1,814 thoughts on “Charles Green – What Will Football’s Authorities Do?”

1. 
   

   2nd sentence had me laughing!!
2. 
   

   doncaster must surely now be replaced asap his position is completely untenable.
3. 
   

   By taking this course surely Greene is seriously damaging the chances of NewClub being fast-tracked to SPL2. Players have been hinting strongly that they have been told NewClub wont have to climb through the divisions. Will the authorities and the clubs still see financial incentives as more important than integrity? Especially as armegeddon hasn’t quite started yet.
4. 
   

   This was written before Paul’s piece above and hopefully does not take away from the import of the dissembling of the CG propoganda as described above.

   Good Evening,

   Somebody somewhere once said that September would be an interesting month……………..

   Charles Hardin Holley ( with an e ) was born in Lubbock Texas on September 7th 1936.. so just a few days ago would have been his 76th Birthday. Of course by the time he tragically died in a plane crash ( with J.P. “The Big Bopper” Richardson and Richie Valens ) on 3rd February 1959 the world knew him as simply Buddy Holly.

   The change of name came about because his family simply referred to him as “Buddy”, and when Decca records signed him and his band up to their label in 1955 they misspelled his name as “Holly”— with the reult that the world got Buddy Holly — although in truth he was still Charles Hardin Holley.

   It just goes to show you that you can actually have two legal names at once and still be the same person.

   Today, in an astonishing statement, Mr Charles Green of The Rangers Football Club issued a statement where he mirrored Buddy Holly— he seeks to persuade the world that his company can have one name but be two legal people!

   We are Rangers… We are Not Rangers…. yes we are Rangers…. just not the Rangers with the debts… we are The Rangers who are debt free. We are not part of the SPL, but we own the titles that the SPL awarded to someone else entirely who were called…… well Rangers…… and if the SPL, who issued those titles, in any way decide to take those titles away from that other somebody who is or was called Rangers…. then we will not be giving them up because they belong to us…. The Rangers…….and we will not be going to any legal hearings about this issue……. but if there is a decision which we don’t like then we will be appealing to the courts against the decision which we were not party to and which may well have not been against us at all but against that other Rangers… because……. well…… just because……ok?

   Mr Green’s statement today is one of the strangest statements I have ever seen given that it is supposedly made after he had taken extensive legal advice.

   Let’s just look at some of what he said today:

   “The club ceased to be subject to the SPL’s rules when it was ejected from its league,” he said.

   “Our lawyers have made that point repeatedly to the SPL in correspondence and yet our requests for an explanation from the SPL have been completely ignored. The SPL’s silence on these issues is deafening.

   “The outcome of the SPL’s process will have no legal effect.”

   He goes on:

   “”To make it crystal clear, the new owners purchased all the business and assets of Rangers, including titles and trophies.

   “Any attempt to undermine or diminish the value of those assets will be met with the stiffest resistance, including legal recourse.”

   and

   “As far as I am concerned, Rangers Football Club has won a world record 54 league titles, and, whatever the decision of the SPL commission, these titles cannot and will not be taken away from us and our Manager Ally McCoist is in total agreement.”

   Quite separately Mr Green berates the five way agreement, seemingly implying that the agreement includes some kind of deal on EBT’s and the relevant sanctions:

   “”What compounds the breathtaking hypocrisy of the SPL in this whole saga, is that the SFA, the SPL and us – as the new owners – took part in numerous discussions regarding the new company’s league status during which it was made clear that a deal was there to be done where ‘the EBT issue’ would be dealt with as part of a package of sanctions which would be implemented in return for membership of the SFA and a place in either the SPL or Division One.

   “We do not accept that people who are willing to come to an agreement on such matters then have a right to instigate a full blown inquisition when matters do not unfold as they thought they would.

   “In our view, it beggars belief that an authority which can be heavily involved in these discussions to the point that the chief executive Neil Doncaster repeatedly stated he was not interested in stripping titles from Rangers can lurch from that position to setting up its own commission under the chairmanship of Lord Nimmo Smith.”

   Now follow me if you will:

   Imagine you buy a watch from a man selling watches from a tray in a street market. You have paid the price, and you have the watch. Then imagine the police come to the door and let you know that the man had stolen the watch, that it was not legally his to sell and so they demand that you hand the watch over to them for return to the rightful owner.

   Well it would appear that if you are Mr Green you will refuse to hand it over and go to court. yet you cannot obtain a good title from someone who does not have a good title to give in the first place.

   Further, imagine that when you buy the watch from the man in the street, you already know that he is under investigation for obtainig watches illegally. You can’t even argue that you have been duped in that case because you already know that any title proffered by the seller may well be flawed.

   That is where Charles Green stands with regard to the question of titles.

   Except that it is even worse than that– because the hearing starting tomorrow is an investigation into matters which took place before his company even existed, and concerns the winning of competitions by a team called Rangers who the Governing body presumed at the time had acted within the rules.

   It now appears that there is every possibility that at the material time, the team called Rangers did not act within the rules at all and so the SPL, as the governing body and the perpetual proprietors of the SPL title must act within the Rules of football and review the results.

   Now, if Charles Green is the owner of the same club that participated in those championships, then he is undoubtedly under the jurisdiction of the SPL– because what the panel is investigating is the conduct of Rangers in the relevant seasons, and saying that they have no jurisdiction because Green’s Rangers are in SFL 3 is a really very poor legal argument.

   If the SPL were investigating season 2011-2012 would Dunfermiline not be subject to the SPL jurisdiction because they had been relegated?

   That makes no sense.

   Further, in referring to the titles as “Their titles” and talking about resisting their being stripped of the same titles– Green shows no clear understanding of the law– a law that is very clear and very simple.

   First– the title belongs to the SPL. In any one year, the SPL award that title to the team that amasses the most points over the football year— provided they play within the rules!!!

   Forget who Rangers are, might be, could be, should be or were— If the team called Rangers did not comply with the rules, and actually broke the rules– with the result that all results that were so obtained have to be reversed and replaced with a 0-3 scoreline—- then the simple fact is that no team called Rangers won anything– and any ward of a title to anyone using that name under such circumstances is totally and legally invalid!

   Further, as the owner of the SPL title is in fact the SPL, then that same SPL has every legal right to withdraw its award of Champions to any team — it it can be shown that the award was gained by way of illegal actions on the part of that team or a false pretence being made by that team or its management.

   The titles do not belong to “Rangers”– they were supposedly won by “Rangers”— but if they broke the rules– then they weren’t won at all.

   It really is that simple.

   The statement today shows that Mr Green has no real undertanding of the law— or that he is simply choosing to ignore the law and running away from it.

