Jump to content

Cinch


Recommended Posts

Rogue Daddy
2 minutes ago, sadj said:

No of course Im not having a goūü§£. Im

bad for bypassing the swear filter. Happens when you have a jonnoesque level of creativity with them. T’was indeedy a reference to your comment to the mods about not having a sweary in the post. 
 

Ill go back to puns clearly they land better ūü§®

ūüĎćAhhhhhh‚Ķ. Fraid¬†it went over my ****ing heid! ūüėā

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 231
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Rogue Daddy

    15

  • davemclaren

    14

  • Hagar the Horrible

    13

  • Lone Striker

    11

Dirty Deeds

As amazing as it is that Doncaster still has a job and I agree the cinch deal is shit, it still feels like an odd fight for Rangers to pick.

 

I'll sit back and enjoy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Riccarton3
13 hours ago, Jambo92 said:

The latest statement from Rangers is hilarious, reveals Doncaster took the praise for winning cinch deal when I fact they have paid an agency £500k to do it.

Doncaster would claim he deserves credit for identifying the agency...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Smithee

There may well be some kind of technicality that the hun feel they can take advantage of, but isn't there a rule about acting in the interests of the league? I forget how it was worded

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nookie Bear
9 hours ago, Dirty Deeds said:

As amazing as it is that Doncaster still has a job and I agree the cinch deal is shit, it still feels like an odd fight for Rangers to pick.

 

I'll sit back and enjoy.


It’s a fight they can probably afford to lose but a great opportunity to get stuck into Doncaster. 
 

I hope it escalates. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Smithee said:

There may well be some kind of technicality that the hun feel they can take advantage of, but isn't there a rule about acting in the interests of the league? I forget how it was worded

It's about acting in the utmost good faith towards other member clubs, but that principle was blown out of the water when the majority of other member clubs voted to curtail the league season and demote us, Partick and Stranraer.

 

We used that wording as part of our legal challenge to the decision, but we lost our case, so I guess that means these are just empty words in the articles of association.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rogue Daddy
1 hour ago, Smithee said:

There may well be some kind of technicality that the hun feel they can take advantage of, but isn't there a rule about acting in the interests of the league? I forget how it was worded

Think that was pretty much torpedoed last year by, virtually, everyone.

 

..RobNox beat me to it¬†ūü§£

Edited by Rogue Daddy
Link to post
Share on other sites
colinmaroon
On 03/08/2021 at 15:11, Hagar the Horrible said:

Just for perspective, we as fans put in roughly the same into the FoH, if we were to redirect our money we could sponsor the new Heart of Midlothian FC league and force all clubs to have our crest on every other 41 clubs sleeve

 

THAT is what call a touchdown pass.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
SectionDJambo

There's little doubt that there is a wee power struggle going on here between Rangers and Celtic. Celtic took full advantage of Rangers previous demise to tie up the SPFL board and create a, not so secret, cabal that would support any moves in their favour. Rangers, in great part due to Celtic's complacency and arrogance, have clawed their way back to the top of Scottish football and are now going after Lawwell's stooges within the SPFL.

Doncaster is either completely incompetent or has been doing a great job promoting Celtic's interests by keeping all of the opposition scrambling for financial scraps whilst they took the Champions League money and the lion's share of any money available domestically. The lack of good domestic sponsorship has definitely helped Celtic dominate and in so doing make Scottish football even less of an attractive prospect for investment into the other clubs.

Rangers look to have a reasonable case for not promoting Cinch against their existing sponsors, if that rule about not conflicting existing arrangements is clear and unambiguous. Doncaster should have known this but probably doesn't know the SPFL rules and probably didn't do much of the running to get this earth shattering deal that he celebrated with much pride. Mr Vindication has done it again.

Why more of the bigger clubs didn't publicly question the value of this deal is a bigger concern. Are they all so suppressed by the SPFL cabal and it's SFA entanglement that none of them thought to question it? Do none of them have the backbone to demand an explanation of why a CEO is going to be paid £2m over the same period that this deal will bring in £8m to be split, far from evenly, between all of the SPFL clubs? 

