craigkillie Posted August 16, 2022 Share Posted August 16, 2022 And it would still be the clubs' fault for employing that person. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coprolite Posted August 16, 2022 Share Posted August 16, 2022 11 minutes ago, G51 said: I don’t care that the clubs are happy with him. I don’t own any of the football clubs. He’s part of the problem. If all of a sudden all 42 club owners were replaced by competent, functioning ownership groups, we’d still have a problem with our contracts because the guy negotiating them on our behalf is absolutely shite at it. Why would competent professionals continue to hire that donkey though? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G51 Posted August 16, 2022 Share Posted August 16, 2022 1 minute ago, coprolite said: Why would competent professionals continue to hire that donkey though? They wouldn’t. But the point being made was that Doncaster was just a human shield. He’s not. Just because the ultimate responsibility doesn’t lie with him, it doesn’t absolve him of blame for every f**k up he’s made. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted August 16, 2022 Share Posted August 16, 2022 2 hours ago, G51 said: I don’t care that the clubs are happy with him. I don’t own any of the football clubs. He’s part of the problem. If all of a sudden all 42 club owners were replaced by competent, functioning ownership groups, we’d still have a problem with our contracts because the guy negotiating them on our behalf is absolutely shite at it. If they were replaced with competent owners they'd bin him, but they won't be and he won't either. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgie greatness Posted August 16, 2022 Share Posted August 16, 2022 8 hours ago, Leith Green said: Hibs also advertised a couple of posts recently on poor money............but got loads of applicants. Some people just want to work in fitba, and if its for their own team, all the better. I will do it for £200k then, for that money they can call me a useless Hibby b*****d all they like. That’s my job & your getting f**k all 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJF Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Wasn’t sure where was best to post this so I suppose this thread might be appropriate: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Central Belt Caley Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 5 minutes ago, AJF said: Wasn’t sure where was best to post this so I suppose this thread might be appropriate: Good attempt at listing the clubs in alphabetical order 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJF Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 2 minutes ago, Central Belt Caley said: Good attempt at listing the clubs in alphabetical order Exactly. Never mind L coming before M, The Rangers should've been at the end of the list! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 You wonder who the one club who got an input on the report was? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Only one club was allowed to have an input, I wonder which club that was? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJF Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Here is McLennan's statement that is referenced in the letter of concern: SPFL press release: 22/01/24 | SPFL 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gannonball Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 2 minutes ago, AJF said: Here is McLennan's statement that is referenced in the letter of concern: SPFL press release: 22/01/24 | SPFL Surely if they interviewed 15 stake holders it was representatives of more than one club? Also is it just the 6 out of the 42 who arent happy about it I assume? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJF Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 (edited) 11 minutes ago, gannonball said: Surely if they interviewed 15 stake holders it was representatives of more than one club? Also is it just the 6 out of the 42 who arent happy about it I assume? Yeah, I'm not sure regarding both questions to be fair. The stakeholders were described as "executive team members, non-executive directors, and other senior figures in the game". Who that may be, I've no idea I am assuming more details will come out in the wash. Additionally, looking at the wording in the letter of concern, it states: "Of the 42 member clubs, only one had the opportunity to input into the report's investigation, outside of current or previous SPFL board members". Maybe suggests that club representatives who are/have been on the SPFL board got to have a say, but in their capacity as board members rather than representing their club. Just guesswork at this stage, though. ETA: STV are reporting that it is Aberdeen that is the only club that has been part of the audit process Six Scottish Premiership football clubs demand answers from SPFL in unprecedented attack | STV News Edited February 8 by AJF 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gannonball Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 (edited) 19 minutes ago, AJF said: Yeah, I'm not sure regarding both questions to be fair. The stakeholders were described as "executive team members, non-executive directors, and other senior figures in the game". Who that may be, I've no idea I am assuming more details will come out in the wash. Additionally, looking at the wording in the letter of concern, it states: "Of the 42 member clubs, only one had the opportunity to input into the report's investigation, outside of current or previous SPFL board members". Maybe suggests that club representatives who are/have been on the SPFL board got to have a say, but in their capacity as board members rather than representing their club. Just guesswork at this stage, though. Yeah agreed the bit you had highlight kind of makes the statement abit wishy washy for me. Obviously there will be more to come from this but given it's got <15% of the clubs on it, 2 of which have pretty batshit crazy owners I'm not looking too much in to this at present. No doubt the likes of Tom English will look too much in to either but will sensationalise it anyway which I suppose was the main aim of this statement. Edited February 8 by gannonball 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Aberdeen have spoken, get rid of the lot of them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 46 minutes ago, AJF said: Yeah, I'm not sure regarding both questions to be fair. The stakeholders were described as "executive team members, non-executive directors, and other senior figures in the game". Who that may be, I've no idea I am assuming more details will come out in the wash. Additionally, looking at the wording in the letter of concern, it states: "Of the 42 member clubs, only one had the opportunity to input into the report's investigation, outside of current or previous SPFL board members". Maybe suggests that club representatives who are/have been on the SPFL board got to have a say, but in their capacity as board members rather than representing their club. Just guesswork at this stage, though. ETA: STV are reporting that it is Aberdeen that is the only club that has been part of the audit process Six Scottish Premiership football clubs demand answers from SPFL in unprecedented attack | STV News The statement is deliberately written to imply that it is another Premiership club who is not Aberdeen IMO. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJF Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 1 minute ago, craigkillie said: The statement is deliberately written to imply that it is another Premiership club who is not Aberdeen IMO. Agreed. When I first read the letter of concern I assumed the one club that had input was not one of the 6 that had attached their name to it based on the tone of the letter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molotov Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Does anyone else think that Doncaster trousering the annual salary and pension every year is appropriate in the current climate of austerity? I appreciate it’s deemed an important role but I find it obscene. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alert Mongoose Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Aberdeen, St Mirren, St Johnstone, Motherwell and Livingston's big team found. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLIS Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Very clear that this massive issue should put an immediate stop to all relegations this season. If a resolution is to take place, expand the top flight and void any and all relegations from that league. 1 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.