CammyF

Why is no one asking why 1 SPFL club forgo'ed their cash to advance it to 2 other clubs? Why was this done, who was aware of it? What, if any, strings were attached to the "advancements" (Don't call them loans)? Also, if advancements were easily available in 2017 why not now?

To the failed trialist, I am sure Doncaster does appear to be a decent guy.... not much of a character reference to be fair.

That was very good viewing - should do this type of Q&A more often. Two young and ambitious guys doing a great job for our club. Long may it continue

And has yet to receive official confirmation/documentation of findings of said investigation

Interesting bit buried at the very bottom of the Record article ; It’s understood several clubs have contacted the Ibrox outfit in recent days to express their anger and disillusionment at the conduct of the SPFL in recent days, ahead of an EGM on May 12.

Tom English on BBC on the loans, advances not being loans / advances !The vexed business of loans and advances has blown up again. A few weeks back the SPFL said they could not issue loans to cash-strapped clubs without final league placings being confirmed by way of a yes vote in the SPFL's resolution to call the leagues.A few days later, Ann Budge, chair of Hearts, contradicted the SPFL's view on that. "I've sat on the SPFL board and I've approved a loan for another club," she told BBC Scotland on 18 April."[It was] in my early days as a director. I genuinely can't remember the club involved, but a club required an advance. We discussed it [as a board], it wasn't contentious, everybody agreed and we moved on. It sticks in my mind. Can you give a loan to a club? Yes you can. And I know that for a Last week, SPFL chairman Murdoch MacLennan contradicted the contradiction in the mammoth Q&A with himself, stating no loan had been issued by the SPFL for more than seven years. SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster reiterated that point later in the day in his round of media interviews."The suggestion of issuing loans is a red herring," said MacLennan. "Loans have been made by the league to individual members in the past, but not for many years - and only where the board was able to satisfy itself that making a loan was in the best interests of the league as a whole. The last loan made by the SPL was more than seven years ago, in unique circumstances to a single member, secured against a personal guarantee given by a wealthy supporter."Now there is further information. When you trawl through the SPFL's accounts dated 31 May, 2017 you will eventually come to section 14 which details advances [some might call them loans] to two clubs during the year. "Two advances on club payments were made to SPFL clubs totalling £300,000," the annual report says."An amount of £6,613 remained outstanding as of year end, which has since been repaid."These were the financial transactions that Budge was referring to when she pointed out that the SPFL was wrong to say that loans to cash-strapped clubs could not be made. Budge was on the SPFL board at the time the £300,000 was paid out.MacLennan, soon-to-be SPFL chairman, was one of the people who names appears on the accounts. Neil Doncaster was the chief executive. Other directors whose names appear on those accounts detailing the release of £300,000 to struggling clubs were Ken Ferguson, Karyn McCluskey and Les Gray and Stewart Robertson.The list of other directors and advisors on the accounts include Celtic chief executive Peter Lawwell, Scottish FA chief executive Ian Maxwell and Hibs chief executive Leeann Dempster. All three retired from the board in July 2017.The SPFL denied on Friday evening that these figures were loans, but when is a loan not a loan? If, according to the accounts, a sum of £6,613 "remained outstanding" then does that not indicate it's a loan, the very thing that MacLennan said midweek hadn't happened in more than seven years?All of this goes back to disquiet among certain clubs about the haste in which the SPFL's resolution was held. Some feel that they were railroaded into voting to end the leagues because they were told that was the only way they could have end-of-season payments released.A number of clubs say they will tell their stories, should Rangers' call for an independent inquiry prove successful. The odds are hugely against it. Rangers will release whatever information they have to clubs sometime next week. Their so-called dossier will need to be explosive, or else the only detonation going on in the Scottish game, will be one that goes off in the face of the Rangers board.Privately, in the days leading up to the SPFL's resolution to end the leagues, some SPFL figures confirmed that the only way money could be released to clubs was for them to vote for the league's resolution.In his Q&A, MacLennan asked himself a question about alternatives to loans being issued to troubled clubs. He never mentioned advances; he just said that no money could be forthcoming to clubs without a yes vote."What other options did the board look at? What other ways were explored to get cash in the pockets of clubs now?" he asked. The answer was emphatic. "There were simply no other viable options. We've already talked about loans. It is clear, that in the absence of any suggested alternative ways of providing money to clubs, no other practical and realistic way exists."So, the possibility of loans or advances - call it what you will - didn't exist, according to the chairman. However, the accounts of 2017 suggest that the board did, indeed, have that latitude.The SPFL have now sought to explain all of this. "During season 2016-17, earlier than usual fee payments were made to two clubs, totalling £300,000," said a spokesman. "These were made following the promotion of Rangers FC to the Ladbroke Premiership. These fee payments followed complaints by three clubs that they had been disadvantaged in the fixturing for that season by not getting three visits from Celtic FC/Rangers FC."As a result of the negative impacts on their cash flow resulting from this fixturing anomaly, two of those three clubs requested earlier than normal fee payments totalling £300,000. These fee payments were not loans and were wholly within the amounts budgeted to be earned by those clubs, whatever final league placing was achieved by those clubs that season."In other words, they were advances against prize money that was due to the clubs. The SPFL spokesman even used the words "advance fee payments" in his statement on Friday.Even if you accept that they were, indeed, advances and not loans, how does that tally with MacLennan's view that "there were simply no other options"? A repeat of what they did for the two clubs back in 2016-17 wasn't an option?There also remains the mention of the repayment of an "outstanding amount" of £6,613. The SPFL spokesman came back: "At no point was there any loan to any Premiership club, indeed not to any SPFL club."A loan? An advance? The other day, the SPFL told us that none of these things were options. Their own accounts shed extra light on that.

