ian1964

Brown is nothing but a cowardly thug,if he ever makes contact with another player in such a manner as to injure him then you just know that's exactly what he was trying to do.

Supporters have flooded the companies with letters of protest as well as ceasing to use their produc Sunday April 29,2012 By Greg Christison RANGERS fans are boycotting firms linked to the Scottish Football Association in a revenge protest at sanctions that have pushed the club to the brink. The Scottish Sunday Express can reveal the body’s sponsors and partners – including Bank of Scotland and Tesco – have been targeted. Supporters have flooded the companies – which also include Wiseman Dairies, Sky, Adidas, McDonalds, Carling and Mars – with letters of protest as well as ceasing to use their products. Officials at the SFA have now been forced to write to firms to provide reassurances. A source at the Bank of Scotland of said: “This is having an impact.” The boycott comes after the SFA imposed a 12-month transfer ban and a £160,000 fine on Rangers. I think this demonstrates the level of injustice by the Scottish Football Association. It is just a fantastic turnout, but not just that, every one of you has been a fantastic ambassador for Rangers Football Club Sandy Jardine A website entitled Stop the SFA, which urges fans to boycott both sponsors and partners, sports the headline: “Scottish FA – Not fit to govern.” The fans’ sanctions came as almost 7,000 supporters, led by former player Sandy Jardine, yesterday demonstrated outside the SFA offices at Hampden. Banners unveiled on the steps of the National Stadium read: “SFA – not fit for purpose. SFA sanctions cost jobs. SFA killing Scottish football.” Another sported the message: “We support Glasgow Rangers, we won’t walk away, boycott the SFA.” After a delayed start due to health and safety issues over the numbers in attendance, Mr Jardine spoke to the supporters before handing over a letter of complaint. He declared: “I think this demonstrates the level of injustice by the Scottish Football Association. It is just a fantastic turnout, but not just that, every one of you has been a fantastic ambassador for Rangers Football Club. It has been absolutely magnificent what you have all done to try and save this club. “The supporters did nothing wrong, the players did nothing wrong, the management did nothing wrong, and the staff did nothing wrong. If we can stick together and keep it going, there will always be a Rangers.” Speaking after the rally, Mr Jardine added: “The implications of the SFA sanctions could tip us over the edge into liquidation, and if that happens we have 250 people there who could lose their jobs.” Mark Dingwall, the head of Rangers Supporters Trust said he hoped that the protest and campaign against sponsors could force the SFA into a U-turn. “I think it certainly shows the strength of feeling,” he added. “The fans have taken the boycott of sponsors up with gusto, and I think the way they are doing it is the right way. “They are lobbying and asking that they use their good offices to influence the SFA to say that it is frankly ludicrous that a team has been hamstrung so much that it destroys competition. “The reputational damage this has done to the SFA is great, and it will have repercussions.” Officials at the Bank of Scotland yesterday said it would be “inappropriate to comment on any other matter in relation to the SFA”, while a spokesman for Tesco said it has “not been involved in any way in the current issue between Rangers and the SFA”.” A spokesman for the SFA refused to comment but confirmed that letters had been sent to all sponsors explaining the organisation’s position.

Oi,leave us baldies alone!.........................................

Dundee United - Hearts Attendance 7001 Dunfermline - Aberdeen Attendance 3501 Kilmarnock - ICT Attendance 3848 Motherwell - St Johnstone Attendance 4743 Bears walk in the sun Attendance 10,000 +

Rangers Fans against SFA Sanctions demo 28.04.2012

Vinny‏@DarcheVinnyReply Retweet Favorite · Open The SFA have apparently threatened Park's of Hamilton with legal action, as Douglas Park is wanting his company name off the SFA website.

I;m in a time warp!!. Sorry I didn't see it,I don't use RM......................................................

Has it already been posted on here?

