hellbhoy Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Has anyone seen the Deeds yet??? Is that the durty deeds ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killingfloorman Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 When we bought Flo, I was jumping up and down in glee. When we bought Boumsong I said; Who the f**k is he. Fans rarely know what is good for them, the fit and proper person test is in place for a reason is it not? True. Please answer my second post. If they forced Chucky to sell would you accept that? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 It is democracy, it is a Peter Lawwell appointed democracy Ha! That yin deserves a Charles........never a truer word and all that! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 If the SFA had and come out and said that CG was not a fit and proper person then I would have rejected him Did they? It is the resposibility of the owner of a club selling on the club to another person to do the background checks first,then the owner passes on this information to the SFA that this person is a fit and proper person to run a football club responsibly. Murray said he checked Craig Whyte's background and found him a suitable fit and proper person to run Rangers PLC. Who's at fault here ? Murray for not doing better investigative procedures to find out Whyte was acyually skint or the SFA for taking Murray's word that Whyte was fit and proper person. The SFA, frankly, has not the resources to trawl the backgrounds of potential owners exhaustively and then to employ lawyers to keep such disbarred suitors at bay. Source ! Herald http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/sport/football/a-fit-and-proper-person-for-a-football-club.16975823 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Yep. Celtic are the establishment club 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 The SFA have changed nothing that would have altered events this summer, not even your rule, if it still existed would have changed anything. You keep telling yourself that enough times and you'll completely believe it Tedi. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aofjays Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 How the rule operates is quite frankly irrelevant. It either works or it does not, in this case is obviously did not, the rule is flawed and as such pointless. Are you claiming your ex-chairman didn't do his job properly because the rules let him get away with doing a half assed job? That in fact the rules need to be far far more stringent to prevent your club from screwing itself? You really think the people running your club are that sleekit? I'm stunned, all these people claiming you're blinkered will be eating their words now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 The SFA, frankly, has not the resources to trawl the backgrounds of potential owners exhaustively and then to employ lawyers to keep such disbarred suitors at bay. Excellent - here's hoping Whyte can do something useful at last and bring the house of cards down by suing the arse off those wankers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 I have proved it to be the case, you were unable to provide proof that D & P applied to the court of session in Jun 2012 like you claimed, an impossible task as they applied in Oct 2012. Right I've just scrolled through yesterdays posts by me looking for where I posted "APPLIED" there are none but this post by me was the closest you'll get. So let me get this correct ! you are saying that applying for liquidation is not entering the liquidation process ? So Duff & Phelps applying on the 14th of June for liquidation is not entering into the liquidation process ? the liquidation process starts when a company/club files for liquidation like what D&P on the 14th of June. I always posted "APPLYING" and not "APPLIED" so I'd be completely correct that on the 14th of June 2012 when the CVA failed that D&P would be applying for liquidation from that day onwards.NOTE I said would be APPLYING and not APPLIED so get it right up ye. Now let this one just settle before you make a cnut of yourself AGAIN.Applying is going to happen and applied means it has happened. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 How the rule operates is quite frankly irrelevant. It either works or it does not, in this case is obviously did not, the rule is flawed and as such pointless. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotbawmad Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Not sure, perhaps I did and If I did I would have been correct. it is the SFA`s duty to do a fit and proper person test. Craig Whyte is not a fit and proper person, nobody can argue with this. Whatever system the SFA have in place it failed. It was Minty's responsibilty, Whyte was a flee bite compared to the situation his company was in. Rangers was an unwelcome distraction for both him and LBG. If it does go tits up the SFA have changed their rules to such a degree that we could be hit with Rangers V3,the holding company that owns the club will be liquidated but the club ? it will still carry on as before.How many times will they be allowed to reform under a new company before they finally decide enough is enough and just let it die. They're called "The Rangers" soon to be called "Thee Rangers" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 It was Minty's responsibilty, Whyte was a flee bite compared to the situation his company was in. Rangers was an unwelcome distraction for both him and LBG. They're called "The Rangers" soon to be called "Thee Rangers" The Three Rangers ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 It is the resposibility of the owner of a club selling on the club to another person to do the background checks first,then the owner passes on this information to the SFA that this person is a fit and proper person to run a football club responsibly. You made that up. the idea that a seller has to do background checks on a buyer comes from fantasy land. Also, it's amazing that you're buying in to the 'we don't have resources' bollocks. Howoften do football clubs change hands? The SFA failed to police their own F&PP test when it came to Whyte. This is beyond dispute. Now this doesn't mean I blame The SFA for our demise.......this is firmly down to we as Bears. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aofjays Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 If you mean Murray then yes. This is still deflecting away from the SFA having a rule in place which is 100% flawed. How can you say a rule is flawed just because your ex-chairman didn't actually follow it? That's like saying speed limits are flawed because a minority break them. This sounds more like you're just trying to deflect the blame from those actually responsible (David Murray and probably the rest of the board at the time) to anyone else. Next you'll tell us a big boy did it and ran away. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 They neither applied or were applying for liquidation on the 14th of June, they applied on the 17th October. You have made cnut out of yourself from the very beginning with this. NAW your making it some sort of agenda of your own ! which day they actually APPLIED is irrelevent as they were going to apply for it since the 14th of June anyway. Now if you continue I'm just gonna let you go round in circles chasing your tail. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 How can you say a rule is flawed just because your ex-chairman didn't actually follow it? That's like saying speed limits are flawed because a minority break them. This sounds more like you're just trying to deflect the blame from those actually responsible (David Murray and probably the rest of the board at the time) to anyone else. Next you'll tell us a big boy did it and ran away. With big hands as well 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 How can you say a rule is flawed just because your ex-chairman didn't actually follow it? It wasn't up to Murray to act as The SFA's police. I have no idea where this notion comes from but it is ridiculous. The SFA have/had a F&PP test and it is up to The SFA to enforce it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 It wasn't up to Murray to act as The SFA's police. I have no idea where this notion comes from but it is ridiculous. The SFA have/had a F&PP test and it is up to The SFA to enforce it. It is the resposibility of the owner of a club selling on the club to another person to do the background checks first,then the owner passes on this information to the SFA that this person is a fit and proper person to run a football club responsibly. Murray said he checked Craig Whyte's background and found him a suitable fit and proper person to run Rangers PLC. Who's at fault here ? Murray for not doing better investigative procedures to find out Whyte was acyually skint or the SFA for taking Murray's word that Whyte was fit and proper person. Source ! Herald http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/sport/football/a-fit-and-proper-person-for-a-football-club.16975823 Read the source ! the blame ! it's clearly at Murray's door. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 You are making this up. They neither applied or as you put it 'applying on the 14th of June' They were simply in administration from Feb 2012 until October 2012 They applied to the court of session on the 17th October for liquidators to be appointed, this was granted on the 31st if October 2012 when BDO were appointed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Read the source ! the blame ! it's clearly at Murray's door. Quote me a source and I'll read it. What you posted is NOT a source. 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.