Article The executive summary of Rangers submission to the SPFL AGM - download

Some cnut is sitting on Liewell, he has said f all (to my knowledge) about this shit.
As I said previously, these guys aren’t stupid. They may be morally and commercially reprehensible and not fit for purpose, but they’re not daft. They won’t be caught directly, indirectly on the other hand if enough pressure is applied, then someone is gonna squeal.
That’s how it works.
Mulreany should be sitting at number one target once doncaster and Mackenzie have been given the bullet.
Mulreany is one of the slimiest operators this game has ever had, all from the control of a Shitey, non entity club itself that has zero standing in this game. HE is a major target.
 
Primarily it is.

Right now it's about Scottish football emerging from the other side of the Covid pandemic with as many clubs as possible in as healthy a position as possible. You think that the charimen of Killie, Ross County, Morton, Airdrie or Stenny are thinking about the long term administration of football in Scotland. Getting rid of Doncaster would be a fine achievement from a Rangers viewpoint. Arguably more important would be reaching a position where Rangers are capable of having more influence in football going forward. That cant happen without reformation of the SPFL, but it also can't happen without the support of the rest of the SPFL club chairmen. Right now all they want to know is whether or not their clubs will be around when we finally get to play football again.
Moving forward is high on the agenda, but very difficult as nobody knows how the land lies. Next season isn't a certainty. They're going through the motions concerning the rest of this season but it's a formality. What we mustn't do is get too focused on these issues, this is a build up of years of underhanded tactics towards a certain persuasion
 
I've shifted nothing.

If Doncaster is removed then great. He's useless, probably a corrupt and deceitful slug and it would be better if he was removed from his position. So long as whoever is appointed to replace him is of a higher caliber.

Scottish football may well quietly thank Rangers if it gets rid of the thoroughly detestable figure. Again that's fine, but only if it improves our influence in the game.

Coming back to the original vote itself? It may have been flawed. There may have been other options. I'm sure Falkirk would really like it if Raith weren't given a title they don't deserve and Thistle would rather they weren't relegated. Again, none of that helps with a conclusion to this season's top flight or whats likely to happen going forward.

As for the £10million bill? If football cannot be played until September and the league cannot find a way to keep clubs, broadcasters and sponsors happy then regardless of the vote for the bottom 3 leagues, Scottish football is going to have a bill to pay. As fans on here like to boast, Scottish football only has a TV deal and only attracts sponsors because of us and them.

The only real difference between our views on this seems to be that you see victories in exposing Doncaster and getting shot of him. For me thats a fine outcome, but it isnt the most important one. We're still left with fundamental problems in Scottish football surrounding the 19/20 top flight, the Scottish cup, the consequences of being unable to complete either competition and how we take Scottish football forward. There has to be something more. There has to be an end game that actually means something more than simply settling scores with Doncaster and making the SPFL board look bad.
I think the relevance of the £10m is that liabilities were referred to as the reason null and void was not an option but liabilities equally applied to the option selected by the SPFL to call the league with promotion and relegation.
The position was therefore misrepresented to members and if they had that info they might have rejected the resolution and the SPFL would not now be in a position to gift Celtic a title.
 
Moving forward is high on the agenda, but very difficult as nobody knows how the land lies. Next season isn't a certainty. They're going through the motions concerning the rest of this season but it's a formality. What we mustn't do is get too focused on these issues, this is a build up of years of underhanded tactics towards a certain persuasion

And yet nothing in the vote gave any clear benefit to the mhanks. Absolutely nothing in the submission released could be said to favour Celtic at our expense.
 
I think the relevance of the £10m is that liabilities were referred to as the reason null and void was not an option but liabilities equally applied to the option selected by the SPFL to call the league with promotion and relegation.
The position was therefore misrepresented to members and if they had that info they might have rejected the resolution and the SPFL would not now be in a position to gift Celtic a title.

The vote only confirmed the SPFL's responsibility to decide on a conclusion to the top flight if matches could not be resumed. It's the question that we always come back to and that nobody has an answer for.

If matches cannot resume and the 19/20 season cannot be completed then how does the SPFL reach a conclusion to the league?
 
