|
The All New Sevco Back in Yer Bin Thread; Taking out the trash
|
|
Topic Started: 29 Apr 2018, 04:24 PM (2,086,656 Views)
|
|
JohnRobertson
|
4 Jun 2018, 12:25 PM
Post #7601
|
Getting noticed in the reserves
- Posts:
- 86
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #36,282
- Joined:
- 24 May 2018
- Favourite all-time player
- Jimmy Johnstone
|
- ceannaboe
- 4 Jun 2018, 09:03 AM
- goalsgallagher
- 4 Jun 2018, 08:07 AM
- john67
- 4 Jun 2018, 06:38 AM
Anyone know the timescale to get your A and B pro license, is it a 2-3 week thing or months of hard graft.
According to SFA website, Uefa Pro licence is the "highest" qualification. These are the timescales A minimum of 360 course contact hours, comprising of a minimum of the following: 144 hours theory units off the pitch 216 hours practical units on the pitch, including work experience, study visits, and overseas study trips That is comprised over 20 months.
mcallister has his pro licence so they will circumvent it that way This. Gerrard mentioned that it would be unfair to call McAllister an assistant as he would be much more than that
|
|
|
| |
|
Tenenbaum
|
4 Jun 2018, 01:53 PM
Post #7602
|
Anybody interested in grabbing a couple of burgers and hittin' the cemetery?
- Posts:
- 1,064
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #35,678
- Joined:
- 23 June 2017
- Favourite all-time player
- Paul McStay
|
- JohnRobertson
- 4 Jun 2018, 12:25 PM
- ceannaboe
- 4 Jun 2018, 09:03 AM
- goalsgallagher
- 4 Jun 2018, 08:07 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
mcallister has his pro licence so they will circumvent it that way
This. Gerrard mentioned that it would be unfair to call McAllister an assistant as he would be much more than that His 'fluffer'?
|
|
|
| |
|
jim62
|
4 Jun 2018, 01:56 PM
Post #7603
|
up on the roof!!
- Posts:
- 33,332
- Group:
- Backroom Staff
- Member
- #312
- Joined:
- 26 October 2004
|
- JohnRobertson
- 4 Jun 2018, 12:25 PM
- ceannaboe
- 4 Jun 2018, 09:03 AM
- goalsgallagher
- 4 Jun 2018, 08:07 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
mcallister has his pro licence so they will circumvent it that way
This. Gerrard mentioned that it would be unfair to call McAllister an assistant as he would be much more than that people should read the rules fully....looks like lots of folk have read article 36 (head coach needs highest available qualification) but then stopped...need to read it all..
Article 40 – Common provisions applicable to UEFA coaching qualifications under the UEFA Coaching Convention 1 A holder of the required UEFA coaching licence within the meaning of Articles 36 to 39 is considered a coach who, in accordance with the UEFA implementation provisions of the UEFA Coaching Convention, has: a) been issued a UEFA coaching licence by a UEFA member association; or b) at least started the required UEFA coaching diploma course. Simple registration for the required diploma course is not sufficient to meet this criterion.
Gerrard meets the criteria if he has started the course...and given his attendance at Toulon as part of the course then presumably he has started it
|
|
|
| |
|
pablo5
|
4 Jun 2018, 02:09 PM
Post #7604
|
Whatever it is, there's not enough of it
- Posts:
- 33,086
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #1,558
- Joined:
- 16 July 2005
- Favourite all-time player
- Allen Woody
- Twitter Name
- pablo567
|
It's not that uncommon for someone like Gerrard to be working towards his Pro License when he gets his first real job.
Problem is, that first real job is rarely of the magnitude of the one he's fallen into.
|
|
|
| |
|
danbhoy09
|
4 Jun 2018, 02:12 PM
Post #7605
|
- Posts:
- 4,255
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #24,604
- Joined:
- 12 October 2009
- Favourite all-time player
- Henke
|
- FenianJack
- 4 Jun 2018, 09:47 AM
- Tam Haas
- 4 Jun 2018, 09:37 AM
- Gothamcelt
- 4 Jun 2018, 08:33 AM
Keith Jackson saying that Robertson was not informed about Maclennan (after saying all clubs were informed) and also questioning Maclennans loyalty because of the wage he may be earning from INM, "So Rangers have every right to examine this whole process especially as, according to the company’s accounts, the man MacLennan succeeded as non-executive chairman at INM was taking home a basic salary before bonuses of 165,000 euros a year, Which presents another huge problem in terms of perception as, if it were ever to come to the crunch, legitimate questions would almost certainly be asked about where his loyalties lie." SPFL failing to rap Rangers over Murdoch MacLennan row points to a guilty conscience - Keith JacksonKeith reckons the row over the SPFL chairman's links to Celtic supremo Dermot Desmond has been badly mishandled from the outset. Spoiler: click to toggle ByKeith Jackson When the SPFL called in the lawyers last week for the fifth set in their statement tennis with Dave King, it was an indication squeaky bum time had come bouncing down Hampden’s sixth floor. Even by Scottish football’s bizarre standards, this public slanging match over Murdoch MacLennan’s links with Celtic has been a curious affair and it remains to be seen if there will be a winner. Or, more importantly, a loser. The very fact solicitors were required to respond to another exocet fired at them from King’s Johannesburg bunker merely added to the whiff of danger that now surrounds this meltdown in relations between the league and one of its biggest clubs. It created a feeling we may be one wrong move from a full-blown crisis. And a potential rolling of heads. On the same day this newspaper attempted to carry out a straw poll of opinions from top-flight clubs. That not one chose to make a public comment is another sign of the nervousness around the entire MacLennan issue. They may be happy to sit back and watch the ball fizzing across the net but not one of them feels like getting in its path, which is a great pity as this is an issue that affects every one of them. It is now surely time for someone to do something more than just fire up the office laptop and press the button on another public rebuke or insinuation. If King feels strongly enough to fight this out in public – and the Rangers chairman does have a point in terms of proper governance – why has he not formalised his grievance or taken his complaint directly to the SPFL boardroom or chief executive Neil Doncaster? King may well have a sound, legitimate reason for questioning how MacLennan was able to take a seat as non-executive chairman of a company part owned by Dermot Desmond and Denis O’Brien but he undermines the seriousness of the situation by engaging in grandstanding and playing to the gallery. Also, by calling for transparency and good corporate governance he might as well have added “yours pot, signed kettle.” If the SPFL feel their name or that of MacLennan or even Doncaster has been unfairly tarnished by King’s actions and accusations then pull him up for it. Demand he cease or throw the book at him on a charge of disrepute or whatever else is in your power. Because in terms of perception their lack of action points to a guilty conscience. That’s not to say MacLennan has been nobbled by Celtic’s biggest shareholder and his long-term business ally. Nor is it confirmation for the conspiracy theorists convinced Celtic have grabbed the game in this country by the short and curlies. It also opens the gates to a toxic swamp of whataboutery – especially given the roles Campbell Ogilvie and Gordon Smith once held within the SFA. The truth of the matter is MacLennan’s CV and background in media would most probably have had him on the shortlist for a role at a company like INM whether he was head of the table at the SPFL or not. But that’s not the point either. The point is MacLennan is being paid to act in the best interests of the Scottish game so when he was first invited on to INM’s board the onus was on him to raise a flag inside Hampden and to point out a possible conflict of interests. Whether there was or wasn’t should then have become a matter for others to determine. It was most certainly not up to him to decide there was none. It is unimaginable a man of MacLennan’s experience agreed to take on this role without carrying out his own due diligence on the structure of the company and its shareholding. It would have taken him 30 seconds on Google to discover Desmond – as