The Real PapaBear

A total fucking embarrassment. The depths to which our club has fallen have just reached a new low.

ahhh. Wee shame. Ach, well, never mind. Life goes on, eh?

Damn you, Moriarity! I am undone! Nah, seriously mate -said it before, will say it again. The SFA and SPL can go fuck themselves slowly in a sandpit. I would love for us to move to England and leave the rest of them to rot - but I don't see that as being contradictory to an Independence philosophy. Vindictive, petty and spiteful, yes. Hypocritical, no. These corrupt scumbags have only ever done us harm and were it not for the SFL, we'd be screwed, so afaiac they can gft. Rangers is not a public service, and far less important than healthcare, education or transport, so if we move elsewhere the only people who will suffer are the rats who tried to kill us. Scotland, as a country, won't be in the least bothered or affected by our playing in a different league and any income we generate will still go into the local economy; we'll still need pies, burgers, programmes, etc etc - it just won't go into the coffers of SPL clubs. And if the day comes when we do move, I would make a point of ensuring that we did everything we could do for the SFL - testimonials, pre-season friendlies etc - as a way of remembering who our friends were when we needed them.

If you remember the programme Blue Heaven that was on about 3 or 4 years ago, the dutch fella that was there under Dick told us exactly why Murray Park was failing; because the kids were being trained as footballers and not developed as people. When they hit the problems that young athletes face (family, school, money, confdence, whatever) , too many of these kids aren't able to handle them because their personal development is ignored. I worked for a while in one of Germany's elite sports academies - a 'Bundesleistungszentrum' - where priority number 1, 2 and 3 was the personal development of the child. Within that framework, their sporting ability was developed to its maximum, to the extent that these kids were generally competing for national and international titles. However, the philosophy was always that the kid could lose all interest or become injured or leave the academy for whatever reason, and it was the centre's responsibility to make sure they were able to make the transition into normal society seamlessly if that were to happen. Unlike MP, where if you don't make it, you're off to stack shelves in Asda because football is all you've ever known for 16 years and you're fit for nothing else.

ideology rather than reality? Really? The figures I quoted, from the UK govt, the (pre-SNP ) Scottish Government and other non SNP/independence sources *are* the reality. The only ideology on show here is your own, where everything you say comes from a pro-union standpoint. Your mind is made up already and you seem happy to dismiss any facts that don't support that position and make sweeping statements with little basis in fact. You ignore the fact that we pay more and owe less than the rest of the UK and yet still ask how we would pay for an infrastructure that you say we lack. In fact, Scotland, like the rest of the UK, has one of the world's most highly developed infrastructures - we don't lack anything needed to be independent. You ignore the fact that Scotland will be an exporter of energy for decades to come - irrespective of the territorial waters England stole under your unionist government - and that this industry, both carbon and renewable, will be a gold mine for a nation of 5 million. Christ, let's *give* England half the oil - we would still have far more than we need. And then, once we're free of them, we can start to implement economic policies that suit our economy rather than the economy of south-east england. For example, 15 years ago, we used to export more per head of population than either Japan or Germany. True; look it up. Then the 'boom' came and it was party time; the City of London was making billions every day. Problem was, that they were selling 'services' and they needed the Pound to be as strong as possible so that they could make as much profit as possible. We, in Scotland, however, were making 'things' to export (food, whisky, textiles, computers etc) so we needed a weaker pound to help our exports. Guess who got screwed on that one? Westminster allowed the pound to remain artificially strong for far too long. Result? Big banker's bonuses for them; job losses and factory closures for us. Our manufacturing is now only half of what it was 15 years ago because the economic policies followed by Westminster were aimed at the services sector of England's south east and ignored the manufacturing base of the rest of the UK. My conversion to the independence viewpoint comes as a result of looking at the facts and figures of the debate; it is a rational decision and nothing to do with ideology. You actually seem to agree with the basis and facts of most of the points I make, - "The facts and figures look great but they assume we can actually take everything that's rightfully ours." - but dismiss the idea that we, well, can actually take everything that's rightfully ours. You're right in one respect; my arguments are based on facts and figures and on the assumption that we will control what is ours and that international law will apply to us as it is applied to every other country. If, on the other hand, we are to be denied what is rightfully and legally our and if international law is to be flouted and ignored, then, yes, your argument is the one which would be correct.