   He can’t afford to go to any Tribunal and have a high court judge declare that Rangers the original club are dead– and he and others can’t afford to go to the court and answer questions about EBT’s, payments, dual contracts or anything else.

   In short, what the days statement confirms is that you can run but you cannot hide from the law.

   You can make all sorts of public proclamations, and even have the papers print them as if they were gospel, but the fact remains that when the facts and circumstances are placed before any court or tribunal, a legal ruling will ensue and it is likely that any such ruling will not be to the liking of Mr Green, Mr Whyte or Mr Murray.

   Perhaps Mr Green’s legal team have already been told that they will have no right of audience at tomorrow’s hearing– as after all his company was not a party to any of the contracts under discussion and they were not registered with the SFA or SPL at the relevant time.

   Obviously Mr Green would not want the potential share buying public to hear that.

   No– Mr Green’s statement was made after he took some legal advice– and that advice told him he was behind the eight ball without a cue.

   Perhaps he should heed the advice of Mr Sonny Curtis…………… Sonny Who?

   Well following Buddy Holly’s death, Sonny Curtis– a lifelong friend of Holly’s— took his place with the Crickets, taking lead vocal and playing lead guitar.

   A year after Buddy’s death, the band released their first album without him, and called it “In style with the Crickets”.

   Mr Green should note that they were no longer Buddy Holly and the Crickets,…….. just the crickets. Similar…. but just not the same.

   He should also note that on that album was a Sonny Curtis penned composition which would later be recorded by Bobby Fuller, The Clash, The Dead Kennedys, Bryan Adams, John Cougar Mellencamp, Bruce Springsteen, Roy Orbison, Tom Petty, Social Distortion, Mike Ness, Hank Williams Jr, Waylon Jennings, the Nitty Gritty Dirt Band, Green Day, The Ramones, Grateful Dead, Stray Cats, Mary’s Danish, Mano Negra, the Big Dirty Band, Lolita No. 18, The Brian Jonestown Massacre, Attaque 77, Die Toten Hosen, Status Quo, Nanci Griffith, and finally and most poignantly. by a band called………………… The Men They Couldn’t Hang!

   They all had their own reasons for recording the song and sending out its core message;

   I fought the law… and the law won!
5. 
   

   Two things. To anyone who saw the first post, I know that Charkes is not the correct spelling! I have changed it.

   Secondly, my thoughts on D&P’s statement are at the link below. Not to say that they are spinning like mad to suit Mr Green, but, as was once commented on a memo returned to Jim Hacker in “Yes Minister” “Round Objects”. Of course Sir Humphrey’s response was “Who is Round, and to what does he object?”

   Enjoy – http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/09/10/duff-and-phelps-are-right-behind-charles-green-with-friends-like-that/
6. 
   

   Apologies for repost – put this up at the tail end of previous blog – thank you Paulsatim for the heads up:

   The governing bodies do everything they can to get you fast tracked into the top flight. It doesn’t work due to massive fan backlash.

   Same governing bodies speak of imminent league restructuring – which would get you fast tracked into the top flight – but the public’s having none of that either.

   So how do you treat these governing bodies which have done everything they can (including not doing much that they should have) to get you fast tracked into the top flight?

   You ridicule them. You taunt them. You undermine their already-low credibility to the extent that their continued operation is virtually untenable.

   And yet the governing bodies do nothing.

   So the governing structure of Scottish football collapses, along with the existing league system.

   A new governing body is formed, with a whole new league structure, and (wouldn’t you know it!) you get fast-tracked into the top flight.

   Ta-daa!
7. 
   

   wow.what a defence arguement..i did NOT have sex with that woman ———>
   is this a credible defence?
   sounds like chuck woke up with the white beard and mucky dress.
8. 
   

   brth @22.41 how could you forget the pogues 😉
9. 
   

   Alberto Contador taught Green all he knows.

   Shamelessly stolen from KDS

   http://bicycling.com/blogs/thisjustin/2012/09/10/contador-drug-ban-tours-still-count-for-me/?cm_mmc=Twitter-_-Bicycling-_-Content-Blog-_-tours%20still%20count
10. 
    

    Charles Green is one of the worst people ever to have been involved in the Scottish game. He is taking NewCo and it’s fanatical followers to a place from where they may never return. He is driving a wedge between us and them, that I fear will prove unmovable.

    This new organisation and its foster support now firmly believe they have been treated unfairly. It is obvious to all others that the organisations that run and regulate the game have conived and twisted the rules to ensure they are kept happy and the money they spend on their obsession is not lost to other recreational activities.

    It is all but proven that the OldCo broke the rules in the competitions they took part in. As such the competition’s records will be changed to reflect this, once it is confirmed they are guilty. Charles Green is playing an extremely dangerous game. In his quest to increase his personal wealth, he is feeding his followers a diet of lies and untruths. He is taking them to place from where their bitterness may not allow them to return.

    The dislike between the two groups can only get wider, regardless of the outcome. A permanent divorce between both parties looks increasingly like the only safe option.

    For us, I can still see a future. A less wealthy future, but a relatively happy future. I don’t see any happy future for them. I can only see a sad lonely period followed by a premature death.

    I don’t think Scotland’s national game will ever be the same again. It has been mismanaged by weak minded cowards and ripped apart by venture capitalists and glory hunters.
11. 
    

    This Sevco Rangers farce has gone way too far now.

    Just who the hell is going to speak up on behalf of Scottish football?

    I despair – but at least watching Murray win the first set is giving me hope.

    Maybe found my new Scottish sporting interest..
12. 
    

    Does Charles have Regan and Doncaster by the short and curlies ?
    Is he prepared to expose their corrupt practice if he doesnt get things his own way
    How would the bears react if he brought the entire structure of our game to its knees ?
    My guess is they would be in raptures
    Mr Green isnt smart imo ,Mr Green is dangerous ,
    He’s poison , he doesnt give a hoot for Rfc ,Rfc* or Scottish football , He has no respect for
    anyone or anything and will backstab and threaten anyone who gets in his way .
    This is a man who upon entering Ibrox threatened to graze sheep on the pitch if it was more profitable for him than playing football . This is a man who applauded the support when they chanted about hating the SFA. This is a man who is prepared to whip up the emotions of the knuckle dragging element within the support by playing the bogit card , a card he has no understanding of the depths of feelings that can release . This is a man who accuses other clubs of hatred .
    This man is a dog and the police should blow the whistle on his politics.
13. 
    

    Are we nearing ‘NUCLEAR’ 🙂
14. 
    