The SPFL have said in various interviews that it is their obligation to investigate thoroughly any accusations of wrong doing yet in reality they have been threatening Rangers to drop the accusations.

I think our approach overall has been excellent, it won’t happen overnight but we will eventually get rid of these cretins for the good of the game.
 
Primarily it is.

Right now it's about Scottish football emerging from the other side of the Covid pandemic with as many clubs as possible in as healthy a position as possible. You think that the charimen of Killie, Ross County, Morton, Airdrie or Stenny are thinking about the long term administration of football in Scotland. Getting rid of Doncaster would be a fine achievement from a Rangers viewpoint. Arguably more important would be reaching a position where Rangers are capable of having more influence in football going forward. That cant happen without reformation of the SPFL, but it also can't happen without the support of the rest of the SPFL club chairmen. Right now all they want to know is whether or not their clubs will be around when we finally get to play football again.
Have you read the 19 pages ?
If you have
Do you think we as a club have proceeded in the correct manner and do you think there should be an investigation?
 
The vote only confirmed the SPFL's responsibility to decide on a conclusion to the top flight if matches could not be resumed. It's the question that we always come back to and that nobody has an answer for.

If matches cannot resume and the 19/20 season cannot be completed then how does the SPFL reach a conclusion to the league?
They put the options to a members vote as they did in Holland.
null and void v promotion and relegation.
 
The combined total may well be £10million, but if you remove the SPFL premier league and Scottish cup, the remaining amount would barely stretch to 6 figures.

The Scottish Cup is irrelevant, that contract is with the SFA. We are talking about the SFPL here.

I've laid out the contracts that the SPFL have with the TV companies, so if there is a £10m potential liability then all 42 clubs will be het for it. It will not be split into Premiership, Championship, L1 & L2. It will be everybody as a whole.

If Doncaster didn't tell the clubs that they were potentially on the hook for £10m and those clubs budgeted for TV Cash next season that didn't come, because Doncaster & Co gave it away as part of a fudge then where would that leave the smaller clubs who voted for something based on a lie of ommission.
 
The 19 pager makes literally dozens of well-argued and reasonable points, and sets out exactly the areas to be covered by an independent enquiry. SPFLs bluster about evidence makes no sense. These are all valid questions which must be answered, and the only way to get them is through a full enquiry.

Frankly, any club reading it and finding no necessity for detailed questioning of this bunch of shysters (1) needs their head examined (2) is a mentally challenged sympathiser. Likely both.

In reality, I feel many clubs won’t bother reading it in detail and will vote against because (1) it’s the easy option and they don’t care (2) they detest Rangers (3) they don’t want to upset Peter.
 
Enjoyed that, pieces a lot of things together and highlighted a Lot of new info that brings the cabals meanings into severe question.
Even if an independent investigation is not voted through, all those questions raised MUST be pursued and Answers sought.
Should be a journalists wet dream having all this info, sadly we have to rely on a Rugby and Golf journalist to get to the heart of proceedings.
Anyway thanks for the report, it means I can now avoid conversing with idiot's and *** on the other threads.
 
And given that the vote concerning the bottom 3 divisions in Scottish football didnt disadvantage Rangers in the slightest, how does any of the summary achieve a level playing field? The only way we get a level playing field is if we have enough influence within Scottish football that fellow club chairmen will listen to us.

The vote only confirmed the SPFL's responsibility to decide on a conclusion to the top flight if matches could not be resumed. It's the question that we always come back to and that nobody has an answer for.

If matches cannot resume and the 19/20 season cannot be completed then how does the SPFL reach a conclusion to the league?

You say the vote was about the lower leagues but completely ignore the fact that the same vote gave the SPFL Board the power to call the Premiership - on the same basis - as soon as they, the SPFL Board, determine the games cannot be completed. The vote was not, solely, about the lower leagues.

And their own website makes it perfectly clear how the league will be concluded.

"SPFL clubs are to vote on a resolution recommending the termination of the 2019/20 season in the Ladbrokes Championship, Ladbrokes League 1 and Ladbrokes League 2, with final season placings determined by points per game in league matches played to date by each club.

The resolution also recommends that matches in the Ladbrokes Premiership remain postponed for the time being, to give the best possible opportunity for the remaining 2019/20 fixtures to be played.