Where are the searching questions from those razor sharp football journalists like Young, Leckie and Gordon? Our national game has become a national disgrace of corruption and self interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are two issues here.

 

1. The Cinch deal. It really is terrible, but that's on the clubs as Doncaster is effectively employed to work on their behalf.

 

2. Rangers requirement to adhere to the new contractual obligations. Rule 17 suggests they do not, so I understand their position. If this puts the whole deal in jeopardy, then that sits with Doncaster as it should have been picked up in due diligence.

 

Fun to watch from the sidelines :lol:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Disco Dave
1 hour ago, Dunks said:

There are two issues here.

 

1. The Cinch deal. It really is terrible, but that's on the clubs as Doncaster is effectively employed to work on their behalf.

 

Doncasters favourite line...... You have to wonder why we are paying £400,000 per annum to someone who by his own admission is a personal assistant to all the clubs and only does whatever they tell him.  Apparently outside consultants are being paid £100K p.a. for securing this "deal" too. 

 

I don't like to side with Rangers here but their suggestion of hiring a commercial executive/team would surely be a far better use of this money instead of paying an agency for a one off (sh!te) deal.

Edited by Disco Dave
Link to post
Share on other sites
Japan Jambo
On 03/08/2021 at 12:32, Paolo said:

He pretty much got chased out of town.  

 

remember it the time - he was spot on though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
kingantti1874

I hope rangers win their fight and get rid of these Celtic puppets 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Footballfirst

Confirmation on Sprotsound that the SPFL has taken their argument with Rangers about contractual arrangements to Arbitration.

Edited by Footballfirst
Link to post
Share on other sites
davemclaren
8 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

The SPFL has taken their argument with Rangers about contractual arrangements to Arbitration.

Interesting. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
RustyRightPeg

Few questions about this one now it's reached arbitration stage and I've seen the SPFL are urging clubs to side with them.

 

1. Are Rangers on a shoogly peg here?

2. What does it mean for the rest of the leagues if Rangers win?

3. Will it affect the puppets at the top of our game?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Lone Striker

It seems the crux of this is that TRIFC are claiming Rule 17 absolves them for displaying the cinch badges etc  due to a conflict with an existing commercial contract they have with someone else........  but they're not telling the SPFL who their existing contract is with and what the nature of the conflict is.

 

I thought Stewart Robertson  had stood down from the SPFL board  last year after "Dossier-gate".  But the BBC report says he's still on it.   ??????????

 

image.jpeg.45cf05d9a4e6bb840727e34d77eeacb2.jpeg

    

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1971fozzy
On 05/08/2021 at 08:01, Nookie Bear said:


It’s a fight they can probably afford to lose but a great opportunity to get stuck into Doncaster. 
 

I hope it escalates. 


me too. Anything to stick it to that idiot is all fine by me. Hope they take it the whole way.

oh the irony. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1971fozzy
2 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

Confirmation on Sprotsound that the SPFL has taken their argument with Rangers about contractual arrangements to Arbitration.

Asked the SFA to arbitrate?  But Rangers have to agree I heard. 
this will be fascinating 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s contractual law, if rangers can prove the pre existing contract then that’s it they are dead to

rights. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
gnasher75
On 05/08/2021 at 09:42, davemclaren said:

Will end up at SFA arbitration. ūüėĄ

 

You deserved more credit for this prediction.

 

So, how's it going to pan out?

Link to post
Share on other sites
davemclaren
1 minute ago, gnasher75 said:

 

You deserved more credit for this prediction.

 

So, how's it going to pan out?

ūüėĄ Rangers to lose due to lack of evidence of commercial detriment.¬†

Link to post
Share on other sites
gnasher75

Wee bit concerned Rangers don't have anything in writing for their pre-existing contract. Not necessarily the end of the matter but you would think they would have produced it by now given that it is key to their argument.