the company’s second largest shareholder – also has the right to appoint his own nominee to the INM board. That’s all that would have been required for MacLennan to raise the issue internally with Doncaster. If for no other reason than to keep himself right. If he did not do this MacLennan has a case to answer. But if such a conversation did take place it is Doncaster who is left with his chin exposed for failing to share it with the rest of the class. King is absolutely adamant no such disclosure was made to Rangers managing director Stewart Robertson who also sits on the SPFL board. The SPFL had the opportunity to refute this when they called in the lawyers. That they chose not to appears to lend weight to King’s position and makes the league look highly disingenuous for previously insisting Robertson was in possession of all the relevant facts surrounding MacLennan’s appointment as far back as January. It seems obvious he was not. So Rangers have every right to examine this whole process especially as, according to the company’s accounts, the man MacLennan succeeded as non-executive chairman at INM was taking home a basic salary before bonuses of 165,000 euros a year. MacLennan’s remuneration is not yet a matter of public record but if it is in any way similar to his predecessor it dwarves the kind of money he’ll be earning from Hampden. Which presents another huge problem in terms of perception as, if it were ever to come to the crunch, legitimate questions would almost certainly be asked about where his loyalties lie. This entire issue has been horribly mishandled from the outset. And it will take more than just a bunch of statements to clean up the mess it has left behind. https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/spfl-failing-rap-rangers-over-12642766
The SPFL should be saying no more on the subject. Ignore King if he pipes up again. That will infuriate him & the huns even more than saying anything anyway.
Exactly. Jacksons a tool as well. He started this knowing GASL was looking for milk bottles to pour petrol into. Now he’s doing his Mrs Flanders will someone please think of the children. Mrs Lovejoy.
|
|
|
| |
|
DhenBhoy
|
4 Jun 2018, 02:33 PM
Post #7606
|
Everyone's Fantasy Football first pick
- Posts:
- 2,155
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #31,669
- Joined:
- 8 September 2012
|
- FenianJack
- 4 Jun 2018, 12:14 PM
- DhenBhoy
- 4 Jun 2018, 11:48 AM
- Tam Haas
- 4 Jun 2018, 09:37 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep SPFL failing to rap Rangers over Murdoch MacLennan row points to a guilty conscience - Keith JacksonKeith reckons the row over the SPFL chairman's links to Celtic supremo Dermot Desmond has been badly mishandled from the outset. Spoiler: click to toggle ByKeith Jackson When the SPFL called in the lawyers last week for the fifth set in their statement tennis with Dave King, it was an indication squeaky bum time had come bouncing down Hampden’s sixth floor. Even by Scottish football’s bizarre standards, this public slanging match over Murdoch MacLennan’s links with Celtic has been a curious affair and it remains to be seen if there will be a winner. Or, more importantly, a loser. The very fact solicitors were required to respond to another exocet fired at them from King’s Johannesburg bunker merely added to the whiff of danger that now surrounds this meltdown in relations between the league and one of its biggest clubs. It created a feeling we may be one wrong move from a full-blown crisis. And a potential rolling of heads. On the same day this newspaper attempted to carry out a straw poll of opinions from top-flight clubs. That not one chose to make a public comment is another sign of the nervousness around the entire MacLennan issue. They may be happy to sit back and watch the ball fizzing across the net but not one of them feels like getting in its path, which is a great pity as this is an issue that affects every one of them. It is now surely time for someone to do something more than just fire up the office laptop and press the button on another public rebuke or insinuation. If King feels strongly enough to fight this out in public – and the Rangers chairman does have a point in terms of proper governance – why has he not formalised his grievance or taken his complaint directly to the SPFL boardroom or chief executive Neil Doncaster? King may well have a sound, legitimate reason for questioning how MacLennan was able to take a seat as non-executive chairman of a company part owned by Dermot Desmond and Denis O’Brien but he undermines the seriousness of the situation by engaging in grandstanding and playing to the gallery. Also, by calling for transparency and good corporate governance he might as well have added “yours pot, signed kettle.” If the SPFL feel their name or that of MacLennan or even Doncaster has been unfairly tarnished by King’s actions and accusations then pull him up for it. Demand he cease or throw the book at him on a charge of disrepute or whatever else is in your power. Because in terms of perception their lack of action points to a guilty conscience. That’s not to say MacLennan has been nobbled by Celtic’s biggest shareholder and his long-term business ally. Nor is it confirmation for the conspiracy theorists convinced Celtic have grabbed the game in this country by the short and curlies. It also opens the gates to a toxic swamp of whataboutery – especially given the roles Campbell Ogilvie and Gordon Smith once held within the SFA. The truth of the matter is MacLennan’s CV and background in media would most probably have had him on the shortlist for a role at a company like INM whether he was head of the table at the SPFL or not. But that’s not the point either. The point is MacLennan is being paid to act in the best interests of the Scottish game so when he was first invited on to INM’s board the onus was on him to raise a flag inside Hampden and to point out a possible conflict of interests. Whether there was or wasn’t should then have become a matter for others to determine. It was most certainly not up to him to decide there was none. It is unimaginable a man of MacLennan’s experience agreed to take on this role without carrying out his own due diligence on the structure of the company and its shareholding. It would have taken him 30 seconds on Google to discover Desmond – as the company’s second largest shareholder – also has the right to appoint his own nominee to the INM board. That’s all that would have been required for MacLennan to raise the issue internally with Doncaster. If for no other reason than to keep himself right. If he did not do this MacLennan has a case to answer. But if such a conversation did take place it is Doncaster who is left with his chin exposed for failing to share it with the rest of the class. King is absolutely adamant no such disclosure was made to Rangers managing director Stewart Robertson who also sits on the SPFL board. The SPFL had the opportunity to refute this when they called in the lawyers. That they chose not to appears to lend weight to King’s position and makes the league look highly disingenuous for previously insisting Robertson was in possession of all the relevant facts surrounding MacLennan’s appointment as far back as January. It seems obvious he was not. So Rangers have every right to examine this whole process especially as, according to the company’s accounts, the man MacLennan succeeded as non-executive chairman at INM was taking home a basic salary before bonuses of 165,000 euros a year. MacLennan’s remuneration is not yet a matter of public record but if it is in any way similar to his predecessor it dwarves the kind of money he’ll be earning from Hampden. Which presents another huge problem in terms of perception as, if it were ever to come to the crunch, legitimate questions would almost certainly be asked about where his loyalties lie. This entire issue has been horribly mishandled from the outset. And it will take more than just a bunch of statements to clean up the mess it has left behind. https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/spfl-failing-rap-rangers-over-12642766
They cannot just ignore someone who is bringing the game into disrepute. It smacks of having no control over him or Sevco. Why is that? It would indicate the organization or those in power within are compromised.
