Two questions.........

[BrahimHemdani 1]

So much for the SFA's 'supervisory' role. Not worth the paper it was written on. In a different legal jurisdiction they would have been the subject of a class action lawsuit from the Rangers shareholders who were wiped out by Whyte.

 

With regard to a 'more robust procedure' ... does this just apply to Rangers (a bit like much of Vincent Lunny's work) or will it apply to every club? Also, given the ability to separate ownership from directorship and the club from the company that actually owns it, does the 'more robust procedure' have any substance?

 

These are excellent questions.

 

As most people on here are aware, I was close to the SFA in 2011/12 and met Regan on a number of occasions (not to discuss Rangers I hasten to stress!) but I am no longer in that position.

 

My assessment, for what it's worth, is that Regan WILL apply the Articles and Rules of the SFA as evenly as he can (though I am in no doubt that Lawwell's position on the full SFA Board may make that quite awkward for him on occasion); but the second issue is much more difficult if not impossible for the SFA to control. I did have that discussion with Regan and it is simply the case that the SFA cannot control who buys and sells shares in a football club, they can only control (or seek to control) anyone who

 

(i) is a member of a club; or

(ii) is involved in any capacity whatsoever in the management or

administration of a club; or

(iii) has any power whatsoever to influence the management or

administration of a club,

 

So if an owner is not involved in the management or administration of a club they have no control over that person or body.

 

What is interesting in my view in that context however is that:

 

13.4 The Scottish FA is authorised to request full disclosure of the identity of all of the shareholders

of a member and details of all beneficial interests represented by any such shareholder and

all members and other relevant persons under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA will be

required to meet all such requests without delay. Failure to do so will constitute a breach of

these Articles and the Judicial Panel will have jurisdiction to deal with any such breach and to

impose sanctions in relation to it.

 

One wonders if they have asked those questions of Rangers; but even if they have I doubt if they could be forced to disclose the information.

[Anchorman 0]

As most people on here are aware, I was close to the SFA in 2011/12 and met Regan on a number of occasions (not to discuss Rangers I hasten to stress!) but I am no longer in that position.

 

My assessment, for what it's worth, is that Regan WILL apply the Articles and Rules of the SFA as evenly as he can (though I am in no doubt that Lawwell's position on the full SFA Board may make that quite awkward for him on occasion); but the second issue is much more difficult if not impossible for the SFA to control. I did have that discussion with Regan and it is simply the case that the SFA cannot control who buys and sells shares in a football club...............

 

No I didn't know you were 'close' to the SFA. I find it astonishing that you can gleam that information without any mention or hint of Rangers. And if it had been me on there, as a bluenose, I would have been thinking "surely this has all to do with our situation" - I would find it unhealthy that they couldn't even mention us by name, considering the catastrophe that faced our game because of our plight\investigation (whatever it was at that time you were there). Were they aware where your allegiances lay?

[Dragonfly Trumpeter 50]

I knew there were folk who liked to cause us grief. Stitched up Gers men who wanted to invest a couple of million in the club, hassle the sfa about other would be investors and generally keep banging on about the club in a negative light to all and sundry.

 

I always imagined it was green & grey chaps, on the blower to their pal Regan, nokia in one hand and dick in the other, furiously squashing their eyes closer together.

 

Strange old game this footie.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

No I didn't know you were 'close' to the SFA. I find it astonishing that you can gleam that information without any mention or hint of Rangers. And if it had been me on there, as a bluenose, I would have been thinking "surely this has all to do with our situation" - I would find it unhealthy that they couldn't even mention us by name, considering the catastrophe that faced our game because of our plight\investigation (whatever it was at that time you were there). Were they aware where your allegiances lay?

 

For your information:

 

The Joint Action Group (JAG) was established following the Football Summit in March 2011 to develop proposals to deliver the 8 Summit commitments.

 

The JAG - which has representation from the Scottish Football Association, the Scottish Premier League, the Scottish Football League, Celtic Football Club, Rangers Football Club, Strathclyde Police and the Scottish Government - has carefully considered the commitments and has developed proposals to support their delivery. These proposals are set out in the summit report.

 

The JAG continued to meet until the end of 2011 with a focus on supporting the further development of the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act and to consider and agree further measures to tackle unacceptable supporter conduct.

 

These measures are being developed, monitored and reviewed by the Joint Review Group (JRG) which meets regularly.

 

When I was Chair of SDS in 2011-12 I was a member of the JRG and I believe it was well known that I was (a) a Rangers fan and (b) the former Secretary of RST. In fact there was some concern over the sensitivities involved; but I did manage to overcome same and attended two meetings of the JAG itself, including the final meeting.

 

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/254430/0121641.pdf

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/254430/0124485.pdf

 

However as Chair of Supporters Direct Scotland (SDS) I was representing all fans not just Rangers fans. This was a difficult tightrope for me as I am sure you can appreciate.

 

Rangers were represented at the JRG by David Martin, Head of Security (though he did not attend many meetings) and Celtic were represented by Robert Howat, Secretary of the Club.

 

The discussions were mostly about fans behaviour in the context of the OBB and the SPL rules on that subject.

 

As I have said elsewhere I did my best right up to the last meeting with Ministers:

 

(a) to push the concept of strict liability in terms of fan behaviour rather than the "reasonably practicable" defence; and

(b) the illogicality of an offence of singing in opposition to prohibited groups as well as the obvious offence of singing in support of such groups;

 

as well as other anomalies that I perceived or were drawn to the attention of SDS by the Trusts.

