ian1964

WALTER SMITH last night condemned as ââ?¬Å?dangerousââ?¬Â the decisions of the referee after Rangers won the Co-operative Insurance Cup final 2-1 at Hampden. A goal from Nikica Jelavic gave Smithââ?¬â?¢s side victory in extra time after Celticââ?¬â?¢s Joe Ledley had equalised Steven Davisââ?¬â?¢s opener, but the match included a major controversy when Craig Thomson, the match referee, awarded Rangers a penalty in the first half only to rescind it immediately. Thomson pointed straight away to the spot as Thomas Rogne, the Celtic defender, attempted to challenge Jelavic inside the box. Seconds later he had told players it was not a penalty and booked the Rangers striker for diving. Thomson also turned down a Celtic appeal for a penalty when Mark Wilson fell in the box under a challenge from Sasa Papac and another plea from Rangers when Wilson appeared to handle in the box. However, it was the decision to overturn the penalty that angered Smith. ââ?¬Å?It is dangerous for a referee to do that. Very dangerous. If it had been in the other penalty box, I donââ?¬â?¢t know . . .ââ?¬Â he said, referring to penalty controversies that have involved Celtic in recent seasons. ââ?¬Å?I felt a wee bit aggrieved that Jelavic got booked,ââ?¬Â said Smith. ââ?¬Å?Obviously, the referee must have thought himself there was something in the decision to give a penalty in the first place so therefore it was strange he booked him afterwards especially as there was a similar incident at the other end of the field.ââ?¬Â This was a reference to Wilsonââ?¬â?¢s fall under Papacââ?¬â?¢s challenge. Smith could not shed any light on Thomsonââ?¬â?¢s process of thought as he changed his mind immediately. But he insisted that incident was relevant, despite the result. ââ?¬Å?It matters. It matters, none the less. It was a strange one,ââ?¬Â he said. ââ?¬Å?I would prefer to talk about winning rather than refereeing, but that was a very strange one,ââ?¬Â he said. The Rangers manager added that when ââ?¬Å?Celtic were mounting their campaign at the start of the seasonââ?¬Â over referees he had put forward his own philosophy. ââ?¬Å?If your team is good enough then you will win. That is how I have always looked at it. Regardless of a refereeing decision in todayââ?¬â?¢s game, we have come out of it good enough to win.ââ?¬Â Of the match, he said: ââ?¬Å?It was a terrific game. I thought we slightly edged the game overall and deserved to win. But it could have gone either way. We played exceptionally well.ââ?¬Â He said of the match-winner: ââ?¬Å?Jelavic is getting somewhere near match sharpness for us and he played very well for us today. Although, I felt that Steven Davis was, by far, the man of the match.ââ?¬Â Smithââ?¬â?¢s pleasure at the victory was enhanced by the vindication of his side, who had gone into the final as underdogs after a run of four Old Firm matches without victory. ââ?¬Å?I think it was strange for them to find themselves in a position where they were almost written off for todayââ?¬â?¢s game,ââ?¬Â he said. ââ?¬Å?It was a nice little challenge for them and they accepted it very well. The boys here do not need to prove anything to anybody. They have given everything for the club and have played exceptionally well. ââ?¬Å?They have to keep winning and today they found quite a bit which is a testimony to their own professionalism, overall fitness and desire to win. The motivation has to come from within.ââ?¬Â Smith was pleased to lift the trophy on a personal level, saying: ââ?¬Å?It is a nice one. The last time when I was leaving [1998] we did not win anything.ââ?¬Â Johan Mjallby, the Celtic assistant manager, felt his side struggled to play to their capabilities defensively. He explained: ââ?¬Å?Itââ?¬â?¢s very disappointing. Itââ?¬â?¢s always hard to swallow when you lose a cup final, but all credit to Rangers who won it. ââ?¬Å?There wasnââ?¬â?¢t really much in it. From our aspect we were a bit disappointed the way we lost our two goals.ââ?¬Â He added that the substitution of Thomas Rogne with Glenn Loovens was for tactical reasons. ââ?¬Å?Jelavic was creating some problems for Thomas,ââ?¬Â he said. The Swede was succinct on the reasons for the defeat. ââ?¬Å?Maybe our passing game should have been a wee bit better,ââ?¬Â he said. ââ?¬Å?We didnââ?¬â?¢t really create as many chances as we hoped. But we still should have defended better for the goals we conceded.ââ?¬Â http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/spl/rangers/rangers-manager-critical-of-referee-thomson-after-dangerous-decision-to-rescind-penalty-1.1091500