It’s been said before - how can the SPFL “rap” King ? What jurisdiction have they got ? They can rap Robertson but he’s said eff all. Funnily enough. Jackson’s article is balls. What are they supposed to do other than to tell him to stop talking shampooe. Which they’ve done twice. Tam Haas is right. Let him santer away. The authorities had jurisdiction over Mike Ashley who had less of a percentage than King and wasn't even chairman, do they get to pick and choose?
|
|
|
| |
|
JohnRobertson
|
4 Jun 2018, 02:38 PM
Post #7607
|
Getting noticed in the reserves
- Posts:
- 86
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #36,282
- Joined:
- 24 May 2018
- Favourite all-time player
- Jimmy Johnstone
|
- jim62
- 4 Jun 2018, 01:56 PM
- JohnRobertson
- 4 Jun 2018, 12:25 PM
- ceannaboe
- 4 Jun 2018, 09:03 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
This. Gerrard mentioned that it would be unfair to call McAllister an assistant as he would be much more than that
people should read the rules fully....looks like lots of folk have read article 36 (head coach needs highest available qualification) but then stopped...need to read it all.. Article 40 – Common provisions applicable to UEFA coaching qualifications under the UEFA Coaching Convention 1 A holder of the required UEFA coaching licence within the meaning of Articles 36 to 39 is considered a coach who, in accordance with the UEFA implementation provisions of the UEFA Coaching Convention, has: a) been issued a UEFA coaching licence by a UEFA member association; or b) at least started the required UEFA coaching diploma course. Simple registration for the required diploma course is not sufficient to meet this criterion. Gerrard meets the criteria if he has started the course...and given his attendance at Toulon as part of the course then presumably he has started it That's correct, at the time of the press conference when he was introduced he was probably just registered on it, however as was taking up the post on the 1st of June he had started it at that point
|
|
|
| |
|
Dubz
|
4 Jun 2018, 02:41 PM
Post #7608
|
- Posts:
- 4,757
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #27,189
- Joined:
- 7 November 2010
- Favourite all-time player
- Daniel Fergus McGrain
|
Lenny was in the same situation with his Pro Licnce when he became Celtic manager.
|
|
|
| |
|
FenianJack
|
4 Jun 2018, 02:56 PM
Post #7609
|
- Posts:
- 4,879
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #6,829
- Joined:
- 3 February 2007
|
- DhenBhoy
- 4 Jun 2018, 02:33 PM
- FenianJack
- 4 Jun 2018, 12:14 PM
- DhenBhoy
- 4 Jun 2018, 11:48 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep SPFL failing to rap Rangers over Murdoch MacLennan row points to a guilty conscience - Keith JacksonKeith reckons the row over the SPFL chairman's links to Celtic supremo Dermot Desmond has been badly mishandled from the outset. Spoiler: click to toggle ByKeith Jackson When the SPFL called in the lawyers last week for the fifth set in their statement tennis with Dave King, it was an indication squeaky bum time had come bouncing down Hampden’s sixth floor. Even by Scottish football’s bizarre standards, this public slanging match over Murdoch MacLennan’s links with Celtic has been a curious affair and it remains to be seen if there will be a winner. Or, more importantly, a loser. The very fact solicitors were required to respond to another exocet fired at them from King’s Johannesburg bunker merely added to the whiff of danger that now surrounds this meltdown in relations between the league and one of its biggest clubs. It created a feeling we may be one wrong move from a full-blown crisis. And a potential rolling of heads. On the same day this newspaper attempted to carry out a straw poll of opinions from top-flight clubs. That not one chose to make a public comment is another sign of the nervousness around the entire MacLennan issue. They may be happy to sit back and watch the ball fizzing across the net but not one of them feels like getting in its path, which is a great pity as this is an issue that affects every one of them. It is now surely time for someone to do something more than just fire up the office laptop and press the button on another public rebuke or insinuation. If King feels strongly enough to fight this out in public – and the Rangers chairman does have a point in terms of proper governance – why has he not formalised his grievance or taken his complaint directly to the SPFL boardroom or chief executive Neil Doncaster? King may well have a sound, legitimate reason for questioning how MacLennan was able to take a seat as non-executive chairman of a company part owned by Dermot Desmond and Denis O’Brien but he undermines the seriousness of the situation by engaging in grandstanding and playing to the gallery. Also, by calling for transparency and good corporate governance he might as well have added “yours pot, signed kettle.” If the SPFL feel their name or that of MacLennan or even Doncaster has been unfairly tarnished by King’s actions and accusations then pull him up for it. Demand he cease or throw the book at him on a charge of disrepute or whatever else is in your power. Because in terms of perception their lack of action points to a guilty conscience. That’s not to say MacLennan has been nobbled by Celtic’s biggest shareholder and his long-term business ally. Nor is it confirmation for the conspiracy theorists convinced Celtic have grabbed the game in this country by the short and curlies. It also opens the gates to a toxic swamp of whataboutery – especially given the roles Campbell Ogilvie and Gordon Smith once held within the SFA. The truth of the matter is MacLennan’s CV and background in media would most probably have had him on the shortlist for a role at a company like INM whether he was head of the table at the SPFL or not. But that’s not the point either. The point is MacLennan is being paid to act in the best interests of the Scottish game so when he was first invited on to INM’s board the onus was on him to raise a flag inside Hampden and to point out a possible conflict of interests. Whether there was or wasn’t should then have become a matter for others to determine. It was most certainly not up to him to decide there was none. It is unimaginable a man of MacLennan’s experience agreed to take on this role without carrying out his own due diligence on the structure of the company and its shareholding. It would have taken him 30 seconds on Google to discover Desmond – as the company’s second largest shareholder – also has the right to appoint his own nominee to the INM board. That’s all that would have been required for MacLennan to raise the issue internally with Doncaster. If for no other reason than to keep himself right. If he did not do this MacLennan has a case to answer. But if such a conversation did take place it is Doncaster who is left with his chin exposed for failing to share it with the rest of the class. King is absolutely adamant no such disclosure was made to Rangers managing director Stewart Robertson who also sits on the SPFL board. The SPFL had the opportunity to refute this when they called in the lawyers. That they chose not to appears to lend weight to King’s position and makes the league look highly disingenuous for previously insisting Robertson was in possession of all the relevant facts surrounding MacLennan’s appointment as far back as January. It seems obvious he was not. So Rangers have every right to examine this whole process especially as, according to the company’s accounts, the man MacLennan succeeded as non-executive chairman at INM was taking home a basic salary before bonuses of 165,000 euros a year. MacLennan’s remuneration is not yet a matter of public record but if it is in any way similar to his predecessor it dwarves the kind of money he’ll be earning from Hampden. Which presents another huge problem in terms of perception as, if it were ever to come to the crunch, legitimate questions would almost certainly be asked about where his loyalties lie. This entire issue has been horribly mishandled from the outset. And it will take more than just a bunch of statements to clean up the mess it has left behind. https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/spfl-failing-rap-rangers-over-12642766
It’s been said before - how can the SPFL “rap” King ? What jurisdiction have they got ? They can rap Robertson but he’s said eff all. Funnily enough. Jackson’s article is balls. What are they supposed to do other than to tell him to stop talking shampooe. Which they’ve done twice. Tam Haas is right. Let him santer away.
