A letter from Aberdeen, Motherwell, Livingston, Rangers, St Johnstone and St Mirren to the SPFL

[Deid Heid]

I guess I don't get it.

Only one club had input into this report across all 42 member clubs - how can that possibly be representitive of every single club.

Sounds like a complete sham right-off the bat.

 

Also I am very pleased that Hearts are not involved in this. Nothing will change, these turkeys will not vote for christmas, ever.

The one guidiing, fundemental principe that unrderpins the whole association, with only a handful of exceptions is that of "**** everyone else, we look after w'ur sel's".

 

Whilst I doubt there was ever any different attitude from Hearts, every time Hearts pipe-up, the full weight of the media propaganda machine kicks in to ridicule and undermine us. The SFA sick their most partizan 'uber' refs in to cheat us Then, on the back of that, in one of the most egregious acts ever sanctioned by 86% of all 42 clubs. they expel us from the top division.

 

i would suggest we don't engage with these ***** ever on anything nor co-operate with them on anything. If any future motion comes up about the good of scottish football - i trust that Herts will view it and vote to ONLY the benifit of HMFC and, as a far as possible, to the the detriment of all of those clubs that knifed us in the back. I would even go as far as to say that even if the motion was to our detriment, but even worse for the rest of them, I'd back that. If it puts some of those clubs out of business, good, that's what they wanted for us.

 

I hope you all understand that this is just my petty opinion, i would never expect anyone else to share my extremely jaundiced view of Scottish football, but the other clubs are beneath contempt and I can honestly say I wish every single one of them the very worst, always.

Edited February 8 by Deid Heid
didn't scan right

[Deid Heid]

Leave these p***** their wee bun-fight, P*****

Nothing will change even if they didn't  doctor te report

[hectornicol]

53 minutes ago, Deid Heid said:

I guess I don't get it.

Only one club had input into this report across all 42 member clubs - how can that possibly be representitive of every single club.

Sounds like a complete sham right-off the bat.

 

Also I am very pleased that Hearts are not involved in this. Nothing will change, these turkeys will not vote for christmas, ever.

The one guidiing, fundemental principe that unrderpins the whole association, with only a handful of exceptions is that of "**** everyone else, we look after w'ur sel's".

 

Whilst I doubt there was ever any different attitude from Hearts, every time Hearts pipe-up, the full weight of the media propaganda machine kicks in to ridicule and undermine us. The SFA sick their most partizan 'uber' refs in to cheat us Then, on the back of that, in one of the most egregious acts ever sanctioned by 86% of all 42 clubs. they expel us from the top division.

 

i would suggest we don't engage with these ***** ever on anything nor co-operate with them on anything. If any future motion comes up about the good of scottish football - i trust that Herts will view it and vote to ONLY the benifit of HMFC and, as a far as possible, to the the detriment of all of those clubs that knifed us in the back. I would even go as far as to say that even if the motion was to our detriment, but even worse for the rest of them, I'd back that. If it puts some of those clubs out of business, good, that's what they wanted for us.

 

I hope you all understand that this is just my petty opinion, i would never expect anyone else to share my extremely jaundiced view of Scottish football, but the other clubs are beneath contempt and I can honestly say I wish every single one of them the very worst, always.

I'm with you on this!

[Toxteth O'Grady]

5 hours ago, Yoda said:

I agree, but Andrew McKinley is not going to rock any SPFL / SFA boats.

Which is why he shouldn’t be with us.

[RENE]

1 hour ago, Ex member of the SaS said:

If anything needs to change it's ONE governing body. Having two running such a small country's sport is beyond daft. Then board member voted in every four years or so. Giving donkey a job for life was the worse thing they could have done.

And NO board member should be affiliated to any club.

[Footballfirst]

Here's the full SPFL statement about the report.

 

https://spfl.co.uk/news/spfl-press-release-22-01-24

[SUTOL]

4 hours ago, Ex member of the SaS said:

If anything needs to change it's ONE governing body. Having two running such a small country's sport is beyond daft. Then board member voted in every four years or so. Giving donkey a job for life was the worse thing they could have done.

 

There is just one governing body, the SFA.

The SPFL is the senior clubs organising together to run the leagues. Just like the Highland League, the Lowland league, the various juniors and other amateur leagues.