Brilliant, you can't help but luv Big Marv ??????????⚪?

When all said and done (and if Mrs Cammy agrees ?) I'll probably renew as well (don't think I'll join the members scheme unless it helps my RSC), but will understand if anyone doesn't

With so many people losing their lives, their loved ones, their livelihoods, their jobs etc, and with the continued uncertainty of the virus and on-going measures, puts both the club and the fans in a hugely difficult position when it comes to renewing season tickets. I can totally understand any fan who for whatever reason decides they can't renew at this time and hope the club are sympathetic to these fans as I feel they shouldn't automatically lose their ticket for good if they can't renew this season due to circumstances completely out with their control. As for the members scheme, the less said about that the better in my humble opinion

I may be "niave" but if there is nothing to hide, then the SPFL needn't fear complete and comprehensive independent inquiry. Why are they so set against one? It's a simple question that remains unanswered

There's Doncaster setting his farewell agenda - I'm leaving due to the (sectarian) abuse I am receiving. Case closed your honour.

Best final would be 5-1 victory over Hearts in 1996. Durie hatrick but still didn't earn him MOTM ? Worst? The borefest mentioned above against Hibs. Was at the 1st and 2nd replays. Also 3-2 defeat to Hibs in 2016 (both on and off the pitch).

As you say Ian best player of his generation and a player who'd be in your team every week. Been to a few Q&As with players who played in the same Rangers team as him and they all say how good a player he was. For DA to not only build a team around him, shows how good a player he was. Would take 11 Barry Ferguson's in the team now that's for sure.

Helicopter Sunday - never forget standing at Easter Road when the news of Motherwells goals filtered through. Keep Believing

Leanne Dempsy resigns from the SPFL League Reconstruction working group......

Decent article in Belfast Telegraph https://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/scottish/how-the-sorry-saga-of-the-spfl-vote-descended-from-incompetence-to-scandal-39140041.html