The authorities had jurisdiction over Mike Ashley who had less of a percentage than King and wasn't even chairman, do they get to pick and choose? That was the SFA and that was on dual ownership. Not nasty things he said about them. Other than that.....
|
|
|
| |
|
FenianJack
|
4 Jun 2018, 03:01 PM
Post #7610
|
- Posts:
- 4,879
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #6,829
- Joined:
- 3 February 2007
|
- danbhoy09
- 4 Jun 2018, 02:12 PM
- FenianJack
- 4 Jun 2018, 09:47 AM
- Tam Haas
- 4 Jun 2018, 09:37 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep SPFL failing to rap Rangers over Murdoch MacLennan row points to a guilty conscience - Keith JacksonKeith reckons the row over the SPFL chairman's links to Celtic supremo Dermot Desmond has been badly mishandled from the outset. Spoiler: click to toggle ByKeith Jackson When the SPFL called in the lawyers last week for the fifth set in their statement tennis with Dave King, it was an indication squeaky bum time had come bouncing down Hampden’s sixth floor. Even by Scottish football’s bizarre standards, this public slanging match over Murdoch MacLennan’s links with Celtic has been a curious affair and it remains to be seen if there will be a winner. Or, more importantly, a loser. The very fact solicitors were required to respond to another exocet fired at them from King’s Johannesburg bunker merely added to the whiff of danger that now surrounds this meltdown in relations between the league and one of its biggest clubs. It created a feeling we may be one wrong move from a full-blown crisis. And a potential rolling of heads. On the same day this newspaper attempted to carry out a straw poll of opinions from top-flight clubs. That not one chose to make a public comment is another sign of the nervousness around the entire MacLennan issue. They may be happy to sit back and watch the ball fizzing across the net but not one of them feels like getting in its path, which is a great pity as this is an issue that affects every one of them. It is now surely time for someone to do something more than just fire up the office laptop and press the button on another public rebuke or insinuation. If King feels strongly enough to fight this out in public – and the Rangers chairman does have a point in terms of proper governance – why has he not formalised his grievance or taken his complaint directly to the SPFL boardroom or chief executive Neil Doncaster? King may well have a sound, legitimate reason for questioning how MacLennan was able to take a seat as non-executive chairman of a company part owned by Dermot Desmond and Denis O’Brien but he undermines the seriousness of the situation by engaging in grandstanding and playing to the gallery. Also, by calling for transparency and good corporate governance he might as well have added “yours pot, signed kettle.” If the SPFL feel their name or that of MacLennan or even Doncaster has been unfairly tarnished by King’s actions and accusations then pull him up for it. Demand he cease or throw the book at him on a charge of disrepute or whatever else is in your power. Because in terms of perception their lack of action points to a guilty conscience. That’s not to say MacLennan has been nobbled by Celtic’s biggest shareholder and his long-term business ally. Nor is it confirmation for the conspiracy theorists convinced Celtic have grabbed the game in this country by the short and curlies. It also opens the gates to a toxic swamp of whataboutery – especially given the roles Campbell Ogilvie and Gordon Smith once held within the SFA. The truth of the matter is MacLennan’s CV and background in media would most probably have had him on the shortlist for a role at a company like INM whether he was head of the table at the SPFL or not. But that’s not the point either. The point is MacLennan is being paid to act in the best interests of the Scottish game so when he was first invited on to INM’s board the onus was on him to raise a flag inside Hampden and to point out a possible conflict of interests. Whether there was or wasn’t should then have become a matter for others to determine. It was most certainly not up to him to decide there was none. It is unimaginable a man of MacLennan’s experience agreed to take on this role without carrying out his own due diligence on the structure of the company and its shareholding. It would have taken him 30 seconds on Google to discover Desmond – as the company’s second largest shareholder – also has the right to appoint his own nominee to the INM board. That’s all that would have been required for MacLennan to raise the issue internally with Doncaster. If for no other reason than to keep himself right. If he did not do this MacLennan has a case to answer. But if such a conversation did take place it is Doncaster who is left with his chin exposed for failing to share it with the rest of the class. King is absolutely adamant no such disclosure was made to Rangers managing director Stewart Robertson who also sits on the SPFL board. The SPFL had the opportunity to refute this when they called in the lawyers. That they chose not to appears to lend weight to King’s position and makes the league look highly disingenuous for previously insisting Robertson was in possession of all the relevant facts surrounding MacLennan’s appointment as far back as January. It seems obvious he was not. So Rangers have every right to examine this whole process especially as, according to the company’s accounts, the man MacLennan succeeded as non-executive chairman at INM was taking home a basic salary before bonuses of 165,000 euros a year. MacLennan’s remuneration is not yet a matter of public record but if it is in any way similar to his predecessor it dwarves the kind of money he’ll be earning from Hampden. Which presents another huge problem in terms of perception as, if it were ever to come to the crunch, legitimate questions would almost certainly be asked about where his loyalties lie. This entire issue has been horribly mishandled from the outset. And it will take more than just a bunch of statements to clean up the mess it has left behind. https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/spfl-failing-rap-rangers-over-12642766
Exactly. Jacksons a tool as well. He started this knowing GASL was looking for milk bottles to pour petrol into. Now he’s doing his Mrs Flanders will someone please think of the children.
