Jamboelite Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Is Paul Murray not debarred as well? He can't be chairman or on the Board either!!!he resigned on the day Whyte took over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alva-Jambo Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 "He also insisted he is ready to "rebuild relationships" with the rest of Scottish football, many of which were damaged by the likes of Charles Green." Sorry Dave Rangers have forever damaged and soured any chance of a reconciliation with Scottish football. We've had your lording shit for years and years and we don't want it any more. "He also insisted he is ready to "rebuild relationships" with the rest of Scottish football, many of which were damaged by the likes of Charles Green." Sorry Dave Rangers have forever damaged and soured any chance of a reconciliation with Scottish football. We've had your lording shit for years and years and we don't want it any more. This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 "However, before this conversation could take place and contrary to our agreement WH Ireland resigned without prior notification to me. That lack of professionalism has characterised WH Ireland?s role as Nomad and reinforces why there was a complete lack of governance and transparency under its watch." That's rubbish the Nomad indicated weeks ago that they would resign if King won. King just can't help himself the SA judge was bang on the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 A poster on Rangers Media agrees with you. "I agree with all apart from building bridges with Scottish football **** that" funny Charles Green and Ally McCoist at least knew their fans always positive to have good relationships but this will only be done for Rangers not Scottish football Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown user Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Do you think there are any berrs thinking about going against their proxy vote after hearing the building bridges speech? It's really not what they want at all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deevers Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Full statement from King Infamy, infamy, they've all got in in for me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 he resigned on the day Whyte took over. But he's still suspect though? The Board has also had legal advice that the "?t and proper" person requirement of article 10 of the Scottish Football Association's articles of association would be likely to preclude both Paul Murray and David King from becoming a director of The Rangers Football Club Ltd (were they to seek to be elected to the board of that company). This is because the company which previously ran Rangers Football Club went into administration within the last ?ve years and Mr King and Mr Murray were each a director of that company in that ?ve year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 (edited) he resigned on the day Whyte took over. No he didn't. Whyte took over on 06/05/11. Murray was sacked on 23/05/11. From RFC's 2011 accounts: C.T. Whyte (Chairman) (Appointed 6 May 2011) P. Betts (Appointed 6 May 2011) A.J. Johnston (Resigned/Removed 23 May 2011) J.F. McClelland CBE (Vice Chairman) (Resigned 17 October 2011) M. Bain (Resigned 24 June 2011) D.C. McIntyre J. Greig MBE (Resigned 17 October 2011) D.C. King M.S. McGill (Resigned 6 May 2011) D.W. Muir (Resigned 6 May 2011) P. Murray (Resigned/Removed 23 May 2011) Edited March 4, 2015 by Footballfirst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamboelite Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 No he didn't. Whyte took over on 06/05/11. Murray was sacked on 23/05/11. From RFC's 2011 accounts: C.T. Whyte (Chairman) (Appointed 6 May 2011) P. Betts (Appointed 6 May 2011) A.J. Johnston (Resigned/Removed 23 May 2011) J.F. McClelland CBE (Vice Chairman) (Resigned 17 October 2011) M. Bain (Resigned 24 June 2011) D.C. McIntyre J. Greig MBE (Resigned 17 October 2011) D.C. King M.S. McGill (Resigned 6 May 2011) D.W. Muir (Resigned 6 May 2011) P. Murray (Resigned/Removed 23 May 2011) Yeah but as good as FF i think his defence would be that he wasnt complicit with Whyte and left. Im not saying he will pass or should just that he didnt stick around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjwye Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Surely the EGM was called and shareholders have voted on appointing King? If he is now saying he won't take up post then is it not all null and void? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Surely the EGM was called and shareholders have voted on appointing King? If he is now saying he won't take up post then is it not all null and void? Good question. Friday pm could mean the only men on the Board are Ashely's men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboy1982 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Here we go. The Board has speci?c concerns about the proposed appointment of Mr King and Mr Murray. Mr King was convicted in South Africa on 41 counts of contravening s.75 of the South African Income Tax Act. Mr King was previously a director of the company that formerly ran Rangers Football Club, The Rangers Football Club PLC. He held o?ce at the same time as Craig Whyte from 2011 until that company entered administration on 14 February 2012. Noting the above and WH Ireland's obligations as a NOMAD,WH Ireland have informed the Board that should Mr King be appointed to the Board, WH Ireland will resign as NOMAD and Broker to the Company with immediate e?ect. In the event that the NOMAD resigns, the Company's shares will