Sportsound Watch

[Fife Saint]

Chick Young '... but what about Rangers'

[mozam76]

Les Gray coming across as a sycophantic arsehole. A shame that he's getting questioned by the three morons who are on today. 

[Ray Patterson]

8 minutes ago, Fife Saint said:

Chick Young '... but what about Rangers'

This. Again.

[Pet Jeden]

21 minutes ago, Green Day said:

I suspect - based on what he is saying - that the SPFL board are 100% nailed down on their stance, and feel that they dont necessarily need to "justify" their actions.

What the nuggets out there dont realise is that no company I know of puts all the (hundreds) of options to their consumers to come to a conclusion - I know football is "different" but Chico continually asking Grey about the Rangers stuff is nonsensical.

As Grey says, he doesnt like Boris Johnson, and can ask for him to be removed but theres no chance it will happen.

Very obviously from what he says, they went through myriad options and came up with this one

Consumers? The clubs? 
 

Sounds like you have the same mindset as Doncaster.i.e. “the business”  is the Sky deal and everything else is just fodder to that end. Mind you, if that is how Doncaster is bonussed, his attitude is undetstandable

Edited April 19, 2020 by Pet Jeden

[Green Day]

2 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

Consumers? The clubs? 

No, I was talking about the punters, radio commentators etc who all seem to think that they should be privy to confidential detail and minutes of board meetings etc.

Anyone that thinks that way is a fanny, I am sure you agree.................

[mozam76]

6 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

Consumers? The clubs? 
 

Sounds like you have the same mindset as Doncaster.i.e. “the business”  is the Sky deal and everything else is just fodder to that end. Mind you, if that is how Doncaster is bonussed, his attitude is undetstandable

Gray does also. "Broadcasters are the lifeblood of the game". 

[bennett]

34 minutes ago, Green Day said:

Les Gray (Hamilton) is being questioned by David Currie, Chico, Bonner and is coming across as very very reasoned and sensible.

I believe him over any pish Sevco and others are babbling - every question asked has been answered, including refuting some of the utter utter nonsense spouted by others yesterday.

 

Is this the Lesley Gray that's jointly deciding on reconstruction,  will listen on the listen again thing to see what he's saying. 

 

Always listen to both sides of the argument. 

[NorthBank]

Thought Les Gray was excellent today. Pity he was being interrogated by Currie (can only talk with 2 sec gap between words), Young (cannot fininsh any sentence before going off on an unrelated tangent) and Bonnar who didn't have a clue about what is going on.

Anyone screaming for 'more transparancy' should listen to yesterday and todays editions.

[ropy]

Bonner was better today than he is on the football 

[Bohemian]

8 minutes ago, ropy said:

Bonner was better today than he is on the football 

Cant be hard, hes a slavering moron when it comes to football 

[craigkillie]

1 hour ago, bennett said:

 

Is this the Lesley Gray that's jointly deciding on reconstruction,  will listen on the listen again thing to see what he's saying. 

 

Always listen to both sides of the argument. 

All 42 clubs will jointly decide on reconstruction.

[ropy]

12 hours ago, tamthebam said:

How much would an independent enquiry cost?

Or would the people doing the enquiry do it for nowt out of the love of the game and a sense of fair play...

Is there going to be an inquiry into Rangers accusations, is it slander or libel?

[Ric]

59 minutes ago, ropy said:

Is there going to be an inquiry into Rangers accusations, is it slander or libel?

It's actually a tough call on this one, considering Rangers has gone for the belt and braces approach.

It's all under defamation law, but slander tends to involve verbal one off statements. While libel is about making false accusations in print.

That's a rough approximation, as you can probably imagine there is a lot of legal arguments to be made around either.

[Sergeant Wilson]

3 hours ago, Green Day said:

Les Gray (Hamilton) is being questioned by David Currie, Chico, Bonner and is coming across as very very reasoned and sensible.

 

So would Fred West in that company.

[Jacksgranda]

14 hours ago, tamthebam said:

How much would an independent enquiry cost?

Or would the people doing the enquiry do it for nowt out of the love of the game and a sense of fair play...

Step forward Charles Greene and Craig Whyte...

[Pet Jeden]

3 hours ago, ropy said:

Is there going to be an inquiry into Rangers accusations, is it slander or libel?

 

2 hours ago, Ric said:

It's actually a tough call on this one, considering Rangers has gone for the belt and braces approach.

It's all under defamation law, but slander tends to involve verbal one off statements. While libel is about making false accusations in print.

That's a rough approximation, as you can probably imagine there is a lot of legal arguments to be made around either.

From what I can see, they have said:-  

"evidence via a whistleblower that raises serious concerns surrounding the SPFL's processes"

"attempt to silence legitimate concerns"

"evidence we possess raise serious questions concerning the corporate governance"

"farcical conduct"

We don't know what, if anything, they've got from a whistleblower. Tbf nobody sane hands over their complaints to the people they are complaining about, do they? 

But what would you think/do in the position of McLennan/Doncaster/McKenzie if your reputation was being publicly attacked? The only 3 alternatives I can think of are -

1. Although the implications/smears are wide, the actual charges are not specific enough or damaging enough (given the accuser) to bother going for slander etc

2. One or more of the 3 already have their lawyers on to it.

3. They are worried about what might be said in the privileged environment of the court.

 

[Ric]

Just now, Pet Jeden said:

From what I can see, they have said:-  

"evidence via a whistleblower that raises serious concerns surrounding the SPFL's processes"

"attempt to silence legitimate concerns"

"evidence we possess raise serious questions concerning the corporate governance"

"farcical conduct"

We don't know what, if anything, they've got from a whistleblower. Tbf nobody sane hands over their complaints to the people they are complaining about, do they? 

But what would you think/do in the position of McLennan/Doncaster/McKenzie if your reputation was being publicly attacked? The only 3 alternatives I can think of are -

1. Although the implications/smears are wide, the actual charges are not specific enough or damaging enough (given the accuser) to bother going for slander etc

2. One or more of the 3 already have their lawyers on to it.

3. They are worried about what might be said in the privileged environment of the court.

I've got to admit I really don't keep abreast of what Rangers say, so can't be sure exactly what it is they are claiming. However if Rangers were to repeat a claim from someone the court doesn't consider that any different than them saying it themselves. They can't claim that they were simply repeating it and were unaware it was defamation. It's the old "ignorance is no defence" line.

Ultimately, we both know what will happen. The SPFL will avoid a big court battle to reduce costs, and will offer a bit of an olive branch. Rangers will then claim that as some sort of moral victory. Neither side will accept either is wrong and neither will end up with a costly lawyers bill (well a more costly one).

[lionel wickson]

It's just hit a new low in the last few minutes.

[gannonball]

3 minutes ago, lionel wickson said:

It's just hit a new low in the last few minutes.

Absolutely, was shocked he was allowed on. Could tell English and Stewart were absolutely disgusted but didn't dwell on it as would give the horrible bigot even more air time than he deserves 

[lionel wickson]

1 minute ago, gannonball said:

Absolutely, was shocked he was allowed on. Could tell English and Stewart were absolutely disgusted but didn't dwell on it as would give the horrible bigot even more air time than he deserves 

I'm not sure I can take seriously anyone who has previously spoken out about the evils of The Simpsons and Dido.