However, if the SPFL Board determines that the remaining Premiership matches cannot be played, the Ladbrokes Premiership would also be terminated, with final season placings determined on the same basis."

 
Rangers have the option of seeking judicial intervention to declare that the vote in favour of the SPFL resolution was unlawfully achieved, however, I'm not sure what this will achieve, in practice, other than to try destroy the credibility of ND and RMcK and to force their resignations; their positions becoming untenable. Maybe that is what they do seek and that would do me for starters.

if a judicial review was called would that not have the effect of freezing all monies. That is unless clubs agreed to an independent review.

Another thought who would be suitable to conduct the review
 
And given that the vote concerning the bottom 3 divisions in Scottish football didnt disadvantage Rangers in the slightest, how does any of the summary achieve a level playing field? The only way we get a level playing field is if we have enough influence within Scottish football that fellow club chairmen will listen to us.

Being listened to by other clubs would be helpful and is a worthy long term goal. Getting rid of a corrupt governing body is a duty to ourselves, to Scottish football and a necessary step for a club with our principles. We have never been the kind of club to turn a blind eye or to run away from this.
 
You say the vote was about the lower leagues but completely ignore the fact that the same vote gave the SPFL Board the power to call the Premiership - on the same basis - as soon as they, the SPFL Board, determine the games cannot be completed. The vote was not, solely, about the lower leagues.

And their own website makes it perfectly clear how the league will be concluded.

"SPFL clubs are to vote on a resolution recommending the termination of the 2019/20 season in the Ladbrokes Championship, Ladbrokes League 1 and Ladbrokes League 2, with final season placings determined by points per game in league matches played to date by each club.

The resolution also recommends that matches in the Ladbrokes Premiership remain postponed for the time being, to give the best possible opportunity for the remaining 2019/20 fixtures to be played.

However, if the SPFL Board determines that the remaining Premiership matches cannot be played, the Ladbrokes Premiership would also be terminated, with final season placings determined on the same basis."
He's been constantly pushing this on a couple of threads today, and a lot of his comments seem to be, less favourable towards the dossier. Appreciate we all have our own opinions, but to constantly push the point the vote only affected the bottom 3 leagues, raises concerns
 
You say the vote was about the lower leagues but completely ignore the fact that the same vote gave the SPFL Board the power to call the Premiership - on the same basis - as soon as they, the SPFL Board, determine the games cannot be completed. The vote was not, solely, about the lower leagues.

And their own website makes it perfectly clear how the league will be concluded.

"SPFL clubs are to vote on a resolution recommending the termination of the 2019/20 season in the Ladbrokes Championship, Ladbrokes League 1 and Ladbrokes League 2, with final season placings determined by points per game in league matches played to date by each club.

The resolution also recommends that matches in the Ladbrokes Premiership remain postponed for the time being, to give the best possible opportunity for the remaining 2019/20 fixtures to be played.

However, if the SPFL Board determines that the remaining Premiership matches cannot be played, the Ladbrokes Premiership would also be terminated, with final season placings determined on the same basis."

Yet Aberdeen were given concessions?
 
Have you read the 19 pages ?
If you have
Do you think we as a club have proceeded in the correct manner and do you think there should be an investigation?

I've read the 19 pages.

As I've said already:

I believe that theres a strong case for investigating Doncaster and McKenzie for their conduct. There's a very good chance that both have acted dishonestly and have failed in their responsibilities to SPFL member clubs.

I also believe that Doncaster will go. He'll be thrown to the wolves. It's doubtful that he could survive the allegations made.

But the big question is why? Why do things improve for Rangers with the removal of Neil Doncaster and Rod McKenzie? What else has to happen for clubs to treat Rangers differently, for governance standards within the league to improve and for our lot in life to get better? And what is there in any of the 19 pages that clubs are going to put ahead of their basic sense of survival during a lockdown that has potentially catastrophic consequences for the game up here?
 
On a quick read through, it's hardly deep throat is it? The gun isnt exactly smoking.

There is certainly some validity in the allegations that we're making. It would appear that Doncaster is guilty of misleading by omission. It would also appear that certain club chairmen have acted exceptionally poorly. That said, there are a few things that do nothing to help any argument that we may have regarding wrongdoing.