 

Interesting comments about this being a Rangers-Celtic power struggle for control of the SPFL. It may well be the case but regardless I really hope it brings an end to Doncaster's reign because he really has done nothing for Scottish football. We could do so much better with someone who is really passionate about promoting the Scottish game and not just two clubs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
gnasher75
3 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

ūüėĄ Rangers to lose due to lack of evidence of commercial detriment.¬†

 

Looks likely!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no fan of Rangers, but I do hope they win this case and finally show up Doncaster and his cronies as the not fit for purpose rabble that they are.  Doncaster getting credit for obtaining the most lucrative sponsorship deal ever, when in fact...

 

1.  He paid a 3rd party to source the deal and they'll take £500k over 5 years from the £8m deal

2. It's only the most lucrative deal because it's over a 5 year period.  During Ladbrokes sponsorship, which lasted 5 years but comprised of 3 separate deals, they paid £11m in total.

 

I hope the cinch deal collapses, as Doncaster will have to take the blame, after all he was taking the credit for securing the deal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

ūüėĄ Rangers to lose due to lack of evidence of commercial detriment.¬†

Would a side letter count?

Link to post
Share on other sites
kingantti1874
22 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

ūüėĄ Rangers to lose due to lack of evidence of commercial detriment.¬†


We should all be backing them to win, it will be the end of the Celtic cabal who put us in the championship to protect 9IAR 

 

The end of Doncaster and McLennan once and for all

Link to post
Share on other sites
Lone Striker
7 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

ūüėĄ Rangers to lose due to lack of evidence of commercial detriment.¬†

2  possible scenarios ...... 

 

1) They really do have a written contract with someone, but its commercially sensitive and will only reveal it at a tribunal in front of lawyers  with no public disclosure.   Whether it meets the Rule 17 criteria  is anyone's guess  though.

 

or

 

2) The rumour that its Douglas Park simply trying to protect his own  car business from a new rival might well mean there's no written contract.     A bit like their "dossier" which amounted to not very much.    However there could still be "interesting fallout" from the evidence provided by both sides !!    

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hungry hippo
4 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:


We should all be backing them to win, it will be the end of the Celtic cabal who put us in the championship to protect 9IAR 

 

The end of Doncaster and McLennan once and for all

 

I'm not convinced much will change no matter who wins this one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jambo mark
38 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

It seems the crux of this is that TRIFC are claiming Rule 17 absolves them for displaying the cinch badges etc  due to a conflict with an existing commercial contract they have with someone else........  but they're not telling the SPFL who their existing contract is with and what the nature of the conflict is.

 

I thought Stewart Robertson  had stood down from the SPFL board  last year after "Dossier-gate".  But the BBC report says he's still on it.   ??????????

 

image.jpeg.45cf05d9a4e6bb840727e34d77eeacb2.jpeg

    

 

 

Have they checked their ‚Äújunk‚Ä̬†folder?

 

Must be clogged by now …

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cruyff said:

Doncaster needs to go. **** knows how he's still in a job. 

It's the way of the world these days.  He's the CEO on a handsome salary, but when it comes to making deals or decisions, he outsources it to a highly paid consultant or advisor.  Any statements he makes are written by highly paid PR people.  A bit like Boris to be honest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Lone Striker
1 minute ago, jambo mark said:

Have they checked their ‚Äújunk‚Ä̬†folder?

 

Must be clogged by now …

ūüėā¬†

Link to post
Share on other sites
davemclaren
22 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:


We should all be backing them to win, it will be the end of the Celtic cabal who put us in the championship to protect 9IAR 

 

The end of Doncaster and McLennan once and for all

One cabal replaced by another. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, RobNox said:

I'm no fan of Rangers, but I do hope they win this case and finally show up Doncaster and his cronies as the not fit for purpose rabble that they are.  Doncaster getting credit for obtaining the most lucrative sponsorship deal ever, when in fact...

 

1.  He paid a 3rd party to source the deal and they'll take £500k over 5 years from the £8m deal

2. It's only the most lucrative deal because it's over a 5 year period.  During Ladbrokes sponsorship, which lasted 5 years but comprised of 3 separate deals, they paid £11m in total.

