barca72

I thought that until I watched them last night. Their defence is definitely suspect if you go at them with a bit of pace, especially wide. Brown and Commons are just about done. Their offence when it comes forward looks not bad but with Stokes and Griffiths their finishing was poor. As for the goalie that trained with us, they can keep him. Even Simmo is better. They are there for the taking, I'm just not sure how our tactical geniuses will go about it.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-30242028

Sp*v-speak !!!

Legia Warsaw won their group. I wonder what the chances are of 2nd place C1888c being drawn against them. It is a delicious thought.

I agree with your premise but because of the lack of communication and information from RFFF, do you think they might open an account offshore?

Is this our reply when anybody asks us why we sing 'The Billy Boys' at the cup tie in January against them? http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer/international/solicitors-were-instructed-to-deny-video-showed-john-delaney-1.2014408 The video won't post with the article, so here is the utube link ... John Delaney ‘sorry’ if republican song caused offence FAI chief says singing recorded ‘in sly way’ and he does not ‘believe every lyric’ Video A video showing FAI chief executive John Delaney singing 'Joe McDonnell' by The Wolfe Tones. Football Association of Ireland chief executive John Delaney (right) has said he is sorry if his rendition of the republican ballad Joe McDonnell offended anybody and that he does not support violence or believe in every lyric in the song. Steven Carroll Tue, Nov 25, 2014, 11:00 First published: Tue, Nov 25, 2014, 10:46 65 Football Association of Ireland chief executive John Delaney has said he is sorry if his rendition of the republican ballad Joe McDonnell offended anybody and that he does not support violence or believe every lyric in the song. Mr Delaney, filmed singing the song in a Dublin pub after Ireland beat the USA 4-1 last Tuesday, said the clip had been recorded in “a sly way” and that his performance was not for the public as he was not “on X-Factor or out in the Aviva”. Speaking on RTÉ’s Tubridy programme, Mr Delaney said he was from a nationalist background and that is grandfather had fought in the Civil War and War of Independence. “Joe McDonnell is a song that has been sang in my presence and I have chipped in and sang on a number of occasions in the past,” Mr Delaney said. “I’m not somebody who supports violence at all, in fact over a large number of years I have been working very closely on cross-border initiatives in football to break down barriers.” He said that “when you sing a song like that you don’t believe in every word”. “I sing a large number of songs, maybe five or six different ones, and it is normally done in a private way when there’s a singsong… Many of us have a nationalist background but are anti-violence. We also sing songs we don’t believe in every lyric on…there are many songs we all sing that we don’t believe in every lyric on. I don’t believe in many lyrics that are in that song.” Joe McDonnell is a song written from the perspective of an IRA member convicted of firearms offences in 1977 following a bomb attack on a furniture shop the previous year. McDonnell died on hunger strike in July 1981. Mr Delaney said that when you sang in a group you expected it to be kept in the group but that “unfortunately on occasions people use camera phones in a sly way and they try and tape it” and “then they try to make it something bigger than it is”. “What I will say is if the song offended anybody, of course I am sorry. That’s not in my nature to want to offend people but it was something I have sang or have sung in my presence in private in the past.” Tubridy asked Mr Delaney if he would like to hear a clip of himself singing the song, but he replied that it would be best if he asked him about the matter instead. “I think we’ll save the Irish public that,” he said. Tubridy said “the last thing he wanted to do” was “embarrass” Mr Delaney after he had agreed to come on air. The incident occurred in The Bath pub on the same night that the England football manager Roy Hodgson apologised “if anyone was offended” by the singing of anti-IRA songs by England fans at Celtic Park. Both England and Scotland are due to play against Ireland in Dublin next June.

I firmly believe that the culture of an institution is created and led by the executive management, not the operational management. How can we see, or feel, a strong leadership when we are represented by spectres?

Well I guess you have answered the questions I put to you in the previous post so I'll disengage now, bye.

And you could guarantee that we would be better served with one of these unknowns for that kind of money? You who have bemoaned the many millions that have been spent at the present time, and for which you say we have gone backwards. Would you trust the present board to do the selection?

