CammyF

In any other country they'd already be gone. There is sufficient evidence already in the public domain to sink them. However, if The Suns summary of the contents of the dossier are correct, we have a case and the SPFL must be forced to address these claims and be held accountable for any (sic) wrong doing

Wonder how The Sun could pull these very serious points out of our dossier in little over 2hrs when SPFL dismissed it completely in 1hr. Maybe worth SPFL going back and actually reading the dossier?

Key points according to The Sun Gers accuse chief executive Neil Doncaster of holding back key information from clubs and being ‘the guiding hand’ who determined the league’s actions. They claim the SPFL could be liable for up to £10million in refunds to broadcasters by ending the season prematurely. Gers say Doncaster suggested the SPFL handed over a sponsorship deal to Sky Sports which was significantly below the league’s market value. They question why SPFL lawyer Rod McKenzie issued four ‘cease and desist’ requests to Ibrox chairman Douglas Park - insisting he blocked their bid for a new resolution. They query a letter sent to UEFA outlining how Scotland’s clubs wanted the season over before any vote had taken place. And they insist there are still unanswered questions on why Dundee performed a voting U-turn.

Haha - no wonder SPFL and their lackies saying that there is nothing worth seeing in the "dossier"

So they've managed to read a 200 page document in circa 1hr (1 page every 20 seconds) of a document they weren't sent, then type and release a statement dismissing the dossier? Wow, that's impressive work considering most of their staff are on furlough.....

And within 2hrs the SPFL have read the entire document and released a statement stating 'no evidence'. Case closed

200 page document sent to 41 clubs this morning. Our legal opinion is Doncaster breached his duties.

Same here lol- saying that I might have chosen that option when I moved to Toronto 3 years ago to make it easier but can't remember doing it ?

Stranger and stranger.... https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/may/06/gretna-loan-details-deepen-controversy-over-plan-to-end-scottish-football-season-spfl?CMP=share_btn_tw

Where to do start with that pile of tripe (in the week that managers of the tax avoidance scheme used by Celtic staff and players lost their latest appeal and another link to the Boys Club scandal was revealed)? Best off ignored really.......

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......