Search the Community

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=2565&newsCategoryID=1&newsID=12361 As if we haven't got enough going on.

An excellent introduction from an American fan on how he grew to love Rangers... http://www.gersnet.co.uk/index.php/latest-news/159-we-the-going-gets-tough-the-tough-get-going I suspect that my road to becoming a Rangers supporter is quite unlike most of those who pack into Ibrox on any given Saturday. My first shirt wasn’t a wee Rangers strip. Nor I did not grow up with posters of Souness and McCoist on my walls. I’m actually quite positive that until I discovered the club and its history, my father had no idea that one could play football professionally. Growing up “across the pond,” my early years were full of baseball, basketball, and the American version football; which, as most of you know, doesn’t really involve the feet at all. I played football, mostly as a goalkeeper, when I was young, because that was the “cool” thing to do if you grew up in suburban America in the 1990s. Everything changed, however, when I was 14, and our family spent most of the summer living in Ayr. Being a typical American “Scotophile,” my Dad felt it to be a wonderful idea to switch houses, cars, and jobs with a local pastor in the Church of Scotland. And while I was excited to escape the country for a few weeks, I honestly felt the whole trip would be rather boring and an overall waste of time. Then I did some reading. After doing a bit of research, I became relatively well versed - at least for an American teenager - about the history of Scottish football, and of course, the Old Firm. The accessible, white bread version told me I had two choices. One was to support a Catholic side, the other was to support a Protestant side. Positively without malicious intent, I sided with Rangers simply because I knew that I didn’t go to mass on Sunday. This was followed by discarding every piece of green clothing that I was planning on bringing to Scotland, a few deep breaths, and quite a long plane ride. In the ensuing eight weeks, however, I realized that religion was merely one piece of the puzzle. And I went from a casual bystander, to a downright obsessive fan. I quickly learned that there was a Rangers shop conveniently located in the Ayr city center - to which my mother dutifully drove me at least twice a week, and where I bought anything I could afford. We visited Ibrox and took the tour where I got my first glimpse at the well-stocked trophy room, walked through the tunnel and sat in the dugout. I also bought two strips. One in the traditional home blue, and the other in the now infamous shade of neon orange. I’m pretty sure that those were the only two shirts I wore for the remainder of the trip. When we arrived home, my bedroom was quickly decorated with pin up of Barry Ferguson, a bright blue Rangers rug, and about any other image relating to the club that I could print off of the trusty inkjet printer. Yet it wasn’t merely a childhood fascination with something new that drove my fandom so far, so fast. Even at that age, I could sense that there was something about different about both football fans in general, and Rangers supporters in particular. In the U.S., we use the term “pink hat” quite often to describe a fan whose devotion to a team is extremely fickle and shallow. It was originally connoted with fans of the Boston Red Sox, my local baseball team, who preferred donning pink, rhinestone encrusted versions of the typical team t-shirts and hats, rather than the traditional red and blue. They typically knew nothing about the team or their run of form. They just showed up at games, hoped to get on the big screens, and in the process typically acted like complete and utter idiots. I’m sure that many season ticket holders would disagree with me, but at first glance, being a Rangers fan meant so much more than simply attending football matches. Rangers was a culture, a religion if you will. This was not simply what one did every few Saturdays. It wasn’t simply what colour scarf or top you preferred wearing. Rangers was and is a way of life, that’s been passed down through the generations. It’s a fervour that only those on the inside can understand. And across social classes, neighbourhoods, and countries, it’s a moniker that brings thousands, if not millions of people together. When I travelled back to Scotland to study at the University of Edinburgh, all I had to do was reach out to my local RSC, and I was immediately embraced as part of that exquisite Rangers family. No one on the bus to Ibrox glanced uneasily at the lanky kid from America, but allowed me to join in the songs, the banter, and the many, many pints, as a neighbour and friend. We were all brought together by a club we loved, and simply that was enough. While my story may seem rather cliché, and a bit kitschy, it’s extremely pertinent to the situation we as Rangers find ourselves in today. It’s no mistake that as the extent of Craig Whyte’s damage became more and more apparent; one of the first rallying cries the support drummed up was #RangersFamily. When our club was threatened from the outside, we turned inward to tap the collective power of the millions of supporters across the globe, reminding each other that together, as one Rangers family, we’re unbeatable and certainly don’t do walking away. Yet, as the months have lagged on, and our collected friends in the media take their swipes at this proud club, a lot of us have forgotten the reason why Rangers means so much to us. Instead of remembering the true meaning and power of the Rangers Family, we’ve found it more constructive to start splitting hairs, and fighting amongst each other. I for one, can’t see how this serves any type of a constructive purpose. Of course it’s important that we stay informed as a support, weed out misinformation, and ensure that those who will take the reins at Ibrox and Auchenhowie are not only capable, but equally passionate about Rangers and all that it means to each and every one of us. Debate is good when it remains positive and constructive, and I certainly do not propose the stifling of these conversations under the guise of phony unity. But when every single opinion, dutifully researched and written, is immediately attacked for being “against the best interest of the club,” or its author is said to not be a true fan, or worse, a Tim in disguise, then we truly lose sight of what’s important in times such as these. It’s realizing that no matter our different opinions on the road we must take to get there, we all love Rangers immensely, and understand that the club is better when we as the support present a strong, united front. What hooked me on Rangers, and what keeps me excited for its future is that collective spirit and energy that takes a mass of supporters and shapes them into what we know to be the Rangers Family. It was the sense that the club’s history and values would live on through the years, and would eventually triumph despite whatever obstacles would stand in our way. This is what we must remember as the tabloids continue to print stories of shady boardroom tactics, or as we get taken to court by those who pretend to have our best interests at heart. Because when the dust settles, and it will eventually settle, we will all, as Rangers, be better for it. The future will be taxing (no pun intended). But when the going gets tough, the tough get going. That’s why WE are the people.

