07 May 2020 16:23:50
Can someone tell me if the dossier was 200 pages or as some are saying 19 pages.
07 May 2020 16:29:53
No one on here knows all complete guesswork n general bull as it hasn't gone public yet.
07 May 2020 16:35:58
No matter what IOM, it’s embarrassing to us all. 😡🇬🇧.
07 May 2020 16:36:18
200 plus appendices.
07 May 2020 16:40:55
200 pages of he said, you said nonsense.
The person who sanctioned this dossier should be sacked ASAP.
07 May 2020 16:49:44
Mull I’d be very surprised if 200 pages.
07 May 2020 17:20:18
Irrelevant how long it is
Factual accuracy which can be proven the main thing.
07 May 2020 17:20:45
Why are you embarrassed yately and demanding people
sacked blue? This dossier is solely for the purpose of getting the other clubs on board to demand another inquiry . When and if that happens the facts / evidence will be submitted to the inquiry.
Why would you give your evidence to the accused before the trial?
In my opinion there is a multitude of evidence in the doc to move forward . and if it was here say . the spfl would be screaming sue sue sue . Instead I am hearing they have agreed to another inquiry. The lack of faith in our board on here at times is flabbergasting.
The SPFL scream that it’s rubbish . Sutton screams it’s rubbish and as another poster posted earlier ( not sure who ) the panty wetters come out in force .
This is the way forward.
07 May 2020 17:34:43
I have just read the 19 page one and it states some interesting points to be fair.
07 May 2020 17:42:20
Why is pointing out the failings of the SPFL and Doncaster in particular embarrassing? 🤔.
07 May 2020 17:56:49
Molsgoals as a point of law the accused has to be presented with the evidence against then to allow them to provide a robust defence regardless of their guilt or innocence.
07 May 2020 18:23:27
not questioning you Snell but where did you read the 19 page one? because if i'm reading any kind of paper work I'd rather read the whole lot not 19 pages, and the 19 pages selected by who? excuse the ignorance if i've missed anything.
07 May 2020 18:55:46
Mr mojo . yea but not proof of the evidence?
07 May 2020 18:58:19
Before a potential inquiry mojo?
07 May 2020 20:53:01
Of course before the enquire otherwise how can you justify incurring the cost unless you know the rationale for pressing ahead. Lots of Legal covers on insurance policies won't go ahead with a case unless there is a strong chance of winning and to do that they need the lawyers to first review the evidence.
07 May 2020 21:40:27
Nonsense MMR, don’t hide behind some spurious corporate fig leaf. The integrity and transparency of governance provided by the SPFL Board is the only issue.
07 May 2020 23:14:23
Bankie this is not a spurious fig leaf but is something that is standard in most insurance legal contracts. To you point about corporate governance then yes I agree that some things, on the surface seem dubious however what was produced today did not have enough hard facts/ evidence to illustrate wrongdoing.
07 May 2020 21:41:40
this is a 19 page dossier which was sent to me don`t know anything about 200 pages.