    Seems Mr Green is intent on biting the hand that feeds him. For a Chairman of a club that, under normal rules, would be in the lowest tier of the game rather than having thr rules bent to accommodate your existence, Mr Green clearly doesn’t apreciate the favours extended to him. Is this the point that any remaining goodwill that the SFA / SPL /SFL had for the new club evaporates?
    A club that continue to demonstrate no humility, no honour or no dignity in the face of some of the most damning indictments seen anywhere in football. An absolute disgrace.
    But as Jim Traynor said tonight …they’ve been punished enough!!!! The master has spoken and dog wags his tail.
15. 
    

    How many of these have been used by Rangers – in whatever form?
    http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/06/02/defending_the_indefensible_a_how_to_guide

    Defending the indefensible: a how-to guide

    Powerful states often do bad things. When they do, government officials and sympathizers inevitably try to defend their conduct, even when those actions are clearly wrong or obviously counterproductive. This is called being an “apologist,” although people who do this rarely apologize for much of anything.

    Some readers out there may aspire to careers in foreign policy, and you may be called upon to perform these duties as part of your professional obligations. Moreover, all of us need to be able to spot the rhetorical ploys that governments use to justify their own misconduct. To help students prepare for future acts of diplomatic casuistry, and to raise public consciousness about these tactics, I offer as a public service this handy 21-step guide: “How to Defend the Indefensible and Get Away With It.” The connection to recent events is obvious, but such practices are commonplace in many countries and widely practiced by non-state actors as well.

    Here are my 21 handy talking-points when you need to apply the whitewash:

    1. We didn’t do it! (Denials usually don’t work, but it’s worth a try).

    2. We know you think we did it but we aren’t admitting anything.

    3. Actually, maybe we did do something but not what we are accused of doing.

    4. Ok, we did it but it wasn’t that bad (“waterboarding isn’t really torture, you know”).

    5. Well, maybe it was pretty bad but it was justified or necessary. (We only torture terrorists, or suspected terrorists, or people who might know a terrorist…”)

    6. What we did was really quite restrained, when you consider how powerful we really are. I mean, we could have done something even worse.

    7. Besides, what we did was technically legal under some interpretations of international law (or at least as our lawyers interpret the law as it applies to us.)

    8. Don’t forget: the other side is much worse. In fact, they’re evil. Really.

    9. Plus, they started it.

    10. And remember: We are the good guys. We are not morally equivalent to the bad guys no matter what we did. Only morally obtuse, misguided critics could fail to see this fundamental distinction between Them and Us.

    11. The results may have been imperfect, but our intentions were noble. (Invading Iraq may have resulted in tens of thousands of dead and wounded and millions of refugees, but we meant well.)

    12. We have to do things like this to maintain our credibility. You don’t want to encourage those bad guys, do you?

    13. Especially because the only language the other side understands is force.

    14. In fact, it was imperative to teach them a lesson. For the Nth time.

    15. If we hadn’t done this to them they would undoubtedly have done something even worse to us. Well, maybe not. But who could take that chance?

    16. In fact, no responsible government could have acted otherwise in the face of such provocation.

    17. Plus, we had no choice. What we did may have been awful, but all other policy options had failed and/or nothing else would have worked.

    18. It’s a tough world out there and Serious People understand that sometimes you have to do these things. Only ignorant idealists, terrorist sympathizers, craven appeasers and/or treasonous liberals would question our actions.

    19. In fact, whatever we did will be worth it eventually, and someday the rest of the world will thank us.

    20. We are the victims of a double-standard. Other states do the same things (or worse) and nobody complains about them. What we did was therefore permissible.

    21. And if you keep criticizing us, we’ll get really upset and then we might do something really crazy. You don’t want that, do you?

    Repeat as necessary.
16. 
    

    Your absolutely right Brenda…………Time for someone to push the button.
17. 
    

    One has to stand back and admire the audacity of Mr Green. His statement is the epitome of that most ubiquitous of school playground cries “it’s my baw!”. Surely Mr Green can’t think that by indulging in the most gratuitous ‘whataboutery’ and name-calling he will benefit his new club in any way. Either he is seeking his (and his club’s) speedy downfall with the “come ahead, I’ll take every one of you on” approach or he seriously believes that it is, in fact, his baw. I’m inclined to think the former.
18. 
    

    I have been trying to read up in the SFA’s articles of association, the SPL’s articles, and the Judicial Panel Protocol.

    The Judicial panel is the creation of the SFA.
    The Compliance Officer is a creation of the SFA.
    There is no scope ( it seems to me) for the SPL to lay charges.

    The Compliance Officer would be the one to do that, on a reference from the SPL, perhaps.

    But the charges would be against Sevco/Rangers AS members of the SFA, not as members of the SPL.

    So Charlie boy is, perhaps, technically right , when he argues that the SPL have no jurisdiction, no power to bring charges against a non-SPL member.

    But that is irrelevant, because the SFA do have jurisdiction!

    Even if it was some daft bugger in the SPL who brought the charges , then that can quickly be rectified by Vincent Lunny swiftly taking ownership of the charge sheet on behalf of the SFA, since Sevco/Rangers are ( however illicitly) members of the SFA ,and are required to accept its jurisdiction, under penalty if they fail to do so, and it was SFA articles that were (allegedly) breached….

    Likewise, the SFA can approach the Court to seek to compel D&P, as officers of the Court, to release documents etc that relate to the past actions of the directors of the club that are material to the circumstances that led to the club’s insolvency .

    I don’t know who CG uses as lawyers, but I don’t think their advice is terribly sound.

    (brought forward )
19. 
    

    No question I think that, as someone forecast yesterday (apols for poor memory), we are seeing a defense strategy kicking in here in advance of what Green and others know is bad news coming in the near future. Maybe more than one lot of bad news.

    Consequently I don’t think we should analyse his most recent comments too much and give them more credence because they are so much of a diversionary tactic.

    It appears the real fun is about to start. Then we can have some serious debate about consequences, next steps and so on. And there’ll be some blood on the walls at the end for sure.
20. 
    

    Brenda @ 23:04

    We could be heading for Defcon 1
21. 
    

    Always thought the nuclear stuff was about individuals rather than the club. Green’s statement is simply rabble rousing of the lunatic fringe before the bad news starts to come thick and fast.
22. 
    

    The whole thing is a blatant smoke screen designed to get the majority of people to accept a lie hidden within the bulldroppings.

    You’ve all missed it.

    Sevco are claiming they have purchased RFC Plc’s league titles.

    Duff & Duffer have colluded in the lie that league titles are assets that can be bought and sold.