 

 

Ofcourse the SPFL will have representatives from various clubs on the board, who else should represent the clubs and organise the leagues? 

 

[Armageddon]

9 hours ago, John Findlay said:

Why would Aberdeen be the only club to have seen something?

 

I'm here reading and thinking the only club is Celtic, as Lawell has his arm up the back of Doncaster and works him like a puppet.

Something must be up with Aberdeen as they do seen very sheepish 😂

[Strattiesroll]

This Herald article about it is staggering. 

 

When SPFL chairman Murdoch MacLennan released his statement recently over the Independent Corporate Governance Review of the league’s governing body, the summary of which essentially boiled down to there being nothing to see here, the abiding feeling was that we weren’t being informed of the full picture. Little did we know then that the clubs themselves hadn’t been either.
Despite several requests from members of the SPFL to see the full report since, they have yet to receive it. That is troubling enough, but the most alarming aspect of the process is that the SPFL board themselves were presented with a version of the report that had apparently first been edited and altered by the executive.
Perhaps only the SPFL, in their handling of an audit into their own corporate governance, could raise more questions than answers around their corporate governance. And the very fact that the organisation being audited was allowed first viewing of the findings has sent alarm bells ringing in boardrooms throughout the Scottish game.

The filtering of the information in the version presented to member clubs has now prompted six of them to come forward and attach their names to a co-signed letter, spelling out their concerns about the leadership of MacLennan and SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster in no uncertain terms.
READ MORE: MacLennan 'needs to go' claims ex-SPFL CEO Roger Mitchell
The SPFL agreed to the audit as part of the settlement to the so-called ‘cinch dispute’ between the governing body and Rangers over the Ibrox club’s refusal to carry the league sponsor’s name on their strips or on advertising boards at Ibrox due to a pre-existing deal with Park’s Motor Group.
Criticisms of their governance from Rangers during that row were often painted by the SPFL of being agenda-driven given the acrimony that existed at the time between themselves and the club, but that is a much harder line to push in this instance with such a wide range of signatories to the complaint.
Herald Sport understands that clubs were shocked not to see any reference to the cinch dispute whatsoever in the version of the report they have seen, with many feeling that it amounts to the SPFL ‘marking their own homework’. The one club who did have input into the report was Aberdeen, but they still hold deep concerns about the way the process was carried out.
In addition, it is understood that the external auditor who carried out the report, Henderson Loggie, intimated to the SPFL board that the audit of the SPFL prompted the largest number of findings and recommendations that they had ever made.
Now, the six signatories to the letter are demanding to know what amendments were made to the original report before it was presented to the SPFL board, having been blindsided by the statement released by MacLennan.
Trust and confidence in the competence of the SPFL leadership has now been eroded to the point that these clubs have felt they had no other choice to take this step, amid wider concern in the lack of a strategy to meet the recommendations put forward by the club-led Deloitte report that was published last year with a view to growing revenue for the Scottish game.
In addition, it is believed the governance report contained a number of queries around the SPFL remuneration committee, highlighting concerns around a lack of transparency on issues such as bonuses and the highly unusual two-year notice period on Doncaster’s contract, as Herald Sport exclusively revealed last summer.
The SPFL have been approached for comment, but at the time of publication, had issued no response. And it will be intriguing to see just what response eventually emerges, and how tenable the positions of both MacLennan and Doncaster will be going forward having lost the confidence of so many Premiership clubs.
The statement released by the clubs read: "On behalf of SPFL Premiership clubs Aberdeen, Motherwell, Livingston, Rangers, St Johnstone and St. Mirren, a letter was today issued to the SPFL executive in response to the handling of the recent Independent Governance report.