One of my all time favourites, a son of Airdrie. Click the link to see the full interview from May last year. http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/interview-ian-mcmillan-airdrie-director-and-former-rangers-and-airdrie-forward-1-2319440 Interview: Ian McMillan, Airdrie director and former Rangers and Airdrie forward Ian McMillan remains a director of Airdrie United aged 81. Picture: Robert Perry by ALAN PATTULLO Published on the 26 May 2012 00:00 8 comments Email thisPrint this RELUCTANT star reflects on an enduring bond with Airdrie and life as a part-timer at Ibrox The McMillan family is deep into Olympic countdown mode as the days tick down to the Great Britain women hockey side’s first appointment, at the end of July. Ian McMillan, formerly of Airdrie and Rangers, is the grandfather of Laura Bartlett, one of only two Scots in the squad. He clearly believes she should be the focus of any attention, rather than his octogenarian self. This, however, is the Wee Prime Minister’s own question time. For any sports writer, an hour or so in the company of someone renowned for being one of Scottish football’s gentlemen is a dream assignment. In this version of PMQs there is no braying from across the room to have to endure either, only the pleasant hum of background chatter emitted by McMillan’s golfing crowd, who meet at the Airdrie Golf club each week to put to the world to rights. McMillan himself is slightly anxious. He is concerned that he has not got enough to say, and that, at age 81, no-one will want to read about what his views on the game any longer. He fears he is as relevant to present day football as Harold Macmillan is to contemporary politics. His near-namesake’s occupancy of No 10 Downing Street during the late 1950s and early 60s saw McMillan bestowed with his Wee Prime Minister moniker, one still employed by friends to this day. Having listened to him, however, it is not hard to understand why he is still a director at Airdrie United, as well as honorary president. It would be considered gross negligence if his influence had been lost to the game, and to his hometown club in particular, where he has also served as ball boy, esteemed player, youth coach and, for six and-a-half years in the Seventies, as manager. Sandy Clark, whose career started under McMillan at Airdrie, recalls never having heard the manager swear, something almost unheard of in professional football. That’s not to say he was not sworn at. The notorious Airdrie crowd did not even spare their own, although McMillan, whose managerial tenure included a Texaco Cup final appearance against Derby County and a Scottish Cup final defeat to Celtic, never had it as bad as some. “Do you know the old Broomfield?” he asks. “You had to walk from the pavilion right the way up to the dug-out near the stand, and at half-time and full-time you had to walk all the way round, and if you were losing you would get slaughtered – quite rightly, because some of the games we played were not very clever. “As a manager I got more abuse than as a player,” he adds. “One comment I always had a wee smile at was: ‘I think you should stick to playing McMillan!’” That he appeared for Scotland at all is notable enough. McMillan was a part-time player all his days. While this was not so remarkable in his first ten years as an inside forward with Airdrie, it became something to marvel at as he continued to hold his own after a £10,000 move to Rangers. He was the sole part-time player in a side that reached the semi-finals of the European Cup in 1960. “They could have given me the cold shoulder, but they never did,” he says of his team-mates. “They were very welcoming.” He does concede that working as a chartered surveyor from Monday to Friday did tend to compromise his performances on a Saturday. Given that many Rangers fans of a certain vintage rate McMillan as one of the club’s most under-rated players, it’s possible to wonder just how good he could have been had he been able to train with his team-mates each day, rather than with the youths in the evening? “I had to take wee rests occasionally,” he says. “That is what I maintain, if you are fit and able to do 90 minutes, then you can be a better player. And I think I could have been a better player. I only trained three nights a week as opposed to the others, who trained all week, so I had to rest occasionally in games. That was a fault. “If I had been able to train a bit harder, then looking back I could have been a better player,” he continues. “I could have lasted the game longer, I could have been in the game more often.” He made a conscious decision to remain part-time, and it was the sensible one at the time. He had had two young daughters, Laura and Lesley. The latter is now the mother of Scottish hockey internationalist twins Laura and Kay Bartlett, while the former passed on some of her father’s footballing prowess to Iain, a striker with Livingston. “I was 27 when I moved to Rangers, and I weighed up [whether to go full-time] and it was borderline,” McMillan continues. “If I had been 22 it would a different story. I would have gone full-time then. I had a young family, two wee girls. It was a big decision. I knew that I could get an injury, and be finished. My wife and I sat down and thought: well it is going not too bad the way it is, we will just carry on.” Making things slightly easier was a job switch from one side of West Regent Street in Glasgow to the other. “John Lawrence, who was chairman at Ibrox at the time, asked me to come over and work for him, so I was able to get away for games in Europe,” he says. “Prior to that, it had been difficult.” McMillan was thus free to star in the Ibrox side’s run to the last four of the European Cup, where they came up against Eintracht Frankfurt. “Our trouble was that even when we were abroad we played as if we were playing against Stirling Albion, we just kept going forward,” he recalls. “We were one each against Eintracht Frankfurt at half-time, but you could tell the writing was on the wall. They were a tremendous side. They ran over the top of us in the second-half, beating us 6-1, so the return leg was a bit of a non-event. We were a top side, and they whacked us 6-3 at Ibrox. I was interviewed on television afterwards, and they asked me how I thought Eintracht Frankfurt would do against Real Madrid in the final? Well after that experience, I said, I think they will beat Real Madrid!” Of course, the aristocrats from Madrid defeated the Germans 7-3 at Hampden Park, in one of the best remembered games in football history. McMillan watched on from the stand at Hampden, where he had already made three appearances for Scotland as well as enduring a 7-2 away defeat to England at Wembley. Unusually perhaps, of the six caps he earned with Scotland, five were won out of Airdrie. However, he struggles to make playing for Scotland sound like a happy experience. “We didn’t get good results,” he says. “It was not really as enjoyable as playing with Airdrie, my local club. But Rangers was the best of the lot. Great players, they made it easy for you.” Games against the amateurs of the United States and Denmark were the only ones he won, and McMillan sometimes wondered whether he belonged in such illustrious company as Lawrie Reilly and Gordon Smith. Reilly scored a hat-trick against the States that day at Hampden, in a match described as an “amusing interlude” in Andrew Ward’s Scotland – The Team. Two goals for Scotland within the first ten minutes killed the game as a contest, and the score was 4-0 at half-time. Making a mockery of the self-doubt McMillan says he experienced with Scotland is the late Bob Crampsey’s recollection of the day. Writing in The Scotsman in 1998, the respected football historian noted that “the team that had won 6-0 was never picked again yet I invite you to look in particular at the right wing, Gordon Smith and McMillan, two of the purest footballers this country has produced.” The US, whose centre-half Charlie Colombo wore leather gloves throughout the game, didn’t have a hope, despite an astounding 1-0 victory over England in the 1950 World Cup in Brazil. “They had played England, and beat them, we though oh oh, who do we have here?” remembers McMillan. “We had not a clue about them. Because they had whacked England we thought we need to watch ourselves here. Maybe that was a good thing. If they hadn’t beaten them we might have come out and think it was toffee. If you think that, it can rebound on you.” Still, it’s possible to detect from McMillan that he felt he didn’t belong in a Scotland jersey. “I moved from Airdrie to Rangers, not knowing what was ahead of me, worrying about going from a wee provincial club to a big club. “I maybe had the wrong attitude. You have to be a bit like Jim Baxter was, a wee bit arrogant, a ‘nobody is like yourself’ sort of thing. Instead, McMillan was the complete opposite to Baxter. “I had a slight inferiority complex,” he admits. “It’s not a good thing for a footballer.” McMillan considers Baxter to be the best footballer he played with, but his complaint about his team-mate is a familiar one in that he feels he could have been even better. “I couldn’t believe what I heard he’d been up to on a Friday night when I turned up on the Saturday,” McMillan says. Harold Davis, who played just behind him, is a different story. The Korea war veteran made the best of himself despite horrific wounds sustained in active service with the Black Watch. Recalls McMillan: “At the end of the game you would be in the big bath and you could see the scars on his tummy. You would think: ‘how is he able to full-time football at this level after what he went through?’ That’s the type of man he is. He used to encourage me, if things weren’t going well. “I always maintain that, because he was behind me, I lasted longer at Rangers. Harold won all the balls for me, and I said to him: ‘Harold, I am fine if I get the ball in a bit of space. As soon as you win the ball, I will be looking for it right away’. And that’s how we operated. “Football is all about movement, making space to get away from your opponent. I just needed a second, then I could get the ball under control and use it. That is what I was good at. I could get the ball and take men on and I had good vision, I could pass a decent ball. But I couldn’t header and I couldn’t tackle! I had deficiencies as well as one or two qualities.” His lack of inches meant he relied on his wiles to escape the rough and tumble of the game at the time, and the lightness he displayed on his feet was perhaps partly attributable to the Italian-style football boot both he and Ralph Brand preferred to wear, to the great suspicion of manager Scot Symon. “It didn’t have that bulbous toe which was common at the time,” he says. “You could get the feel of the ball better.” The knocks have, though, caught up with him, leading to a hip replacement 17 years ago which itself now needs replaced. The complaint, he believes, is a consequence of his preference for shielding the ball with what he refers to as his “largish bottom”, and which meant 18 years’ worth of heavy impacts from behind as defenders jostled for the ball. It has curtailed his golf outings, but he will be fit enough to watch from the stands as his granddaughter plays in a second successive Olympic games, this time in a rather more convenient location than Beijing. “I think I have been allocated a ticket,” he smiles, clearly proud that the Olympic ideals he espoused throughout his career – “to my mind there was nothing better, whether you had won or lost, than coming in after a hard game of football” – are still being upheld in a talented family.

