CammyF

https://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/18436100.rangers-md-stewart-robertson-spfls-dictatorship-filibustering-deflection-tactics/ Decent article / interview and some brilliant answers from Stewart Robertson. Nailing them again.

Decent article by Gary Ralston Scottish football could soon go cap in hand to the government for a bailout to avoid further financial carnage from coronavirus.Nicola Sturgeon should do the decent thing and loosen the money belt for a national sport that means so much to so many.But untying the strings on the public purse should come with a non-negotiable condition that our football authorities finally open the doors of Hampden sixth floor to accountability.What an ugly democracy controls our game, as evidenced by the damning dossier produced by Rangers yesterday on the end-of-season resolution saga.What arrogance and hubris underpins the executive of the SPFL, a pampered, privileged and well-feathered elite protected by a coterie of boardroom flunkeys determined to preserve a ruinous status quo.No minutes signed off for the last 15 board meetings? Move along, nothing to see hereA chief executive releasing a briefing paper to clubs on the most contentious resolution in seasons without board approval? Come on, start walking.Non-executive directors on the board being given less than 24 hours to review 118 pages of complex resolution documentation? Told you – scat.The appalling corporate governance, including the omission of vital information on documents made available to clubs, should be enough to put Neil Doncaster and legal adviser Rod McKenzie in the Scottish football dock.Give them another couple of days and they’ll probably start pinning it all on Carole Baskin from Tiger King.Take this to the bank –Rangers will not garner enough support from member clubs to push through their calls for an independent inquiry into the whole resolution fiascoIn truth, they knew that all along, but reasoned compiling their dossier of wrongdoing and joining forces with Hearts and Stranraer was the only way to shine a light on the shadowy corners of our game.Their hope, surely, has been to convince some of the bigger clubs in the country,particularly Aberdeen and Hibs, the conduct of the SPFL at executive level is now beyond the pale because only then will heads start to roll and the healing begin.Scottish football prides itself on the fact 43 per cent of their turnover comes from gate receipts. It seems the fans can spend £20 and £30 watching their teams every week but don’t dare throw in your tuppenceworth.The SPFL apparently know the reconstruction talks are a sham, doomed to failure because a realignment of the leagues requires broadcaster support and a renegotiation of existing contracts, which would never be favourable.Again, they didn’t tell the clubs. A £10million black hole as a result of cash clawbacks from Sky and BT Sport? The suggestion of handing the naming rights of the league, worth £1.5million a year, to Sky for buckshee? All information that was kept from clubs and, as a result, supporters.There has been an indecent haste to end the season, perfectly portrayed in a letter to UEFA from the SPFL and SFA that should have given Doncaster and Ian Maxwell a red face to match their brass necks. Sent six days before the resolution was even voted upon, it claimed the “vast majority” of clubs wanted the season to end as it was the only way to access prize money.It was as sinister as it was surprising, not least as clubs hadn’t been surveyed at that stage for their point of view by Hampden’s powerbrokers.The biggest losers from the resolution have, of course, been Hearts, Partick Thistle,Stranraer, Falkirk and a clutch of clubs who still held out hope of a play-off spot.But Rangers are also left to count the cost financially as the rush to end the season ended their chance – slim but still a chance – of overtaking Celtic and banking a potential £25 million Champions League windfall.The Parkhead club have also suffered – missing the chance to claim a historic ninth successive title on the field.The reputational damage to the SPFL and, in turn, Scottish football has been severe. Rangers have done the game a favour by asking the biggest questions that, shamefully, could remain unansweredWhy, in light of their flip- flopping over the stance of loans and advances to Gretna, Motherwell and Partick Thistle, did the SPFL not explore all options to get money to clubs?Why was McKenzie such a truculent, obstructive force as two members, Rangers and Hearts, sought to shape another resolution for clubs to consider?What did Doncaster say to Dundee’s John Nelms on the afternoon of Friday, April 10 to persuade him to change his vote and why did it take until 8.30pm for the SPFL to check its own spam filter?As long as valid questions are ignored, suspicions will always remain and bad blood will continue to coarse through Scottish football when it badly needs a period of calm.Sturgeon would do our game the greatest favour if she wrote that cheque and demanded greater transparency as the price to pay.Let’s see the SPFL and SFA subject to freedom of information requests and their committee meetings publicly minuted and live streamed.Let’s allow Scottish football fans a greater insight into how the game is run and organised because just now? The view of their governance is pretty damn appalling

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-vs-spfl-verdict-4-21992864

Compare and contrast Stewart Robertson's open, honest and professional interview tonight to the contrived, staged and closed interview Dungcaster conducted at the weekend (in addition to the truly Bizzare shifty self-Q&A). It is also worth re-listening to the Doncaster interview when Dick Gordon questions him on any potential loss of earnings from sponsorship if we called the league. He stutters, side-steps and then question - he knew he'd be caught and "deflected" the question.

As well as informing UEFA that they were calling the league BEFORE the vote and taken place. It's all unravelling and the rats are scurrying all over the place trying to rubbish our claims. They're worried, make no mistake

Stewart Robertson has just been on RC and came across really well against an openly hostile panel (thought they were meant to be impartial) and has set the scene brilliantly. He has mentioned he has already received messages of support from other clubs and left the floor open for others to add their grievances. This has a long way to run before it's finished and for once we appear to be on the front foot and have all the evidence we require. He summed up by saying that if we lose the vote for an independent investigation then we would review other options open to us. I for one called for the board to come out fighting and they have with a well put together dossier and now a great follow up interview with a hostile anti-Rangers radio station- that's takin the fight behind enemy lines Worth noting that football expert Gordon Delziel admitted he hadn't read the dossier - that's the level of professionalism that gets paid to give opinion on our game

They responded just over 1hr after Rangers circulated the document even tho the document wasn't sent to them. Think about that, they took 1hr to respond to an email they didn't receive from Rangers, but couldn't find an email sent to them from Dundee. Anyway their response was the predictible ; nothing to see here so bugger off you annoying huns. We even have Roger Mitchell tweeting today that if Rangers refuse to call the season, we should be deducted points.

Some bits to add on to Suns Bullet points* The SPFL know reconstruction talks are a sham as they require contract renegotiations with broadcasters - but didn’t tell the clubs.* The SPFL are guilty of appalling corporate governance - 15 sets of previous board minutes sat unapproved as recently as April 26, while non executive directors were given less than 24 hours to review a 118 page legal document on the resolution.

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 ??????????⚪?