Rangersitis 0 Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Exactly, so when journos are citing a 10% rule that isn't there in the SFA Handbook, it begs the question, have the rules just recently been changed for the release of the 2014/15 SFA Handbook? The 2011 version has the same clause. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted September 4, 2014 Author Share Posted September 4, 2014 The 2011 version has the same clause. You're right. I've just checked the 2011/12, 2012/13 & 2013/14 Articles of Association docs and they all have that same 3% clause with no mention of any 10% rule in the Dual ownership section/Article 13. So why are the Scottish press & media running with this 10% rule aspect of the story? Maybe Ashley & Green applied for special permission from the SFA for him to have a stake and they said 'ok, but only up to 10%' ?? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 You're right. I've just checked the 2011/12, 2012/13 & 2013/14 Articles of Association docs and they all have that same 3% clause with no mention of any 10% rule in the Dual ownership section/Article 13. So why are the Scottish press & media running with this 10% rule aspect of the story? Maybe Ashley & Green applied for special permission from the SFA for him to have a stake and they said 'ok, but only up to 10%' ?? I have something in my head about that, mate, but all I can find is the recent stuff from the UoF about the dangers of Ashley getting special dispensation to underwrite the share issue. Getting too old for all this memory shite! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Cooper 0 Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 How did Romanov work Hearts and Kaunas? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted September 4, 2014 Author Share Posted September 4, 2014 How did Romanov work Hearts and Kaunas? That's what I was wondering myself. Either it was simply overlooked by the SFA or they allowed it on the basis that Hearts were in big trouble and his involvement would solve some immediate problems for the club. Remember, Hearts were almost forced to sell Tynecastle and move to Murrayfield before Romanov got involved. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,254 Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Mike Ashley - no thanks. For once we can thank the SFA.... Great idea - lets just go out of business........ 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Great idea - lets just go out of business........ Is this the latest ploy? Mike Ashley is our next saviour! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted September 4, 2014 Author Share Posted September 4, 2014 Is this the latest ploy? Mike Ashley is our next saviour! Keep up FFS! Dave King = Bad Mike Ashley = Good 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Moon 1,113 Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Great idea - lets just go out of business........ Eh no! Let's take someone else's money and get rid of these parasites. No thanks, Mike Ashley!!! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whosthedado 1,487 Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Keep up FFS! Dave King = Bad Mike Ashley = Good I'm not saying for one minute that I agree with this but I really do wish King would come out with a statement or something and tell us his plans if he has any 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.