amms

I tend to defend the BBC on here, but you're spot on with this. The only thing they were interested in was Rangers, it was almost a parody. Their obsessive hatred will kill them in the end.

As a footballing nation our parallels with Austria are huge, you'd have thought they might try and learn from their mistakes instead of continuing to repeat them.

Is that right? I had shares in the Royal Bank, fancy explaining how that worked out for me? Share value is only an indicator of market confidence, nothing else. The 'market' have a different view on Rangers than me and you I think. Progress on the park is linked but progress off the park will be far more important to them. The second part of that para is a strawman frankly. There has been a 'business element' to football since it went professional well over 100 years ago, running a club correctly is nothing new, these guys haven't just discovered alchemy you know.

Because success for Rangers should always be judged by what's in the trophy cabinet not the vagaries of the square mile. In my opinion we shouldn't be an attractive investment vehicle for hedge fund managers. If your goal is to raise the share value then you make decisions based on achieving that. Those decisions might not always be in the best interest of the support though.

I agree entirely with you. Doncaster was on Radio Scotland earlier and he explained that a league of 16 is not acceptable to SPL clubs because it will have to many "meaningless" games. It's this type of thinking that is destroying Scottish football, no professional football match is meaningless.

Eh, 2009. Typing some more characters because 'Eh, 2009.' is too short apparently!!!

The CEO doesn't have to own the club though. If there's a business genius out there who think they can make Rangers a wealthy self-sustaining business that's great, but they don't have to own the club. Their remuneration can be tied to performance if that's what they desire. There is nothing stopping the club going out 'to the market' and finding a great CEO, we just don't need to hand him/her the keys to Ibrox.

So EPL and the SFL aren't paying corporation tax either then? I wasn't having a dig at you I just wondered if you knew. Actually it's nothing like the MPs expenses story but I understand the point you're trying to make. It's a bit more like a Chamber of Commerce or a trade body like SNIPEF Training where the company structure is limited by guarantee but the 'company' is not there to make a profit but to help its members. But you are right to point it out, the taxman might well feel multi-million pound TV and sponsorship deals for professional football clubs isn't the same as providing examinations for plumbers.

I assume the English Premier League don't pay corporation tax currently, or indeed the SFL? I mean it's an interesting point and worth raising, but if it is how 'leagues' are commercially set-up I'm not sure it takes us much further forward.

King's clearly a smart guy and I'd suggest he's not above the odd political game or two. That reads like a 'make me an offer I can't refuse' piece; remind Green and co he's still about, that he's now free to invest and again and that he's minded too, just not quite yet. He's dangling a big juicy worm in front of Green and seeing if he'll bite I think. I feel sorry for King, he lost serious money, but I'm not sure I want him back. The club should be self funding, rich benefactors should not be part of our future.

All the best Sandy.

I saw Peter McCloy, Stewart Kennedy and Nicky Walker play too. I actually think goalkeeper coaching at Rangers is something we don't give the club enough credit for, we're a genuine centre of excellence in that field over the last 20 years.

My point wasn't so much about the legality. I'm more intrigued about what message the club actually recognising him sends out (if it did indeed take legal action against him). I've only seen his website once and I didn't read this piece. From memory he positions himself as someone who speaks on legal matters from a position of knowledge as opposed to a standard blogger signing up to basic Wordpress and positioning himself as a fan with an opinion. By treating him as a 'threat' to be dealt with legally we bestow something on what he writes. It's always struck me that guys like this one, the Rangers Tax Case and the Phil 3 names bloke are simply dying to be taken seriously. They crave recognition and authority. in a way this is giving one of them just that. As I said at the beginning I'm not sure how I feel about it, it might just simply be the inevitable 'next step' of the internet.

Yeah, I understand the clamour to know their identity and if nothing else it gives credence to what they say. But if someone chooses to be anonymous, for whatever reason, naming them publicly is a dangerous game.

But not here unless your parents had a wicked sense of humour! So do I, but I'd be less comfortable with it on here or Rangersmedia for example, or my job for that matter.

If the BBC call Lord McAlpine a pedophile it is very different from you saying it to your next door neighbour or indeed posting it on here. So yes, the proportion of the population who are exposed to it does make a difference. If this is true then the club have raised this guy's profile hugely, they've legitimised him by publicly saying it matters what he thinks and says about us. We have then elevated his position from obscure blogger. If this is true we've made him a story when currently most people have never heard of this guy or anything he's ever written. I don't know what he wrote, do you?

It's an interesting day for the internet it seems. How would everyone on here feel if their names and occupations were made public on Celtic supporter messageboards? I always admired Andy Steel on here for posting under his real name, Frankie for similar reasons.

Was it liable? I didn't read the piece in question, what did it say? I guess they should ignore it for the same reason I expect Ally McCoist to not to take legal action against you or me if we call him inept, clueless or lacking the ability to be Rangers manager. It's the internet and we're not being paid for our views, indeed we're not qualified in anyway to pass them. As I said I don't know how I feel about it. It legitimises the guy, perhaps that was inevitable eventually. From memory the guy in question kind of sets himself up as a professional lawyer dispensing views influenced by his legal experience. That does make him different from anonymous people posting on a messageboard after a defeat.

This is an interesting development and I'm not sure how I feel about it. For a start it kind of legitimises the fellow McConville, who until now was an obscure Rangers obsessed blogger. Had we served an injunction on an established mainstream media outlet (and maybe we still will) that would be one thing but guys like McConville and indeed Leggat are the electronic version of a fanzine. I'm surprised the club feels they need to do this. That's either an increasing acceptance and awareness of the power of 'bloggers' and their role influencing the media today, an over-reaction by the club or a further attempt to 'play to the gallery' by Rangers directors.

What Bee Gees soundtrack? I agree with everything else though.

"It’s a heavy jersey, the Rangers shirt". Nice line Tommy!

Tiger Tim was prone to gaffs, I once heard him play 'Friggin in the Riggin' by The Sex Pistols on the Radio Clyde 70s show, the song was half way through before he pulled it and spent the rest of the programme apologising for it claiming he'd never heard it before. Aye right, Tiger.

It was definitely before McCann but the reasons for his dismissal might be right.

It was pre-Fergus McCann days, I don't even remember what had happened, we might have lost in Europe or something and he played a tune or made a quip about it at the next Celtic home game and was publicly rebuked and then sacked by their board. It was fairly big news at the time, if nothing else I think most people thought it was overkill by the Celtic board who were very unpopular with their support and the media in general at the time. As a fan of the Untied Shoelaces Show I always struggled with Tim Stevens working at Parkhead, but what are you going to do after the tigers gone?

Hibs are denying it was this he was binned for, rather for playing a song with swearing in it on 'Hibs Kids Day' which conjures up some disturbing images in itself. The song apparently was by Green Day, surely a sacking offence on its own!