The behaviour of Doncaster. It's clear that he has withheld things from member clubs. The effect of that was to encourage a vote based on incomplete information. Would the information withheld have led members to vote in a different way? Nobody will know for sure. It's one thing having John Steele complain about the way that the vote was run but it's another thing completely arguing that Dumbarton would have voted any differently. The same goes for every other SPFL club.

The £10million potential liability. Is that allegation absolutely cast iron? Would ending the lower 3 leagues in the SPFL really give rise to a liability of £10million? Include the top flight in that and between Ladbrokes league sponsorship and TV rights there could be a significant cost, but £10million based on ending the Championship, League One and League Two? I'd love to see the actual evidence because it's a pretty strong claim that seems more than a bit outlandish.

The behaviour of chairmen of other clubs. Far too easy for the SPFL board to write that off as club chairmen looking after their own affairs. McArthur and Mulraney trying to strong arm Inverness into voting the way they want? Too easy to argue that it was the act of individual chairmen trying to get money to their own clubs. Brechin chairman trying to influence League Two? The same. It's hardly something that will reflect poorly on the 3 main targets of Doncaster, MacKenzie and MacLellan. Talk of failing to pursue reports of misconduct from SPFL chairmen is an allegation that reflects badly on Doncaster for sure - if he was made aware of the conduct of club chairmen then there should have been a means of taking that allegation forward.

At first reading this really looks like Doncaster should be facing action under companies law. He appears to have acted in bad faith, to have withheld information and to have failed in various duties that would be expected of him. What would that actually achieve, other than potentially seeing him removed from his position? Are clubs going to vote differently? If clubs do vote again and reach the same outcome then what's actually changed? We havent resolved the top flight yet and we appear no closer to having a settled outcome - will reopening the debate about awarding Raith Rovers a league title do anything to progress whats likely to happen with the Premier League?

The full 200 page version needs to be significantly better than that summary.
It does show Incompetence and/or willful witholding of information before and during the voting process. I think Doncaster is shown in a very poor light here - it is obvious they had a single agenda and were desperate to railroad it through.
 
I've read the 19 pages.

As I've said already:

I believe that theres a strong case for investigating Doncaster and McKenzie for their conduct. There's a very good chance that both have acted dishonestly and have failed in their responsibilities to SPFL member clubs.

I also believe that Doncaster will go. He'll be thrown to the wolves. It's doubtful that he could survive the allegations made.

But the big question is why? Why do things improve for Rangers with the removal of Neil Doncaster and Rod McKenzie? What else has to happen for clubs to treat Rangers differently, for governance standards within the league to improve and for our lot in life to get better? And what is there in any of the 19 pages that clubs are going to put ahead of their basic sense of survival during a lockdown that has potentially catastrophic consequences for the game up here?
Get rid of ND and fat Rod removes 2 *** placemen, listen SR must be the last employee we had in amongst any corridor of power for over a decade and look what's coming out and being unearthed.
 
if a judicial review was called would that not have the effect of freezing all monies. That is unless clubs agreed to an independent review.

Another thought who would be suitable to conduct the review


If Rangers successfully sought Judicial Review and Declarator, the outcome would be as if the resolution had not been passed and everything thereafter would be deemed unlawful. The SPFL would then have to have another vote, which may well have the same outcome, but they will have the full information to hand, to allow them to have an informed vote. Such an outcome would surely terminate the SPFL careers of Doncaster, Mckenzie et al.
 
I started reading that with a bit of trepidation after reading all the panic merchants. In reality it's a damning indictment of the SPFL, and anyone who cant see it is working to an agenda.

Just read it all now.

It's damning allright. The SPFL Executive (and a couple of others on the Board) plus those mentioned that have positions at the SFA may hold on for a while yet with the assistance of certain clubs and a compliant press. However their reputations are damaged beyond repair and won't be able to last much longer IMO (damaged goods never last as long as one might imagine).
 
If Scottish football was serious about it’s self they would sack these pair immediately for the complete unprofessionalism. However as long as it’s Rangers that are having the boot stuck in or the aggrieved party who cares.
 
