How could possibly they know if they were constantly kept in the dark by Whyte?
Good posy, 54.
Chris is a shinning light in this mess.
We can argue the severity of the fines however not the principle.
However the transfer embargo is simply draconian and way beyond any reasonable persons view on alledged crimes.
Very well written article.
Cant argue with any of it.
Right bears, get sharing, tweeting, emailing Chris's article- time to apply some pressure on the SFA before the appeal.
One question Murray yes forget him ever been called Sir again as that would be a insult to people who are knighted, this guy sold Rangers Down the river he knew what Whyte was and if Murray would have done his job right in the first place Rangers would not be in the mess they have been and still are
Yes you owed the bank money but bottom lone is if you would have done a newco or other then Whyte would have never been at Rangers and you wouldn't be were you are today
Yes the SFA should have done there job two and investigated Whyte swell, but bottom line it amazes me how Murray comes away from all this squeaky clean when really he is the start of all this
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Brilliant article although I think he is copying my stuff from ja606
Jinky it amazes me how Murray has not been questioned more, for some reason though the SFA have restricted their investigation to Whyte's tenure.
Also something the article misses is that the whole fit and reasonable test was first raised when Graham Rix was appointed Hearts manager. The SFA delayed and delayed until Romanov sacked him before saying he was not a fit and proper person.
Therefore the whole issue of carrying out a fit and proper person test should have been resolved ages ago. It wasn't as if Whyte came out of nowhere, he was linked with a takeover for months.
I can't dispute any of it.
But I have one thing I may add, that the author of the article has not mentioned, there is another director at Rangers, Andrew Ellis? Mr Ellis was the man who introduced Whyte to the Rangers takeover, can we be certain that he as a director did not know anything about what Mr Whyte was doing? I can accept the others probably didn't and hence resigned, but Mr Ellis was also a director and was heavily involved with Mr Whyte.
Bluetoonger
Agree don't get mr wrong SFA haven't done there job and if they did Whyte would never have had anything to do with our game
I agree the SFA should have done checks on Whyte, and probably should do on Green.
But I can only imagine the venom directed towards them if they had blocked the sale of Rangers to a guy who the Rangers fans thought was their saviour.
That's not me justifying their incompetence, but I am giving a reason for it.
Giving a reason for why they may have done it, not justifying their decision.
<<The document is long and so I am going to ignore several parts.>>
Yeah Chris.
The lawyers will be shiiitin themselves.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Curly, agreed.
I mean the whole Rangers scenario has quite rightly made the ludicrous situation at Hearts a sideshow. When in truth, if Rangers were in a healthy state, then this would be receiving a lot more coverage.
Murray should be in the dock for several things.
He should be in jail for selling to Whyte.
Too - many - wurds.
Whit's the gist of it?
read it issy ya lazy bassa
Cannae be ar$ed. Is there any durty pictures in it?
1. It's no fair.
2. If the media didn't report it - it didn't happen.
Point 2 will be a shock to Woodward and Bernstein.
I'll break it to them gently.
Very compelling and simply adds to the idea that this is a witchunt of the highest order.
Anyone confident that we have someone arguing our case who will be able to provide such a logical rebuttal? No, me either - PR disaster we are, from top to bottom!
"Woodward and Bernstein."
I loved them. Especially once they got that big dog, Snorbitz involved in their act.
Mearns.
What about the other directors, which the author of the article has ignored?
I'm talking about people such as Phil Betts, a man who received £160,000 from the same Collyer Bristow account which Whyte received the Ticketus money from. Are we to believe that he also didn't know?
Don't get me wrong, Rangers certainly have a case in that Greig and Mclleland were probably oblivious to Whyte's dealings, but what about Betts?
Sign in if you want to comment
Reasonable remarks on Rangers.
Page 1 of 3
posted on 14/5/12
How could possibly they know if they were constantly kept in the dark by Whyte?
Good posy, 54.
posted on 14/5/12
Chris is a shinning light in this mess.
We can argue the severity of the fines however not the principle.
