Gribz 743 Posted April 26, 2020 Share Posted April 26, 2020 3 minutes ago, ian1964 said: They just make up the rules as they go True - they attempt to. But at the same time all 42 clubs have a rule book and its there to be looked at. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,808 Posted April 26, 2020 Share Posted April 26, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Gribz said: Id say if we have the trump card then it has to be played by tonight or first thing tomorrow. Holding the evidence at the start was the right thing to do as it possibly would have given SPFL time to make an excuse prior to the "Investigation". On the flip side I wonder if the evidence wasnt in black and white. Next stage is the 42 club GM (whenever that is). No significant disclosure and IMO it's doubtful there will be an Independent Enquiry. If we don't show and don't get the vote through, the main focus surrounding this will become us, rather than the SPFL. Basically we've placed everything on red (the evidence). Smoking gun - we win (probably to a significant level) Damp squib - we lose (don't want to go there) Edited April 26, 2020 by buster. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,409 Posted April 26, 2020 Share Posted April 26, 2020 https://mobile.twitter.com/CupRigby/status/1254367113856397312 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Gaffer 1,665 Posted April 26, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted April 26, 2020 (edited) The Rangers board is quite right to attempt to use the existng governance to tackle the issue. They've asked for the whistleblowing policy and drawn a blank. This is dangerous for the SPFL because all organisations with a corruption or bribery risk should have one. Failure to take this seriously or to have sufficient controls in place can result in a prison sentence. Without such a policy, the club will now attempt to gather support for an inquiry from other clubs. If this fails I would imagine they will go to the court of arbitration for sport. If they go there they will be asked to demonstrate that they took all reasonable steps and attempts to resolve this, hence the reason why the board is currently doing what it's doing. If (and as I suspect it will) it goes to the CAS, I think the SPFL trio are in serious trouble. In many ways I hope this attempt to gather support fails with the other clubs because CAS will be thorough in its investigation and will want to make an example of such corruption when it discovers it. I don't know who is advising the SPFL but this is a dangerous game he or she is playing. After the FIFA scandal there is a great deal of scrutiny on bribery and corruption in sport. If they want further opportunities to clean the game up, we can surely provide them a cracker here in Scotland. Edited April 26, 2020 by Gaffer 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,808 Posted April 26, 2020 Share Posted April 26, 2020 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Gaffer said: The Rangers board is quite right to attempt to use the existng governance to tackle the issue. They've asked for the whistleblowing policy and drawn a blank. This is dangerous for the SPFL because all organisations with a corruption or bribery risk should have on. Failure to take this seriously or to have sufficient controls in place can result in a prison sentence. Without such a policy, the club will now attempt to gather support for an inquiry from other clubs. If this fails I would imagine they will go to the court of arbitration for sport. If they go there they will be asked to demonstrate that they took all reasonable steps and attempts to resolve this, hence the reason why the board is currently doing what it's doing. If (and as I suspect it will) it goes to the CAS, I think the SPFL trio are in serious trouble. In many ways I hope this attempt to gather support fails with the other clubs because CAS will be thorough in its investigation and will want to make an example of such corruption when it discovers it. I don't know who is advising the SPFL but this is a dangerous game he or she is playing. After the FIFA scandal there is a great deal of scrutiny on bribery and corruption in sport. If they want further opportunities to clean the game up, we can surely provide them a cracker here in Scotland. Interesting Gaffer ! Are you 100% that this falls within the remit of CAS (not disagreeing, I just don't know) All seems to come down to what evidence we have. A CAS procedure would take months and they seem to be booked up until at least the end of June. https://www.tas-cas.org/en/general-information/news-detail/article/list-of-hearings-2.html Is there a stage (internal remedy) we would have to go through with the SFA prior to CAS ? It would be interesting to listen to the conversations in the SPFL bunker speculating on I.D. of whistleblower and what the evidence may consist of. McKenzie might lose some weight with the effort. I optimistically hope some clubs are recording any phonecalls from the SPFL lobbyists in the days leading up to this 42 club meeting ? Edited April 26, 2020 by buster. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill 13,717 Posted April 26, 2020 Share Posted April 26, 2020 49 minutes ago, Gribz said: Id have imagined that would have been a given by the Club solicitors. Also would think the SPFL rule book would have been went through with a fine tooth comb before any original statement. Gone. ?? "Would have been gone through with a fine....." Weegies eh? ? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaffer 1,665 Posted April 26, 2020 Share Posted April 26, 2020 41 minutes ago, buster. said: Interesting Gaffer ! Are you 100% that this falls within the remit of CAS (not disagreeing, I just don't know) All seems to come down to what evidence we have. A CAS procedure would take months and they seem to be booked up until at least the end of June. https://www.tas-cas.org/en/general-information/news-detail/article/list-of-hearings-2.html Is there a stage (internal remedy) we would have to go through with the SFA prior to CAS ? It would be interesting to listen to the conversations in the SPFL bunker speculating on I.D. of whistleblower and what the evidence may consist of. McKenzie might lose some weight with the effort. I optimistically hope some clubs are recording any phonecalls from the SPFL lobbyists in the days leading up to this 42 club meeting ? It is within its remit but the SPFL would have to agree to it too. If not, this will end up in court. With all the history we have in court battle failures I don't hold much hope for us if it goes that far, unless our evidence is strong. I've read the SPFL rules myself and I believe that the vote breaches at least 3. What I don't understand (and hence why I am so suspicious about the intent) is that if it seems so clear that a breach has taken place (which it must be to any lawyer either in the SPFL or from an individual club), why doesn't the SPFL just confirm that but say there were special circumstances requiring these breaches. This would have blown over by now. The problem the SPFL has now is that it's tried to cover up the issue of breaches to its own rules, and attempted to mislead the members further with this sham of an investigation. In any bribery and corruption cases I've been made aware of previously, this cover up is regarded as being more serious. In addition it's the cover up that then implicates other people who were actually innocent of the original breach. The other SPFL board members or executives will all be in serious trouble, even if they had nothing to do with the initial bribery and corruption. Roberson will be fine thanks to this public statement by the club, but the others need to make sure their protests are at least minuted in the board meeting documentation. I don't think they realise how serious this might be for them. I've seen CEOs fined huge amounts, and even sent to prison and yet they personally were not involved in bribery or corruption. They are punished however because they did not ensure that adequate controls existed or they did not have awareness of (or respond promptly to) corruption in their organisation. This is why a whistleblower policy is so critical. If you have one and it's well publicised within your organisations, it can serve as a strong defence that you've been taken reasonable measures to identify and deal with bribery and corruption, or any other wrong doing. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott7 5,135 Posted April 26, 2020 Share Posted April 26, 2020 1 hour ago, Bill said: Weegies eh Gribz is an Aiberdeen loon. Should know better right enough. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill 13,717 Posted April 26, 2020 Share Posted April 26, 2020 2 minutes ago, Scott7 said: Gribz is an Aiberdeen loon. Should know better right enough. Shocking from an Aberdonian. They have more than enough linguistic challenges of their own without importing the west coast inability to handle the past participle. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gribz 743 Posted April 26, 2020 Share Posted April 26, 2020 1 minute ago, Bill said: Shocking from an Aberdonian. They have more than enough linguistic challenges of their own without importing the west coast inability to handle the past participle. Apologies...Ive came into the thread late on and secondly was using my phone for typing the last 2 hours. Granted RE linguistic challenges, ive been away 17 out of my 40 years though so technically I can apply for a passport from nowhere. 1 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.