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdY5QMpG5_4

I'd like to take the credit mate,but the videos are not mine,cracking all the same:thup:

I just can't get enough:twisted: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p09dKcwUf8k

The big bad Rangers fans were singing pyoor bad songs all game

:tongue::spl:

Where have you been hiding??:smile: Have we finally turned the corner to go on and retain the title?,quite possibly,beating the BHEASTS should now get us back on track from the slump we have had against them in recent fixtures and no European distractions this result/performance today will ask serious questions of the BHEASTS. I'm always a glass half full person and I do think we will go from strength to strength until the end of the season and bag another title. Well done Rangers today:boogie: :spl:

Published Date: 18 March 2011 By Angus Wright NEIL Lennon's lawyer has urged the Celtic manager to defy the Scottish Football Association and enter the dug-out after he completes a five-match suspension, even if the game's governing body believes the ban is for eight games. Lennon has been hit with two separate four-match bans, which the SFA has indicated should be served consecutively. But the SFA rulebook states that a punishment begins 14 days after the offence, leading Celtic to believe the bans can be served concurrently, with the second ban kicking in after Lennon had served one match of the first ban - taking the total number of games missed to five. Lennon's lawyer, Paul McBride QC, last night said: "As a matter of law, there is no question in my mind, it is a four-match ban. "I have looked at the SFA rules in some detail. There is provision for players to serve consecutive bans. There is no provision for managers or club officials to serve consecutive bans at all. "The only dispute apparently in the minds of the SFA is whether it is consecutive or concurrent. Everyone who is sensible and who can read will see from the rules that ought to run from 16 March." McBride expects Lennon to return to the touchline for the Scottish Cup semi-final with Aberdeen, which will take place on 16 or 17 April. "He should enter the dugout and get on with the game," said McBride. "If the SFA believe it is an eight-match ban then the referee would go over and presumably attempt to send him to the stand. It may be, at that point, Celtic would consider their position about protective action in relation to their manager." The SFA's chief executive Stewart Regan refused to comment on the situation, as legal advice is sought over the matter. But their position is understood to be that the punishments will run consecutively, with the four-match suspension Lennon received for his clash with Rangers assistant manager Ally McCoist following the ban for dismissal against Hearts in November, which he is now halfway through. "I'm not able to talk about Neil Lennon or Celtic," Regan said. "We're in the middle of a live case and we're not able to get into it. There are legal implications on both sides." In a separate development yesterday, Lennon was fined �£5,000 by the SFA for his criticism of match officials following his team's 2-0 SPL defeat against Hearts at Tynecastle last November. The punishment, handed down by the SFA's general purposes committee at Hampden, is suspended until 30 June 2012 and will be set aside completely if Lennon does not commit a similar offence before then. Lennon branded the red card shown to Celtic midfielder Joe Ledley for a foul on Ian Black of Hearts as "scandalous" and also claimed referee Craig Thomson and his assistants "would probably have their story ready" when compiling their report into why he was sent from the technical area that night. For that dismissal and a subsequent report of excessive misconduct from Thomson, dealt with by the SFA's disciplinary committee, Lennon received the six-match touchline ban which was reduced to four games by an independent appeals board. Regan revealed yesterday that he has secured the backing of the SFA board to streamline and speed up the disciplinary process, with the aim being to implement change for the start of next season. He admitted he had identified failings in the SFA systems from his first day in the job in October and he is closing in on a major shake-up. He said: "The committee structure, whilst it has worked for many years, is very bureaucratic and laborious. "We need to have much slicker, more transparent, more up-front system where all clubs, players and officials know exactly what's happening and how long it takes for things to be dealt with. "I'm delighted to say that the board have backed the proposals and we will be taking them to the agm on 6 June." Regan revealed that the plans included restructuring the board, incorporating a professional and non-professional board and a main strategic board, with responsibility for financial and other major decisions. He also revealed that disciplinary procedures would be streamlined, pointing out that five committees currently deal with certain disciplinary matters. "We want to have one compliance or regulatory body which meets after each weekend's fixtures and tries to deal very promptly with what happens in those games. "If the charges are accepted by those involved they are actioned before the next game, in which case everyone can move on and there is an understanding of the disciplinary process." Regan hopes the proposed system will reduce the number of disputes such as the current disagreement with Celtic. "Nobody likes to see fallouts," he said. "We are all in the game of football and we are all trying to do the best for fans, for clubs, for the media, sponsors, everyone associated with the game. "It's disappointing when a lot of resources are being spent on fighting costly legal fees. It's a substantial amount of money. "It is something that is taking money out of the SFA. A substantial part of the SFA's resources, which could otherwise be invested in developing football and performance, is being spent on something that is not benefiting the game specifically or the development of the game." http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/football/Lawyer-tells-Neil-Lennon-to.6736121.jp

