or to join or start a new Discussion

44 Comments
Article Rating 1 Star

Well said

Secret three should be outed

ROGER HANNAH, SPORTS NEWS EDITOR
“I REITERATE my personal determination to improve the efficiency and transparency of our decision-making."
Not my words. Those of SFA chief executive Stewart Regan.
He was speaking after the attempted cover-up and scandal which cost top ref Dougie McDonald his job 18 months ago.
Regan has made transparency and accountability two of the cornerstones of his Hampden reign.
So why were Scottish football’s top brass so eager to protect the anonymity of the Judicial Panel Tribunal members right from the off?
The Scottish Sun has chosen NOT to reveal the identities of the three men who punished Rangers on Monday night now their safety could be at risk. But we know who they are.
Despite his public claims to the contrary, Ally McCoist knows who they are.
One glance at internet forums or social network sites will tell everyone who they are.
Yet Mr Regan, despite his insistence that he wants to drag the SFA into the 21st Century, took the decision not to name them.
He says they are volunteers who deserve privacy. He fears their safety will be endangered.
But by that very action he has stirred up a vicious chattering campaign on the internet and turned them into shadowy hate figures.
It’s NOT good enough to preach openness with one breath then demand secrecy with the next.
Bill Leckie and John Hartson sparked outrage among some Gers fans yesterday with their strong opinions on the crisis gripping the club.
As always, they had the courage to put their names to those controversial, hard-hitting columns.
If it’s the opinion of the three-man tribunal that crisis-torn Gers should face these unprecedented sanctions, they should have come out and stood by their decisions right from the start.


comment by (U10878)

posted on 26/4/12

Did he know the names?
-----------------------------------

Read the piece by one of the more balanced Scots commentators Michael Grant in today's on-line Herald.

It identifies who the Rangers representative was (i.e. the club knew), suggests that Ally would have known and why Ally might find himself in a bit of bother on this issue

posted on 26/4/12

Jinky - I have yet to see one bear deny this

U - suggests? As I said, that's not clear yet

posted on 26/4/12

Rangers ended up in dire financial mismanagement because they were sold.
------------------

To David Murray? Yeah I agree.

posted on 26/4/12

Rangers ended up in dire financial mismanagement because they were sold.
------------------

To David Murray? Yeah I agree.
_________________________

Rangers were solvent and comfortably within their banking covenants when sold to Whyte.

Other than the EBT case (which was Murray's doing anyway) Rangers had no issues. The wages were at their lowers at 16m per year, less than the season book income. Debt was structured over 18 years, easily repayable.

Murray selling to Whyte is why Rangers are in this mess.

posted on 26/4/12

Why should they be 'outed'

posted on 26/4/12

For transparency. If they have nothing to hide and they made the right decision then why hide?

Also , that's all regan has banged on about since he took up his post , transparency

posted on 26/4/12

What dfference would it make?

Ally's caused quite a stir..,

posted on 26/4/12

It would take away the whole cloak n dagger stuff that it's caused.

Super ally he certainly has caused a stir. Job done for him I'm sure

posted on 26/4/12

PBN - So you dont believe under Murray Rangers were in dire financial management?

£200m lost since mid 90s, tax payers picking up the bill for £50m of that and a potential tax liability that could spell the end for the club.

Your club wouldnt be in the bother it is in just now if it wasnt for Murray's management, all Whyte did was make some promises and refuse to pay some bills. He may have made decisions that brought you to this point but thats like me saying that last cigarette I smoked is the one that will kill me.

posted on 26/4/12

PBN - So you dont believe under Murray Rangers were in dire financial management?

£200m lost since mid 90s, tax payers picking up the bill for £50m of that and a potential tax liability that could spell the end for the club.

Your club wouldnt be in the bother it is in just now if it wasnt for Murray's management, all Whyte did was make some promises and refuse to pay some bills. He may have made decisions that brought you to this point but thats like me saying that last cigarette I smoked is the one that will kill me.
__________________________________

CelticDavie

It's not a matter of believing, the accounts are there to read. As to the fantasy you added, there's not much to say to that.

When Murray sold to Whyte, the only issue Rangers had (although I'll accept a big one) was the EBT case.

Everything that has happened to Rangers so far has not been because of the EBT case, but because of Murray selling to Whyte.

Sign in if you want to comment
RATE THIS ARTICLE
Rate Breakdown
5
0 Votes
4
0 Votes
3
0 Votes
2
0 Votes
1
0 Votes

Average Rating: 1 from 1 vote

ARTICLE STATS
Day
Article RankingNot Ranked
Article ViewsNot Available
Average Time(mins)Not Available
Total Time(mins)Not Available
Month
Article RankingNot Ranked
Article ViewsNot Available
Average Time(mins)Not Available
Total Time(mins)Not Available