Rangers FC lodge papers to go into administration

Dempsey · 25-04-2012 11:57pm

Jelle1880 wrote: »

He doesn't HAVE to write any letters.

The last time he did it it was only to ask Lennon to explain himself.

WRONG

TheBuilder · 26-04-2012 12:01am

Lonesome Boatman wrote: »

McCoist, the catalyst of the Neil Lennon death threats and now solely responsible for SFA employees fearing for their lives

Poisonous bigot.

Wow, you live in some fantasy world. McCoist has nothing to do with anyone fearing for their lives, and if you have any decency you'll retract that last line.

Being as small minded as you must be an awful experience, what do the other people in your care home think about it?

Jelle1880 · 26-04-2012 12:02am

Dempsey wrote: »

Surely you know about this?

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=2566&newsCategoryID=1&newsID=9718

Yeah, and that says exactly what I quoted.

Rangers were found guilty regarding Rule 2.
But Rule 2 is in relation to Rule 1, for which Rangers were found 'not proven'.

Dempsey · 26-04-2012 12:03am

TheBuilder wrote: »

Wow, you live in some fantasy world. McCoist has nothing to do with anyone fearing for their lives, and if you have any decency you'll retract that last line.

Being as small minded as you must be an awful experience, what do the other people in your care home think about it?

The threats happened the day after his comments, not the day after the tribunal. Go figure.

TheBuilder · 26-04-2012 12:07am

Dempsey wrote: »

TheBuilder wrote: »

Wow, you live in some fantasy world. McCoist has nothing to do with anyone fearing for their lives, and if you have any decency you'll retract that last line.

Being as small minded as you must be an awful experience, what do the other people in your care home think about it?

The threats happened the day after his comments, not the day after the tribunal. Go figure.

So McCoist asking for information he felt the club deserved makes him a poisonous bigot sending out messages to so called fans to send threats?

The nonsense getting spouted in this thread recently, mostly from the new fans appearing out of the woodwork since the league was won is laughable, 3 or 4 members just obviously here to troll because it's the cool thing to do on boards these days.

Lonesome Boatman · 26-04-2012 12:11am

TheBuilder wrote: »

Wow, you live in some fantasy world. McCoist has nothing to do with anyone fearing for their lives, and if you have any decency you'll retract that last line.

Being as small minded as you must be an awful experience, what do the other people in your care home think about it?

if he had any decency he would withdraw his venomous comments and resign

the police are visiting him tomorrow

Dempsey · 26-04-2012 12:12am

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Yeah, and that says exactly what I quoted.

Rangers were found guilty regarding Rule 2.
But found 'not proven' on Rule 1, which is a necessity for Rule 2.

Your guilty of rule two because Whyte and the fact that he's now not a fit and proper person. You'd be guilty of rule 1 (b) if you knew that he was a unfit person before taking control and there was evidence to support it.

TheBuilder · 26-04-2012 12:12am

Lonesome Boatman wrote: »

TheBuilder wrote: »

Wow, you live in some fantasy world. McCoist has nothing to do with anyone fearing for their lives, and if you have any decency you'll retract that last line.

Being as small minded as you must be an awful experience, what do the other people in your care home think about it?

if he had any decency he would withdraw his venomous comments and resign

the police are visiting him tomorrow

Venomous comments haha, troll.

Jelle1880 · 26-04-2012 12:14am

Lonesome Boatman wrote: »

if he had any decency he would withdraw his venomous comments and resign

the police are visiting him tomorrow

I'm afraid you're actually serious too.

Sad.

Dempsey wrote: »

Rule 1 basically says that clubs should comply with all the rules of football

Rule 2 basically says that the club should ensure that all officials, team staff and players comply with those rules.

Your guilty of rule two because Whyte and the fact that he's now not a fit and proper person. You'd be guilty of rule 1 if you knew that he was a unfit person before taking control and there was evidence to support it.

I know what the rules mean, but Rule 2 states that it has to follow Rule 1, for which we were found 'Not Proven'.

