Rangers blamed by Scottish fa, John Brown ‘corrupt’ remark ‘Wrong Comments’ Football News

The Scottish Football Association (SFA) has accused the statements of “misleading comments” in the criticism of the sentence from John Brown to the club’s media channels.

Rangers were sentenced to £ 3,000 after £ 3,000 after charges of violating the 38th year, which was “to imagine the” or “calculated to show the prejudice” or “calculated”

Brown, while Rangers working on TV, claiming that Rangers decided not to score a goal on Easter road, the final week of the final week was “corruption” and the ball was not passed.

On Thursday, Rangers, in the court hearing, “they mentioned numerous examples of similar events in club channels, and claimed that” lack of consistency “with the SFA approach.

The statement of a SFA read: “We responded to the definition of Rangers’s recent independent judiciary court.

“The sanctions imposed by an independent panel are entirely related to the application of the rules. The most recent and relevant example of a similar violation is the sanctions that apply to a similar nature similar to a similar nature similar to a similar nature.

Motherwell Development Technical Director Foster, in September in September for the controversial rewarded arm in September, “lie” as “false” against Stahnstone’s Stahnstone

“In addition, ‘In addition, to resolve the research behind different results, say that in previous cases, there will be the attitude of compliance employees to be related to a warning letter for potential violations in previous cases.

“This system has been adopted since the beginning of the trial protocol in 2011. Indeed, this kind of discretion was applied to warn the future behavior of the Compliance Officer (Rangers), Vaclav Cerny, Dujon Sterling and Mohammad Diomande.

“Let’s note that reynts intend to connect with the association to observe a clarity to the court panel protocol and its application. The club is actually represented in the JPP Working Group.

“We have demanded the written reasons for the panel department and transparency in the stands.

“JPP Rule 38, in response to the ruling strike of 2010, while the match officials, clubs and fans are recalled in this regard on this issue.”

What did brown do?

Before Niko Raskin, the hib passed by Hibs by the Hibs, HiBs passed the ball and went through the ball and passed the ball before the end of the hibernation, the hib saw you with the last game of Hib.

There, “The second goal was not intervened as a final evidence / angle to say that the line was fully passed to reward.

The brown Rangers tv was angry with the decision said, “I would say that I would like it.”

Commentator Tom Miller warned: “Well, I’m not sure that we can say that,” Before you continue brown, “Well, I say it.”

What did Rangers say?

In connection with a strong word on Thursday, Rangers said, “These incidents said that they had legal questions about the regulations of the Scottish faucet and how consecutive they are applied.

“None of these cases does not seem to be charged with relevant clubs.

“The lack of a series of similar events with the Police of similar events, the Scottish FA will follow the CEO of the CEO and the President to ensure a suitable approach to the main protection and equal treatment.

“We will also ask Scottish fa, not consistently applied in all clubs and not to accept a rule that lost a rule such as a fair and executable arrangement on all platforms.”

The statement added: “When choosing to follow this work, Scotland FA opened the door to the beginning of how similar situations progress.

Rangers phrase is exactly

“We feel that the extensive concern and regulatory processes of this result should be highlighted by the wider effects on clarity and confidence.

“John Brown spoke as emotional and spontaneously as someone who took deeper care to the club.

“Today, as part of our defense, we noted numerous examples of similar events in club channels. These events seem to have raised their legal questions and how consecutively, none of these cases are not charged against the relevant clubs.

“The lack of a series of similar events with the Police of similar events in Scotland will ask for a fair and proportionate approach to the application of clubs and all platforms, which is a fair and applicable arrangement.

“Our goal is to understand the reason behind the different results. The absence of a consistency or perception, and all member clubs are not allowed and are not allowed.

“There is no guide to how clubs are waiting for the clubs to manage live broadcasting, although the panel can serve as a constructive step as the internal editorial rules move forward.

“To be clear, we referred to not suggesting these other examples of sanctions, but we referred to emphasizing the clear inconsistencies when similar events work. The club is a passionate and partisan.

“But when choosing to follow this work, Scotland FA opened the door closer to how to progress similar situations.

Sky Sports to show 215 Live PL game from the season

From the next season, Sky Sports’ Premier League coverage will increase by 128 matches to at least 215 games.

80 percent of all television premier league games next season are sky sport