craig

Apparently the Italian bench said that they were just celebrating the goal from Inzaghi..... funny way to celebrate, trying to grab the coach's throat !

A draw means Italy would be through - but Czech Republic would be out if Ghana beat the US. Actually as it stands all 4 teams can qualify so there are many permutations. If both games are a draw I think that Italy and Czech Republic go through - can't be arsed going through all the permutations Rino - sorry

Anti-Rangers reporting again ?? I am sure the lad's father would know if it was a Rangers or Scotland top at the time (at least I would like to think so)..... wonder how it got into print it was a Rangers top ??? Yes, makes no difference.... wonder if Rangers will renege their offer of the day out now ? (just kidding !!!)

Agreed wija, I apologise for responding to Jim's post. The main point of this thread has been lost to another England/Scotland debate. This thread really was about the condemnation of what happened to that poor lad and the disabled guy. We have lost the focus of the thread !! Good for Rangers in bringing the lad and his family to Ibrox for a day out - and hopefully they catch the moron that hit the lad and do a whole lot more than ban him from Ibrox for life (hopefully the bobbies can catch him and he serves time.... cretin !!)

Agreed on the mascot - my only concern with the England to is that we all know the mhedia will take is as an opportunity to ridicule our club as being "pro-English"/"anti-Scottish" or whetever lame excuse to have a dig they can come up with on the day.

Was this due to your request yesterday Cammy ? Yes, gersfem, at least something good has come from it - for once we have seen some decent PR from Ibrox. Craig "hope the lad and his family have a GREAT day out" loyal

Cammy, Don't forget your good friend Craig here........ Motherwell on the Sunday doesn't quite work too well but Utd at Ibrox on Saturday 5th August might be ideal !! I need to check the schedules of the parents while we are home !

Funny Jim - I EXPECTED the whole "Andy Murray is representing the UK" thing - that is utter nonsense too. If he were to win Wimbledon we would claim him as our own. and you know it. Either way though just why SHOULD the English support him ??? They have the freedom to support whoever they like !!!!! You sure Jack McConnell never said it ? I was sure I read him quoted as saying such a thing but I stand corrected it it isn't so - or is his "support who you want" that you say he said a back-tracking statement ? What are you talking about with suggesting I think you are anti-English - read my post again and read your own again Jim - I mentioned anti-English in reference to a statement of supporting everyone BUT England - you said you aren't supporting England - very subtle difference between that and simply NOT supporting ONE team. The English saying they won't support Murray is no different to him saying he won't support them - don't hide him behind the "representing the UK" bullshit. We will agree to disagree no doubt - and I won't label your post utter nonsense because no matter what you think of mine, I will respect your opinion, no matter how much I disagree with it.

http://ipswichtown.rivals.net/default.asp?sid=911&p=2&stid=8414195 Good luck to him if it comes off.

Why SHOULD they support Andy Murray ? He isn't supporting their national team (the only home nation in the tournament) - so why should they support a Scotsman at Wimbledon ? I can't say I blame them for taking that stance. Surely your only complaint is that the question was asked ? It still is an innocent question IMO. As a Rangers fan you can vote for whoever you like - IMO politics and football allegiance are two different issues. regarding your "anti-scottishness" comment... to put the shoe on the other foot.... is Andy Murray not being "anti-English" with his response ? Or what about our First Minister with his "i will support everyone that plays against England" comment ? Anti-English ? YES, in my opinion.

EXCELLENT idea Cammy... perhaps send Gers PR dept an email (do we even HAVE a PR department ?) - I always thought you would make a great Gers PR employee......

Maybe I am wrong but I also thought that one of the incidents was in Edinburgh (the child) and one was in Aberdeen (the disabled guy) - which would make it unlikely it was the same person. Could be wrong though

20% actually isn't high in regular business, it is quite low. However, personally I would like it eradicated completely but would say that your 10% would be appropriate - and if the figure of 25 mill is representative of 20% then 10% would be 12.5 million. So from the JJB deal alone there should be 5.5 mill left and this doesn't include the CL money. So there should be AT LEAST 7 mill to spend if Gers were to get to a point of 10% gearing. My true point to your statement about clearing down debt was simply that if DM has used the JJB money and CL profits to eliminate the debt then I think it is an unwise decision because you still need to provide a product on the pitch. Money doesn't guarantee success so it is a balancing act but even DM must realise that investment is needed in the squad. Agreed Calscot that spending doesn't bring success. But as I said above it should be a balancing act - PLG so far has looked like a manager that has a keen eye for potential (look at the number of youngsters he has brought in and the players he nurtured at Lyon) and this is a major coup for DM and may even be a financial windfall for Gers (unearthing a gem, seeing him perform very well for 2 or 3 years and then sell-on for handsome profit) but I also would like to see PLG here for the long-term and I think that will require some decent (not exorbitant) money to spend. No doubt. That was then though, it isn't currently the figure so it shouldn't be crippling us - we should still be looking to reduce the debt wherever possible but not ALWAYS at the expense od the squad. Sometimes it makes sense to do so, but not consistently. Hopefully PLG will get the money that AM was promised in January but didn't get..... . From the quotes it looks like it will be anything up to 9.99 million - "several but not tens of millions" - I would be happy if PLG gets 7 mill - but that makes me wonder why we don't go the extra 300k for Clement ??? Regards player profits I agree, I think it was one of the things Murray was looking for in a new manager, someone that can unearth some gems as youngsters, get a few good seasons from them and then sell them on at sizeable profit. True, all accounts seem to give credence to PLG knowing what he was given so he will be happy and he seems to have accepted that, so I presume he thinks he can do a good job under those circumstances. I wouldn't say he KNOWS he can't afford to blow it but I certainly hope he does - because make no mistake, PLG is a HUGE catch for our club. Hopefully you are correct ! However I'm trusting Le guen to make the most of the money available, he really does come across as having his head screwed on straight. Agreed, I have more confidence in him working under tight financial constraints than many, many other managers - he appears to be a very good tactician who also holds the respect of his players - and even without money those are very valuable tools for seeing success.