Analysis: is Blue Knight Paul Murray fighting a losing battle? Hugh Macdonald Wednesday 21 August 201 THE shifting quicksands of the Rangers saga have consumed a variety of personalities. Charles Green, the bluff Yorkshireman from central casting, joined the ranks yet again of those who have been banished from the drama on the south side but a more significant character now has a leading role in what will happen at Ibrox. The name of Paul Murray was absent from a Rangers statement in the wake of the dismissal of Green as a consultant but it does not require the combined skills of Interpol to deduce that he forms a block to any immediate resolution to the boardroom problems. To summarise the plot so far, if somewhat crudely: there is a move from outside the boardroom to remove Brian Stockbridge, Craig Mather and Bryan Smart and replace them with Frank Blin and Murray. A club statement last night read: "This board has been working tirelessly to find an intelligent solution to the request for a general meeting and all of the directors are open to sensible and reasonable additions. For instance, the board are not against Frank Blin becoming a director but do have reservations about other proposals.'' When it comes to Murray, some on the board have more reservations than the Apaches. There was a feeling of relief that Green had gone, a belief among his opponents that a metaphorical stake had finally been placed through the heart of the significant shareholder, but there was also an anxiety about his almost diabolical powers of recovery. The most pressing difficulty for Rangers, however, centres on Murray. The opposition group could make a compromise by suggesting Blin, former executive chairman of PricewaterhouseCoopers Scotland, is joined on the board by A.N Other. Jim McColl, part of the outside group, would not consider such a role but the more intriguing aspect is the willingness or otherwise of Murray to relinquish his attempt to join a board that needs stability. The indications last night were surprising concrete given the fluidity of events at Ibrox. First, it seems there exists a strong aversion to bringing in Murray from among existing board members. Second, there was no sign of Murray issuing any sort of statement saying he would fall on his sword to facilitate peace, at least for the present. The objections are believed to be both personal and on matters of business. The accountant was part of the board before Craig Whyte bought the club and is seen by some as part of the problem rather than part of the solution. One City source said: "Murray had his chance to influence matters when he was on the board and then had his chance with the Blue Knights. There is no mood among some on the board to bring him back into the fold.'' The private concerns are shrouded in claim and counter claim. The Rangers story has been extraordinarily messy with dirt thrown in all directions. Information has leaked steadily. Murray, rightly or wrongly, has been suspected as one of those who have used media outlets to his advantage. If true, he would stand in a crowded dock as the briefings have come from almost every source, every faction. However, the fog of war has cleared just a little over Ibrox. Green has been sacked, disposed of by an increasingly frustrated and determined Mather. There is now an opportunity for compromise and even, heaven forfend, resolution of the boardroom struggle. This could come in a variety of forms. Two options are most likely. The first is Murray stands down and the McColl group is allowed to bring in Blin and an unspecified ally. The second is that Murray, backed by McColl, stands his ground and maintains his attempt to come on to the board. This eventuality would be fast-tracked by the approval of a vote at the extraordinary general meeting. The crux of the matter is this: if the McColl group is sure of the support of a group of shareholders, it will feel it has no need to sacrifice the candidature of Murray. McColl and his cohorts will flex their muscle and the Blue Room will undergo yet another change of cast. Mather, it must be presumed, would not wait to be pushed and Stockbridge and Smart would face a limited future. There are a couple of possible twists, of course. This is a Rangers story, after all. The first is Murray could step aside temporarily, peace could break out and he could then be brought on board at a later stage. The second is that the present board finds enough support to win any vote. There is also the possibility of hearing the less than dulcet tones of Green joining the increasingly raucous debate. He may be gone but no one will be surprised at another scene-stealing interruption from the former chief executive. However, the narrative is now about Murray. Will he walk away or will he pursue his ambition to be on the board? History suggests it be latter option. The arithmetic will decide whether the erstwhile Blue Knight finally lands his prize. http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/analysis-is-blue-knight-paul-murray-fighting-a-losing-battle.1377061992

IF YOU wanted to delve into the world of footballers placing bets on matches then you had better set aside a year of your life in an attempt to document it. Even then, a year would probably only get you a bit of the way through the alphabet, maybe as far as H for Hartson. Big John never made any secret of his fondness for a bet when he was a professional footballer, nor ever attempted to hide the fact that he was dealing in pretty big sums of money. It’s all there in his autobiography. Chapter and verse. Hartson was lucky in that, although he gambled outrageous sums, he never seems to have been a problem gambler, never a man who couldn’t control himself when he needed controlling. The game was full of such people, past and present. They have a disease. Kevin Twaddle was in the papers the other day – and published a compelling book – about his epic struggle with his gambling addiction, a struggle that brought him to the point of suicide. There are stories all over the game of high-profile players losing almost everything. Matthew Etherington, the Stoke midfielder, said he got on the team bus years ago and, by the time he got off it, he had lost £20,000. In his gambling years he estimated that he blew £1.5 million, mostly on horses and dogs but also on football. Dietmar Hamann, the former German international and ex-Liverpool player, lost £200,000 in one night. Dominic Matteo, the Scotland international, said he only came to terms with his own self-destruction when he experienced a moment of clarity about wasting his daughter’s inheritance. Kevin Kyle’s battle was well documented. Andy McLaren’s too. There’s no end of sad tales. It’s a grim business. Mercifully, Ian Black, we believe, is not of these people. His gambling is said to involve small – if not tiny – sums, so the question of his betting being a curse in his life does not arise, it seems. That’s a relief. Black, of course, is one of many, many players who dabble in betting on football matches. Casual punters doing a coupon or two on the weekend. The fact that it is banned by the SFA clearly has no impact on footballers. So many of them have a wager and so few of them make a secret of it. Some of the lesser-known players even go on Twitter talking about it. They’re the fortunate ones in that they have not been charged, whereas Black has. His followers can bang on all they like about him being made a scapegoat and the SFA opening up a can of worms and they can slam the SFA for being hypocritical if they like, for players are not allowed gamble but the association is only too glad to accept the sponsorship of a betting firm, William Hill. There’s been a lot of noise around the Black subject. It was only a fiver. They’re all “at it”. The central charge is that Black not only contravened clearly-stated rules but that he went several steps beyond that by gambling on his own team not to win. That is the most serious charge you can level at a footballer. The allegation is that he backed his team not to win, so did he try to influence the result while on the field? It was only a fiver? The amount of money involved hardly matters. What matters is if it is true or not. What is key is the charge that, on at least one occasion, Black played in a match in which he backed against his own side. He will face sanction on the other 157 charges if they are held up but he can recover from those even if found guilty. Players have recovered from a lot worse. An awful lot worse. The battleground is the three games and particularly the one – or more – in which he played. Ignorance of the rules is no defence. Nor is the old chestnut of them all being “all at it”. Did Black bet against his own team? That is the only seismic, potentially career-ending, question to be answered here. Trust is the big issue at Ibrox now Charles Green might have left the building but in offering the Easdale boys first refusal on the vast majority of his shares, when he’s free to sell in December, the question must be asked about the fine detail of any cosy arrangement between the former chief executive and the Easdales. He’s gone in body, but will Green’s influence live on regardless? The latest statement that came whirring out of Ibrox tried to strike a conciliatory note, offering a welcome to Frank Blin from the agitators in the shadows led by Jim McColl, Paul Murray and, of course, the supporters in great numbers. You could paraphrase the statement thus: “Okay, if we let Blin in will you shut up and mind your own business and will you, for heaven’s sake, stop banging on about the state of the accounts?’ Green may have “gone” but the need to carry on and bring real change to Ibrox is as pressing as it ever was. The fans are being told that there was £12.5 million in pre-share offer money lodged to the Rangers bank account along with £12m of season ticket money and £22m of share money and that, of the £46.5m raised in something like 10-11 months, only £10m is left. If that is true then it’s a crisis of waste. If it’s not true it’s a crisis of trust. Either way, Green or no Green, accountability and responsibility needs to visit Ibrox before it’s too late. In that sense, Green’s exit should change nothing. No Spanish inquisition over Schuster doping comments when the former German international and current Malaga manager Bernd Schuster spoke about performance-enhancing drugs and why he thinks their use is legitimate when helping a player to recover from injury you might have expected a major reaction from the footballing authorities in Spain. Doping deemed acceptable in certain circumstances by one of the game’s most high-profile figures? Imagine if somebody said the same in Britain. There would be an outcry and, most probably, a demand for the person in question to explain his comments. In Spain, there has been virtually nothing. Because, in Spain, this kind of thing doesn’t really matter. Doping? Yeah, whatever. Schuster’s attitude to doping should have had the governing body in a flap. If he condones this kind of thing, has he ever allowed it to happen? Does he allow it now? To his knowledge, has any player under his stewardship ever taken performance-enhancing drugs for any reason? Do any of the medics attached to Malagahave any history in doping in professional sport? Questions, questions, but no answers. Indeed, none of them is likely to be asked. Back in February, Inaki Badiola, a former president of Real Sociedad told the AS newspaper that in the early years of the millennium, in a regime previous to his own, Real Sociedad employed the infamous doping doctor, Eufemiano Fuentes. Badiola stated that he discovered annual payments to Fuentes of almost €328,000 and that he sacked two of the club’s doctors when he realised what had been going on. The payments were repeated for a number of years and the products that were administered to the player were banned substances. The response of the authorities was to deny and then look the other way “Thanks be to God, there is no doping,” the president of the Spanish FA, Angel Maria Villar, told El Pais. “Well, very little, so little that the cases given are just an anecdote to an anecdote. In Spain, players take many tests each weekend and nobody is found to be positive. That is the reality. The rest is just talk, talk, talk. . .” “As long as it’s for recovery purposes, I have no problems with it,” said Schuster. “If a player can reach his full fitness level two to three weeks faster, then it makes sense.” It tells you much about the unquestioning culture in Spanish sport that Schuster could say such a thing seemingly without any fear of an inquisition.

Here's an interesting article about Uefa's financial fair play regulations by Stefan Szymanski http://www.soccernomics-agency.com/?p=527 He thinks that it will lead to a closed system like the N.F.L. where big clubs are protected from competition and owners can actually make a profit. I've been aware of, and opposed to, these regulations for a while but the following quote surprised me: Interested to read what the rest of you think of it all.

Turns out a rumour which has been floating around all week is true for once! He was only just given a new 1 year deal this summer, but it looks like the lad might have finally burnt his bridges and his last chance at the club could be up in smoke. Fingers crossed because the sooner the club gets rid of these smart arse Nandos crew chancers and gives the opportunities to lads who really deserve it, the better off the club will be. Cole Stays Away Written by Andrew Dickson DARREN COLE has been asked to stay away from the club on a temporary basis following a breach of discipline. The 21-year-old was due to be part of the squad for the Garry Lynch Memorial friendly between junior side Cambuslang Rangers and a Light Blues reserve team on August 11. But Cole failed to report for the game and following a discussion with manager Ally McCoist, he is not currently training at Murray Park. The defender has found himself fall out of favour in recent weeks after being included in the squad for the Northern Tour matches at Brora and Elgin City last month. He hasn’t featured for the first team since that second fixture at Borough Briggs on July 10 and isn’t being considered for selection at present by McCoist. The Gers boss said: “Darren failed to report for the game against Cambuslang but he’s not following a fixed suspension. “He didn’t attempt to contact anybody at all to let them know he wouldn’t be coming to the game and it goes without saying we thought his conduct was totally unacceptable. “I’ve asked Darren to stay away from the club until further notice and until we discuss what our next course of action will be. “I’ve already had a chat with the player to register my disappointment with him and to ask him for an explanation. “What was said there will remain between him and I but I’ll also need to have a talk with my staff to decide what we will do now.” http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/4838-cole-stays-away

Sure to be an interesting day ahead as the board meet to discuss various issues... 1. Charles Green's position as a consultant - sack, censure or promote? 2. EGM requisition - do they accept it's requested board changes, confirm the EGM or reject the requisition altogether? 3. New chairman - erm, see 1. 4. Expedited publishing of audited accounts 5. Reaction to Ian Black notice of complaint I'm currently standing outside the Norton House Hotel awaiting the arrival of the key players...

I know this is probably the 6 million dollar question, but I confess to be constantly left behind when it comes to knowledge of the more low level corporate wheeling and dealing of shares (and I'm sure I'm not alone). Can anyone give an overview at a high level of roughly how the split in shares stands at the moment, and what the likelihood is of it falling on the side of McColl at final count e.g. Current - Approx - 29% McColl, 36% Green, 35% unknown, but xxx looks like getting most of the unknowns? (purely fictional figures as an example). I'm finding that I'm pretty much in the dark who is buying shares, and for whom, and what the current 'known' split is. Am I being optimistic asking this? Are we all as much in the dark as each other as to the state of play?

Friday, 16 August 2013 AHMAD, GREEN AND THE MONEY-LAUNDERING FEARS OF WHYTE'S £137,5000 RANGERS have been placed at the centre of money laundering fears over the mysterious £137,500 paid into the bank account of Imran Ahmad’s mother by Craig Whyte. And further doubts have also been raised over just what that the money was for after a letter from Charles Green was leaked. For the leaked letter from Green to the Scottish Football Association – now available on-line - gives an explanation for the mystery money which is different and entirely at odds to the one Imran Ahmad trotted out at the time the deal was first revealed four months ago. At the time Ahmad insisted that it was all just a devious scheme to trap Craig Whyte into believing he was investing in their group’s move to gain control of Rangers through a CVA, in order that he would be easy to deal with. The story Ahmad spun was that the £137,500 was a payment made by Whyte to show his good faith in the Ahmad-Green promises that he would be part of the future of Rangers and that they needed to get Whyte’s agreement to get his shares if they got their CVA proposals accepted. All of which seemed pretty plausible. However, that is not the same story as the version which was spun by Charles Green in a letter to the Scottish Football Association which claimed the £137,500 was money from Whyte to reimburse Ahmad for the £200,000 payment Ahmad personally made to Duff and Phelps to secure exclusivity on their bid for Rangers. That was not an investment in Rangers, but a fee to Duff and Phelps. The only real point where the Imran Ahmad story and the Charles Green tale of woe merged was when they both claimed they had no idea where the £137,500 paid into the bank of account of Imran Ahmad’s mother actually came from. And that is the point in Charles Green’s letter to the SFA which Hampden bosses quite rightly pounced on and which saw them raise the serious spectre of the sort of financial jiggery pokery, the sort of shady fiscal dealing which flags up concerns about money laundering. For there are strict regulations in place concerning the movement of money. Just try to open a bank account without a whole host of documents to prove your identity and you’ll see what I mean. Yet Imran Ahmad and Charles Green want the SFA to believe that £137,500 was accepted into the NatWest bank account in London of Imran Ahmad’s mother without the NatWest having a clue where it came from. By the time the SFA replied to the claims made in Charles Green’s letter, he was no longer chief executive, therefore they drove a their bus through the gaping hole in the Green story in a reply sent to the then chairman Malcolm Murray which has also been leaked and is available on-line. The SFA letter quite properly pointed out that the money Imran Ahmad got from Craig Whyte did not appear to have been subjected to the normal anti money laundering procedures and asked why that did not occur. It would be interesting to hear from Imran Ahmad on that point. It would also be interesting to hear from Charles Green on that point. I wonder if they will sing the same song this time, or if their tales of woe will again fail to tally. All of which once again raises the question of just where Craig Whyte gets the cash to sustain his considerable lifestyle? Just where did he get that £137,500? After all, as every examination of Craig Whyte’s business dealings reveal, he has no visible means of support, a fact I have mentioned on numerous occasions and a mystery Charles Green and Imran Ahmad must have been aware of at the outset of their dealings with him. However, they seemed to have been quite happy to take £137,500 of Craig Whyte’s dough without any of the normal checks on just where his funds were coming from, procedures which Imran Ahmad must be familiar with given his history of work in the financial sector. It was also something which Imran Ahmad was happy to keep secret until the shady transaction was exposed in April. Then he tried to explain it away as a con trick on Craig Whyte. Charles Green also sought to find an explanation. Unfortunately for him, his version of events, as we can now see, does not tally with what Ahmad said. And these are the two men some deluded folk still want to see back inside Ibrox, running Rangers. posted by leggoland @ 09:09 http://davidleggat-leggoland.blogspot.co.uk/

http://www.gersnet.co.uk/index.php/latest-news/155-mccoll-the-messiah-some-key-questions From a cursory look across the various forums this sunny Wednesday morning, I note Jim McColl et al appears to be requesting EGM support from the Rangers supporters who are shareholders (apparently around 12% of the whole). Fair enough and not an unexpected development but this is actually an important issue so please allow me to labour the point somewhat. First of all, I'd fancy, under normal circumstances Jim McColl would be exactly the kind of investor and/or board member and/or outright owner our fans would literally carry up the marble staircase to victory. He's substantially rich, apparently a genuine fan and his business reputation is clearly impressive given his various successes. What's not to like? Unfortunately, as we know, the situation at Ibrox is far from normal and McColl’s influence with specific regard to Rangers has hardly been impressive in recent times: 1. McColl has been involved with previous failed bids – including an aborted attempt at fan ownership in conjunction with the RST and purportedly a rejected post-D&P deadline bid for the club along with Walter Smith last year. Has he learned from these experiences? 2. McColl has always come across as reluctant at best and quirky to a fault when it comes to Rangers. Sure, a football club can’t be seen as a sound investment by someone used to making money rather than losing it but, if he’s a fan, then his involvement would only ever be an emotional one anyway. Where does he draw the line between personal concern and business? 3. Fan trust of anyone involved is at an all-time low. The most recent regimes from Sir David Murray and Craig Whyte have failed completely whilst the current incumbents are struggling to retain supporter backing with a variety of poor decisions. Thus, anyone who wants to control Rangers has to accept public scrutiny will be higher than anything they’ll have experienced before. Does that fit with McColl’s preference for remaining in the background? 4. His current share-holding is hardly impressive (even if he may have the backing of others). No-one knows just how many shares McColl owns but it must be lower than the LSE-notifiable 3%. Is that reflective of his overall interest or just someone who prefers to stay under the radar? Just how much money is he willing to spend? 5. McColl and/or his group have never made their plans clear and, in fact, it's impossible to tell from one day to the next if they want to buy the club and/or if they just want to be a short-term controlling bloc to ensure ‘effective’ ownership (perhaps via a new share issue) is transferred to someone else like Dave King. How exactly do they see the club’s financial future? All these valid questions means, instead of having the automatic backing of a huge majority of supporters (and indeed other shareholders), many people are - quite rightly - less than clear about what he's offering. Ergo, to make calls for fan backing without being completely open on his intentions is not the best strategy in my opinion. Indeed, it could be said he’s suffering from the same problems the Blue Knights stumbled into last year; namely failing to grasp supporter attention amidst a variety of strategic errors. To conclude, I'll say again: Jim McColl should be the right man for the job, but the very fact we have doubters (based on constructive criticism rather than daft stuff about his politics), doesn't reflect well on his efforts so far. Thus, I'd argue that McColl still has a bit of work to do if he wants to be successful; even if the fact he's come this far suggests he's clearly confident. However, if it's a straight choice between a Charles Green and a Frank Blin along with an Imran Ahmad and a Jim McColl, I don't see many fans opting for the former. Of course, as always, it's not as simple as that so McColl and his group would be well advised to avoid complacency and/or assume fan backing. If not, he only needs to phone Paul Murray to release what over-confidence can do to your reputation. What Rangers fans want more than anything is a well-run, self-sustainable club. If McColl can provide that, then great but instead of hiding from the debate on how this can happen, why not show the support why you’re the right man for the job. That’s real leadership quality and, if the plans are viable, then backing would be a given. Over to you, Jim…