Mrs Lovejoy.  You’re right! It’s Helen Lovejoy who has the supererogatory concern for children.....
|
|
|
| |
|
Ffdiva
|
4 Jun 2018, 03:42 PM
Post #7611
|
- Posts:
- 3,265
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #31,504
- Joined:
- 8 August 2012
- Favourite all-time player
- Georgios Samaras
|
- GoKartMozart
- 4 Jun 2018, 09:25 AM
- Gothamcelt
- 4 Jun 2018, 08:33 AM
Keith Jackson saying that Robertson was not informed about Maclennan (after saying all clubs were informed) and also questioning Maclennans loyalty because of the wage he may be earning from INM, "So Rangers have every right to examine this whole process especially as, according to the company’s accounts, the man MacLennan succeeded as non-executive chairman at INM was taking home a basic salary before bonuses of 165,000 euros a year, Which presents another huge problem in terms of perception as, if it were ever to come to the crunch, legitimate questions would almost certainly be asked about where his loyalties lie." SPFL failing to rap Rangers over Murdoch MacLennan row points to a guilty conscience - Keith JacksonKeith reckons the row over the SPFL chairman's links to Celtic supremo Dermot Desmond has been badly mishandled from the outset. Spoiler: click to toggle ByKeith Jackson When the SPFL called in the lawyers last week for the fifth set in their statement tennis with Dave King, it was an indication squeaky bum time had come bouncing down Hampden’s sixth floor. Even by Scottish football’s bizarre standards, this public slanging match over Murdoch MacLennan’s links with Celtic has been a curious affair and it remains to be seen if there will be a winner. Or, more importantly, a loser. The very fact solicitors were required to respond to another exocet fired at them from King’s Johannesburg bunker merely added to the whiff of danger that now surrounds this meltdown in relations between the league and one of its biggest clubs. It created a feeling we may be one wrong move from a full-blown crisis. And a potential rolling of heads. On the same day this newspaper attempted to carry out a straw poll of opinions from top-flight clubs. That not one chose to make a public comment is another sign of the nervousness around the entire MacLennan issue. They may be happy to sit back and watch the ball fizzing across the net but not one of them feels like getting in its path, which is a great pity as this is an issue that affects every one of them. It is now surely time for someone to do something more than just fire up the office laptop and press the button on another public rebuke or insinuation. If King feels strongly enough to fight this out in public – and the Rangers chairman does have a point in terms of proper governance – why has he not formalised his grievance or taken his complaint directly to the SPFL boardroom or chief executive Neil Doncaster? King may well have a sound, legitimate reason for questioning how MacLennan was able to take a seat as non-executive chairman of a company part owned by Dermot Desmond and Denis O’Brien but he undermines the seriousness of the situation by engaging in grandstanding and playing to the gallery. Also, by calling for transparency and good corporate governance he might as well have added “yours pot, signed kettle.” If the SPFL feel their name or that of MacLennan or even Doncaster has been unfairly tarnished by King’s actions and accusations then pull him up for it. Demand he cease or throw the book at him on a charge of disrepute or whatever else is in your power. Because in terms of perception their lack of action points to a guilty conscience. That’s not to say MacLennan has been nobbled by Celtic’s biggest shareholder and his long-term business ally. Nor is it confirmation for the conspiracy theorists convinced Celtic have grabbed the game in this country by the short and curlies. It also opens the gates to a toxic swamp of whataboutery – especially given the roles Campbell Ogilvie and Gordon Smith once held within the SFA. The truth of the matter is MacLennan’s CV and background in media would most probably have had him on the shortlist for a role at a company like INM whether he was head of the table at the SPFL or not. But that’s not the point either. The point is MacLennan is being paid to act in the best interests of the Scottish game so when he was first invited on to INM’s board the onus was on him to raise a flag inside Hampden and to point out a possible conflict of interests. Whether there was or wasn’t should then have become a matter for others to determine. It was most certainly not up to him to decide there was none. It is unimaginable a man of MacLennan’s experience agreed to take on this role without carrying out his own due diligence on the structure of the company and its shareholding. It would have taken him 30 seconds on Google to discover Desmond – as the company’s second largest shareholder – also has the right to appoint his own nominee to the INM board. That’s all that would have been required for MacLennan to raise the issue internally with Doncaster. If for no other reason than to keep himself right. If he did not do this MacLennan has a case to answer. But if such a conversation did take place it is Doncaster who is left with his chin exposed for failing to share it with the rest of the class. King is absolutely adamant no such disclosure was made to Rangers managing director Stewart Robertson who also sits on the SPFL board. The SPFL had the opportunity to refute this when they called in the lawyers. That they chose not to appears to lend weight to King’s position and makes the league look highly disingenuous for previously insisting Robertson was in possession of all the relevant facts surrounding MacLennan’s appointment as far back as January. It seems obvious he was not. So Rangers have every right to examine this whole process especially as, according to the company’s accounts, the man MacLennan succeeded as non-executive chairman at INM was taking home a basic salary before bonuses of 165,000 euros a year. MacLennan’s remuneration is not yet a matter of public record but if it is in any way similar to his predecessor it dwarves the kind of money he’ll be earning from Hampden. Which presents another huge problem in terms of perception as, if it were ever to come to the crunch, legitimate questions would almost certainly be asked about where his loyalties lie. This entire issue has been horribly mishandled from the outset. And it will take more than just a bunch of statements to clean up the mess it has left behind. https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/spfl-failing-rap-rangers-over-12642766
What a lot of pish. Dave King is adamant. A born lying dick is adamant. The Rangers chairman does have a point regarding proper governance.
You really are the f#ckwit’s f#ckwit aren’t you Keith ?
