chilledbear

Our position in all of this is to buy ST Books, not speculate in who is ruining the Club.

What is he a robot ?

The problem is News programmes seen all over the UK, the top story on the BBC News web site, try and make out that it must be a Rangers Supporter. Then if the idiot is caught and it turns out not to be the case, nothing will be said to change what they have put into the publics minds.

I'll put it this way. The Breakfast programme pointed out the rivalry between the Catholic celtc, and the Protestant Rangers Supporters. Nothing about terrorism, all about the rivalry between the Clubs.

The Breakfast programme on BBC this morning did everything but accuse Rangers Supporters, first item on the News.

Can someone tell me, if King etc. have a share issue and put �£25m into the Club. Will the Bank not be able to take their share ?

If Murray wants the money, then surely he will sell to Whyte. Does the Board members plan involve buying shares from Murray?

'To this end the Board has had an approach from one of its directors who wishes the Board to consider an alternative funding option. This would involve a fresh issue of new capital to raise �£25m to be invested directly into the Club' Can this be done without the Bank looking to grab some??

If it was a bid by current Board members, are they waiting on the Tax issue to become clearer before they make a bid?

AJ might have a very good reason for wanting a delay, but with Supporters being asked to shell out hundreds of pounds, someone must give an explanation.

Why do they want it delayed till the end of the season, the only reason I can see is they hope/know another bid will be launched. To delay until then, with what it would mean to ST sales, and the plans of McCoist for next season, there must be a very good reason. Even delaying the deal, doesn't mean Whyte would walk away, so there would be the consequences of the delay and Whyte might end up being the new owner anyway. Whatever is happening I'll not hold my breath waiting for the Club to explain.

It is still up to Murray. 'The purpose of the committee is to appraise the deal with the long-term interests of the club in mind. The vetting committee can delay the deal but cannot veto any sale'

His recruiting drive worked.

Just one of many.

Certainly makes you look.

Whatever people think of the RST or Stephen Smith, and I do not know the lad. this is not on. A piece by Phil MacGobblygook. The National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers (NASUWT) reacted with horror when they learned that Stephen Smith their Principal Official for ââ?¬Å?Equality and Trainingââ?¬Â Stephen Smith has tried to defend racist chanting by Rangers fans. When I spoke to an NASUWT press officer he had no idea that Smith is currently the public face of the Rangers Supporters Trust (RST). In 2008, at the height of the ââ?¬Å?Famine Songââ?¬Â controversy Stephen Smith, speaking as a representative of the RST, said in an interview with the Sun Newspaper that the reaction to fans singing The ââ?¬Å?Famine Songââ?¬Â was ââ?¬Å?completely over the top.ââ?¬Â http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scot...cle1699672.ece The following year Lord Justice Carloway ruled in the High Court of Justiciary that the ââ?¬Å?Famine songââ?¬Â was indeed racist and aimed at people of Irish heritage in Scotland to go home to Ireland. http://news.stv.tv/scotland/103580-j...ong-is-racist/ In 2009 the union nominated Smith as a judge on the prestigious Anne Frank Awards. When this journalist spoke to Gillian Wallness the charityââ?¬â?¢s CEO she was horrified to find out that the NASUWT nominated judge was defending something like the ââ?¬Å?Famine Songââ?¬Â in his spare time. Mr.Smith is well known to the inhabitants of the planet Scottish Football where he is often the public face of the Rangers Supporters Trust. Only last night (14/04/2011) he was on Sky Sports News discussing with Jim White Rangers most recent bit of European bother. On that interview the Equality Officer posed the question to Jim White: ââ?¬Å?What is racism? What is sectarian? What is offensive?ââ?¬Â I hope Mr.Smith was more confident of these issues when on Thursday 9 July 2009 at the Holiday Inn, Bromsgrove an internal NASUWT document states: "Organising for equalities" Stephen Smith, Principal Official, Equality and Training, ran an interactive session looking at how to organise for equalities using the Equalities Calendar. Delegates were asked to identify a month and come up with ideas and identify the resources they would use and develop an action plan. The feedback discussion included: ââ?¬Â¢ the need to ensure the anti-violence material and events covered all sections of members; ââ?¬Â¢ young membersââ?¬â?¢ engagement in equality; ââ?¬Â¢ younger membersââ?¬â?¢ engagement with the Union; ââ?¬Â¢ broadening the categories of members to ââ?¬Ë?new to teachingââ?¬â?¢; ââ?¬Â¢ anti-semitism and antifascism to include Islamophobia; ââ?¬Â¢ using the Stonewall Spell it out DVD for tackling all forms of bullying. Chris Keates, General Secretary of the NASUWT said: ââ?¬Å?The Union has a record second to none in promoting anti-racist policies, defending members against all forms of discrimination and campaigning against racist and fascist organisations. The NASUWT condemns unequivocally any form of racist behaviour. The Unionââ?¬â?¢s rules make clear our anti-racist stance. The Unionââ?¬â?¢s contract of employment and codes of conduct for staff are equally clear on these matters. The NASUWT disassociates itself fully from the ââ?¬Ë?Famine Songââ?¬â?¢ and recognises the judiciaryââ?¬â?¢s view that this song is racist. In light of these reports, the Union will be conducting a thorough investigation into the allegations that have been made.ââ?¬Â Sources inside the union informed me that NASUWT due process should be completed within two weeks. A spokesperson for the NASUWT further added: ââ?¬Å?In response to media interest, Stephen Smith would like to make it clear that he recognises and accepts the judicial findings that what is known as ââ?¬Å?The Famine Songââ?¬Â is illegal and racist. He neither condones nor encourages anyone to sing 'The Famine Song'; and would like to make it clear that he is committed fully to opposing racism in all forms.ââ?¬Â