"The clubs hold serious concerns regarding the report's independence, transparency, and the overall governance of the SPFL.
"The letter seeks full clarity on numerous issues so that the clubs, as shareholders of the SPFL, can determine if further action is necessary.
READ MORE: Neil Doncaster's astonishing SPFL exit cost amid 2 year notice period
"In conjunction with a draft report being made available to the SPFL Board, SPFL Chairman Murdoch MacLennan hastily released a statement that did not reflect the full findings of the report.
"Additionally, the statement was issued without the approval or knowledge of members of the SPFL Board or SPFL member clubs.
"The SPFL Board is to meet at a future date to discuss the draft report's contents, making it highly inappropriate for the SPFL Chairman to have made any public comment ahead of that meeting.
"Regarding the report itself, the clubs and others are deeply concerned about its independence, given that the SPFL Executive received the first draft of the report and made changes to it prior to sending it to SPFL Board members.
"Of the 42 member clubs, only one had the opportunity to input into the report’s investigation, outside of current or previous SPFL Board members.

"Despite several requests from the clubs, the report has yet to be released to any of the member clubs despite the clubs footing the bill for its creation.
"The handling of the Independent Governance report has brought the clubs governance concerns to a head, and it is now incumbent on the SPFL Board and Executive, for the sake of trust in those running our game, to provide clarity over these clear and deeply troubling concerns as a matter of urgency."

[RobNox]

11 hours ago, HopeDiouf said:

it's not like I made it up it's in the papers.  Believe whatever you want.

My bad.  I misinterpreted things and thought it was another club who had seen the report, not any of the 6 clubs who are party to the letter.  As I read through the thread it became clearer that I had the wrong end of the stick.

[RobNox]

This is typical of the SPFL, trying to whitewash things.  Remember when the judgement was passed in their favour when Partick and us took legal action against our demotion.  They refused a request from us and Partick to publish the entire report, instead wanted to only publish the conclusion, which was that they had acted within their powers, which Hearts and Partick refused to agree to.

 

Now why would they only want to publish the conclusion and not all of the findings of the judicial review? It's fairly obvious that they were criticised for the way in which they handled the matter and didn't want to admit to their failings.

[HeartsandonlyHearts]

14 hours ago, davemclaren said:

Hearts will probably be told to stop training for a few weeks. 😎

Well that’s just silly. 😜 

 

 

[John Findlay]

This one is not going away.

[jamboinglasgow]

11 hours ago, Strattiesroll said:

This Herald article about it is staggering. 

 

When SPFL chairman Murdoch MacLennan released his statement recently over the Independent Corporate Governance Review of the league’s governing body, the summary of which essentially boiled down to there being nothing to see here, the abiding feeling was that we weren’t being informed of the full picture. Little did we know then that the clubs themselves hadn’t been either.
Despite several requests from members of the SPFL to see the full report since, they have yet to receive it. That is troubling enough, but the most alarming aspect of the process is that the SPFL board themselves were presented with a version of the report that had apparently first been edited and altered by the executive.
Perhaps only the SPFL, in their handling of an audit into their own corporate governance, could raise more questions than answers around their corporate governance. And the very fact that the organisation being audited was allowed first viewing of the findings has sent alarm bells ringing in boardrooms throughout the Scottish game.

The filtering of the information in the version presented to member clubs has now prompted six of them to come forward and attach their names to a co-signed letter, spelling out their concerns about the leadership of MacLennan and SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster in no uncertain terms.
READ MORE: MacLennan 'needs to go' claims ex-SPFL CEO Roger Mitchell
The SPFL agreed to the audit as part of the settlement to the so-called ‘cinch dispute’ between the governing body and Rangers over the Ibrox club’s refusal to carry the league sponsor’s name on their strips or on advertising boards at Ibrox due to a pre-existing deal with Park’s Motor Group.
Criticisms of their governance from Rangers during that row were often painted by the SPFL of being agenda-driven given the acrimony that existed at the time between themselves and the club, but that is a much harder line to push in this instance with such a wide range of signatories to the complaint.
Herald Sport understands that clubs were shocked not to see any reference to the cinch dispute whatsoever in the version of the report they have seen, with many feeling that it amounts to the SPFL ‘marking their own homework’. The one club who did have input into the report was Aberdeen, but they still hold deep concerns about the way the process was carried out.
In addition, it is understood that the external auditor who carried out the report, Henderson Loggie, intimated to the SPFL board that the audit of the SPFL prompted the largest number of findings and recommendations that they had ever made.
Now, the six signatories to the letter are demanding to know what amendments were made to the original report before it was presented to the SPFL board, having been blindsided by the statement released by MacLennan.
Trust and confidence in the competence of the SPFL leadership has now been eroded to the point that these clubs have felt they had no other choice to take this step, amid wider concern in the lack of a strategy to meet the recommendations put forward by the club-led Deloitte report that was published last year with a view to growing revenue for the Scottish game.
In addition, it is believed the governance report contained a number of queries around the SPFL remuneration committee, highlighting concerns around a lack of transparency on issues such as bonuses and the highly unusual two-year notice period on Doncaster’s contract, as Herald Sport exclusively revealed last summer.
The SPFL have been approached for comment, but at the time of publication, had issued no response. And it will be intriguing to see just what response eventually emerges, and how tenable the positions of both MacLennan and Doncaster will be going forward having lost the confidence of so many Premiership clubs.
The statement released by the clubs read: "On behalf of SPFL Premiership clubs Aberdeen, Motherwell, Livingston, Rangers, St Johnstone and St. Mirren, a letter was today issued to the SPFL executive in response to the handling of the recent Independent Governance report.

