haggis pakora Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 I have this "dingleberry" I cannot shake loose Dave .... does it talk .. I keep hearing whiny noises on the threads? "dingleberry" what a thick bigot you are. "dingleberry". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 I have this "dingleberry" I cannot shake loose Dave .... does it talk .. I keep hearing whiny noises on the threads? Why are brown nosing someone who openly mocks you? Him and Norman see you as a joke figure. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haggis pakora Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Why are brown nosing someone who openly mocks you? Him and Norman see you as a joke figure. But he has a "dingleberry". the thick racist moron. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 You seem too thick to understand. Help me intelligent bigot, what do I not understand? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 I have this "dingleberry" I cannot shake loose Dave .... does it talk .. I keep hearing whiny noises on the threads? I don't know if it's mastered talking. Probably speaks in some Orc bigot tongue. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haggis pakora Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Help me intelligent bigot, what do I not understand? Go and ask your fellow bigot. HTH. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Go and ask your fellow bigot.HTH. Na, yer ok. You keep dealing with your loss, tho. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 A new bout of obsession since his beloved hoops have drawn Rangers. They've not worn hoops in decades. It's been blue and white vertical stripes for a long time now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 Ashley has signed an undertaking pledging not to have an influence in the running of the Gers and limiting him to owning 10 per cent of the shares in RIFC plc. Aye right. The definition of consultant - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consultant Consultant Peter Block defines a consultant as "someone who has influence over an individual, group, or organization, but who has no direct authority to implement changes." He contrasts this with a surrogate manager who is a person who "acts on behalf of, or in place of, a manager." The key difference is that a consultant never makes decisions for the individual or group, whereas a surrogate manager does make decisions. There's no chance that the sfa nor anyone within the club will be able to stand in the way of ashley protecting his shares nor prevent him from having an influence within the club when it comes to his interests and the decision process through his two appointed 'consultants'. Right there the fact he brought in Llambias and Leach proves he already has influence in how the club is run. Indeed. The idea that the SFA need more information before they can decide whether Ashley has influence in the running of the club is laughable. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross. Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 (edited) I expect that if the SFA seriously try and limit Ashley's involvement to anything less than he wants, they will find themselves dealing with his legal team, and they will shite themselves and back down. Tends to be how he operates from what I have read. It seems he is the only show in town. The question still hangs over how he is going to direct it. Edited November 4, 2014 by Ross. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ribzanelli Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 Indeed. The idea that the SFA need more information before they can decide whether Ashley has influence in the running of the club is laughable. They are probably 99% sure but it is probably better to get it in writing from Rangers before they make a move rather than rely what has appeared in the succulent press 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 Stewart Regan got played like a cheap fiddle by Château Chuckie, he doesn't have a hope against Ashley. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenockRover Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 Stewart Regan got played like a cheap fiddle by Château Chuckie, he doesn't have a hope against Ashley. If it hadn't been for the massive comedy show that is still ongoing at Clusterfuck FC, the incompetent, gerrymandering stooges of Reagan, Doncaster and Ogilvie would be under some decent pressure to GTF. Still no sponsor for competitions, abject failure to take a controlling hand in the aforementioned farce (unless forced) and transparent in their desire to drag the country back to the dark ages by re-uniting the Hate Derby. Not fit for purpose really doesn't cover it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haggis pakora Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 If it hadn't been for the massive comedy show that is still ongoing at Clusterfuck FC, the incompetent, gerrymandering stooges of Reagan, Doncaster and Ogilvie would be under some decent pressure to GTF. Still no sponsor for competitions, abject failure to take a controlling hand in the aforementioned farce (unless forced) and transparent in their desire to drag the country back to the dark ages by re-uniting the Hate Derby. Not fit for purpose really doesn't cover it. Well start protesting outside the SFA headquarters to get rid of the three of them... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 They are probably 99% sure but it is probably better to get it in writing from Rangers before they make a move rather than rely what has appeared in the succulent press They already have it in writing. The announcement to the stock exchange was pretty clear that Ashley got to appoint two board members for his £2m loan 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killingfloorman Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 Of course there is no doubt that he is extending his influence beyond the prior agreement but it looks like Ashley has thought of this, the appointment of his man in a non exec role has been done to circumvent the SFA agreement in a legal sense, so I agree with Ross that should the SFA try and block this in anyway that a legal response could be likely. Imagine the Gers fans reaction if Ashley was told to 'git tae...' by the SFA 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 Did Mr Somers not hold his hand up and say "it was me Sir, wot done it ... I invited them" ... No, did he not say that when Ashleys stooge was appointed as a consultant? The announcement to the LSE couldnt have been much clearer. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kildog Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 Jubilation There isn't a competition to see how many different teams you can cheer onto administration. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killingfloorman Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 (edited) Jubilation Jubilation You are kidding right? You do realise that there is no other way for the clumpany to get past Christmas? Edited November 4, 2014 by killingfloorman 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 That announcement doesn't mean Mr Ashley or Mash have exercised any right referred to in that agreement, plus any nominee referred to would have to satisfy all regulatory requirements. The term " such appointments being subject to all necessary regulatory approvals " means any requirement the SFA may legally have will be met ... it breaks no rules on it's own. If someone else has invited people aboard .... it has no bearing on that agreement or MA. Those people would have no connection in relation to the rights mentioned no matter what the succulent press say or how it looks. The SFA will not be able to rely on their "balance of probabilities" as proof in a court of law. Mr Oglvie can posture for raging bearz all he likes Mike will simply show him the middle finger and laugh. Mike's lawyers would run rings around them if it came to that ..... imagine the cost to the association both financially and in terms of their already shredded reputation. Surely the regulatory requirements refers to the company side not the SFA? As I said, the Somers stuff was about being appointed a consultant. The announcement of his appointment to the stock exchange specifically refers to MASH holdings exercising their right as part of the loan agreement. Ashley has quite clearly, in public, broken the agreement he had with the SFA. Frankly, I couldnt care less but the fact that the SFA are still scrabbling around writing to him asking for further information is laughable. Lets be honest, Ashleys lawyers will run rings round the SFA whatever happens 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.