Get rid of ND and fat Rod removes 2 *** placemen, listen SR must be the last employee we had in amongst any corridor of power for over a decade and look what's coming out and being unearthed.

It's only worthwhile if the rest of Scottish football cares enough that we dont simply see another 2 place men appointed to take over.
 
I've read the 19 pages.

As I've said already:

I believe that theres a strong case for investigating Doncaster and McKenzie for their conduct. There's a very good chance that both have acted dishonestly and have failed in their responsibilities to SPFL member clubs.

I also believe that Doncaster will go. He'll be thrown to the wolves. It's doubtful that he could survive the allegations made.

But the big question is why? Why do things improve for Rangers with the removal of Neil Doncaster and Rod McKenzie? What else has to happen for clubs to treat Rangers differently, for governance standards within the league to improve and for our lot in life to get better? And what is there in any of the 19 pages that clubs are going to put ahead of their basic sense of survival during a lockdown that has potentially catastrophic consequences for the game up here?
If they go then wed have to campaign strongly for much better administrators of our game.
This is for the long term of tne Scottish game.
 
On a quick read through, it's hardly deep throat is it? The gun isnt exactly smoking.

There is certainly some validity in the allegations that we're making. It would appear that Doncaster is guilty of misleading by omission. It would also appear that certain club chairmen have acted exceptionally poorly. That said, there are a few things that do nothing to help any argument that we may have regarding wrongdoing.

The behaviour of Doncaster. It's clear that he has withheld things from member clubs. The effect of that was to encourage a vote based on incomplete information. Would the information withheld have led members to vote in a different way? Nobody will know for sure. It's one thing having John Steele complain about the way that the vote was run but it's another thing completely arguing that Dumbarton would have voted any differently. The same goes for every other SPFL club.

The £10million potential liability. Is that allegation absolutely cast iron? Would ending the lower 3 leagues in the SPFL really give rise to a liability of £10million? Include the top flight in that and between Ladbrokes league sponsorship and TV rights there could be a significant cost, but £10million based on ending the Championship, League One and League Two? I'd love to see the actual evidence because it's a pretty strong claim that seems more than a bit outlandish.

The behaviour of chairmen of other clubs. Far too easy for the SPFL board to write that off as club chairmen looking after their own affairs. McArthur and Mulraney trying to strong arm Inverness into voting the way they want? Too easy to argue that it was the act of individual chairmen trying to get money to their own clubs. Brechin chairman trying to influence League Two? The same. It's hardly something that will reflect poorly on the 3 main targets of Doncaster, MacKenzie and MacLellan. Talk of failing to pursue reports of misconduct from SPFL chairmen is an allegation that reflects badly on Doncaster for sure - if he was made aware of the conduct of club chairmen then there should have been a means of taking that allegation forward.

At first reading this really looks like Doncaster should be facing action under companies law. He appears to have acted in bad faith, to have withheld information and to have failed in various duties that would be expected of him. What would that actually achieve, other than potentially seeing him removed from his position? Are clubs going to vote differently? If clubs do vote again and reach the same outcome then what's actually changed? We havent resolved the top flight yet and we appear no closer to having a settled outcome - will reopening the debate about awarding Raith Rovers a league title do anything to progress whats likely to happen with the Premier League?

The full 200 page version needs to be significantly better than that summary.

It isn't smoking and that's what gets me.

We've lost this one.
 
What exactly were people expecting? Some Scooby Doo reveal that Neil Doncaster is actually Peter Lawell in disguise? It’s a carefully set out document detailing huge concerns over how the League’s Executive Team operate.
 
If Rangers successfully sought Judicial Review and Declarator, the outcome would be as if the resolution had not been passed and everything thereafter would be deemed unlawful. The SPFL would then have to have another vote, which may well have the same outcome, but they will have the full information to hand, to allow them to have an informed vote. Such an outcome would surely terminate the SPFL careers of Doncaster, Mckenzie et al.
Thanks for that but I was primarily thinking about the mone. If a judicial review was applied for would that not have the effect of freezing payments to clubs until the matter was resolved? I n other words force a lot of clubs into administration
 
If they go then wed have to campaign strongly for much better administrators of our game.
This is for the long term of tne Scottish game.

Which goes back to my long standing comments about narrative and consensus.

