Oleg_Mcnoleg
-
Posts
981 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by Oleg_Mcnoleg
-
Twitter is alive with hyperbole over it. 'Shocking', 'sickening' etc. What a lot of baws. It's slightly embarrassing for the organisers but that's it. Only shocking and sickening thing is what's happened to the club's finances in the last two years. One can disagree about whether he should have been allowed to finish before being given pelters (such as they were. Seems pretty mild) but have to say the size of a fuq I couldn't give over this is absolutely immense.
-
Quite. With feelings running so high, what the feck did they think would happen?
-
He's free, he's reputedly on relatively little money, and it's a one year deal with the possibility, but no guarantee, of renewal, we're potless and we'veno scouting system. It's not going to set the pulse rating but, unr the circumstances, I'm not too unhappy. If he stays fit, he'll do ok.
-
Having that!
-
We should have as many threads as possible devoted to this news.
-
Lennon resigns as Celtic manager
Oleg_Mcnoleg replied to Whosthedado's topic in General Football Chat
If Lawell follows him out, scottish football can start to clean itself up a bit. Can see why he's going though. It's only in Europe that he's going to get any credit and his club's downsizing so that's getting harder. -
This is getting pretty inane.
-
I'm afraid I'm finding this quite funny. Any normal person would just filter the messages out and let the thing run its course. Reckon he calls the polis when the local kids play knock and run on Easdale Towers?
-
Quite. The point is that we'd still be using it, we'd just not own it anymore. And the amount we paid to use it would be the same plus whatever mark-up whoever bought it charged. Sale and leaseback will provide a short-term injection of cash followed by increased out-goings thereafter. We can argue the toss about youth development and whether it's good enough (it's not but then the expectations of it are over-inflated too). But it's a first team training ground and club HQ as well. And none of this discussion is in the context of some overhaul of training or development. It's an attempt to cash in in the short term and is a fucking dreadful idea. Stadium next...
-
If there are any, I suspect it's simply because of where it originates from. I'd hope that even the most fervent 'back-the -boarders, would have their spider senses tingling if the fucking training ground and stadium were sold and leased back.
-
I signed. Can't see why anyone with the club's interests at heart wouldn't
-
-
-
Well given that their press notice says nothing about what questions were asked or what answers given, it's impossible to judge whether they can justify the seemingly unconditional support given to the board. If they want to keep that information to their members then that's up to them. But they can't expect anyone else to agree with them.
-
Supporters Direct chief calls on Rangers fans to unite...
Oleg_Mcnoleg replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
I can see that the Trust's remit has expanded in ways that haven't pleased everyone. But it was set up specifically to promote fan ownership, wasn't it? So we come back to the issue of the baggage it now seems to come with and the perceived need for a 'neutral', baggage-free vehicle to achieve the same goal. Again, fair enough. But if it's successful, we're still going to have the same divisions over the club. But they'll be within the group rather than/as well as on the message boards/twitter. Stances on, for eg, board members will need to be taken. Hope I'm making sense: genuinely trying to work out what's going on. Massively supportive of the concept of fan share ownership and have started researching coops etc. But I'm not cheerleading for the trust (not in it) nor FF (on since the old email forum but based in London and too much of a handwringer for 'the clique'). But they banned me from RM before I'd even managed to post!). -
Supporters Direct chief calls on Rangers fans to unite...
Oleg_Mcnoleg replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
I've come over from FF specifically to get a bit of clarity on this. It was in short supply over there. Implicit in what you've been saying seems to be that the RST 'brand' having too much baggage to act as a vehicle for fan share ownership. Or am I misreading it? Otherwise I can't see why any scheme couldn't have been accommodated under the RST. And if so, why not just say it? If the RST has become so divisive that too many won't touch it then so be it but surely it would be better to just come out and say it?