bmck

Can't believe anyone's blaming the NOTW. If you think the blurb didn't point them specifically to the pages that could be sensationalised in that manner, they wouldn't be doing their job to publicise the book on behalf of their client.

Don't be daft mate, though it's cool your now a paypal ninja

Thanks! Mind and PM me your address if you want a copy. They've now arrived, but I need to wait till I get paid before I send them out

Frankie, the only possible motivation for writing a minor celebrity formula autobiography ( = humble background + i got some fame + people hated me + met powerful people + battled addiction) is money. Just to be clear, money's no evil motive; he's a well known figure and people may find his story interesting. I just won't be buying it for the same reasons I don't buy Rebecca Loos' or the third winner of big brothers'. It's a shame, the guy clearly engages people well and a thoughtful version of what it is like to be a modern Rangers fan might be nice to read, but the make-money-from-fame-and-shocking-tasteless-revelations autobiographies are just universally horrible, even if written by a Rangers fan. Perhaps epecially.

This is fascinating. How would they manage to spill his guts and keep him alive for long enough that he could see that the maggots had gathered? That's some expert macabre torture. Cashing in on your celebrity by selling the sensationalised version of your life through the gutter press you'd previously made your name standing up to may not be the best way to prove those who call you a glory hunter wrong, but fair play to the guy I suppose. I think as a general rule if you've had your name in the paper more than three times nowadays 'you' need to write a tasteless horribly written autobiography.

Is all this fuss over �£30?

I think those defending PLG from criticism because she is a woman are probably more disrespectful to her than those who treat her according to her role. She handles large sums of money, and put herself forward for a position of leadership - to single her out for chivalry is more condescending than gentlemanly. That said, it does seem uncouth how much aggro she's getting, but given that the questions are pretty much fair on the most part, I think the real question is why she's been left to plough such a lonely furrow on her own. Where's UCB and other Trust supporters to argue the Trust's side?

Then why have you (successfully) tried to shift the debate from whether it's a professional way to run anything (an area where the RST's position is irrecoverable) to whether this person financially gained from it (where it's less clear)? While everyone's bickering over the last point, the infinitely more important point - to anyone who actually cares about the RST and not about the soap opera that underpins it - is the first.

Mate, this sounds nicer than it is. I don't think what people really need so much as the ability to see two sides of a coin, especially here, as the need for a certain opinion. We have loads of devil's advocate's advocate and everyone I know is able to keep themselves from reactionary polarisation. The ability to come to firm conclusions that are nonetheless open to change is just as important when the situation demands it, especially if people care about the RST as many do here. That the RST felt itself positioned to internal financial jiggery pokery with funds, and sufficiently comfortable to never actually note it down anywhere for the people to whom their accountable, and for it only to be revealed owing to their spite towards each other and inability to present a united front to me is sufficient to come to a fairly firm conclusion. That it was all done in good faith I don't doubt, that it was never not going to be paid back I don't doubt, that there's a nice story in which no-one is actually a Baddy I don't doubt, but there's no escaping that there's no version of the story where it's not representative of an organisation that's incompetent and dysfuctional, and is so more as a rule than an exception. The RST is nothing like transparent. They have loads of nice people as board members - the few that come here from time to time to address the occasional thing seem nice, and I don't doubt the ones that don't are likewise good bears, but that doesn't make them good leaders of men. When reasonable people - people with a history of looking on both sides - come to a firm conclusions, with fairness taking your approach of a tentative foot in both camps is the quickest way to going backwards.

Stab in the dark - 7-2!

What's Edu's biggest run of games? Isn't he still young too? Think he needs a sustained run to start developing his game.

Glad the schmooozin to get yourself in the supporters club worked. I had to watch the game on a feed while I studied Was going to text at the final whistle to congratulate you on the singing but thought you'd probably be too to still have control over yer thumbs!

Mate, if you want me to e-mail it to you, just PM your address.

I know from long experience that aint true muckero! How was it anyway man?

What I find most offensive, and I've a good mind to write, is it's shocking lack of originality and possible breach of copyright. It's essentially Frankie Boyle's joke about the election of the new pope being a confusing time to be a Rangers fan "Religiously I hate the guy, but politically, I see where he's coming from" in cartoon format. The thing that annoys me most about the editor's response is that it's not that people are actually offended by the word, but at the disparity with which sectarianism is viewed. When against Celtic fans its religious bile to be viewed with the utmost gravity, when its against Rangers fans it's just the craic, why take yourself so seriously? Damn hypocrites! I don't think someone's a bigot if they call me a hun, just like I don't think someone's a bigot if they call a Celtic supporter a ******. Bigotry's not insults at a football match ffs - there is real bigotry in the world, and Celtic fan's crusade just debases the notion.

HAHA! Outstanding!

I've not read page 7 yet, but i'm fecking dying to now!

Hey everyone, please find the copy of The Copenhagen Post below. Sorry it's taken until tonight, I've been massively busy with work. Really impressed with its half-page size. It's on page 5. The copies are being sent over in the next few days, so if you you would like a copy do remember to PM me your address details and I'll send it on. http://www.gersnetonline.co.uk/post.pdf

Stick to shrugging off injury man!

As a RC it would be hard to hear, but I don't doubt E_B's used to it. There's been more vitriolic objections to his arrival than that I imagine.

Haha, I was trying my best to act normal too

I'll need to work out how to break it to my current wife

Alrighty troops. Amanda e-mailed me this afternoon to say that, after mentioning it to her partner, they put out a message on the Danish Press Agency wire thing that a group of fans had got together to send a message of support to Brian. This was picked up by the country's biggest tabloid and the Danish equivalent of the Financial Times. She says that, given the stature of the newspapers involved, it's more than likely he'll read about the message before it's published tomorrow. The links and a google tranlsation are below: Ekstra Bladet, the country’s biggest tabloid! http://ekstrabladet.dk/sport/fodbold/udenlandsk_fodbold/skotland/article1411120.ece BÃ?¸rsen, the Danish equivalent of the Financial Times: http://borsen.dk/nyheder/weekend_og_nat/natteside/artikel/ritzau/3/R2GL-89BE6P273165.html It also seems to have be picked up by the rest of the press in Denmark: http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=-fans+st%C3%B8tter+kr%C3%A6ftramt+Laudrup%E2%80%99&meta= It's great that she's done this. Great work guys, great idea MF.

I'll get back to you once I've finished this concealer.

Who among us really hasn't got drunk and winched one of their mates? Really, no-one? No-one at all? Shit.