Gary Keown - Mail On Sunday RIGHT, can we get this independent investigation into the disgrace that is the SPFL up and running now, please? Aberdeen chairman Dave Cormack supports it, along with Ann Budge at Hearts and Douglas Park at Rangers, and has given fresh evidence to suggest it is more than worthwhile. Despite later attempts to change the subject, Cormack (left) admitted on radio yesterday that he was told in a call from SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster at 4:40pm last Friday — when Aberdeen had not submitted their ballot paper — that another ‘yes’ vote was no longer needed to push through the league’s resolution on calling the season as it stands. Forgive my naivety here, but what kind of process is this when the governing body are letting clubs know how other votes are shaping up to let them work out how best to cast theirs? That’s before we even get to the ‘coercion’ Budge and Park have spoken about, incomplete results being released and Dundee submitting a ‘no’ vote that somehow got lost in the internet and was later allowed to be changed to a ‘yes’. The more you hear, the more the whole thing stinks. The insight it has given into the politicking that goes on behind the scenes has surely been alarming to fans of all clubs no matter whether they were affected in a sporting sense by that resolution or not. What’s more, there hasn’t been a single note of contrition from the SPFL. Instead, they seem quite happy with themselves, their chairman Murdoch MacLennan offering his pearls of wisdom to the proles for the first time in pretty much three years and, almost immediately, making you wish he hadn’t. It is impossible to have any trust in the workings of the SPFL right now. Sure, that might be an uncharitable position to take, but it is hard to see how anything other than a fully independent inquiry can even begin to turn that round.

The Sunday PostApril 19, 2020, 9:15 amSir Kenny Dalglish has called on the SPFL to get its house in order.Scotland’s most-capped player is currently recuperating at home after being diagnosed with asymptomatic coronavirus.But he has looked on aghast as the country’s football clubs have indulged in petty squabbling – and serious allegations – while the game is in lockdown.Dalglish said: “I believe the SPFL’s credibility is on the floor.“There must be an independent investigation into the accusations made by Rangers against Chief Executive, Neil Doncaster, and legal adviser, Rod McKenzie.“The Ibrox board need to produce their evidence and let it be looked at.“It’s as simple and straightforward as that.“The game in Scotland has gone backwards in the past few days.“It looks like a bit of a shambles, and it needs cleaned up.”Dalglish’s call was echoed by Hearts owner, Ann Budge, and Aberdeen chairman, Dave Cormack, who both spoke out yesterday.

From The DR The 4 Rangers demands to SPFL as Douglas Park steps up bid for independent inquiryThe Ibrox side aren't happy with the governing body and have added Murdoch MacLennan to their hitlist. SHARE (Image: SNS)Sign up to FREE email alerts from Daily Record - RangersSubscribeWe will use your email address to send you newsletters. Please see ourPrivacy Noticefor more information on how we use your data and your data protection rights.Rangers switched tactics in their bid for an independent inquiry into votergate – by adding Murdoch MacLennan to their SPFL hitlist.Chairman Douglas Park and the Ibrox club also aim to use the the league’s own rules against 
them – by turning whistleblower on the men they claim have brought the game into disrepute.MailSport can reveal exclusively details of an explosive letter sent by Park to league supremo 
MacLennan in the wake of last week’s vote to end the season.Having already called for the 
suspension of chief executive Neil Doncaster and legal advisor Rod McKenzie, Rangers now have deep reservations over MacLennan’s impartiality.In the strongly worded letter in response to the SPFL chairman demanding to see any evidence of wrongdoing, Park: says he WON’T provide evidence unless MacLennan, Doncaster and McKenzie aren’t involved. wants a copy of the league’s
 official whistleblower policy so the trio can’t have access to it. demands McLennan explains derogatory comments he made about Rangers in the past. accuses him of attempting to shut down the club’s concerns by 
denying them free speech. READ MORERangers FCRangers are adamant they have information which shows the
process of the resolution vote to be flawed, as well as calling the
governance and integrity of the SPFL into question.But they won’t hand it over while Doncaster and MacLennan are still at the helm of the organisation.138212091369MOST READ1 Celtic receive major title boost as Manchester United legend reveals shock UEFA climb down2 Kris Boyd makes Rangers 'egg on face' claim as he reveals the SPFL move he cannot understand3 Dave Cormack backs SPFL inquiry as Aberdeen chairman reveals late Neil Doncaster call on day of crucial voteIn his letter, designed to heap more pressure on the SPFL hierarchy, Park says: “An initial request to share the evidence we hold came from one of the individuals (McKenzie) we’re seeking to have independently investigated and it would therefore have been wholly inappropriate to provide it in those circumstances.“Rangers will readily share all of the information and evidence it has amassed with a properly constituted independent investigation.”Gers want to know who they can take evidence to, given the conflicts of interest surrounding the trio.Park also hit out at MacLennan, saying: “Can you provide Rangers with a copy of your organisation’s whistleblower’s policy, as an initial step towards establishing the framework for an investigation?”Park also wants answers from MacLennan on anti-Rangers 
comments he allegedly made when he took up his position in 2017.In the letter circulated to all 42 clubs, he said: “It has been widely reported that you have previously made your attitude towards
Rangers Football Club known. There has been no explanation for, or denial of, these remarks.“It must be clear to you why, in the absence of an explanation of denial, Rangers can have no faith in your impartiality.”The only ways Rangers can get an independent inquiry is for it to be either granted by the SPFL board or if three clubs call for an EGM and it gets 75 per cent approval in a vote.Follow @Record_Sport

