bruce778 Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 While I understand they are only guidelines, to set out example criteria, then pass someone as fit and proper who fits at least 2 of these criteria would be a bit of a farce. I'm not fussed either way, but be interesting to see how it pans out. I expect he will pass. I doubt he should pass. The test has to be applied in context though. The reason for the test is to ensure proper governance of football clubs and protect them from chancers like Craig whyte. Everyone knows about kings misdemeanours. I agree with his comment that he is probably the most scrutinised director in Scottish football history. I think the tax issues he had in South Africa are very separate and not indicative of how he would run rangers, simply because of the high profile nature of the club. That's my opinion and it will be up to king to persuade the SFA to agree with him. If the SFA is legitimately concerned, then I wonder if they might consider imposing conditions regarding rangers reporting requirements to ensure that everything is above board. Their own rules probably don't allow them so probably a non starter but rangers could always agree to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parklife Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 Quite the wordsmith. You're the one who seems to have difficulty reading as you seem obsessed with my argument that him not being a disqualified director in the jurisdiction where he encountered the tax issue is relevant. I never said this was conclusive to the SFA decision, which you somehow appear to have misunderstood and distorted my words accordingly. You were the one who said it was irrelevant. In any event, you've made an arse of yourself so many times on here I'm not sure why I am even bothering! I've posted the guidelines and highlighted the parts which King fails upon. You've came on, ignored this and repeated ad nauseam that he's allowed to be a director in SA. This is why several folk have been ripping the pish out of you. No one has ever argued that he's not legally allowed to be a Director. It has been argued that he should fail the SFA's Fit and Proper Persons test, for being a Director at one of their members. I'm unsure why you can't comprehend the difference between the law and the SFA's articles of association. But, seen as this is about the 5th time i've had to tell you this, i don't expect you to understand. Best go back to your crayons and colouring books. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce778 Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 I've posted the guidelines and highlighted the parts which King fails upon. You've came on, ignored this and repeated ad nauseam that he's allowed to be a director in SA. This is why several folk have been ripping the pish out of you. No one has ever argued that he's not legally allowed to be a Director. It has been argued that he should fail the SFA's Fit and Proper Persons test, for being a Director at one of their members. I'm unsure why you can't comprehend the difference between the law and the SFA's articles of association. But, seen as this is about the 5th time i've had to tell you this, i don't expect you to understand. Best go back to your crayons and colouring books. Ha, you appear to be rewriting history. I said his remaining ability to be a director in SA was a relevant factor. You came on here saying it was irrelevant. I never said it was the only factor or that it was conclusive evidence one way or another. Your dismissal of the issue as a factor says it all about your knowledge of how this will likely play out. I haven't ignored the guidelines. The SFA is entitled to use its discretion. When exercising that discretion they will consider the underlying purpose of the test and the guidelines together with the relevant facts in this case. Essentially, they will say dave king has done this and that, this judge said that about him, etc then they will weigh up factors in his favour and assess whether the evidence suggests he is or is not fit and proper. Conduct falling within illustrative examples in guidelines would not, in my view, be determinative of his application, otherwise the SFA would have made them hard and fast rules. And I think I know the difference between the law and SFA tests. I never said there was a strict legal issue as to kings ability to be a director so I don't know what you're on about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbcmfc Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 The test has to be applied in context though. The reason for the test is to ensure proper governance of football clubs and protect them from chancers like Craig whyte. Everyone knows about kings misdemeanours. I agree with his comment that he is probably the most scrutinised director in Scottish football history. I think the tax issues he had in South Africa are very separate and not indicative of how he would run rangers, simply because of the high profile nature of the club. Pre Craig whyte I'd have agreed with that statement. I worked with someone once, they got sacked for stealing, years later I worked with them again, money started going missing, it was them again. I thought they wouldnt do it again, gave them the benefit of the doubt and was left in the embarrassing situation of having let it happen. Fairly pointless anecdote, but the point I'm trying to make is that Dave King is a bit of a dodgy character, I'm doubtful that he'll all of a sudden change his ways. I could be wrong? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RenfrewBlue Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 Was Paul Murray not also a director of RFC in the 5-year period before its liquidation? If so, why has there been no mention of him being subject to the fit and proper test? He quit after a fortnight of Whyte's reign saying that Craigy boy was a chance, not to be trusted.I think he probably gets a pardon based on the fact he did this and opposed the sale to Whyte in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parklife Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 Ha, you appear to be rewriting history. I said his remaining ability to be a director in SA was a relevant factor. You came on here saying it was irrelevant. I never said it was the only factor or that it was conclusive evidence one way or another. Your dismissal of the issue as a factor says it all about your knowledge of how this will likely play out. It kind of is irrelevant. Why do you think that the judgements of the SA legal system has any jurisdiction over the SFA and their articles of association? I know exactly how it'll play out, it'll be the way i've said all along. Despite King clearly contravening the F&PP guidelines, the SFA will placate the hun hoards and allow him to be a Director. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 I know exactly how it'll play out, it'll be the way i've said all along. Good job you're not chocolate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Col Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 King David has spoken http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/8994-dave-king-statement classic whataboutery and itwisnaeme Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parklife Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 Good job you're not chocolate. Good job indeed, Larky-boy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 Good job you're not chocolate. Considering how often you suck yourself on here that is quite a comment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 (edited) Considering how often you suck yourself on here that is quite a comment. Tut, tut, tut petty personal abuse, are you having problems accessing Wikipedia so this is all you have? Edited April 8, 2015 by Larky Masher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 (edited) To be honest I'm either always right and frequently grumpy or frequently right and alway grumpy, it depends who you talk to. i am surprised you could type that with your mouth full. Edited April 8, 2015 by thplinth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 i am surprised you could type that with your mouth full. Which isn't as good as your trick of typing with your head up your arse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angus_Young Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 I've posted the guidelines below and highlighted the ones King fails upon. These are just guidelines and the SFA can (and likely, will) completely ignore them. Although in doing so it calls in to question the point of having the guidelines in the first place... Considering how many Rangers fans wailed and blamed the SFA for allowing Whyte to be in charge at the club and stating he wasn't a fit and proper person, it'd be a little hilarious if those same people got all irate because the SFA done their job correctly and stopped King being on the board. Cheers for that Honestly, what a ing pantomime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parklife Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 Cheers for that Honestly, what a ing pantomime. King doesn't actually need to be on the board to call the shots anyway. As Mr Ashley has shown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langtonian Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 that's been proven already with no nomad appointed which was kings preference and which suits him,no coincidence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RenfrewBlue Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 Just checked the Rangers score on the BBC and the text commentary has called the QoS keeper Zander Diamond and then in the next entry Zander Clark! Does he have a double barrelled name or are the BBC just completely useless? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 Now that King has got RFC de-listed and taken control I expect the information curtain will come down. And instead of transparency we will have the opposite, total opaqueness. But this will feel good for the RFC fans, bruised and battered by having to disclose their dire situation all the damn time etc... The question is will this new secrecy be a good or a bad thing for RFC. Will it allow a new RFC seedling to grow unmolested... or will it allow a new flesh eating RFC corruption mould to fester and multiply. How do you know which way it is going when you cannot see? King promised transparency but de-listing = a huge step into opaqueness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnie x Posted April 9, 2015 Author Share Posted April 9, 2015 King David has spoken http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/8994-dave-king-statement Jim traynor has spoken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Endell Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 (edited) I just switched the TV on as QoS scored - I was in a state of confusion as I automatically assumed Rangers were the team in blue... Edited April 9, 2015 by Charlie Endell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robroysboy Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 I just switched the TV on as QoS scored - I was in a state of confusion as I automatically assumed Rangers were the team in blue... A bit like Scotland against Northen ireland recently at hampden, I know NI were playing in a different shade of blue ( not dark) but it took me time to adjust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Endell Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 Crazy as I've been to Palmerston numerous time for Thistle games! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 (edited) Jim traynor has spoken. Have you noticed how quiet eddard has gone now King has 'won'. It is like 'job done'. Byeeeeeee. Edited April 9, 2015 by thplinth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wembley67lisbon Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 2-0 to the queens Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Endell Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 Great to see the Terregles Street end back in use - mind standing there on my first visit to Palmerston in the '80s (won 4-1 - think Bobby Watson was in temporary charge). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.