Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Kerrydale Street. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use.

If you decide to register, please be aware that we don't accept email addresses from free web accounts like gmail, Hotmail, live.co.uk etc. Sorry, but almost all of the abuse and spam that we get is from free web accounts. The software on the forum will automatically block any requests using a free email account.

Upon Registration, you will be given access to all our varied Forums, and you will be expected to comply with our fairly stringent Rules and Regulations. Meantime, enjoy your visit

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
The Board - general discussion (including Res 12); notes from the AGM
Topic Started: 15 Jul 2014, 12:03 AM (1,414,576 Views)
smiddy1956
Member Avatar
First team training
[ *  *  * ]
Auldyin
5 Nov 2016, 11:05 AM
Resolution 12: Where it currently stands.

This is a repost from yesterday on CQN with revised links to 8th June letter and The Activity Account.

There seems to be some idea that nothing more can be done about Res12 and that Celtic will simply say nothing at the forthcoming AGM.

It is timely therefore to remind folk who have funded the exercise since the AGM 2013 what that adjournment at the 2013 AGM meant and why if Celtic were to say nothing at the forthcoming AGM, that would be a betrayal of what we (and so the shareholders we represented) were led to understand when the adjournment (not abandonment) was accepted, along with what an adjournment meant in AGM terms.

There was some debate on CQN at the time in 2013 that might still be retrievable, but Video Celts copied the essential aspects of it which can be read at the following link for what was said in 2013 in lead up to the AGM . It contains information from BRTH from CQN who was involved in the adjournment discussions and confirms what was said to two other requistitioners on Skype by way of explanation at the time, plus a reliable witness.

http://videocelts.com/2013/11/blogs/latest-news/celtic-take-shareholders-licence-concerns-straight-to-sfa/

Our understanding from the above, then and now is that Res12 (AGM 2013) is still on the table and that it should either be passed or voted against at the forthcoming AGM given that the exercise the adjournment allowed to take place has ended because the shareholder’s representatives have taken it as far as we can. However, that exercise has been revealing.

Celtic’s position at the 2013 AGM was that Res12 was unnecessary. The information provided by UEFA on 8th June 2016 about the new club (which is of interest to many so fill yer boots)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6uWzxhblAt9ckdxNTU4bFIyNFU/view

contained much more relevant (in Res 12 terms) information about dates that suggests that the information given to Celtic in 2011 and later by the SFA, which led Celtic to conclude Res12 was “unnecessary” was less than candid and certainly subsequent utterances in public by Regan have been misleading.

This excludes the famous leaked 7th December 2011 e mail from Regan to RFC which explains the basis on which the SFA wanted to justify in public the granting of the UEFA licence in spring 2011. This justification (that the liability was potential at 31st March) if it is the basis on which the grant was allowed, is highly questionable and possibly involves fraud.

Consequently, Res12 is anything but over until Celtic say so, both in AGM process terms and until it can be shown without doubt the licence was granted as UEFA intended and the statements made that allowed the granting in March 2011 were true as much as the statements made afterwards by the SFA to explain the granting.

Over 100 signatories to Res12 have been given an Account of Activity on their behalf including correspondence with the SFA and UEFA as well as the Conclusions arising from the correspondence and an interesting similar case involving a Greek club whose use of private agreements as well as having an overdue payable saw a licence refused.

That Activity Account itself with links to all the correspondence can now be read at

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6uWzxhblAt9bnFxLXZYRi1pems/view

There is a lot to absorb so The Conclusions can wait a few more days before publishing to allow Celtic, who have a copy of both Timeline and Conclusions, to consider their position in terms of addressing Res12 (2013) at the forthcoming AGM in order to meet their responsibility to shareholders.

No meaning should be read into the absence of any response from the SLO, whom signatories who received the paperwork last week were advised to e mail, John Paul Taylor is only the public mail box in this case so do not expect a response from him.


To repeat: Any response must come within the AGM framework. That was the point of using the AGM route in the first place, to make the point to the SFA that one way or another they will be held accountable.
Lets hope Celtic will reinforce this point at the AGM and afterwards, why wouldn’t they?

Great read (all of it) Auldyin, what a power of work you lads have put in. IMO EUFA are stonewalling and hiding behind their/footballs unnecessary bureaucracy (when it suits them). If this was match fixing they'd be whistling a different tune - they want everyone and their dog involved in that one. Keep up the good work.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
smiddy1956
Member Avatar
First team training
[ *  *  * ]
Auldyin
5 Nov 2016, 11:05 AM
Resolution 12: Where it currently stands.

This is a repost from yesterday on CQN with revised links to 8th June letter and The Activity Account.

