Park on doncaster

The SPFL responded selectively to the allegations in it, but didn’t address two of them – that Neil Doncaster failed to report allegations of bullying between clubs to the board, and that reconstruction was a red herring as it would require renegotiation of the new TV deal with Sky. Have Rangers received responses to those allegations yet?

Every response they’ve given has been selective and patronising, whilst attempting to cloud issues with semantics. Their responses typically raise more questions than answers. Neil Doncaster states one thing publicly but acts differently. He certainly didn’t want to help me raise serious concerns.

Only he can answer what he did with the reports he received from other clubs on bullying.

It’s interesting that when he was asked on Radio Scotland, he gave a very narrow answer, distorting the question to allegations of bullying against SPFL staff when that wasn’t the question.

It’s fairly clear he answers what he wants to, and in a way that confuses the issue. On the subject of reconstruction, you have to ask yourself, why were the executive happy to allow 15 club representatives to waste considerable amounts of their own time and energy on reconstruction talks that were never going to get off the ground? It was disingenuous not to have that declaration early on.

It’s ironic that the SPFL talk about our EGM, properly constituted within the rules, wasting time and money yet at the same time they are happy to send leaders of clubs on a wild goose chase on something the SPFL knew faced significantly more challenges than they acknowledged. They are there to serve the member clubs, a fact that often goes overlooked.