    Without doubt Sevco will have taken legal advice and know that RFC Plc’s misdeeds will not go unpunished. They’ll already know the oldco doesn’t have a leg to stand on and will be expecting that the oldco’s league title wins will be reduced from 54.

    In knowing this they’re going for a bit of sleight of hand.

    They’re trying to convince the world that the titles are owned by Sevco and that when judgement is handed down that it’ll be against their will but will then spin the further lie that it’s all okay and that they now have, say, 44 titles.

    The fact remains.

    They have 0 titles.

    None.

    Nada.

    Zilch.

    Zero.

    Don’t fall for the smoke and mirrors that’ll fool the morons that support the Sevco myth.

    The facts remain, you can’t buy league titles. They don’t pass over to a newco when an oldco liquidates. There is no continuation of Rangers.

    The die have been cast and it’s obvious to anyone who is willing to look hard enough.

    They have been beaten already, the bampots have beat them.

    They’re now just fighting to get the morons to believe that none of it happened.

    That is all fine. Keep buying the tickets. Keep buying the replica strips. Keep buying.

    Nothing to see here. Move along.

    Well all I can say is this.

    We aren’t as stupid as your target audience Mr. Green.

    You’re Sevco can change it’s name all it likes, you can change it to Bare Ar$e Alona if you wan’t but we all know that you’ve started an new venture and the new venture has no history, has no cups, has no way to make us believe the lies you’re peddling.

    Stupid Sevco.
23. 
    

    The SFA have gone – the SPL have gone – there is no-one left running the shop. Thieves and vagabonds are now trading from the shattered shop front using the stock that the owners have abandoned to line their own pockets – and now they want a start up grant from the powers that be to fix up the broken shop and buy some more stolen goods.
24. 
    

    Green does appear to be dangerous ! He tried the same thing in Sheffield !

    BTW, Many thanks Paul for the post’s ! Really appreciated and eagerly awaited !

    Personally speaking, IMHO, I got the impression Green is running scared, closely followed by D&D.

    Something is in the wind that they don’t like, thus the reactions today !

    Unfortunately, also IMHO, Green is not in Sheffield ! Glasgow is different from Sheffield !!!

    Don’t we have new S£ctarianism laws up here now ?

    I’ve read about the idiot’s being charged at Brechin & Peterhead for their chanting in the papers, but is there not also a law about “Inciting” S£ctarianism ?

    Appears to me that is what Green is trying to do !

    His statement today was totally ridiculous and pompous. The SFA & SPL, again IMHO, now have an open goal against this Charade.

    Who is going to step up and take the final penalty towards an open goal ?

    Messr’s Reagan & Doncaster, there’s nothing to stop you taking a penalty EACH into an open goal.

    Why not try and Unite Scottish Football by taking a PROPER STANCE !

    Nip this in the bud NOW !

    That way, you might just gain some respect in this Country, and proper Fan’s might even consider coming back to watch.

    I would, especially after the way Green spoke about you both today ! Or are you both going to keep your heads down as usual tomorrow !

    Men or Mice, eh ?

    Ach, to be honest, I don’t even know why I’m appealing to these 2 hypochrits to try and sort out Our National Game and apply “The Rules” !

    p.s. I was criticised previously for questioning Lord Nimmo Smiths impartiality / “being lent on from above”. Will be interesting to see the verdict after Green & D&D’s statements today.

    Surely their statements must have pressed a few buttons in the wrong places today ?

    Not so much “Armageddon” but “Implosion” !
25. 
    

    Listening to podcasts as my nerves are completely shot from Murray’s match.

    Traynor on Sportsound more or less came down on the side of appeasement. Must be trying to boost sales for tomorrow’s Record.

    Clyde1 presenters are confused but actually let a couple of excellent callers on who knew their stuff. It was encouraging to hear them agreeing with the bright callers who had their finger on the pulse.

    Green is seriously off his trolley, but if his intimidation works I’m afraid I will be with those who say that Scottish football is, in fact, deid.

    PS Go Andy Murray!!
26. 
    

    It’s been a long day. And all I don’t need is the possibility that I have completely misread the situation! ( I’ve just been reading the DR online account of CG’s statement)

    I am well open to correction here, but there’s absolutely nothing in the SPL’s articles that seems to relate to matters of disciplining a member, let alone a non-member.

    For the sake of my sanity, will someone show me where the SPL have the power to appoint a judicial commission, separate from the SFA’s judicial tribunal?

    If they have such power, then for the first time in my life I will have to agree with Chick Young that there are two too many authorities in the administration of scottish football.

    And to agree with him on anything other than the joys of sailing would kill me!
27. 
    

    Completely agree with this post, which hits several nails on the head

    The Sheep says:
    September 10, 2012 at 22:59
    16 0 Rate This
    Charles Green is one of the worst people ever to have been involved in the Scottish game. He is taking NewCo and it’s fanatical followers to a place from where they may never return. He is driving a wedge between us and them, that I fear will prove unmovable.

    This new organisation and its foster support now firmly believe they have been treated unfairly. It is obvious to all others that the organisations that run and regulate the game have conived and twisted the rules to ensure they are kept happy and the money they spend on their obsession is not lost to other recreational activities.

    It is all but proven that the OldCo broke the rules in the competitions they took part in. As such the competition’s records will be changed to reflect this, once it is confirmed they are guilty. Charles Green is playing an extremely dangerous game. In his quest to increase his personal wealth, he is feeding his followers a diet of lies and untruths. He is taking them to place from where their bitterness may not allow them to return.

    The dislike between the two groups can only get wider, regardless of the outcome. A permanent divorce between both parties looks increasingly like the only safe option.

    For us, I can still see a future. A less wealthy future, but a relatively happy future. I don’t see any happy future for them. I can only see a sad lonely period followed by a premature death.

    I don’t think Scotland’s national game will ever be the same again. It has been mismanaged by weak minded cowards and ripped apart by venture capitalists and glory hunters.
28. 
    

    In Green’s statement has he not said he was willing to accept sanction’s for spl/div1 admittance so surely he was admitting guilt but now he want’s to put up a fight because the bampot’s told him to gtf when he would sold part of thier history for spl silver
29. 
    

    ‘The Rangers’ continuing to do what RFC(IL) did better than any other club: generating negative goodwill.
30. 
    

    Charlie Green is basically calling out the SPL and SFA, either they keep quiet and pretty much accept Greens dominance over them, or they come out and implicate themselves in corruption, collusion and secret deals. Doncaster and Regan will both resign by the end of the football season.
    Scottish Football left embarrassed as usual.
31. 
    

    Can Green be done for reset, after all he bought trophies that were gained illegally?
32. 
    

