upgotheheads Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 John Brown and the rest of the Rangers Mafia keep peddling the idea that the Rangers squad is the best in the division. It isn't, but let's hope they keep believing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 (edited) John Brown on Sportscene tonight. Wonder who is in his firing line from the Beeb? Michael Stewart? Kenny Macintyre @bbckennymac ? 2h 2 hours ago #BBCSportsound - John Brown also attacks one of our pundits who has been critical of .@RangersFC manager Ally McCoist.Strong stuff #rangers Edited November 25, 2014 by DETTY29 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armageddon Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 1 down is 'Blizzard' Rangers ... 2 down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jammy T Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Is Bomber eating a Chinese takeaway meal whilst he is doing this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jammy T Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 As an aside the out pouring of vociferous support for McCoist this week is pleasing Completely ridiculous and idiotic But pleasing.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strachsuit Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Rangers ... 2 down Shouldn't that be Rangers 9 down? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Comedian Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Is Bomber eating a Chinese takeaway meal whilst he is doing this? He'll do that just before a 15 mile run. It's the Bomber way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indianajones Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Just look at Browns face FFS. What a complete cretin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Does he still have that old bloke's season ticket money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alva-Jambo Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Logically Sally should buy in Brown and play him with his other thugs. Brown can probably get them all playing better too. Though I'd rather see them out of football, that mucky lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musemic Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Hey Bomber - your team died. They are deceased. They are no more. It is an ex-team. Your pal Ally is manager of a new team barely 2 years old, don't expect too much of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboinglasgow Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Opium for ra peepul. I always love when former players attack current players for not having enough "passion." Because its the fact players are not "fired up enough" not the manager playing players out of position, not playing a style that suits the players etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 I always love when former players attack current players for not having enough "passion." Because its the fact players are not "fired up enough" not the manager playing players out of position, not playing a style that suits the players etc. They were fired up all right but fired up in thuggery. Shameful stuff from McCoist playing hoof ball and assault tactics that City Casuals would be proud of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Reagan (SPFL) in dialog with Ashley's men. "Rangers have a strong economic impact on Scottish" according to Reagan, it was that strong they went bust ya muppet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maroonlegions Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Reagan (SPFL) in dialog with Ashley's men. "Rangers have a strong economic impact on Scottish" according to Reagan, it was that strong they went bust ya muppet. Just watched that interview with Reagan and it stunk off we will do anything to manipulate them into the Premiership, they have been turning a blind eye to NEWCOs situation and you can tell that these corrupt men in charge of our game are the biggest hypocrites going , take how they handle and acted on our situation last year.???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deevers Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Reagan (SPFL) in dialog with Ashley's men. "Rangers have a strong economic impact on Scottish" according to Reagan, it was that strong they went bust ya muppet. Interesting! Cue the inexplainable refereeing decisions that will start to go against us, coupled with a rash of the reverse foe Sevco. Scottish football honks to high heaven. There is nothing the gangsters won't do to ensure that Sevco are given a free run to the Premiership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Interesting! Cue the inexplainable refereeing decisions that will start to go against us, coupled with a rash of the reverse foe Sevco. Scottish football honks to high heaven. There is nothing the gangsters won't do to ensure that Sevco are given a free run to the Premiership. Start to go against us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Bottom line what can or will Reagan and his yes men do to Ashley/Rangers for is "influence in the Board Room" when he's admitted that they want Rangers in any form competing in Scottish top flight football. Surely the Media must challenge him on this and use us and Livingston etc as examples of their fork tounge attitude. It will also be interesting to see if the other footballing bodies step in ( if they can). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jammy T Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Reagan should be lining up guns against sevco It is entirely their fault where they are. This situation should be used as a basis upon which no team in Scotland can over and wrongly spend again. Wage salary caps etc Sevco can't keep getting bailed out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Regan should just say that Rangers is a member of the SFA and the SFA will always try to protect it's members subject to them complying with the governing bodies rules and regulations. Subject to the various boards' discretion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 (edited) http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/sfa-chief-stewart-regan-admits-4694522 Regan would disagree with you I think. Interesting quotes:- "In that regard I know the fans are desperate to see success again. They are desperate for stability' So not stability first but success although appreciate they should go hand in hand. But my favourite. "We have a situation in our articles which prevents dual interests in football clubs. We gave Mike Ashley the ability to have up to 10 per cent shareholding in the club. "As part of that, there was a commitment there would be no management or