Jump to content

 

 

Recommended Posts

Trying to f--k us for pre season we can't attract players and we can't plan for next season ?

 

I was going to say, delay as long as possible so they know what division we will be in next season.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The SFA cannot with any credibility work from the default position he is unfit. At the very least they must work from the position of an open mind (no laughing now!). Are we really saying that any appointment to a club board in Scotland is presumed to be unfit to hold that position until they prove their Celtic-mindedness, sorry competence/fitness to hold such a position.

 

Also if the SFA are all of a sudden so concerned about club Directors, why has there been no retrospective FAPP test carried out on all club Directors/owners on ALL clubs in Scotland.

 

Anything less makes it look like the witch-hunt against only one club that it so clearly is. Dermot Desmond's background would fail any proper test of FAPP in his regard if King is deemed to be unsuitable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the sfa work from the position he is unfit. It is down to dk to prove he is fit and proper. So far he has not provided evidence to sway the guilty position.

 

he should be ok as far as being an x director at ibrox since Murray was passed

 

That's all correct IMHO and exactly what I said at #7.

 

The question poised by the OP was not is DK fit and proper it was why is there a delay in making the decision.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The SFA cannot with any credibility work from the default position he is unfit. At the very least they must work from the position of an open mind (no laughing now!). Also if the SFA are all of a sudden so concerned about club Directors, why has there been no retrospective FAPP test carried out on all club Directors/owners on ALL clubs in Scotland.

 

I disagree, this is not guilty until proven innocent. It is more likely that we (the SFA) are aware of your convictions in SA, Mr King that carry sentences of 2 years or more on each count and on the face of it therefore, you do not meet the fit and proper criteria set out at 10.2 (h) in our rules. If you disagree with this interpretation, Mr King, please tell us why we should view these convictions in some other light? In other words present us with information which mitigate the convictions.

 

Clubs are obliged to include details of "all officials, office-bearers, secretary, directors or members of the board of directors or the board of management or committee of such member, Team Staff, with their full designation, profession, business or occupation and full service address," in their Annual Return and the SFA are entitled to consider whether any such person is "fit and proper" to hold such office. However, as I understand it, it was Mr King who pre-empted the situation by asking the SFA to consider his status ahead of taking up a position on the Board or investing any money directly into the Club.

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.