calscot

I think the point is not who is offended at the time of the song it's the perpetuation of the sentiment and the encouragement of Rangers fans to indulge in that sentiment. If you bring up kids encouraging them to call Jews, "kykes" all the time with antisemetic sentiment, they will likely grow up to be discriminatory against Jews. So the thinking by UEFA etc is that by allowing what is perceived as anti-Catholic/anti-Irish songs then they are allowing the encouragement of discriminatory feelings and actions in a section of the population. So it is not the audience at the time that is the concern.

The problem is the idiots who would insist on singing the line that is considered offensive. If our fans were clever enough the song would never have been banned as after warnings they should have changed the words. There are plenty of insults they could have chosen from to replace it that would be far from PC but not considered sectarian, but no, they think they can sing what they want... They banned the tackle from behind and most players were able to adapt to the new rule even if they didn't agree with it; our fans just don't know how to play to changes in the rules and so lose time after time - like a bunch of players who keep getting sent off.

Weird thing is that I am just reading "The art of war" although haven't got to that quote yet. There is a lot of wisdom in there that we could take heed from in our fight with the enemy. Thanks for that wise quote.

I think it will be quite funny if other teams do sell out Tannadice. Appart from Celtic, DU are the one team that have been somewhat insulated from the absence of Rangers due to the Dundee Derby, so now if other suffering clubs lose their own fans' money for them to attend a DU game they might start to see who the only beneficiaries are - DU and Celtic. There are so many chairmen and fans of the other clubs that have yet to figure out that they have been duped big time by these two.

Dundee United have been incredibly stupid in this as well as greedy and petty. You hold the match and sell what tickets you can. You can't force anyone to buy them and if they want to change the rules about giving only the proportion of the the ticket sales of the opposition fans from next season, we'll be more than happy with that. It's been obvious for a while that they have no idea about fairness and are incredibly self serving in their thoughts. How can a club like this have been allowed to vote on our SPL membership?

Oh yeah it also has wifi with automatic syncing.

Just notice there are new Android apps so that you can see calls and messages and talk via your headphones; and also another that gives weather forecasts. I need to get it all souped up...

I've got a Motorola Motactv watch which has GPS tracking, Bluetooth internet connection via your smartphone to sync with online software; 8GB mp3 player; connection with optional Heart rate monitor, speedo or cadence sensor, accelerometer that works as a pedometer and more for about £120. You can use it for cycling, running or walking and now golf. Came with phones, wrist strap and belt clip. Just bought a bike mount for £7.50 from Evans. Haven't really used all the features properly yet but it seems pretty good for the money. In fact after looking here: http://www.motorola.com/us/consumers/8GB-or-16GB-MOTOACTV/79070,en_US,pd.html I think I need to upgrade the software and learn how to use it more.

The problem with our signings in the summer was more to do with quantity than quality. We don't have an inexhaustible supply of kids up to the standard we need. Usually you're lucky to get one or two graduates of your youth system into your first team but the 3rd division has allowed us quite a few more - something like 10 which is usually unheard of. However, when you're playing five rookies at a time in every game and a couple more coming off the bench, you're hardly going to be Premiership or CL standard. There will be gaps in quality and quite a bit of inconsistency and some naivety against seasoned pros from a lower level. I still don't see how we can expect any kid from Murray Park to run rings round experienced pros off the bat. We have a bit of a paradox where people say they would like youth to have a chance and would be patient but then get torn into the manager and team when they are winning 7 games in a row and scoring 27 goals in the process. People are actualy expecting a midfield of three rookies (with two teenagers) and a young up and coming player to highly dominate games and play exhibition stuff. FFS give youth a chance! Central defence seems to be a big problem with injuries and we need definitely reinforcements there.

We only won 3-0? Must be Ally bashing time again...

I think most of the money will be probably be spent on upgrades on infrastructure or some-such investment in the facilities. These windfalls don't come along often and they have to spend them wisely on something that will benefit them for years to come.

Records are nice but if all you do is aim for them you'll not only be disappointed most of the time even when you do well, but you'll also risk sabotaging your real goals. I don't care one jot about the Gretna record, I just want to win the league. We have absolutely no idea how another manager would have done under the circumstances, so to say someone else would have done it is the usual glib, pseudo-psychic fiction dressed up as fact. I think we should leave that kind of stuff to you know who. Can you imagine an Olympic gold medal winner being slagged off for not breaking the world record...?

I still fail to see why they are angry at us and not HMRC and Lloyds bank. They seem angry about the unpaid debts but it's obvious we've been the victims here. Our club had about a maximum of £20m debt which was pretty manageable on a turnover of £50m and was being quickly paid off. Then HMRC put massive pressure on a made up debt of £75m and Lloyds bank put pressure on Murray to sell to a charlatan. That resulted in our new owner not paying taxes and our holding company being put into liquidation - again by HMRC using a made up debt to force this. We came out with another company and debt free but lost £30m of players, a European ban and were demoted to the 3rd division plus fines and other sanctions. How did we gain out of this? We've probably made a net £80m or more deficit. We didn't want what happened and were the biggest losers. How are we to blame? HMRC could have stopped anytime and been at least £30m better off and therefore so would the tax payer and all the creditors. Lloyds could have waited for their money which was a drop in the ocean compared to the rest of their debtors. They are really grasping at straws in trying to demonise us and weirdly are backing the very taxman that caused the problem and decimated the public purse. They are a very strange lot.

