridden bloggers passed off as fact. The opening lines from Thomson were about "as yet unproven" allegations. Loads of weasel words like "some say" were littered throughout his piece. For a man that clearly clearly considers himsel a serious journalist, he is being played like an absolute puppet.

I don't want him to be sacked. I just want him to voluntarily step down until the situation is resolved. The outcome of the FTT should do it, and possibly the SPL enquiry so I think we are talking a few weeks paid leave. Put it another way, who does it suit for Ogive to remain and for suggestions of underhand dealings, undeclared dual contracts, etc; to continue and be linked to the SFA.... Monsieur Liewell's grip on power gets stronger and stronger....

I can see I am not getting much support on this one! Fair enough, but I still think its valid. I await to see how this will pan out and my guess is that this will not go away.

We as Rangers fans have called for transparency in other areas of the SFA, particularly in respect of their disciplinary process. This for me is no different. And it is a significant conflict of interest which will only be resolved upon the outcome of the FTT and the SPL enquiry. Until it is, questions will not go away. I say this not because I think him temporarily stepping down will be an admission of guilt, but because it is the best thing to do in the circumstances. The fact that he has not already done so, and the manner in which the SFA have handled this has only made it worse in my view.

I agree up to a point. But imagine you are an official of Company A. You leave Company A having served for a number of years a pursue other interests before joining the industry regulator as Chair. Shortly afterwards Company A is engulfed in a financial meltdown, a failed takeover and intense media scrutiny. As the meltdown unfolds, accusations of fraud and impropriety emerge. Given your status previoauly in Company A you are either implicated in the events or were ignorant of them. Until your role in said events is clarified, can you really continue as Chair of the regulatory body? I would suggest not.

But the SFA are the appellate body should it arise. But whilst this has been the result of Celtic minded bloggers, it should not detract from the fact they have a point. Ogilve may well be innocent and I believe this will be proved, but until then his presence will cause problems over transparency. Though I would contend this isn't exactly the SFA's strong suit.