Oh and btw, it’s dear pot, signed, kettle, you thick moron.
|
|
|
| |
|
FenianJack
|
4 Jun 2018, 03:48 PM
Post #7612
|
- Posts:
- 4,879
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #6,829
- Joined:
- 3 February 2007
|
- Ffdiva
- 4 Jun 2018, 03:42 PM
- GoKartMozart
- 4 Jun 2018, 09:25 AM
- Gothamcelt
- 4 Jun 2018, 08:33 AM
Keith Jackson saying that Robertson was not informed about Maclennan (after saying all clubs were informed) and also questioning Maclennans loyalty because of the wage he may be earning from INM, "So Rangers have every right to examine this whole process especially as, according to the company’s accounts, the man MacLennan succeeded as non-executive chairman at INM was taking home a basic salary before bonuses of 165,000 euros a year, Which presents another huge problem in terms of perception as, if it were ever to come to the crunch, legitimate questions would almost certainly be asked about where his loyalties lie." SPFL failing to rap Rangers over Murdoch MacLennan row points to a guilty conscience - Keith JacksonKeith reckons the row over the SPFL chairman's links to Celtic supremo Dermot Desmond has been badly mishandled from the outset. Spoiler: click to toggle ByKeith Jackson When the SPFL called in the lawyers last week for the fifth set in their statement tennis with Dave King, it was an indication squeaky bum time had come bouncing down Hampden’s sixth floor. Even by Scottish football’s bizarre standards, this public slanging match over Murdoch MacLennan’s links with Celtic has been a curious affair and it remains to be seen if there will be a winner. Or, more importantly, a loser. The very fact solicitors were required to respond to another exocet fired at them from King’s Johannesburg bunker merely added to the whiff of danger that now surrounds this meltdown in relations between the league and one of its biggest clubs. It created a feeling we may be one wrong move from a full-blown crisis. And a potential rolling of heads. On the same day this newspaper attempted to carry out a straw poll of opinions from top-flight clubs. That not one chose to make a public comment is another sign of the nervousness around the entire MacLennan issue. They may be happy to sit back and watch the ball fizzing across the net but not one of them feels like getting in its path, which is a great pity as this is an issue that affects every one of them. It is now surely time for someone to do something more than just fire up the office laptop and press the button on another public rebuke or insinuation. If King feels strongly enough to fight this out in public – and the Rangers chairman does have a point in terms of proper governance – why has he not formalised his grievance or taken his complaint directly to the SPFL boardroom or chief executive Neil Doncaster? King may well have a sound, legitimate reason for questioning how MacLennan was able to take a seat as non-executive chairman of a company part owned by Dermot Desmond and Denis O’Brien but he undermines the seriousness of the situation by engaging in grandstanding and playing to the gallery. Also, by calling for transparency and good corporate governance he might as well have added “yours pot, signed kettle.” If the SPFL feel their name or that of MacLennan or even Doncaster has been unfairly tarnished by King’s actions and accusations then pull him up for it. Demand he cease or throw the book at him on a charge of disrepute or whatever else is in your power. Because in terms of perception their lack of action points to a guilty conscience. That’s not to say MacLennan has been nobbled by Celtic’s biggest shareholder and his long-term business ally. Nor is it confirmation for the conspiracy theorists convinced Celtic have grabbed the game in this country by the short and curlies. It also opens the gates to a toxic swamp of whataboutery – especially given the roles Campbell Ogilvie and Gordon Smith once held within the SFA. The truth of the matter is MacLennan’s CV and background in media would most probably have had him on the shortlist for a role at a company like INM whether he was head of the table at the SPFL or not. But that’s not the point either. The point is MacLennan is being paid to act in the best interests of the Scottish game so when he was first invited on to INM’s board the onus was on him to raise a flag inside Hampden and to point out a possible conflict of interests. Whether there was or wasn’t should then have become a matter for others to determine. It was most certainly not up to him to decide there was none. It is unimaginable a man of MacLennan’s experience agreed to take on this role without carrying out his own due diligence on the structure of the company and its shareholding. It would have taken him 30 seconds on Google to discover Desmond – as the company’s second largest shareholder – also has the right to appoint his own nominee to the INM board. That’s all that would have been required for MacLennan to raise the issue internally with Doncaster. If for no other reason than to keep himself right. If he did not do this MacLennan has a case to answer. But if such a conversation did take place it is Doncaster who is left with his chin exposed for failing to share it with the rest of the class. King is absolutely adamant no such disclosure was made to Rangers managing director Stewart Robertson who also sits on the SPFL board. The SPFL had the opportunity to refute this when they called in the lawyers. That they chose not to appears to lend weight to King’s position and makes the league look highly disingenuous for previously insisting Robertson was in possession of all the relevant facts surrounding MacLennan’s appointment as far back as January. It seems obvious he was not. So Rangers have every right to examine this whole process especially as, according to the company’s accounts, the man MacLennan succeeded as non-executive chairman at INM was taking home a basic salary before bonuses of 165,000 euros a year. MacLennan’s remuneration is not yet a matter of public record but if it is in any way similar to his predecessor it dwarves the kind of money he’ll be earning from Hampden. Which presents another huge problem in terms of perception as, if it were ever to come to the crunch, legitimate questions would almost certainly be asked about where his loyalties lie. This entire issue has been horribly mishandled from the outset. And it will take more than just a bunch of statements to clean up the mess it has left behind. https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/spfl-failing-rap-rangers-over-12642766
What a lot of pish. Dave King is adamant. A born lying dick is adamant.
The Rangers chairman does have a point regarding proper governance. You really are the f#ckwit’s f#ckwit aren’t you Keith ? Oh and btw, it’s dear pot, signed, kettle, you thick moron. “Whether there was or wasn’t should then have become a matter for others to determine. It was most certainly not up to him to decide there was none” is also not true unless “others “ means the Companies Act 2006.