1. The source was not reliable - he was talking unadulterated mince, if that's what he said. The City of London generates £40 billion profit; The entire Scottish financial services sector combined contributes £5 billion. One eigth of the size, and if Edinburgh is half of that, Edinburgh is one 16th of the size of London. Edinburgh has not declined to become 16 times smaller nor London become 16 times larger in the past 5 years. 2. The information on the subject is not sketchy, it is plentiful and easy to find. 3. Why are you talking about Glasgow? You claimed that Edinburgh was the financial capital of Europe and lost its top spot to London because of the crash. The current ownership of the bank which prints the notes becomes irrelevant after independence. We would have our own Central Bank, like every other independent country on earth. The money in would be printed by the Scottish central bank. Hopefully, however, we will be joining the Euro sooner rather than later and so the whole thing becomes moot. Well, I have some good news for you, the Scottish share of UK national debt represents 46.3% of Scottish GDP, compared to 52.9% of GDP for the whole of the UK. i.e. we owe less per person, as well as contributing more, per person. Our national debt would continue to fall as we would no longer be tied into criminally stupid and immoral foreign wars and we wouldn't have to continue to pay for the obscene waste of money that is Trident to name but two. Oh, they are accurate. The resources are not wonderous, they are natural and they are ours. 90% of gas production and almost 100% of oil production lies in Scottish waters, internationally recognised and agreed Scottish waters. The wind is ours and the damns in the highlands are ours - so, we can claim 100% of our own natural resources. We are already entirely energy self-sufficient and once wave and tidal power are fully developed we will be sitting on a second boom, even bigger than the first North Sea oil boom. I can understand the arguments for the union when presented from a cultural or philosophical point of view (disagree, but understand them) but there is no serious economic argument for staying in the union with England. At the very worst, we would find ourselves in the same economic situation we are in at the moment - but in all probability we would soon begin to resemble Norway, the other nation of 5 million on the other side of the North Sea, which is now just about the richest country on the planet, with the highest levels of public services and happiness levels of anywhere. Interesting. You're happy to stay in a union with people who you think would kill you to get our oil? Do I need to point out that it was the UK, Westminster controlled, HMRC that tried to kill us, that it was the UK, Westminster controlled, BBC that set the agenda and maintains that agenda against us and the UK Westminster controlled Lloyds that set the whole thing off in the first place? The establishment that you want to remain part of is the establishment that was largely responsible for the near destruction of the club.

yes, and all of them are cunts.

mate, that is so devoid of any reality, I don't know where to start. Edinburgh was never anywhere near the financial capital of Europe. London is 'the' world financial centre and has been for decades. It's like comparing Stoke City to Man Utd. in 2007 - before the crisis - Edinburgh was ranked 15th in the world, 6th in Europe and 2nd in the UK. in 2012 - after the crisis - Edinburgh was ranked 15th in the world, 6th in Europe and 2nd in the UK. London was first in the world. Of course we don't - because we're not independent yet. You can't have a monetary system with a moneary system. That's like saying we can't be independent because we don't yet have our own embassies or armed forces. Actually, they're not. A great number of the big businesses in Scotland are Scottish owned. But even if they were, you're saying that our businesses are all foreign or English owned and this is a reason to *stay* in the union that caused this? Our industrial base has been decimated and this is a reason to *stay* in the union that decimated it? Quite the reverse. The worst effects of the recession were avoided in Scotland because the Scottish government followed as different an economic course from Westminster as it could. The SG invested heavily in public infrastructure projects, keeping people in work and minimising public sector job losses where possible. Contrast and compare with torys in Westminster. The Herald, Scotsman, SMG? And this erosion of national identity is a reason to stay in the union that is causing it? So are all of Englands biggest clubs - and we have seen what a sorry state the SPL and SFA are in. So, if I can summarise your case for remaining in the union it is this: Everything in Scotland is shit: we're controlled and owned by English and foreigners: we're powerless and subjugated .....and the best thing for us to do is to stay in this union that has resulted in the way things are today. Here are a few *facts* to keep you going. We contribute more to the exchequer than we receive - we subsidise the UK. Scotch whisky alone accounts for 25% of *total* UK food and drink exports Scotland accounts for 50% of european oil production Oil has another 40 years at least to go before it runs out We will account for 20% of total european renewable energy production by the mid 2020s We have Europes 6th largest financial services industry.

