SPFL hit back at Rangers and other clubs over letter and ‘inaccuracies’

SPFL hit back at Rangers and other clubs over letter and 'inaccuracies'
SPFL hit back at Rangers and other clubs over letter and 'inaccuracies'

SPFL hit back at Rangers and other clubs over letter and ‘inaccuracies’

SPFL hit back at Rangers and other clubs over letter and ‘inaccuracies’

Responding to a letter written by Rangers and five other clubs to league executives, the SPFL has accused the clubs

of making “factual inaccuracies.”

In a united letter to the SPFL, Gers, Aberdeen, Motherwell, Livingston, St. Mirren, and St. Johnstone expressed their

concerns regarding the Independent Governance study and questioned why chairman Murdoch MacLennan had

made a positive remark on the report’s conclusions. They charged him with acting without member consent and

without informing member clubs beforehand.

SPFL hit back at Rangers and other clubs over letter and 'inaccuracies'
SPFL hit back at Rangers and other clubs over letter and ‘inaccuracies’

They also claimed that his statement didn’t fully and accurately reflect the conclusions of the report. The clubs were

also concerned about the true independence of the report given the SPFL Executive allegedly made changes to the

first draft before it was sent to member clubs.

With a statement declaring, “We can confirm that yesterday we received a letter on behalf of six Premiership Clubs,”

the SPFL has now retaliated. Numerous factual errors were in the letter,

which we have since corrected with those clubs.

“After the process is finished, we look forward to meeting with all Premiership Clubs and discussing the

recommendations of the independent governance review.”

“On behalf of SPFL Premiership clubs Aberdeen, Motherwell, Livingston, Rangers, St Johnstone, and St. Mirren, a

letter was issued today to the SPFL executive in response to the handling of the recent Independent Governance

report,” the six clubs released the following statement.

It is highly inappropriate for the SPFL Chairman to have made any public remarks before to the SPFL Board

meeting, which is scheduled to examine the contents of the draft report.

Since the SPFL Executive received the initial draft of the study and made revisions before giving it to SPFL Board

members, the clubs and others have serious concerns about the report’s independence.

Only one club out of the 42 had the chance to provide feedback on the report’s investigation, and that club wasn’t the

current or former SPFL Board members.

Get more related news on https://sportviewers.com/

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*