influence at Rangers Football Club. I think dear Mr, Regan, Mr Ashley has done you up like a kipper. Edited November 25, 2014 by DETTY29 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 "We have a situation in our articles which prevents dual interests in football clubs. We gave Mike Ashley the ability to have up to 10 per cent shareholding in the club. "As part of that, there was a commitment there would be no management or influence at Rangers Football Club. "Clearly we want to have a better understanding of his position in that regard." Regan said. What's to understand, Ashley demanded board room changes, they happened and boom ?3m of loans appeared. If that's not influence then I'm not sure what is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalstonjambo Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 The governing body in this country is genuinely more bent than a dictatorship. Regan implying he wants rangers to be successful. Not even hiding it. You couldn't make it up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 "We have a situation in our articles which prevents dual interests in football clubs. We gave Mike Ashley the ability to have up to 10 per cent shareholding in the club. "As part of that, there was a commitment there would be no management or influence at Rangers Football Club. "Clearly we want to have a better understanding of his position in that regard." Regan said. What's to understand, Ashley demanded board room changes, they happened and boom ?3m of loans appeared. If that's not influence then I'm not sure what is. Just read Detty29 post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Just read Detty29 post. Now I know RIFC is 'only' an AIM listed company rather than a full stock exchange listed one, but any listed company where a shareholder maintains 10% of the shares will have significant influence on the running and strategy of that company. As we are seeing with Ashley. Indeed, even without the loans, did the SFA think he would just sit there in the background and pick up his half yearly dividends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
132goals1958 Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Under the Companies act definition, could Ashley justifiably be considered a shadow director. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Lyon Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Scottish football authority still corrupt! Any club but Sevco gets punished quickly while they can do what they want. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deevers Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 (edited) Now I know RIFC is 'only' an AIM listed company rather than a full stock exchange listed one, but any listed company where a shareholder maintains 10% of the shares will have significant influence on the running and strategy of that company. As we are seeing with Ashley. Indeed, even without the loans, did the SFA think he would just sit there in the background and pick up his half yearly dividends. There are plenty in the corridors of power at Hampden that are quite prepared to completely ignore anything that goes on with Serco. They will twist and turn and use any loophole in the rules to ensure that they get away with murder. Edited November 25, 2014 by Deevers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Under the Companies act definition, could Ashley justifiably be considered a shadow director. Ashely may well be a shadow director which if he's not careful could bring problems. http://www.sjberwin.com/insights/2013/11/08/shadow-directors-beware Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Under the Companies act definition, could Ashley justifiably be considered a shadow director. What is a Shadow Director?A shadow director is defined in section 251 of the Companies Act 2006 as a person in accordance with whose directions or instructions the directors of a company are accustomed to act (although a person is not deemed to be a shadow director simply because the directors act on advice given by him in a professional capacity). The High Court spelt out what this means in practice: on the question of who must be accustomed to act, this means that a governing majority of the board must be accustomed to act in accordance with the directions or instructions of the alleged shadow director. The purpose of the legislation is to catch a person who effectively controls the running of the company by controlling the board. Therefore, a person is unlikely to be within the definition of a shadow director if only one or two directors on a board of several directors follow his instructions on the question of how must the directors react to the instructions, the directors must ?do something in conformity with? such instructions. It is not sufficient for the alleged shadow director simply to give instructions to the directors; his instructions ?must be translated into action by the board? the directors must act on the alleged shadow director?s directions as a matter of regular practice; it must be a regular course of conduct of the directors over a period of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malinga the Swinga Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Would actually have more admiration for Regan if he just came out and said 'we will let Rangers do whatever they want, and we will assist them in every way we can as we want them to get promoted.' At least it would be more honest than the pretence of them investigating Rangers, whilst Ashley and co run rings round them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 (edited) The Directors resigned there positions at the instance of Ashley. Therefore Ashley is a Shodow Director. Why are the SPFL procrastinating the evidence is there for all to see. The SPFL are now in breach of their own rules own dual ownership. Will they act or do anything about it, no chance I would say. Edit Dual Ownership might not bet the correct terminology but you get my gist. Edited November 25, 2014 by Dannie Boy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i wish jj was my dad Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 I wonder how concerned and patient regan would be if some Lithuanian shareholder was taking the piss out of him and the governing body while the club was being run into the ground? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malinga the Swinga Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 The Directors resigned there positions at the instance of Ashley. Therefore Ashley is a Shodow Director. Why are the SPFL procrastinating the evidence is there for all to see. The SPFL are now in breach of their own rules own dual ownership. Will they act or do anything about it, no chance I would say. To be fair, it is hard to act or do anything when you are bent over, lubed up and willingly preparing to be shafted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 (edited) To be fair, it is hard to act or do anything when you are bent over, lubed up and willingly preparing to be shafted. The shafting is in full swing and is being watched by an impotent audience and willing cheer leaders. Edited November 25, 2014 by Dannie Boy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blairdin Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 The big problem I think is that the SFAs dual ownership rules are legally unenforceable. Ashley knows it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Lyon Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Start an online petition for a public inquiry into the SPFL. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