We're not going to get anybody with a bit of form. Look at C1888c, even Keane said they didn't offer him enough money and they had to settle for Ronnie. If they dump Ally we'll end up with a no-name for sure. Look at the quality of the board then figure what level of coach we'll get. That's not to say that there are not some new and good coaches out there.

Peter, I think the English fans at the recent friendly at C1888c Park have given you your answer about you joining the EPL or any other English division ...

"Celtic also admitted at the AGM that the loss of Rangers from the Scottish Premiership has cost the club around £10m a year." That must have cost them dearly to admit that. However, it shows you the level they will stoop to before they will part with any money. Politicians indeed, it was their own people who started the cry for the 'living wage'.

Aahh, okay then.

Sorry, I omitted to list the link ... http://www.scribd.com/doc/93212354/SFA-Rangers-Note-of-Reasons

Well then, your guess is as good as mine as to why they waited for as long as they did before taking action.

It looks like all conspiracy theories are off. There was only one culprit - Whyte. As per usual if you are going to be a liar you better have a long memory. Imagine, it was a department in Ticketus that was responsible for Whyte being caught, probably earlier than he wanted. He was playing his dodgy little games with HMRC, and they swatted him down. They probably waited with their strategy until they became the major creditor to be able to control acceptance of the CVA. I believe that they can bring more severe laws against Whyte when a company goes into liquidation than they can if it is administration. I can't quote the law yet, but maybe I'll find it. It looks like Rangers the club, was just taken along for the ride in this little charlatan's plans. 52. That Mr Ken Olverman was the Financial Controller of Rangers FC prior to 6 May 2011 and continued in that role after that date. Prior to 6 May 2011 he had a very substantial responsibility for the management of the business administration of Rangers FC as previously explained. He had the responsibility of assimilating and compiling financial data for the information of directors and the preparing of financial reports, accounts and projections. He reported directly to Mr Donald McIntyre the Executive Finance Director. From 18 June 2011 his line manager was Mr Alistair Russell, the Chief Operations Officer and Executive Director. 55. That whereas prior to 6 May 2011 Mr Ken Olverman as Financial Controller of the ordinary business and trading operations of Rangers FC had substantial personal bank instrument signing authority and joint bank instrument signing authority with an Executive Director up to a value of £10,000, upon the implementation of the new policies he was instructed by Mr Craig Whyte that this previous bank authority was revoked and his limit for signing cheques etc was reduced to £100. 57. That Mr Ken Olverman was instructed that despite Mr Alistair Russell being the Chief Operations Officer and Executive Director, Mr Ken Olverman was to report directly to and take instructions directly from Mr Craig Whyte. He instructed that no one except Mr Craig Whyte should be provided with information by Mr Ken Olverman. Mr Craig Whyte emphasised to Mr Ken Olverman that no information about the finance or affairs of Rangers FC was to be provided to anyone not specifically approved by Mr Craig Whyte. Mr Ken Olverman was instructed that this prohibition also applied to directors of Rangers FC. Mr Ken Olverman was concerned about the policy in which he was instructed but implemented it. 58. That whereas prior to 6 May 2011 all of the directors of Rangers FC were provided by Mr Ken Olverman and other managers with briefing papers, management accounts, bank correspondence, financial accounts and projections and other materials to assist in the corporate governance of Rangers FC, after that date, on the instructions of Mr Craig Whyte, little or no information relating to the affairs of Rangers FC was made available to Mr David King (NonExecutive Director), Mr John McClelland, ( Non Executive Director) orMr John Greig ( Non Executive Director). Mr Ken Olverman was concerned about the policy in which he was instructed but implemented it. 60. That as Financial Controller and as the company officer directly involved in its trading and financial affairs, Mr Ken Olverman was aware at all times of the state of the bank operating accounts and other bank accounts of Rangers FC. At no time between 6 May 2011 and October 2011 was he aware of any sum of money being received from Mr Craig Whyte or any company with which Mr Craig Whyte had a connection, into any account of Rangers FC. 66. That shortly before 19 September 2011 Mr Ken Olverman was aware that Rangers FC were due to make a payment to HMRC in respect of PAYE income tax, National Insurance Contributions and Value added Tax. On making enquiry with Mr Craig Whyte about said payments, he was not authorised to make the payment which was therefore not paid on the due date. Upon his expressing his concern to Mr Craig Whyte, Mr Ken Olverman was in due course instructed that payments to HMRC were to be suspended and withheld. At the time of the first withheld payment in September 2011 Rangers FC’s financial situation was such that it could have made the payment due to HMRC. 67. That in the course of his subsequent communications with Mr Craig Whyte about the payment of these social taxes due to HMRC, Mr Craig Whyte stated to Mr Olverman that non payment of the sums due was a tactic or negotiating ploy intended to improve the position of Rangers FC in any attempted negotiation with HMRC of a settlement in “the Big Tax Case”. 