I couldnâ??t quite make out the identity of one clown in the broadcasting press conference Alastair McCoist held yesterday. But using his pathetic and persistent question to the Rangers manager as a yardstick, I suspect it was the man from BBC Scotland. Whoever it was, asked, time and time again, why people had to know the identities of the SFA appointed so called independent Judicial Panel which hammered Rangers? Does the wee laddieâ??s mammy knows he out? Or has the National Union of Journalists suddenly been transformed into the Media Masons? With the Daily Mail Two, John Greechan and Stephen McGowan, as Grand Masters? WHEESTâ?¦â?¦itâ??s a secret. Well, let me tell all the reporters who think TRUTH and OPENESS are bad words, while CENSORSHIP and SECRECY is what they believe in, just WHY it is important to know the names of the Judicial Panel which hammered Rangers. It is important to know their names in order that we make an assessment of what manner of men they are. It is important to know who they are so we may ask a few questions about them. Beginning with NEIL DRYSDALE of the Royal Bank of Scotland, who has been a Raith Rovers director for more than a decade. He signed the most recent accounts to 30 June 2011. Here are some extracts: - loss for the year £162,000 (2010: loss £73,000) - balance sheet insolvent to the tune of £1.4m - this excludes £201,000 of unpaid rent that the landlords have waived for the moment but retain the right to claim later - net current liabilities £310,000 - payroll taxes and VAT outstanding of £78,000 (2010: £118,000) - was only able to pay some of its bills because other directors paid in £52,000 - going concern emphasis of matter by the auditors which cast "significant doubt on the company's ability to continue as a going concern". - disclosure that "the company does not have formal funding facilities in place that allow it to meet its liabilities as they fall due". - disclosure that a group restructuring took place in 2005, the terms of which were "incorrectly documented" and an "assumed waiver of the loan ... has not in fact been made". Drysdale owned 0.0003% of the 327,400 ordinary shares and 0.5% of the 10,000 preference shares. If he has made any money in banking, it doesn't appear that he has invested it in football. Although there were payroll taxes and VAT due at the year end, these weren't necessarily overdue at that time. How £78,000 was paid in full the following month when there was only £27,000 in the bank at 30 June would be a legitimate question to ask. Likewise the year before, £118,000 taxes due but £44,000 in the bank. In the interests of transparency, perhaps Drysdale would like to make a statement confirming that, during his directorship, Raith Rovers have never been late with any tax payments. If he is sitting in judgement of Rangers on these matters, surely that's the least we can expect? B&B Limited Drysdale was a director of B&B Limited when it was dissolved at the instance of the Registrar of Companies on 23 June 2009. - the accounts which he signed in August 2008 state that he had been a director since at least 1 December 2006, but his appointment form states that he was appointed in 2008 - loss for the year of £7,000 - balance sheet insolvent to the tune of £15,000 but no disclosures regarding going concern or ability to continue trading (and indeed it was dissolved less than 12 months later) - it should have submitted its annual return in December 2008, but didn't - this is a breach of the Companies Act for which the current maximum fine is £5,000 - Drysdale also signed the accountant's report. What? Since when was he an accountant? What qualifications or experience does he have to sign that? Especially when the accounts appear to contain a number of non compliance matters and omissions. A director who is not an accountant signing the accountant's report is almost unheard of. Airdrie Airdrie supporters remember Drysdale kindly. When the old Airdrie died, and newco Airdrie applied for SFL membership, Drysdale was particularly sympathetic to their cause, believing that Airdrie fans had suffered enough. Raith Rovers voted for newco Airdrie, although Gretna won the overall vote. Sympathetic to