"The clubs hold serious concerns regarding the report's independence, transparency, and the overall governance of the SPFL.
"The letter seeks full clarity on numerous issues so that the clubs, as shareholders of the SPFL, can determine if further action is necessary.
READ MORE: Neil Doncaster's astonishing SPFL exit cost amid 2 year notice period
"In conjunction with a draft report being made available to the SPFL Board, SPFL Chairman Murdoch MacLennan hastily released a statement that did not reflect the full findings of the report.
"Additionally, the statement was issued without the approval or knowledge of members of the SPFL Board or SPFL member clubs.
"The SPFL Board is to meet at a future date to discuss the draft report's contents, making it highly inappropriate for the SPFL Chairman to have made any public comment ahead of that meeting.
"Regarding the report itself, the clubs and others are deeply concerned about its independence, given that the SPFL Executive received the first draft of the report and made changes to it prior to sending it to SPFL Board members.
"Of the 42 member clubs, only one had the opportunity to input into the report’s investigation, outside of current or previous SPFL Board members.

"Despite several requests from the clubs, the report has yet to be released to any of the member clubs despite the clubs footing the bill for its creation.
"The handling of the Independent Governance report has brought the clubs governance concerns to a head, and it is now incumbent on the SPFL Board and Executive, for the sake of trust in those running our game, to provide clarity over these clear and deeply troubling concerns as a matter of urgency."

 

Reading that it is pretty shocking, you would think Doncaster and MacLennan could be in serious trouble, to hide the full findings of the report before even the board could read it, only a edited version. 

[Malinga the Swinga]

17 hours ago, Deid Heid said:

I guess I don't get it.

Only one club had input into this report across all 42 member clubs - how can that possibly be representitive of every single club.

Sounds like a complete sham right-off the bat.

 

Also I am very pleased that Hearts are not involved in this. Nothing will change, these turkeys will not vote for christmas, ever.

The one guidiing, fundemental principe that unrderpins the whole association, with only a handful of exceptions is that of "**** everyone else, we look after w'ur sel's".

 

Whilst I doubt there was ever any different attitude from Hearts, every time Hearts pipe-up, the full weight of the media propaganda machine kicks in to ridicule and undermine us. The SFA sick their most partizan 'uber' refs in to cheat us Then, on the back of that, in one of the most egregious acts ever sanctioned by 86% of all 42 clubs. they expel us from the top division.

 

i would suggest we don't engage with these ***** ever on anything nor co-operate with them on anything. If any future motion comes up about the good of scottish football - i trust that Herts will view it and vote to ONLY the benifit of HMFC and, as a far as possible, to the the detriment of all of those clubs that knifed us in the back. I would even go as far as to say that even if the motion was to our detriment, but even worse for the rest of them, I'd back that. If it puts some of those clubs out of business, good, that's what they wanted for us.

 

I hope you all understand that this is just my petty opinion, i would never expect anyone else to share my extremely jaundiced view of Scottish football, but the other clubs are beneath contempt and I can honestly say I wish every single one of them the very worst, always.

That's my position. Never forget and never forgive 

[RustyRightPeg]

9 hours ago, John Findlay said:

This one is not going away.

 

Quite rightly. I hope the SPFL crash and burn, and those at the top have a slow and painful demise throughout the process that exposes their corruption.

[Byyy The Light]

11 minutes ago, RustyRightPeg said:

 

Quite rightly. I hope the SPFL crash and burn, and those at the top have a slow and painful demise throughout the process that exposes their corruption.

There have been a couple of false dawns where I’ve thought change might happen. Covid being the biggest one. 
 

Genuinely hope this is finally the one that blows the whole corrupt cartel apart. 🤞🏼🤞🏼

 

There is huge potential in our game if Governance is in the right hands. 

[Deid Heid]

2 hours ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

That's my position. Never forget and never forgive 

Much more succinctly put!

I should get a tattoo of that

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Hopefully this means they can terminate Doncaster with cause and avoid his golden parachute.

[JTJ]

7 minutes ago, Watt-Zeefuik said:

Hopefully this means they can terminate Doncaster with cause and avoid his golden parachute.

"Terminate with Extreme Prejudice" covers it, I think 😁

[jamboinglasgow]

1 hour ago, Byyy The Light said:

There have been a couple of false dawns where I’ve thought change might happen. Covid being the biggest one. 
 

Genuinely hope this is finally the one that blows the whole corrupt cartel apart. 🤞🏼🤞🏼

 

There is huge potential in our game if Governance is in the right hands. 

 

There should have been a serious review of decision making by the SPFL during Covid. There has been so many questionable decisions, bizarre actions and blatant self protection.

 

But of course, only 3 clubs had any negative impact (Hearts, Partick Thistle and Stranraer from bein relegated 8 games early) and 1 major decision in awarding the title to Celtic 8 games early. So apart from the 3 relegated clubs and Rangers, no one wants to dig things up as they were either not affected or benefited directly from the decision made.

 

But think of the actions: the sudden decision to end the season and count everything at that point as final including relegation, the questionable actions with Dundee's lost vote, Doncasters actions, the leadership of SPFL refusing to do anything and just let Hearts and Partick Thistle try to lobby for reconstruction to try and placate us without any real push to change. Also was reminded that we started training in June (I think) to give us time to get up to speed after not playing for months, then the SPFL after a couple of weeks ordered us to stop as other clubs complained it was giving us an unfair advantage.

 

Is there anything else I have forgotten?

 

 

[Hagar the Horrible]

13 minutes ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

 

 

Is there anything else I have forgotten?

 

 

I still Hope that for regardless of the Rangers championing this, That the full report  is published publicly that demoted us, not just the conclusion, there is clearly something to hide.  

[sac]

Am I mistaken, but did the clubs themselves not fund this Governance report?

[Gorgierools]

1 hour ago, sac said:

Am I mistaken, but did the clubs themselves not fund this Governance report?

Might as well have given them an all  inclusive holiday in Vegas for all the good it will have done.

Edited February 9 by Gorgierools

[JyTees]

Change and reform are long overdue in our game. We should be fully behind and onboard with those who are highlighting the incompetence and skulduggery that's persisted for decades and holding to account those involved in the whitewashing of "independant" reveiws. 

 

With Rangers and half the league raising concerns we should be strengthening that voice. I'd hate to think McKinley's position is holding us back.

[Mikey1874]

On 08/02/2024 at 11:03, davemclaren said:

Without knowing any of the details around this it's hard to have any thoughts on it. 🤷‍♂️

 

Another angle re the concerns 

 

 

[Ex member of the SaS]

Also never forget Hibs lost money to see us sh!t on. Better to stay on the side and only vote for our benefit. As stated if the worst case scenario harms us slightly but dumps on the rest then go for it.

[No Idle Talk]

Curious that the report was doctored before Celtic got a look at it yet Celtic haven't put their name to this letter. Seems like the sort of thing they would normally be up in arms about.........

[Pilmuir]

13 hours ago, John Findlay said:

This one is not going away.

Hope you are correct. The SPFL has been vindictive and arrogant for years. Doncaster must be made of Teflon, he is surely the most overpaid person in the country yet gets away with it. Hope he and the hopeless administration around him finally get their comeuppance.

[Jim_Duncan]

2 hours ago, JTJ said:

"Terminate with Extreme Prejudice" covers it, I think 😁

The horror, the horror. 

[OTT]

I don't like our clubs silence on this. 