It was always the Supporters Clubs that it would start with. Fingers crossed.

This has been posted on FF http://www.milestonegroup.co.uk/licence-agreement-issue-of-equity--total-voting-rights-08-april-2011.html Power..Paul Elliot... Brett Desmond son of Dermot Desmond

Former Grade One referee Stuart Dougal believes football rules prevented the Scottish Football Association handing a stiffer punishment to Madjid Bougherra. The Rangers defender was given a �£2,500 fine after laying hands on referee Calum Murray during a stormy Scottish Cup defeat by Celtic on 2 March. Critics suggested that Bougherra should have received a suspension. But Dougal says that the SFA's hands were tied as referee Calum Murray did not deem the action as aggressive. "Based on the criteria the disciplinary committee were working with, I don't think they have failed," Dougal told BBC Scotland. "If he as the referee viewed it as violent conduct, we are talking a whole different ball game. "He wasn't threatened, there was no violence and in his eyes there was no aggression towards him." Dougal's former referee colleague, Kenny Clark, warned that another referees' strike could result from the lack of action taken in such circumstances. Continue reading the main story I am sure the they will insist that if any player lays hands on any match official there will be at least a two-match ban and probably more Stuart Dougal Former Grade One referee Grade One officials took such an action earlier this season following a barrage of criticism, particularly from Celtic, following a series of decisions. "I don't disagree with Kenny in saying that players shouldn't be laying hands on referees," said Dougal. "But there will be no strike based on this. That was a wee bit sensationalist. "What happened the last time was a built up over years, not over one, two or three comments. "We need to be fair to the SFA in terms of what could they actually do based on the criteria at the moment. "I think they would have liked to have done it, but I think they were unable to do it. "That will change, I am sure the they will insist that if any player lays hands on any match official there will be at least a two-match ban and probably more." This week's disciplinary committee decision also led to stinging criticism of the SFA from Paul McBride, the QC who has represented Celtic manager Neil Lennon before the SFA. McBride was angry that Rangers assistant manager Ally McCoist won his appeal against a two-match touchline line ban following a confrontation with Lennon that led to the latter winning his legal battle to have his own recent suspensions run concurrently instead of consecutively. The QC was also critical of the decision not to hand further suspensions to Bougherra and Rangers forward El Hadji Diouf, who was shown a red card for dissent after the same game, and also received a �£5,000 fine. However, Dougal thought that McBride and Clark, as lawyers, should have taken into consideration that the disciplinary committee's power to act was limited by its rules in light of the referee's report. Dougal was generally uncomfortable with the increasing intrusion of lawyers into the workings of the game. "Everybody accepts that there is etiquette and you don't lay your hands on the referee, but when you have lawyers and QCs sitting analysing every word and the position of the referee then the SFA, particularly what they have gone through with Mr McBride and Celtic, need to be bullet proof," he said. "If you want to take a legal mind to go through any rule book, whether it be the SFA's articles, English FA, go through other sports, then there are holes to be picked. "But where does it leave the game? I think we are going down a very dangerous road. "Football should be allowed to police itself and, if you want to participate in football, you have got to accept the rules as they are."

What songs ? TBB we know, what others, whatever FARE don't like.

http://www.rangers.co.uk/articles/20110414/rangers-face-new-uefa-action-_2254024_2338937

The number of corners we had in the last 10 minutes, and not once did we take a short one in order to keep possession.

Ah but if the best team do it !!

Perhaps that is the problem, serious commentators in Scotland !! Regan should have said, McCoist and Lennon were both banned, McCoist appealed, Lennon didn't. I have to say I thought the players were lucky.

Why the big change from St Johnstone and Hamilton, to Aberdeen last night? Do we take some teams and results for granted, while others we know we will have to fight. Sorry Rangers but you are not good enough to take any team for granted. Fight and press the ball in every game till the end of the season, and we will win the League.