Airdrie following liquidation, but extremely harsh penalty for Rangers Independence On the Raith Rovers website http://www.raithrovers.net/directors Drysdale's "primary responsibilities are the management of cashflow, corporate governance and representation of the club at SFL and SFA meetings". How many meetings with the SFA has he had? Who has he met with? Has anything ever been discussed at any of those meetings which is relevant, directly or indirectly, to the affairs of Rangers? Given the supposed independence of the Judicial Panel, will minutes of those meetings be published? Banker According to Drysdale's publicly available LinkedIn account, as a Sector Credit Policy Manager at the Royal Bank of Scotland he has responsibility for setting lending policy for certain key industries including professional football. Having all but bankrupted the country with their policies, despite any other perceived failings, it is hard to blame Drysdale for the catastrophic failures at the RBS. Where does this leave Stewart Regan? Appointments to the Judicial Panel are made by the Board of the SFA with reference to the Judicial Panel Terms of Reference. I have not been able to find this document on the SFA website. Perhaps in the interests of transparency, Regan should make it publicly available so that we can judge what procedures, including fit and proper tests, are carried out before appointing Panel Members. Did Regan did carry out a fit and proper test before Drysdale's appointment? It was reported that Drysdale was "hand-picked for the tribunal" which is in accordance with clause 7.2.1 of the Judicial Panel Protocol, where each individual Tribunal is appointed by the Secretary. Who is that? It's Regan of course! So Regan, who sits in the Hampden boardroom with his Parkhead pal and fellow SFA director, Celtic chief executive, Peter Lawwell, decides exactly who sits in judgement on Rangers. Regan makes the appointments to each tribunal with reference to the Protocol for Tribunal Appointments. Once again I haven't seen this document and wonder whether Regan, in the interests of transparency, can direct me to its public availability. AND THEREâ??S MORE. From The Herald eleven years agoâ?¦. "Raith Rovers have paid £ 2000 to the SFA to avoid being kicked out of the Scottish Cup, but they have also written to SFA chief executive David Taylor to ask why the story of their potential barring from the competition was leaked. Rovers were given a deadline of yesterday to stump up the unpaid cash for poor discipline from season 1999/2000. Officials at the club have confirmed the fees were paid on Friday but they are still concerned that the story was made public. Raith company director Eric Drysdale said: ''I have clarified with the SFA that the fine was received. I have also sent them a letter asking why sensitive information was made available to the media.'' Therefore, in answer to the clown of a broadcaster's oft repeated question to Alastair McCoist as to why it was important to know the identity of the Judicial Panel, the answer isâ?¦.ALL of the above. For all of the above is only brief history of Raith Rovers and the Royal Bank of Scotland's Eric Drysdale's business history. There may be other episodes which happened during a previous regime at the club. No doubt further investigations will reveal if there is anything else. But only because we now know the indentity of the three members of Stewart Regan's handpicked and clearly not-so-INDEPENDENT Judicial Panel. Having read all of the above and digested it, some may believe the Royal Bank of Scotland's Eric Drysdale is not a fit and proper person to undertake the task he was handpicked by Stewart Regan for. OTHERS MAY DISAGREE! But now we know and, thanks to some fine reporting by the Daily Record and the Daily Telegraph, we are able to reach a view. It's called a a free and open society. It is called democracy. No doubt that is a novel idea for the broadcasting clown - the man from BBC Scotland? - to get his head around. Not to mention a concept - along with that of a free and open press - those masters of Media Masonic secrecy, the Daily Mail Two, John Greechan and Stephen McGowan, will struggle to get to grips with.