So surely that would mean that the accusation regarding Rule 2 should also be thrown out ?

Lonesome Boatman · 26-04-2012 12:14am

TheBuilder wrote: »

So McCoist asking for information he felt the club deserved makes him a poisonous bigot sending out messages to so called fans to send threats?

The nonsense getting spouted in this thread recently, mostly from the new fans appearing out of the woodwork since the league was won is laughable, 3 or 4 members just obviously here to troll because it's the cool thing to do on boards these days.

his representative knew the names already, the cheeky chappy just wanted them made public.

wonder why?

Jelle1880 · 26-04-2012 12:18am

Lonesome Boatman wrote: »

his representative knew the names already, the cheeky chappy just wanted them made public.

wonder why?

Of another panel.

Lonesome Boatman · 26-04-2012 12:19am

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Of another panel.

No.

Rangers had a legal rep at the meeting.

Dempsey · 26-04-2012 12:21am

Jelle1880 wrote: »

I know what the rules mean, but Rule 2 states that it has to follow Rule 1, for which we were found 'Not Proven'.

So surely that would mean that the accusation regarding Rule 2 should also be thrown out ?

No

Crann na Beatha · 26-04-2012 12:25am

This post has been deleted.

Dempsey · 26-04-2012 12:29am

Aquila wrote: »

So,whats the status of Rangers fc right now ? In Administration
What will happen? Liquidation if a buyer is not found even without knowing the outcome of the 'Big Tax Case'
Also was that bet paid? Not Yet

Jelle1880 · 26-04-2012 12:33am

Dempsey wrote: »

No

Sorry, but that makes absolutely no sense.

Rule 1: Not Proven.

Rule 2: Each member shall procure that its officials, its Team Staff and its players act in accordance with Rule 1.

Does not compute.

Same as this:

1.6 The Protocol comes into effect on 7 June 2011 ("the Effective Date").

The findings:

Name: Craig Whyte, Director, Rangers FC
Dates: 6th May 2011 to 6th March 2012

Name: Rangers FC
Dates: 6th May 2011 to 6th March 2012

Charges are from May, but the rules didn't come into effect until June.

edit: Or does that Rule 1 and Rule 2 thing only work because Rule 2 deals with people and Rule 1 with the club as a whole ?
As in that Rangers are being punished because Whyte didn't follow the rules ?

Dempsey · 26-04-2012 12:42am

Yes, Rule 1 is about the club itself being inline with the rules, Rule 2 makes the club responsible for officials, team staff and players not following the rules and the rules they are referring to are

subject to and comply with the Articles and any statutes, regulations, directives, codes, decisions and International Match Calendar promulgated by the Board, the Professional Game Board, the Non Professional Game Board, the Judicial Panel, a Committee or sub-committee, FIFA, UEFA or the Court of Arbitration for Sport;

As said already, the club are being punished for Craig Whyte now not being a fit and proper person (rule 2), just cant prove that Rangers knew as he was taking over the club (rule 1). Craig Whyte/Rangers was guilty of this after the rule came into effect and before the charge was made so there is nothing wrong with the dates.

Lonesome Boatman · 26-04-2012 1:04am

Offensive Behaviour and Threatening Communications Act
Posted on 25 April, 2012 by Paul67

Can there be any surprise at tonight’s news that police are now investigating alleged harassment of members of the SFA Judicial Panel? On the way home tonight I almost drove off the road when I heard Scotsman journalist, Tom English, on Radio Scotland tell us Rangers knew who sat on the judicial panel a day before Ally McCoist demanded to know who they were on Rangers TV.

Now the SFA inform us the panel members’ identities have been “compromised”. There was no suggestion their identities were hidden until McCoist fanned the flames on Tuesday, these individuals were not subject to a witch hunt or harrassment. The Association added “all three panel members have reported intrusion into their personal and work lives, including abusive and threatening communication.”

