Bill 13,717 Posted April 26, 2020 Share Posted April 26, 2020 18 minutes ago, Gaffer said: 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. Great post. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,808 Posted April 26, 2020 Share Posted April 26, 2020 18 minutes ago, Gaffer said: 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. Can't see the SPFL being willing to agree to a CAS hearing. How would it work re. charges/civil/criminal court? Corruption & bribery would be criminal charges I ask, thinking about standards of proof. McKenzie and other advsors will have played the game through in his head (I wonder if they have an idea what the evidence is), considering probable routes as they consider strategy. Up until now, they have been kicking the can down the road, without any decent cards to play. The show goes on........... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,386 Posted April 26, 2020 Share Posted April 26, 2020 https://mobile.twitter.com/RangersFC/status/1254441397538734084 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) 10 hours ago, buster. said: So, a 42 club meeting to look at our resolution this week. Look's like...... - Difficult ask to get 32 clubs to vote yes. - Probably a non-starter if we don't give other clubs a taster+ of the whistleblower evidence and they regard it as strong enough. - If strong evidence is presented to clubs, good chance of Independent Inquiry Do we show the clubs or not ? Club Statement THERE are key issues to be discussed and agreed within Scottish football including the circumstances and dates on which football can resume, the health and safety of all involved and the financial implications for members. It is vital that those involved in making those decisions have the confidence and support of member clubs. An independent investigation provides a route to achieving this. It has always been Rangers’ intention to produce our evidence at the appropriate time. The evidence will be provided to all member clubs well in advance of a general meeting to approve an independent investigation. https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/independent-investigation ------------------------------------------------- Short, to the point and a promise of sharing evidence in a timely way. You could read it and for the first time think leadership. More importantly, I think that going into the meeting, many clubs will appreciate it. Odds on getting a Yes vote have shortened. Edited April 26, 2020 by buster. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,808 Posted April 26, 2020 Share Posted April 26, 2020 (edited) Quick look aroud various places and I don't think the importance of this statement has hit home. For me, it´s got more of a punch to an SPFL solar plexus than the longer and louder statement that first mentioned the evidence. Edited April 26, 2020 by buster. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post trueblue 64 53 Posted April 26, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted April 26, 2020 I really appreciate your many informative links ian but did you really have to include that pic on this page? 7 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueflag 378 Posted April 26, 2020 Share Posted April 26, 2020 I've had to hide it. Coudlnt bear looking at his smiling smug fucking face 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,386 Posted April 26, 2020 Share Posted April 26, 2020 2 hours ago, trueblue 64 said: I really appreciate your many informative links ian but did you really have to include that pic on this page? I don't know how to separate it mate, maybe admin can??, sorry! 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rino 10 Posted April 27, 2020 Share Posted April 27, 2020 What support from other clubs do Rangers need to obtain in order to get an independant investigation? (I'm sure I read this in this thread somewhere but I can't find it) 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaffer 1,665 Posted April 27, 2020 Share Posted April 27, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, Rino said: What support from other clubs do Rangers need to obtain in order to get an independant investigation? (I'm sure I read this in this thread somewhere but I can't find it) 75% of clubs need to agree to their proposal which will be held at an extraordinary meeting. If it goes that far I expect the SPFL board will be compelled to facilitate the inquiry. If not, we don't need any other clubs to support us if we take the legal route. One thing that the club has not mentioned (for obvious reasons) is that they have the option of taking the police route. If there is indeed bribery or corruption that can be evidenced, it is highly likely that this could end up as a criminal case. If there's an independent inquiry, or if the police get involved, this will escalate very quickly and I suspect that much more evidence will appear as more and more whistleblowers emerge. This always happens in these cases as others become desperate to distance themselves from the centre of the corruption. These additional (or as I call them ... save your own skin) whistleblowers are often the ones who deliver the killer blow and it's their evidence that usually secures the convictions. The "prisoner dilemma" often comes into play here. Edited April 27, 2020 by Gaffer 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.