Follow Follow Rangers. Season 2024/25

[Dons_1988]

8 minutes ago, gannonball said:

Going by every Sportsound episode he has been in I would argue there is nothing remotely interesting about what he thinks.

Heathen 

[Romeo]

At least the got "Blood Stained" correct.

The **** getting more desperate every day.

[gannonball]

8 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

Heathen 

For a man who has been to the very top, played under some legends, became one himself, you would think he would provide some great stories and insight.

He however has the charisma and personality of Father Stone from Father Ted.

Edited April 29, 2020 by gannonball

[Ranaldo Bairn]

Aye, just look how smoothly it's gone in the Netherlands... 

[The_Kincardine]

3 hours ago, Dons_1988 said:

The media have made a big thing of this.

Cormack himself said he had no issue with it on Sportsound. It's Tom English carrying the can on this one.

He may not have an issue but that doesn't mean he is right.  It was an act of crassness at the very least.  Maybe even corruption if, in fact, the SPFL had only received 8 votes from Premiership teams at that point.  Part of the remit of the inquiry would be to timeline when votes were received and verify if Doncaster had actually received 9 votes in favour prior to that call.  

23 minutes ago, coprolite said:

 

I respectfully disagree. 

The vote was a virtual show of hands, not a secret ballot. Had they all been sat in an egm the members would have had that information from their own eyes.

I mean, I don't disagree that Doncaster should go. I just don't see any problem with that bit.  

Had it been an actual show of hands then Cormack would have been able to verify if Doncaster was right.  It wasn't so he couldn't and this is why Doncaster's action is either crass or misleading.  Definitely worth investigating, along with everything else.

[Romeo]

Going by every Sportsound episode he has been in I would argue there is nothing remotely interesting about what he thinks.

I don't mind Miller , he's fairly even handed at doesn't shy away from being honest about Aberdeen if they've been shite. He's a bit boring at times but there's plenty I'd like to see gft before.Miller.

[Romeo]

Had it been an actual show of hands then Cormack would have been able to verify if Doncaster was right.  It wasn't so he couldn't and this is why Doncaster's action is either crass or misleading.  Definitely worth investigating, along with everything else.

We've gone from corruption and rules being broken to "crassness".

[gannonball]

Just now, Romeo said:

23 minutes ago, gannonball said:

Going by every Sportsound episode he has been in I would argue there is nothing remotely interesting about what he thinks.

I don't mind Miller , he's fairly even handed at doesn't shy away from being honest about Aberdeen if they've been shite. He's a bit boring at times but there's plenty I'd like to see gft before.Miller.

 I think he's just on way too much, same as Bonner where you can tell they cant really be arsed doing any real research before hand and are just dining out only their reputations.

 

[CambieBud]

At least the got "Blood Stained" correct.

The **** getting more desperate every day.

That sounds like a Trump statement. What a clown

[The DA]

52 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said:

10/10, then?

Fur Mercans, the day after 9/10 is 9/11.

[ropy]

9 hours ago, The_Kincardine said:

If yer man Cormack was called, when the ballot wasn't complete, to say his vote wasn't required then I'd say the game was a bogey.

That is enough to call the entire process to account.  No?

Les Grey was phoning folk, the other board members would be phoning folk, clubs were phoning each other.  There was lobbying going on, clubs were phoning for clarification, other topics were being discussed, what happens next scenarios were being played out.  Why are you fixating on one of these calls, the recipient of which has made it clear wasn’t out of the ordinary or in any way objectionable?

[The DA]

5 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

He may not have an issue but that doesn't mean he is right.  It was an act of crassness at the very least.  Maybe even corruption if, in fact, the SPFL had only received 8 votes from Premiership teams at that point.  Part of the remit of the inquiry would be to timeline when votes were received and verify if Doncaster had actually received 9 votes in favour prior to that call.  

Had it been an actual show of hands then Cormack would have been able to verify if Doncaster was right.  It wasn't so he couldn't and this is why Doncaster's action is either crass or misleading.  Definitely worth investigating, along with everything else.

Kincy, you're seeing possible collusion and corruption where there's no evidence to support it.  This MIGHT have happened, THAT might have happened...

 

[Jacksgranda]

1 minute ago, The DA said:

Fur Mercans, the day after 9/10 is 9/11.

Yes but we're not Mercans.

[gannonball]

They seemed to have no issue with Doncaster lobbying for Sevco to be put immediately in the championship?

[Jacksgranda]

7 minutes ago, Romeo said:

We've gone from corruption and rules being broken to "crassness".
 

Surely it's "crass" to break the rules and being corrupt. After all, we're all gentlemen here.

[coprolite]

3 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

He may not have an issue but that doesn't mean he is right.  It was an act of crassness at the very least.  Maybe even corruption if, in fact, the SPFL had only received 8 votes from Premiership teams at that point.  Part of the remit of the inquiry would be to timeline when votes were received and verify if Doncaster had actually received 9 votes in favour prior to that call.  

Had it been an actual show of hands then Cormack would have been able to verify if Doncaster was right.  It wasn't so he couldn't and this is why Doncaster's action is either crass or misleading.  Definitely worth investigating, along with everything else.

Ok so it might have been misleading. Maybe. Is an independent investigation really required to ring round the other clubs and check if they'd all voted by 2 minutes to 5? Especially given there is no reason to suspect they hadn't, and no reason to think this information would cause cormack to vote in a particular way. 

Back to the bit where you said it had been established that clubs had been misled about funds. That sounded interesting. Any more on that? 

[Romeo]

Surely it's "crass" to break the rules and being corrupt. After all, we're all gentlemen here.

Speak for yourself

[Romeo]

They seemed to have no issue with Doncaster lobbying for Sevco to be put immediately in the championship?

Thats different, that was to benefit them.

So that's okay.

[Green Day]

3 hours ago, Green Day said:

This isnt the Brexit referendum where Yes and No votes have the same weight.

It was members of a club voting FOR a resolution, and each of the divisions had a previously specified number of votes required to carry the vote.

At the point Cormack was called (and Cormack had actually asked to be called on a related issue, see @Dons_1988post below) the arithmetic was clear and Aberdeens vote was irrelevant and had no impact on the result for the Premiership - it had already reached the required 9 votes - which was what Cormack was told.

Only simpletons cant understand this - only people with vested interests decide not to understand this.

Just quoting this for @The_Kincardine who appears to have ignored it and is ranting about the same thing - again.

For the avoidance of doubt, its been stated numerous times that Hibs Yes vote took it over the threshold, that was ahead of the call you are referring to.

H2H

[Jacksgranda]

4 minutes ago, Romeo said:

5 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said:

Surely it's "crass" to break the rules and being corrupt. After all, we're all gentlemen here.

Speak for yourself

Very crass, imho