RANGERS vice-chairman John Bennett last night dismissed a claim that Ibrox chairman Douglas Park had threatened SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster as “unfounded”.
A letter sent by eight of the nine SPFL board members to all 42 member clubs yesterday claimed that Park had made a "defamatory" and “very serious” accusation and “threatened to act in a particular way” towards Doncaster in a telephone call last month.
It also revealed that SPFL legal adviser Rod McKenzie had then sought a commitment from Rangers company secretary James Blair that the remark would not be repeated.
However, Bennett revealed that the allegation had taken the Rangers directors aback and stressed that motor tycoon Park, who succeeded Dave King as chairman on an interim basis in March, flatly denies the assertion.
Asked what his response to the claim about Park had been, he said: “Incredulous. I found it telling that today was the first anyone had heard this allegation.
“Having spoken to Douglas, we can rest assured the allegation is unfounded. It is ironic that this allegation has been raised now given the fact the SPFL’s legal adviser went to such lengths to shut down the chairman of Rangers.”
Bennett hit back at the lengthy responses to the “dossier of evidence” that Rangers released to their fellow clubs on Thursday in the SPFL board members’ letter.
“It seems they can’t help themselves,” he said. “Every statement or comment from the SPFL raises more questions than answers. I am even more convinced that an independent investigation is urgently required.”
The SPFL letter accused Rangers managing director Stewart Robertson of “baseless, damaging and self-serving attacks on the board” and claimed the dossier breached confidentiality by “copying and publishing commercially sensitive information”.
However, Bennett defended Robertson’s actions and pledged to stand by him if there were any personal repercussions arising out of his comments in the media this week.
“As a board, we are fully supportive of Stewart and will continue to stand firm in the face of the unrelenting attacks on our managing director,” he said.
“It is ironic, that Rangers and Stewart in particular, are being criticised for applying the SPFL’s own rules. We have followed every law, rule, policy and article to the letter.
“The fact that the SPFL, particularly their chairman (Murdoch MacLennan), see fit to ridicule Stewart is not the way a normally functioning organisation would conduct its business.
“This approach from the SPFL is consistent. As demonstrated by the ‘cease and desist’ emails from Rod McKenzie, it appears the SPFL will go to great lengths to shut down legitimate scrutiny of their practices.”
Rangers want an independent investigation into the handling of the resolution on the end of the season and have, along with Hearts and Stranraer, requisitioned an extraordinary general meeting next Tuesday.
Bennett said the Glasgow club – who need 75 per cent of Premiership, Championship and League One and League Two clubs to back their proposal to get an external review - had received many messages of support.
“We have had reaction from other clubs,” he said. “I have been struck by how widely shared our concerns are. However, it is up to the clubs themselves to step forward now, but unlike the SPFL we will not influence how they vote.”
The SPFL have warned clubs about the cost of an independent investigation – but Bennett believes they are trying to apply pressure on their members to vote against it during the coronavirus pandemic and football shutdown.
“I think it is another example of such influence being accepted as normal within the SPFL,” he said. “The cost of not asking these legitimate questions would prove altogether more punitive.
“It is ironic the SPFL are raising the question of cost when they initiated their own ‘independent’ investigation, the cost of which is apparently unknown even to the SPFL’s chief executive.
“If I were a member of that board front and centre of my mind right now would be my fiduciary duty. That fiduciary duty would compel me to push hard for an independent investigation. Indeed, I would be crying out for one.”
Meanwhile, Bennett, who has three decades of experience in investment management and specialises in European companies, stressed again that Rangers had seen evidence of clubs being bullied before the vote on the resolution.
“It is very clear that there has been a concerted effort to spin a particular narrative,” he said. “It is concerning that so many commentators and members of the media feel it appropriate to treat ‘bullying’ in such a frivolous manner.
“Rangers were very clear that we had seen claims by other clubs of bullying. That evidence is in our report. Bullying was also brought to the attention of the CEO of the SPFL. We were making it very clear and we continue to do so, that while other clubs appear to have been bullied, Rangers will not be.”
The Rangers dossier claimed the SPFL executive had failed to inform clubs that voting to curtail the 2019/20 season prematurely could result in a £10m compensation payment to broadcasters.
The board members’ letter, though, described that as “fundamentally wrong”. But Bennett said: “We think it is fundamentally right. Let an independent investigation be the judge.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel