Thinker

That's what he claims. Cynics would say he doesn't want to challenge the allegations because he'll just be found guilty. It provides a good argument for why you should always be present at inquests to plead your innocence.

I'm not going to give you pelters - I know where you're coming from. I'm glad CG has set a lot of people straight about certain aspects of what's happeneing - with regards to the "no SPL jurisdiction" argument I want to believe Charles has got an ace up his sleeve but I'm not convinced he does. It reminds me of when he said any player who didn't TUPE would be in breach of contract. It's entirely possible he could easily lose this argument and I don't know where it will leave us if he does...

It wouldn't surprise me if they tried, but unless they did extremely indirectly it would be the most blatant conflict of interests ever.

Agreed, the difference in process between stripping and fining is that with stripping they only have to declare it so for it to happen. If they fine us we can say, "We don't agree this is legal, you're not getting any money." and they'll have to take us to court if they want it. If they strip titles we can say, "We don't agree this is legal.", but we would have to take them to court to get it overturned...

I fully expect the SPL to respond tomorrow with a statement amounting to: "Aye we can so strip titles. We can do whatever we like. It's oor baw. etc."

Hard to believe this clown had the nerve to write this. Surely he can't actually believe it. It's a blatant attempt to turn the positive story of Rangers fans supporting their team through a crisis into a negative one. We don't show up out for oneupmanship, or to prove "we are the peepil" as he so ascerbically puts it. We show up to support our team in it's time of need. The story is doubly moronic in that, if he actually believes what he's written about Green's strategy, he's actually helping him by showing a bias against Rangers.

Good to see Leggo's still off the negativite, paranoid stuff. Ambition isn't just about who you play against - it's also about who you play alongside, and who you play in front of. He'll be on telly more often than he would have been otherwise, he'll get to play his home games in front of a packed European-standard stadium, and he'll have excellent training facilities at his disposal.

This again? A Belgium-Netherlands(-Luxembourg) league makes absolute sense. That's a smaller geographical area than that covered by many national leagues, transport betweem them is easy, the climate is the same, they all use the same currency, etc. Adding Scotland and Portugal into the mix is a different story entirely.

If Leggo has shifted his position on Green to "wait and see", that's still a massive climb down! He was calling him a "proven liar" and a "snake-oil salesman" just a couple of weeks ago. The rational position is to say the jury's still out on Green at the moment. It all looks good so far - but there's still a lot that's unclear about what's going on and who's involved.

I don't think it'll ever disappear completely, but surely it's realistic to think it could be controlled a bit more and reduced? All it would take is a bit more vigilance from the stewards.

Croneyism means "doing your mates favours" doesn't it? Jobs for the boys. (or bhoys in this case).

I was thinking of their habit of crying foul on others when I wrote that. All I meant was, maybe it's time for us to start putting more effort into bringing their antics to the attention of the police, UEFA, and the press in general. For the avoidance of doubt, yes, I agree that we as a club should crack down a bit more on the anti-social behaviour that a minority of our fans exhibit. I don't expect that it will stop the accusations flying in our direction though.

I think we're all a bit on edge and slightly paranoid at the moment -the conspiracy theories start to sound more and more plausible. However, I think it probably is true to say that a combination of "positive" discrimination and croneyism has lead to a bias in the media and, to an extent, the authorities.

Sorry if this sounds defeatist: Yes it would be good to clean up our image, but you will never get 100% of our support behaving themselves properly. Negative propogandists aren't interested in giving a balanced representation, and as long as one example is there that fits their story they'll use it. Sadly, we've reached a point were we have to stoop to their level and employ the same tactics against them that they use against us.

Absolutely. We (the people) have the right to boycott any organisation that pays, promotes or otherwise supports an individual who voices opinions which we strongly disagree with. You could argue that it's democracy in action. I'm still astounded that The Sun ever thought it was a good idea to serialise his nonsense.

Showing up for a game doesn't mean you accept the performance of the team. In fact, it's the perfect place to voice your objections. Turn up, support the club, and let the players know when they need to get their fingers out.

You're right, of course. I suppose, these days, the difference between the "90 minutes" and the rest of the week has blurred. There's so much TV coverage, and what isn't on telly ends up on youtube. Changed times... The bottom line is that (for better or for worse) FIFA and UEFA are are determined to separate "politics" and football. There's no point in arguing the toss with either of those two.

It's a good piece, but the problem is too complex to do justice in an article that size. Yes, some people feign being offended in order to get others into bother. Some pretend to be offended because they're sheep and feel they ought to be offended. But that doesn't mean everyone should be allowed to say and do anything they want. There is such a thing as offensive behaviour, and it has to be addressed and punished. The simple rule-of-thumb for me is to keep football separate from the other stuff. It's fine to hurl abuse at a player if they've cheated, or they're a traitor - e.g. footballing reasons, but (IMHO) it's not okay to slag them off for non-football related reasons (race, religion, nationality, orientation). And when it comes to songs; I want to sing about football when I'm at a game. Nothing more. Sorry if that sounds politically correct - it's intended to be politically neutral (like the game).

Life after death. (According to google translate).

I disagree with that statement. I didn't buy my season ticket because of, or despite, anything Green said. The uptake of STs increased simply because it became clear which league we were going to play in and what the price would be. I bought my ticket because the Club needs our support now more than ever. At the end of the day your choice is support the club, or starve the club. I like Green - he's thoroughly entertaining - but I still don't 100% trust him. His consortium may well end up taking a bigger chunk of what I've paid than I'd like - but to my mind that's better than me holding on to my money and the club getting nothing at all.

True, but publishing misinformation is harmful. It starts rumours and some readers who don't check the accuracy start believing the fairy tales. One of the toughest thing about this last year has been figuring out which out of the many hundreds of stories that circulate to take seriously. Which are the true warnings that have to be taken heed of, and which are scaremongering and malicious gossip... It's still happening, in fact. Of course, that's not just down to Leggo.

I daresay he is right occasionally - He's the boy who cried wolf though. If he just presented the facts as he found them instead of sensationalizing everything, people would pay more attention to him. IMHO he's the worst kind of journalist - one who seeks to influence rather than inform. He bends the facts to fit his message rather than basing his message on the facts.

I've always thought he seemed reasonably likeable off the court - normal, anyway. It's his on-court attitude that's put me off him. Generally he's too quick to start whinging, and looks ready to throw the towel in when things start to go against him. Having said that, the Olympic gold might change him for the better. He could also do with ditching his over-bearing maw.

Yeah' date=' I see what you're getting at. I don't feel England are [i']my [/i]team - but I don't hate them either. I generally want all the home nations to do okay. And I've actually got nothing against the Republic of Ireland as a team either, or their Irish fans. You should support the country you live in, that's fine - but we've become pariahs in Scotland and it's difficult to support the national side when the majority of other Scotland fans hate you. Basically, I feel like an outsider in international football - but it's not much of a loss since Scotland are rotten and never get to major finals these days anyway. It's got to the stage were I actually wish there was a permanent Team GB (that had Scottish representation). Not going to happen though.

It used to be the case (and not that long ago!) that you could simultaneously be proud to be Scottish and proud to be British without any conflict or controversy. That's how it still ought to be. It seems these days, though, that to be pro-Scottish you have to be anti-British. You could argue exactly why that might be the case for a long time.