be suspended from trading immediately. Under the AIM Rules, the Company will then have one month to replace the NOMAD. The Board is of the view that in the circumstances, there can be no guarantee that a new NOMAD will be appointed. In the event that a NOMAD is not appointed within a month of the suspension of trading, the Company's admission to trading will be cancelled. Accordingly, if this were to occur, the Company would no longer be traded on any Stock Exchange. In the judgement of the Board this is likely to make raising capital both more di?cult and more expensive. There would then be no regulatory oversight of the type to which companies admitted to AIM are subject, and there would be no market for Shareholders to sell their shares. The Board has also had legal advice that the "?t and proper" person requirement of article 10 of the Scottish Football Association's articles of association would be likely to preclude both Paul Murray and David King from becoming a director of The Rangers Football Club Ltd (were they to seek to be elected to the board of that company). This is because the company which previously ran Rangers Football Club went into administration within the last ?ve years and Mr King and Mr Murray were each a director of that company in that ?ve year period. In addition to Mr King's convictions in South Africa and the legal advice which the Board has received about the Scottish Football Association's "?t and proper" person requirement, the Board has a further concern about Mr King which is that his appointment would be in breach of section 216 of the Insolvency Act 1986. Subject to certain limited exceptions, s.216 requires a person to obtain the leave of the Court before becoming a director of a company if, in the preceding ?ve years, that person was a director of a company which went into liquidation whilst they were a director (or within one year of their ceasing to be a director) and the name of the new company of which they wish to be a director is the same as, or similar to, the name of the company which went into liquidation. This section applies to Mr King given he was, at the relevant time, a director of the company which previously owned the Rangers Football Club. This means that if he were to become a director of the Company without such leave then, unless he fell within one of the limited exceptions, he would be committing a criminal o?ence, punishable by imprisonment or a ?ne or both. The Board is not aware that Mr King either has such leave or comes within any of the other limited exceptions to s.216. The Directors are not aware of any similar reason which might preclude the appointment of Mr John Gilligan. However the priority for the Board is to appoint independent directors with capital markets experience and, so far as they know, Mr Gilligan does not possess that experience. The Directors do not rule out the appointment of Mr Gilligan in the future. The Directors recommend that Shareholders vote AGAINST Resolutions 5-7. This is an excellent statement. On two points. 1 get it right up king and Murray 2 gets this info into the public domain where the smsm will have no choice but to discuss it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 (edited) If only some would take a step back and just take a second to think Some of the posts on here do make you shake your head at the desperation some show to tell you that King is this and that and Ashley is the best thing since sliced bread and can never lose. Neither of them can be fully trusted Ashley was out foxed in ths deal once the 'three bears' and King bought their tranch of shares from others. He was caught out and has lost the war. He may have lost the war but of course the price of victory will be high for the incoming owners re the deals made by the 'old' regime..but he lost. King cannot name a nomad at present as they are not yet in position or allowed to do so as the EGM result has still to be official. Once that happens those new board members will have to be approved by the footballing authorities but being on the board or not will not stop his influence (ala Vlad for example) or the deal being completed Time to accept there will be change but the cost of change will be high and the funding required extensive. Still only 48 hours or so and it will be a bit clearer........however the clearing up of the mess will take quite a while longer assuming funds are or will become available to do so. Edited March 4, 2015 by CJGJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar the Horrible Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 So the whole playground has ganged up on the playground bully, but just as they think they can bring him down a peg or 2, the bully has just taken out the biggest guy with one punch! King better have on Monday the money to both pay back MA and run the club until the end of the season? You would like to think he has a bona fide Nomad lined up? but he might just be gambling on MA walking away quietly? Clearly MA is ensuring the EGM takes place in the knowledge that King will have to fund it now, and now that the shares are suspended, there will be no opertunity for the King Kabal to strengthen their hands, While MA can now turn the vote because if they don't and King cant prove the existence of a new Nomad, then they have all just waved goodbye to their giros? The fans groups have just invested their own money badly? They should have waited and forced an admin event and bough more for their money after admin? This is going to get very interesting now, Could MA force an admin event 5 mins after King walks through the door by taking them to court and get the court to issue a winding up