Jump to content

 

 

barca72

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,356

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 Content Type 

Everything posted by barca72

  1. barca72
    Maybe you are missing the point. Could it not be that Ally is talking this guy up to give him a chance at employment elsewhere? Respect for a fellow professional, etc? Ally knows there are other positions needing strenghtened before a GK.
  2. barca72
    What's the matter with you? A guy is shot and is critically injured and all you want to talk about is the game. Are you a football fan or something?
  3. barca72
    That's the first time I've watched a game in the last while and thought that we played not bad, especially in the first half. Before the Simonsen error, however, most of the talk was that we were holding our own but not really stepping up a gear. I agree that there are a few guys that need cleaned out and others brought in, but from where and for how much? I disagreed with Ally taking off young Aird, unless he had some kind of injury, because he was our best pace and width. One guy who did surprise was Peralta, for once he looked like he wanted it. I wonder if he took the chance to showcase himself against top flight opposition. At least we were left with a better taste in our mouths this week than we were last week, in that they did play with effort today for a while. Unfortunately, Dun. Utd. were there for the taking and we couldn't do it.
  4. barca72

    Club Statement

    barca72 replied to Zappa's topic in Rangers Chat

    If we are to believe Richard Wilson's article then King has the board dead to rights. They lied again. I agree that no matter what else they do, they must at least release the review results, and it better be convincing one way or another. http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/26959101 From para. 5 ... "... Dave King, who wants to invest in the club, the Ibrox board had agreed to complete the business review being undertaken by chief executive Graham Wallace before the season ticket renewal process. King will consider the launch as a breach of that agreement and is likely to respond firmly."
  5. barca72
    Shit-stirring article. We are quite capable of handling it ourselves internally. We do not need another mhedia inspired meltdown.
  6. barca72
    FFS, we lost a game of football, the sun will rise tomorrow.
  7. barca72
    I have deliberately not come on to the forum until late tonight, because I had anticipated a lot of over the top vitriol from posters about today's performance and the inevitable Ally must go shouts. I'm used to it now and although I don't like it, I just let the vicious tit for tat pass on by most of the time. I assume this unwanted divisiveness comes from either a deep passion for the club or out and out ignorance. Either way it is destructive and in that I can agree with D'Art. He is right when he says that this 'consistent inconsistency' is debilitating. It must stop before posters of such high grade desert us forever. Take a rest D'Art, then reconsider, please.
  8. barca72
    There was no pyro stuff, I take it?
  9. barca72
    Does that mean we should stay positive for tomorrow? Nighty, night munchkin !!!
  10. barca72
    This is not about fantasy, bud. This is realism. Rangers are in a cup final. Two years ago today I would have said thank you. If you and your mate think that in every post you make you should decry our team for not playing like CL champions, go ahead. For me, I'm satisfied to make progress and look forward to any piece of success however it comes. Do I like how we have played every game in the last two years? No I don't, but we are alive and heading upwards and onwards. p.s. I hope your boy enjoys his Xmas.
  11. barca72
    Well I don't know about you, bud, but I'm buzzing. Can't wait for tomorrow, reserve team or not. I hope the choir is loud and proud.
  12. barca72
    I agree with BH from a competitive standpoint. I don't think we will see CL type football but it will be the most contested league in Scottish football. There again we may make a few astute buys and outstrip the opposition by 30+ points again. Only problem is where is the money going to come from with this board?
  13. barca72
    I don't know if you can entirely blame the Rangers' fans for this ban. I agree they are numpties for using the flares, but there is history with the Police actions in this area. That is not to say that there is any difference between our numpties and their numpties. http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer/st-johnstone-lift-ban-on-flags-and-banners-for-celtic-game-1.1637335 St Johnstone lift ban on flags and banners for Celtic game Move was put in place in bid to stop pyrotechnics entering ground http://www.irishtimes.com/polopoly_fs/1.1637333.1387888751!