thelegendthatis Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 From the Glasgow Herald Stewart Regan, the SFA chief executive, defended the governing body against accusations from some Rangers fans that they should have examined Whyte more thoroughly from the outset. It was down to clubs themselves to do the first and most significant checks, he said, and in Rangers' case that should have been former owner Sir David Murray. "The alternative to that is that [the SFA] would have to employ a cast of thousands to research every potential takeover, every potential change of director, across the entire game. We don't have the resources or time to actually do that. We rely heavily on the clubs themselves. "In the case of a plc like Rangers, you have a board of directors who are selling a club to an individual. That board of directors would undergo due diligence and, because they are a plc, would have to go through a fairly stringent process of testing out who they are selling the club to. When you [the SFA] get confirmation that the person they have sold the club to has satisfied all of these criteria, then you have to take a certain amount of credence from what those directors are saying. That is what the Scottish FA have done. "When the individual has then told lies and hasn't disclosed the disqualification [as a company director] that he was holding, then comes back and tries to argue that wording in Article 10 [of the SFA's rules, on fit and proper conditions] is misleading and he believes it was the point of disqualification that had to be disclosed, not the fact he was still disqualified, and uses smoke and mirrors to try and buy time, then it becomes very difficult to deal with the matter quickly." "It is my understanding that for the four years or so the club was up for sale, the talk of acting in the best interests of Rangers was top of the agenda. I think that has to be taken into account. It's easy after the event to try and find a scapegoat, to say we should have done a 'fit and proper person' test and that we should have prevented the takeover. I can't see how we could have done that, quite frankly, without having gone through a long, bureaucratic process on every single director." I know he is dodging bullets and trying to deflect any responsibilities away from the SFA, but this is just downright stupidity. If a governing body can't govern, why does it exist? If you go to get a mortgage from a bank they check you out. From electoral roll, to credit history, to court judgements etc etc It is simple. Call Experian I am sure they would give you the low down on how to go about it! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelegendthatis Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 (edited) Some of it was owed to Moffat, but its gradually dawning on him that there is next to f**k all chance of him seeing any of it ever again. He's hanging on in there on the off chance. A wee interest rate rise could be interesting for any club with significant bank debt, and banks are starting to raise their rates as they realise that they need to look after savers better. Does he not still owe Moffatt? Thought the current total was about £18million? Edited March 10, 2012 by thelegendthatis 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdTheDuck Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 BBC stating quite categorically that it's the SPL Board who vote on letting a Newco into the SPL, not the full league. http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/17310468 The impression I've got from these pages is that the Board can only ratify the full vote of the 11. Who's right? No doubt the group of 10 will be discussing this and giving their unequivocal approval for the reps on the board to give newco the nod Failing that whatever rule change is required to get renjurs2012 into the SPL will be unanimously approved Regardless of what Petrie has said recently I don't believe any of The Rest have the balls to excude renjurs except for Vlad 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdTheDuck Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 The vast bulk of Killies debt IS to the bank. You can add Aberdeen to that list, isn't their debt (£9M? £11M?) owed to the bank but underwritten by Stewart Milne? And when the new ground is built aren't they taking out something like a £20M mortage, which will be debt owed to a bank? Who do United owe their debt (£6M?) to? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Does he not still owe Moffatt? Thought the current total was about £18million? Moffat was owed around £2m in a "soft loan", but he wrote around half of that off about 2 years ago. Our net debt was £9.4m at the last set of accounts, and will hopefully have sneaked below £9m given the fairly profitable year we've had. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 You can add Aberdeen to that list, isn't their debt (£9M? £11M?) owed to the bank but underwritten by Stewart Milne? And when the new ground is built aren't they taking out something like a £20M mortage, which will be debt owed to a bank? Who do United owe their debt (£6M?) to? I'm sure Milne can keep the bank sweet as far as Aberdeen is concerned. No idea about Utd. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 (edited) [ [/size]If a governing body can't govern, why does it exist?