bmck

15 minutes ago, the gunslinger said:

 Be a convenient excuse to shaft us certainly. 

Certainly a way to test hypotheses. If anyone FOIAs, the chatter around this would be interesting to uncover as the time gets closer. 

3 minutes ago, the gunslinger said:

This will be huge. I remember the buzz around Glasgow when we played AC Milan. I expect this to be the same. 

 

Just hope the SNP don't take the hump over it and put the blockers on. 

You can un-hope that quick style. Who was it here that said we live in a nationalist socialist state, I want to give them credit. In a sense it’s stating the obvious but has rhetorical power. Needs attribution.

3 minutes ago, the gunslinger said:

don't worry about bill he is our resident krank. 

 

I thought it was clear this was good either way but hey ho. 

I really like Bill. We agree on so many things and can still find ways to debate them. What more can one ask for?

16 minutes ago, Bill said:

There is no way Rangers is losing money in this fixture. Or that RM is prostituting themselves for seven figures of Rangers money. I also think it's highly unlikely this friendly is taking place at Rangers' sole request. Sometimes, the inherent negativity from some quarters of our support is just absurd. The apparent need to find fault with the club suggests an urgent need to review priorities. We have predictions of share issue failures, accusations of share price shenanigans, and now throwing money at Real Madrid. When you consider the prudence shown in recruitment these last few seasons and the rebuilding of infrastructure and brand, you have to ask where does this pessimism and lack of trust come from?

I think the sentiment was more even if it made a loss it would be worth it rather than it being predictive of one. Certainly for me. Our moves couldn’t have been sounder recently, in my view. 

1 hour ago, the gunslinger said:

It's all one big pot but it does pose the question is it worth the money. We don't know the numbers so it's hard to discuss fully. I would say it is even if it is making a loss. We need to celebrate this anniversary properly and we need to get our reputation as a huge club polished up. 

 

It is a real shame we can't get a full house. 

 

There is of course the possibility we are getting this cheap. I seem to recall them playing Dundee utd not so long ago after coming to Scotland for pre season training. 

 

 

Agreed on all counts. It would be best if Real Madrid could hear us as well as play us. Still, will take it. Global Rangers and all that. 

53 minutes ago, the gunslinger said:

tend to agree. quite probable RM fee is 7 figures. 

A good use of the share issue money….. kidding kidding

2 hours ago, Gonzo79 said:

 

PS Can we leave Face/Off out of it - one of the worst films ever made, featuring some preposterously bad acting (mainly from Cage).

Bad actors. Works on another level. 

3 hours ago, Uilleam said:

Myth? 

Well, let's start with Myth Sturgeon.

 

Homer nods, Sturgeon wobbles.

But, hey, it's so, so, difficult to keep the heid steady with a' thae snakes wrigglin' and writhin', and writhin' and wrigglin'. 

 

To be fair, no part of any man was turned to stone in the making of her legend. 

 

 

Medusa fits the bill too. Turned to stone with cunting boredom, perhaps.

Cerberus was the three faced dug that stopped you leaving the hell you’d been taxed into. 
 

Both work brother. 

45 minutes ago, Uilleam said:

Perhaps, but Nicholas Cage.....And the protagonists had but one face each. 

 

Cerberus on so many levels. 

41 minutes ago, Uilleam said:

Well, RM attracts global interest, and it may be that La Sturgeon will wish to avoid looking churlish, small minded, bitter, twisted and shrewish. 

(A difficult trick for her to pull off, I concede.)

Face off was a good film 

4 hours ago, craig said:

Amazing how quickly the time flies my friend.  What you up to these days ?

Being as illogical as ever, man. Quit a really good job to take over a business. What about your good self? 

On 26/05/2021 at 11:13, Bill said:

 In my opinion, although McLeish undoubtedly benefited from inheriting many of Advocaat's signings, what he achieved in the face of severe financial stringency was actually far more of an achievement than anything Advocaat did.

McLeish doesn’t get half the praise he deserves. 

5 hours ago, Rousseau said:

Oops! I missed that video piece...  

 

I agree, but they don't have to be built like Herman Munster, just be well proportioned. The Spain first team has Ferran Torres (21) and Pedri (18) at the moment, who are not big at all, but they are quite strong and able to compete physically. OK--The Spanish U21 side will run rings around us through their superior technical ability, but they are still appear to be more developed physically, even if they are smaller. (Of course, sample size will come into that too. )

 

If it is diet -- or at least, a large part of it is -- then I'd like to see our Academy being more stringent and hands-on with dietary requirements with our youngsters, from a young age.  

Hopefully a positive sign on what we were discussing. 

2 hours ago, Rousseau said:

 

 

If it is diet -- or at least, a large part of it is -- then I'd like to see our Academy being more stringent and hands-on with dietary requirements with our youngsters, from a young age.  

