|
The Board - general discussion (including Res 12); notes from the AGM
|
|
Topic Started: 15 Jul 2014, 12:03 AM (1,414,472 Views)
|
|
Dubz
|
11 Sep 2017, 12:51 PM
Post #10981
|
- Posts:
- 4,757
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #27,189
- Joined:
- 7 November 2010
- Favourite all-time player
- Daniel Fergus McGrain
|
- Josecuervo
- 11 Sep 2017, 12:42 PM
- brianlara67
- 11 Sep 2017, 12:30 PM
Breaking news on BBC website. That sleekit effer Regan quoted as saying on only club wants a review.
What about the letter on behalf of all 42 clubs? Does that not count? "The Board of the SPFL supports those calls for such an independent review and will seek to facilitate such review and the publication of its report with and to the Scottish FA"
He can spout as much lies and spin as he wants, his time is up.
Edited by Dubz, 11 Sep 2017, 12:52 PM.
|
|
|
| |
|
lenobhoy
|
11 Sep 2017, 12:51 PM
Post #10982
|
Catch some light and it'll be alright
- Posts:
- 26,056
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #333
- Joined:
- 4 November 2004
|
- puroresu_boy
- 11 Sep 2017, 12:39 PM
- brianlara67
- 11 Sep 2017, 12:30 PM
Breaking news on BBC website. That sleekit effer Regan quoted as saying on only club wants a review.
There we have it. This will be the agenda from Regan and the SFA now while the Media will call us paranoid. They are trying to make this 'Celtic against the wishes of everyone else in Scottish Football' hoping that the silence of others and there hacks in the Media will do enough to discredit our claims. We really need to go for the throat on this. He's shampooting himself now and he's trying to paint this as a us v them issue. Let's get after them as the gloves are off.
|
|
|
| |
|
Tenenbaum
|
11 Sep 2017, 12:54 PM
Post #10983
|
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
|
Right, that Regan quote in the BBC has ensured infinite patience on my part from now until this vile saga has come to a close (in the unlikely event that it ever does). Clearly the leak was in preparation for this deflection/smear campaign.
|
|
|
| |
|
ronny_is_not_da_man
|
11 Sep 2017, 12:55 PM
Post #10984
|
Off treasure hunting in Holland
- Posts:
- 12,151
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #34,169
- Joined:
- 14 May 2015
- Favourite all-time player
- Henke
|
This is going to get very very messy isn't it?
|
|
|
| |
|
lenobhoy
|
11 Sep 2017, 01:00 PM
Post #10985
|
Catch some light and it'll be alright
- Posts:
- 26,056
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #333
- Joined:
- 4 November 2004
|
- ronny_is_not_da_man
- 11 Sep 2017, 12:55 PM
This is going to get very very messy isn't it? Hopefully
|
|
|
| |
|
Otis B Driftwood
|
11 Sep 2017, 01:01 PM
Post #10986
|
Satisfaction came in a chain reaction
- Posts:
- 16,158
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #25,838
- Joined:
- 6 April 2010
- Favourite all-time player
- Jimmy Johnstone
|
- paulfg42
- 11 Sep 2017, 11:48 AM
- stevie21
- 11 Sep 2017, 11:28 AM
- CHR15
- 10 Sep 2017, 11:31 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
I am completely unsurprised that I'm about to out-pedant a lawyer, but the number that you're "short of" is the number you need to achieve to attain your goal. If their goal is 1 league title and they're currently on zero, then they're one short. If their target is two league titles and they're on zero, then they're two short of that. They're 55 short of going for 55. I know that they're already going for 1 but until they achieve that one, they're still going for it and it doesn't count towards the overall total.  If they were going for 55, it would mean they already have 54. As they are currently on zero, they need 54 to be in a position to go for 55. Your logic is flawed, mate; 55 could be a long-term goal, they might be any number short of that - i.e. 55 - but still be going for it.
|
|
|
| |
|
justinjest
|
11 Sep 2017, 01:02 PM
Post #10987
|
- Posts:
- 3,780
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #30,913
- Joined:
- 16 May 2012
|
- Otis B Driftwood
- 11 Sep 2017, 01:01 PM
- paulfg42
- 11 Sep 2017, 11:48 AM
- stevie21
- 11 Sep 2017, 11:28 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
If they were going for 55, it would mean they already have 54. As they are currently on zero, they need 54 to be in a position to go for 55.
