-------- Original Message --------I wonder if Doncaster wants to go on the radio and, this time, allow questions from Tom English to clear everything up on this? No? Thought not. Any chance of the other member clubs asking questions? What about the privately funded Deloitte review? Anything?
FBS
Maybe Rangers are bound by the SPFL rules which has no jurisdiction whatsoever to Mr Parks. Think he is confident enough to hold these bastards to account, allowing our club to sit back and enjoy the show.Good statement from Parks. Maybe a good time for our club to weigh in with their opinion. Spfl have slandered Rangers and don't have the decency to apologize for their lying. Cmon Rangers.get right into this corrupt,lying and hateful and shambolic organisation
That's a brilliant statement and every word true. Well done Parks!
Heads should role but they won’tThey might actually start getting pressured by the other clubs now. Anyone can see it was already a poor deal, now they have to knock several hundred thousand off it for legal fees due to their own incompetence
Interesting to see what the external review that Hearts and Aberdeen were working on comes up with. Could add more pressure
Yup, pile-on!Good statement from Parks. Maybe a good time for our club to weigh in with their opinion. Spfl have slandered Rangers and don't have the decency to apologize for their lying. Cmon Rangers.get right into this corrupt,lying and hateful and shambolic organisation
Spot on mate. Remember he was responsible for sending a letter to all member clubs intimating that 1 member club was putting them all in financial jeopardy. A disgusting tactic to try and build resentment and also bully one member who had a disagreement with them.Murdoch MacLennan is a f*cking rat of the worst kind. Scottish football won’t move forward until him, Doncaster and the support act are purged altogether. Well done Parks and Rangers.
Well done. Told them exactly how they felt and left them in no doubt what Parks thought of it all. There are always two sides to a story and for months it had all been one way traffic, despite Park’s trying to explain their position. Good to see Rangers minded people, getting their point across in such a clear manner. Well done.Brutal statement from Park's of Hamilton about the Cinch deal and court process
They are taking no prisoners here.
Statement from Parks of Hamilton Ltd
A spokesperson for Parks of Hamilton Ltd said: “We were not surprised to learn from the media announcement last night that the SPFL have finally acknowledged Rangers legitimately engaged rule i7 in June of last year and thus, vindicated the stance held by the club for over a year. It is not for us to speculate as to why the SPFL leadership sought to ignore their own rules for so long.
“The fact that the SPFL prevaricated and continued to stall an arbitration process they themselves initiated in August last year, and which was ruled upon by the court of appeal in October, underlined the weakness of the case they truly had. Were it not for our interim interdict, it is clear their strategy was to try and bully one of their members and shareholders; a strategy which they have employed on numerous occasions.
“Throughout the last year, Park’s have kept their counsel as the SPFL leadership insulted us and misled the SFA, their member clubs, their title sponsor, and various other stakeholders in Scottish football.
“We have a long standing and proud association with Scottish football, and it was entirely wrong that we were compelled to take the SFA to court because the SPFL decided to abuse the SFA’s arbitration process. We believe that the SPFL and members of its leadership have brought the game in to disrepute and have failed, as have the SPFL as an organisation, to act with the utmost good faith towards their members.
“The SFA must carry out an independent investigation into this issue which has cost all parties involved hundreds of thousands of pounds. Despite being awarded expenses in court, Park’s will not recover all their legal fees nor be compensated for the reputational damage caused by the SPFL.
“Finally, the glaring omission from the SPFL’s statement was an apology. The SPFL leadership owe their members an apology, they owe Park's an apology, they owe the SFA an apology and they also owe an apology to Rangers. Unfortunately, they seem to lack any accountability and would rather spend their members money than admit their failures.”
Wanna bet?It does changes things though.
For example, surely all those who went against us a couple of years back cannot have the same confidence in the SPFL board.
Of course they do.Spot on mate. Remember he was responsible for sending a letter to all member clubs intimating that 1 member club was putting them all in financial jeopardy. A disgusting tactic to try and build resentment and also bully one member who had a disagreement with them.