Agreed. To use an awful bit of jargon there does seem to have been a shift in vertically integrating the whole operation since Gerrard and Beale etc came in. The players we are looking at now are pre this era. Perhaps just optimism on my part but I do suspect if they understand the importance of it for senior players - ala Wright - it’s hopefully permeating all levels. If it isn’t the introduction of the Colts will quickly show the need for it. 

2 minutes ago, Rousseau said:

I recall reading somewhere--though I forget where--that Scott Wright was put on a special training regime or diet when he signed to beef him up. 

 

Of course, there's natural body type, whereby individuals develop at different rates. 

 

However, the difference seems too common. Compare the English U21s to the Scottish U21s. The difference is staggering. 

You’re right. They did a whole video section on it last night. 
 

Yeah - it is odd. I can only think it’s historic diet and genetics. Look at the Nordic countries. But for us being so close. Without wishing to be politically incorrect there’s also a greater proportion of black players in England, which by objective metrics do tend to be bigger and more muscular, which raises the median size and stature, but you’re still right.

It could also be sample size. The Venn diagram that allows intersection between talent and size may be bigger, the bigger the country. However, you think of a country like Spain. Hardly giants. 
 

I still think it’s the generations of principally chips and no vegetables. 

1 hour ago, Rousseau said:

Are we all jumping on my Stephen Kelly bandwagon now?  

 

He is a good metronome, I think; good passer, controls the tempo, and is quite lively. He could be a really good player. 

 

He needs to get some porridge in him, though! 

 

On a serious note, why are our youngsters so small and slight? Compared to English youngsters, of the same age-range, our lads are tiny!

 

Someone like Billy Gilmour compared to someone like Reece James is scary, or even Bukayo Saka, who looks like he's bulked up this summer.

 

I'll always prefer technical over physicality, but they need to be able to cope at the higher level of the game. 

Not quite a bandwagon to point out he slotted in well, but that’s a point I’ve never considered. You saw Mayo struggle in that department. Though the physique change can happen at different times for different people. Few were genuinely kids. They harped on about it enough, but Scott Wright does look differently scaled somewhat. 
 

All that said it’s probably just years of chips only diet in their genetic progenitors. All my parents could afford to eat as kids. 

Still not sure what formation we were playing in the first half right enough. Wright I think too really has something. 

18 minutes ago, Bill said:

The one thing I learned from that was how good a prospect Stephen Kelly is. 

Agreed. Comparisons to Davis, albeit obvious, worth noting. Has a bit of bite too. 

On 25/06/2021 at 21:12, Scott7 said:

Who is the nasal-whiny bloke doing the interview? 

 

Fair play to the new coach. He looked perplexed. Hasn’t been through induction and indoctrination yet, I suppose.

Scottish government late with their drafting as usual. 

14 minutes ago, Bill said:

There’s no “extra” anything, just a price to accept or not

Perhaps worth the price differential about which some people were concerned. How merrily we go round not disagreeing on anything substantive. 

2 hours ago, the gunslinger said:

we must be well under subscribed on this share issue. 

 

 

It’s looking that way, though they’d be ill advised not to promote it hard either way. We can only guess. 

3 hours ago, Bill said:

Other than “buy shares”, there were two messages I picked up on. The first was that owning shares gives you a personal stake in Rangers. The second was that your shares are forever and can be passed on to your heirs when you’re gone. Both messages were a barely-concealed put down of the collective Club1872 model, where fans have nothing to show for their money and commitment. I like Bennett and I like his view that supporting Rangers is a personal journey, not something for the anthill. 

Perhaps worth that extra 5p.

23 minutes ago, Bill said:

You’re right, you do appear to miss the point. It isn’t about some things costing more than other things, which is hardly a revelation, but about the nature of ethics and whether “things” can possess some inherent quality that makes them “ethical”. 
 

You mustn’t become obsessed with the advantages and disadvantages of price and wealth, or I’m concerned you might accidentally stray into the fantasy world of “fairness”. Price and affordability have little bearing on value and none at all on ethics. 

We can agree that one of us is. You seem determined to disagree on points we don’t really disagree on. I’d kindly return the advice you gave me the other day, and maybe read what I said more closely. 

2 hours ago, Bill said:

There’s no such thing as ethical investments, only personal comfort and preferences. But if there were, it would have absolutely nothing to do with being expensive or otherwise. 

Fair trade tea costs more than tetley’s. Chocolate grown by collectives cost more than Mars bars. And you just restated my point about personal comfort and preference as though you were disagreeing. I must be missing something. People are free to pay more for the comfort of conscience, so long as it isn’t for snide superiority over those who can’t afford to and consume the abundance capitalism makes affordable. 

9 hours ago, Rousseau said:

We must become a selling club. It's the sustainable model we must adopt. Players must be sold. 

 

Except Morelos. 

 

And Kamara.

 

And Tavernier. 

 

And Helander. 

 

And any player of value. 

 

  

It’s circular though, without them do we get to the CL? Certain money now (we always undervalue our assets) versus uncertain larger money if CL comes in. Hope there are smarter people than me doing these risk assessments.