    Would it not be a lot easier if Green just admitted that his club – The Rangers – are a new club with 0 titles, changed the badge and removed the five stars? Better still, can’t the SFA grow a pair of balls and tell him how it really is? We all know it.
33. 
    

    Ordinary Fan says:
    September 11, 2012 at 00:16

    Charlie Green is basically calling out the SPL and SFA,
    ————————–
    Over in RM, they’re all hailing Green as a hero. How can they be so stupid. This statement by Green could be the death-knell for TRFC and the passport to Green’s fortune.

    Is there no one out there who could explain this to them. Where are the intelligent RFC Old/New peepil?
34. 
    

    I go to bed, content that at last our football authorities, however reluctantly, are now forced to summon up the courage to act decisively against the club that Green maintains is the old Rangers.

    Failure to do so will entail the de facto dissolution of the SFA, and the necessity for honest clubs to form themselves into a new association- minus Sevco- if they want to continue in business.

    If there is a serious split, it will be the equivalent of the ‘Great Disruption’, with disputes as to which association should be recognised by Uefa, and who gets Hampden!

    The SFA really, really, all kidding and swanking aside, must deal with this most pernicious CG and his cohorts, and with the remnants of the legal entity that is RFC(IA).

    The whole episode has been an absolute piece of nonsense from beginning to end, caused, I believe, by the malign historic influence of a handful of people in positions of authority, aided and abetted by such ‘commentators’ as Jabba and his ilk, and by BBC Radio Scotland.

    Bad, and doubly bad cess to them.

    And now, a very good night to you all.
35. 
    

    Off topic guys.

    Murray’s bottle crashed?

    Hope not but not looking good 🙁
36. 
    

    Easy explanation on Green !

    He’s been watching “The Men Who Stare at Goats”.
37. 
    

    In my humble opinion, this entire fiasco could be put to bed with one simple statement from the SFA. That being “The Rangers are a NEW club”. Now, given that this statement is an established fact, why has that not yet happened?
    All of the misunderstandings surrounding the demise of ‘old’ Rangers and the subsequent consequences and punishments would become immediately apparent, to even the most cognitively dissonant.
    Once those duped supporters of The Rangers realise what the guardians of their beloved ‘old’ Rangers have done to them, even the most loyal may rebel and there will be hell to pay.
    Mr Green is doing a very good job of kicking them while they’re down.
    Jabba and his sycophantic minions are not helping them either.
38. 
    

    john clarke says:
    September 11, 2012 at 00:00
    0 0 Rate This
    It’s been a long day. And all I don’t need is the possibility that I have completely misread the situation! ( I’ve just been reading the DR online account of CG’s statement)

    I am well open to correction here, but there’s absolutely nothing in the SPL’s articles that seems to relate to matters of disciplining a member, let alone a non-member.

    For the sake of my sanity, will someone show me where the SPL have the power to appoint a judicial commission, separate from the SFA’s judicial tribunal?

    If they have such power, then for the first time in my life I will have to agree with Chick Young that there are two too many authorities in the administration of scottish football.

    And to agree with him on anything other than the joys of sailing would kill me!
    ================================================

    http://www.scotprem.com/content/mediaassets/doc/RULES%20EFFECTIVE%2016%20JULY%202012%20(CLEAN).pdf

    Agreement on compliance with applicable rules, statutes and regulations
    A7.1.1 Membership of the League shall constitute an agreement between the Company and each Club, and between each of the Clubs, to be bound by and to comply with:
    (a) these Rules and the Articles of Association;
    (b) the SFA Articles and the statutes and regulations of UEFA and FIFA;
    (c) the Laws of the Game; and
    (d) the terms of the Settlement Agreement insofar as such terms apply to the members of the League for that Season.
    A7.1.2 Nothing in these Rules shall relieve any member of the Company from its obligations as a full member club of the SFA to comply with the applicable SFA Articles for so long as it remains a member of SFA.
    A7.2 Such agreement shall have effect from the date of the Club’s admission to the League and terminate upon the Club ceasing to be a member thereof (but without prejudice to any rights or claims which may have arisen or arise in respect of circumstances prior to such date and to any Rules which, by their terms, establish rights and obligations applicable after such date).

    and

    Power of Inquiry and Determination
    G1.1 The Board and, where appointed by the Board, a Commission, shall have the power of inquiry into all financial, contractual and other arrangements within, between and/or amongst Clubs and Players and all matters concerning compliance with the Financial Disclosure Requirements and into all matters constituting or pertaining to any suspected or alleged breach of or failure to fulfill the Rules by any Club, Club Official and/or Player or any matter considered by the Board or, where appointed by the Board, a Commission, to be relevant to an Adjudication or an Appeal and every Club and Club Official and Player shall be liable to and shall afford every assistance to the Board or, as the case may be Commission, as may be requested or required of it or him.
39. 
    

    Conversation in Barlinnie

    “Hector”
    ,,,,,,,
    “Yes Minty”?
    ,,,,,,,,,,
    “I`ve got something to tell you”
    ,,,,,,,,,,
    “Tell me all about it Minty”.
    “Well Hector , It’s a long story, I`ll start at the beginning
    In 2009 I decided to sell a Football Club. My first step was to visit an Old Folks Home in Saltcoats.
    it was called “The Whyte House” or something like that. I remember it was very well built. Solid brick I think. Reminded me of sleeping rough in Burntisland
    Anyway, I managed to persuade 14 residents to let me use their name as Directors in 14 different shell companies I was setting up. The plan was to invest in buying STs from Rangers The idea was to avoid paying tax on dividends from my steel companies.”
    “Mmmm ……..Steal Companies”? said Hector “I don’t like the sound of that. I hope you were stealing from poor people and not from Her Majesty”
    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
    “Anyway said Hector,” What happened next”?
    “Well” said Minty
    “ It was a great wheeze for a couple of years”
    “You see Hector . Investing in Ticketus gives poor millionaires like me 30% tax relief because they are putting money into risky companies. But because I owned the risky company I could make sure my investment was free of risk”
    “That’s a great wheeze” said Hector. “In fact it`s so great I think it might be illegal. Is this why you asked to see me in Barlinnie? Are you worried about going to the bad fire?
    “Not really “ said Minty “When Celtic humped us 6-2 I stopped worrying about the bad fire and started worrying about MON
    “My big problem happened on 6 Aug 2012 when Octopus did a press release. They inadvertently revealed that the 14 companies who had been investing in Ticketus since 2009 were the same 14 companies that invested in the Craig Whyte scam”
    “Thats interesting” said Hector “Does that mean that you have not just been scamming Lizzie on EBTS but you have also been scamming her on these EIS thingies run by Ticketus “?
    “Well you would have to check out the Old Folks Home at Saltcoats “ said Minty
    “Maybe the residents are legally to blame for cheating Lizzie.”
    Anyway, I need to tell somebody that Octopus are working hard to cover up the scam. They are planning to put Ticketus into liquidation later in the year and move the money to an in house company called Fern Trading. They have created an internal floating charge that means the money can be paid back to the 14 companies. That way Ticketus and the 14 companies can be wound up and nobody will know what happened to the money. When these companies vanish, the residents from the Whyte House will get their Directorships cancelled and poor Lizzie will be done yet again
    “Is there any way I can check this story ? said Hector
    Well said Minty
    You could try this link
    http://www.octopusinvestments.com
    and search for “Rangers”
    “It tells you Ticketus investment in Rangers is currently 15 % of total Ticketus investment and that the 14 companies who put money into Rangers STs in 2011 through Ticketus have been doing so for 3 years ie since I announced my intention to sell a football club”
    and you could try this link
    http://bizzy.co.uk/uk/OC341356/ticketus-llp
    it tells you that on 14 March 2012 Fern Trading Ltd took out a Floating Charge over all the assets of Ticketus
    Meaning
    Octopus had decided by 14 March 2012 to liquidate Ticketus and move their assets to Fern Trading Ltd That way Octopus could fudge the repayment of monies to the 14 companies who invested in Rangers STs from season 2009-2010 to season 2011-202
    “That’s very interesting” said Hector
    “Why are you telling me this now”?
    “ Cos if I don`t tell you the Bampots will”, said Minty
    “Just like they told everybody about Craig Whyte