Rubbish, mate; 55 could be a long-term goal, they might be any number short of that - i.e. 55 - but still be going for it. what does it matter, they won't manage it in most of our lifetimes anyway.
|
|
|
| |
|
Forza
|
11 Sep 2017, 01:03 PM
Post #10988
|
- Posts:
- 7,738
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #23,749
- Joined:
- 5 June 2009
- Favourite all-time player
- Henrik
- Twitter Name
- @ForzaKDS
|
- brianlara67
- 11 Sep 2017, 12:30 PM
Breaking news on BBC website. That sleekit effer Regan quoted as saying on only club wants a review. Only one club broke tax and football registration rules over a ten year period too. We all know what is more relevant.
|
|
|
| |
|
sevilliano
|
11 Sep 2017, 01:05 PM
Post #10989
|
Retired and now a BT Sports pundit
- Posts:
- 10,619
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #80
- Joined:
- 1 September 2004
|
- ronny_is_not_da_man
- 11 Sep 2017, 12:55 PM
This is going to get very very messy isn't it? i don't think anyone has an understanding of how messy and dangerous this could get
if celtic do what we all believe they should do whilst they may get regan moving to the next issue and getting the titles stripped will see resistance from all and sundry the like of which we haven't seen
speculation on unrest and things ending badly will be repeated and repeated by the media whipping the sevco support into a frenzy
combining that with our move to 10iar and we'll need balls of steel to see this through as a club
|
|
|
| |
|
GreenWhite67
|
11 Sep 2017, 01:06 PM
Post #10990
|
From desperation, came celebration
- Posts:
- 430
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #35,018
- Joined:
- 29 July 2016
|
http://scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=2986&newsID=17202&newsCategoryID=1
- Quote:
-
The Board of the Scottish FA has considered the recent requests from the SPFL and one of our member clubs to participate in an independent review in light of the UK Supreme Court judgment on the use of EBTs by Rangers FC and its implications for Scottish football.
Notwithstanding the Board’s statement of July 5th 2017, it considered the request and explored the potential scope of any additional independent review in some detail. After a full debate, the Board’s position remains unchanged for the following reasons.
The Scottish FA has examined new information with respect to what is commonly referred to as the Wee Tax Case and the awarding of a UEFA Licence in 2011. This information came to light in the recent Craig Whyte trial and concerns the testimony in Court of two former directors of Rangers FC regarding “overdue payables” to HMRC and relating to a Discounted Option Scheme.
The matter has now been referred to the Scottish FA’s Compliance Officer for further investigation following receipt of a written opinion from Senior Counsel.
Moreover, the events of the last six years have contributed directly to many amendments to the Scottish FA Articles and Judicial Panel Protocol to address the key learnings. These include:
• An enhanced role for the Board in our governance structure
• Stronger powers for the PGB and the NPGB
• Strengthened processes in relation to insolvency and change of control
• Bolstering the duty of good faith
• Clarity on what information is to be lodged within the context of players’ contracts
• A clearer separation of powers between the executive and judicial activities of the Scottish FA and a more specific and detailed menu of sanctions.
It is also worth noting that all relevant Scottish FA disciplinary tribunals were undertaken with senior legal advisors. Indeed, all such cases were also chaired by senior legal figures.
In summary, the Board of the Scottish FA has considered thoroughly the implications of the recent UK Supreme Court Judgement and, furthermore, has identified specific matters from the Craig Whyte trial that require to be revisited.