Yeah but Cormack can't "unsay" it, it's out there now! You are correct regarding English, said last weekend he smells a story here and he is (to his credit) going after it.

From BBC website Aberdeen have echoed calls by Rangers and Hearts for an independent review into the SPFL's voting process to end the lower league season early. Dons chairman Dave Cormack said that SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster informed him before the deadline that his vote was not required. "I don't have a problem with Neil getting involved," Cormack told BBC Radio Scotland. "Neil didn't push us either way on the conversations we had." A total of 81% of Scotland's 42 senior clubs backed the resolution to end the lower league season. Cormack said he supports calls for an independent review into the process. "Yes, I would. I could almost repeat what [Hearts owner] Ann Budge has said." No decision has yet been made on the Premiership, with a Uefa meeting next week expected to provide clarity for top-flight leagues across Europe. 'It's about righting wrongs' - Ann Budge SPFL make £1.8m end of season payments Cormack, who revealed his club is losing £1m a month during the pandemic lockdown, said: "He [Doncaster] absolutely understood that our position was that we wanted the Premiership clubs to decide. 'We'd be as well setting fire to £1m in the car park' "We were trying to negotiate a written assurance from the SPFL board that that was the case. Where we are now is that we've got the assurance that the decision to close the league, in the Premiership, will not be taken without full consultation of the Premiership clubs." Cormack added: "The sensible thing to do would be to take a deep breath and say: 'Look, let's get a temporary change in place for this coming season.' Because, boy, we have so many other things to focus on. "We'd be as well taking £1m out to the car park at Pittodrie and setting fire to it. Every month that this goes by, it's costing us £1m and costing other clubs different amounts." The Dons chairman added: "Neil Doncaster and I had a Zoom [meeting] yesterday. Dave Cormack said Neil Doncaster contacted him before the vote deadline "The four key aspects for us are: how can we get back to playing football safely and survive; how do we end the Premiership; what is the task force and its terms of reference; how do we draw a line in the sand on this investigation on what happened. "We can sit and talk for hours on what happened and why it happened - but look, it's happened. We need to learn from this. "I said to Neil: 'If I were in your position, then I would show some contrition for what has happened.' Clearly, it is a vote that was forced down our throats in many ways, and that's obvious. "I said to Neil that we want to see some clear leadership from the SPFL, setting out terms of reference for us to get back playing football safely. Let's look at [playing games behind] closed doors. "We haven't ended the Premiership yet... the task force is to expand the Premiership and it hasn't ended yet. "It all comes back to the 48 hours we were given [before voting on the SPFL proposal to call the lower leagues] and this needed a lot more time for discussion." Cormack says Aberdeen are in favour of an expanded 14-team Scottish Premiership for one or two seasons. "We think that's the fair thing to do for everybody," he said.

Aberdeen chairman on radio today saying he backs an independent investigation. SPFL phoned him on day of vote (4:40PM) and informed him the doesn't matter how you vote as they had received sufficient yes votes ? Tried to backtrack but English to be fare, would let him. Gets murkier and murkier

You couldn't make it up ?

Probably about as subtle as Shagger can be https://mobile.twitter.com/i/web/status/1251159922357624835

Don't see that in what English, Stewart and Ralston are saying. They are asking why the rush and who's gotten something to gain by calling the season? They have all called out the vote, the bullying and the fact that reconstruction has magically made it's way onto the agenda.