Time to speak up is now. Hopefully Ann and co writing a scathing statement to dump more fuel on the fire. 

[Albert McFly]

There's two clubs who will stay silent until the outcome for different reasons 

 

Heart of Midlothian - Will have legal cause to engage with them for compensation if corporate governance is found to be wanting

 

Celtic - shitting themselves due to the influence and evidence of them being over involved in governance and decisions that could lead to them being culpable..... Think the award of league title 8.5!

[sac]

3 minutes ago, OTT said:

I don't like our clubs silence on this. 

Time to speak up is now. Hopefully Ann and co writing a scathing statement to dump more fuel on the fire. 

No need, let the rest bump their gums.

The touch paper has been lit, the Huns are asking questions, so the SPFL will be squirming and trying to get their excuses ready.

[John Findlay]

7 minutes ago, OTT said:

I don't like our clubs silence on this. 

Time to speak up is now. Hopefully Ann and co writing a scathing statement to dump more fuel on the fire. 

Have you not cottoned on yet?

Hearts will speak/make a statement when the time is right. At this moment in time, we are quite rightly keeping our powder dry.

[OTT]

13 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

Have you not cottoned on yet?

Hearts will speak/make a statement when the time is right. At this moment in time, we are quite rightly keeping our powder dry.

 

I just don't want this opportunity to go by us. If there is a chance to further demonstrate how not fit for purpose our governing body is, we should grab it with both hands. 

 

Scottish football fails to move forward because of a near constant "I'm alright Jack" attitude from the clubs, when one club is ****ed over, the rest look on and laugh until it happens to them, by which point its the next clubs turn to point and laugh. 

 

About time Doncaster & McLennans positions came under threat.

[John Findlay]

6 minutes ago, OTT said:

 

I just don't want this opportunity to go by us. 

It won't Imho.

[part_time_jambo]

On 08/02/2024 at 12:18, indianajones said:

Genuinely no idea as to what is going on here. 

A lot of words to say nothing in that letter.

As I understand it, it's about governance, independence, transparency and handling. Simple.

[merrymac]

1 hour ago, Albert McFly said:

There's two clubs who will stay silent until the outcome for different reasons 

 

Heart of Midlothian - Will have legal cause to engage with them for compensation if corporate governance is found to be wanting

 

Celtic - shitting themselves due to the influence and evidence of them being over involved in governance and decisions that could lead to them being culpable..... Think the award of league title 8.5!

Agree but you forgot Hibs who like to copy Celtic like some love struck teenager

[RENE]

Why don't the clubs all contact the writers of the report and ask for a copy of the original report, after all they ordered it.

[B.S.]

I wouldn’t be surprised if Hearts attitude is ‘****em, let them get on with it’

Hearts have been attacked from the media and other clubs when trying to sort out previous SPFL/SFA created mess.

There is no benefit to Hearts getting involved, the others will do what they want no matter what Hearts say or do.

[section s heart]

2 hours ago, Pilmuir said:

Hope you are correct. The SPFL has been vindictive and arrogant for years. Doncaster must be made of Teflon, he is surely the most overpaid person in the country yet gets away with it. Hope he and the hopeless administration around him finally get their comeuppance.

Doncaster often reminds us that he's here to serve the will of member clubs, which seems to mean the uglies, principally Celtic.

 

When we need some CEO leadership, such as TV contract renewals, he delivers underwhelming results and seemingly needs Lawwell to hold his hand, to ensure a modest £ deal which again is all about the uglies. 

 

So what does this oug offer. You'd think he must be a great administrator, and then the governance of the SPFL is brought into serious question. 

 

Not very good this guy, is he? Get him in the bin.

[RobNox]

2 hours ago, section s heart said:

Doncaster often reminds us that he's here to serve the will of member clubs, which seems to mean the uglies, principally Celtic.

 

When we need some CEO leadership, such as TV contract renewals, he delivers underwhelming results and seemingly needs Lawwell to hold his hand, to ensure a modest £ deal which again is all about the uglies. 

 

So what does this oug offer. You'd think he must be a great administrator, and then the governance of the SPFL is brought into serious question. 

 

Not very good this guy, is he? Get him in the bin.