There seems to be some idea that nothing more can be done about Res12 and that Celtic will simply say nothing at the forthcoming AGM.

It is timely therefore to remind folk who have funded the exercise since the AGM 2013 what that adjournment at the 2013 AGM meant and why if Celtic were to say nothing at the forthcoming AGM, that would be a betrayal of what we (and so the shareholders we represented) were led to understand when the adjournment (not abandonment) was accepted, along with what an adjournment meant in AGM terms.

There was some debate on CQN at the time in 2013 that might still be retrievable, but Video Celts copied the essential aspects of it which can be read at the following link for what was said in 2013 in lead up to the AGM . It contains information from BRTH from CQN who was involved in the adjournment discussions and confirms what was said to two other requistitioners on Skype by way of explanation at the time, plus a reliable witness.

http://videocelts.com/2013/11/blogs/latest-news/celtic-take-shareholders-licence-concerns-straight-to-sfa/

Our understanding from the above, then and now is that Res12 (AGM 2013) is still on the table and that it should either be passed or voted against at the forthcoming AGM given that the exercise the adjournment allowed to take place has ended because the shareholder’s representatives have taken it as far as we can. However, that exercise has been revealing.

Celtic’s position at the 2013 AGM was that Res12 was unnecessary. The information provided by UEFA on 8th June 2016 about the new club (which is of interest to many so fill yer boots)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6uWzxhblAt9ckdxNTU4bFIyNFU/view

contained much more relevant (in Res 12 terms) information about dates that suggests that the information given to Celtic in 2011 and later by the SFA, which led Celtic to conclude Res12 was “unnecessary” was less than candid and certainly subsequent utterances in public by Regan have been misleading.

This excludes the famous leaked 7th December 2011 e mail from Regan to RFC which explains the basis on which the SFA wanted to justify in public the granting of the UEFA licence in spring 2011. This justification (that the liability was potential at 31st March) if it is the basis on which the grant was allowed, is highly questionable and possibly involves fraud.

Consequently, Res12 is anything but over until Celtic say so, both in AGM process terms and until it can be shown without doubt the licence was granted as UEFA intended and the statements made that allowed the granting in March 2011 were true as much as the statements made afterwards by the SFA to explain the granting.

Over 100 signatories to Res12 have been given an Account of Activity on their behalf including correspondence with the SFA and UEFA as well as the Conclusions arising from the correspondence and an interesting similar case involving a Greek club whose use of private agreements as well as having an overdue payable saw a licence refused.

That Activity Account itself with links to all the correspondence can now be read at

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6uWzxhblAt9bnFxLXZYRi1pems/view

There is a lot to absorb so The Conclusions can wait a few more days before publishing to allow Celtic, who have a copy of both Timeline and Conclusions, to consider their position in terms of addressing Res12 (2013) at the forthcoming AGM in order to meet their responsibility to shareholders.

No meaning should be read into the absence of any response from the SLO, whom signatories who received the paperwork last week were advised to e mail, John Paul Taylor is only the public mail box in this case so do not expect a response from him.


To repeat: Any response must come within the AGM framework. That was the point of using the AGM route in the first place, to make the point to the SFA that one way or another they will be held accountable.
Lets hope Celtic will reinforce this point at the AGM and afterwards, why wouldn’t they?

Great read (all of it) Auldyin, what a power of work you lads have put in. IMO EUFA are stonewalling and hiding behind their/footballs unnecessary bureaucracy (when it suits them). If this was match fixing they'd be whistling a different tune - they want everyone and their dog involved in that one. Keep up the good work.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tonyjaa-csc
Older than dirt
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Peter Lawwell is in Dubai right now being buddies with the owners of the team Al Wasl.........

What's he up to? :hmmm:
Edited by tonyjaa-csc, 9 Nov 2016, 06:55 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
georgiesleftpeg
Everyone's Fantasy Football first pick
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Sun on his back, brass on tap, nothing unusual for Splob here :)

Might also be arranging training camp / games for winter break, at the same time, right enough...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tonyjaa-csc
Older than dirt
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
georgiesleftpeg
9 Nov 2016, 06:58 PM
Sun on his back, brass on tap, nothing unusual for Splob here :)

Might also be arranging training camp / games for winter break, at the same time, right enough...
We could also be set to train in that 'super fitness centre' that Barton used

Cheers for the heads up Joey :thumbsup:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gothamcelt
Retired and now a BT Sports pundit
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]

Celtic chief executive Peter Lawwell is in the Middle East but is it for another international club tie-up?

