Livingston fined and given registration embargo for 'dual ownership' issues

[RabiDuck 89]

Rule 1 - No secret about the dual interest, SFA approval for up to 10% shareholding

Rule 7 - Again, no secrecy about the interest and 10% approved. Don't believe there's a fit and proper concern either

Rule 21 - "Influence the management or administration" is the important bit here, and while there's historic instances, it couldn't be argued that he currently has this influence

Rule 86 - Guilty

 

Given similarities, I'd expect the same punishment as Livi, however "2. Livingston FC prevented from registering any player, either on loan or permanently, or extending the contract of any player currently registered with the club until such time as the club has resolved the ongoing breach of Disciplinary Rule 21." - I'd argue that in this instance we've resolved this breach.

[Frankie 8,651]

Rule 1 - No secret about the dual interest, SFA approval for up to 10% shareholding

Rule 7 - Again, no secrecy about the interest and 10% approved. Don't believe there's a fit and proper concern either

Rule 21 - "Influence the management or administration" is the important bit here, and while there's historic instances, it couldn't be argued that he currently has this influence

Rule 86 - Guilty

 

Given similarities, I'd expect the same punishment as Livi, however "2. Livingston FC prevented from registering any player, either on loan or permanently, or extending the contract of any player currently registered with the club until such time as the club has resolved the ongoing breach of Disciplinary Rule 21." - I'd argue that in this instance we've resolved this breach.

 

Generally I think you're right mate but the Rangers Retail stuff may prove problematic; not to mention the loans. I guess that's why SD was belatedly favoured over MASH for some stuff.

[colinstein 294]

Ashley did not try to hide his influence at Rangers and Newcastle from the SFA...Rule 1

don't think he broke rule 7 either by failing to disclose he "was fit and proper"....doubt he filled in any form wrongly

 

and following this couldn't have broken rules 21 and 86 either

 

He was up front about dual ownership, asked the SFA to allow him to buy 30% of the shares (which they refused) and accepted their ruling.

Undoubtedly for a time he was the main influence on the Rangers Board by proxy..........but none of it was hidden.

Far less serious than Livingston I think

and now his influence has gone I don't see the SFA meting out any punishment at all.

[Frankie 8,651]

Let's remember Ashley has already been fined for breaking Rule 19.

 

He may have (currently) lost his voices on the RFC board but his influence remains via his association with Sports Direct and Rangers Retail.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Rule 1 - No secret about the dual interest, SFA approval for up to 10% shareholding

Rule 7 - Again, no secrecy about the interest and 10% approved. Don't believe there's a fit and proper concern either

Rule 21 - "Influence the management or administration" is the important bit here, and while there's historic instances, it couldn't be argued that he currently has this influence

Rule 86 - Guilty

 

Given similarities, I'd expect the same punishment as Livi, however "2. Livingston FC prevented from registering any player, either on loan or permanently, or extending the contract of any player currently registered with the club until such time as the club has resolved the ongoing breach of Disciplinary Rule 21." - I'd argue that in this instance we've resolved this breach.

 

Our best and perhaps only hope is that removing l and l saves us.