|
|
|
| |
|
londonroad
|
11 Sep 2017, 01:06 PM
Post #10991
|
First name on the team-sheet
- Posts:
- 1,446
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #24,035
- Joined:
- 14 July 2009
- Favourite all-time player
- Henrik
|
- paulfg42
- 11 Sep 2017, 11:48 AM
- stevie21
- 11 Sep 2017, 11:28 AM
- CHR15
- 10 Sep 2017, 11:31 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
I am completely unsurprised that I'm about to out-pedant a lawyer, but the number that you're "short of" is the number you need to achieve to attain your goal. If their goal is 1 league title and they're currently on zero, then they're one short. If their target is two league titles and they're on zero, then they're two short of that. They're 55 short of going for 55. I know that they're already going for 1 but until they achieve that one, they're still going for it and it doesn't count towards the overall total.  If they were going for 55, it would mean they already have 54. As they are currently on zero, they need 54 to be in a position to go for 55. Not really. We're going for 10 in a row while sitting on 6 They're going for 55 while sitting on zilch. Kilmarnock are closer to 55 than Sevco right enough 
|
|
|
| |
|
SaMule
|
11 Sep 2017, 01:08 PM
Post #10992
|
- Posts:
- 16,137
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #4,033
- Joined:
- 14 June 2006
- Favourite all-time player
- Badr El Kaddouri
|
I'd like to think we're just waiting for Strachan to officially make it impossible for Scotland to qualify for the World Cup before the Scottish Government steps in to sort the SFA out and FIFA suspend the national team for government interference.
I doubt that's the case of course, but it's a more acceptable reason for no action being taken as yet than simple cowardice.
|
|
|
| |
|
Pussyfoot
|
11 Sep 2017, 01:09 PM
Post #10993
|
- Posts:
- 13,323
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #22,774
- Joined:
- 12 January 2009
- Favourite all-time player
- Paul McStay
|
- GreenWhite67
- 11 Sep 2017, 01:06 PM
http://scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=2986&newsID=17202&newsCategoryID=1- Quote:
-
The Board of the Scottish FA has considered the recent requests from the SPFL and one of our member clubs to participate in an independent review in light of the UK Supreme Court judgment on the use of EBTs by Rangers FC and its implications for Scottish football.
Notwithstanding the Board’s statement of July 5th 2017, it considered the request and explored the potential scope of any additional independent review in some detail. After a full debate, the Board’s position remains unchanged for the following reasons.
The Scottish FA has examined new information with respect to what is commonly referred to as the Wee Tax Case and the awarding of a UEFA Licence in 2011. This information came to light in the recent Craig Whyte trial and concerns the testimony in Court of two former directors of Rangers FC regarding “overdue payables” to HMRC and relating to a Discounted Option Scheme.
The matter has now been referred to the Scottish FA’s Compliance Officer for further investigation following receipt of a written opinion from Senior Counsel.
Moreover, the events of the last six years have contributed directly to many amendments to the Scottish FA Articles and Judicial Panel Protocol to address the key learnings. These include:
•An enhanced role for the Board in our governance structure
•Stronger powers for the PGB and the NPGB
•Strengthened processes in relation to insolvency and change of control
•Bolstering the duty of good faith
•Clarity on what information is to be lodged within the context of players’ contracts
•A clearer separation of powers between the executive and judicial activities of the Scottish FA and a more specific and detailed menu of sanctions.
It is also worth noting that all relevant Scottish FA disciplinary tribunals were undertaken with senior legal advisors. Indeed, all such cases were also chaired by senior legal figures.
In summary, the Board of the Scottish FA has considered thoroughly the implications of the recent UK Supreme Court Judgement and, furthermore, has identified specific matters from the Craig Whyte trial that require to be revisited.
A repeat of the claptrap from the other day only now specifying the one member club. Nothing here to validate non review, nothing new.
Bolstering eff all, bastards.
|
|
|
| |
|
Forza
|
11 Sep 2017, 01:14 PM
Post #10994
|
- Posts:
- 7,738
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #23,749
- Joined:
- 5 June 2009
- Favourite all-time player
- Henrik
- Twitter Name
- @ForzaKDS
|
- GreenWhite67
- 11 Sep 2017, 01:06 PM
http://scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=2986&newsID=17202&newsCategoryID=1- Quote:
-
The Board of the Scottish FA has considered the recent requests from the SPFL and one of our member clubs to participate in an independent review in light of the UK Supreme Court judgment on the use of EBTs by Rangers FC and its implications for Scottish football.
Notwithstanding the Board’s statement of July 5th 2017, it considered the request and explored the potential scope of any additional independent review in some detail. After a full debate, the Board’s position remains unchanged for the following reasons.
The Scottish FA has examined new information with respect to what is commonly referred to as the Wee Tax Case and the awarding of a UEFA Licence in 2011. This information came to light in the recent Craig Whyte trial and concerns the testimony in Court of two former directors of Rangers FC regarding “overdue payables” to HMRC and relating to a Discounted Option Scheme.
The matter has now been referred to the Scottish FA’s Compliance Officer for further investigation following receipt of a written opinion from Senior Counsel.
Moreover, the events of the last six years have contributed directly to many amendments to the Scottish FA Articles and Judicial Panel Protocol to address the key learnings. These include:
•An enhanced role for the Board in our governance structure
•Stronger powers for the PGB and the NPGB
•Strengthened processes in relation to insolvency and change of control
•Bolstering the duty of good faith
•Clarity on what information is to be lodged within the context of players’ contracts
•A clearer separation of powers between the executive and judicial activities of the Scottish FA and a more specific and detailed menu of sanctions.
It is also worth noting that all relevant Scottish FA disciplinary tribunals were undertaken with senior legal advisors. Indeed, all such cases were also chaired by senior legal figures.
In summary, the Board of the Scottish FA has considered thoroughly the implications of the recent UK Supreme Court Judgement and, furthermore, has identified specific matters from the Craig Whyte trial that require to be revisited.
I wonder how Regan's covert efforts to agitate and bully SPL and SFL clubs into having a Rangers entity in the SPL or at least the First Division are commensurate with:
•An enhanced role for the Board in our governance structure •Bolstering the duty of good faith (what the hell does this actually mean in practice, anyway?!) •A clearer separation of powers between the executive and judicial activities of the Scottish FA and a more specific and detailed menu of sanctions.
Does any of the above address the most senior footballing executive in Scotland periodically warning of social unrest and footballing Armageddon in Scotland if certain matters are not go the way he has advised they should go?
He and Doncaster should have been gone in July 2012.
|
|
|
| |
|
Sheshoon
|
11 Sep 2017, 01:14 PM
Post #10995
|
First name on the team-sheet
- Posts:
- 1,470
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #27,449
- Joined:
- 22 December 2010
|
- Pussyfoot
- 11 Sep 2017, 11:52 AM
- ronny_is_not_da_man
- 11 Sep 2017, 11:46 AM
Regan will be on SSB the night talking about our statement.
Hopefully Laurie will get the chance to bore him out of Scotland. Clyde SSB is nothing other than an element of the SMSM and Regan obviously believes he can try and exploit this in the defence of his and the SFA's chicanery......Oh dear!
So, if we take a step back and have a look at this. Pistol Pete bides his time, waits for the outcome of both the CW trial and Big Tax Case, only then discloses correspondence and emails dating as far back as pre liquidation of Rangers (deid), which by any objective measure, nails Regan and Doncaster to the wall. Regan's strategic reposte - he goes on a footie phone in.
I cannot wait to hear this!!.......and I'm going to laugh my fu*king arse off, cause Regan's farting against Thunder - and he knows it.
|
|
|
| |
|
Forza
|
11 Sep 2017, 01:14 PM
Post #10996
|
- Posts:
- 7,738
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #23,749
- Joined:
- 5 June 2009
- Favourite all-time player
- Henrik
- Twitter Name
- @ForzaKDS
|
- Forza
- 11 Sep 2017, 01:14 PM
- GreenWhite67
- 11 Sep 2017, 01:06 PM
http://scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=2986&newsID=17202&newsCategoryID=1- Quote:
-
The Board of the Scottish FA has considered the recent requests from the SPFL and one of our member clubs to participate in an independent review in light of the UK Supreme Court judgment on the use of EBTs by Rangers FC and its implications for Scottish football.
Notwithstanding the Board’s statement of July 5th 2017, it considered the request and explored the potential scope of any additional independent review in some detail. After a full debate, the Board’s position remains unchanged for the following reasons.
The Scottish FA has examined new information with respect to what is commonly referred to as the Wee Tax Case and the awarding of a UEFA Licence in 2011. This information came to light in the recent Craig Whyte trial and concerns the testimony in Court of two former directors of Rangers FC regarding “overdue payables” to HMRC and relating to a Discounted Option Scheme.
The matter has now been referred to the Scottish FA’s Compliance Officer for further investigation following receipt of a written opinion from Senior Counsel.
Moreover, the events of the last six years have contributed directly to many amendments to the Scottish FA Articles and Judicial Panel Protocol to address the key learnings. These include:
•An enhanced role for the Board in our governance structure
•Stronger powers for the PGB and the NPGB
•Strengthened processes in relation to insolvency and change of control
•Bolstering the duty of good faith
•Clarity on what information is to be lodged within the context of players’ contracts
•A clearer separation of powers between the executive and judicial activities of the Scottish FA and a more specific and detailed menu of sanctions.
It is also worth noting that all relevant Scottish FA disciplinary tribunals were undertaken with senior legal advisors. Indeed, all such cases were also chaired by senior legal figures.
In summary, the Board of the Scottish FA has considered thoroughly the implications of the recent UK Supreme Court Judgement and, furthermore, has identified specific matters from the Craig Whyte trial that require to be revisited.
I wonder how Regan's covert efforts to agitate and bully SPL and SFL clubs into having a Rangers entity in the SPL or at least the First Division are commensurate with: •An enhanced role for the Board in our governance structure •Bolstering the duty of good faith (what the hell does this actually mean in practice, anyway?!) •A clearer separation of powers between the executive and judicial activities of the Scottish FA and a more specific and detailed menu of sanctions. Does any of the above address the most senior footballing executive in Scotland periodically warning of social unrest and footballing Armageddon in Scotland if certain matters do not go the way he has advised they should go? He and Doncaster should have been gone in July 2012.
|
|
|
| |
|
Ned Rise
|
11 Sep 2017, 01:16 PM
Post #10997
|
These boots were made for hunbustin'
- Posts:
- 9,160
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #30,170
- Joined:
- 12 January 2012
|
- GreenWhite67
- 11 Sep 2017, 01:06 PM
http://scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=2986&newsID=17202&newsCategoryID=1- Quote:
-
The Board of the Scottish FA has considered the recent requests from the SPFL and one of our member clubs to participate in an independent review in light of the UK Supreme Court judgment on the use of EBTs by Rangers FC and its implications for Scottish football.
Notwithstanding the Board’s statement of July 5th 2017, it considered the request and explored the potential scope of any additional independent review in some detail. After a full debate, the Board’s position remains unchanged for the following reasons.
The Scottish FA has examined new information with respect to what is commonly referred to as the Wee Tax Case and the awarding of a UEFA Licence in 2011. This information came to light in the recent Craig Whyte trial and concerns the testimony in Court of two former directors of Rangers FC regarding “overdue payables” to HMRC and relating to a Discounted Option Scheme.
The matter has now been referred to the Scottish FA’s Compliance Officer for further investigation following receipt of a written opinion from Senior Counsel.
Moreover, the events of the last six years have contributed directly to many amendments to the Scottish FA Articles and Judicial Panel Protocol to address the key learnings. These include:
•An enhanced role for the Board in our governance structure
•Stronger powers for the PGB and the NPGB
•Strengthened processes in relation to insolvency and change of control
•Bolstering the duty of good faith
•Clarity on what information is to be lodged within the context of players’ contracts
•A clearer separation of powers between the executive and judicial activities of the Scottish FA and a more specific and detailed menu of sanctions.
It is also worth noting that all relevant Scottish FA disciplinary tribunals were undertaken with senior legal advisors. Indeed, all such cases were also chaired by senior legal figures.
In summary, the Board of the Scottish FA has considered thoroughly the implications of the recent UK Supreme Court Judgement and, furthermore, has identified specific matters from the Craig Whyte trial that require to be revisited.
Missed a bullet point:
•Gave jobs to people directly involved in EBTs at Rangers.