' We don't need Rangers ',aye right you are then,get it right up you ya plum and the rest of the diddy teams that rely on Rangers for their income.

Sandy Jardine speech

Delighted to hear this protest went off without any trouble. Well done to all who attended.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/922...n-Rangers.html As a matter of fact, they worked their socks off to get the job done. At which point Gary Allan QC, Eric Drysdale of Raith Rovers and Alistair Murning, erstwhile football commentator, discovered that their best intentions had paved the highway to hell. If you are a Rangers supporter you might well want to read that a few times – and reflect upon how much good it did them. After listening to four solid days of Lord Nimmo Smith’s summation of the evidence against Craig Whyte and Rangers, the three men sat down last Friday to consider the courses of action open to them. Had they been dealing with just about any other football club they would have been well within their rights to have told themselves: “Stuff this – we’ll start again Monday morning, OK?” Instead, they convened until 10.45 on Friday night. On Monday they again worked long into the evening hours. And for whose benefit, exactly? For Rangers – whose administrators had conveyed that they needed a verdict delivered with absolute urgency. As Eric Drysdale told this column: “The administrators were desperate for decisions in respect of prospective buyers and there was extreme keenness on the part of the panel members to deliver the judgments to them. Related Articles Smith seeks suspended sentence 26 Apr 2012 Trio who ruled on Rangers threatened 25 Apr 2012 McCoist 'disgusted' by threats from supporters 26 Apr 2012 Rangers woe resurrects Dundee hopes 24 Apr 2012 McCoist: sanctions could kill Rangers 24 Apr 2012 SFA surprised by Rangers ruling 24 Apr 2012 “We had listened to all the evidence and you should have seen the size of the folders of documents – most of them financial. I have suggested to Stewart Regan that – if nothing else comes out of this – we should not rush a decision in such a contentious case and that 10.30 at night might not be the best time to release the findings. “My own feeling is that it might be better not to announce the judgment until the note of explanation is ready, but, of course, hindsight is perfect vision.” Equally, an original vision of the SFA’s wholesale reforms last year was to provide an arm’s-length body to consider football disciplinary matters. The member clubs agreed, as the SFA has pointed out this week, to install a so-called ‘cab rank’ of legal, business and football experts to provide an on-demand adjudication service. Transparency was the watchword. Trouble was – and how many saw it coming any more than they spied Whyte preparing to cast his spider’s silk around Ibrox? – someone thought it prudent to assure the Judicial Tribunal members that their identities would not be disclosed. But, just as Macbeth murdered sleep, the internet has assassinated anonymity. Had this tribunal been assembled in the days before dotcom the three members just might have managed to stay below the radar until the storm blew through. Some inside the SFA seem to believe that it was Rangers who leaked the members’ names to supporters’ websites. Perhaps it was – I have no evidence to support the contention and the SFA has not pushed the suggestion publicly – but I can testify that the information did not come to Telegraph Sport via the Ibrox club or from online sources. Remember super-injunctions? They came and went in jig time because although force of law could restrain conventional media outlets it was powerless against social media sites. Now the SFA has been forced to deal with the awkward truth that the very notion of a covert process provides the fuel that rockets disclosure through cyberspace. The speed of this reaction must compel others to consider their responses, too. Since Neil Lennon is in trouble for retweeting a fan’s comment that SFA officials are corrupt, Ally McCoist might consider himself lucky if he doesn’t face sanctions for his vehement demand to know the identities of the tribunal members. One assumes Lennon does not actually believe that failure to give decisions that favour Celtic automatically renders referees rotten to the core. McCoist, after the benefit of a pause for reflection, yesterday declared himself “disgusted” by threats made to Drysdale as well as SFA functionaries, presumably by those whose supposed devotion to his club assumes warped forms. Nevertheless, the force with which his demand was expressed is the sort of signal that can inflame the crazies out there. Plus the fact, Rangers fans are accumulating form in intimidating people who cross them this season. The list of those who have been warned by the police to take precautions for the good of their health includes Whyte, the two administrators appointed by Duff and Phelps, the tribunal members and a number of SFA luminaries. And the Rangers supporters’ organisations might want to consider that potential sponsors of the club are not being charmed by the frequency with which boycotts or protests are called for whenever some business or other is deemed to have committed an infraction. As for Drysdale, the experience has seasoned, but – happily – not soured him. “I’ve changed my mind over the course of the day and I have a certain experience of football and finance to offer which can benefit the game,” he said. “But I can imagine some of the other 90-odd panel members around Scotland saying, ‘I don’t want any part of this’.” Alex Thomson clarification On Thursday we reported that Strathclyde Police were not investigating a complaint from Alex Thomson in respect of a “direct physical threat” allegedly made by a Scottish journalist, to which the chief correspondent of Channel 4 News referred in his blog after he visited Glasgow to cover the story of Rangers’ financial plight. Alex has, however, asked us to point out that Strathclyde Police are investigating a complaint in relation to an implied physical threat against him and three other journalists and that a dossier of evidence has been made available to the force. Telegraph Sport understands that this relates to comments posted in a blog. The journalist against whom the allegations have been made remains unnamed.

The big tax case?,I wonder?.

Lifted from FF,this is alledgedly the man BKs' PR man Fellow Gers, Get ready for the Haymaker. Tomorrow. Bainer