    You can`t keep anything secret nowadays”
40. 
    

    I can’t help but think the club is deploying the Lance Armstrong defence here, strangely aided and abetted by D&P (who surely should have kept a dignified silence on the whole issue).

    The LA approach has been to claim a witch-hunt against him and refuse to answer to the investigation. Years and years of blood, sweat and toil being stripped from the history books, the loss of many hard-fought titles and honours. Wow. He’s really giving all that up rather than fight back? Just how bad is the alternative? Well that alternative sees all the evidence being laid out for public scrutiny and LA having to answer to it. Oh, and a book exposing the systematic cheating (actively lead by LA) in all good book shops. Sound familiar?

    Green is caught in a simple conundrum. Fans and club have denied any wrong-doing yet the club is announcing that it is not going to support an investigation. Others may well ask, If there is nothing to hide, then why hide?

    Well, if they help the investigation, they would have to answer to it, and the truth, you would think, will be outed. If they don’t help then they are at least making it as difficult as possible and there will no doubt be an argument that any judgement without their input must be flawed; yet more evidence of a witch-hunt.

    Interestingly though, the language seems to be focused around titles being stripped, as if the guilt is not really in doubt. Green could have made an obvious but difficult decision. He could have said if the titles are tainted then ‘take them back, we cannot have the proud club history sullied by titles won under a cloud of impropriety’.

    But he hasn’t. The harsh truth is that he had a credibility gap to plug to get fans through the turnstiles. It makes no difference to his business plan to have or not have these titles but more than anything what he needs is fans onside. In that context a simple, defiant message brings in much needed cash flow to keep the show on the road for a good while longer.

    Perhaps as importantly it also helps build that sense of esprit de corps between fans and owner as the victim mentality builds. The could help Green by keeping the fans compliant, perhaps, for example, helping to reduce the volume on valid questions around the timing and rationale for a share issue…?

    For Green to execute a float-and-run strategy that might be worth more than lawyers fees and SPL penalties.
41. 
    

    The utter crucifixion of this rebarbative mob can’t come soon enough for me. They really are a piece of work.
42. 
    

    Maybe it’s just me but, Green’s statement today is the biggest indicator yet that he is here only for a very short time frame.

    If the plan was to have The Rangers back in the SPL next season, he’s certainly going about making sure that would be vetoed at the first opportunity by the SPL.

    Perhaps Charlie Boy sees an exit door that is just too good to miss and in his excitement he is allowing the mask to slip a little. If ‘The Rangers’ fans can’t see that now then hell mend ’em.

    As for D&D …… please …… for the love of God ….. don’t anybody take away the shovel they are currently in possession of. 😉
43. 
    

    john clarke says:
    September 11, 2012 at 00:37
    11 0 Rate This

    Failure to do so will entail the de facto dissolution of the SFA, and the necessity for honest clubs to form themselves into a new association- minus Sevco- if they want to continue in business.
    ————

    Still up here, and I totally agree with this.

    In New York Murray struggling but back fighting in the 4th, though a break down.
44. 
    

    There was a chap on SSB tonight claiming Rangers are still Rangers and to justify this he explained that his wife had worked for the DR for 40yrs. In that time the paper had had several owners but at the end of the day it was still the DR, therefore the current owners could rightly lay claim to its history. A fair point and I couldn’t argee more with that statement but unfortunately what he failed to grasp is that it has always changed hands when it was a viable and on going business concern unlike Rangers who have gone into adminstration and will shortly be liquidated. There have been many anologies on how to explain this situation which so many Rangers supporters fail to grasp so let me offer this.

    In the hospitality trade it is common for hotels to change names, often more than once and they may even end back at the name it originally started with. This of course can be for marketing reasons, tax reasons or purely down the fact a new hotel chain has taken over the establishment and therefore their brand name will be used. As a young man working in Glasgow in the mid 70’s I attended what was the first of many functions in what I thought at the time was the most amazing hotel, none other than the famous Glasgow Central. Once the Albany in Bothwell St opened business started to shift and I slowly watched the decline over the years of what was once the best hotel in Glasgow. It changed ownership buy no matter who was operating the hotel they just didn’t have the necessary funds to to bring it up to scratch. There comes a point when even a lick of paint wont do and so unfortunately the last firm running the hotel went into adminstration and the hotel closed it’s doors in 2009 and the staff lost their jobs. The good news was that a group of investors saw the opportunity, bought the hotel and totally refurbished it and 2 years later it reopened as the Grand Central Hotel.

    It is still called the Central, but is it the same Hotel? It operates in the same building but it has new owners, staff, uniforms, bedrooms, function suites and restuarants. Let say for arguments sake there had been a cabinet filled with trophies at the old Central Hotel for awards won in previous years for services to tourism and customer service, could the new owners who bought a defunct business lay claim to these past awards ? I think not as they belonged to the former business that operated from that address, so to it is with Rangers and The Rangers they may operate from the same address and carry over goodwill from previous customers but they are starting afresh, a new business similar name and nae history. The building retains the history and the memories.

