Rangers open the door to Dave King

[Bluedell 5,624]

Can you show me one shred of evidence to back that up.

 

My mate says that he stayed in the same apartment block overlooking the Clyde as Whyte around 15 years ago and saw him going to games then.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

I don't find you irritating. I don't know you. What I find irritating is the stance you adopt towards anyone with a title, whether it be a "learned" judge or a member of the SFA. There is a certain 'snobbery' to it that really doesn't sit well with me. You've be very consistent with it over a very long period. It many cases these 'learned' people were involved in very dubious decisions against our Club for example, but in your eyes they held a title so couldn't be wrong.

I have experienced many 'learned' people and 'suits with titles' who have been unscrupulous, untrustworthy and basically corrupt. It comes across to me as a form of snobbery which I abhor.

 

I've already responded about SA and am waiting to hear if you have evidence or read any reports that Justice Brian Smallwood is corrupt.

 

As far as the SFA is concerned, I have known the President Campbell Ogilvie for many years and regard him as honest and trustworthy. He is in an elected position that certainly does not make him infallible in my eyes but equally he is not in a position to make many, if any, decisions on his own. The Boards of the SFA are elected and I have criticised the fact that Celtic FC have a man on both the full SFA Board and the Professional Game Board; but that is something for the other Clubs to aswer. I came to know Stewart Regan quite well in 2011-12 and whilst I think he struggled at first he can be credited with completely revising the SFA Rule Book and changing the outdated committee system against the wishes of many of the so called "blazers" who thereby lost their sinecures and trips abroad etc. He was also the driving force behind the play offs and the pyramid structure, again against the wishes of many of the member clubs. I think he would acknowledge his mistakes - one of which certainly was in not pursuing Whyte's lawyers nearly hard enough for answers on "fit and proper". No doubt you will correct me if I am wrong but I don't think that he personally made any decisions against Rangers, they would have been made by his employers the Clubs. He was just their mouthpiece.

 

Far from kowtowing I have had many robust arguments with Messrs Regan and Doncaster and I am sure they would tell you for example that I gave them both a very hard time over not promoting "absolute liability" against the club's "reasonably practicable" defence for fan misbehaviour and I argued this against the football authorities and police in front of Ministers despite the "advice" of civil servants . I also spent many a meeting arguing for a 16 team league and more even distribution of the SPL's funds. I also argued with Ministers and others on the JAG/JRG against the "man on the no 9 Clapham omnibus" definition of a "reasonable person" and many other aspects of the OBA. It may comfort you a little to know that Mr Doncaster described the circumstances of our relationship as "difficult and testing ".

 

BTW I don't care for snobbery either.

[aweebluesoandso 290]

I've already responded about SA and am waiting to hear if you have evidence or read any reports that Justice Brian Smallwood is corrupt.

 

As far as the SFA is concerned, I have known the President Campbell Ogilvie for many years and regard him as honest and trustworthy. He is in an elected position that certainly does not make him infallible in my eyes but equally he is not in a position to make many, if any, decisions on his own. The Boards of the SFA are elected and I have criticised the fact that Celtic FC have a man on both the full SFA Board and the Professional Game Board; but that is something for the other Clubs to aswer. I came to know Stewart Regan quite well in 2011-12 and whilst I think he struggled at first he can be credited with completely revising the SFA Rule Book and changing the outdated committee system against the wishes of many of the so called "blazers" who thereby lost their sinecures and trips abroad etc. He was also the driving force behind the play offs and the pyramid structure, again against the wishes of many of the member clubs. I think he would acknowledge his mistakes - one of which certainly was in not pursuing Whyte's lawyers nearly hard enough for answers on "fit and proper". No doubt you will correct me if I am wrong but I don't think that he personally made any decisions against Rangers, they would have been made by his employers the Clubs. He was just their mouthpiece.

 

Far from kowtowing I have had many robust arguments with Messrs Regan and Doncaster and I am sure they would tell you for example that I gave them both a very hard time over not promoting "absolute liability" against the club's "reasonably practicable" defence for fan misbehaviour and I argued this against the football authorities and police in front of Ministers despite the "advice" of civil servants . I also spent many a meeting arguing for a 16 team league and more even distribution of the SPL's funds. I also argued with Ministers and others on the JAG/JRG against the "man on the no 9 Clapham omnibus" definition of a "reasonable person" and many other aspects of the OBA. It may comfort you a little to know that Mr Doncaster described the circumstances of our relationship as "difficult and testing ".

 

BTW I don't care for snobbery either.

 

Bh you're in the wrong profession, you should be a QC. You defend the indefensible in Regan and Doncaster two quislings in the thrall (i use that word advisedly to save me from a possible lawsuit) of Celtic and Liewell. Those two puppets don't blow their noses without Livewells say so.

[Bluedell 5,624]

No doubt you will correct me if I am wrong but I don't think that he personally made any decisions against Rangers, they would have been made by his employers the Clubs. He was just their mouthpiece.

 

Regan wasn't known as Lawwell's bitch long before administration for no reason

 

Regan is not just the clubs' mouthpiece. He is given the authority to run the organisation and makes daily, weekly and monthly decisions on his own without reference to the clubs.

