Popular Post RandomGuy. Posted August 5, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted August 5, 2021 About 15 pages of this, of conspiracies and wild theories, when it can be summarised by things we've all known for years. Rangers are arrogant c***s. Neil Doncaster is an incompetent moron. Charlie Adam is a thick ***. 22 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobby Dossar Posted August 5, 2021 Share Posted August 5, 2021 Easy solution SPFL do not put Rangers forward as their representative for Champions League or any of the European competitions Let them chuck their toys out of the park and f**k off. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingjoey Posted August 5, 2021 Share Posted August 5, 2021 9 minutes ago, Lobby Dossar said: Easy solution SPFL do not put Rangers forward as their representative for Champions League or any of the European competitions Let them chuck their toys out of the park and f**k off. With the points deduction they’re going to be hammered with, they may not end up in the top two this season. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScarf Posted August 5, 2021 Author Share Posted August 5, 2021 I like how Dundee fans claim Adam is a Dee. He's one of the biggest ***s going. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted August 5, 2021 Share Posted August 5, 2021 Adam should shut the f**k up. He might not have said anything overtly pro rangers but he’s basically implied a continuation of a decades old story whereby the OF throw their weight around and act like c***s and then ‘we all sit down and agree to give them more money’. f**k off charlie. Are rangers even after a bigger slice of the pie here? That’s not the impression I get. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJF Posted August 5, 2021 Share Posted August 5, 2021 2 hours ago, kingjoey said: If Rangers are so hot on the SPFL rules, why has Stewart Robertson not quoted Rule G46, set out in full in an earlier post, as well? I couldn’t say. Reading Robertson’s letter, he mentions that they informed the SPFL that they wouldn’t be able to provide Cinch with many of their rights, so it may not be specifically centred around the sleeve branding. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJF Posted August 5, 2021 Share Posted August 5, 2021 1 minute ago, Dons_1988 said: Are rangers even after a bigger slice of the pie here? That’s not the impression I get. Same here. I think Robertson criticising the broadcasting deal last week and now this issue seems to be getting conflated somewhat. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forfinn Posted August 5, 2021 Share Posted August 5, 2021 13 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said: Are rangers even after a bigger slice of the pie here? That’s not the impression I get. It's not the point Rangers are making, but Adam is probably right insomuch as greasing their palms with a few more pieces of silver would probably make the problem go away. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted August 5, 2021 Share Posted August 5, 2021 (edited) On the side issue of ex-OF players showing more deference to a team that dumped them than the team that is currently paying them, and this is more a broader point than specifically aimed at Adam - although he's obviously relevant to this point, it's one of the reasons I really dislike adding an 'established' OF player to the St Mirren squad. It's obviously difficult to avoid any connection to the OF, and this doesn't really apply to youth players spat out of their system (Kenny McLean being an example), but I just find it utterly annoying to see players being suckered by the media into continuing the tedious tradition of talking up what is effectively the opposition. Anyway, nothing to do with the sponsorship stuff, feel free to ignore this... Edited August 5, 2021 by Ric 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted August 5, 2021 Share Posted August 5, 2021 I’m assuming Rangers are at it here, as shirt sponsorship contracts will surely be generic for all the clubs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiG Posted August 5, 2021 Share Posted August 5, 2021 No one should really be surprised at these comments from Adam given he is so catastrophically bald. However, I am more surprised that he thinks there are only 12 clubs in the SPFL. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted August 5, 2021 Share Posted August 5, 2021 Used car salesmen slugging it out over a few brass farthings and the end of the month luncheon vouchers.Low rent. Tinpot. Standard. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahemps Posted August 5, 2021 Share Posted August 5, 2021 37 minutes ago, Ric said: On the side issue of ex-OF players showing more deference to a team that dumped them than the team that is currently paying them, and this is more a broader point than specifically aimed at Adam - although he's obviously relevant to this point, it's one of the reasons I really dislike adding an 'established' OF player to the St Mirren squad. It's obviously difficult to avoid any connection to the OF, and this doesn't really apply to youth players spat out of their system (Kenny McLean being an example), but I just find it utterly annoying to see players being suckered by the media into continuing the tedious tradition of talking up what is effectively the opposition. Anyway, nothing to do with the sponsorship stuff, feel free to ignore this... 100% agree with you here. I remember being in a social club bar when a load of Rangers supporters descended on it as there was a speakers night on in the lounge later on. Kenny Miller and Kris Boyd were coming along for a Q&A. Boyd was still actively playing for Kilmarnock in the same league as Rangers at the time yet was going to Rangers supporter gatherings????? The OF are blind to see how this makes the league look. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted August 5, 2021 Share Posted August 5, 2021 Just now, ahemps said: 100% agree with you here. I remember being in a social club bar when a load of Rangers supporters descended on it as there was a speakers night on in the lounge later on. Kenny Miller and Kris Boyd were coming along for a Q&A. Boyd was still actively playing for Kilmarnock in the same league as Rangers at the time yet was going to Rangers supporter gatherings????? The OF are blind to see how this makes the league look. I don't think the media realise just how fucking insulting it is for your current players to be asked about another team, or worse on another game such as the OF derby. Or... perhaps they do, don't give a f**k, and will continue to pander to the mouthbreathers that buy their shitty rags. Yeah, definitely the second one of those.