My thinking about JC is that he has succeeded at every level he has worked at and there's nothing to suggest that he wouldn't succeed at Ibrox both in the league and in Europe. You won't know if you don't try. As for fresh ideas and modern methods, what I particularly like about the two Jimmies was that when they left Aberdeen (I think it was) they spent the next couple of months touring the top European clubs studying their set up and training methods and talking to the guys in the know.

deckchairs - rearranging - Titanic

We all know - well most of us do - that JC is a very good manager, but how do you know how good he could be with some serious money behind him? Why do you think that appointing him would show limited ambition?

Maybe one of the mods could put this in the Bluenose lounge? Because I'd love to know a) what infrastructure we are lacking and b) how having more money would make it impossible for us to build.

Her Majesty's Government.

and let's not forget the political element. The Yes campaign is picking up ground month by month, bit by bit, step by step. The No campaign will do *anything* - and I mean *anything* - to stop Scottish independence, because without North Sea Oil revenues, England is fucked. They can do without the 0.3% more in tax that we pay than we receive. Scotland: 8.6% population provides 9.6% tax revenue and receives 9.3% of UK expenditure. So, next time you get called a scrounger, living off the English teat, bear that in mind. We put in far more than we get out. Offer the carrot of playing in the English leagues and suddenly you have 100,000 No voters. Yes, it's simplistic, but for tens of thousands of people the welfare of their football club is of greater importance than the welfare of their country.

That's an outrageous thing to say UFC - by what criteria can Calderwood be called a muppet? Everywhere he's been he has exceeded expectations.

they're doing it because it fulfills two basic criteria: 1) and most importantly, it costs them nothing and 2) it's an empty gesture that makes them look good.

Carlsberg don't do sarcasm...but even if they did, they wouldn't beat that.

observing criminal law is a different kettle of fhish, though, - or is covering up child abuse a football, tax or civil matter?

aahhemm. Signing embargo, anyone?

How do you figure it could have been resurrected? It had debts it couldn't pay and assets that were sold off in a fire-sale to CG's consortium. The old company still has those debts and will have the debts until it is liquidated. There was never any way back for the oldco once the CVA was rejected.

And the L'Oreal "Hair Splitting" award for 2013 goes to.......BlueDell! Aye, ok. The old company still existed. True. As a sheet of paper. In a ring binder. In an office. Somewhere. Let me rephrase, "when the old company no longer *operated*, the documents became defunct..." There. That any better, Miss?

points 6 and 7 are incorrect. We were not 'demoted' into Div 3, nor were we 'banned' for 'failure to file unbroken accounts'. The club was transferred to a new company. The old company was the legal entity which had signed the documents, agreements, contracts, memberships etc. When the old company no longer existed, those documents etc became defunct, because the other parties to those documents no longer had a legal body to deal with. The SPL could have decided, as the SFA did (and UEFA and everyone else) that Rangers could continue in the league, as it was only the company which has been liquidated and not the club. Fhor Rheasons we all know, the ShPL decided to chuck us out and we had to apply for admission to the SFL. So we were not 'demoted' to the SFL3 - we were admitted. As for Europe, by definition, this new company cannot have 3 years of accounts to submit to UEFA, until a period 3 years has passed. So we weren't banned, we are simply ineligible to play in Europe.

A shady character, no doubt - but be fair to the guy, he never sank so low as to work for Harper Macleod

Whittaker and Naismith? C'mon the serbs!

my shout would be for the two Jimmies. Calderwood has experience and success at every level in Scotland; he's a thinker as well as a man manager and he's a bluenose.