bmck
-
Posts
5,602 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Everything posted by bmck
-
BD, i heard that murray moved all his investment out of steel production and into property. dont know when it happened or if its true, but it seems like if it were true and the vast majority of his investments were in property, is the immediacy of all this now a direct consequence of the recession and its impact on the housing market? if so, wont everything just be merry and as it was when it eventually picks up, if indeed it does?
-
im going for a 6-1 Urinea win with a Wilson hatrick of own goals :box::devil:
-
everyone remembers celtics financial woes, and we all had quite a good laugh then im sure. and though things are really pretty hard, one small consolation is that we are going through all this in our rightful place as champions. near financial ruin and still the best scotland has to offer :spl:
-
outstanding to see.
-
probably a good approach for reading the papers generally in there somewhere
-
i bet if each high-profile ex-ger sold just one of their cars and donated the proceedings to buying the club we'd at least be able to afford bain's wages in the transition period...
-
how many ex-players are millionaires? why don't they get a whip round on the go?
-
oh, with the mod editing functioning you can be sure if you do win there'll be a 'plus give bmck a wee turn' clause stuck in there
-
whatever walter smith's tactical limitations are, he makes up for them with largeness of character and integrity. he might not be the future, but i'm glad we have him at present.
-
I don't think the substance of what is said is really that important. Companies don't care about anything other than how many people sign something criticising them.
-
It wont bolster the status quo; it reminds Lloyds who have both a stake in the club, and the company who is underwriting the club's debt, that it matters. It makes them less likely to play games and hold out for a high price for their stake.
-
the only thing worse for the ego than it taking a kicking, is hitting back when you're not in a position to and looking pathetic. -
agreed! they slowly took my overdraft away, but it was for my own good. and now they've given it back. which was kind.
-
anyone have a link to highlights?
-
naw, makes sense to me.
-
does it not now seem like absolutely nothing has actually changed?
-
i tend to think young players should be introduced systematically. they should know they're onto regular games in given circumstances. ie: if we're ahead by two with half an hour to go, they'll get on. or they're always going to get a game in the cup. ideally they would be introduced to a confident and settled eleven who can bolster their confidence. expectations should be kept systematically low because, unless they're a wonderkid, they're not going to do immensely. as it stands we're turning to them in among all the blood and carnage of on and off-field pandaemonium like little pubescent messiahs, and that's why i don't think it's the ideal circumstances. that said, i agree that they need experience somewhere, and i'd rather they had it than not. if danny wilson has a really big temparement this pressured context could be the making of him, but if not, it could put him back un-necessarily. i think these are just the facts. i'm still happy we're playing him. but then i'm one of the fans who would be happy to lose the league for a few years to start a youth-revolution.
-
no-one's said it's the wrong time. the only person who could remotely have been said to have implied it is me. and even then i just said it's going to a tough environment to finally get your chance. which it is.
-
Man, for what little it's worth, here's my problem. I read complicated stuff all the time, and when uncomplicated things are made complicated through language, I tend not to be able to trust in the competence of what's being said. You can call it pedantry, but I think language matters. This works hard to lose readers, for my money. I'm just not sure what anyone is actually supposed to take from this. The only bit of information in this is that the RST wants to know what's happening at the club, and will help anyone who wants to invest. The rest is verbiage. The amount of redundant words and clauses in this sentence is ridiculous. You could remove 'In common', 'the extent of', 'at present', 'by representatives', 'consequent' without losing a shred of meaning. As such the lexical density in a single sentence for such a simple concept is harrowing. If it's supposed to inspire a sense of intelligence and authority by the use of so many nominalised forms, I think it does the opposite. The while->also construction here seems to promise some sort of contrast that makes some point or dispels some misunderstanding. It seems to be saying that while the Rangers support are frustrated they would also welcome a positive response. Removing the subject in the opening clause obsfucates who exactly is frustrated. Then you have to wonder why anyone would infer from someone being frustrated, they wouldn't also be open to a 'positive response', if you can even work out what a 'positive response' is in this context, and who is expected to make it, and with regards to what. The 'Accordingly' seems to want to step forward from the previous paragraph as if some clear point had been made. The sentence that follows seems to want to say 'The trust invites all friends of Rangers to work with us to establish sufficient shares to give the support a strong voice within the club' but actually says whatever that is. The fear of verbs has turned everything into noun phrases ('invites' into 'an invitation', 'establish shares' turns into 'a sufficient shareholding') until the sentence is nine miles longs and so far removed from something you would hear someone actually say as to require lawyer-esque understanding to get past the words to the meaning. The sentence about helping investors for Rangers' benefit is interesting. I'm not sure exactly what it means, but it sounds positive. Who does Rangers refer to in this context? Isn't it obvious a Rangers supporters club will be committed to Rangers? The last sentence says absolutely nothing - an invitation to collaborate and engage on nothing in particular, but on a 'basis' flowered with token adjectives. What happened to the Trust's good old-fashioned, direct and to-the-point, statements?
-
not usually one to complain about this sort of stuff, but this is a barely comprehensible statement. seven sentences in four paragraphs? this faux-business type of english, with a million redundant clauses, just drains any force from anything that's said. sorry mate. i just don't think we need more obsfucation.
-
that's all we need. new guy comes in, revolution's afoot, then gets sent down for fraud and the club gets sold to South Africa. interesting times.
-
that old chestnut
-
i dont know anything about him. what's your reservations?
-
with such ill-confidence kicking about, it's not the best environment for youngsters to be introduced. like flinging a non-swimmer into turbulent waters; hopefully it'll be the making of him.
-
^ this is trippy zen management. shroomz for manager!