In Scotland we now have an Offensive Behaviour and Threatening Communications Act. The Act criminalises “behaviour likely to lead to public disorder which expresses or incites hatred”. We’ll now see how the law works in this country.

Very sinister

Eirebear · 26-04-2012 2:23am

Here Boatman - i assume you still havnt cottoned on that this last few pages of "outrage" have been the result of SSN and BBC, once again jumping the gun with their shameful brand of "Journalism".

You look almost as foolish as them by carrying this bull**** on.

Jelle1880 · 26-04-2012 8:47am

ONE of the Hampden Three blamed by Ally McCoist for pushing Rangers to the brink last night insisted he has “no axe to grind” with the Ibrox club.
Raith Rovers director Eric Drysdale also insisted he would relish the chance to explain the reasons behind the decision to ban the Rangers manager from the transfer market – but fears he’d be hammered by the SFA for breaching a strict gagging order if he did.

On Tuesday McCoist demanded to know the names of the anonymous “experts” selected by the SFA to make the decision which the Rangers’ manager says could kill his club.
By lunchtime yesterday, following McCoist’s demands for transparency and despite SFA concerns over the safety of the individuals concerned, the internet was ablaze withspeculation as to who the three were.
Record Sport can confirm Drysdale was indeed part of the judiciary panel along with leading QC Gary Allan and former freelance football journalist Alistair Murning.
And Drysdale contacted Record Sport in a bid to explain his part in the process which is being blamed for kicking the club closer than ever towards oblivion.
The chartered banker, who feels he has been placed in an almost impossible position amidst soaring levels of animosity, said: “It was unfortunate Ally McCoist chose to speak out in the way he did yesterday and cause this furore for people who have given up their time voluntarily to assist in the administration of Scottish football.
“But while I found that disappointing, I also understand feelings are running high. If it was my club then I would understand the emotions.
“I genuinely believe when the statement of reasons is published obviously Rangers can and no doubt will appeal.
“That’s the process and I have no difficulty with that whatsoever. But I would like to make it clear I have no axe to grind against Rangers, Celtic or any football club. I’m a Raith Rovers supporter and I have been all my life.”
Drysdale, Allan and Murning were hand-picked for the tribunal and charged with the task of dishing
out appropriate sanctions for a list of misdemeanours dating back over Craig Whyte’s 10-month reign.
The absconded Whyte was hit with fines adding up to £200,000. But the club he plunged into administration was also hammered with £160,000 of cash penalties and banned from signing new players for a year.
The Ibrox club’s administrators, Duff and Phelps, have announced they will appeal the decision, with a hearing likely next week.
Drysdale said: “Were it not for the confidentiality agreement I would be more than happy to speak out in full and explain what happened but I cannot do that.
“There will be a detailed statement of reasons which will come out when it is ready and I hope when people have the opportunity to read it and digest it in full, they will form a better understanding of the process and the decisions reached.
“Beyond that I won’t say anything else about the process.”
Last night Murning said: “I didn’t have any concerns about being asked to make such an important decision. On the contrary, I felt ideally qualified to deal with the questions raised because they related to business matters.
“Apart from being a former football journalist I have also been involved in some fairly high-level business positions – a lot of which involved investigatory work.
“On top of that, I realised the very serious nature of the situation dictated that the people involved would not be fazed by the subject matter or the size of the club in question. We were well served by our chairman and I believe we reached the only possible conclusion.
“When the full facts of this case are made public I’m sure others will realise why we were left with no choice but to take the action we did.”
Edinburgh-based lawyer Allan, who headed up the three-man tribunal, said only: “My role is a judicial one in this process and, accordingly, it would be quite inappropriate that I make any comment at all at this stage.”

Transparency at it's best.