NACHO NOVO is playing in the league which sees him take on Jose Mourinho on Saturday night. But for the ex-Rangers striker, the SPL will always be the special one. Novo, 32, has been away from Ibrox for 18 months now, since joining La Liga outfit Sporting Gijon. As a born and bred Spaniard he's living the dream facing the likes of Real Madrid, and he's up against Mourinho's men this weekend. But Novo still finds himself thinking back to his time in Scottish football. He told SunSport: "I don't know anyone who wouldn't want to be involved in this kind of game. It's massive. "Real are a really great team and a lot better and stronger than they were last year. "It's going to be hard, but we have done very well when we have played the top teams at home. Hopefully we can get a good result. "I'm looking forward to it. There will be around 35,000 inside our stadium and the atmosphere should be great. "But it won't be like a Rangers and Celtic match. For me that's still the best there is. Nothing I can experience in Spain will come close to it. "That's one of the things I miss about Scotland, the supporters. "It's not just for the Old Firm games. Every week they travel all over the country to watch their team. The weather isn't great and it can be expensive, but still the fans are there. They sing for their team and as a player that is amazing. "We have some great teams in Spain and it's great football. But there are sometimes games where the atmosphere isn't anything like Scotland. The culture is totally different. "What you have in Scotland, you just can't beat it. I miss it. "Scotland for me is my home. It's where I have lots of friends who helped me turn from a boy to a man. "I was always happy there and some day in the future I think I would like to go back. I really love it. "Scotland gave me everything I have now. It made me as a player and made me as a man. "From Raith Rovers to Dundee and then Rangers, I grew up there and cannot forget that. "People forget I was so young when I moved there. It's the place I think of as my home. "That may sound strange because I am from Spain and that's where I live now. But whenever we have time off I fly back to Glasgow to spend a few days with friends. "The problem is we train so much here, mornings and then in the afternoons. "The next time I'll be off is at Christmas time." Even in Spain Novo is glued to his TV watching Ally McCoist's side in action. Rangers' shock 1-0 defeat to Kilmarnock hit him hard last weekend. But his problem now is that his telly is on the blink. Novo added: "I got Sky TV for my house, but it's not been working properly. I'll need to change to another satellite company â?? or move! "I need to watch Rangers whenever I can. They are my team and they always will be. I have feelings for Raith Rovers and Dundee too, but Rangers are the team I support now. "I always check the results and I was disappointed to see they lost to Kilmarnock. "But Coisty and the lads are still at the top of the table and four points ahead of Celtic. That's the important thing." Novo has been in and out of the Sporting Gijon side because of injury this season, making just five appearances. But he scored a last-minute winner against Getafe last week for his first goal of the season. Now he's dreaming of a strike against Madrid this weekend. He said: "We created history for this club last season by beating them. It was fantastic. "All week in training we've been looking forward to this game. It's not a normal week because Madrid is special." Read more: http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/spl/3970718/Id-rather-face-Celts-than-Jose.html#ixzz1fEkESJGh

Your very own piece of Ibrox history. I am selling Rangers desk sets that are made out of the wooden seats that were installed in the Main Stand at Ibrox in 1929 and were removed in 1990. They were originally sold in the early 90s following the modernisation of the main stand (the original leaflet is below). The "Executive" model comes complete with twin pens and golf on aluminium plaque with the Rangers crest and has an upright formed from the back of an individual seat with the original ivory coloured number disc with solid brass pins. �£89.00 The "Gold" model has all the features of the the executive plus a polished brass plate on the reverse of the upright with your own individual name and company position (or whatever you would like) engraved alongside the Rangers crest. �£114.00 Postage & packing are on top. I can email a paypal invoice to you or else it could be arranged to meet up at Ibrox on a matchday. I have sold a number on FF and everyone has been delighted with them If anyone wishes to order one or would like further information, please PM me.