19:37, 9 NOV 2016 UPDATED 19:50, 9 NOV 2016 BY ALAN CLARK
HE attended a training session and received an Al Wasl shirt from head coach Rodolfo Arruabarrena, posing for pictures and being shown around the club's facilities.

CELTIC chief executive Peter Lawwell is in the Middle East for what could be the first step in securing another international club link.

Celtic currently have tie-ups at clubs in Europe, Mexico and India and Lawwell sat down for discussions with Dubai-based side Al Wasl in the United Arab Emirates.

As well as talks with board member Waleed Al Shaibani, Lawwell attended a training session and received an Al Wasl shirt from head coach Rodolfo Arruabarrena, posing for pictures and being shown around the club's facilities.

During the visit, Lawwell spoke to Al Wasl club media and said: "I was very happy with the warm reception at Al Wasl and a fruitful discussion with the management of the club. I'm impressed by the potential of this club.

The Hoops CEO was given a warm welcome at the club
"I wish success to them and especially my team Celtic and I'm hoping that both teams celebrate the title at the end of the season."

Seven-time league winners Al Wasl currently sit top of the Arabian Gulf League after six games and were once managed by Argentina legend Diego Maradona between May 2011 and July 2012.

Lawwell is not the first person from Parkhead to visit the Dubai club, as the Hoops travelled over to the Middle East to face Liverpool in 1986 at the Al Wasl Stadium in the Dubai Champions Cup.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/celtic-chief-executive-peter-lawwell-9229170
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lunarhog
Member Avatar
First-team starter
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
originally posted in Sevco thread but probably more appropriate here:

Oh interesting, a new site popped up with the full Res12 cheating SFA Huns etc story. Very extensive then the page was pulled quickly after. But you can still access it using the link below...

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:XXILekuHe6gJ:www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/rangers-sfa-may-colluded-award-rangers-uefa-licence/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
georgiesleftpeg
Everyone's Fantasy Football first pick
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
^^
:theclap:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lunarhog
Member Avatar
First-team starter
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
amazed there's not more discussion about the Sporting Integrity Initiative report. It is quite damning. Also very interested to know why it was pulled so quickly - swift intervention by SFA lawyers perhaps? I have emailed them to ask why and will share their response if received.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bongo
Member Avatar
Free Palestine
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
lunarhog
10 Nov 2016, 10:21 AM
amazed there's not more discussion about the Sporting Integrity Initiative report. It is quite damning. Also very interested to know why it was pulled so quickly - swift intervention by SFA lawyers perhaps? I have emailed them to ask why and will share their response if received.
Great find :thumbsup: and set out matters well.

I'm interested in hearing this raised and discussed at our next agm, I just can't see how the board can ignore this.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tiny Tim
Member Avatar
"a Premier League player in all but status"
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
lunarhog
10 Nov 2016, 10:21 AM
amazed there's not more discussion about the Sporting Integrity Initiative report. It is quite damning. Also very interested to know why it was pulled so quickly - swift intervention by SFA lawyers perhaps? I have emailed them to ask why and will share their response if received.
Looking forward to seeing their response too :thumbsup:
Most of the info in it was already available to anyone who's followed the Res 12 saga, so I'm wondering who had it taken down and why.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BardseyCelt
Member Avatar


I saw that Dembelition Derby thing a while ago and thought it was a photoshop job. Jesus.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tomtheleedstim
First-team captain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Tiny Tim
10 Nov 2016, 10:41 AM
lunarhog
10 Nov 2016, 10:21 AM
amazed there's not more discussion about the Sporting Integrity Initiative report. It is quite damning. Also very interested to know why it was pulled so quickly - swift intervention by SFA lawyers perhaps? I have emailed them to ask why and will share their response if received.
Looking forward to seeing their response too :thumbsup:
Most of the info in it was already available to anyone who's followed the Res 12 saga, so I'm wondering who had it taken down and why.
Petition on Change.org https://goo.gl/27Rj8R

I know we are all pissed off and weary with this - but that's what they rely on. Let's get it signed and keep the pressure on the SFA AND Celtic.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
VerdeYBlanco
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
bongo
10 Nov 2016, 10:29 AM
lunarhog
10 Nov 2016, 10:21 AM
amazed there's not more discussion about the Sporting Integrity Initiative report. It is quite damning. Also very interested to know why it was pulled so quickly - swift intervention by SFA lawyers perhaps? I have emailed them to ask why and will share their response if received.
Great find :thumbsup: and set out matters well.

I'm interested in hearing this raised and discussed at our next agm, I just can't see how the board can ignore this.
This bit is just plain wrong, though -

'The accusation is that due to the importance of Rangers to the revenues of domestic Scottish football, the SFA was keen for the Glasgow club to have the money to return to the SPL as soon as possible, and so ignored issues with the award of the licence.'
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lunarhog
Member Avatar
First-team starter
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
tomtheleedstim
10 Nov 2016, 12:54 PM
Tiny Tim
10 Nov 2016, 10:41 AM
lunarhog
10 Nov 2016, 10:21 AM
amazed there's not more discussion about the Sporting Integrity Initiative report. It is quite damning. Also very interested to know why it was pulled so quickly - swift intervention by SFA lawyers perhaps? I have emailed them to ask why and will share their response if received.
Looking forward to seeing their response too :thumbsup:
Most of the info in it was already available to anyone who's followed the Res 12 saga, so I'm wondering who had it taken down and why.
Petition on Change.org https://goo.gl/27Rj8R

I know we are all pissed off and weary with this - but that's what they rely on. Let's get it signed and keep the pressure on the SFA AND Celtic.
Thank you, signed and shared on twitter also!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Auldyin
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Tiny Tim
10 Nov 2016, 10:41 AM
lunarhog
10 Nov 2016, 10:21 AM
amazed there's not more discussion about the Sporting Integrity Initiative report. It is quite damning. Also very interested to know why it was pulled so quickly - swift intervention by SFA lawyers perhaps? I have emailed them to ask why and will share their response if received.
Looking forward to seeing their response too :thumbsup:
Most of the info in it was already available to anyone who's followed the Res 12 saga, so I'm wondering who had it taken down and why.
Perhaps the following posted on SFM (copied to CQN) answers your question.

CrownSTbhoy
The link in question is to Google cache where the original SII remains after being removed by the author.

It was removed as I understand it to revise some parts so they pass legal muster and replace one graphic with another more relevant.

I understand it is the authors intent to republish but from what was in the original and from what can be gleaned from UEFA’s responses to the Res12 lawyer, Regan has questions to answer on what exact basis was the UEFA licence granted in 2011 (there are two reasons in the SII report either of which put the SFA in the collusion dock unless they can clarify why they shouldn’t be) and why exactly did the SFA excuse themselves from Commissioning LNS and how far a distance did they maintain and did they reveal all that they knew about side letters and ebts in the lead up to the investigation launched by Harper Mcleod on behalf of the then SPL.

So the linkage between Res12 which is primarily a Celtic shareholder concern but has wider implications for honest governance and the possible misdirection of LNS by the SFA make what happened in 2011 and 2012 a matter of concern for supporters of all clubs who value honest governance that believes in integrity.

To that end the more who sign up to the petition on E Tims at

https://www.change.org/p/the-scottish-football-association-the-sfa-has-to-respond-to-allegations-of-impropriety-concerning-the-issue-of-uefa-licences?recruiter=158907509&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=share_twitter_responsive

the better and the more supporters who approach their own clubs demanding the truth (a stranger in a strange land nowadays, where lies rule the landscape) the more likely we will get that governance rather an accepting it’s counterfeit deceitful alternative which has become common currency.

I understand SII will republish their report and that the separate Conclusions arrived at and disseminated to Celtic shareholders and the club as a result of Res12 lawyers writing to SFA and UEFA, will also be made public before the Celtic AGM.

They complement or support what was in the SII which came from a different base than Res12, which was driven by the same desire for honest governance but not from a Celtic source.

Joey Barton is the talk of today’s JJ steamie but that affair only impacts on one club, an honest SFA impacts on all clubs even the one with Joey Barton problems.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Auldyin
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
VerdeYBlanco
10 Nov 2016, 02:58 PM
bongo
10 Nov 2016, 10:29 AM
lunarhog
10 Nov 2016, 10:21 AM
amazed there's not more discussion about the Sporting Integrity Initiative report. It is quite damning. Also very interested to know why it was pulled so quickly - swift intervention by SFA lawyers perhaps? I have emailed them to ask why and will share their response if received.
Great find :thumbsup: and set out matters well.

I'm interested in hearing this raised and discussed at our next agm, I just can't see how the board can ignore this.
This bit is just plain wrong, though -

'The accusation is that due to the importance of Rangers to the revenues of domestic Scottish football, the SFA was keen for the Glasgow club to have the money to return to the SPL as soon as possible, and so ignored issues with the award of the licence.'
Correct and it is evidence it's not Res12 instigated although covering similar ground. The necessity for CL money was to keep RFC from insolvency during season 2011/12.