[Zappa 0]

My mate says that he stayed in the same apartment block overlooking the Clyde as Whyte around 15 years ago and saw him going to games then.

 

I remember you saying that before BD, but surely it doesn't convince you that he's actually a Rangers fan?

[simplythebest 0]

I remember you saying that before BD, but surely it doesn't convince you that he's actually a Rangers fan?

 

Well how many people go to games in Glasgow just for entertainment?

 

Not that it in any way excuses Whyte or makes him look any better, he obviously didn't care for the consequences of his actions.

[Anchorman 0]

I've already responded about SA and am waiting to hear if you have evidence or read any reports that Justice Brian Smallwood is corrupt.

 

As far as the SFA is concerned, I have known the President Campbell Ogilvie for many years and regard him as honest and trustworthy. He is in an elected position that certainly does not make him infallible in my eyes but equally he is not in a position to make many, if any, decisions on his own. The Boards of the SFA are elected and I have criticised the fact that Celtic FC have a man on both the full SFA Board and the Professional Game Board; but that is something for the other Clubs to aswer. I came to know Stewart Regan quite well in 2011-12 and whilst I think he struggled at first he can be credited with completely revising the SFA Rule Book and changing the outdated committee system against the wishes of many of the so called "blazers" who thereby lost their sinecures and trips abroad etc. He was also the driving force behind the play offs and the pyramid structure, again against the wishes of many of the member clubs. I think he would acknowledge his mistakes - one of which certainly was in not pursuing Whyte's lawyers nearly hard enough for answers on "fit and proper". No doubt you will correct me if I am wrong but I don't think that he personally made any decisions against Rangers, they would have been made by his employers the Clubs. He was just their mouthpiece.

 

Far from kowtowing I have had many robust arguments with Messrs Regan and Doncaster and I am sure they would tell you for example that I gave them both a very hard time over not promoting "absolute liability" against the club's "reasonably practicable" defence for fan misbehaviour and I argued this against the football authorities and police in front of Ministers despite the "advice" of civil servants . I also spent many a meeting arguing for a 16 team league and more even distribution of the SPL's funds. I also argued with Ministers and others on the JAG/JRG against the "man on the no 9 Clapham omnibus" definition of a "reasonable person" and many other aspects of the OBA. It may comfort you a little to know that Mr Doncaster described the circumstances of our relationship as "difficult and testing ".

 

BTW I don't care for snobbery either.

 

You will be waiting a while because that is not what I said. What I am saying is that he accepted the testimony of SARS (who have a heavy track record of corruption). So for me, I lose all trust in the legal system he resides over in this case. On one side you have SARS with a track record for corruption (and a man in a wig all too ready to believe their evidence) and on the other side you have Dave King, who is admittedly no angel. King was wrong on many aspects, which he has now admitted. Have SARS made any similar admission?

Given the above, why do you (and others) continually want to take the word of a corrupt foreign establishment (SARS) wholeheartedly, while accusing King (a Rangers man who has been around our Club for a long time with a 'clean' record in the process) of all sorts?

All I care about is Rangers. King would never harm our Club. He has been around our Club for a long time and has never tried to 'milk' anything from the Club. The opposite is true. Can the same be said about the current board? King is no angel, but as long as he wants the best for Rangers I will support him.

 

I'm sure the other stuff about Regan, Doncaster, etc is interesting but I didn't mention them, so it's not relevant to what I was saying with all due respect.

[simplythebest 0]

You will be waiting a while because that is not what I said. What I am saying is that he accepted the testimony of SARS (who have a heavy track record of corruption). So for me, I lose all trust in the legal system he resides over in this case. On one side you have SARS with a track record for corruption (and a man in a wig all too ready to believe their evidence) and on the other side you have Dave King, who is admittedly no angel. King was wrong on many aspects, which he has now admitted. Have SARS made any similar admission?

Given the above, why do you (and others) continually want to take the word of a corrupt foreign establishment (SARS) wholeheartedly, while accusing King (a Rangers man who has been around our Club for a long time with a 'clean' record in the process) of all sorts?

All I care about is Rangers. King would never harm our Club. He has been around our Club for a long time and has never tried to 'milk' anything from the Club. The opposite is true. Can the same be said about the current board? King is no angel, but as long as he wants the best for Rangers I will support him.

 

I'm sure the other stuff about Regan, Doncaster, etc is interesting but I didn't mention them, so it's not relevant to what I was saying with all due respect.

 

I don't care for King's past, I think it's hypocrisy when people then make a fuss over Sandy Easdale's though.

[Zappa 0]

Well how many people go to games in Glasgow just for entertainment?

 

Just because the football isn't always entertaining and Whyte is said to have went to Ibrox 15 years ago doesn't mean he's a Rangers fan. He could have attended matches for numerous reasons other than actually being a fan.

[Scott7 6,002]

Was there not a shot of him on the telly after a Rangers goal, on his feet, arms stretched out in triumph, cheering wildly while those about him in the Directors' Box applaud quietly?

 

However, just because you are a fan, doesn't mean you're not a chancer or much worse.