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScarf Posted August 5, 2021 Author Share Posted August 5, 2021 3 minutes ago, ahemps said: 100% agree with you here. I remember being in a social club bar when a load of Rangers supporters descended on it as there was a speakers night on in the lounge later on. Kenny Miller and Kris Boyd were coming along for a Q&A. Boyd was still actively playing for Kilmarnock in the same league as Rangers at the time yet was going to Rangers supporter gatherings????? The OF are blind to see how this makes the league look. Did he not used to pundit Rangers games on Sky when he played for Kilmarnock too? Made Rangers TV look neutral if I recall. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clown Job Posted August 5, 2021 Share Posted August 5, 2021 (edited) 10 hours ago, AJF said: Apologies if it has been posted already, but here is Rangers’ letter to the clubs regarding the matter: Reads to me as if they’re taking the piss while trying to act as the innocent party As pointed out elsewhere, sponsors have been part of the league sleeve patch for over 20 years now. League sponsorship is a collective agreement, either we are all in it or none of us are. I cannot think of a single league that has an opt out for individual clubs when it comes to league sponsorship Knowing the above about the sleeve patches etc.., did RFC really negotiate an external deal with someone and not have it in the contact they as part of the SPFL would be promoting league sponsors? I know nothing about writing commercial contracts, but you’d think it would be standard to have something similar to the above Honestly it comes across as giving the rest of the clubs the middle finger I said it before, but all they’re doing is undermining the SPFL, and making it harder in the future to find someone willing to put in the cash Edit: Does this mean also the fans can’t buy the sleeve patch for a replica kit in the club store? Edited August 5, 2021 by Clown Job 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginaro Posted August 5, 2021 Share Posted August 5, 2021 Surely a few other clubs will have a local car dealer as a sponsor of some sort, does that mean they can also not comply with the cinch sponsorship requirements? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aim Here Posted August 5, 2021 Share Posted August 5, 2021 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Clown Job said: I said it before, but all they’re doing is undermining the SPFL, and making it harder in the future to find someone willing to put in the cash This looks like it's the plan - ditch the SPFL leadership and put in someone more to their liking, by undermining the new sponsorship deal. But if it's really what they're up to, they better have something better than 'We signed a contract for sleeve space despite knowing for as long as we've existed that the SPFL Board had the right to take that space over' or 'Douglas Park with his Rangers hat on signed a contract with Douglas Park with his Parks of Hamilton Hat on offering a team bus to Rangers in exchange for NO CAR SALESMEN IN IBROX, and Douglas Park with his Rangers hat on must abide by the contract he signed with Douglas Park with his Parks of Hamilton hat on, or Douglas Park will get sued by Douglas Park'. Because there are 41 teams here, who are going to be losing actual hard cash if cinch drops out and if there's a sniff of bad faith about whatever this contract is, they're not going to blame Neil Doncaster for Rangers deliberately concocting boobytrapped sponsorship contracts. Edited August 5, 2021 by Aim Here 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twinkle Posted August 5, 2021 Share Posted August 5, 2021 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Ginaro said: Surely a few other clubs will have a local car dealer as a sponsor of some sort, does that mean they can also not comply with the cinch sponsorship requirements? Dont know about car dealers but Celtic had a Betfred sleeve sponsor in the cup and were sponsored by Dafaqbet so surely that wouldve been a conflict but i cant remember anything coming out of that Edited August 5, 2021 by Twinkle 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJF Posted August 5, 2021 Share Posted August 5, 2021 (edited) 28 minutes ago, Clown Job said: Reads to me as if they’re taking the piss while trying to act as the innocent party As pointed out elsewhere, sponsors have been part of the league sleeve patch for over 20 years now. League sponsorship is a collective agreement, either we are all in it or none of us are. I cannot think of a single league that has an opt out for individual clubs when it comes to league sponsorship Knowing the above about the sleeve patches etc.., did RFC really negotiate an external deal with someone and not have it in the contact they as part of the SPFL would be promoting league sponsors? I know nothing about writing commercial contracts, but you’d think it would be standard to have something similar to the above Honestly it comes across as giving the rest of the clubs the middle finger I said it before, but all they’re doing is undermining the SPFL, and making it harder in the future to find someone willing to put in the cash Edit: Does this mean also the fans can’t buy the sleeve patch for a replica kit in the club store? I don’t know the ins and outs of it. It could be that Rangers have acted in their best interests and secured a deal for themselves (e.g. Tomket Tires or similar) after there was no league sponsor last season and they may have had doubts over any future sponsorship deal. They then notified the SPFL of any conflict when the Cinch deal was under discussion which should have then been relayed to Cinch according to Rangers. This is just speculation though, as there is very little in concrete facts about what the contractual conflict is (or isn’t). Edited August 5, 2021 by AJF 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.