Jump to content

New SPFL sponsor


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Dundee Hibernian said:

Correct me if I'm wrong: is this the first time the new club has won any of the many court cases in which they've been involved?

If so, congratulations are in order.

I don't think it was decided in court. The grown ups have done the grown up thing and conceded some ground to minimise the disruption caused by a ten year-old having a tantrum. 

Hopefully the entitled little shit doesn't take it as an invitation to throw it's toys whenever it doesn't like something, but i'm not optimistic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Raidernation said:

So hopes the new club gets bugger all money from this deal with cinch, last year or in the future, directly or indirectly?

No the Cinch money goes in the main pot and gets split depending on your league placing.

Doncaster fucked up if spent any money challenging Rangers in court.

 

Edited by Detournement
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ropy said:

Pay the legal fees out of the money that would have otherwise gone to Rangers?

Kicking off another legal battle about the SPFL not fulfilling its contractual obligations? At that point you’d be wondering if they were secretly a make work scheme for the Scottish legal profession.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, ropy said:

Pay the legal fees out of the money that would have otherwise gone to Rangers?

 

It should be coming out of Doncasters wages but it won't. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I genuinely don't understand why this was an issue. The league was sponsored by Ladbrokes, the Scottish Cup by William Hill and the league cup by Betfred all at a time when both Celtic and Rangers were sponsored by rival betting companies. 

The Dons have a vehicle partner in Morrison Motors of Turra, yet weren't jumping up and down about Cinch being title sponsor. Utter petulance and nonsense from Rangers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s definitely an embarrassment for the SPFL and a “win” for rangers here, but it certainly feels more like this was all about sticking it to the SPFL rather than some genuine commercial concern. 

In the long run this is bad for the game. It hardly makes the league attractive to sponsors when stuff like this goes on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, bennett said:

So Rangers were right all along.

No, only a meaningless and expendable operating company entirely divorced from Rangers*, the football club, was right all along. That's the problem when you constantly twist reality to suit your agenda.  

Edited by Squonk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, coprolite said:

I don't think it was decided in court. The grown ups have done the grown up thing and conceded some ground to minimise the disruption caused by a ten year-old having a tantrum. 

Hopefully the entitled little shit doesn't take it as an invitation to throw it's toys whenever it doesn't like something, but i'm not optimistic. 

This has already been to court several times, the SPFL lost each time it did. First, by trying to claim that Parks weren't a related party, second, by trying to send the matter to the SFA for arbitration rather than settle it through the courts.

If the SPFL had any chance of winning this case, they wouldn't have been forced into a humiliating climb-down and relying on the good grace of cinch not to deduct more money from the already paltry deal that they're giving us.

The wildest thing about this is that Rule 17 is very straightforward and only a complete fucking idiot could fail to understand it.

For supporters on here not to understand how badly the SPFL fucked this is one thing. For Doncaster and McLennan to not understand their own rule book is quite another.

The most embarrassing thing about this for the SPFL is probably that they got outsmarted by Stewart Robertson and James Bisgrove, who are hardly shining examples of competent executives themselves. The league leadership is filled with incompetent losers, and it's crazy that they retain support among certain influential media figures (both traditional and supporter-led media).

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...