Edited by Ned Rise, 11 Sep 2017, 01:17 PM.
|
|
|
| |
|
bubba
|
11 Sep 2017, 01:17 PM
Post #10998
|
- Posts:
- 5,359
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #27,401
- Joined:
- 9 December 2010
|
Another sfa statement that says eff all
The compliance officer will have no powers to punish deidco, though some sevco directors may get a slap on the wrist
Still a total failure to accept their own complicity in sidestepping rules to accommodate sevco and the total breakdown of trust within the game
Painting it as us v everyone else is pathetic and potentially dangerous
|
|
|
| |
|
FenianJack
|
11 Sep 2017, 01:19 PM
Post #10999
|
- Posts:
- 4,879
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #6,829
- Joined:
- 3 February 2007
|
- Pussyfoot
- 11 Sep 2017, 01:09 PM
- GreenWhite67
- 11 Sep 2017, 01:06 PM
http://scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=2986&newsID=17202&newsCategoryID=1- Quote:
-
The Board of the Scottish FA has considered the recent requests from the SPFL and one of our member clubs to participate in an independent review in light of the UK Supreme Court judgment on the use of EBTs by Rangers FC and its implications for Scottish football.
Notwithstanding the Board’s statement of July 5th 2017, it considered the request and explored the potential scope of any additional independent review in some detail. After a full debate, the Board’s position remains unchanged for the following reasons.
The Scottish FA has examined new information with respect to what is commonly referred to as the Wee Tax Case and the awarding of a UEFA Licence in 2011. This information came to light in the recent Craig Whyte trial and concerns the testimony in Court of two former directors of Rangers FC regarding “overdue payables” to HMRC and relating to a Discounted Option Scheme.
The matter has now been referred to the Scottish FA’s Compliance Officer for further investigation following receipt of a written opinion from Senior Counsel.
Moreover, the events of the last six years have contributed directly to many amendments to the Scottish FA Articles and Judicial Panel Protocol to address the key learnings. These include:
•An enhanced role for the Board in our governance structure
•Stronger powers for the PGB and the NPGB
•Strengthened processes in relation to insolvency and change of control
•Bolstering the duty of good faith
•Clarity on what information is to be lodged within the context of players’ contracts
•A clearer separation of powers between the executive and judicial activities of the Scottish FA and a more specific and detailed menu of sanctions.
It is also worth noting that all relevant Scottish FA disciplinary tribunals were undertaken with senior legal advisors. Indeed, all such cases were also chaired by senior legal figures.
In summary, the Board of the Scottish FA has considered thoroughly the implications of the recent UK Supreme Court Judgement and, furthermore, has identified specific matters from the Craig Whyte trial that require to be revisited.
A repeat of the claptrap from the other day only now specifying the one member club. Nothing here to validate non review, nothing new. Bolstering eff all, bastards. Exactly. It's just para 4 of his letter to Lawwell of 18th August
|
|
|
| |
|
blanco
|
11 Sep 2017, 01:21 PM
Post #11000
|
- Posts:
- 660
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #30,628
- Joined:
- 23 February 2012
- Favourite all-time player
- henrik larsson
|
- Sheshoon
- 11 Sep 2017, 01:14 PM
- Pussyfoot
- 11 Sep 2017, 11:52 AM
- ronny_is_not_da_man
- 11 Sep 2017, 11:46 AM
Regan will be on SSB the night talking about our statement.
Hopefully Laurie will get the chance to bore him out of Scotland.
Clyde SSB is nothing other than an element of the SMSM and Regan obviously believes he can try and exploit this in the defence of his and the SFA's chicanery......Oh dear! So, if we take a step back and have a look at this. Pistol Pete bides his time, waits for the outcome of both the CW trial and Big Tax Case, only then discloses correspondence and emails dating as far back as pre liquidation of Rangers (deid), which by any objective measure, nails Regan and Doncaster to the wall. Regan's strategic reposte - he goes on a footie phone in. I cannot wait to hear this!!.......and I'm going to laugh my fu*king arse off, cause Regan's farting against Thunder - and he knows it. With Regan reiterating his stance that there will be no review of what went on regarding the Huns and the corruption I expect Peter Lawwell to release a statement in the next few days saying we will now be formally complaining to UEFA, taking our case to the CAS or applying for a judicial review.
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|