However the transfer embargo is simply draconian and way beyond any reasonable persons view on alledged crimes.
posted on 14/5/12
posy.
posted on 14/5/12
Yank you ayheist!
posted on 14/5/12
Very well written article.
Cant argue with any of it.
posted on 14/5/12
Right bears, get sharing, tweeting, emailing Chris's article- time to apply some pressure on the SFA before the appeal.
posted on 14/5/12
One question Murray yes forget him ever been called Sir again as that would be a insult to people who are knighted, this guy sold Rangers Down the river he knew what Whyte was and if Murray would have done his job right in the first place Rangers would not be in the mess they have been and still are
Yes you owed the bank money but bottom lone is if you would have done a newco or other then Whyte would have never been at Rangers and you wouldn't be were you are today
Yes the SFA should have done there job two and investigated Whyte swell, but bottom line it amazes me how Murray comes away from all this squeaky clean when really he is the start of all this
posted on 14/5/12
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 14/5/12
Brilliant article although I think he is copying my stuff from ja606
Jinky it amazes me how Murray has not been questioned more, for some reason though the SFA have restricted their investigation to Whyte's tenure.
Also something the article misses is that the whole fit and reasonable test was first raised when Graham Rix was appointed Hearts manager. The SFA delayed and delayed until Romanov sacked him before saying he was not a fit and proper person.
Therefore the whole issue of carrying out a fit and proper person test should have been resolved ages ago. It wasn't as if Whyte came out of nowhere, he was linked with a takeover for months.
posted on 14/5/12
I can't dispute any of it.
But I have one thing I may add, that the author of the article has not mentioned, there is another director at Rangers, Andrew Ellis? Mr Ellis was the man who introduced Whyte to the Rangers takeover, can we be certain that he as a director did not know anything about what Mr Whyte was doing? I can accept the others probably didn't and hence resigned, but Mr Ellis was also a director and was heavily involved with Mr Whyte.
posted on 14/5/12
Bluetoonger
Agree don't get mr wrong SFA haven't done there job and if they did Whyte would never have had anything to do with our game
posted on 14/5/12
I agree the SFA should have done checks on Whyte, and probably should do on Green.
But I can only imagine the venom directed towards them if they had blocked the sale of Rangers to a guy who the Rangers fans thought was their saviour.
That's not me justifying their incompetence, but I am giving a reason for it.
posted on 14/5/12
Giving a reason for why they may have done it, not justifying their decision.
posted on 14/5/12
<<The document is long and so I am going to ignore several parts.>>
posted on 14/5/12
Yeah Chris.
The lawyers will be shiiitin themselves.
posted on 14/5/12
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 14/5/12
Curly, agreed.
I mean the whole Rangers scenario has quite rightly made the ludicrous situation at Hearts a sideshow. When in truth, if Rangers were in a healthy state, then this would be receiving a lot more coverage.
posted on 14/5/12
Murray should be in the dock for several things.
He should be in jail for selling to Whyte.
posted on 14/5/12
Too - many - wurds.
Whit's the gist of it?
posted on 14/5/12
read it issy ya lazy bassa
posted on 14/5/12
Cannae be ar$ed. Is there any durty pictures in it?
posted on 14/5/12
1. It's no fair.
2. If the media didn't report it - it didn't happen.
Point 2 will be a shock to Woodward and Bernstein.
I'll break it to them gently.
posted on 14/5/12
Very compelling and simply adds to the idea that this is a witchunt of the highest order.
Anyone confident that we have someone arguing our case who will be able to provide such a logical rebuttal? No, me either - PR disaster we are, from top to bottom!
posted on 14/5/12
"Woodward and Bernstein."
I loved them. Especially once they got that big dog, Snorbitz involved in their act.
posted on 14/5/12
Mearns.
What about the other directors, which the author of the article has ignored?
I'm talking about people such as Phil Betts, a man who received £160,000 from the same Collyer Bristow account which Whyte received the Ticketus money from. Are we to believe that he also didn't know?
Don't get me wrong, Rangers certainly have a case in that Greig and Mclleland were probably oblivious to Whyte's dealings, but what about Betts?
Page 1 of 3