He should be dismissed for that alone. They’ve lied to member clubs and cost them the much needed finances that they said Rangers would be depriving them of.
They played with money that’s not there theirs through sheer malevolence, hatred and unprofessionalism.
How blind are the rest of Scottish football to accept these people, one can only assume that they agree with the hatred and bloodlust to try and destroy us.
Still, some fans of the diddy clubs are blaming Rangers, they can’t see past their hatred.Was there not talk of other clubs suing Rangers if Cinch refused to pony up due to our stance? Maybe these same member clubs should be on the phone to Doncaster now and telling him all court fees should be taken from the mammoth wage that him and that old idiot bastard McLennan are stealing from them.
No, they are actually doubling down.So no apology still......????
Thank God we've got Spade loads of European cash coming in ever year. Imagine being stuck with the Scottish share of money.No holding back with that statement,
I don’t think we’ll hear the last of this for a while yet, meanwhile Donecaster will continue to ruin Scottish football while every other club stands by and let’s him take the piss out of them.
ShamelessNo, they are actually doubling down.
Aye but less sexy. I'd kick the spfl out of bed for farting.Anyone else think the SPFL are like the football federation version of Amber haerd?
Any pointers to the statement?Just read The SPFL halfwits have released a desperate rhetorical press release.
They really are a poisonous , condescending, inept, conglomerate of parasites, who know they are failing Scottish Football.
The fact that they felt the need to respond , indicates that they are worried about their fiefdom diminishing .
Getting top pay for continued gross negligence is an irreplaceable role. They won’t be able to earn it anywhere else .
The gravy train is potentially grinding to a sobering halt, their PR team are hoping the corporate inadequates of the SPFL members club will be fawning at their amateur cryptic hour response.
Neil Doncaster has the similar comparable affinity to football, as the fat man who owns sports chains and previously northern football clubs. At what point will the SPFL grab him by his diamond cuff links , and boot him up and down the hampden car park? ( metaphorically of course)
A spokesperson for the SPFL said: “We note with interest Park’s version of events.Any pointers to the statement?
Cheers, I look forward to their rationale, but they are saying they have to ask Rangers and Parks if a confidentiality agreement is still in place? Surely they should know this.A spokesperson for the SPFL said: “We note with interest Park’s version of events.
“We are currently bound by the confidentiality of the legal process. Frustratingly, we have had to keep our counsel throughout.
"However, we have written to Rangers and Park’s seeking confirmation that this confidentiality no longer applies, following yesterday’s announcement of our revised title sponsorship agreement with cinch.
“If they agree to our proposal we will be able to provide a full and frank narrative to our member clubs. We very much look forward to the opportunity to set the record straight.”
I don’t know if it’s a role that can investigate the SPFL, but if there was ever a NON-COMPLIANCE then this would be an open and shut case.How is the SFA compliance officers case coming along?
Don’t hang about,just do itI’m away to Google prevaricated
A spokesperson for the SPFL said: “We note with interest Park’s version of events.
“We are currently bound by the confidentiality of the legal process. Frustratingly, we have had to keep our counsel throughout.
"However, we have written to Rangers and Park’s seeking confirmation that this confidentiality no longer applies, following yesterday’s announcement of our revised title sponsorship agreement with cinch.
“If they agree to our proposal we will be able to provide a full and frank narrative to our member clubs. We very much look forward to the opportunity to set the record straight.”
It’s a win-win. We don’t have to advertise cinch but we still get our share of their money via the positional payments for where we finish in the League.Does anyone know what the interpretation of this new cinch contract will be for Rangers commercially?
Is it written in such a way that it frees Rangers up to pursue their own match sponsorship for matches at Ibrox?
If we are not to be allowed to benefit from the league sponsorship, isn't that an opportunity for us to cash in with other sponsors when we host league matches?
Is there such a commercial relevance in these recent developments for Rangers?