132goals1958 Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 The Directors resigned there positions at the instance of Ashley. Therefore Ashley is a Shodow Director. Why are the SPFL procrastinating the evidence is there for all to see. The SPFL are now in breach of their own rules own dual ownership. Will they act or do anything about it, no chance I would say. Edit Dual Ownership might not bet the correct terminology but you get my gist. The appointment of his sidekick Llambias as consultant would also suggest he has a de facto directorship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunks Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 The big problem I think is that the SFAs dual ownership rules are legally unenforceable. Ashley knows it... But they can be conditional to league membership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hungry hippo Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 The big problem I think is that the SFAs dual ownership rules are legally unenforceable. Ashley knows it... Not an issue at all. Most football rules are not because something is illegal. He could legally buy the shares but club can still be punished. To take it to an extreme imagine a wealthy individual decided to own 2 or 3 clubs ib the SPL for example. The clubs would simply not be allowed to compete against each other despite not being in breach of any laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malinga the Swinga Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 The big problem I think is that the SFAs dual ownership rules are legally unenforceable. Ashley knows it... The big problem is most of the SFA support and worship Rangers, and have absolutely no backbone or courage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rods Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Reagan is a disgrace of a man. He should not be in the position he is in and should be fired. Have you ever heard of the head of company basically underselling the product. They wonder why they can't get sponsors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutchmul Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 But they can be conditional to league membership. SFA/SPFL will not revoke sevco's license to play, not now not ever, in fact they will do ANYTHING to support them and get them back in the spl. And ashley knows it. Look at how sevco have been treated. if it wasn't for the fans of the "diddy" clubs taking a stand, sevco would have been playing spl football for the last 2.5 years. Scottish football governance(LOL) is corrupt and a joke, it supports 2 clubs only and neither plays in Edinburgh. Reagan is a complete fud of a man and Doncaster is just a front man/mouthpiece/meatshield for the spl chairmen. Anyone waiting for the SFA/SPFL to take any action against sevco needs to wake up and smell the coffee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwaysthereinspirit Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Every day I open this thread, and every day brings me one day closer to being done with Scottish football. it'll seriously depress me if Newco get promoted through obvious insider help. They dont even pretend to our faces anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxteth O'Grady Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Regan is a puppet. Regan, SPFL, SPL. Doncaster. Ogillvie the lot of them are all puppets, can they look themselves in the mirror and say they they have treated 5 stars FC the same as Livingstone? Has Campbell Ogillvie ever paid back his EBT "Loan"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboinglasgow Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 according to the BBC the AGM will be on 22nd of December and accounts should be signed off by the end of the week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 ?We would all like to see Rangers back to their winning ways as quickly as possible and to improve their financial position in order to bring more money to the game of football in Scotland.? This just grates my gears so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malinga the Swinga Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 ?We would all like to see Rangers back to their winning ways as quickly as possible and to improve their financial position in order to bring more money to the game of football in Scotland.? This just grates my gears so much. If that is an official Regan quote, then I honestly don't see the point in clubs trying to beat Rangers, when it is so obvious that they are treated as a special case, to the detriment of others. Don't get me wrong, when we play Celtic on Sunday I will be no doubt moaning that Collum gives them everything, but there is something in Celtic's complaints that Rangers are the establishment team and they are favoured strongly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biffa Bacon Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 ?We would all like to see Rangers back to their winning ways as quickly as possible and to improve their financial position in order to bring more money to the game of football in Scotland.? This just grates my gears so much. Why don't they just welcome them to play, like every other club. Why to they have to have "winning ways" ? By definition if they are winning then one or more of the other equal member clubs must be losing. Where is the integrity, the sport, the taking part, let the best team win, who ever it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tazio Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 1 across is boffins 3 down isobar 7 across Ill maul 5 down is Ashley. 7 across 2 down: fullback 7 across: ill 4 down. Clue. Rangers and Hibs only hope of automatic promotion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
63,352
Recommended Posts