Yes it does calscot but if the product on the pitch is inferior then the club run the risk of more than negating the interest saved by not having CL football, not selling as many season tickets. It is a balancing act, but one simply cannot be preferred over another. It is a well-known business fact that debt gearing (debt vs equity) shouldn't be zero as you don't get the best use of funds. In other words, it is widely accepted that it is GOOD to carry some level of debt. I would love Rangers to be debt free and cash-rich - as a club they aren't so the debt has to be reduced but not at the exclusion of the product they are in the business of providing.

NOPE. But it might stop them from looking for more than a player is worth. However, to counter-act that statement the problem is that Clement is not only interesting Rangers but other French teams - so the chances of Lyon getting the 1M they want is quite high. Rangers can't hold a club to ransom when the other club have offers which meet their valuation - seems to me that Gers are trying to get Clement on a cheap deal because the player himself wants to come here - but Lyon don't seem willing to budge on their asking price (why should they if they already have offers meeting their valuation ?) so if we really want the player then we have to pony up the money - it is an additional 300k - which surely isn't too much if PLG really likes the player - AND he is a youngster so hopefully has a higher sell on value if/when he produces the goods.

To make things worse.... the "few million" you mention Cammy is in Euros, not pounds - the exchange rate makes that even less appealing than it already was. I hope, very much hope, that DM is simply keeping things close to his chest regarding funds available and that money WILL be spent as it NEEDS to be spent. Hoping he is just preventing us from being over-charged for players by saying there isn't a lot of money available. If he is being honest though then if I were PLG I wouldn't be too happy about the situation he finds himself in so early. Would DM really hoodwink a manager into signing with the financial backing he said would be there ?? Playing a very dangerous game if he has. Frankie, as for the cash paying down the debt, I like to see debt being eliminated but I don't believe the club should be using ALL funds to clear debt - the PRODUCT still has to be of a sufficient standard, and if last season was anything to go by, money needs to be spent on the team to improve the standard.

Yes it IS peripheral to the debate. The guy was obviously beaten, yes it might have been a coincidence that it happened whilst wearing an England top. However, what excuse could there be for a grown man to hit a CHILD - you think it is a coincidence that the kid was wearing an England top ? Just how can the Sun create lies out of THAT story ?? The WHOLE point of the debate is that these acts are despicable acts in ANY society and that to carry out such crimes due to the CLOTHING worn by someone makes it all the worse.

Cammy, You raised the mention of one very important individual in all of this as well...... Jack McConnell. I don't want to bring politics into it but how much of a signal does it send out when the country's First Minister makes it public knowledge that he "will support every team England plays in the World Cup". Someone of such stature (or at least perceived stature) should not be making such remarks - even if only meant as light-hearted banter he has to realise that by some it can be taken the wrong way. I am in no way suggesting he was anything to do with these incidents (these individuals acted the way they did because they wanted to) but a publc figure, indeed one of the highest ranking, if not THE highest ranking, civil servant in the country shouldn't be making such remarks. AND..... I don't for a second condone either incident and I don't think that anyone is ignoring the disabled guy that got beaten (my brother is mentally disabled and he wouldn't have any idea of why something like that happened to him if it had - sad !!) but for me I just cannot get over someone taking that action with an innocent child - a CHILD FFS - sickening

I may be in the minority but I happen to think that England's strength may be in a 4-5-1 anyway. Their midfield is very strong so if they played either Joe Cole or Gerrard in behind the main striker with a free role they could give the other teams a torrid time. Also allows Gerrard and Lampard to not play directly beside each other (which I don't think works too well for them)

Correct Cammy. This is a different issue to some extent from the issue seen on the other threads. These are racist hate crimes, the other ones were more to do with football than these are. These acts are simply despicable acts by individuals who have no sense of humanity towards their fellow people ! Unbelievable acts - I am STILL shaking my head how a grown man can punch a 7 year old - I just can't fathom it !!

So is Henry Chris.... I guess he wouldn't be comforting either ? My point really being that you can't label one person's qualities with someone else's just because they are both in the same WC squad...

Agreed Cammy, my point being that no-one should jump to blame a CLUB on an idiot's actions. I don't happen to think it is a "national" issue though - I think it is a moronic action by an individual. Calling it a national issue suggests the nation has a problem which I think is an unfair general assumption. Racist ? Absolutely - but it is an INDIVIDUAL that carries out the action.

They credited it to Larsson but it was a coin flip as to whether it was him or the #3 (not sure of his name) - they both went for it and it was VERY difficult to see who got the last touch Gav

Chris hit the nail on the head - every club has fans like this. It isn't the club's fault they have idiots following them. I wouldn't be so quick to tar the guy as a Dons fan..... especially when the scumbag that hit the 7 year old in Edinburgh was wearing a Rangers top at the time (allegedly). I can't believe anyone would do this to another person for what they wear.... but for a grown man to hit a 7 year old ????? All I can say is I am glad I am 3,500 miles away from the idiocy !!

You trying to say I don't look after my kids education ??