Named and shamed by Hateley -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ERIC DRYSDALE, Gary Allan and Alistair Murning. Or as I prefer to call them - Moe, Larry and Curly. The SFA's "Three Stooges" who decided this week, in their wisdom, to hammer Rangers and threaten their existence by imposing a transfer ban on them. A ruling that endangers the bidding process for one of Scotland's biggest clubs, which finds itself engulfed in a financial crisis. So much for the SFA servicing the Scottish game, eh? What I want to know is, what qualifications do Drysdale, Allan and Murning have to sit on a judicial panel and dish out sanctions? Do they have any sort of background at the top level of football? These men have just had a major say on the future of the Scottish game. They've been asked to rule on one of the biggest decisions in the last 50 years. Who do they think they are - and how did they get into this position of power? Ally McCoist came out and said this SFA ban could kill Rangers. How can a judgment like that be put in the hands of three individuals who don't even work for the SFA? Any decision should surely come from the governing body. It should be people within the game, who understand the ramifications of the punishments they're handing out. Clearly, none of them have given a thought to the effect it would have on the game's future in Scotland. I'm astonished the SFA get other people in to make their decisions. I'm absolutely stunned by that. If you want to run a successful business or organisation, I accept you will have independent consultants who advise you on some matters. But when you have monumental decisions to make, which could be detrimental to the game you're trying to improve, surely it has to come from within Hampden? You'd think the SFA would have at least three men working for them with the knowledge and qualifications to make judgments like that. People aware of the structure of Scottish football wouldn't have imposed these sanctions on Rangers. And it disturbs me when I hear that it's lawyers, QCs and journalists who are part of these judicial panels. That's incredible. We're talking about football business here, which is run completely differently to any other. These people don't know the game. I just can't understand it. Since Stewart Regan was appointed chief executive at Hampden, he's been banging on about getting their house in order. But this typifies what everyone is battling against. This ruling has taken the SFA back two decades. They've made a balls-up of a relatively simple decision. Of course, Rangers and Craig Whyte deserved to be punished. But the timing of it - and the failure to recognise the repercussions which would follow - is staggering. They've opened up a huge can of worms and I'm not sure they're aware of the backlash that could follow. I've heard Murning's last involvement on an SFA panel was ruling on a red-card appeal by an Albion Rovers player. He managed to rescind the sending off from a game against Brechin. Now, I'm sorry, but how can he go from making decisions on a Second Division game to ruling on the potential future of Rangers FC? It's unbelievable. That's what the Three Stooges did. After all, it was announced on the day the club's administrators wanted to name a preferred bidder and that process has now stalled as a result. But nothing surprises me about the SFA any more. They talk of taking the game forward. Well, God help us. Everything Regan has said since he took the job has been about improving the game. But this decision, if it means killing off Rangers, will completely knock the stuffing out of Scottish football. After everything they've been working on in the last few years, they've managed to score another own goal. They take two steps forward then 10 back with some of their decisions. Ally was right in demanding to know who was on the panel. Drysdale, Allan and Murning must be accountable, surely? They're supposed to be anonymous - but that's why the SFA should have made the decision themselves, instead of getting others to do it for them. This type of thing just wouldn't happen in England. You have to ask, what are we getting from the SFA, what are clubs paying for? If they can't make a ruling on the biggest story to hit Scottish football what chance do we have? They are the game's governing body. I would like to think Regan and Co will back down after an appeal. They should be big enough to hold their hands up and admit their mistake. Because if they think they can attract sponsors for their tournaments, when they're making decisions which could liquidate one of their top clubs, they're having a laugh. Already, Rangers fans are planning to boycott some of the SFA's big commercial partners. These deals are huge earners for them. And if they under-estimate fan power, they'll be in an even bigger mess than they currently find themselves in.

Dundee United chairman Stephen Thompson has called for "cool heads" as Rangers brace themselves for further sanctions on Monday. The administration-hit Ibrox club are still reeling from the Scottish Football Association's decision this week to impose a fine of £160,000 and a 12-month transfer embargo. Rangers will appeal against the controversial punishment, which was handed out by the SFA's independent judicial panel after finding the club guilty of five charges in relation to their finances and the appointment of Craig Whyte as chairman. Manager Ally McCoist claimed the panel's decision could kill the club and there has been an angry reaction towards the SFA and panel members from some Light Blues' fans, amid a growing feeling of rebellion in Govan. However, there could be further trouble for Rangers early next week when the 12 Scottish Premier League clubs vote on whether to introduce tougher punishment for top-flight sides who go into administration or face liquidation. The proposals include increasing the number of points docked from clubs who go into administration from 10 to at least 15. If Rangers are forced into liquidation, a 'newco' club would be deducted 10 points for two seasons if accepted straight back into the league and lose 75% of their SPL income over three seasons. SPL board member Thompson, who helped draft the proposals, told Sky Sports: "Emotions are running very very high across all of Scotland at the moment. "It is unfortunate the stage it has got to. "It is a time for cool heads and a bit of reflection on everything that has happened and why have we got to the stage we have got to. "It is not a great reflection on Scotland as a nation either so hopefully we can all just reflect on it and talk properly and sensibly about the whole thing and the way forward." http://www.sportinglife.com/football...medium=twitter

