Juancornetto

Best use of smiley's in a thread award 2014, goes to.......

Zappa!

I'm sure he'll be fondly remembered by the Celtic family for his focus on Rangers.

Candlelight vigil anyone?

A man who used his last months on earth to sink the boot into a supposedly dead football club.

Did he have an Elvis costume on at the time of the attack?

Strange in what way? Point me to where I stated anything which suggested that I wasn't aware of what King's plans entailed.

 

This sorry saga has produced more than enough spin to last a hundred lifetimes. That remains true even if it is coming from 'the good guy' and his followers.

"It is a bid for a majority share, and without that being made available to him, the life-saving will not come from him."

Were you implying that somehow DK should be on hand to deliver life saving funding without receiving the keys to the shop in return? If I've picked you up wrong I'll withdraw the comment.

That stance was needed a long time before now.

 

Also, can we please desist from perpetuating this idea that King is offering a loan. It is a bid for a majority share, and without that being made available to him, the life-saving will not come from him.

That's a strange angle to draw from it. King has been waiting in the wings until such time as the clowns in charge need bailed out to the extent they do now. His (and the other high net worth individuals) entire strategy has been to get control and I can't see why anybody would think it might not be. What would be the point of plowing several million in just to prop up a rogue regime?

What sort of investment would they need to sustain this and actually win the title? It's only a matter of time before Celtic go on a run, as they always do, they will improve but can Accies keep this great run going? I would love it obviously but i am not so sure.

 

In fact, i would loan them Boyd for 6 months. He is wasted here, a guy like him could be the difference.

Controversial!

Talks a good game Lenny but when the pressure's on he somehow manages to pile the pressure on to his players and they under perform. Bolton to get relegated is now 13/10 at the bookies....worth a punt.

Done.

Nosotros somos la gente!

I was sure I had already sorted my payment but it seems not... Think Alzheimers is setting in.

Will log in and send it in the morning BH.

I am the 3%!

You've got to take your hat off to him, he's scammed a first class living for years and gotten away with it.

So far....

It doesn't help zappa when posters from other forums start threads or arguements then run back to there favourite site and bitch like old women , just saying

There's other Rangers forums?

Is there any good reason to believe that this didn't happen?

Exactly.

I'd put my house on there being a large sum of money finding it's way to Mr C Green from Mr M Ashley for an obscure business transaction. All conjecture of course.

I have a feeling that Mike Ashley fancies a bit of the Old Firm glamour. I wouldn't be surprised if he ups his stake and tries to recreate the Old Firm of old. The merchandising opportunity in itself is considerable and with BT Sport a UK wide (and then worldwide) audience is there to be exploited. Scottish Football is irrelevant but that fixture does grip people with no connection to either team.

I could be wrong and it'll be an omni-shambles of epic proportions and Celtic will trounce is for years to come.

The thing is they SHOULD be way, way, way ahead of us in all departments and they aren't. They've had a free go at the title for three years, they've had guaranteed Europe until Xmas every year basically and they've bought and sold well in the transfer market.

If Rangers were to beat them there would be a mutiny on Kerrydale Street of previously unheard of proportions. Nuclear Timplosion.

I had the misfortune to have to listen to OTB a couple of weeks ago (I was getting a lift so couldn't turn off the radio) and he was announcing that the new 101 number was being introduced to replce 999 which was being phased out. The reason he gave was that 101 was quicker to dial than 999.

 

Far be it from me to defend Cosgrove's honour but he's basically correct. It's not about the physical time it takes to push a digit 3 times or push 2 in close succession, it's the digital dialling and connection time that makes it quicker to dial 101 than 999. The former requires only 2 pulses and the latter requires 27.

He's still a dick of course.

It was probably quite easy to hack the VB Twitter account... I'd guess hatedbutrated was the password.

I never said that 45% of votes were. You did notice me saying "in the past month or so"?

 

However I do think that a percentage of those who made up their minds late did so based on momentum and without properly considering the pros and cons.

 

Oh, another example of someone voting yes was because they didn't like the "better together" rep that appeared at their door. Voting to separate the country because of one random person at their door?

Funny, most No voters I spoke to cited Alex Salmond as the reason they were voting that way. I don't mean one example, I mean thousands, probably tens of thousands. As you say, there are a lot of gullible people out there.

Seriously? Just because you did that doesn't mean others did.

 

I had people telling me on facebook that their children's friends were voting yes because of English football fans, ffs.

 

Your conclusion doesn't stack up for me given the demographics of voting,

 

Over the past few years, I've noticed that members of certain Rangers websites can get entrenched in their views very quickly over certain issues and it seems their views are formed because of the website they are a member of, and it borders on hysteria (on both sides). I think something similar happened over the past month or so.

The idea that 45% of votes were made because of some kind of mass hysteria is laughable. Lots of people voted for lots of different reasons and to say otherwise is rather naive. By your logic the other 55% of votes were cast with absolute cast iron logic and by on the ball politicos....both positions are equally without basis.

I am just a wee bit surprised why folk like yourself Bearger would choose to declare your voting intentions. Many considered that this was something that should remain a private matter.

That's what I was thinking too, especially with regard to Gers fans who regularly use social media sites.