A Dub in Glasgo · 26-04-2012 9:06am

So Rangers and McCoist did know the identity of the 3 man panel before McCoist went on TV demanding to know their identities so they can be brought to task

This takes a more sinister turn and McCoist should be charged with breaching SFA rules and the PF should look to bring criminal charges for incitement. I can only imagine the uproar if Lennon done what McCoist done

bobbysands81 · 26-04-2012 9:19am

Jelle - Alex Thompson says that reports that Strathclyde Police have dropped the case against him are false and the story is made up - https://twitter.com/alextomo/status/195370722238005248

Jelle1880 · 26-04-2012 9:23am

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Jelle - Alex Thompson says that reports that Strathclyde Police have dropped the case against him are false and the story is made up - https://twitter.com/alextomo/status/195370722238005248

He says a lot of things

McCoist clarifies his statements:

RANGERS boss Ally McCoist has reiterated his belief that the season-long transfer embargo imposed by the SFA's judicial panel is inherently wrong and will be robustly appealed.
He has also reaffirmed his belief that the three-man panel who made this decision should be identified to the public at large in the spirit of transparency.

However, he has urged all supporters to desist from any form of threatening behaviour which, he says, would do a dis-service to the club and disgust him.
He said: "I would like to make quite clear my position in relation to the decision by the SFA's judicial panel which earlier this week imposed sanctions against Rangers which have far reaching consequences for our club and Scottish football.

"I firmly believe that decisions of this magnitude should be fully transparent and everyone should have confidence in the system that has been created to deliver such a finding.

"When I called for full transparency on Tuesday I took the view that the decision by the judicial panel should be subject to proper scrutiny. It is unthinkable in any walk of life that such a significant punishment would be meted out without full transparency.

"I fully understand that there are difficult decisions to be taken in football and they will never suit everyone but in this day and age clarity and transparency are surely of paramount importance.

"That said, I would not for one moment want anyone to interpret my remarks as a signal to engage in any form of threatening behaviour. Such activity disgusts me and anyone who engages in it does Rangers Football Club nothing but harm. No Rangers supporter should get themselves involved in it - not now nor at any time.

"Our focus has got to be firmly on ensuring that the Club's case in appealing the sanctions imposed on us is put forward robustly and in the appropriate manner.

"Rangers Football Club was a victim of what happened during the tenure of Craig Whyte. The Club was not an accomplice, a co-conspirator nor a perpetrator of wrongdoing.

"We suffered from it and still are. I hope that our appeal can be dealt with by the SFA as quickly as possible as the situation for the Club and the possible ramifications for Scottish football are very serious."

A Dub in Glasgo · 26-04-2012 9:28am

http://blogs.channel4.com/alex-thomsons-view/21st-century-rules-applied-rangers/1302

Faced with a judicial process at the Scottish Football Association and a due appeal process (active now) to be heard before a retired judge or QC – faced with all that, what does the Rangers manager Ally McCoist do?

Bide his time? Seek appeal advice? Reserve comment on an obviously sub-judicial procedure?

No – he suddenly demands on Rangers TV on Tuesday that the Scottish Football Association panel which imposed a 12 month ban on the club buying players be identified in public.

As an act of such irresponsibility in the current climate beggars belief. Like so many in this drama Mr McCoist goes “public” in an environment where I doubt he’ll never be properly questioned.

Far from letting due process happen and preparing the case for appeal, Mr McCoist chooses a lynch mob approach potentially putting the safety of these people at risk.

....

Will Mr McCoist be equally “public” in facing up to the responsibility of what he’s done? Given the cowardice of his initial act, you have to say it’s doubtful.

Jelle1880 · 26-04-2012 10:09am

Drysdale, Allan and Murning were hand-picked for the tribunal

So whatever happened to the 'cab rank system' Regan ?

bobbysands81 · 26-04-2012 10:30am

McCost - 'We are victims'

Disgraceful behaviour from the cheeky chappy. Double standards all over the shop when compared to how Neil Lennon gets treated.

Looking forward to TheBrewster coming on and absolutely imploding at the McCoist's behaviour... Oh wait, it's only Lennon that gets that treatment from him.

Eirebear · 26-04-2012 10:51am

lol, this is just getting silly now.

