aofjays Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 Have Inverness been hammered by the SFA yet? Fans running on to the pitch and pulling down players in the box is scummy behaviour IMO. Premiership forum for this pish. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 A wee dig at Celtic and Norman ain't amused.... -2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Brees Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 No ISDX For Rangers The RSL understands that RIFC PLC has been refused a listing on the ISDX. The toxicity of the club due to heightened investor activism and inability to meet exchange crtieria are contributory factors. Given the ISDX is considered to have a low suitability threshold in relation to other exchanges, this is a further blow to the new boards credibility. We are not a market for AIM rejects the ISDX said. As one City observer said, this is like being refused entry into a drive thru at McDonalds. More to folow. https://rangerssupportersloyal.wordp...x-for-rangers/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 Sevco. Dave King. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 Reads like a bear version of Phillip. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Njord Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 If that's genuine, I don't see why a berz site would mention "toxicity". Surely the failure to meet entrance criteria would suffice for them? Eta without editing...... " LOL". Carry on........ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 Reads like a bear version of Phillip. How would you know? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 How would you know? Yer mate Densboy is was always posting his shite on here. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kildog Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 The good guys have won! :lol: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
accietilleyedye Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 Yer mate Densboy is was always posting his shite on here. But you apparently never read it , or so you repeatably said, are you a glib and shameless liar 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dindeleux Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 A wee dig at Celtic and Norman ain't amused.... Very defensive over the old Celtic. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Njord Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 Very defensive over the old Celtic. Vicky was the artist for this (doubled checked for swearies) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 Very defensive over the old Celtic. Hmmm. Vicky didn't mention celtic in his initial post. I didn't mention them in my reply. Possibly realising his error, Vicky moves onto referencing..... a celtic blogger who he claims not to read. All this, and more, on the Big rangers Administration/liquidation Thread. On topic, where's next now that the ISDX has unsurprisingly decided not to risk their reputation with this lot? When's the wages due? off-topic again - 'mon the Accies! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 Hateley just writes exactly what the orc hordes want to hear. he knows his audience and panders to them. Somebody reads it out to them, do they? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 Somebody reads it out to them, do they? Probably quicker that way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 Hmmm. Vicky didn't mention celtic in his initial post. I didn't mention them in my reply. Possibly realising his error, Vicky moves onto referencing..... a celtic blogger who he claims not to read. Uh huh, it was a pretty obvious dig about the bhoy zone tv interview so stop being pedantic Norman. You always get so touchy when the greenyins are slated. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 Uh huh, it was a pretty obvious dig about the bhoy zone tv interview so stop being pedantic Norman. You always get so touchy when the greenyins are slated. I'm sorry - the what? Maybe try making your posts more comprehensible to those who don't obsess over everything your former partners and their idiot fans get up to in future. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 Well you must be about the only person who hasn't watched that interview Norm. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 Time for Stewart and Peter to stand firm... Mike Ashley’s legal team have taken on the Scottish Football Association over the £7500 fine imposed on the Newcastle United owner for breaching rules on dual ownership through his interest in Rangers. Telegraph Sport can also reveal that Ashley’s representatives asked the governing body of Scottish football to process an appeal against the sanction in confidence but that it is not known when the matter will be resolved – or even if it will be dealt with before the end of the season. The grounds for the appeal remain unclear. On the one hand Ashley – estimated to be worth £3.5 billion – might simply object to the size of the fine, which is at the top end of the scale, or he could be attempting to test the limits of the SFA’s ability to control his influence on Rangers. An SFA Council member, who learned about the appeal this week, said: “It’s impossible to tell what Mike Ashley wants in this instance. If it’s just about the money, he’s taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut. “On the other hand he might want to test the limits of what he can do with a club in Scotland as well as having Newcastle United,” The fine was imposed on March 2 – four days before the board supported by Ashley was removed at a general meeting requisitioned by former Ibrox director, Dave King, and the day after the Telegraph exclusively revealed that the outgoing regime had admitted defeat. Ashley was charged under SFA disciplinary rule 19, which states that a person “involved in any capacity whatsoever in the management or administration of a club”, cannot – without the prior written consent of the SFA Board – “be involved in any capacity whatsoever in the management or administration of another club or…have any power whatsoever to influence the management or administration of another club." A second charge – that Ashley “failed to act in the best interests of Association Football” was found to be not proven. He continues to hold 8.92% of Rangers stock and 75% of Rangers Retail. Rangers, meanwhile, were fined £5500 last week after being found guilty of three breaches of the rules, including the clause governing the best interests of football. It is understood that the club will pay the fine on the grounds that the current board was not in place when the breaches occurred and will not argue in favour of the previous regime. The incoming regime chose not to draw down a second tranche of Ashley loan funding which was open to them. Instead, a second loan of £1.5 million from the Three Bears consortium of wealthy Rangers supporters – the first £1.5 million was made available last month – will shortly be accepted to bridge cash flow needs until season income for 2015-16 begins to flow in to the Ibrox coffers' 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sugna Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 Ashley continues to play an absolute blinder, while King continues to endorse the South African court's findings on his integrity. It looks very much as though Paul Murray has gone cap-in-hand to plead with MA's representatives to reconsider tranche two. Can't see any reason MA would have had him entertained, certainly not because MA needs Sevco's cooperation or goodwill. He's got them by the blueing gonads simply by relying on the fans' sense of entitlement to drive costs above revenue. Aided of course by King driving revenue in the other direction. But with things having changed so radically with respect to the original status when the facility was established, any reconsideration is very much weighted towards Ashley. Maybe John Brown will soon get his wish, and the matter of who owns Ibrox will be resolved. 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.