‘Bullied and threatened’ Caley Thistle vow to testify
INVERNESS have pledged to testify that they were ‘bullied’ and ‘threatened’ by an SPFL board member if an independent investigation takes place into the handling of a key vote to end the season. The Highland club yesterday launched a scathing attack on the league hierarchy for ‘arrogant, aggressive mismanagement’ in a 2,000-word statement. Branding recent events a ‘disingenuous, incompetent shambles’, Caley Thistle also expressed a belief that league reconstruction talks had been set up to fail from the beginning. SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster stressed no formal complaints about bullying had been made to him during the build-up to the vote, but admitted concerns had been expressed about language used on ‘both sides’ of ‘robust conversations’. He added that any formal complaint would be investigated in the proper manner. Inverness took issue with that as they gave their backing to Rangers, Hearts and Stranraer, who have called a league EGM tomorrow to vote on an independent probe into the whole affair. The Ibrox dossier supporting their case included claims that Inverness and Dundee had felt ‘threatened’ by an SPFL board member and the representative of another club over suggestions Championship prize money would be split on a different basis if the vote failed. Those details have been disputed
by sources close to the two men involved. The resolution ultimately passed after Dundee managing director John Nelms changed his mind on an initial no vote, with Inverness still angry at what unfolded. ‘Without going into the specifics at this time, please know that we will testify to the bullying and threats made against our club on Friday 10th by an SPFL board member and the threats against others by the same board member and how these threats were “reported back to the centre” and to the SPFL CEO directly on the day.’ The statement added that Inverness would come forward ‘with evidence at any genuine independent investigation with the proper and appropriate scope, should there be one, or at any further subsequent action thereafter’.
It continued: ‘These were threats and not robust conversations. We believe serious questions remain over the actions of the MD of one club during the now infamous vote on April 10th and what happened between the submission of their legally binding ‘No’ vote before the fake 5pm deadline and five days later when they became the only club out of 42 to have “negotiations” with the CEO and chairman of the SPFL and with “big hitters” or persons unknown, before being allowed to vote for a second time. ‘An independent investigation is the only possible route to try and uncover what happened — and it may or may not reveal the reasoning behind their apparently contradictory statements since then.’ The statement added: ‘It is also bemusing to hear them (the SPFL) so publicly state they are unaware of any threats or bullying during the period of the 9th or 10th of
April when the CEO knows what happened as it was reported to him and they continue to accuse anyone who spoke out against this take-it-or-leave-it offer as having an agenda which should be questioned!’ Asked about claims he had ignored reports of threats being made, Doncaster said: ‘I had a number of conversations on that Friday, including with John (Nelms) and with Scot (Gardiner, Inverness CEO), and others. There was unhappiness expressed with a number of directors in the Championship about the behaviour of people on both sides of the debate. ‘No formal complaint was made, however, by anyone and therefore I didn’t think it was appropriate to do anything further. ‘If a formal complaint had been made, then it would have been dealt with. I didn’t take forward one side of the debate or the other because there was no formal allegation made and I don’t believe the word bullying was used either. When someone does want to make a very serious allegation they should do so properly and formally — and that hasn’t happened.’ Nelms insisted the promise of meaningful dialogue on reconstruction had been central to his change of mind. However, that process collapsed last Friday when six top-tier clubs confirmed their opposition. Inverness said the announcement was ‘as inevitable as it was depressing’. They added: ‘The incredible numbers co-opted onto the (reconstruction) group at the outset was one of the reasons why we believed, perhaps understandably cynically, that it was being set up to fail from the very beginning and nothing we heard from our colleagues did anything to really dilute that opinion. ‘It was, in our opinion, consistent with the disingenuous, incompetent shambles that began on Wednesday April 8th.’