McCoist's "Behaviour"?
He angrily reacted to unprecedented punishment from the SFA, rightly or wrongly he gave an interview asking for transparancy.

How exactly would any other manager, of any other club react?
McCoist didnt name anyone, McCoist didnt give anyone any details, He simply asked a question.

The media in Scotland are a ****ing disgrace. How the BBC and SSN can morally, and indeed legally get away with reporting as fact that suspicious packages were sent to these men is completely beyond me.
Never mind though, i'm sure we can just blame McCoist for that too.

Jelle1880 · 26-04-2012 10:53am

bobbysands81 wrote: »

McCost - 'We are victims'

Disgraceful behaviour from the cheeky chappy. Double standards all over the shop when compared to how Neil Lennon gets treated.

Looking forward to TheBrewster coming on and absolutely imploding at the McCoist's behaviour... Oh wait, it's only Lennon that gets that treatment from him.

Dry your eyes :rolleyes:

Or have you forgotten how Lennon has treated officials ?

By the way, this is the same media acting outraged, who in the past have printed personal details of players and officials.

Pompey Magnus · 26-04-2012 11:03am

I haven't been keeping up with the fine details of the story but from what I have heard I would think McCoist was right to demand transparency, was there any good reason why the 3 panels members should have been kept private apart from them running the risk of getting a few nasty emails?

Also did the Rangers defense team make any criticism of choice of the 3 man panel prior to the judgement being announced?

the realpigiron · 26-04-2012 11:03am

McCoist letting himself down badly in the last couple of days, pandering to the dregs of Rangers supporters. McCoist should be careful not to associate himself with Scotland's Shame. Extricating Rangers from it's dodgy past and it's dodgy flank of support would be more in his line.

A Dub in Glasgo · 26-04-2012 11:14am

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

I haven't been keeping up with the fine details of the story but from what I have heard I would think McCoist was right to demand transparency, was there any good reason why the 3 panels members should have been kept private apart from them running the risk of getting a few nasty emails?

Also did the Rangers defense team make any criticism of choice of the 3 man panel prior to the judgement being announced?

Rangers had a rep at the hearing therefore knew who the panel members were. McCoist was playing to gallery when he demanded to know who they were in public. His cheeky chappy mask is slipping and the pressure is getting to him

Eirebear · 26-04-2012 11:16am

the realpigiron wrote: »

McCoist letting himself down badly in the last couple of days, pandering to the dregs of Rangers supporters. McCoist should be careful not to associate himself with Scotland's Shame. Extricating Rangers from it's dodgy past and it's dodgy flank of support would be more in his line.

Care to explain how?

Or is this just the opportune moment for you to have your stock dig at the Rangers support?

the realpigiron · 26-04-2012 11:28am

Eirebear wrote: »

Care to explain how?

Or is this just the opportune moment for you to have your stock dig at the Rangers support?

Not having a dig at the entire Rangers support, just the dodgy flank in their number. The dodgy flank, that McCoist should be careful not to associate himself with no matter how unwittingly. He has responsibilities in that regard.

Jelle1880 · 26-04-2012 11:36am

Drysdale says:

"“I genuinely believe when the statement of reasons is published obviously Rangers can and no doubt will appeal".

Sounds like he thinks we have every right to appeal this.

Eirebear · 26-04-2012 11:37am

the realpigiron wrote: »

Not having a dig at the entire Rangers support, just the dodgy flank in their number. The dodgy flank, that McCoist should be careful not to associate himself with no matter how unwittingly. He has responsibilities in that regard.

Fair enough - but i still don't understand how McCoist giving an interview does this.

How about the reports on both BBC and SSN which had mentioned "Suspicious packages" being sent to at least one of the three men?
Surely that sort of disgusting, misinformed, scandalous reporting is something which must be brought under the microscope?
People are very quick to have a go at the media around here usually, today though those people seem more interested in revelling in the idea that McCoist, a man who has been involved with the club for the majority of his career, nay the majority of his life is feeling a bit rattled by what's happening.