Tough game again,but I'm going for a Rangers victory,surprise surprise:smile: Rangers 2 - Weiss,Bougherra PSV 1

http://leggoland2.blogspot.com/2011/03/sfa-open-door-to-law.html

STEVIE NAISMITH will hand Rangers a Euro and Old Firm boost by returning to full training this morning. The Ibrox ace has been out for three weeks after his hamstring problems flared up against Celtic. But the Scotland ace is set to return for the second leg Europa League last 16 tie with PSV Eindhoven on Thursday. And he could also land a call for Sunday's Co-op Cup Final with Celts. Read more: http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/spl/3467982/Gers-Naisy-boost.html#ixzz1Gdcg3NAy

To be honest mate,all I'm saying is when he plays he's nearly always the player who doesn't make too many mistakes and organises well,however I've always said if we had another CB that was decent I'd like Weir to be only played as a back up,or an extra CB when we are in Europe against the stronger teams and agree this should be his last season for Rangers. Does WS pick the whole team just so he can play Weir?,I don't think so,but would admit WS wants him in the team so maybe he does. I wonder what system WS would playing if Weir was not here?. I still blame our non exsistent midfield for a lot of our troubles,games are won and lost in midfield and we don't have one.

Weir for me again

How can the bank have anything to do with who owns the club?,what does it matter to them if a take over happens?,whoever owns the club will still have x amount of debt to pay to the bank. COPS ON THE STREETS,NOT IN THE STANDS.

Is it close to season ticket sale time?????

There's more chance of getting the take over answers:whistle:

If Murray has agreed to sell to Whyte and the tax issue has been solved then the question of why has the take over not happened yet is kind of worrying for me