order? Just like Hector kept doing to us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jammy T Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 If only some would take a step back and just take a second to think Some of the posts on here do make you shake your head at the desperation some show to tell you that King is this and that and Ashley is the best thing since sliced bread and can never lose. Neither of them can be fully trusted Ashley was out foxed in ths deal once the 'three bears' and King bought their tranch of shares from others. He was caught out and has lost the war. He may have lost the war but of course the price of victory will be high for the incoming owners re the deals made by the 'old' regime..but he lost. King cannot name a nomad at present as they are not yet in position or allowed to do so as the EGM result has still to be official. Once that happens those new board members will have to be approved by the footballing authorities but being on the board or not will not stop his influence (ala Vlad for example) or the deal being completed Time to accept there will be change but the cost of change will be high and the funding required extensive. Still only 48 hours or so and it will be a bit clearer........however the clearing up of the mess will take quite a while longer assuming funds are or will become available to do so. What has Mike ashley actually lost though? He'll still take nearly every penny the club make other than from Season tickets and TV money, and to be honest we don't know what else.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbie Neilson Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 If I were a hun, i wouldnt want King anywhere near the club Ashley is a bitter, bitter pill to swallow. Obviously he is not going to pour in millions and "get Rangers back to their rightful place" and all that other nonsense. But i think he needs Rangers to have some success so the fans buy the tops and other stuff that he has sewn up in his retail deals. King just looks like a complete fantasist to me. He certainly sounds it, I think the base of his plan will be to paint himself as the saviour, talk of competing with Celtic and saving Rangers from big nasty Mike. And rely on the stay away fans to come back and rally round them now that a "Rangers man" is in place again One simple set of questions just blows him to bits in my mind, where was he when Whyte took over? Why didnt he want control then? Where was he when Green took over? Why didnt he want involved then? The guys a charlatan in my eyes He will do damage to Rangers, and he will do damage to Scottish football Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 If I were a hun, i wouldnt want King anywhere near the club Ashley is a bitter, bitter pill to swallow. Obviously he is not going to pour in millions and "get Rangers back to their rightful place" and all that other nonsense. But i think he needs Rangers to have some success so the fans buy the tops and other stuff that he has sewn up in his retail deals. King just looks like a complete fantasist to me. He certainly sounds it, I think the base of his plan will be to paint himself as the saviour, talk of competing with Celtic and saving Rangers from big nasty Mike. And rely on the stay away fans to come back and rally round them now that a "Rangers man" is in place again One simple set of questions just blows him to bits in my mind, where was he when Whyte took over? Why didnt he want control then? Where was he when Green took over? Why didnt he want involved then? The guys a charlatan in my eyes He will do damage to Rangers, and he will do damage to Scottish football last line sounds good to me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghkjambo Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 (edited) The response from king stating he will wait is hugely problematic as it clearly opens the door for him to be seen as a shadow director. It's as if he doesn't have a clue about (or care about) UK business law. The public nature of this battle leaves no uncertainty that King will call some of the shots... Even if many are directed squarely at his own foot. Edited March 4, 2015 by ghkjambo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbie Neilson Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 (edited) last line sounds good to me! Aye damaging Rangers, fine by me too But damaging Scottish football is not. The SFA have the duty to prevent these types from getting involved in our game They wont though, the SFA's blatant desire for Rangers back in the SPL is stomach turning Edited March 4, 2015 by Robbie Neilson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar the Horrible Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Judging by the latest King statement it sounded like Kind needs the Nomad he was planning on sacking (just cause they said they would quit if he was in charge) to stay long enough to find a new Nomad? Does this sound like he actually had one lined up? and even if he does it might be difficult now to get one within the 4 weeks, That makes April fools day all the more prevalent does it not? Also he claimed they would hang around long enough in place until a new one took over, but then quit without informing him? I think the GASL (Glib and Shameless Liar) either got it so wrong or is once again telling porkies? However there is nothing in the WH Ireland to substantiate this? they said they would quit? they have done so! they said they would assist a take over and they will but in the interim the share trading has been suspended? Sorry King they warned you!