A Dub in Glasgo · 26-04-2012 12:24pm

Michael Grant in the (Glasgow) Herald today

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/833/004gqf.jpg

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/440/005qm.jpg

Old Gill · 26-04-2012 1:22pm

Lonesome Boatman wrote: »

McCoist, the catalyst of the Neil Lennon death threats and now solely responsible for SFA employees fearing for their lives

Poisonous bigot.

as a celtic fan I dont really think mccoist is a bigot as such (though he was allegedly one of those very against catholic mo johnstone signing). I do however think his comments this week were inflammatory/irresponsible and very dangerous considering rangers fans have previous when it comes to carrying out threats such as the 3 bombs last year and if anything happens the sfa panel then he would have to shoulder some of the blame for putting the spotlight on them.

Jelle1880 · 26-04-2012 1:25pm

Old Gill wrote: »

as a celtic fan I dont really think mccoist is a bigot as such (though he was allegedly one of those very against catholic mo johnstone signing). I do however think his comments this week were inflammatory/irresponsible and very dangerous considering rangers fans have previous when it comes to carrying out threats such as the 3 bombs last year and if anything happens the sfa panel then he would have to shoulder some of the blame for putting the spotlight on them.

Ah, that old chestnut again :rolleyes:

Those scumbags have nothing to do with Rangers.

the realpigiron · 26-04-2012 1:30pm

Old Gill wrote: »

as a celtic fan I dont really think mccoist is a bigot as such (though he was allegedly one of those very against catholic mo johnstone signing). I do however think his comments this week were inflammatory/irresponsible and very dangerous considering rangers fans have previous when it comes to carrying out threats such as the 3 bombs last year and if anything happens the sfa panel then he would have to shoulder some of the blame for putting the spotlight on them.

Really I didn't know that.

Regardless of that, McCoist's injudicial comments over the last couple of days shows a different side to the cheeky chap that cracks inane jokes on Question of Sport. McCoist needs to cop himself on, somebody should have a word with the boy.

Eirebear · 26-04-2012 1:39pm

Old Gill wrote: »

as a celtic fan I dont really think mccoist is a bigot as such (though he was allegedly one of those very against catholic mo johnstone signing). I do however think his comments this week were inflammatory/irresponsible and very dangerous considering rangers fans have previous when it comes to carrying out threats such as the 3 bombs last year and if anything happens the sfa panel then he would have to shoulder some of the blame for putting the spotlight on them.

Nice one, slip in a wee bit of propoganda while you're at it.
You seen our new socks? They're white. Must be really cleaning up our act!

MoJo and McCoist were very close pals due to being room mates on Scotland trips, and he was one of the first players who found out about his impending signing.

Eirebear · 26-04-2012 1:57pm

Eric Drysdale on SSN saying he hasnt recieved any threatening communication.

Good old Scottish media, Good old mockrage.

Dempsey · 26-04-2012 1:59pm

Eirebear wrote: »

Eric Drysdale on SSN saying he hasnt recieved any threatening communication.

Good old Scottish media, Good old mockrage.

And what about the others?

Jelle1880 · 26-04-2012 2:20pm

Dempsey wrote: »

And what about the others?

If they don't say anything then I assume nothing happened.

Dempsey · 26-04-2012 2:29pm

Jelle1880 wrote: »

If they don't say anything then I assume nothing happened.

The bullshít deflection responses from Rangers supporters over this are laughable.

As for the logic above, you really must be thick to assume that.

Eirebear · 26-04-2012 2:37pm

Dempsey wrote: »

The bullshít deflection responses from Rangers supporters over this are laughable.

As for the logic above, you really must be thick to assume that.

Wait a minute. Bull**** deflection?

Since last night we've went from "Suspicious Packages" to "Threatening Communication" to the only one of the three to do any interviews saying "I've had nothing".