[/font] [/b][/size][/font] I said much the same a few pages back. The SFA need to look at themselves, who governs them? They say enquiries re Whyte were ignored and they couldn't gather info. That in itself was enough to at least delay the take over. Why did they allow it? Rank amateurism or collusion in the master plan? Edited March 10, 2012 by Sergeant Wilson 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magee84 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 I said much the same a few pages back. The SFA need to look at themselves, who governs them. They say enquiries re Whyte were ignored and they couldn't gather info. That in itself was enough to at least delay the take over. Why did they allow it? Rank amateurism or collusion in the master plan? The SFA heirarchy calling whyte 'unfit for football' purposes is like robert mugabe calling gadaffi a opressive zealot b*****d.....correct though they may be rhe SFA are a shambolic organisation. What did their 'fit and proper persons' check entail? Show us your bank statement...... Someone with the business brain and no nonsense clout in the mould of fergus mcann or alan sugar is needed at the top level in scottish football.. Ps morning captain....i notice you havent been following me around for a few days.....are you seeing someone else???? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Duck Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 The SFA heirarchy calling whyte 'unfit for football' purposes is like robert mugabe calling gadaffi a opressive zealot b*****d.....correct though they may be rhe SFA are a shambolic organisation. What did their 'fit and proper persons' check entail? Show us your bank statement...... Someone with the business brain and no nonsense clout in the mould of fergus mcann or alan sugar is needed at the top level in scottish football.. Ps morning captain....i notice you havent been following me around for a few days.....are you seeing someone else???? Gadaffi may have been many things, but a zealot certainly wasn't one of them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magee84 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Gadaffi may have been many things, but a zealot certainly wasn't one of them. He was a very naughty boy.....!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagfox Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 So.takeover bid is being backed by Ticketus, the firm Whyte used to set up his takeover bid with, and was pilliored for doing so. Mini Moonbeams jumps into bed with them to save the scumbags.....Venture capitalists of the world unite, then downsize and sell at a profit Meet the new, new boss same as the old, new boss same as the old, old boss Does this all mean her majesty will get her cash from her disloyal subjects? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 The SFA need to look at themselves, who governs them? Peter Lawwell 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 So.takeover bid is being backed by Ticketus, the firm Whyte used to set up his takeover bid with, and was pilliored for doing so. Mini Moonbeams jumps into bed with them to save the scumbags.....Venture capitalists of the world unite, then downsize and sell at a profit Meet the new, new boss same as the old, new boss same as the old, old boss Does this all mean her majesty will get her cash from her disloyal subjects? When will the SFA do the fit and proper person test on this outfit of Murray, Ticketus and The Alliance of Gypsies, Tramps and Thieves? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Meet the new, new boss same as the old, new boss same as the old, old boss and they will be fooled again....... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagfox Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 He he 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyrshireTon Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 1331336127[/url]' post='6042732']The Old Firm are indeed two sides of the same arse. They combine to exploit sectarianism and bigotry in order to win success on the pitch. You support the Old Firm because you have a need to support a winning football team. You somehow think that the success of a football club is a reflection on you personally. You shut yourself off to how that club's success is achieved because your need to follow a winning team is so overwhelming. Your head would explode otherwise. Not often it happens, but for once I am in complete agreement with you. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7-2 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 The impression I've got from these pages is that the Board can only ratify the full vote of the 11. People on internet forum in talking shite to sound knowledgeable shocker. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArabianKnight Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 You can add Aberdeen to that list, isn't their debt (£9M? £11M?) owed to the bank but underwritten by Stewart Milne? And when the new ground is built aren't they taking out something like a £20M mortage, which will be debt owed to a bank? Who do United owe their debt (£6M?) to? Iirc united's debt now stands at 4million with 1 million of that being an overdraft facility with the bank. our debt has been reduced with the sale of goodie and looks very likely to be reduced again with the sales of gms and russell on the horizon. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nijmegen bairn Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 People on internet forum in talking shite to sound knowledgeable shocker. Is that you Chick or maybe Jim 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Yes it is exactly that, 'if' the moral 10 go their own way, Scottish football IS at risk. Tv deal is only relevant to an SPL. It has been going through my mind 'what if' ? scenarios, ie , the currents fold, get 9 other teams to join in with them to create an alternative FL? Is it possible? Say for the sake of arguement 9 well supported SFL teams get a good deal to feck off and join them, tv deal in place, sponsership etc. It would take a shitload of cash to buy Rangers, but if they were bought AND not in SPL 'could' a newco LEAGUE be set up? Considering this thread is on the cusp of having run 300 pages, with the majority of content based on rumour, supposition, and hope, what I'm about to say may appear remarkable... but this is quite possibly the biggest load of tosh we've seen in the entire thread thusfar. Certainly measured in tosh-per-word terms. I salute you for that notable achievement. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.