 

The above are of course gross simplifications of discussions that went on over many months and you can take what you like from my contribution. However, I was deeply honoured and humbled to be in a position to represent fans views on these important matters with Government, the Police, the Clubs and the Football Authorities and I could not have done so if I had displayed any bias either in favour of or against Rangers or any other club for that a matter.

 

There were no discussions about the ownership of Rangers as this was not the object of the JRG.

 

I hope you find this clarification helpful.

[Anchorman 0]

For your information:

 

The Joint Action Group (JAG) was established following the Football Summit in March 2011 to develop proposals to deliver the 8 Summit commitments.

 

The JAG - which has representation from the Scottish Football Association, the Scottish Premier League, the Scottish Football League, Celtic Football Club, Rangers Football Club, Strathclyde Police and the Scottish Government - has carefully considered the commitments and has developed proposals to support their delivery. These proposals are set out in the summit report.

 

The JAG continued to meet until the end of 2011 with a focus on supporting the further development of the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act and to consider and agree further measures to tackle unacceptable supporter conduct.

 

These measures are being developed, monitored and reviewed by the Joint Review Group (JRG) which meets regularly.

 

When I was Chair of SDS in 2011-12 I was a member of the JRG and I believe it was well known that I was (a) a Rangers fan and (b) the former Secretary of RST. In fact there was some concern over the sensitivities involved; but I did manage to overcome same and attended two meetings of the JAG itself, including the final meeting.

 

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/254430/0121641.pdf

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/254430/0124485.pdf

 

However as Chair of Supporters Direct Scotland (SDS) I was representing all fans not just Rangers fans. This was a difficult tightrope for me as I am sure you can appreciate.

 

Rangers were represented at the JRG by David Martin, Head of Security (though he did not attend many meetings) and Celtic were represented by Robert Howat, Secretary of the Club.

 

The discussions were mostly about fans behaviour in the context of the OBB and the SPL rules on that subject.

 

As I have said elsewhere I did my best right up to the last meeting with Ministers:

 

(a) to push the concept of strict liability in terms of fan behaviour rather than the "reasonably practicable" defence; and

(b) the illogicality of an offence of singing in opposition to prohibited groups as well as the obvious offence of singing in support of such groups;

 

as well as other anomalies that I perceived or were drawn to the attention of SDS by the Trusts.

 

The above are of course gross simplifications of discussions that went on over many months and you can take what you like from my contribution. However, I was deeply honoured and humbled to be in a position to represent fans views on these important matters with Government, the Police, the Clubs and the Football Authorities and I could not have done so if I had displayed any bias either in favour of or against Rangers or any other club for that a matter.

 

There were no discussions about the ownership of Rangers as this was not the object of the JRG.

 

I hope you find this clarification helpful.

 

Sorry I don't mean to be disrespectful, but I'm of football man. and I find SFA type jargon hard to digest as It will never be something I relate to. From a quick scan of the stuff above your role appears to have been related to fans rather than the policing of the 'fit and proper persons' approach by the SFA. I'm interested to know at which point you crossed the boundaries of your role to get into the area you commented on above i.e.

"My assessment, for what it's worth, is that Regan WILL apply the Articles and Rules of the SFA as evenly as he can (though I am in no doubt that Lawwell's position on the full SFA Board may make that quite awkward for him on occasion); but the second issue is much more difficult if not impossible for the SFA to control. I did have that discussion with Regan and it is simply the case that the SFA cannot control who buys and sells shares in a football club..............."

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Sorry I don't mean to be disrespectful, but I'm of football man. and I find SFA type jargon hard to digest as It will never be something I relate to. From a quick scan of the stuff above your role appears to have been related to fans rather than the policing of the 'fit and proper persons' approach by the SFA. I'm interested to know at which point you crossed the boundaries of your role to get into the area you commented on above i.e.

"My assessment, for what it's worth, is that Regan WILL apply the Articles and Rules of the SFA as evenly as he can (though I am in no doubt that Lawwell's position on the full SFA Board may make that quite awkward for him on occasion); but the second issue is much more difficult if not impossible for the SFA to control. I did have that discussion with Regan and it is simply the case that the SFA cannot control who buys and sells shares in a football club..............."

 

I think the best way I can answer your question is to say that when you are involved with any committee you will make assessments of the people with whom you have to interact, how best to influence their judgement and at the same time hopefully gain their trust and respect. That is the best way to get things done and it does not mean having to give in all the time. Indeed when I resigned one committee member referred to the "sometimes difficult and testing circumstances" of our discussions. At the same time one can form good relationships that can be useful outside the boardroom or even over coffee before or after a meeting. My comments that you have quoted again were made in that context.

 

I hope you will understand that I have done my best to be factual. I may already have over-stepped the boundaries of confidentiality and there is nothing more that I can add.

[bluebear54 0]

On looking back through the JAG minutes, and what they have created and achieved, it was certainly a waste of time and a whole load of waffle.

[bluebear54 0]

Addressing an earlier point in this thread, the DK thing has been done to death.

However, what's to stop DK investing and nominating a director with his proxy.

Everyone else seems to get away with it at the Club.

[ian1964 10,413]

Addressing an earlier point in this thread, the DK thing has been done to death.

However, what's to stop DK investing and nominating a director with his proxy.

Everyone else seems to get away with it at the Club.

 

Nothing I would say

[chilledbear 16]

He did want Paul Murray on board.