SPFL Season declaration challenged legally (ongoing discussion)

[buster. 5,199]

1 hour ago, Gaffer said:

75% of clubs need to agree to their proposal to hold an extraordinary meeting.  If it goes that far I expect the SPFL board will be compelled to facilitate the inquiry. If not, we don't need any other clubs to support us if we take the legal route.  One thing that the club has not mentioned (for obvious reasons) is that they have the option of taking the police route.  If there is indeed bribery or corruption that can be evidenced, it is highly likely that this could end up as a criminal case.  If there's an independent inquiry, or if the police get involved, this will escalate very quickly and I suspect that much more evidence will appear as more and more whistleblowers emerge.  This always happens in these cases as others become desperate to distance themselves from the centre of the corruption.  These additional (or as I call them ... save your own skin) whistleblowers are often the ones who deliver the killer blow and it's their evidence that usually secures the convictions.  The "prisoner dilemma" often comes into play here.

Is it not that 2 clubs need to back the resolution and/or call for a General Meeting

The requisitioners !!! (blast fae the past)

 

In such a General Meeting, 75% of the 42 clubs would need to back the call for an Independent Enquiry to get it through.

ie. at least 32 clubs from the 42

 

Until the clubs see the evidence for themselves, it'll be pretty pointless to do any polling or estimates.

 

[Gaffer 1,665]

The EGM will take place on May 12.  That gives Rangers plenty of time to present their evidence.  Should be interesting.  The spin doctors at Sceptic and the SPFL will be working overtime.

[der Berliner 3,747]

Sky Sports Scotland

 

@ScotlandSky

 

SPFL LATEST BREAKING NEWS

@spfl

board calls EGM of clubs for Tuesday May 12th, following requisitions from

@JamTarts

@RangersFC

and

@StranraerFC

[ian1964 10,724]

 

[ian1964 10,724]

 

[ian1964 10,724]

 

[Gonzo79 15,294]

Declan is on a par with Geraldine in the silly name stakes.

[buster. 5,199]

12 hours ago, Gaffer said:

The EGM will take place on May 12.  That gives Rangers plenty of time to present their evidence.  Should be interesting.  The spin doctors at Sceptic and the SPFL will be working overtime.

The SPFL have shown that they have a weak hand.

In this case, it's difficult to spin a web if you don't have anything useful to use.

If they go negative and look to discredit, many watching club chairmen won't be impressed.

We should be careful not to give them anything.

The statement on Sunday was I think, just right.

 

It's pretty much all on the card that hasn't yet been upturned.

[Gaffer 1,665]

40 minutes ago, buster. said:

The SPFL have shown that they have a weak hand.

In this case, it's difficult to spin a web if you don't have anything useful to use.

If they go negative and look to discredit, many watching club chairmen won't be impressed.

We should be careful not to give them anything.

The statement on Sunday was I think, just right.

 

It's pretty much all on the card that hasn't yet been upturned.

I agree.  To get an inquiry however, I don't think we need much more than the evidence that's already out there.  What we need is a smart presentation (and reminder) of all the facts, including where it breaches the SPFL's rules.  The inquiry will then uncover the juicy stuff because I can almost guarantee that certain people will sing like a canary (and so they should) to protect the selves in any potential bribery/corruption case.  Of course if we have additional evidence of wrong doing then that can only help.

 

The clubs have their money now so I hope they now realise that our game is a joke (and therefore at risk of losing financial support from sponsors) if we don't clean it up.  In many ways I hope it goes down the criminal route because that will rattle the cages of two people in particular.  I mentioned the prisoner dilemma before and I wonder who would squeal first ...  McKenzie or Doncaster.  Doncaster seems weak to me and my money is on him.

 

 

[buster. 5,199]

2 minutes ago, Gaffer said:

I agree.  To get an inquiry however, I don't think we need much more than the evidence that's already out there.  What we need is a smart presentation (and reminder) of all the facts, including where it breaches the SPFL's rules.  The inquiry will then uncover the juicy stuff because I can almost guarantee that certain people will sing like a canary (and so they should) to protect the selves in any potential bribery/corruption case.  Of course if we have additional evidence of wrong doing then that can only help.

 

The clubs have their money now so I hope they now realise that our game is a joke (and therefore at risk of losing financial support from sponsors) if we don't clean it up.  In many ways I hope it goes down the criminal route because that will rattle the cages of two people in particular.  I mentioned the prisoner dilemma before and I wonder who would squeal first ...  McKenzie or Doncaster.  Doncaster seems weak to me and my money is on him.

 

 

Our statement on Sunday says we will present the evidence to the clubs in advance of the GM.

 

I think Rangers recognise that to have a chance of gaining enough support in GM, that now becomes the appropriate time to show the clubs what we have and if we only go with what is out there, we'll be onto plumbs.