 

I hope the cinch deal collapses, as Doncaster will have to take the blame, after all he was taking the credit for securing the deal.

Like the cockroach that he is, Doncaster is bomb proof. Solely composed of solid brass neck.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lone Striker said:

It seems the crux of this is that TRIFC are claiming Rule 17 absolves them for displaying the cinch badges etc  due to a conflict with an existing commercial contract they have with someone else........  but they're not telling the SPFL who their existing contract is with and what the nature of the conflict is.

 

I thought Stewart Robertson  had stood down from the SPFL board  last year after "Dossier-gate".  But the BBC report says he's still on it.   ??????????

 

image.jpeg.45cf05d9a4e6bb840727e34d77eeacb2.jpeg

    

 

 

 

From around the time of the demotion I seem to remember that there's a gentleman's agreement that the old firm alternate their representatives on the SPFL board, so it will be back to Sevco's turn this year 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jambo92
22 minutes ago, gnasher75 said:

Had a wee look at Rangers website to see if Park's Motors are listed anywhere as a sponsor or partner.

 

https://www.rangers.co.uk/partners/2SmHSWaLyUqNvYPbace4t7

 

There are loads of companies listed but not Park's. Will be disappointing if Rangers have managed to score an own goal here and the SPFL win at arbitration again.

 

A quick look in the spam folder at Ibrox should sort that out, "oh look here is the signed partnership agreement from Parks your honour, it must have got lost". 

Link to post
Share on other sites
gnasher75
1 hour ago, Lone Striker said:

It seems the crux of this is that TRIFC are claiming Rule 17 absolves them for displaying the cinch badges etc  due to a conflict with an existing commercial contract they have with someone else........  but they're not telling the SPFL who their existing contract is with and what the nature of the conflict is.

 

I thought Stewart Robertson  had stood down from the SPFL board  last year after "Dossier-gate".  But the BBC report says he's still on it.   ??????????

 

image.jpeg.45cf05d9a4e6bb840727e34d77eeacb2.jpeg

    

 

 

 

Thursday 22nd July 2021

SPFL BOARD ELECTED FOR 2021/22

CLUB REPRESENTATIVES ELECTED AT AGM

At Tuesday’s AGM of the Scottish Professional Football League, the 42 member clubs elected the seven club representatives who will serve on the SPFL Board for the forthcoming season.

The SPFL Board includes three cinch Premiership representatives, two from the cinch Championship and two covering cinch League 1 and cinch League 2, one as an alternate director.

Elected to serve on the 2021/22 SPFL Board, alongside SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster, chairman Murdoch MacLennan and independent non-executive director Karyn McCluskey, were: 

  • cinch Premiership: Ron Gordon (Hibernian), James MacDonald (Ross County), Stewart¬†Robertson (Rangers)
  • cinch Championship: Les Gray (Hamilton Academical), Ross McArthur (Dunfermline Athletic)
  • cinch League 1 and League 2: Alastair Donald (Forfar Athletic), Alternate director - Paul¬†Hetherington (Airdrieonians)

 

 

He is one of the cinch Premiership representatives! ūü§£ūü§£ūü§£

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fozzyonthefence
48 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:


We should all be backing them to win, it will be the end of the Celtic cabal who put us in the championship to protect 9IAR 

 

The end of Doncaster and McLennan once and for all


It’s hard to pick a dog in this fight.  I hope they both lose but at least one of them has to lose face as they can’t both be right!  If Rangers win, Doncaster must surely be finished.  If the SPFL win it will be glorious to see Rangers have to make a humiliating u-turn. Win, win. 
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hagar the Horrible

Rangers never backed down with the media in a fight. This is them choosing to do so. At best all they can do is withhold the pennies Cinch have paid

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fozzyonthefence
28 minutes ago, Hagar the Horrible said:

Rangers never backed down with the media in a fight. This is them choosing to do so. At best all they can do is withhold the pennies Cinch have paid


They backed down against Doncaster the last time though, will be interesting to see how this one pans out.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nookie Bear
9 hours ago, davemclaren said:

One cabal replaced by another. 