So you're saying that it's incredibly unusual for clubs to be run as profit making businesses with opportunities in only the biggest 2 out of 42 clubs in the country. Throughout their history those two clubs have generally not been run as a profit making machine so that makes it almost unheard of. Which pretty much shows that football clubs are nothing like other normal businesses. Celtic gave McCann a one off windfall in 94 and although that's happening to us now the scary thing is that the gravy train looks set to run for a while...

I thought that was what we were doing...

I don't think he's come in for the business side. He's come in to help steer the club in footballing matters. The guy loves the club, why wouldn't he? I would. It's still my club, my problem is where my money goes. I'd have no problem buying a season ticket if I was near enough - that's supporting the team. The share issue is supporting the board and I'm not sure I like the road they've taken.

I'm not pining for something else I'm showing a plausible scenario where the club could be saved without making a few people fabulously rich. The fact that they will make huge amounts shows that there was plenty of scope for someone far more benevolent. You can't argue something is normal and inevitable and then disparage a counter argument as "pining". I'm sorry it's not prevalent and not traditional for football to be a business opportunity. It might be becoming more that way but that will mostly be in the cash rich environment of the Premiership with some Championship wannabes. There are 42 Scottish clubs, how many have been used as business opportunities? Our investors are making more in a year than most clubs are worth. It's just taking advantage of a strong and large fanbase. How is that moot? You and others have been saying it's just like any other business and then add to why that does not ring true and then immediately call it moot. It's not moot, it's highly relevant.

Is there anyone not moving on? Surely it's still worthy of comment?

Possibly but for me, we needed a rich Rangers fan who could rescue the club like Green did and then sell the club to the fans for a fair amount while pocketing a million for his trouble. People are talking like a million is peanuts but it's not bad for a year's work for anyone. Most owners LOSE money in football - even look at Vlad and other SPL chairmen who are swapping debt for equity. Clubs are usually a labour of love, a rich man's hobby and they also bring you business outside of the game. You don't usually buy a classic car because you want to make money, you buy it to spend money on. If you're canny you might not hemorrhage money and might find ways of bringing some money in like Weddings. But who really respects those that buy classic cars to make huge amounts of money? But to get back to my point, a McCann type character could have spent 10m on the club and then sold it back to us for £11m. We also need investment but that could have been another share issue in a couple of years. I would forgo massive investments for a while for pure fan ownership. I would have bought into that. At the moment it seems I'm being offered someone elses get rich quick scheme - which is fine elsewhere, but this is a bit more like emotional blackmail. If I wasn't a supporter/fan, and this was another business, I wouldn't even consider investing, so comparing it as such is missing a huge point.

Yes, our directors wages are more like that of a middling Premiership team than what is basically the equivalent of a lower Championship team. BUT they also get millions of pounds worth of shares on top. Green will have 8.4% of the club for NO investment PLUS the wage. That could be £5m and I'll bet the Man U CEO doesn't get that.

I get what you're saying but I'm sure you would contradict yourself in an instant if we brought in players on 50k a year. The point is we NEED to pay that to get the quality of player due to market forces. As I said in a previous post, I don't think that applies to the board.

What you say seems like a good pitch for a bank but not a football club. This is a one time thing. I can understand a developer who buys a run down house at auction, does it up and sells for market value while making a substantial profit. However, this is more akin to them selling 20% to the previous people who rented the place and love their home, but charging them 40% of the market value and then continuing to charging them full rent.

Lots of people work hard but don't expect to walk away with up to £5m. I hate that argument - I remember seeing someone like Julia Roberts saying she worked her ass off for her millions. I'd like to see her work down a pit for a week for £500 and then say that again - not that I have ever done so. Has he worked hard enough to earn five times as much as your average person earns in a lifetime? I really don't think so.

I'm not sure what you mean by tuppence unless you are saying they doubled their money... They put in about 10m say. A return of 10% for all them in one year would be a good investment. However I'm saying the CEO should get 10% back. If they collectively made £5m that would be a great return. As I've said, I don't see football as somewhere that entrepreneurs should be making a killing - it's not buying something for a pound and selling it for two while giving good value for money, it's exploiting the hearts and souls of people.

Perhaps but I think those wages are premature. However, the thing that sticks in my craw is the millions in shares they will also be pocketing. It seem to me that their shares will be like quantitative easing by the Bank of England - printed without real investment backing and diluting the shares of the real investors. I'm all for 51% fan ownership but when it costs you more than 100% it's just never going to be an impact.