|
|
|
| |
|
Ffdiva
|
4 Jun 2018, 03:51 PM
Post #7613
|
- Posts:
- 3,265
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #31,504
- Joined:
- 8 August 2012
- Favourite all-time player
- Georgios Samaras
|
- lenobhoy
- 4 Jun 2018, 10:07 AM
- Luca
- 4 Jun 2018, 09:59 AM
- Gothamcelt
- 4 Jun 2018, 08:33 AM
Keith Jackson saying that Robertson was not informed about Maclennan (after saying all clubs were informed) and also questioning Maclennans loyalty because of the wage he may be earning from INM, "So Rangers have every right to examine this whole process especially as, according to the company’s accounts, the man MacLennan succeeded as non-executive chairman at INM was taking home a basic salary before bonuses of 165,000 euros a year, Which presents another huge problem in terms of perception as, if it were ever to come to the crunch, legitimate questions would almost certainly be asked about where his loyalties lie." SPFL failing to rap Rangers over Murdoch MacLennan row points to a guilty conscience - Keith JacksonKeith reckons the row over the SPFL chairman's links to Celtic supremo Dermot Desmond has been badly mishandled from the outset. Spoiler: click to toggle ByKeith Jackson When the SPFL called in the lawyers last week for the fifth set in their statement tennis with Dave King, it was an indication squeaky bum time had come bouncing down Hampden’s sixth floor. Even by Scottish football’s bizarre standards, this public slanging match over Murdoch MacLennan’s links with Celtic has been a curious affair and it remains to be seen if there will be a winner. Or, more importantly, a loser. The very fact solicitors were required to respond to another exocet fired at them from King’s Johannesburg bunker merely added to the whiff of danger that now surrounds this meltdown in relations between the league and one of its biggest clubs. It created a feeling we may be one wrong move from a full-blown crisis. And a potential rolling of heads. On the same day this newspaper attempted to carry out a straw poll of opinions from top-flight clubs. That not one chose to make a public comment is another sign of the nervousness around the entire MacLennan issue. They may be happy to sit back and watch the ball fizzing across the net but not one of them feels like getting in its path, which is a great pity as this is an issue that affects every one of them. It is now surely time for someone to do something more than just fire up the office laptop and press the button on another public rebuke or insinuation. If King feels strongly enough to fight this out in public – and the Rangers chairman does have a point in terms of proper governance – why has he not formalised his grievance or taken his complaint directly to the SPFL boardroom or chief executive Neil Doncaster? King may well have a sound, legitimate reason for questioning how MacLennan was able to take a seat as non-executive chairman of a company part owned by Dermot Desmond and Denis O’Brien but he undermines the seriousness of the situation by engaging in grandstanding and playing to the gallery. Also, by calling for transparency and good corporate governance he might as well have added “yours pot, signed kettle.” If the SPFL feel their name or that of MacLennan or even Doncaster has been unfairly tarnished by King’s actions and accusations then pull him up for it. Demand he cease or throw the book at him on a charge of disrepute or whatever else is in your power. Because in terms of perception their lack of action points to a guilty conscience. That’s not to say MacLennan has been nobbled by Celtic’s biggest shareholder and his long-term business ally. Nor is it confirmation for the conspiracy theorists convinced Celtic have grabbed the game in this country by the short and curlies. It also opens the gates to a toxic swamp of whataboutery – especially given the roles Campbell Ogilvie and Gordon Smith once held within the SFA. The truth of the matter is MacLennan’s CV and background in media would most probably have had him on the shortlist for a role at a company like INM whether he was head of the table at the SPFL or not. But that’s not the point either. The point is MacLennan is being paid to act in the best interests of the Scottish game so when he was first invited on to INM’s board the onus was on him to raise a flag inside Hampden and to point out a possible conflict of interests. Whether there was or wasn’t should then have become a matter for others to determine. It was most certainly not up to him to decide there was none. It is unimaginable a man of MacLennan’s experience agreed to take on this role without carrying out his own due diligence on the structure of the company and its shareholding. It would have taken him 30 seconds on Google to discover Desmond – as the company’s second largest shareholder – also has the right to appoint his own nominee to the INM board. That’s all that would have been required for MacLennan to raise the issue internally with Doncaster. If for no other reason than to keep himself right. If he did not do this MacLennan has a case to answer. But if such a conversation did take place it is Doncaster who is left with his chin exposed for failing to share it with the rest of the class. King is absolutely adamant no such disclosure was made to Rangers managing director Stewart Robertson who also sits on the SPFL board. The SPFL had the opportunity to refute this when they called in the lawyers. That they chose not to appears to lend weight to King’s position and makes the league look highly disingenuous for previously insisting Robertson was in possession of all the relevant facts surrounding MacLennan’s appointment as far back as January. It seems obvious he was not. So Rangers have every right to examine this whole process especially as, according to the company’s accounts, the man MacLennan succeeded as non-executive chairman at INM was taking home a basic salary before bonuses of 165,000 euros a year. MacLennan’s remuneration is not yet a matter of public record but if it is in any way similar to his predecessor it dwarves the kind of money he’ll be earning from Hampden. Which presents another huge problem in terms of perception as, if it were ever to come to the crunch, legitimate questions would almost certainly be asked about where his loyalties lie. This entire issue has been horribly mishandled from the outset. And it will take more than just a bunch of statements to clean up the mess it has left behind. https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/spfl-failing-rap-rangers-over-12642766
Why is this even any kind of issue? What about when Gordon Smith was in charge of the entire game in Scotland? That was ok cos he was a Hun though, aye?
He's a "good guy" according to Spiers. And “ Ogilvie is a very decent guy who got dragged into a mess at RFC. “ italics mine.
Yeah, he was dragged kicking and screaming to sign that first EBT letter, and turned on the rack to dissuade him from revealing the whole EBT scandal to the SFA.
The revisionism that has gone on is worthy of a Pulitzer. FFS, the SMSM would be a shoo in for a job at Fox Fake News channel.
|
|
|
| |
|
bricor
|
4 Jun 2018, 03:54 PM
Post #7614
|
- Posts:
- 818
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #30,641
- Joined:
- 24 February 2012
- Favourite all-time player
- Jimmy Johnstone
|
- Ffdiva
- 4 Jun 2018, 03:42 PM
- GoKartMozart
- 4 Jun 2018, 09:25 AM
- Gothamcelt
- 4 Jun 2018, 08:33 AM