 

Why would you announce which way you're voting on those social media platforms if you know it's a touchy subject amongst many Rangers supporters and something you're quite likely to get some abuse for?

 

Most of us know there's a fair number of our supporters with quite extreme views and not afraid to voice them on those social media sites, so if you declared yourself as a 'YES' voter on them, I think you pretty much knew what was going to happen.

So as not to upset the supporters with "quite extreme views" you should keep your mouth shut? Are you both really saying what I think you're saying? Deary me.

There is an element of the Rangers support which struggles to articulate itself in song without mentioning Bobby Sands. There is another element - it could even be the same one - which is vehemently behind the Union but in such an uncouth way that it makes it seem like a narrow place - a place not to be.

 

Like it or not, just as the Celtic support lives with a sinister hardcore element in its ranks, so do we, but this is not unique.

 

Within the Scottish nationalist camp there is enough anti-English bigotry to refloat the Titanic, but decent people have still been attracted to the concept and they often delude themselves that they are part of something fresh and hopeful when they are actually part of a pillar of dark-hearted intolerance.

 

Rangers and Celtic still have to evolve and change some of their ways, but with enough good influences to the fore, it can be done. Within Scottish nationalism, though, I'm not so optimistic.

 

Sectarianism is evil - we keep hearing - but nationalism is the ultimate in sectarianism. It is the capital of intolerance and narrow-mindedness - the polar opposite of freedom and inclusivity.

Scottish Nationalism itself has been infiltrated and possibly even hijacked by those who only want to see the end of Great Britain rather than the majority of people who like me simply want to see a better, fairer Scotland. The majority of Yes voters that I know, friends and family among them were in it for similar reasons. Inclusiveness, tolerance and a desire for self determination.

Putting the sectarian divide aside for the moment, Scotland is a very tolerant country. We have a large Asian population, a growing Somali, Sudanese, West African and Eastern European population and by and large it's a safe place for them to live and work. Contrast with a UK Govt under assault from UKIP, the far right and extremists like Britain First etc. The SDL model themselves on their southern big brother and we got a snapshot of their intolerant form of Unionism last week.

People like myself? Fancy explaining yourself on that one? Please bear in mind that you will also be denigrating the characters of the many thousands of Rangers men who have held similar views over the years.

 

The Rangers support has always had a huge following from the people of Ulster, whether it was from those still living there, or the many who moved to Scotland for work, especially in engineering and shipbuilding in the areas around Ibrox. Rangers were 'chosen' to be the Protestant team to rival the emergence of the RC team operating out of the East.

 

Many of those who arrived were Orangemen and links were formed between the support and the club, especially under the tenure of Sir John Ure Primrose, a man who was very much a prominent and outspoken Unionist when the Home Rule debate was raging.

 

There was certainly a direct link between the club and the Orange Order from at least the 1950s until 1997 when Sir David Murray put an end to the annual church service being held in the stadium. This lead to the Order relinquishing long-held shares that it had in the club.

I assume from your posts that you either are an active Orangemen or at least have sympathy for their "cause". That being the case I'm more than happy to denigrate your character because quite simply it is a stain on the club and support. It may be an old stain and have been tolerated far more in bygone days of yore but the harsh reality is that it is irrelevant to the football club and is driving people like me away and as I mentioned it is likely to deter a whole new generation of supporters from our club. An organisation which holds a victory in a religious battle 324 years ago as it's central theme should be mocked not respected.

You seem to be lumping stuff like the respectful singing of GSTQ at games with the neds running around George Square. Are we really allowing neds to dictate what we are and what we are not?

 

Are you suggesting that everyone who does fall into your notions is unreasonable?

 

 

Agreed.

 

 

 

Do you mean that we should not take Union Jacks to the game? You're proposing that we have no national flags (UJs or saltires) on our strips or in the stands? We take down the picture of Queen from the dressing room? We stop the Loving Cup ceremony?

 

What you are proposing is likely to cause bigger splits in the support than anything we've seen up until now, and I don't see that much of what you seen to be having a go at is "intolerance, negative affiliations and polarizing attitudes". Showing support for the no vote is not intolerant or negative, for example.

 

I'm certainly not in favour of the club giving up its links.

Firstly, I said Loyalist symbolism which in my mind is distinct from Unionism. I'm certainly not advocating removal of Union flags etc because in itself there is nothing wrong with being a proud British club. I still believe Rangers to be the quintessential British club in the same way Jaguar is a quintessential British car maker and Harrod's to be a quintessentially British store. You get the picture.

Secondly, support for the No vote is a political choice. It has absolutely nothing to do with Rangers and those who engaged in telling people like me where they could stick their view created division. Lastly, I've yet to be convinced of any link between Rangers Football Club itself and the political institutions that people keep telling me are part of it's history. The fans have imposed those links, whether that be Northern Irish supporters using Rangers as the anti-thesis to their enemies use of Celtic in the same way.

You could also simply do what you want to do, whilst affording others the same opportunity. Just a thought.

 

Whether you like it or not, Rangers, through both it's fans and it's history, are linked with some areas of society which make you squeamish. Deal with it however you wish, but the whining and bleating you did in the OP won't do you many favours.

Rangers are only linked with areas of society because people like yourself continue to be apologists for them. Tell me exactly what about Rangers history links it to King Billy please?