Updated Rangers Statement - SPFL’s legal adviser deems Rangers' Members Resolution as incompetent, other clubs being bullied

mountloyal

Well-Known Member
We only asked for advice at 10.18pm last night? Surely that’s not correct?
The exact timing would suggest it is. It will be a time recorded fax. As I posted earlier we are dealing with scummy cvnts but we are not acting very professionay imho.
 

Tydfo1872

Well-Known Member
breaking news on ssn Rangers proposal will not be given to other members. they say it goes against company law
 

Ponientebear

Well-Known Member
If you think the corruption is bad just now wait to next year when they go for 10 in a row,

Do other clubs not notice every single decision ever made in Scottish football gives the tarriers the advantage.
They don’t care, their attitude is still, rather strangely I might add that were as bad as each other.
 

Valley Bluenose

Well-Known Member
Interesting how many of our fans on here immediately jump to the conclusion that the SPFL statement is 100% correct and start slating the Club again. As I posted earlier, read the SPFL statement again - it talks about an email to the SPFL Lawyers. Rangers statement talks about trying to contact the 'SPFL Executive'. They are(the SPFL), to my mind, playing with words.
 

bearspakora

Well-Known Member
The media is sewn up and can and very much will ignore it mate.
Even BBC Scotland have referred to the coercion and bullying of clubs by the SPFL, mate. Phase 2 should be Rangers publicly condemning the SPFL as not fit for purpose.

 

sw26

Well-Known Member
The exact timing would suggest it is. It will be a time recorded fax. As I posted earlier we are dealing with scummy cvnts but we are not acting very professionay imho.
What are you banging on about faxes?

The article says an email was sent to the “SPFL’s lawyer” at 10.18pm, Rangers statement says they “sought assistance from the SPFL
Executive on several occasions yesterday”. These are two different things, you’ve fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

Anything to have a pop at the club eh?
 

Forth Bear

Well-Known Member
Is it really? The statement just issued re communications we sent? We should have evidence of this to disprove them?

Lets see if they are released by us.
If you engage your brain and read what Rangers have said and what the SPFL have just put out, you would see that Rangers state they "sought assistance from the SPFL Executive on several occasions", yet the SPFL only mention one email to their lawyers.
 

Grigo Yossarian

Well-Known Member

Rangerista

Well-Known Member
One thing we learnt from the Charles Green era was that what was missing from statements was often as important as what they contained. Snake Oil Salesman.

The SPFL rebuttal says the SPFL's lawyers only got 1 email from Rangers. Late last night. The Rangers statement says - explicitly - that they tried to contact the 'SPFL Executive' all day. I'd say 'lawyers' and 'Executive' are completely different things. Separate entities if you will.;)

They are devious c*nts, no doubts about it.
This instantly stood out for me, semantics from the SPFL, deliberately designed to divert criticism on to our club.
 

Fogg

New Member
That spfl statement reads to me that we submitted our proposal last night after trying and failing to get any response from the spfl all day, that it left us in a position we had no choice to submit knowing it would likely not be accepted in the current format.

All about the wording of both statements, the fact they dont deny the bullying aspect of our statement says it all
 

rfc4ever

Active Member
The response

The SPFL Board received a requisition from Rangers, supported by two other clubs, that the Board must issue a further resolution to members. This resolution sought to compel the SPFL to lend money to all 42 Clubs.

The Board took legal advice from a leading QC on the proposed resolution. By law, the members of a private company can require their Board to circulate a resolution, unless such resolution would be ineffective if passed.

The clear and unequivocal legal advice received by the SPFL is that the resolution received from Rangers is ineffective in terms of company law. As a result, the Board determined this morning that it cannot be circulated to members.

We have seen a statement from Rangers that they “sought comment from the SPFL Executive on several occasions yesterday, to ensure [their] resolution was deemed competent”. For the avoidance of doubt, only at 10.18pm yesterday did the SPFL’s lawyer receive an email from Rangers seeking advice on the content of their resolution, which was put before the SPFL Board first thing this morning.

Rangers have expressed a desire to submit a further resolution. The SPFL’s lawyers will work with Rangers, as they will with any other member club, who wishes to put forward a resolution. The offer to help clubs with the drafting of their resolutions was made during the divisional conference calls on Wednesday. Rangers chose to proceed without seeking that help, with the result that their resolution was ineffective.

A spokesman said: “These are extremely difficult times for the people of Scotland and for every club in the land.

“The SPFL Board has worked hard to propose a clear way of quickly delivering much-needed fee payments to the 30 clubs in the Ladbrokes Championship, League 1 and League 2.

“The alternative is further weeks, and possibly months, of uncertainty and financial hardship for dozens of clubs which are desperately looking for a way to survive.”


“The SPFL Board has worked hard to propose a clear way of quickly delivering much-needed fee payments to the 30 clubs in the Ladbrokes Championship, League 1 and League 2.

“The alternative is further weeks, and possibly months, of uncertainty and financial hardship for dozens of clubs which are desperately looking for a way to survive.”


Right there at the bottom for all to see vote yes and give septic the title or you are getting no money! it's that simple and with that I have no doubt they will get what they need, if ever there was a more coercive and bullying statement i'm yet to see one, corrupt to the core, absolutely disgusted what this poisonous league has come down to when football is the least important thing in the world right now!
 

hendo1969

Active Member
If you engage your brain and read what Rangers have said and what the SPFL have just put out, you would see that Rangers state they "sought assistance from the SPFL Executive on several occasions", yet the SPFL only mention one email to their lawyers.
And will it not look bad on the SPFL part for ignoring any sort of engagement with us? Lets see if we release any evidence.
 

Oxford_blue

Active Member
One thing we learnt from the Charles Green era was that what was missing from statements was often as important as what they contained. Snake Oil Salesman.

The SPFL rebuttal says the SPFL's lawyers only got 1 email from Rangers. Late last night. The Rangers statement says - explicitly - that they tried to contact the 'SPFL Executive' all day. I'd say 'lawyers' and 'Executive' are completely different things. Separate entities if you will.;)

They are devious c*nts, no doubts about it.
This is an interesting (and utterly believable) analysis!
 

insanicdrunk

Well-Known Member
One thing we learnt from the Charles Green era was that what was missing from statements was often as important as what they contained. Snake Oil Salesman.

The SPFL rebuttal says the SPFL's lawyers only got 1 email from Rangers. Late last night. The Rangers statement says - explicitly - that they tried to contact the 'SPFL Executive' all day. I'd say 'lawyers' and 'Executive' are completely different things. Separate entities if you will.;)

They are devious c*nts, no doubts about it.
VB 100% it’s all in the language they use. They have been careful not to lie, but careful not to tell the truth either.
 

Barca Bear

Well-Known Member
What a shock eh?
And reports at attempted bullying of smaller clubs into agreeing with the SPFL......again, no shock there
Maybe some not so small. B.
the delay in replying to our proposal indicates either they don’t want our input as the overall decisions are already made.
or there’s no legal people involved and their just blustering along.
 

tvitch

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
Can someone explain to me what the point is of us having Stewart Robertson on the SPFL board? It's not fucking doing us any good.
 
Top