Frankie 8,150 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 LLambias is Ashley's man on the board vis-à-vis his loan to the club. Let's not suggest otherwise. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,808 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 They were discussing this on Clyde SSB last night & raised a valid point. Exactly what power/jurisdiction does the SFA have over Ashley???? His only official connection with the club is as a shareholder - he holds no position within the club & is not an employee. This was always the issue with Mad Vlad @ Hearts - the SFA were powerless to do anything about his numerous rants about everything. Rules were changed post Vlad and the SFA are 'well within their Articles' to bring charges against Ashely. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,808 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 (edited) Very true indeed. Despite all his connections with Ashley, Llambias is after all a man on his own with "vast" amounts of business experience. The problem that we have is not Ashley vs the SFA, but Rangers FC vs the SFA. Given who sits there and the vague rules in place, they may throw all sorts of shyte our way ... I see you want to return to your past 'days of glory' following Whyte and Green as they waged war on the BBC, SFA, SPL etc. Ask Santa for a deflector shield Edited December 17, 2014 by buster. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,246 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 LLambias is Ashley's man on the board vis-à-vis his loan to the club. Let's not suggest otherwise. He obviously is, everyone "knows" it. Whether the SFA can proof that in a legally sound way is another matter though. That said, they do not need to be legally sound, as their "panel" just uses SFA guidelines et al. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,150 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 He obviously is, everyone "knows" it. Whether the SFA can proof that in a legally sound way is another matter though. That said, they do not need to be legally sound, as their "panel" just uses SFA guidelines et al. Balance of probabilities. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,246 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 BTW ... Andy Dowie offered a two match ban by SFA for Ian Black 'stamp'Andy Dowie offered a two match ban by the SFA for 'deliberately standing on an opposing player's leg' during QoS v Rangers. Hearing 18/12. ... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 They were discussing this on Clyde SSB last night & raised a valid point. Exactly what power/jurisdiction does the SFA have over Ashley???? His only official connection with the club is as a shareholder - he holds no position within the club & is not an employee. This was always the issue with Mad Vlad @ Hearts - the SFA were powerless to do anything about his numerous rants about everything. You were given the proof yesterday. Why are you ignoring the simple facts of the matter? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,808 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 You were given the proof yesterday. Why are you ignoring the simple facts of the matter? What is it they say is the first victim of conflict ?.....................the truth Who has that suited in the past and who would that suit now ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 You were given the proof yesterday. Why are you ignoring the simple facts of the matter? not ignoring anything.....just raising a point that was talked about last night.... The fact of the matter is that the SFA have absolutely zero powers to force Ashley to do ANYTHING, whether that is a fine or even to turn up to the hearing. They also (I believe) have zero power to force RFC to cover any fine or punishment directed @ Ashley. Ashley insisted that he appoint 2 board members as part of his loan agreement, we can't argue that, what the SFA must prove is that Ashley is providing guidance to Llambias and therefore influencing board decisions. Laxey forced their man (Crichton) onto the board, and were probably able to have influence, did the SFA check if Laxey were involved with ANY other football clubs/organisations??? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,246 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 ... something that I aluded to before, Darther 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.