Frankie 8,169 Posted May 14, 2012 Author Share Posted May 14, 2012 Great points Calgacus. I'd hope that the Rottweiler (Richard Keen QC) is looking forward to airing them. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Does anyone know the exact 'paper trail' that led to the SFA's EBT investigation? From memory, it seems to me that Hugh Adam's interview in the press was enough to get it going...while interviews in the paper by AJ and others were deemed not enough action by this panel. How come it's good enough on one hand but not on the other? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CumbernauldGers 0 Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 I'm refusing to be excited/pissed off with this. I'm going to wait and see. So far, I like the 15% share cap. That IS good, the rest we shall see. Agree, i dont think anybody should be going over the top either way at the moment. It looks and sounds good at the moment but only time will tell. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,263 Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Great points Calgacus. I'd hope that the Rottweiler (Richard Keen QC) is looking forward to airing them. Has he been hired as yet? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,169 Posted May 14, 2012 Author Share Posted May 14, 2012 Has he been hired as yet? No idea mate. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 What did Traynor call Whyte again, was it a Scottish billionaire or millionaire? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 If Rangers are going to be punished on this then there should be a totally independent inquiry into it. All involved including Whyte should be legally bound to appear. The SFA have been shown up to be totally incompetent in handling anything like an honest inquiry. The Inquiry should also look into the SFA's role in what took place as they had as much a responsibility to make sure any new owners are\were above board. If we deserve to be punished then fair enough but that should not be done by people who also played a role in what went on. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Moon 1,114 Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 I think the SFA/SPL have acted in haste and got themselves into a mess. They have not carried out a proper investigation because they are not trained and don't have the skills to do so. They have bowed to hysterical pressure and ignored their own inadequacies in all of this. Time would have been better spent by the authorities in tightening their own procedures to ensure a situation like this never happens again and allowing the real authorities, HMRC and the police and the courts to do their investigations. When the effects on the rest of the clubs of their hasty and ill conceived actions became apparent there was a noticable shift in opinion when people began to realise that Rangers money would be missed. They want their cake and they want to eat it. They want to emasculate us with a transfer ban but continue to play in the SPL for our money. They want to create new rules and apply them retrospectively. If they create new rules they should apply to the future, not the past. They have now created a situation where fans are threatening boycott and counter boycott. I don't see how they can come out of this with credit. It is a situation of their own making. Yes rules were broken at Ibrox and the punishments should apply based upon rules that are already in place after a professional and thorough investigation. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewarty 1,877 Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Imagine you are an employee of the club. It has a huge financial cloud hanging over it and has recently been taken over by Whyte. First thing he does is sack those who opposed his takeover. He makes multiple quotes to media outlets to say that each and every expense is subject to scrutiny while he unpicks the debris of the Murray regime. The club is taken to court over various small claims which are largely upheld, the biggest clouds continue to get darker (Big Tax Case) and we start to publicly query the Wee Tax Case. Access to financial information is restricted to a need to know basis. And only Whyte needs to know. Various senior staff make acrimonious claims against Whyte and board members resign at the lack of participation in governance matters. It is obvious that your new boss is ruthless and cares not for reputations or track records. And if you oppose him, query his methods or merely disagree, there's plenty of evidence to show that he will sack you first and probably not even ask any question s afterwards. Imagine you are faced with this scenario. You are probably rewarded to a reasonable level for the job you do, but you have a mortgage/rent, a life to lead and a family to provide for. Do you go running to the papers to tell them what your big bad new boss is doing? How would you prove it when you don't have any information that can prove what you are saying. And how can you even be sure any accusations you have are actually true? Whyte was a master spinner. There were regular high profile interviews and statements put out which gave, seemingly plausible reasons for certain things that happened. Do you risk your livehihood on a hunch or an unverifiable theory? I think not. To suggest that people at ibrox could and should have done or said more that actually did happen, is ridiculous. And in any case, as highlighted in Chris Graham's excellent blog, fiduciary responsibility does not extend below the board. To draw this conclusion in particular I think was a spectacular own goal by the SFA 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
smile 0 Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Does anyone take Traynor seriously after he said he had dirt on Liewell then he swept under the carpet never to be heard of again. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.