We want to campaign for better governance of our game? We need clubs to stand with us. It's not a fight we can win on our own. I spent 5 years on the board of my local team's supporters trust. I've had a few roles in that time. I've been in regular discussions with club owners and boards of directors. Maybe that gives me a different take on things that isnt 100% blue tinted, It certainly gives me a bit more objectivity. I know exactly what their feelings would be. Remove Doncaster? Fine. But how do things improve for us?
 
I'm sure I read somewhere, maybe on here, that allegedly Aberdeen were bought off with the promise of a Europa League spot as the fourth place in the Premiership would be allocated this as the Scottish Cup was not be finished in time for one of the competing teams to be nominated.
 
Which goes back to my long standing comments about narrative and consensus.

We want to campaign for better governance of our game? We need clubs to stand with us. It's not a fight we can win on our own. I spent 5 years on the board of my local team's supporters trust. I've had a few roles in that time. I've been in regular discussions with club owners and boards of directors. Maybe that gives me a different take on things that isnt 100% blue tinted, It certainly gives me a bit more objectivity. I know exactly what their feelings would be. Remove Doncaster? Fine. But how do things improve for us?

Your answer to that question?

EDIT: Actually this is diverting from discussion on the dossier. Why don't you start another thread highlighting your concerns and giving us your answer? The we can join in without taking this one off topic.

EDIT 2: In fact there's a thread that's tailor-made for that very discussion: https://www.followfollow.com/forum/threads/next-steps-and-end-game.119665/#post-5993767

And you're already on it.:eek:
 
Last edited:
It isn't smoking and that's what gets me.

We've lost this one.
not so soon. yeh, we don't have leaked nudes of Doncaster. however there is now numerous new lines of enquiry. i'm reading into the general silence of the media so far... they have had all day to read over it. maybe it's not all as rosy as SPFL's pre planned retort 1 hr after the dossier was circulated?
 
not so soon. yeh, we don't have leaked nudes of Doncaster. however there is now numerous new lines of enquiry. i'm reading into the general silence of the media so far... they have had all day to read over it. maybe it's not all as rosy as SPFL's pre planned retort 1 hr after the dossier was circulated?

I just, we just know how this will end.

Biscuit arsed handing of a title and clubs glossing over this.

Literally, LITERALLY sick of reading about off the field matters.
 
Which goes back to my long standing comments about narrative and consensus.

We want to campaign for better governance of our game? We need clubs to stand with us. It's not a fight we can win on our own. I spent 5 years on the board of my local team's supporters trust. I've had a few roles in that time. I've been in regular discussions with club owners and boards of directors. Maybe that gives me a different take on things that isnt 100% blue tinted, It certainly gives me a bit more objectivity. I know exactly what their feelings would be. Remove Doncaster? Fine. But how do things improve for us?

Part of that is surely just making it clear that we aren’t taking this sort of crap anymore?

The club has been mocked over this, but on any reasonable view there are questions to answer. If Doncaster goes over this won’t those chairman and media pundits describing our stance as risible look a bit daft?

Won’t the SPFL think twice before treating the club like shit, as they appear to have done here?

Objectively wouldn’t the club have been vindicated and wouldn’t comments and complaints by the club be given a bit more credibility by other clubs and chairmen going forward?

Also, and leaving all of that aside, isn’t it just the right thing to do?
 
Which goes back to my long standing comments about narrative and consensus.

We want to campaign for better governance of our game? We need clubs to stand with us. It's not a fight we can win on our own. I spent 5 years on the board of my local team's supporters trust. I've had a few roles in that time. I've been in regular discussions with club owners and boards of directors. Maybe that gives me a different take on things that isnt 100% blue tinted, It certainly gives me a bit more objectivity. I know exactly what their feelings would be. Remove Doncaster? Fine. But how do things improve for us?
We need folk on our side to lobby this, that you are right. It might take time.
But now other clubs and SPFL board members, new board members(hopefully) will take notice that we are watching them, so that they follow the rule book.

Its a long game. We need to root out the mentality of favouring one club, and the one club that seems to be on the end of unfair decisions, us.
The lomg game wil eventually get us down to fair refereeing in the end IMO.
 
Back
Top