He got a bonus for securing the Cinch sponsorship deal, yet all he did was hire a consultancy firm to identify potential sponsors.

 

Then he claimed it was the biggest sponsorship deal ever, while conveniently omitting the fact that it was only the biggest deal because it was for 5 years and would actually bring in less per annum than the previous shorter term deals with Ladbrokes.

 

To cap it all, it turns out they fecked up the deal because Cinch conflicts with Parks of Hamilton who sponsor Rangers, they ran up huge legal bills taking the issue to court only to lose the case, which of course led to the current "independent" review.

 

As Malcolm Tucker would say, it's a complete omnishambles.

[Paisley Jambo]

I hope we are keeping our powder dry on this one.

 

A chance to shaft Doncaster et al. who shafted us in 2020.

 

If we miss chance to pile in on Doncaster and  McLennan then it’s disappointing.

[HMFC01]

Hearts and Hibs invited to SPFL meeting as six furious clubs demand answers after scathing criticism

Six furious clubs - including Aberdeen and Rangers - have invited the likes of Hearts and Hibs to a meeting this month. 

 

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts-hibs-spfl-showdown-angry-clubs-demand-answers-4519275

 

 

 

"To that end, the clubs have invited the chairman and chief executive to attend a meeting of all member clubs to address the issues around the Independent Governance Review. All SPFL member clubs are invited to attend and participate in this meeting, which is to take place a 11:00am on 27 February 2024."

Edited February 15 by HMFC01

[John Findlay]

21 minutes ago, HMFC01 said:

Hearts and Hibs invited to SPFL meeting as six furious clubs demand answers after scathing criticism

Six furious clubs - including Aberdeen and Rangers - have invited the likes of Hearts and Hibs to a meeting this month. 

 

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts-hibs-spfl-showdown-angry-clubs-demand-answers-4519275

 

 

 

"To that end, the clubs have invited the chairman and chief executive to attend a meeting of all member clubs to address the issues around the Independent Governance Review. All SPFL member clubs are invited to attend and participate in this meeting, which is to take place a 11:00am on 27 February 2024."

Hibs have their AGM on the 27th of February.

[Sooks]

Surely nobody still believes that the SPFL Board are anything other than Celtic administrators ? The whole thing needs burnt to the ground and buried . Start a fresh with none of this stupid 11-1 voting garbage and let the game grow 

[Hagar the Horrible]

So the Board have called for their own meeting now on 19th March in which they host and set the agenda, If the Seethed six have backbone they will still hold theirs at 27th February giving the Exec less time to prepare bull***t 

 

All clubs have the full doc now, but I would if a chairman to ask for another copy direct from Henderson Loggie as that's who the clubs paid for, otherwise the exec could still doctor it.  The Exec want to paper over it with their proposals by stating they will do HG's recommendations, that wont be an answer, But Celtics PR machine will be all over this, mark my words

 

I hope there is real rage and the whole corrupt lot gets burned down to the ground

[jamboinglasgow]

16 minutes ago, Hagar the Horrible said:

So the Board have called for their own meeting now on 19th March in which they host and set the agenda, If the Seethed six have backbone they will still hold theirs at 27th February giving the Exec less time to prepare bull***t 

 

All clubs have the full doc now, but I would if a chairman to ask for another copy direct from Henderson Loggie as that's who the clubs paid for, otherwise the exec could still doctor it.  The Exec want to paper over it with their proposals by stating they will do HG's recommendations, that wont be an answer, But Celtics PR machine will be all over this, mark my words

 

I hope there is real rage and the whole corrupt lot gets burned down to the ground

 

It all smacks of an executive who are trying everything to hide the incompetence they have shown and the negative effects it has shown on the clubs. They want to protect their jobs. I do think the leadership of SPFL were set in place by Celtic, particularly Lawwell, after Rangers went down (where I think Rangers had much more influence before.) 

 

There is something seriously rotten there. 

[Mikey1874]

Another example of an organisation too arrogant to admit to a mistake that is fighting Rangers and Parks of Hamilton when they had the rules on their side. 

 

 

Edited February 16 by Mikey1874

[jambali]

On 09/02/2024 at 16:05, Mikey1874 said:

 

Another angle re the concerns 

 

 

No sympathy for them due to their past actions