    Finally if I pop along to my local car boot/ junk shop and amongst the crap there is a trophy for a fishing competition stating “Best River Tay Fisherman 1975” and I purchase said cup, can I lay claim to it’s title!
45. 
    

    HirsutePursuit says:

    September 11, 2012 at 00:51

    Well done sir.
46. 
    

    Charles Green is a bit mad, isn’t he?

    I’d love to see him and Romanov in a stand up row.

    Oh aye – well down Andy Murray!
47. 
    

    Goosy says:
    September 11, 2012 at 00:52
    “””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
    So how many geese are to be cooked Goosy?
48. 
    

    longtimelurker says:
    September 11, 2012 at 00:40

    Off topic guys.
    Murray’s bottle crashed?
    Hope not but not looking good 🙁
    ===========================

    Oh ye of little faith ! 😉

    Agreed, it looked like it could have been a typical ‘Scottish football team-like’ result, i.e. snatching defeat from the jaws of victory…

    But the boy done very well.

    Unlike the relative amateurs of the Scotland team [+manager] – we now have a truly world class tennis player to cheer on.
49. 
    

    The test for fit and proper person should now include an appraisal from a psychiatrist or psychologist. The man’s bonkers – and if not proven, try the chancer for inciting civil unrest. He’s an insult to Scottish football.
50. 
    

    http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/top-football-stories/rangers-say-they-will-not-attend-spl-s-ebt-inquiry-1-2517283
51. 
    

    http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spl/st-mirren-owners-turn-down-bid-from-fans-1-2518119
52. 
    

    Was just about to say…………….

    Stunney……..Where’s the papers
53. 
    

    The SPL, through an independent Commission is investigating a club who was a member of the SPL up to June 2012. That’s fine.
    The independent Commission can report back to the SPL with its findings. That’s also fine.
    The SPL can report back to the SFA with its findings and recommendations. That’s also fine.
    One of the sanctions available to the Commission, the SPL and the SFA is expulsion of the club from the SFA. That’s also fine.

    Mr Green says that Rangers, as an SFL member, do not need to report to the SPL’s Commission. That’s also fine, they probably don’t.
    He is also correct that the SPL has no jurisdiction over Rangers as they are not an SPL member.

    But Rangers are a “conditional” SFA member and one of those conditions is to abide by decisions of the EBT/dual contracts investigations. Mr Green plays a very dangerous game – surely he will have received advice from his lawyers that termination of membership, whether for the EBT/dual contract offences, or the breach of conditions of membership, is a very real possibility?

    Is that about right?
54. 
    

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/rangers-snub-ebt-inquiry-and-threaten-legal-defence.18851447
55. 
    

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/fans-group-fail-in-st-mirren-bid.18849456
56. 
    

    Reading Stunney’s links (ta) and a few others – all the papers have so far only quoted Charlie’s statement – and that of Duff & Duffer.

    No comment. No opinion. No challenge to any of the content.

    MSM continue to be cowards – and continue to advertise their obsolescence.

    Internet Bampots know the truth!
57. 
    

    From the BBC website story

    However, Rangers now play in Division Three of the Scottish Football League after the old parent company headed for liquidation and the new company was denied entry to the SPL.

    Can any one in the BBC tell me the name of the old parent company ?
58. 
    

    Nice work if you can get it: 111 words. One hundred and eleven words. The Herald’s report about Mr. Charles’s statement is 851 words long. If you discard the words typed in by the Herald’s reporter and just leave in Mr. Charles’s words–and the initial paraphrasing thereof–you are left with some 740 words. Fair and balanced? Methinks the once-adequate Herald could teach Mr. Murdoch’s Fox News network a thing or two about the meaning of the word “subservient.”
59. 
    

    Goosy says:

    September 11, 2012 at 00:52

    Now you need to open up a School of Journalism to show the MSM how that is all done since apparently as they have shown today, they are only capable of doing their job by simply doing a cut and paste job on any press releases without any comments………however, your piece involved a bit of intelligence, logic and persistence – the difference is unreal and the end result just superb!
60. 
    

    It is vitally important to have the new co/old co – now and forever debate once and truely finished

    The reason is simply this

    It is important to the Bears on how they view events

    it is not important to others because it is deemed just banter from supporters

    To the Bears – it is important they know the truth – that there is/was no holding company and that CG is a heading a brand new football club.

    Reason it is important is this

    If you don’t accept the above, then everything that happened over the summer is indeed unfair

    if the holding club went out of business and not the football club, then they have every right to still be in the SPL.

    if the holding club went out of business and not the football club, then they have every right to wonder why they are in SFL3 since they are not a new SFA member

    if the holding club went out of business and not the football club, then they have every right to think everyone is having a sly kick at them

    if the holding club went out of business and not the football club, then they have every right to still be in eligible for UEFA tournaments.

    if the holding club went out of business and not the football club, then they have every right to still be in the CL qualifiers instead of Motherwell

    However the football club went out of business – there was no holding club

    Only then would the events make sense and the “been punished enough” debate turn to the consequences of the club going out of business

    Only then could we all move forward

    CG’s lies and inability of SFA/SPL to tell the truth and hold him accountabile is splitting us all into factions that will never come back together

    He has indeed split Scottish football with the SFA/SPL/SFL’s connivence.

    Apeasement is not an option
61. 
    

    clearly Green / Rangers has lsunched ‘Operation Scorched Earth’ with the intent to create further schisms, expose the leadership crisis at the spl and sfa, expose the hypocrites who failed rangers as they see it and who failed everyone else as everyone else sees it, basically if rangers are going down for these charges they will try to bring down the house on top of them and take others with them except by instigating the removal of doncaster and regan they will actually be doing scottish fitba a favour, for everybody’s sake we need a clear out at the top of scottish fitba.
62. 
    

    SKY SPORTS NEWS correctly proclaiming Murrays victory. Banner headline underneath , proclaiming Rangers refuse to attend meetiing. Were they ever invited???? Show us the invite Charlie !!
63. 
    

    “a deal was there to be done where ‘the EBT issue’ …..”
    “We do not accept that people who are willing to come to an agreement on such matters then have a right to instigate a full blown inquisition when matters do not unfold as they thought they would.”
    So they offered him a deal, he rejected it, but thinks they should have to stick to the terms offered?
    Charles Green – shout loud enough and people might just believe you’re right
64. 
    

    After Charles Green’s rediculous statement yesterday with regards to the impending SPL Commission into the EBT/Dual Contract Scandal by Rangers Football Club (In Administration) it is imperative that the Scottish Football Authorities deal with Sevco/Rangers Tribute Act without further delay.
    While the future of Sevco/Rangers Tribute Act is an insignificant matter, the future of Scottish Football must be secured.
65. 
    