Keith Jackson saying that Robertson was not informed about Maclennan (after saying all clubs were informed) and also questioning Maclennans loyalty because of the wage he may be earning from INM, "So Rangers have every right to examine this whole process especially as, according to the company’s accounts, the man MacLennan succeeded as non-executive chairman at INM was taking home a basic salary before bonuses of 165,000 euros a year, Which presents another huge problem in terms of perception as, if it were ever to come to the crunch, legitimate questions would almost certainly be asked about where his loyalties lie." SPFL failing to rap Rangers over Murdoch MacLennan row points to a guilty conscience - Keith JacksonKeith reckons the row over the SPFL chairman's links to Celtic supremo Dermot Desmond has been badly mishandled from the outset. Spoiler: click to toggle ByKeith Jackson When the SPFL called in the lawyers last week for the fifth set in their statement tennis with Dave King, it was an indication squeaky bum time had come bouncing down Hampden’s sixth floor. Even by Scottish football’s bizarre standards, this public slanging match over Murdoch MacLennan’s links with Celtic has been a curious affair and it remains to be seen if there will be a winner. Or, more importantly, a loser. The very fact solicitors were required to respond to another exocet fired at them from King’s Johannesburg bunker merely added to the whiff of danger that now surrounds this meltdown in relations between the league and one of its biggest clubs. It created a feeling we may be one wrong move from a full-blown crisis. And a potential rolling of heads. On the same day this newspaper attempted to carry out a straw poll of opinions from top-flight clubs. That not one chose to make a public comment is another sign of the nervousness around the entire MacLennan issue. They may be happy to sit back and watch the ball fizzing across the net but not one of them feels like getting in its path, which is a great pity as this is an issue that affects every one of them. It is now surely time for someone to do something more than just fire up the office laptop and press the button on another public rebuke or insinuation. If King feels strongly enough to fight this out in public – and the Rangers chairman does have a point in terms of proper governance – why has he not formalised his grievance or taken his complaint directly to the SPFL boardroom or chief executive Neil Doncaster? King may well have a sound, legitimate reason for questioning how MacLennan was able to take a seat as non-executive chairman of a company part owned by Dermot Desmond and Denis O’Brien but he undermines the seriousness of the situation by engaging in grandstanding and playing to the gallery. Also, by calling for transparency and good corporate governance he might as well have added “yours pot, signed kettle.” If the SPFL feel their name or that of MacLennan or even Doncaster has been unfairly tarnished by King’s actions and accusations then pull him up for it. Demand he cease or throw the book at him on a charge of disrepute or whatever else is in your power. Because in terms of perception their lack of action points to a guilty conscience. That’s not to say MacLennan has been nobbled by Celtic’s biggest shareholder and his long-term business ally. Nor is it confirmation for the conspiracy theorists convinced Celtic have grabbed the game in this country by the short and curlies. It also opens the gates to a toxic swamp of whataboutery – especially given the roles Campbell Ogilvie and Gordon Smith once held within the SFA. The truth of the matter is MacLennan’s CV and background in media would most probably have had him on the shortlist for a role at a company like INM whether he was head of the table at the SPFL or not. But that’s not the point either. The point is MacLennan is being paid to act in the best interests of the Scottish game so when he was first invited on to INM’s board the onus was on him to raise a flag inside Hampden and to point out a possible conflict of interests. Whether there was or wasn’t should then have become a matter for others to determine. It was most certainly not up to him to decide there was none. It is unimaginable a man of MacLennan’s experience agreed to take on this role without carrying out his own due diligence on the structure of the company and its shareholding. It would have taken him 30 seconds on Google to discover Desmond – as the company’s second largest shareholder – also has the right to appoint his own nominee to the INM board. That’s all that would have been required for MacLennan to raise the issue internally with Doncaster. If for no other reason than to keep himself right. If he did not do this MacLennan has a case to answer. But if such a conversation did take place it is Doncaster who is left with his chin exposed for failing to share it with the rest of the class. King is absolutely adamant no such disclosure was made to Rangers managing director Stewart Robertson who also sits on the SPFL board. The SPFL had the opportunity to refute this when they called in the lawyers. That they chose not to appears to lend weight to King’s position and makes the league look highly disingenuous for previously insisting Robertson was in possession of all the relevant facts surrounding MacLennan’s appointment as far back as January. It seems obvious he was not. So Rangers have every right to examine this whole process especially as, according to the company’s accounts, the man MacLennan succeeded as non-executive chairman at INM was taking home a basic salary before bonuses of 165,000 euros a year. MacLennan’s remuneration is not yet a matter of public record but if it is in any way similar to his predecessor it dwarves the kind of money he’ll be earning from Hampden. Which presents another huge problem in terms of perception as, if it were ever to come to the crunch, legitimate questions would almost certainly be asked about where his loyalties lie. This entire issue has been horribly mishandled from the outset. And it will take more than just a bunch of statements to clean up the mess it has left behind. https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/spfl-failing-rap-rangers-over-12642766
What a lot of pish. Dave King is adamant. A born lying dick is adamant.
The Rangers chairman does have a point regarding proper governance. You really are the f#ckwit’s f#ckwit aren’t you Keith ? Oh and btw, it’s dear pot, signed, kettle, you thick moron. indeed a morons moron a despicable carrot could not remember where the apostrophe went,,,failed english ...lots
|
|
|
| |
|
Burnley Celt
|
4 Jun 2018, 04:33 PM
Post #7615
|
Old fud, taking things easy......
- Posts:
- 8,834
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #11,442
- Joined:
- 23 October 2007
- Favourite all-time player
- Billy McNeill
- Twitter Name
- @burnleycelt
|
https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2018/06/04/prompt-replies-and-professional-courtesy/
Phil re licences.
|
|
|
| |
|
DhenBhoy
|
4 Jun 2018, 04:37 PM
Post #7616
|
Everyone's Fantasy Football first pick
- Posts:
- 2,155
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #31,669
- Joined:
- 8 September 2012
|
I don't think this is the smoking gun, some imagine it to be. Unless "head coach" is synonymous with "manager" in their regulations.
|
|
|
| |
|
Dubz
|
4 Jun 2018, 04:48 PM
Post #7617
|
- Posts:
- 4,757
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #27,189
- Joined:
- 7 November 2010
- Favourite all-time player
- Daniel Fergus McGrain
|
- Burnley Celt
- 4 Jun 2018, 04:33 PM
We all love a laugh at Sevco but that’s a bit embarrassing from PhilMac. Obsessed indeed.
|
|
|
| |
|
Luca
|
4 Jun 2018, 04:49 PM
Post #7618
|
Off treasure hunting in Holland
- Posts:
- 12,109
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #32,629
- Joined:
- 8 July 2013
- Favourite all-time player
- Maradona
|
- DhenBhoy
- 4 Jun 2018, 04:37 PM
I don't think this is the smoking gun, some imagine it to be. Unless "head coach" is synonymous with "manager" in their regulations.
I think this is a complete non-story as much as i'd like it to be true.
No way would Gerrard or his advisors put him in that position to be embarassed over such a stupid oversight.
|
|
|
| |
|
Ned Rise
|
4 Jun 2018, 04:53 PM
Post #7619
|
These boots were made for hunbustin'
- Posts:
- 9,160
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #30,170
- Joined:
- 12 January 2012
|
- DhenBhoy
- 4 Jun 2018, 04:37 PM
I don't think this is the smoking gun, some imagine it to be. Unless "head coach" is synonymous with "manager" in their regulations.
A smoking gun?
|
|
|
| |
|
Dan1974
|
4 Jun 2018, 04:56 PM
Post #7620
|
- Posts:
- 237
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #35,414
- Joined:
- 25 January 2017
- Favourite all-time player
- Danny McGrain
|
- Dubz
- 4 Jun 2018, 04:48 PM
- Burnley Celt
- 4 Jun 2018, 04:33 PM
We all love a laugh at Sevco but that’s a bit embarrassing from PhilMac. Obsessed indeed. I think that is maybe getting one over the walter mitty character known as john james who had went with the fact Gerrard could not get the job and has now pulled the article in question.
|
|
|
| |
63 users reading this topic (38 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
Members: donbhoy67,
remy mcswain,
jinkyscat,
atalan,
londonroad,
johnny88,
kevinm1967,
BoboBalde6,
Donaldc,
Hooped_Crusader,
StealthBhoy,
FlyBhoy,
The Presidents Box,
stalker,
Bodom Bhoy,
paddyb,
4-4-2,
faboo,
Midnight,
vfranchetti,
yeti,
don73,
leith bhoy,
johnbhoy,
D4nny
|