You might recall that I commented on a story on the Rangers website in early January, which was headlined “Rangers Compensation Claim Boost”.
As Rangers .co.uk reported at the time:-
RANGERS have made a successful start to their bid to win compensation for the players who walked out on the club last summer.
The club is chasing Allan McGregor, Kyle Lafferty, Jamie Ness, Stevie Naismith, Steven Whittaker and Sone Aluko for breaching their contracts. Compensation is also being sought from their clubs – Besiktas, Sion, Stoke City, Everton, Norwich City and Hull City.
A meeting took place on Monday at Hampden to discuss jurisdiction on the case and Rangers prevailed.
Chief Executive Charles Green told RangersTV: “From our side it went as well as we could have expected. From the other side I’m sure they will be disappointed. Clearly they wanted they commission to throw it out and rule that the SFA had no jurisdiction because the whole process of the first meeting was about jurisdiction.
“What we stated at the meeting was that newco wants to continue where oldco was. We have this slight anomaly where for a period newco were not members of the SFA from June 14 until being granted membership on August 3. Continue reading
The Rangers saga will make a number of exceptional case studies, covering numerous areas of law, together with PR, journalism, and even some football!
The comments which have flowed like lava from Krakatoa (which is west of Java, despite the film title) since the declaration of the FTT result are a fine example of the way in which people, on the Internet and in the media, fit the facts into their own narrative, rather than the other way about.
It is a human trait to do so, and I am sure I have been guilty of it myself.
One area of comment I have seen popping up over the last couple of days relates to the dissenting opinion from Dr Heidi Poon, and the status of that opinion.
The narrative which is being pushed and indeed is being believed runs as follows.
- The dissenting opinion was only published in an appendix and therefore is not part of the decision.
- It is therefore of no importance in the case and can be disregarded.
- The majority opinion ignored what Dr Poon had to say because her decision was in some way nonsensical and not worthy of analysis.
- Dr Poon is not a lawyer and therefore her opinion can be ignored because the two lawyers on the panel reached a different conclusion. Continue reading
Death threats by Rangers fans! How dare a newspaper make such vile accusations? Who is responsible for the latest calumny upon the hundreds of thousands of decent supporters of the Ibrox team? We have seen Alex Thomson of Channel 4 News castigated and ridiculed for daring to suggest that threats have come from elements of the Rangers support to journalists, newspapers, football officials and publishers.
Now the Scottish Sun has joined the chorus of anti-Rangers spin by repeating someone else’s no doubt invented accusations against the fans of Rangers.
The Sun reported today as follows:- (My comments are in bold).
IBROX chief Charles Green was warned by cops to be on his guard against deadly mail bombs amid fears he could be targeted by crazed Rangers fans. Worried Green was forced to move between a string of safe-houses after police received credible intelligence that his life was in danger following his takeover of the club. He was ordered to check his car for explosives and Ibrox staff were given special instructions for handling his post.
Oh. Mr Green says that he was threatened. That cannot be right. This must be a re-hash of old stories, taking comments out of context to create a false impression. Surely this is the Sun simply seeking to ambush the share issue as part of its alleged hatred for Rangers? Continue reading