    Hello All,

    I must say that enough is enough, please tell me why, on a Day like today, when every Scottish Person should be walking around the place with their heads held high with the thought of how the Hell, Scotland, yes, Scotland has a Olympic and US Open Champion Tennis, Andy Murray, ( incredible as it really is ), why do we allow ourselves to be continually embaressed by SEVCO, we have our National Game dragged thru the Mud yet again by the entity formally known as Rangers, when we really should just be celebrating the achievements of possibly Scotland Greatest ever Sportsman.

    Well done to Andy Murray, he has shown emotion and dignity in Defeat, but has come back fighting everytime to prove his worth to the Nation, and most importantly to himself.

    Shame on you CG and all at Sevco

    When are the MSM going to do the Nation and Themselves Justice by exposing what is really going on at Ibroke, Duff & Duffer et all ??

    If only the MSM had the balls of Andy Murray. ( and I am not refering to the velvet covered ones ! )
66. 
    

    Green’s purpose:
    – sell season books and shares
    – attempt to frame the punishment debate to titles and to set a marker down that there will be a legal challenge coming the SFA’s way, irrespective of the punishment.

    Green also highlighted SFA and SPL dithering over the EBT and dual contracts problem , thereby signalling if they come after the ‘titles’ he will rip into both SPL and SFA. However, his complaint appears to be that the authorities should have acted earlier in punishing Rgers … still if non payment of PAYE and Vat is next to match fixing then dual contracts you would think is match fixing. However, different legal minds will reach different conclusions. To keep the economics of Scottish football on the road , as the SFA see it then the following will happen:

    – titles removed
    – cups will then follow
    – all directors of the old club banned sin die
    – to avoid throwing them out the league and the resultant ‘economic’ loss , a new regime of financial and regulatory controls will be recommended to ensure that this ‘never happens again’
    – fines based on future SPL placings will be levied to account for the monies paid out in the cheating years

    Inquiry finished, move along
67. 
    

    Forgot to say, ” i will not be attending the Sherrif Court today to submit a defence for my delinquent son who as a similar name to me. I am not that person, never did the crimes he is accused of and therefore won’t serve the sentence handed out after evidence is heard. Come to think of it, i never recieved the summons from the court to attend.” I REFUSE to attend!!!!
    “Could one of my friends in the media attend in the public gallery and report back, missing out the true version of events and just report on the new suit purchased by my errant son ??
68. 
    

    First thoughts when reading CG’s statement: What a tool!

    Second thought: This is the beginning of the end for the SPL.
69. 
    

    CG on Radio Scotland this morning – amazingly blinkered performance. He has been well briefed – its clear to see the line of defence: EBT not illegal, their use published in the accounts etc.

    I get tthe feeling that they are digging in – that they know that a ill wind is blowing. He also mentioned FTTT decision towards end of September.

    There was much speculation about a nuclear event. I am glad that the nuclear button has not been pressed yet. Looking at the way the defence of RFC(IA)/Sevco is being mounted we may need a H Bomb (no pun intended) as it appears that the strategy for the defence of the club and their history is a fight to the death.
70. 
    

    StevieBC says:
    September 11, 2012 at 02:28
    8 0 Rate This
    longtimelurker says:
    September 11, 2012 at 00:40

    Off topic guys.
    Murray’s bottle crashed?
    Hope not but not looking good
    ===========================

    Oh ye of little faith !

    Agreed, it looked like it could have been a typical ‘Scottish football team-like’ result, i.e. snatching defeat from the jaws of victory…

    But the boy done very well.

    Unlike the relative amateurs of the Scotland team [+manager] – we now have a truly world class tennis player to cheer on.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Reverse psychology, spotted him looking at his phone at the end of the fourth set and et-viola! 😉

    Seriously I always knew he would do it, I did, no I did…

    PS, well done Andy.
71. 
    

    Senior says:
    September 11, 2012 at 08:41
    0 0 Rate This
    ‘Regarding this quote from Charles Green’s statement:
    “The decision we have taken has not been taken lightly. There are powerful representatives from Clubs within the SPL – not all of them by any means – who appear hell bent on inflicting as much damage on Rangers as possible’

    Mr Green has, by his recklessness, placed all representatives of clubs in the SPL in a very serious and dangerous position. Surely, if for no other reason they will react to safeguard themselves and their clubs – or have we lost all sense of reality.
72. 
    

    ““The club ceased to be subject to the SPL’s rules when it was ejected from its league,” Charles Green said
    ——————————-
    Maybe he should have a word with Joey Barton and see how the 12 match ban for Joey was still upheld after he moved to France.
    —————————————-
    Just so that we are all aware the SPL announced after their FIRST enequiry that there was a case to be answered on June 18th, they also announced that disciplinary charges would be brought BEFORE the start of the SPL season.
    I am positive Doncaster can tell us all the reason for this delay, maybe the hearing today could ask him.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18496571
    .
73. 
    

    I think we may be missing Charlies point here ,he is trying to buy some time as he needs this to empty the pockets of the followers and has to come up with something to bring them to do this ,hence the rant ,he knows the end is nigh but has not taken in what he expected to satisfy his backers ,that [financial] light you thought you seen was the end of the tunnel Charlie,wrong,its the Midnight Express hurtling towards Sevco .
74. 
    

    A few days back there were calls for the blog to take an alternative direction in respect to the Pro-Celtic / Anti-Sevco slant, there were some very good subject matters proposed for discussion on the Scottish Football Monitor. These matters should not be forgotten or pushed to the side, they should be aired and debated until a consensus of opinion is found on the best way forward.

    Unfortunately in life you have to define your priorities, family, work, finances etc.. Well TSFM is exactly the same and if yesterday’s statement from Mr. Green reminds of us (supporters of all clubs in Scotland) something, it is that we should not distinguish the flames on this specific fire just yet. In fact, I would say “feed it more oxygen!”.
75. 
    

    Desperate stuff from Green, but his business is now at the stage where he can’t afford to be seen to agree with any decision that hurts “Rangers”, as this will hurt the prospects of season ticket and share issue uptake from The Followers. Particularly when he may have no influence or input to any investigation, and especially when he is advised any verdict is likely to be bad news for The Followers whatever input he does make to the process.

    What has he got to lose by such an outburst against a process that is likely to hurt? Ruling out any compromise or cooperation means he will not be party to any punishments that result and will give him clean hands when he comes to offer shares to The Followers.

Comments are closed.