They'll still be calling us the ones that started it.We're fighting this battle on our own, I'm afraid. The rest of the clubs would rather be treated like shite by Doncaster than admit we're right about the corrupt scum destroying our game.
That is exactly the situation.Maybe Rangers are bound by the SPFL rules which has no jurisdiction whatsoever to Mr Parks. Think he is confident enough to hold these bastards to account, allowing our club to sit back and enjoy the show.
Parks are in my opinion, a third party that are not obligated to conform to the spfl rules on confidentiality- hence the statement- spfl then draft a statement saying they have written to RANGERS and Parks for confirmation that confidentiality no longer applies- Rangers did not issue any statement and have conformed to the SPFL’s rules on confidentiality.A spokesperson for the SPFL said: “We note with interest Park’s version of events.
“We are currently bound by the confidentiality of the legal process. Frustratingly, we have had to keep our counsel throughout.
"However, we have written to Rangers and Park’s seeking confirmation that this confidentiality no longer applies, following yesterday’s announcement of our revised title sponsorship agreement with cinch.
“If they agree to our proposal we will be able to provide a full and frank narrative to our member clubs. We very much look forward to the opportunity to set the record straight.”
in fact,A spokesperson for the SPFL said: “We note with interest Park’s version of events.
“We are currently bound by the confidentiality of the legal process. Frustratingly, we have had to keep our counsel throughout.
"However, we have written to Rangers and Park’s seeking confirmation that this confidentiality no longer applies, following yesterday’s announcement of our revised title sponsorship agreement with cinch.
“If they agree to our proposal we will be able to provide a full and frank narrative to our member clubs. We very much look forward to the opportunity to set the record straight.”
perfect.Parks are in my opinion, a third party that are not obligated to conform to the spfl rules on confidentiality- hence the statement- spfl then draft a statement saying they have written to RANGERS and Parks for confirmation that confidentiality no longer applies- Rangers did not issue any statement and have conformed to the SPFL’s rules on confidentiality.
but the SPFL desperately need Rangers to get involved as party to Parks statement in order for RANGERS to have breached the SPFL confidentiality rules and any subsequent penalties inflicted on Rangers.
Rangers only response should be “we note with interest the communications of Parks and the SPFL “ but at this time cannot comment on whether the original statement from parks breached confidentiality as this is a matter solely between the SPFL and PARKS to resolve as to whether communications between these 2 individual parties breached confidentiality.
on this point Rangers can confirm that no statement was released from Rangers on the outcome of the SPFL’s renegotiated sponsorship deal with Cinch and would like to make it known that the current confidentiality dispute is solely between the SPFL and PARKS to resolve, bearing this in mind Rangers will not communicate further on this subject as we as a football club within the SPFL are restricted by the SPFL’s own confidentiality rules.
I’m Probably talking shite here ^^^^^^ but would love something to happen along these lines
Not sure you are too far off here.Parks are in my opinion, a third party that are not obligated to conform to the spfl rules on confidentiality- hence the statement- spfl then draft a statement saying they have written to RANGERS and Parks for confirmation that confidentiality no longer applies- Rangers did not issue any statement and have conformed to the SPFL’s rules on confidentiality.
but the SPFL desperately need Rangers to get involved as party to Parks statement in order for RANGERS to have breached the SPFL confidentiality rules and any subsequent penalties inflicted on Rangers.
Rangers only response should be “we note with interest the communications of Parks and the SPFL “ but at this time cannot comment on whether the original statement from parks breached confidentiality as this is a matter solely between the SPFL and PARKS to resolve as to whether communications between the 2 parties breached confidentiality.
on this point Rangers can confirm that no statement was released from Rangers on the outcome of the SPFL’s renegotiated sponsorship deal with Cinch and would like to make it known that the current confidentiality dispute is solely between the SPFL and PARKS to resolve, bearing this in mind Rangers will not communicate further on this subject as we as a football club within the SPFL are restricted by the SPFL’s own confidentiality rules.
I’m Probably talking shite here ^^^^^^ but would love something to happen along these lines