Rangers: A House Divided (by Bill McMurdo)

[Zappa 0]

actually i though it was hugely telling that is didnt say forgery or fake.

 

Yep, there is that, but I think it's even more telling that Green didn't go on record and make the statement himself. Was he just too exhausted after a tiring week or did he have something more important to do than try to clear his name?

[forlanssister 3,066]

In what way is Sevco 5088 relevant to Rangers?

 

It was relevant enough to secure an exclusive and binding agreement to propose a CVA to the creditors and purchase the assets if said CVA failed. It's relevance to the present day (if there is any) is unknown.

 

Didn't his statement late on Friday say just that i.e. they were forgeries ?

 

Labelling them "not correct or valid" isn't the same as saying they're forgeries, I'm sure if they were forgeries he would have stated so.

[simplythebest 0]

Masters just finished. Some great escapism from all this nonsense.

[forlanssister 3,066]

Masters just finished. Some great escapism from all this nonsense.

 

Yet you rush back to get your fix!....

[simplythebest 0]

Yet you rush back to get your fix!....

 

Unavoidable, I love this club too much.

[plgsarmy 111]

Let's just hope that both sides can let the enquiry take place without running to their pals in the media with more 'stories'.

[der Berliner 3,357]

in that they signed a deal with d@p to buy our assets.

 

... and was removed from the table once Sevco Scotland Lt.d entered a binding agreement with the admins. You seem to leave this bit out "on occasion" ...

[chilledbear 16]

Surely B McMurdo has it wrong, it is not an independent panel.

 

The Statement read....... "The Board has announced today it is to commission an independent examination and report in view of recent allegations in the media concerning the Chief Executive, Charles Green, the Commercial Director, Imran Ahmad, and their management of the Club."

 

Any difference?????

[ian1964 10,508]

Who will uncover the truth during Rangers' introspective?

Michael Grant

Chief football writer

Monday 15 April 2013

 

THE poor souls who take on the job of forming the independent commission assessing Charles Green and Imran Ahmad's management of Rangers could save themselves time and effort by asking a single question at the start: will the club agree to the purchase and use of a lie detector kit?

 

Rangers are shedding staff on what looks like a cost-cutting drive but creating this independent commission means they have committed to the expense of hiring – perhaps for several weeks – legal and accountancy experts to pass judgment on their own chief executive and commercial director. Whoever is appointed will be asked to burrow into the murky, disputed relationship between Green, Ahmad and Craig Whyte and emerge with the truth. Where do they start? How much does polygraph equipment cost these days?

 

What a ridiculous mess Rangers are in again. On one side, Whyte, a discredited, proven liar, has made allegations of collaboration which will bring Green and Ahmad crashing down if they turn out to be true. On the other, Green, a man in the midst of a public relations disaster. Someone who admitted deception of his own while his credibility went through the shredder, and fighting to save his skin. No-one can believe a word that comes out of Whyte's mouth but when he coughs up alleged bank account details, and a document supposedly carrying Green's signature and lodged at Companies House, Rangers no longer have the option of dismissing him as a crank with an axe to grind.

 

Green's defence that he strung Whyte along – relax lads, I was duping him all along – is clever. But Whyte says he and his associate deposited £137,500 and £25,000 with Green and Ahmad and is waving around a document which seems to show Green signed him off as a director of takeover vehicle Sevco 5088. So exactly how sweet did Green keep him and when did their cosiness end? That's what this independent commission has to find out. God help them. Remember, too, that to get SFA membership Green told the governing body he had no connection with Whyte. And when the SFA asked if there was anything else they ought to be told in that respect, he said no.

 

There has been some ridicule for "Rangers investigating Rangers" and an independent commission is problematic and flawed, but how else could this be credibly examined? Green and Ahmad cannot investigate themselves and finance director Brian Stockbridge is aligned with them and, therefore, would not be seen as impartial.

 

Others on the board lack the expertise to know how to examine and verify Whyte's allegations. The board – the whole club, maybe – seems to be splitting into pro- and anti-Green camps. In that context, farming the whole thing out to an independent panel isn't the fudge or whitewash that some have claimed. Rangers supporters must trust in Walter Smith and the other non-executive directors aggressively pursuing their fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the club and shareholders. This is their way.

 

Ally McCoist's pleasure at the creation of this commission has been shared by many others within Ibrox. That is significant in itself. The board could have exonerated Green and Ahmad at that long meeting on Saturday morning – taken their word for it all, announced that the matter was closed and then bad-mouthed Whyte – but it chose not to do so.

 

The decision to put the matter in the hands of outsiders was a unanimous one but Green had no choice. Having been unable to talk himself out of trouble, he could not have been seen to object to any investigation into his dealings with Whyte. This is simple: if he and Ahmad have nothing to hide, they have nothing to worry about.So now the Rangers circus moves on to speculation about who will be on the commission, exactly why each of those individuals was appointed and by whom, who they will speak to and how long they will take to deliver findings.

 

The man making the primary accusations is detested at Rangers and appears to be seeking revenge via the courts and the media: how can they talk to Whyte or trust him? Do they instead approach The Sun which claims to be in possession of bank documents, or STV which says it has a copy of the Companies House document? Companies House itself? This independent commission has no legal weight behind it. No-one outside of Rangers is obliged to co-operate with any of its requests, which could be a problem given that verifying the authenticity of Whyte's allegations will determine whether Green and Ahmad survive.

 

If it's true that Green has been told to keep his mouth shut until the investigation is over, he has already been hit with the punishment which might hurt him most of all. There is one respect in which Rangers are back to where they were a year ago. How can supporters buy season-tickets when they can't trust where their money's going? The entire business plan relies on substantial annual season-ticket income but it is impossible to believe that McCoist will lend his name to a sales drive while a huge question mark hangs over Green, the man who asked him to get rid of Ian Durrant and Kenny McDowall.

 

In the meantime, time to recruit those panel members and buy that lie detector kit.

 

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/opinion/who-will-uncover-the-truth-during-rangers-introspective.20790218

[der Berliner 3,357]

It seems these journos have a field day now ... and one or two at Ibrox should take note who writes the best rubbish.