In SII 's defence it is a complicated subject but the general thrust of their report is right. There are questions to answer particularly on LNS l (see my previous post).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Auldyin
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
VerdeYBlanco
10 Nov 2016, 02:58 PM
bongo
10 Nov 2016, 10:29 AM
lunarhog
10 Nov 2016, 10:21 AM
amazed there's not more discussion about the Sporting Integrity Initiative report. It is quite damning. Also very interested to know why it was pulled so quickly - swift intervention by SFA lawyers perhaps? I have emailed them to ask why and will share their response if received.
Great find :thumbsup: and set out matters well. <br /><br />I'm interested in hearing this raised and discussed at our next agm, I just can't see how the board can ignore this.
This bit is just plain wrong, though -<br /><br />'The accusation is that due to the importance of Rangers to the revenues of domestic Scottish football, the SFA was keen for the Glasgow club to have the money to return to the SPL as soon as possible, and so ignored issues with the award of the licence.'
Correct and it is evidence it's not Res12 instigated although covering similar ground. The necessity for CL money was to keep RFC from insolvency during season 2011/12.

In SII 's defence it is a complicated subject but the general thrust of their report is right. There are questions to answer particularly on LNS l (see my previous post).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tiny Tim
Member Avatar
"a Premier League player in all but status"
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Auldyin
10 Nov 2016, 03:42 PM
Tiny Tim
10 Nov 2016, 10:41 AM
lunarhog
10 Nov 2016, 10:21 AM
amazed there's not more discussion about the Sporting Integrity Initiative report. It is quite damning. Also very interested to know why it was pulled so quickly - swift intervention by SFA lawyers perhaps? I have emailed them to ask why and will share their response if received.
Looking forward to seeing their response too :thumbsup:
Most of the info in it was already available to anyone who's followed the Res 12 saga, so I'm wondering who had it taken down and why.
Perhaps the following posted on SFM (copied to CQN) answers your question.

CrownSTbhoy
The link in question is to Google cache where the original SII remains after being removed by the author.

It was removed as I understand it to revise some parts so they pass legal muster and replace one graphic with another more relevant.

I understand it is the authors intent to republish but from what was in the original and from what can be gleaned from UEFA’s responses to the Res12 lawyer, Regan has questions to answer on what exact basis was the UEFA licence granted in 2011 (there are two reasons in the SII report either of which put the SFA in the collusion dock unless they can clarify why they shouldn’t be) and why exactly did the SFA excuse themselves from Commissioning LNS and how far a distance did they maintain and did they reveal all that they knew about side letters and ebts in the lead up to the investigation launched by Harper Mcleod on behalf of the then SPL.

So the linkage between Res12 which is primarily a Celtic shareholder concern but has wider implications for honest governance and the possible misdirection of LNS by the SFA make what happened in 2011 and 2012 a matter of concern for supporters of all clubs who value honest governance that believes in integrity.

To that end the more who sign up to the petition on E Tims at

https://www.change.org/p/the-scottish-football-association-the-sfa-has-to-respond-to-allegations-of-impropriety-concerning-the-issue-of-uefa-licences?recruiter=158907509&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=share_twitter_responsive

the better and the more supporters who approach their own clubs demanding the truth (a stranger in a strange land nowadays, where lies rule the landscape) the more likely we will get that governance rather an accepting it’s counterfeit deceitful alternative which has become common currency.

I understand SII will republish their report and that the separate Conclusions arrived at and disseminated to Celtic shareholders and the club as a result of Res12 lawyers writing to SFA and UEFA, will also be made public before the Celtic AGM.

They complement or support what was in the SII which came from a different base than Res12, which was driven by the same desire for honest governance but not from a Celtic source.

Joey Barton is the talk of today’s JJ steamie but that affair only impacts on one club, an honest SFA impacts on all clubs even the one with Joey Barton problems.
Cheers Auldyin :thumbsup:
I'm sure I'm not the only one that'll be pleasantly surprised by that explanation. I was suspecting hunnery-pokery :suspect:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
VerdeYBlanco
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Auldyin
10 Nov 2016, 03:50 PM
VerdeYBlanco
10 Nov 2016, 02:58 PM
bongo
10 Nov 2016, 10:29 AM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
This bit is just plain wrong, though -<br /><br />'The accusation is that due to the importance of Rangers to the revenues of domestic Scottish football, the SFA was keen for the Glasgow club to have the money to return to the SPL as soon as possible, and so ignored issues with the award of the licence.'
Correct and it is evidence it's not Res12 instigated although covering similar ground. The necessity for CL money was to keep RFC from insolvency during season 2011/12.

In SII 's defence it is a complicated subject but the general thrust of their report is right. There are questions to answer particularly on LNS l (see my previous post).
Yes, it's a great article. I hope it returns updated and correct :thumbsup:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Celtic Football Club Discussion Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply