Jump to content

 

 

Recommended Posts

That seems a bit harsh to me.

 

Like me RR's opinions are often in the minority but he is consistent and I believe very sincere.

 

He has also been warned on multiple occasions today for trolling and inappropriate language. The ban was merited

Link to post
Share on other sites

so the sfa are going to start telling people where and when there can invest their money take the buffons to court mister Ashley show them up for what they are a bunch of narrow minded bigots

 

In a normal world, you would say that they might want to protect football clubs from another Romanov and Whyte scenario. This is not a normal world though and these people sure not work in the "best interest of the game". Else they would have drawn and quartered that chap who has interest in three clubs already - as this is not exactly "news". People may also point at FIFA and UEFA guidlelines and rules, but what have those institutions done with regards to massive investment by e.g. Gazprom and Red Bull thus far? Are we to expect that these companies just hand over their money and do not want anything bar ads in return? Especially RB?

 

The main problem lies with the "club" status of the SFA. They - much like the SPL, SFL, or SPFL - can set up rules as they wish and anyone joining up with them will have to abide. It is obviously a very clever thing if you write some vague "in special cases special rules can be whipped up" clause in there and decide on somesuch ad hoc. If anything, Ashley and or the club can very well address the utter conflict of interest of the current SFA regime, given that it is made up of direct competitors in the Scottish game ... and it might very well not fall on deaf ears in some places.

 

Yet, at the end of the day Rangers FC is a member of that "special rules club", not Ashley. So they can whip up all sorts of fanciful fines and even revoke the license if they see fit. At the end of the day, Scottish football survived without us up there ... if nothing more. Given that and the attitude of 2012 still very much lingering on, I have no doubt that they wouldn't mind trying their luck and go the full monty. Then you could sue the SFA and that would mean that all clubs would be barred from Europe. Such tactic should, in any case, had been used much earlier in the season though. UEFA would have looked upon that with scorn though ... but the unwanted publicity shed on the "impartial" SFA might have been helpful. For that you need characters with balls of steel though. And like it or not, there is only one - unwanted - shareholder with such an interest at Rangers these days. Whether he wants to do that is anyone's guess though.

Edited by der Berliner
Link to post
Share on other sites

In a normal world, you would say that they might want to protect football clubs from another Romanov and Whyte scenario. This is not a normal world though and these people sure not work in the "best interest of the game". Else they would have drawn and quartered that chap who has interest in three clubs already - as this is not exactly "news". People may also point at FIFA and UEFA guidlelines and rules, but what have those institutions done with regards to massive investment by e.g. Gazprom and Red Bull thus far? Are we to expect that these companies just hand over their money and do not want anything bar ads in return? Especially RB?

 

The main problem lies with the "club" status of the SFA. They - much like the SPL, SFL, or SPFL - can set up rules as they wish and anyone joining up with them will have to abide. It is obviously a very clever thing if you write some vague "in special cases special rules can be whipped up" clause in there and decide on somesuch ad hoc. If anything, Ashley and or the club can very well address the utter conflict of interest of the current SFA regime, given that it is made up of direct competitors in the Scottish game ... and it might very well not fall on deaf ears in some places.

 

Yet, at the end of the day Rangers FC is a member of that "special rules club", not Ashley. So they can whip up all sorts of fanciful fines and even revoke the license if they see fit. At the end of the day, Scottish football survived without us up there ... if nothing more. Given that and the attitude of 2012 still very much lingering on, I have no doubt that they wouldn't mind trying their luck and go the full monty. Then you could sue the SFA and that would mean that all clubs would be barred from Europe. Such tactic should, in any case, had been used much earlier in the season though. UEFA would have looked upon that with scorn though ... but the unwanted publicity shed on the "impartial" SFA might have been helpful. For that you need characters with balls of steel though. And like it or not, there is only one - unwanted - shareholder with such an interest at Rangers these days. Whether he wants to do that is anyone's guess though.

 

What is the punchline...........Do you think it part of another cabal wanting to bring Rangers down ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

so the sfa are going to start telling people where and when there can invest their money take the buffons to court mister Ashley show them up for what they are a bunch of narrow minded bigots

 

Ashley should never have signed his initial agreement stating he would keep his investment to below 10% and give an undertaking not to have influence in the board room.

 

Recent actions and emails have proved he intends to break those undertakings , I am not in the least surprised he has been blocked for now , what he does next and what damage he inflicts on us , because it will be the club thats hit with sanctions not Ashley , will be interesting .

 

All this from a man who intended to bring the whole weight of his legal team to bare on us if Somers didnt back his deal and reject King

Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd hope that whatever Ashley or King will do from now on will not retain this "make Rangers a trial & error case" - test site status.

 

BTW, anyone knows what Kennedy does these days? He's an even more frustrating case of come and go than King, with hardly any word about his aspirations for the club.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd hope that whatever Ashley or King will do from now on will not retain this "make Rangers a trial & error case" - test site status.

 

BTW, anyone knows what Kennedy does these days? He's an even more frustrating case of come and go than King, with hardly any word about his aspirations for the club.

Kennedy has been quite open that he has no real aspirations to run the club but he has been willing to put in some cash to try and help us out. I was pissed at Somers comments re kennedy wanting ibrox as security, as if it was in danger in his hands. I think that was kennedy trying to get his hands on ibrox to make sure we have something left if this all goes tits up...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.