Follow Follow Rangers. Season 2023/24

[Henrik's tongue]

14 hours ago, bennett said:

Lawwell is back then.

Don’t be ridiculous. There IS no Lawwell conspiracy. Just like there’s no ref conspiracy, remember? 

[Clown Job]

 

[AJF]

1 hour ago, Clown Job said:

 

It would be good if it wasn’t behind a paywall

Also more suitable for the BRALT.

[Drew Brees]

12 hours ago, AJF said:

It would be good if it wasn’t behind a paywall

Also more suitable for the BRALT.

Quote

A sheriff who owned shares in Rangers FC is to retire after it emerged that he colluded with a senior police officer before submitting a dishonest and misleading report during the botched police investigation into the takeover of the Ibrox club.
David Grier, 61, a consultant with the financial firm Duff & Phelps, lodged a formal complaint against Sheriff Lindsay Wood with the Judicial Office for Scotland last May.
Wood granted 22 warrants to police during the ill-fated fraud investigation despite regularly appearing at Rangers matches and social events and being said to have a framed photograph of the club’s stadium in his chambers.
The warrants included one in 2015 which permitted officers to raid the London offices of Holman Fenwick Willan, the legal firm representing Duff & Phelps.
This police operation was later found to be unlawful and “executed without proper safeguards”.
Following an investigation Craig Turnbull, sheriff principal of Glasgow and Strathkelvin, has concluded that Wood submitted a misleading report attempting to justify his decision, which contained information he was ignorant of when he granted the warrant.
Wood’s account appeared to rely heavily on information taken directly from a “police warrant request sheet” compiled by Detective Chief Inspector Jim Robertson, the senior investigating officer, who is said to have chanted a Rangers song while conducting interviews.
A judge has since ruled that Robertson had given evidence that was “patently untrue”, acted in an “intimidatory and threatening” way and conducted himself in a “reprehensible” manner.
When Rangers fell into administration in 2012, the finance experts Grier, David Whitehouse and Paul Clark, from the firm Duff & Phelps, now Kroll, were appointed to manage the club’s affairs.
All three were arrested two years later over allegations of fraud linked to the club’s collapse and sale. They were exonerated but many Rangers fans believe that they failed to do enough to prevent the club’s demise.
The scandal, which also saw four other men being charged and cleared, has already triggered a public inquiry and cost the taxpayer more than £40 million in payments to individuals who were prosecuted maliciously.
Grier complained that Wood had obtained and used a police warrant request sheet to compile an explanatory report submitted to Lord Carloway, the lord justice general, “without telling the court that was what he had done”.
Turnbull found that Wood did not dispute this. “The sheriff relied upon the police information sheet in the preparation of the supplementary report,” he wrote.
“He accepts that the report looked as if it was his own note of what he was told by the police officer [Robertson] in the application for the warrant in question. The sheriff accepts that there was material in the report which he did not know when he granted the warrant.”
Finding the complaint substantiated, Turnbull added: “An [appeal] court has a legitimate expectation that reports provided to it by judges of the court below are complete, accurate and not misleading.
“In the present case the supplementary report was misleading.”
Turnbull noted that Wood had accepted responsibility and apologised, adding: “The sheriff has given notification of his intention to retire in May 2023.”
He found that the sheriff had not discharged his responsibilities properly.
“That failure requires to be marked in some way,” he said. “My recommendation is that formal advice be given.”
However, his recommendation was overturned by Carloway, Scotland’s most senior judge, who said no action would be required.
A response issued by the Judicial Office states: “Almost seven years have elapsed since the conduct complained of occurred. The sheriff has recognised his error and expressed remorse.
“In these and other circumstances in relation to Sheriff Wood’s tenure, the lord president has decided that it would neither be appropriate nor desirable to issue formal advice.”
Grier expressed astonishment at Carloway’s intervention. “It now appears that passage of time is to be taken as an acceptable defence for wrongdoing,” he said.
“When this matter was first raised in 2019 Sheriff Wood had the opportunity to admit to colluding with DCI Robertson and misleading the appeal court.
“Since then I have incurred considerable cost in exposing this conduct.”
A senior legal figure said that the decision to take no action against Wood was “extraordinary”.
“It is a fundamental principle of our system of justice that it must be operated honestly and with integrity and part of that is coming down hard on breaches,” they said.
“However, it seems that it is okay for a sheriff to mislead a court if it was a long time ago and you are quick enough to retire.”
Wood held shares in Rangers’ old parent company, which became worthless when the club went into administration in 2012. Records from 2008 confirm he owned 110 shares
In a statement submitted in 2019, Robertson said: “Sheriff Wood was interested in the case. He told us he was a season ticket holder and had a framed picture of Ibrox on the walls of his chamber.”
Turnbull did not examine the apparent conflict of interest alleged to be generated by Wood’s close affinity with Rangers.
Grier launched a £9 million damages claim against Police Scotland and the lord advocate, arguing that he had been wrongfully arrested.
The Court of Session ruled last January that he had not been prosecuted maliciously.
The decision was upheld this month after an appeal, which found the police investigation was characterised by “incompetence, poor judgment and a lack of professionalism.”
Grier has also submitted a complaint against Robertson, 54, who is believed to have applied for early retirement.
The Judicial Office said: “Judicial conduct complaints are dealt with in accordance with the Judiciary (Scotland) Rules 2017. This seeks to ensure judges uphold the highest standards of professional and personal conduct both in and out of court

