comment by timmy (U14278)
posted 1 hour, 23 minutes ago
comment by Laudrup (U12366)
posted 49 seconds ago
A statement released today on the SFA's official website read:

"The Scottish FA Board convened on Tuesday, 23rd December to hear a submission from the Board of Rangers Football Club. This meeting was arranged in respect of a request set out in an Application to Consent to an increase in MASH Holdings Limited's shareholding in Rangers International Football Club to a maximum of 29.9% of the issued share capital.

"The Board has now carefully considered the Application and has decided, unanimously, that the Application should not be granted.

"The Board, under Article 13 of the Scottish FA Articles of Association, is required to have due regard to the need to promote and safeguard the interests and public profile of association football, its players, spectators and others involved with the game. This test is set out in full in Article 13.6.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They have done you a favour with that decision. What would have happened if you both qualified for europe.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Qualify for Europe

They can't even beat Alloa

It would takes years to get through the EU courts and in the end UEFA have a similar ruling re joint ownership. This will certainly have spoiled their Xmas ! It's made mine !

I don't believe that.Does this rule 13.6 apply to any other club in the world barring two ownerships one of which in Scotland?

_____________________________

It's an sfa rule in Scotland, it doesn't have to be anywhere else Cal. It has the backing of UEFA and FIFA. Clubs and people in football are not allowed to challenge them in civil courts, if they do they are liable to punishment. They can give Ashley and Rangers a lifetime football ban for it. It's a fact, not opinion.

Castle, cheers

I agree for what it is worth, since this started 3 yrs ago there has been fck all worthwhile to the fans in any shape or form of a statement from the directors stating their intentions, aw secrets and misinformation, Ashley could have gave a statement, a word or two to give the fans some hope and tell you all where he hoped to take the club

I really think they forget who the club, any club truley belongs to-the fans

So how long til uz go bust?

Again.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Lets hope dave's lifted plenty of lolly out of SA if the reports about SARS "re-investigating" are true

There is grounds for a legal challenge Cal. However how many times do I have to tell you that they can get a ban for it? National club associations are allowed to make their own rules with the backing of FIFA.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Here Castle.

Uz are fücked.

You can always support Hearts next season if you want.

Juke

Hearts,Hearts,glorious Hearts...........

Jukebox...gagging for a taker !

There is no possible challenge , Ashley signed the agreement !

One can try

Cal you can challenge anything you want in a civil court however he will get a football ban for it or the club will.

Do you want to continue to ask the same thing over and over Cal?

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

the world loves a trier Juke

"Uz are fücked."

Like telling Stevie Wonder that he's blind.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

You might just have a nibble there

Aye Cal,you wish , hope and pray !

comment by BlueNose © -★★★★★ -The Decadent... (U6456)
posted 1 minute ago
"Uz are fücked."

Like telling Stevie Wonder that he's blind.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Or susan boyle she is a minger

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Tonne