RANGERS held negotiations to rename their ground 'The cinch Ibrox Stadium' before becoming embroiled in a dispute with the SPFL's title sponsors, it has been revealed.

On Wednesday, advocate Lord Keen of Elie QC told the Court of Session that representatives from the Premiership champions and the online car dealership had held talks about the propect of cinch sponsoring the naming rights to the Govan stadium.

Lord Keen was speaking at a hearing in which the Scottish FA successfully appealed against an interim interdict granted against our game's administrators earlier this year.

Ibrox director Douglas Park won that court order - making the SFA comply with its own rues on arbitration - and has argued that the SPFL's sponsorship agreement with cinch breaches a commercial contract between the club and his company, Parks of Hamilton.

Rangers and cinch are currently involved in a dispute after the Ibrox club refused to allow the sponsor's branding to appear on their shirts or inside the stadium.

Acting on behalf of the SPFL, Lord Keen revealed his legal team received a heavily redacted document from May 2021 (where some information was omitted due to 'commercial sensitivities') that claimed to show a business relationship between the club and Parks of Hamilton.

Lord Keen admitted that an unredacted copy of the apparent agreement would help to shine some light on the matter - adding that the papers showed talks had been held between Rangers and cinch to rename Ibrox.

He explained: “The fact is that right up to June 7, Rangers Football Club Limited was negotiating with cinch to sell them the naming rights to Ibrox so it became the cinch Ibrox Stadium and of course that was a proposal of considerable value to Rangers Football Club Ltd. 

“We do have considerable doubt about the way in which this document has been produced and redacted and we would invite your lordship to direct the petitioners to disclose the full contract to your lordship in a sealed envelope in order that the purported redactions can be examined and the issue of commercial sensitivity determined as it is a matter under the court.”