68. That between September 2011 and February 2012 Rangers FC withheld in excess of £13,000,000 from HMRC due in respect of PAYE income tax, National Insurance Contributions and VAT. 74. That in the course of the latter part of August 2011 Mr Ken Olverman was contacted by two senior officials of the Customs and Excise (VAT)division of HMRC. Their enquiry was in relation to invoices which had been discovered in the business records of Ticketus which bore to have been raised by Rangers FC. The invoices related to sums of many millions of pounds and the VAT element in each of them had been the subject of offset by Ticketus in the submission of its VAT returns for the last period. Such was the size and impact of this offset of VAT which had been paid by Ticketus in respect of these invoices, that Ticketus had made a claim for payment of a substantial sum to it by HMRC by way of recovery of VAT paid. 75. That Mr Ken Olverman, the Financial Controller of Rangers FC had no knowledge of the existence of the invoices purportedly raised by Rangers FC. The raising of such invoices was a matter which fell squarely within his sphere of responsibility and it was inconceivable that such invoices for such large sums could be raised and issued from the finance office of Rangers FC without his knowledge. He had no knowledge of any agreement with Ticketus which might give rise to any invoice within the period concerned. He was unaware of any current transaction with Ticketus and knew that no sums of money had been received in recent times from Ticketus into any accounts of Rangers FC. 76. That in the course of September 2011 Mr Ken Olverman had sight of the said invoices. The nature and format of the invoices was entirely different to that of invoices raised within the finance office of Rangers FC. He was of the view that it appeared as though “Clip Art” computer processes had been involved in their creation. They did not appear to him to resemble any invoices he had ever seen issued by Rangers FC. Having sight of the invoices confirmed his view even further that they had not been created within the finance office of Rangers FC. 77. That Mr Ken Olverman believed from his conversations with the HMRC official that the invoices were the subject of further investigation. He accordingly took no further action in relation to the invoices. He did not make enquiry of Mr Craig Whyte nor of Mr Gary Withey. He did not inform any of the current directors of Rangers FC of the matter. 83. That in mid November 2011 Mr Ken Olverman realised that the revenue accounts of Rangers FC were significantly under pressure and that a situation was arising in which there was insufficient cash at hand or within its borrowing facilities to meet the obligations of Rangers FC. He reported the position to Mr Craig Whyte and Mr Gary Withey and requested that there be an injection of working capital. 83 That in later November 2011 a sum of some £200,000 was transferred from Messrs Collyer Bristow, Solicitors, London to the revenue accounts of Rangers FC, and the obligations of Rangers FC were met. 84 That in early December 2011 Mr Ken Olverman realised that there were insufficient funds within the revenue accounts of Rangers FC or within its borrowing facilities to meet its current liabilities including its wages and salaries due in December 2011. He contacted Mr Craig Whyte and Mr Gary Withey and advised them of the situation and advised them that a working capital injection of £800,000 was required to cover the obligations which required to be met. 85 That in the course of December 2011 a sum of £800,000 was transferred from Collyer Bristow , Solicitors, London, to the revenue accounts of Rangers FC. 86 That the two sums of £200,000 and £800,00 from Collyer Bristow, Solicitors, London, transferred to Rangers FC upon Mr Ken Olverman’s requests in November and December of 2011 comprise the only sums of capital paid into the revenue accounts of Rangers FC between 6 May 2011 and 6 March 2012. 87 That in recent years the wages and salaries payable by Rangers FC under the Pay As You Earn tax accounting scheme amounted to between £1,000,000 and £1,500.000 per month. This level of income tax liability arising from the wages and salaries continued during the period between 6 May 2011 and 6 March 2012. 88 That during that period between September and February, no payments were made by Rangers FC in respect of PAYE income tax, National Insurance Contributions and VAT. The non-payment was a deliberate act in furtherance of a decision of the Chairman and director of Rangers FC not to make payment as a negotiating tactic in the resolution of “the Big Tax Case”. 92 That on 14 February 2012 Rangers FC were placed in Administration by order of the Court of Session. Two insolvency practitioners from the firm of Duff and Phelps were appointed administrators. The principal Creditor was HMRC and sums owed to it were in excess of £13,000,000. 93 That in all material respects, between 6 May 2011 and 14 February 2012 Mr Craig Whyte was “the directing mind and will” of Rangers FC.