Bull**** deflection?
How about non-story?
How about disgraceful journalism?

Dempsey · 26-04-2012 2:38pm

Eirebear wrote: »

Wait a minute. Bull**** deflection?

Since last night we've went from "Suspicious Packages" to "Threatening Communication" to the only one of the three to do any interviews saying "I've had nothing".

Bull**** deflection?
How about non-story?
How about disgraceful journalism?

Why dont you post exactly what Drysdale said? Lets see if you can manage that

Eirebear · 26-04-2012 2:45pm

Dempsey wrote: »

Why dont you post exactly what Drysdale said? Lets see if you can manage that

Oooohhhh! Someone's getting a little bit condescending arent they? "Let's see if you can manage that?"
Are you disapointed the big bad Bears havnt tried to kill anyone yet?
To paraphrase Drysdale as i don't have a video to hand.
"I've recieved no threatening communication, I've recieved emails from Rangers fans expressing their anger at the decision but that was to be expected. I have recieved no telephone calls and no direct threats."

Dempsey · 26-04-2012 2:47pm

Eirebear wrote: »

Oooohhhh! Someone's getting a little bit condescending arent they? "Let's see if you can manage that?"
Are you disapointed the big bad Bears havnt tried to kill anyone yet?
To paraphrase Drysdale as i don't have a video to hand.
"I've recieved no threatening communication, I've recieved emails from Rangers fans expressing their anger at the decision but that was to be expected. I have recieved no telephone calls and no direct threats."

Now you are being an idiot

Jelle1880 · 26-04-2012 2:52pm

Dempsey wrote: »

Why dont you post exactly what Drysdale said? Lets see if you can manage that

Here you go:

Interviewer - Tell me first about the threats, the abuse that you have had...........

ED - Well, there have been calls and emails to the club and a couple of silent phone calls on my mobile phone, but apart from that, there hasn't been any direct threats to myself, so far.

Int - And the calls and the emails, what has been the content of them?

ED -Just expressing disgust about the decision that was made by the Judicial Panel.

Int - What are your thoughts about that abuse, those threats ........ (Eh, he just said he wasn't threatened or abused, you tosser)

ED - Well, the one thing I would say, is that when the Statement of Reasons does come out, that I hope that sensible people will understand that there was logic behind the decisions reached, that there was logic behind the decisions reached both for Rangers and Craig Whyte and will say that the panel has been fair.

Int - The fact that there has been this sort of violent reaction, what are your thoughts about that?.......

ED - I know I have been steeped in football all my life, I know emotions run high. As I have said, if it had been my club threatened with extinction, I would be upset, I would be lashing out, I have no axe to grind at all with any football club. I have no wish to see Rangers die, or any other club die, but equally, there has to be some sort of suitable sanction for offences that have been proved.

Int - But the fact that it has come to threats on the internet, emails, phone calls, the police advising you on personal safety, I assume implication for your family and so on, what are your thoughts on that, that level of reaction? ..........

ED - Yes, I've been surprised by that. When we reached the decision we were conscious we weren't going to please everybody. We thought that some people might think that we were too severe, some people might think the other way. So, we knew that there would be some sort of reaction, but certainly the level of reaction has surprised me and certainly both Strathclyde Police and Tayside Police have taken the threat seriously and been of good assistance to me.

So until either Strathclyde Police or anyone else from the SFA comes out with who was threatened, in what way and what the threats were I will choose not to believe any of this.

Eirebear · 26-04-2012 2:53pm

Dempsey wrote: »

Now you are being an idiot

Maybe so - but the reaction to last night's non-story on here, in other parts of the media and elsewhere has been nothing short of over the top.

You're always one of the first people to tear into how things are reported in Scotland, yet for some reason you cannot see just how wrong, misinformed and downright dangerous their actions where last night.
Today's heightened tensions have come from their mishandling and their jumping the gun on the tiniest bit of information.
Not Rangers and not McCoist.

Rangers FC lodge papers to go into administration

Comments