15-12-2014, 21:10
Not sure your precedent works in this case Larry!! Those clubs are in different world bodies, one in CONCACAF (?) and one in UEFA. I believe the rules for UEFA prevent ownership in two clubs and I would imagine that the SFA follow those rules. He only owns 9% or so of Rangers, so he has not reached the 10% threshold that the rules have so this is not about ownership as such, it is more about the obvious influence he now has over the running of Rangers since he made the two directors of his choosing a provision of the last loan, this is in direct conflict with the rules, both UEFA and the SFA I believe!!
Its also interesting that Ashley has been charged with doing things that are not in the interest of Association Football!! I wonder if this relates to the horrendous dela on merchandise that he has in place with the club?? Maybe the SFA deem this deal partly responsible for the financial mess at Ibrox, after all if the money from the sale of shirts all went to Rangers, the club would be about 7m+ better off!!
Its also interesting that Ashley has been charged with doing things that are not in the interest of Association Football!! I wonder if this relates to the horrendous dela on merchandise that he has in place with the club?? Maybe the SFA deem this deal partly responsible for the financial mess at Ibrox, after all if the money from the sale of shirts all went to Rangers, the club would be about 7m+ better off!!