It's funny how the level of acrimony in Scottish football, sectarian or otherwise, has been greatly reduced since he left. Don't call us, we'll call you.

Back to top form, RPB. Ooffttt

Here's Merlin's latest ... https://billmcmurdo.wordpress.com/2014/11/20/a-risible-suggestion/ A Risible Suggestion November 20, 2014 / billmcmurdo I was amused to read the latest ramblings from Dave King and his claims that Sandy Easdale sought assurances that he and his brother James would not be culled following a King takeover at Ibrox. Let’s just say that it doesn’t sound like the Sandy Easdale I and others know. Unsurprisingly, there has been a swift reply to King’s latest fantasy instalment, which follows below:- Sandy Easdale’s spokesman Jack Irvine said:- 1.There was no conversation between him and Mike Ashley about being “looked after” or about Mr Ashley’’s “commercial rights”. 2.There has been no discussion between Mr Easdale with Mr King on the matters mentioned in his latest statement. 3.If Mr King has any proof of such a conversations and when and where they took place he should produce it and.. 4.If he is suggesting any improper conduct or motive he should make his position clear. 5.Anybody who knows Mr Easdale would find it risible that he would have adopted such a subservient tone with Mr King. Quite emphatic, you have to say. Regardless of your position in the whole matter – and I have to say King is shedding support at a dizzying rate now that Gers fans have seen through his love for a sound bite – this latest retort from South African based businessman is frankly ridiculous and startlingly childish. His pronouncements have also drawn the ire of Sir David Murray, who took a rare foray back into the limelight today to deliver some withering comments on Dave King’s credibility. Things have to be bad when SDM can have a pop at you over matters Rangers and people agree with him! There are also question marks over King’s status as a creditor to oldco and the possibility that he could have saved the club by accepting a CVA. It is quite complicated stuff and I might blog about it some time in the future. It is at the heart of his apparent rift with SDM and is another twist and turn in the ongoing Rangers saga. My own take is that Dave King is his own worst enemy and that he is still being championed by hardcore malcontents in the support base speaks volumes about both his and their intent. Dave King is yesterday’s news but he clearly is not going away quietly. However, with every churlish and petty statement he makes to a Rangers-hating media all too eager to lap up his vitriol, he is showing to all and sundry his true colours.

No I'm not saying that. I don't know why they were all let go for sure. I could speculate, but where is the value in that?

You done for the night? You made a post, #17, that was pure opinionated speculation and have been unable to back it up with fact. Let me draw your attention to a couple of posts you made back in September ... post #91 "You tried to twist words to suit your own agenda and made an utter arse of it. Try a mea culpa and get over it." post #93 "Take your medication and give your vivid imagination a rest." Perhaps you would like to take your own advice, now?

You are still not showing me how speculation becomes fact.

That's just deflection. You still haven't shown how speculation becomes fact.

It's not fact. You are not privy as to why she was let go. How do you know that Ashley is not satisfied with the way she handled the situation with the RFB?

That's speculation, I asked you how you would know that for sure. Your statement to BH was unequivocal.