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Australis Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Dave King has had a nomad lined up for a long time. I am sure we will get his name early tomorrow morning........................or maybe not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alva-Jambo Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 As I said earlier, Ashley will push them in to Admin if he cannot stay on board. The coming weeks could be even worse than this month ( for them) lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar the Horrible Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Just think if they went into Admin v2.0 this week they are 2 points above the play-off place, and we would be a few more points closer to the title? Every cloud eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 As I said earlier, Ashley will push them in to Admin if he cannot stay on board. The coming weeks could be even worse than this month ( for them) lol. Tell us all how this will come about ? I think we will be waiting quite a while for the explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar the Horrible Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 (edited) Dave King has had a nomad lined up for a long time. I am sure we will get his name early tomorrow morning........................or maybe not. You would like to think so, he might be a bit Bob Jamieson, but the T3B's are not? and they will all look like the world biggest tits if he does not? lest face it would you trust your money with somebody who has been dubbed a Glib and Shameless Liar by a court finding him Guilty of tax fraud? I would not even if he was Hearts daft and assured us all he will be righteous? They are all gambling on a lot of money if King is a bit Walter Mitty Edited March 4, 2015 by Hagar the Horrible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo-Jimbo Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 This is an excellent statement. On two points. 1 get it right up king and Murray 2 gets this info into the public domain where the smsm will have no choice but to discuss it This statement was released to the stock exchange last month (6 Feb) and the media have not even mentioned it, as far as I'm aware of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 (edited) You would like to think so, he might be a bit Bob Jamieson, but the T3B's are not? and they will all look like the world biggest tits if he does not? lest face it would you trust your money with somebody who has been dubbed a Glib and Shameless Liar by a court finding him Guilty of tax fraud? I would not even if he was Hearts daft and assured us all he will be righteous? They are all gambling on a lot of money if King is a bit Walter MittySaving Rangers is a face saving exercise for King so as his legacy isn't purely a tax cheat. Thankfully for him he has the benefit of a bent football governing body to help him. Edited March 4, 2015 by DETTY29 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riccarton3 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 If only some would take a step back and just take a second to think Some of the posts on here do make you shake your head at the desperation some show to tell you that King is this and that and Ashley is the best thing since sliced bread and can never lose. Neither of them can be fully trusted Ashley was out foxed in ths deal once the 'three bears' and King bought their tranch of shares from others. He was caught out and has lost the war. He may have lost the war but of course the price of victory will be high for the incoming owners re the deals made by the 'old' regime..but he lost. King cannot name a nomad at present as they are not yet in position or allowed to do so as the EGM result has still to be official. Once that happens those new board members will have to be approved by the footballing authorities but being on the board or not will not stop his influence (ala Vlad for example) or the deal being completed Time to accept there will be change but the cost of change will be high and the funding required extensive. Still only 48 hours or so and it will be a bit clearer........however the clearing up of the mess will take quite a while longer assuming funds are or will become available to do so. Wasn't Ashley restricted from further share purchase so hardly outflanked in an even contest? Mike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 (edited) Wasn't Ashley restricted from further share purchase so hardly outflanked in an even contest? Mike. I was not aware business was an even contest I'm sure all his competitors have felt they are/were dealing with a fair and honest rival in the past decade or so and dealing in an even contest regarding the ability to do a deal. Ashley and co are simply making sure the takeover is as hard as possible and as messy as it can get which shows you exactly what Ashley is like.. he hates losing and his doing his worst to leave the club as a poisoned chalice for the new owners Edited March 4, 2015 by CJGJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riccarton3 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Saving Rangers is a face saving exercise for King so as his legacy isn't purely a tax cheat. Thankfully for him he has the benefit of a bent football governing body to help him. For that first part you would need a conscience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drewboy Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Extremely quiet on this thread tonight considering what's gone on today [emoji9] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Extremely quiet on this thread tonight considering what's gone on today [emoji9] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Nothing much happened though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf's Mate Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I've not read the last 200 posts just some, but - is Ashley not shoving Newcom back into Admin , if the next ?5M loan tranche is not suddenly made available this month? The company surely folds at that point , IS that the poison challice for King? IF Ashely thinks King IS winning this, surely its Admin that would be his main tactic? I ask questions.. Ashley surely has the least to gain from an insolvency event. He'd stand to get pence in the pound back on his investment. Possibility of having any current contract ripped up. I say this without the knowledge of whether he would be a secured creditor or not however I very much doubt he would. If King and Co get in then admin would be one way of removing the shackles of Ashley therefore surely they'd be more likely to force this than Ashley would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 For those of you who have been following the Shareprophets revelations about an alleged Worthington fraud, it took an interesting twist yesterday.http://www.shareprophets.com/views/10920/worthington-s-aiden-earley-gains-interim-injunction-v-tom-winnifrith-fraudster-bitchez-to-be-seen-in-court-11-march Worthington?s Aiden Earley gains interim injunction v Tom Winnifrith: Fraudster Bitchez to be seen in court 11 MarchAiden Earley, the shadow director of the fraud Worthington (WRN) ? who borrowed ?375,000 ? from the company as soon as he gained control, using money borrowed from convicted felon Kevin Sykes, today obtained an interim injunction against me.That means that I cannot publish any more emails from Earley - other than the ones he sent me last week trying to work out when I was back in the UK as I could not be served when in Greece, under the guise of saying that he was praying for my soul - and indeed when formerly served ? tomorrow I guess ? I shall have 48 hours to remove those I have published from the internet and to destroy any copies I may have.I am being asked to hand over any emails or documents that I have.I shall comply with that order from that court order. If is lifted on 11th March then if I can obtain new copies of those emails and documents I shall republish as it is in the public interest.On 11th March I shall be in Court fighting this injunction on the basis that I have obtained nothing illegally ? I have not ? and what I have published is in the public interest. I will not under any circumstance reveal my source or sources. I am being asked to reveal who I have sent the documents and emails to. As it happens that will be no-one other than the FCA and SFO.I am free to comment on the fraud Worthington and shall do so and I am not backing down. See you in Court bitchez! Why is it relevant? Some of the material relates to the purchase of Rangers by Whyte and possibly the charges faced by Whyte, Withey and the three Duffers. Worthington is also the other party in the contingent liability in the TRFC accounts.One to watch over the next week or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkeyeTheGnu2.0 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 (edited) But damaging Scottish football is not. The SFA have the duty to prevent these types from getting involved in our game They wont though, the SFA's blatant desire for Rangers back in the SPL is stomach turning Scottish football is already damaged, and as long as the "need a strong old firm" BS is trotted out, it will remain so. What Scottish football needs is strong competition, but what out governing body and media can't (or won't) grasp, is that that competition doesn't just need to be Celtic & Rangers. While ever this myth is peddled, Scottish football will remain weak and appear to the rest of the world as a joke. Edited March 5, 2015 by HawkeyeTheGnu2.0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Don Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 As I said earlier, Ashley will push them in to Admin if he cannot stay on board. The coming weeks could be even worse than this month ( for them) lol. It is not in Ashley's interest to have them in admin and risk possible liquidation again he would lose everything. Admin or even liquidation would benefit King and Co. But not now we're too far down the road and they can't have an insolvency now they are or likely to be on the board. It was my belief a couple Months ago that King and the 3 bears were looking to push admin to try get rid of Ashley. The loan being offered by T3B if accepted would have made them biggest creditors and in a position to influence a CVA and board. I think Ashley saw that coming and immediately put into effect the 10mlion offer through Lambias etc it was accepted and so he out manouvered T3B and King there. Now they have had to go down the route they are going now. Anyone thinking King cannot be a part of this are just wishing and hoping. Vlad was majority shareholder and owner of us. He was not a board member. He had others do his work for him. That is exactly what King can do with Rangers and will do as I can't see him being allowed onto the board. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey05 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Scottish football is already damaged, and as long as the "need a strong old firm" BS is trotted out, it will remain so. What Scottish football needs is strong competition, but what out governing body and media can't (or won't) grasp, is that that competition doesn't just need to be Celtic & Rangers. While ever this myth is peddled, Scottish football will remain weak and appear to the rest of the world as a joke. And ran by a total bunch of tossers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 The headline sums him up. "Willing" So big of him. http://m.