Davey how do i pm you pal

There is a message in your inbox (top right of screen)

Could I ask what that is as well



Could you PM please

If

Ryan signed the RFL declaration for a fit and proper person which includes:

(g) I have not been an Influential Person of 2 or more companies that have entered into

an Insolvency Event whilst I have been an Influential Person of those companies in the 10 years preceding the date of the completion of this Declaration.

and

If

2 or more companies where he was a director had gone into liquidation then his statement would have been incorrect.



If there had been even more companies, lets say 4 for example, then it would look really bad for him.

I always assumed Omar had left Ryan at the club to look after his interests.



There has to be interlocking agreements between Omar & the new directors, regardless of what the Rfl do.

Quote bobsmyuncle="bobsmyuncle"If Ryan signed the RFL declaration for a fit and proper person which includes: (g) I have not been an Influential Person of 2 or more companies that have entered into an Insolvency Event whilst I have been an Influential Person of those companies in the 10 years preceding the date of the completion of this Declaration. and If 2 or more companies where he was a director had gone into liquidation then his statement would have been incorrect. If there had been even more companies, lets say 4 for example, then it would look really bad for him.'" Your example was a bit understated www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... ons__test/

Quote bobsmyuncle="bobsmyuncle"If Ryan signed the RFL declaration for a fit and proper person which includes: (g) I have not been an Influential Person of 2 or more companies that have entered into an Insolvency Event whilst I have been an Influential Person of those companies in the 10 years preceding the date of the completion of this Declaration. and If 2 or more companies where he was a director had gone into liquidation then his statement would have been incorrect. If there had been even more companies, lets say 4 for example, then it would look really bad for him.'" Your example was a bit understated www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... ons__test/

The surprise for me is that only 2 weeks ago The RL sanctioned the new ownership arrangements. I would have thought that would mean each of the directors had been vetted and passed the fit and proper test. Apparently not.

So what has happened(or will happen) to this directors investment? As a major shareholder he must be classed as a person of influence .

On a more positive note, Solly's comments about the club's future are encouraging.... but our experience over the past 2 years has made us a little sceptical when the hierarchy speaks.

Quote bobsmyuncle="bobsmyuncle"If Ryan signed the RFL declaration for a fit and proper person which includes: (g) I have not been an Influential Person of 2 or more companies that have entered into an Insolvency Event whilst I have been an Influential Person of those companies in the 10 years preceding the date of the completion of this Declaration. and If 2 or more companies where he was a director had gone into liquidation then his statement would have been incorrect. If there had been even more companies, lets say 4 for example, then it would look really bad for him.'" I'm no expert on these things (and the T&A article backs up what you're saying) but I'm pretty sure 2011, 2007 and 2006 are less than 10 years ago....? companycheck.co.uk/director/9117 ... AN-KOUKASH *edit I'll throw [url=http://companycheck.co.uk/director/902417702Simon Moran[/url into the equation as well

Quote bobsmyuncle="bobsmyuncle"If Ryan signed the RFL declaration for a fit and proper person which includes: (g) I have not been an Influential Person of 2 or more companies that have entered into an Insolvency Event whilst I have been an Influential Person of those companies in the 10 years preceding the date of the completion of this Declaration. and If 2 or more companies where he was a director had gone into liquidation then his statement would have been incorrect. If there had been even more companies, lets say 4 for example, then it would look really bad for him.'" I'm no expert on these things (and the T&A article backs up what you're saying) but I'm pretty sure 2011, 2007 and 2006 are less than 10 years ago....? companycheck.co.uk/director/9117 ... AN-KOUKASH *edit I'll throw [url=http://companycheck.co.uk/director/902417702Simon Moran[/url into the equation as well

Agreed.



It wasn't long ago I was replying to one of your posts on here, discussing Whitcut's clear lies in public statements, that he then contradicted himself with (the wages issue and the business plan submission). All the things that were discussed as reasons to not trust the new board, were things Whitcut himself had said. I don't consider it a bad thing that he's been removed.



As someone said to me today, it's only right we give the rest of them the benefit of the doubt, as nobody else on the board has made any blatant lies in public statements (unless you count Robbie during the initial wages problem). It's very very difficult to put any trust in anyone at the club at the moment, even when none of the remaining board appear to have done anything wrong yet. It's up to them to build that trust back.

1, I didn't see any evidence of 'clear' or 'blatant' lies.



2, He was trying to minimise the fallout from something beyond his control, at the same time as selling the club to potential investors, sponsors (without which we are f***ed) and reassuring suppliers of all the stuff you need to run the club. What did you think he should say, "It's touch and go if I can keep the lights on"?



The players were paid within a few days and nobody died.

Perhaps the gap between the ratification and yesterday was a handover and notice period.

I would prefer them to say nothing than give us lies. I appreciate there may be reasons behind it, but if you want people to trust you, you don't come out and say one thing, then completely contradict it a couple of months (or even days/weeks) later. Which is what Whitcut did with the wages situation (the second month), and with the business plan submission. Don't preach about being honest with people and having transparency, then come out and give off a load of bull (if you pardon the pun).