Sheriff’s and senior police acting with bias towards rangers but never Scottish referees, who haven’t given a red card or penalty against at ibrox in three and a half years, makes you think.  

[AJF]

13 minutes ago, Drew Brees said:

Sheriff’s and senior police acting with bias towards rangers but never Scottish referees, who haven’t given a red card or penalty against at ibrox in three and a half years, makes you think.  

Christ, well done for shoehorning referees into that

[AJF]

All of this after a decision was correctly made not to award Celtic a penalty against us.

[Drew Brees]

18 minutes ago, AJF said:

All of this after a decision was correctly made not to award Celtic a penalty against us.

No one gives a penalty against you, right or wrong. 

[AJF]

26 minutes ago, Drew Brees said:

No one gives a penalty against you, right or wrong. 

But it seems the Celtic fan base are upset after a correct decision was made not to award one. The spin and media attention has gone into overdrive after Ange’s comments.

[Drew Brees]

4 minutes ago, AJF said:

But it seems the Celtic fan base are upset after a correct decision was made not to award one. The spin and media attention has gone into overdrive after Ange’s comments.

Keep avoiding the issue and mentioning Celtic at every opportunity, that’ll deflect away from my point. 

[Jinky67]

1 hour ago, AJF said:

All of this after a decision was correctly made not to award Celtic a penalty against us.

You say the correct decision however there is nothing in IFAB that really says you can or cannot give a handball if a player is “protecting their face” It is still a subjective decision solely down the to the ref as to if he thinks it is in the spirit of the game to give it. Personally I thought his hands were already up before the shot was taken but that’s just my thoughts 

If that penalty went against you there is also every possibility it would have stood also depending who was making the decision …therein lies the problem. It’s not clear and it is not obvious.

Edited January 13, 2023 by Jinky67

[JCFooty72]

Lowry off to Ross County rumors going about, happy with that will get Premiership game time... needs to come back as a first teamer from next season though

[AJF]

31 minutes ago, Jinky67 said:

You say the correct decision however there is nothing in IFAB that really says you can or cannot give a handball if a player is “protecting their face” It is still a subjective decision solely down the to the ref as to if he thinks it is in the spirit of the game to give it. Personally I thought his hands were already up before the shot was taken but that’s just my thoughts 

If that penalty went against you there is also every possibility it would have stood also depending who was making the decision …therein lies the problem. It’s not clear and it is not obvious.

I’d say this clarification from IFAB is sufficient to support the referee’s decision not to award a penalty.

And I totally appreciate had it been given it may have stood, but surely the fact that it can’t be deemed a clear and obvious error just emphasises how petty the bleating is we’ve seen from Celtic, some of their fans and the media in the aftermath of the game.

I also think the comments from Ange about how “these decisions won’t even themselves out by the end of the season” was a clever way of putting pressure on referees. Particularly in this case when it can be reasonably argued the decision was the correct one.

[Connor7]

1 hour ago, JCFooty72 said:

Lowry off to Ross County rumors going about, happy with that will get Premiership game time... needs to come back as a first teamer from next season though

I thought he would have been better off playing against Dalbeattie Star in the Lowland league. 
 

Well, this is what the hierarchy tell us.

[bennett]

1 hour ago, Jinky67 said:

You say the correct decision however there is nothing in IFAB that really says you can or cannot give a handball if a player is “protecting their face” It is still a subjective decision solely down the to the ref as to if he thinks it is in the spirit of the game to give it. Personally I thought his hands were already up before the shot was taken but that’s just my thoughts 

If that penalty went against you there is also every possibility it would have stood also depending who was making the decision …therein lies the problem. It’s not clear and it is not obvious.

 

We get it,  celtic never won 1 game and it's a catastrophe. 

 

 

 

[Jinky67]

1 hour ago, AJF said:

I’d say this clarification from IFAB is sufficient to support the referee’s decision not to award a penalty.

And I totally appreciate had it been given it may have stood, but surely the fact that it can’t be deemed a clear and obvious error just emphasises how petty the bleating is we’ve seen from Celtic, some of their fans and the media in the aftermath of the game.

I also think the comments from Ange about how “these decisions won’t even themselves out by the end of the season” was a clever way of putting pressure on referees. Particularly in this case when it can be reasonably argued the decision was the correct one.

Anges comments aren’t just about this decision though. We have now seen a number of them where the decision making and application of VAR is inconsistent and some of the penalties given against us this season just aren’t being given in other games particularly games involving Rangers with the 1 exception being the one we got against Livi which was silly and another example of a penalty call just not being given in many other games. Is it corruption or bias? I genuinely don’t think so but it still points to inconsistencies 

And like I said I don’t think Goldsons was reflex, his arms were already up before the ball left Starfelts boot but that’s just my opinion and one you are unlikely to share so we won’t agree on this.

35 minutes ago, bennett said:

 

We get it,  celtic never won 1 game and it's a catastrophe. 

 

 

 

You clearly don’t hence why you keep repeating this over and over and why I generally haven’t acknowledge you

But no mate it’s a not a catastrophe, the league table and gap should tell you that 

Edited January 13, 2023 by Jinky67

[gannonball]

9 minutes ago, Jinky67 said:

Anges comments aren’t just about this decision though. We have now seen a number of them where the decision making and application of VAR is inconsistent and some of the penalties given against us this season just aren’t being given in other games particularly games involving Rangers with the 1 exception being the one we got against Livi which was silly and another example of a penalty call just not being given in many other games. Is it corruption or bias? I genuinely don’t think so but it still points to inconsistencies 

And like I said I don’t think Goldsons was reflex, his arms were already up before the ball left Starfelts boot but that’s just my opinion and one you are unlikely to share so we won’t agree on this.

You clearly don’t hence why you keep repeating this over and over and why I generally haven’t acknowledge you

But no mate it’s a not a catastrophe, the league table and gap should tell you that 

He's been incessantly saying this stuff on various threads. It doesn't even make sense as we were shite and  happy to grab a late draw.

[AJF]

26 minutes ago, Jinky67 said:

Anges comments aren’t just about this decision though. We have now seen a number of them where the decision making and application of VAR is inconsistent and some of the penalties given against us this season just aren’t being given in other games particularly games involving Rangers with the 1 exception being the one we got against Livi which was silly and another example of a penalty call just not being given in many other games. Is it corruption or bias? I genuinely don’t think so but it still points to inconsistencies 

And like I said I don’t think Goldsons was reflex, his arms were already up before the ball left Starfelts boot but that’s just my opinion and one you are unlikely to share so we won’t agree on this.

I never said his comments were in isolation to this incident, I simply think they were made in an attempt to put pressure on referees going forward, hence the “decisions evening out” comments.

And yep, you’re right we won’t agree. From what I remember of the incident Goldson’s arms don’t go up to his face until contact is made with the ball by Starfelt.

[bennett]

45 minutes ago, Jinky67 said:

Anges comments aren’t just about this decision though. We have now seen a number of them where the decision making and application of VAR is inconsistent and some of the penalties given against us this season just aren’t being given in other games particularly games involving Rangers with the 1 exception being the one we got against Livi which was silly and another example of a penalty call just not being given in many other games. Is it corruption or bias? I genuinely don’t think so but it still points to inconsistencies 

And like I said I don’t think Goldsons was reflex, his arms were already up before the ball left Starfelts boot but that’s just my opinion and one you are unlikely to share so we won’t agree on this.

You clearly don’t hence why you keep repeating this over and over and why I generally haven’t acknowledge you

But no mate it’s a not a catastrophe, the league table and gap should tell you that 

Well stop boring everyone and move on.

[Henrik's tongue]

1 hour ago, bennett said:

 

We get it,  celtic never won 1 game and it's a catastrophe. 

 

 

 

 

[bennett]

28 minutes ago, Henrik's tongue said:

 

Exactly Hen, maybe Jinky will listen to you and chill out a bit.