SFA and fit and proper person

[BEARGER 1,829]

This article brings out a few things the SFA mas have got wrong.

 

http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/03/11/the-sfas-fit-and-proper-test-self-certification-for-football-clubs-a-farce-part-1-craig-whyte/

[bossy 0]

I don't generally like that site given the allegiance of most of its denizens. However, this particular contribution makes interesting reading. I can't help feeling that the SFA have deliberately announced this punishment while we are in administration because D&P are less likely to challenge them than an owner might be. If the SFA persist in punishing Rangers for the consequences of their regulatory failure I wonder if there is an opportunity for some of us small shareholders to go after the SFA for negligence.

[Crimson Dynamo 128]

Not much we didn't know here.

 

My main question would be when Craig Whyte and his lawyers were stonewalling the SFA/SPL's attempt to get him to provide proof he was a fit and proper person to control Rangers last October. Why was there no special enquiry then? Why wait until we are in administration and on the brink of liquidation?

[stewarty 1,878]

Can someone summarise rather than giving this blog more hits?

[bossy 0]

In summary

 

It is the responsibility of the SFA to determine who is 'fit and proper'. They have never formally delegated that responsibility to member clubs.

 

If the SFA abdicates that responsibility informally, as it has done here, then it can be answerable for its failures.

 

The rules on who is 'fit and proper' are badly drafted so that Whyte was able to answer truthfully (if economically) in order to pass.

 

My conclusion:

 

The SFA are punishing Rangers for offences that might have been avoided had the SFA done its job properly.