Sandy Jardine has said that Rangers have been unfairly punished for the actions of Craig Whyte and are being â??kickedâ? by outsiders while in a weak state. Jardine was speaking at an event promoting the Rangers Fans Fighting Fund and stated that employees at Rangers were being punished for Whyteâ??s actions though they were oblivious to them at the time. The club ambassador said that harsh penalties for Rangers would hurt other clubs but also said that he would be meeting with supporters associations ahead of action against clubs they felt had been unhelpful â??It wasnâ??t Rangers Football Club, it was Craig Whyte who put us in this situation,â? Jardine said. â??Iâ??m still at the club, I worked under Craig Whyte and I have to say that nobody knew that he wasnâ??t paying bills. It was as big a shock to us as to everybody in Scottish football. â??The players did nothing wrong, the management of the club did nothing wrong, the supporters did nothing wrong and the staff did nothing wrong. â??The person that did something wrong was Craig Whyte and unfortunately heâ??s getting a penalty which heâ??s laughed off. Theyâ??ll never get the money but the people still at this club are going to have to pay a penalty because of that. The SFA have imposed a signing embargo on the club for bringing the game into disrepute and the SPL are to consider new rules that could effect Rangers should a â??newcoâ? plan be implemented. Jardine said that the club should be treated differently because of the clubâ??s stature and said that the outcome had implications for other clubs, including direct action taken by Rangers supporters groups. â??I know from talking to the supporters, and the feeling within the club is, that we canâ??t do any more than put our case forward,â? he said. â??If they [the SPL and SFA] are starting to ignore us and not take it into consideration then ok, weâ??ll go down a division. â??Rangers are a special case mainly because of the size of the club within Scottish football and what it delivers. â??Weâ??ll get a bit of pain, but everybody else is going to get a bit of pain too.â? He added that details of supporterâ??s sanctions against the unnamed clubs would be announced this weekend. He explained: â??Having gone round and met a lot of the supporters and people within the club, I think people are absolutely sick and tired of everybody having a kick at us when weâ??re down. "We are going to have a meeting with all the delegates from the whole of Britain, and some of them will be flying in from abroad, on Saturday. â??Out of that, the supporters will take sanctions against clubs which we deem have been unfair to ourselves. "I'm not going to go into the actual details but we will probably announce that after the meeting with the supporters clubs.â? "Also the Fighting Fund last night sanctioned money to fund a QC to fight the case against the SFA. "Everybody is sick and tired of just accepting everything that everybody is throwing at us and it's about starting to fight back. "The size of our club and the size of our supporter base, it can be a powerful weapon."

I love the top,hate the Tennents logo,and I would rather have black socks

Trade it in...............!

Just as every Rangers fans has the right to choose not to buy Vauxhall

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/24/39888239230358412578410.jpg/

Every sensible football fan in Scotland can see what the SFA is trying to do to us and think it stinks,only the sad wee bitter twisted twats want it to happen.

Statement Regarding Judicial Panel Wednesday, 25 April 2012 Scottish FA spokesperson: “We are deeply concerned that the safety and security of Judicial Panel members appointed to a recent Tribunal has been compromised by a wholly irresponsible betrayal of confidential information. “The Judicial Panel consists of volunteers from across the spectrum of sport and business in Scotland. They are appointed on the basis of anonymity yet all three panel members have reported intrusion into their personal and work lives, including abusive and threatening communication. “This has been extended to directors of the Scottish FA, whose private details have been published on internet sites and who have, themselves, been victims of abusive communication. “This culminated tonight in a visit by Strathclyde Police, who are taking seriously the threats made towards the individuals involved. We are thankful for their advice and support in these matters.”

Tom English ‏ @TomEnglishSport Reply Retweet Favorite · Open The witch-hunt of the Hampden 3 is objectionable and bloody dangerous. Ally McCoist completely irresponsible in his interview yesterday Tom English ‏ @TomEnglishSport Reply Retweet Favorite · Open Transparency is what we want, but if transparency means putting people's safety at risk...Some real lunatics out there as we all know