The next one might be more sympathetic to us though. 
 

Sad, but it’s how Scottish football operates. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nookie Bear
8 hours ago, gnasher75 said:

 

Thursday 22nd July 2021

SPFL BOARD ELECTED FOR 2021/22

CLUB REPRESENTATIVES ELECTED AT AGM

At Tuesday’s AGM of the Scottish Professional Football League, the 42 member clubs elected the seven club representatives who will serve on the SPFL Board for the forthcoming season.

The SPFL Board includes three cinch Premiership representatives, two from the cinch Championship and two covering cinch League 1 and cinch League 2, one as an alternate director.

Elected to serve on the 2021/22 SPFL Board, alongside SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster, chairman Murdoch MacLennan and independent non-executive director Karyn McCluskey, were: 

  • cinch Premiership: Ron Gordon (Hibernian), James MacDonald (Ross County), Stewart¬†Robertson (Rangers)
  • cinch Championship: Les Gray (Hamilton Academical), Ross McArthur (Dunfermline Athletic)
  • cinch League 1 and League 2: Alastair Donald (Forfar Athletic), Alternate director - Paul¬†Hetherington (Airdrieonians)

 

 

He is one of the cinch Premiership representatives! ūü§£ūü§£ūü§£


Incredible that Ron is on the Board when he is resident in Miami. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

 

Screenshot_20210809-180555_Twitter.jpg.f317d85173aa31d961981b0a4242e956.jpg

Well that letter could have been cut down to 2 paragraphs and a few bullet points.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hagar the Horrible

I do see they are once again using the payment as a weapon, we all need to gang up against that one club, or nobody will get paid, Smells of giving Celtic their 8.75IAR.  The reality is just dont pay out to Rangers.

 

Rangers claim they gave concerns over the contract as it would conflict with an existing contract they had.

 

The SPFL counter that with they have failed to evidence that. and they have been sponsored by 32 Red on the front of their shirts while playing in the Ladbrooks SPFL.

 

Ever since the 1974 world cup where the dutch team were sponsored by Adidas and if you look at Johan Cruyff, he only had 2 strips down his shirt, as he had a personal deal with Puma and claimed against his FA that althought the Dutch FA had a deal with Adidas, his head sticking out of it did not.  Since then the contracts have been tightened and not even Messi would get away with stitching 3 stripes into a Nike Argentina Strip. 

 

Rangers case is slimer than an anorexic whippet, but thats not the point, I think this is just a flexing of bicepts, and opening salvo against Doncaster and his Timmy tangential protectors.  I think this is all about regaining the advantage in the power struggle with Liewells regime.  I think Rangers will be told they have to wear the livery and will do, and say well that that cleared up.  But if they still dont?

 

Also final note, neither the SMSM, Sevco or indeed any clubs has came out publically and stated the deal is shite and we have been under sold, The league has been under valued, and Doncaster paid somebody else £500k for doing the work.  Nobody asks what are we paying him £400k for.  I just hope this is Rangers trying to do something behind the scenes.  Even if its about one director and for his benefit, if the whole league benefits from bringing down the citadel of crap then so be it!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ex member of the SaS

No matter what happens Doncaster will still be in charge. The guy has more brass in his neck than MiM had in the smelter.

The simple fact that he can't be sacked has to be the worst deal ever for all clubs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, gnasher75 said:

Had a wee look at Rangers website to see if Park's Motors are listed anywhere as a sponsor or partner.

 

https://www.rangers.co.uk/partners/2SmHSWaLyUqNvYPbace4t7

 

There are loads of companies listed but not Park's. Will be disappointing if Rangers have managed to score an own goal here and the SPFL win at arbitration again.

 

Rangers mate of mine believes its the Tomket Tyres Sponsorship that's the issue and nothing to do with Park's, crux of the matter is that Tomket have spent £x amount to be a sleeve sponsor and another motoring company (cinch) have gotten the other sleeve at a fraction of the price

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




√ó
√ó
  • Create New...