By jim Traynor on Mar 14, 11 08:37 AM in ALLY McCOIST will fight his two-match touchline ban but he should accept the punishment. He'll need all his reserves of energy and will for more important struggles which lie ahead. Depending on what happens over the next two to three weeks he will be taking over as manager of a club about to be revitalised or one sliding deeper into decline. And many are convinced it will be the latter. With the passing of every week Rangers fans lose hope that their club will be bought over and dragged out of debt. They look at the paucity of Walter Smith's squad and they must feel like weeping. Lloyds Bank, on the other hand, are delighted. Rangers' debt continues to fall and the next set of figures, which are about to be released, will show the Ibrox club now owe less than �£20million. No doubt someone at the bank will take pride in a job well done and it shouldn't surprise anyone if that person is in line for a whopping bonus. After all, that's what the banks do isn't it? They reward themselves for squeezing and destroying hard-working ordinary Joes even though it was their greed and stupidity that pushed the country towards financial ruin. And then they grab our tax money to get them out of the mess. It's instead of being forced back to school to do their sums again they grow fatter and richer by refusing to lend any of the cash back to people trying to buy or hold on to their homes and businesses. And of course the less they lend out the more for them to share in bonus payments which would be enough to keep loads of little companies and households going. They slap one another on the back, oblivious to the damage they cause. However, they are themselves insolvent. They are morally bankrupt. No doubt Lloyds will credit themselves for reducing Rangers' debt but there is nothing sharp, or even intelligent, in putting in place a repayment plan that is making it increasingly difficult for Rangers to remain competitive. While the Ibrox balance sheet is looking much better you have to ask at what cost has this been achieved? The answer won't be clear until the end of this season but it does look as though Rangers don't have enough players to handle the run-in. It's also fairly obvious they can't cope with Neil Lennon's Celtic, who have won three and drawn one of the five Old Firm clashes so far this season. Of course if Rangers were to win the remaining two Old Firm matches everything would look so much brighter but the problems caused by constant wage cuts to keep the bank satisfied would remain. They were there when Smith steered Rangers to back-to-back titles and a glance at any of his team sheets this season proves the problems are even worse now. No matter what Rangers do on the pitch between now and the end of the season McCoist will be inheriting a squad lacking in genuine quality and experience. And he will have to give serious thought to selling one of his few assets, Allan McGregor, to fund moves for a couple of players simply to increase numbers. His task will be practically impossible and his only real hope is Craig Whyte who is still waiting in the wings. However, he won't wait much longer. Time is running out and if Whyte hasn't been given the go ahead by the end of this month don't be surprised if he closes his cheque book, puts it back in his pocket and walks away. Several vague deadlines have come and gone but Whyte is smart enough to realise that buying Rangers solves only half a problem. The other half involves rebuilding a squad and Whyte, I suspect, doesn't want to leave that part to the last minute. He knows clubs and managers are already working on the ins and outs of transfer deals for next season and he would want to give McCoist as much time as possible to improve his squad. But nothing can be done until Whyte's offer has been accepted. If it isn't - Rangers' standards will continue to fall. Whyte's �£33m bid to take the club off David Murray's hands and out of the bank's control, and his promise to spend �£5m on players each season for the first five years of his tenure appears to tick the relevant boxes. But still McCoist and Rangers wait. Of course, there is the potential tax liability should Rangers lose their court battle with the taxman but it is understood some kind of arrangement has been put in place to deal with that as well. But still Rangers fans wait. Now they have to ask why. After all, Whyte has provided proof of funding and Murray, who said he would never sell to anyone who couldn't support the club financially, appears convinced by the Scottish financier and it's understood he's prepared to do the deal. So why the hold up? Who might be stalling? Are Rangers being used as a pawn in a wider game? Is the bank playing hard ball? If so, why? Someone at Lloyds could probably provide the answers but because of market rules and the cloaks of confidentiality bankers wrap around themselves there is only silence. Rangers have cut back to the bare minimum to repay their debt and there is an offer on the table which would rid the bank of the headache, yet nothing continues to happen. If Whyte is ready to get going and help finance McCoist's rebuilding programme but finds he is being blocked then he should say so. Rangers fans are entitled to know why this deal hasn't been concluded. They deserve to know who is holding up progress and why. But they should also be aware that the Whyte saga is nearing its end. The next few weeks will make or break his ambition to own Rangers. That also means the next few weeks could make or break Rangers.

What's the latest,with Naismith,Ness etc:,when are they back?.

Ridiculous mate. It's time TBO ask some questions to the police/Rangers FC as to why the need for them to be there.

Is he responsible for the OTT police presence in beside TBO?. POLICE ON THE STREETS NOT IN THE STANDS.

Already a thread running on this

His goals for Rangers prove he was not a fraud for Rangers. He would have continued to score goals for Rangers as we create more chances in most games compared to a team in any other league. I was a Boyd fan for Rangers. Anyway he's gone and all I'm concerned about is what Rangers and Rangers players do. get back to your Magners and shut up:D:thup:

You can just see the headlines now. Lennon forced to quit by bigoted threats as Rangers FC retain the title for 3 in a row:grin:

Unfortunately a figure of around �£4-5m is probably what Rangers would accept