Firstly can I just say this is a LONG article Nev so don't bother "Whyte was fined £200,000 and given a life ban from the game and the club were hit with a £160,000 fine and told they can't deal in the transfer market for a year. Rangers' appeal will be heard on Wednesday but at the end of last week the judicial inquiry's report was made public. And it was damning, not of the owner because he's impervious to criticism but of former directors, even though it is difficult to see what more they could have done to prevent Whyte from getting his hands on the club". Some verbal sleight of hand there by Jabba. The bulk of the criticism and the reasons why Rangers were punished was not because no one did anything about Whyte âgetting his hands on the clubâ, it was because no one, not one solitary Director of Rangers FC approached the SFA and made a âFormalâ complaint about Whyteâs shady (bordering on illegal) practices. If Jabba had bothered actually reading the report he would have of course known this, perhaps he did read it and ignored the salient points? "Even after the takeover they did their best to raise awareness of Whyte's mismanagement but neither the SFA nor the SPL moved a muscle to help. They didn't even attempt to ask a single question of Whyte, which was strange considering a former director actually approached an extremely high-ranking official in one of the two governing bodies and made his fears about what was happening at his club known". The Directors âdid their best to raise awareness of Whyte's mismanagement but neither the SFA nor the SPL moved a muscle to helpâ? Who says so? One of Traynorâs sources no doubt, probably one of the same Directors who did the square root of Hee haw but is now attempting to show the Board in a good light. Then Jabba provides the evidence that this source was a Director, how would he know âa former director actually approached an extremely high-ranking official in one of the two governing bodiesâ unless this unnamed Director told Traynor? Maybe it was the âextremely high-ranking officialâ who tipped Jabba the wink? Maybe this Director who wishes to remain anonymous thought the Old Boys network would help out in Rangers time of need? "Wonder why that wasn't in the report or why there was no mention of police having been informed last summer of suspicions held by former directors. And why was no attempt made to speak with the man who sold the club, David Murray?" So according to Jabba, someone (Iâm guessing the same source of the other claptrap) made a complaint to the Police? Does that sound feasible? That someone complained to the Coppers but never actually bothered complaining to anyone at the SPL or SFA? Maybe this Mystery Director turned gamekeeper, approached one of his chums at Pitt Street, hoping that perhaps that particular Old Boyâs network would still be in operation? "It is suggested there are inaccuracies in the report and at least two of the former directors insist they've been misrepresented in it." Yet NO one at the hearing challenged what was alleged. Musn't let pesky facts get in the way of a good (Ex Director's) story though. "One is also enraged because he claims he was led to believe whatever he said would remain within the confines of the interview room and that there would be no electronic recordings". Led to believe by whom exactly? Surely Jabba is not just taking his word for this? I would have assumed he would have checked it out with SFA types rather than rely on the word of one of the men who has been blamed, one of the âGuiltyâ parties? I Hope so or this shoddy piece of hackery is even more worthless than I think it is. "So much for the SFA's slick, new and transparent system of justice. But it seems to me this report, which, when you cut through the pompous legalese actually says little that wasn't already known if you'd been reading the papers, leaves the SFA in a tricky position". Jabba is now beginning to sound like Ally McCoist, with a sneaky aside at the way this hearing was held. "The panel was independent the SFA will insist but nonetheless it is part of their system and the findings make it clear the governing body believe those former directors should have done more to expose Whyte's regime. Apparently they should have asked more questions of him and then reported to the authorities." Yes, I think that sounds like reasonable enough that the Directors of a Company âshould have done more to expose Whyte's regime. Apparently they should have asked more questions of himâ. Otherwise what exactly were they being paid for? "So who will ask the questions of Green and his posse? There is no chairman or chief executive to grill Green. And there are no directors who can force him into a chair and then shine a bright lamp in his face." More snide innuendo? No one said that the Directors should have grilled Whyte FBI style, merely that they should have carried out their âdutiesâ as âDirectorsâ, maybe Jabba should look up the definition of âDirectorâ before resorting to this sort of defensive posturing. "So whose responsibility is it this time? Duff and Phelps are in control but the administrators can probably empathise with Lloyds Bank as they dive under their desks trying to escape a never-ending barrage of criticism. They'll be desperate to get out and back to normality so who will get the answers Rangers fans want from Green? Let's see. Well, we have two governing bodies, the SPL and the SFA, but since the former can't agree on the time of day the job probably should fall to the latter. After all, they are supposed to be the custodians of our game and because there are no Rangers directors the SFA, you might think, are obliged to quiz Green and demand he show them his plan in full detail." Well that is a tricky one but seeing as how D&P are being paid a large amount of money then the buck lies with them, it is their duty to carry out due diligence to ensure the Creditors are not scammed and likewise common sense would tell you that Duff and Phelps are effectively the Board of Rangers FC. "But an SFA spokesman said they don't have a "fit and proper persons test". Unbelievable. The onus, he said, is on the clubs and pointed out: "The selling party who, in Rangers' case are the administrators, have to sign off saying in their opinion and after due diligence, the people taking over are sound." Get real. The administrators just want to go home but the SFA have a duty to protect by asking questions such as who are these people Green doesn't want to name yet? He says they have "fantastic connections" but to what and to whom? How much working capital will be set aside - this is important as Whyte's calculations fell far short - and will there be regular board meetings with full disclosures? And what will happen to the assets? Will they be moved, even temporarily to a newco, or incubator company, as Bill Miller would have done? Will they be placed in another company altogether, as one of the other would-be owners might have done?" Jesus Christ Jabba, what do you suggest should happen? That the SFA or SPL send a quick reaction team down to Ibrox to look over the books and do the job the Administrators are being paid to do? Are you really that stupid? "The administrators will know but aren't telling." This is unworthy of serious comment in all honesty. Pathetic. "The game's hierarchy must see they can't stand back and do SFA this time although no one is suggesting Green is the new Whyte. Not for a moment am I suggesting that but after what Rangers have gone through questions must be asked. Sorry, but this one is down to the SFA." No Jim, itâs down to the Administrators who as I said before are at this moment in time Rangers FC. Terrible lazy lazy journalism, unbelievably one sided.
Anger, frustration, whatever. Don't spend all that time typing it out, just get on the blower to Peter Martin tonight. Anyway, how did you celebrate your teams tainted title? Massive Spliff?
Green hasn't the letters A.C.I.D. after his name for nothing. The fact that he is afraid of releasing the names of the investors because of what the core Rangers support may do says alot. I am surprised Ally hasn't demanded that he and the Rangers fans need to know the names of these people. Maybe Ally missed something last week and is on the way to meet Bill Miller. I was looking at SFA 3 and was wondering would Clyde be the derby game for Whateveryoucallthem next season? Now that Green is going to own them and they are playing on Whyte's ground, will this be the first time a team of Green and Whyte played in SFA 3.
From the Book of No Job 5:23 Moses went forth, back to the burning bush with a tablet containing the post of Superhoops. And Moses did there read aloud the contents of his tablet. And lo! the good Lord in his infinite wisdom did ponder. He pondered for 40 days and 40 nights until a judgement was reached. And unto Moses he proclaimed 'Whit a ****ing spastard! I must've been pished the day I made that ****.' This is the word of the Lord.
The media are sh.tting themselves incase their jobs go. No OF in SPL = no need for Keevins, Clyde, Traynor etc Keevins even admitted that he had not watched the 40 minute interview with Green. A well paid newspaper sports journo saying that he could not be bothered to watch the most important interview in Scottish football for many many years. Doesnt deserve his job. They are all Kakking themselves.