/image/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/box_620_330/image.jpg Celtic fans throw flares on to the pitch before the Scottish Premiership match at Fir Park, Motherwell. Photograph: Jeff Holmes/PA Topics:SportSoccerMore Topics Tue, Dec 24, 2013, 12:39 First published: Tue, Dec 24, 2013, 12:39 More Sharing ServicesSt Johnstone have announced that the ban on flags and banners at their St Stephen’s Day clash with Celtic has been lifted. Celtic prematurely made the same announcement on Monday following a major misunderstanding after the ban was announced 24 hours earlier, but the Perth club have now confirmed that police have allowed a relaxation for the McDiarmid Park encounter. A statement from St Johnstone read: “Further discussion has today taken place between all parties and a request from the clubs made to Police Scotland that the ban be lifted has been accepted. “Safety remains of paramount importance to both clubs and the match will be managed with this in mind and with Police Scotland having reviewed this policy, the two clubs are now putting their faith in all supporters that they shall support their respective teams in a manner which befits what should be a great game of football on a special date in the football calendar.” The ban was initially imposed in a bid to prevent fans using flags to hide the use of pyrotechnics. Celtic admitted they had jumped the gun with their statement on Monday but they welcomed the confirmation of the decision. In a statement, the club said: “For clarity, Celtic Football Club has received confirmation that flags and banners will now be permitted at the match against St Johnstone on Boxing Day. “Last week, Celtic Football Club noted the advice given by local police regarding safety, flags and banners at the match. “We acknowledge we had not received final confirmation yesterday in terms of a change. However, we are pleased, following consultation and discussion over the past couple of days, that the initial decision has been reviewed by the police and St Johnstone FC.” Police Scotland’s press office was unable to provide confirmation immediately after the clubs announced the decision.
  14. barca72
    Does that mean that there is no point in watching the game tomorrow?
  15. barca72
    Well, c'est la vie. If they do get saved this is probably the best place for them to be financially,with four games against us next season.
  16. barca72
    I think that's the first time I've fully agreed with RST. Good statement in support of the fans.
  17. barca72
    Probably has something to do with DU's twisted logic that Rangers' fans should not get any benefit from a neutral venue. Honestly, it would make you puke.
  18. barca72
    That was a better game report than the Record or Herald.
  19. barca72
    At 1-1 Chelsea looked comfortable. A disastrous defensive effort at a corner. I thought only the Rangers' defence could be that bad at a corner. Even then it looked klike Chelsea could score anytime. What an individual effort from that Pastore guy for the third goal from PSG. It was brilliant. That might prove to be just too much for Chelsea in the return leg.
  20. barca72
    Imagine, Celtic are enraged that someone (?) outwith themselves should deem that justice must be contemplated ... http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/468139/Celtic-fury-as-SFA-charge-singing-Leigh Celtic fury as SFA charge singing Leigh CELTIC last night hit out at the SFA after Leigh Griffiths was charged for mocking Hearts’ financial woes. By: Michael BailliePublished: Wed, April 2, 2014 The Hoops hitman has been issued with a notice of complaint by the SFA after clips of the former Hibs player singing about the Tynecastle’s club’s cash crisis prior to Sunday’s Edinburgh derby were posted on social network sites. Hampden powerbrokers have charged the 23-year-old with a breach of Disciplinary Rule 86: Not acting in the best interests of Association Football. But Premiership champions Celtic have fined the striker, above, who has apologised for his actions and Hearts have also accepted Celtic’s apology for their player’s behaviour. The player publicly apologised for his actions. Celtic have fined the player and the club has also apologised to Hearts Celtic statement The Hoops believe the matter should now be closed and no further action is needed. But Griffiths could face a ban when he appears before a Judicial Panel at Hampden on Thursday, April 24. A Celtic statement read: “The SFA served a notice of complaint on Leigh Griffiths, alleging a breach of disciplinary rule 86 – not acting in the best interests of Association Football, by singing in public about Heart of Midlothian FC in administration. “Following the incident, the player publicly apologised for his actions. Celtic have fined the player and the club has also apologised to Hearts, an apology which they have accepted. Therefore, the club feels there is no need for any further action, and this is something which we will defend.” Hearts boss Gary Locke was questioned about the video and said: “I haven’t seen it. According to reports I’ve heard he is not a very good singer.”
  21. barca72
    Today's blog from Vanguard Bears ... http://vanguardbears.co.uk/ Get Your Hands Away From The Till! Written by: Nineteen Seventy-Two Tuesday, 1st April 2014 It's always interesting to see the response when Vanguard Bears are forced to reluctantly challenge unethical behaviour by a very small number of prominent Rangers fans' "representatives". Our two recent articles about RFFF funds have irked some on the RFFF committee, and resulted in a number of venomous attacks on our site on Twitter, Facebook and Follow Follow. This is not surprising from these individuals, who are showing disrespect and disdain for Rangers fans who made sacrifices in the summer of 2012. One classic rant on the open forum Follow Follow by Paul Murray's chief propagandist on the site "Buster" this morning was epic in tone, anger and falsehoods. http://vanguardbears.co.uk/articleimg/buster.png A member of the RFFF committee then commented that the post above was "pretty accurate". http://vanguardbears.co.uk/articleimg/waltersboy.png Notably, no one from