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/rangers-dave-king-willing-to-undergo-sfa-vetting-1-3709186 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angus Young Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I Fail to see how this Criminal Glib and Shameless Liar and former Director of the oldco pre Liquidation can be trusted to be a director and indeed run Sevco he may and probably will win this EGM Vote to much slapping of backs by the orcs but it is only a battle won in a long War with MA The enemy. Who is your money on to win this ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I Fail to see how this Criminal Glib and Shameless Liar and former Director of the oldco pre Liquidation can be trusted to be a director and indeed run Sevco he may and probably will win this EGM Vote to much slapping of backs by the orcs but it is only a battle won in a long War with MA The enemy. Who is your money on to win this ? King will win this, think it's winning the war, then find exactly the traps Ashley has set for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.T.K Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Its like Hearts fans forcing out Ann Budge to get 'Hearts man' Chris Robinson back in, while blame Vlad for every penny of debt! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feeno Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 The EGM can vote him in, the SFA can slink him past their pishy rules but circumventing the stock market rules will be a different kettle of fish surely? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Aye damaging Rangers, fine by me too But damaging Scottish football is not. The SFA have the duty to prevent these types from getting involved in our game They wont though, the SFA's blatant desire for Rangers back in the SPL is stomach turning For the SFA, good for Rangers = good for Scottish football. Fortunately the authorities are so useless that they will stand by and watch crooks and tax evaders and liars gain control of Rangers (again) in the hope that it will be good for Rangers or because they are scared to get in the way. This will prove to be bad for Rangers, and bad for Rangers (and Celtic) = good for Scottish football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Tolbooth Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 King will win this, think it's winning the war, then find exactly the traps Ashley has set for him. This! King will be hailed as the new Messiah, and then Ashley will bend him over and make him/them take it harder than ever, and Ashley will be portrayed as the big bad man by our lovely Scottish media who haven't the balls to tell it like it really is, whilst Ashley will probably receive death threats from that mob of knuckle draggers, there's a lot of mileage in this yet, and it's popcorn time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Scottish football is already damaged, and as long as the "need a strong old firm" BS is trotted out, it will remain so. What Scottish football needs is strong competition, but what out governing body and media can't (or won't) grasp, is that that competition doesn't just need to be Celtic & Rangers. While ever this myth is peddled, Scottish football will remain weak and appear to the rest of the world as a joke. The spivs who destroyed Rangers are the best thing to happen to Scottish football for decades. I have every confidence in a new bunch of spivs continuing the good work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I P Knightley Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Full statement from King Having the phrase "...owner-in-waiting..." in the opening line saved me from reading any more of that tripe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alva-Jambo Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 MA was find ?7500 for being in breach of SFA regulations about dual club involvement. - So what promise has he made to the SFA committee to ensure that he is no longer , still in such breach? IF someone commited an offence, and he has, surely he must desist! I don't expect he has disisted. I await the call for him to be further sanctioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alva-Jambo Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 The spivs who destroyed Rangers are the best thing to happen to Scottish football for decades. I have every confidence in a new bunch of spivs continuing the good work. This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alva-Jambo Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 MA was find ?7500 for being in breach of SFA regulations about dual club involvement. - So what promise has he made to the SFA committee to ensure that he is no longer , still in such breach? If someone spits at an opponent , then again next match and the next, there are increasing sanctions. IF someone commited an offence, and he has, surely he must desist! I don't expect he has disisted. I await the call for him to be further sanctioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 How's this for delusion? Taken from the comments section of the Telegraph. joestrummer 2 days ago The SPFL / SFA know they were legally wrong to deliberately demote Rangers when the club could be now seen as the victim of criminal activity. The compensation they'll eventually need to pay back to the Ibrox club will bankrupt Scottish football, and they know it. Wow!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4,123
Recommended Posts