Bluedell

Rangers 2 - 0 St Mirren Defoe

Don't know but her last job was with Celtic's lawyers. ?

Is this referring to fans rather than players or staff?

Happy to propose you too, C.

I'd be happy to be one of your proposers, Stevie.

Marco Negri is another who seems to be bizarrely doing the rounds. After his injury in early Jan in his first season he managed a total of 2 goals (I believe) in his remaining 3 and a half years with the club, and a total of 3 appearances over his last 3 seasons with us. Something wasn't right and I fail to see why he would get invited to functions.

But when Neil Lennon, Leigh Griffiths or Scott Brown do it...…. ?

I'm afraid to say that I don't look on Konterman with any affection. I don't think I'd want to go to something with him in it. However I hope that the event is a great success.

Sorry to hijack the thread but I've a question on RTV. The game is being shown live to non-UK residents but will be available to UK residents after the game has finished and if so, when?

How do you know Flanagan and Polster have been doing better in training than Patterson? You don't know how they've been doing relative to each other so why will you be disappointed if Gerrard picks Patterson?

Are we talking about a different game? We lost 2-0, and the team were crap for the whole game. I'm not singling him out per se but it was one of bad team selections that Gerrard made that day. It wasn't the only one but we suffered due to a lack of attacking options, and it was an area that Celtic targeted. In the one opportunity I've had to compare Flanagan and Patterson was against Wrexham. Patterson was the best player on the park when he was on, and then when Flanagan over to right back he was relatively anonymous. I'm not sure why "deserve" comes into it. We complain that youths don't get a chance in the first team and there's no path for them to progress, but when we have the opportunity to blood a youngster with huge prospects, we don't want to take it? If the likes of Leon King see Patterson get the opportunity then it might persuade him to sign a contract.

Flanagan doesn't offer the same attacking option as Tav or Patterson. Our style of play has changed slightly since we last started with Flanagan, with the wide forwards being moved inside more and therefore having an attacking full back is extremely important to us. Polster would offer a more attacking option than Flanagan but probably not as much as Patterson. However given he has been told he can leave, I doubt he'll be picked. It's worth remembering that our only league defeat was with Flanagan in the team, and his lack of attacking was one of the major deficiencies of the team that day,

It's a real slap in the face to Morelos and the general support by the directors/management.

Do the Sun have a representative at it?

Apparently he'll be missing on Friday with some sort of infection but is back next Wed.

H&H seem to be dismissing the Tav rumour.

Don't think anyone knows for sure but presumably 4 weeks is best case.

Rumour is that he's in Ross Hall Hospital with an appendix issue.

We may do if the rumours about Tav being out are true.

Is Gersnet blocked in Canada? ??

It's a fair point and there are downsides to having a ban as you've highlighted, but we believe a stand has to be made.

The full article: The biggest shake-up of gambling laws in Britain for 15 years could lead to restrictions on football clubs’ shirts carrying the names of betting companies, including a blanket ban. Ministers have committed to reviewing the Gambling Act 2005 and it is expected that the regulations surrounding sponsorship of football shirts, and gambling advertising in sport generally, will be among a host of regulations that are assessed. There has been increasing pressure to tackle the close relationship between football and gambling, especially with the rise of online betting and casinos. Imposing a blanket ban would have a big impact on the income of clubs: in the Premier League, half of the 20 clubs have betting firms as shirt sponsors and that rises to 15 of 24 in the Championship. About £40 million a year goes to the Football League and its clubs from the gambling sector. Even if the government stops short of imposing a ban on shirt sponsorship, it is understood the Labour opposition would seek to introduce amendments to any new legislation proposing that it is outlawed. A spokesman for the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport told The Times: “We are committed to reviewing the Gambling Act to ensure that regulations are fit for the digital age. The government will not hesitate to take further action to help protect people from gambling-related harm.” Restrictions that fall short of a ban on shirt sponsorship could form part of the review; for example betting companies may have to demonstrate that they are more active in promoting responsible gambling, or to introduce new measures for online betting to prevent problem gamblers overspending. Helen Whately, the minister in charge of gambling, referenced the review of the Gambling Act last week in response to the furore over the Football Association having sold exclusive FA Cup TV rights to an agency, which then sold them on to betting companies. The sponsorship of Derby County by the online casino 32Red has taken gambling’s relationship with clubs to a new level: the company has a “star player” clause, which provides an extra £1.5 million to the club, and Wayne Rooney has worn the No 32 shirt since he arrived at the club. Rosena Allin-Khan, the MP who is standing for election as Labour’s deputy leader, said at the start of the season: “We are seeing an increase in the number of football clubs sponsored by gambling companies this season. This relationship is now out of control.” Tim Crow, an independent sports marketing expert who has worked with betting companies, said: “There are a lot of people in the industry who believe that in the next five years, gambling advertising will be prohibited. I am not convinced that will happen but I do think regulations will be tightened.” The ten Premier League clubs with shirts sponsored by betting firms are generally the smaller teams: none of the “big six” clubs’ shirts are. Of the £350 million annual income from shirt sponsors, £69 million comes from betting companies. The spokesman for the Premier League, which does not have a betting partner, said: “Betting and sport have a historic association. The government has a vital role in ensuring that an effective regulatory regime is in place and to help protect people from gambling-related harm. “All our clubs have always fully complied with all regulatory requirements and will continue to do so. The Premier League looks forward to contributing to the government review.” Any ban on gambling advertising in football would potentially have a greater impact in the EFL, which is sponsored by Sky Bet. An EFL spokesman said: “The EFL does discuss issues relating to gambling policy with DCMS on a regular basis as we continue to recognise the importance of protecting people from gambling-related harm. “It remains our view that the gambling industry should make a financial contribution back into football, given the significant revenues it generates from our matches without bearing any of the associated costs. “Over £40 million a season is paid by the gambling sector to the League and its clubs, which is a significant part of the EFL’s financial model. “However, the EFL recognises that it should promote gambling in a safe and responsible way and we are always happy to discuss with the government how this can best be achieved.” The EFL said it had a range of initiatives to promote responsible gambling that included “protecting minors and the vulnerable.” Clubs in countries such as Italy and Turkey are not allowed by law to have shirts sponsored by gambling firms. In Germany, one Bundesliga team — Paderborn — has a betting shirt sponsor, probably because it is less easy to comply with regulations that outlaw the promotion of casinos but allow the advertising of sports betting. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/past-six-days/2020-01-14/sport/betting-firms-facing-curbs-on-shirt-deals-xrc85qc6j

It's extremely disappointing that the club has remained silent about this. Is it because of Dave King's relationship with Andy Devlin at the Sun? If so then that's disgraceful.

Rangers 6 - 0 Stranraer Defoe

The club previously issued a statement about the abuse that Morelos received and the Sun have just stuck their fingers up and done it anyway. The club has to ban the Sun or else their statements have no credibility. It has to show its teeth and it has to support Morelos. Perhaps that's what the Sun wants, and it will allow other journalists to criticise, but racism is unacceptable and can't be ignored. Action in form of a ban has to take place.