the RFFF has confirmed why they made a statement suggesting fans should be polled on whether Craig Houston should receive support from the RFFF after Houston had resolved differences with Sandy Easdale. •Note that no-one has confirmed who on the committee made the suggestion •Note that no-one has recognised or commented on the risk of an unsuccessful conclusion to the HMRC UTTT appeal – and who would fund any legal fight to maintain Rangers proud history against any subsequent SPFL or SFA action •Note that no-one has satisfactorily explained why your money should be used to fund a (now mitigated) legal fight between Craig Houston and Sandy Easdale, and why it would benefit Rangers FC •Note that neither Craig Houston or Chris Graham have denied being wined and dined by the Murrays at Fratelli Sarti in Glasgow city centre We asked yesterday if the RFFF, or prominent fans representatives associated to them can be trusted. We'd suggest that the reaction of anger, deflection and attack to our article, rather than a measured response explaining any of the points above, is damning. A close look at any of our front page articles in recent months will confirm that: a) We have zero interest in VB representation within the club or in the boardroom, never have had and never will. Quite simply, this means that the opinion of Paul Murray, or Dave King, or the Scottish media is irrelevant. b) We have NEVER had any dialogue or instruction from Jack Irvine, or any of the current board of Rangers at club or PLC level. We take instruction from no one, unlike representatives named in yesterday's article who remain in dialogue with Paul and Malcolm Murray. Far be it from us to suggest that those taking instruction from Paul and Malcolm Murray are useful idiots. Useless may be more accurate. c) Our Meeting with Brian Stockbridge and Jim Hannah was documented on our site and distributed to our members, and comprised of a number of questions to Stockbridge about the future of the club. Our requests prior to the AGM for dialogue from Paul Murray were ignored. For avoidance of doubt, VB stated at the meeting that Jack Irvine should be removed immediately. d) VB asking reasonable questions about the custodianship of Rangers' fans money results in abuse, lies and falsehoods about our site and our members. We'll leave you to decide what is and isn't aggressive about that chain of events. e) Our stance on the RFFF is very simple – the money should be protected in order that Rangers history can be protected. Should the HMRC appeal be successful then these funds may well be needed for any legal challenge that may arise with the SFA or SPFL. If the appeal fails, then the funds should be utilised to enhance Rangers' future opportunities, and these opportunities should be of tangible and provable direct benefit to Rangers FC. f) Rangers' history and future is Vanguard Bears' upmost priority at all times. Rangers should be managed properly and with integrity, which is why we continue to ask that the club board communicate to the Rangers support, and we expect the upmost integrity too, from supporters representatives. That includes all named in yesterday's article. To date, they are falling short of the expected behaviours for representatives of the Rangers support.
  22. barca72
    I was going to let this pass but you keep making stuff up. How the RFFF committee was formed I'm not sure, whether it was by invite, acclimation or what. They don't issue many statements so we can't ask them. Narsa executive on the other hand were democratically elected by representatives of each RSC. Each representative knows the mood and instructions of his/her own RSC and vote accordingly. As in any organization the executive are then expected to deal with and annunciate on a given situation without taking a vote of the entire membership. If the membership do not like what the executive have done they are free to vote them out at the next AGM. This ensures that the executive attempt to perform their duties with a degree of responsibility. There are regular updates issued to the membership as regards the goings on. I have never, ever heard of any members being threatened or coerced in any way. In the greatest majority of cases the actions taken by the executive are mutually beneficial to both Rangers and the membership. In this case of the RFFF, I believe the executive moved on their own because of time restraints. As many posters have stated, the motion proposed by the RFFF committee to assist Mr. Houston was in itself wrong. Further, I sense that the general feeling is that the RFFF committee would have a hard time contacting the original contributors to the fund, ergo they would end up making the decision on their own proposal by themselves. This second action would be unacceptable to the NARSA executive and if the forums are any indication, to the Rangers' support in general.
  23. barca72
    That's a pretty serious allegation. By whom were they threatened, the executive?
  24. barca72
    Where are you getting this information from? I am a member of NARSA, and no one has informed me that I will be banished or otherwise. In fact there are no rumblings at all.
  25. barca72
    You know, in the summer of 2012 I wanted to see Hearts punished like the rest of them. However, now that Romanov is out of the picture I feel that the majority of their fans are just like ours and if they get relegated and some kind of a point penalty, that would satisy me.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.