Rangers face Euro ban unless accounts are signed off by independent auditor Dec 2 2011 Keith Jackson TOP BRASS at UEFA last night warned Rangers face expulsion from European football next season unless the club's financial house is put in order. Record Sport can reveal that as things stand, the SPL leaders would be denied an £18million ticket into the Champions League even if Ally McCoist led his side to a fourth consecutive league title - but Rangers sources insist they still have four months to ensure their accounts are signed off and submitted to the SFA ahead of the March 31 deadline. The Ibrox club have breached UEFA president Michel Platini's tough new Financial Fair Play Regulations by publishing their latest set of account WITHOUT having them signed off by an independent auditor. On Wednesday night, the club announced their annual financial figures for the year ending on June 30 to the PLUS Market but, for the first time in the club's history, the figures were not approved by appointed accountants. Edinburgh firm Grant Thornton have refused to discuss why they have not signed them off but UEFA have made it clear Rangers will be denied entry into the Champions League or the Europa League unless their accounts are rubber-stamped before the end of the current campaign. It's understood Rangers have until December 31 to publish a fresh set of figures and then lodge them with Companies House in Edinburgh. But if those results are not given a clean bill of health by the auditors, the club's chances of being granted a licence in time for next season will be damaged further. Although the situation would then become ever more serious, the stricken club believes the vital date for Euro approval will not arrive until next March. A UEFA statement read: "Glasgow Rangers FC, as with any club participating in UEFA competitions, will have to go through a licensing process which the national association in question manages. "Subsequently, the national association (not UEFA), the SFA in this case, will assess whether or not the club has fulfilled the mandatory licensing criteria. "This will take place in March/April. If the answer is yes, the club can take part in UEFA competitions next season and if not, they won't receive a licence." The SFA, who last night announced their own probe into Rangers owner Craig Whyte, are already aware of the breach in Platini's policy. They are now bracing themselves for the potential fall-out should they be forced to freeze a member club out of European football. The Hampden beaks refused to comment on the situation last night but, as things stand, they would have to turn Rangers down flat. UEFA's Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations article 47 spells out the need for all financial results to be signed off by auditors. It says: "Annual financial statements must be audited by independent auditors." And last night an SFA insider informed Record Sport that Rangers will have to "work extremely hard" between now and the spring if they are to pass UEFA's criteria. The source said: "When Rangers submitted their application for this season they were up front about a number of financial issues they were dealing with. "They were in dispute with the tax man but this was declared and, as it was a legitimate dispute, it was allowed and they still satisfied the criteria. "But if they do not satisfy the criteria this time then they won't get a licence for Europe. "There is a lot of work to do before they can qualify. Right now Rangers and the SFA are in a difficult position. The club has an obligation to provide a signed set of accounts and if they are unable to do so then their application cannot be approved. "It really is becoming quite a serious mess."

Published on Sunday 27 November 2011 00:52 SEVENTY-Five years after Celtic brought the first Indian player to Europe to play professional football, two others have arrived at Rangers. No doubt the trialists at Murray Park, Sunil Chhetri and Jeje Lalpekhlua, are well-versed on the story of their predecessor in Glasgow, Mohammed Salim, a talented winger who never quite made it, remembered in places as the Barefoot Indian of Celtic Park or The Juggler of Calcutta as one Scottish paper called him in 1936. Salimâ??s time here was short-lived. Homesickness got to him. Truth be told, we donâ??t know how long his countrymen are going to be around either. For the players, and for the club, their arrival is like a journey into the unknown. What chance have these guys? Long odds against, you have to say. Chhetri, more experienced and a proven international goalscorer, is considered the best bet, but then he failed to impress when at the Kansas City Wizards last year and didnâ??t hack it during a trial at Coventry a few years earlier. There are also work permit issues. QPR wanted to sign him in 2009 but he was turned down for a permit because India are miles outside the top-70 nations in the world rankings. They still are. And that is still a huge issue. Even if Rangers wanted to sign these players, they might not be able to under the rules. We shall see. Somesh Upadhyay writes about football in his homeland and has waited a lifetime to see an Indian player have an impact abroad. In the beginning there was Salim. The Bangalore-born Paul Wilson flourished at Celtic in the 1970s, but he was raised in Scotland and came through the traditional Scottish route. More recently there was Bhaichung Bhuta, a star at home but one who couldnâ??t cut it at Bury. In between there was Harpal Singh at Leeds and not much else. There are some players of Indian origin â?? Michael Chopra, for instance, and the French international Vikash Dhorasoo â?? but to claim them as Indian would be clutching at straws. In these parts the best known Indian player is probably Jesminder â??Jessâ? Bhamra, a fictional female footballer in the film Bend It Like Beckham. â??If even one of Chhetri or Lalpeklua make it to SPL, the popularity of the SPL in general and Rangers in particular will scale new heights,â? says Upadhyay. â??It has a potential to add 50 million new fans at least. The fact that the SPL is telecast in India will only hasten the process. It is one of the most discussed topics among youths in India. Even in smaller towns, people keep up late at night to watch the matches.â? India is very much on the radar of the established football nations. Sometime today, Raymond Farrelly, head of business development at Rangers, is going to jump on a plane bound for India, heâ??s going to spend the next week moving between cities and meetings, from Mumbai to Delhi to Kolkata, all in the name of establishing links, building relationships that will, it is hoped, lead to a commercial result down the line. Last weekend, Rangers set up a Twitter page delivering Hindi text commentary of their game against St Johnstone. They have plans to provide future commentaries in Punjabi and Urdu. They have met members of the Indian community in Glasgow, will meet some heavy hitters from the football world this week and now they have two international footballers at Murray Park and an expectant audience in India wondering if either of them will be offered a deal to stay. â??My agenda is fact-finding,â? says Farrelly. â??I have a lot of a meetings and part of that is sitting down with members of the Indian media. The news of the two players coming across on trial has provoked a lot of media attention. Itâ??s unbelievable, the scope of it. The circulations of some papers over there blows you away. Thereâ??s a huge amount of interest in what weâ??re doing. â??You only have to look at the financial position of our game and where the club sits right now to know that itâ??s absolutely incumbent on us to explore opportunities around the world. If you look at the growth opportunities for Scottish businesses, a lot of them exist in Asia and in particular in India, where there is a real need for infrastructure and a lot of Scottish companies can provide that. So, yeah, weâ??re looking at commercial opportunities, trying to build an audience. Itâ??s a long-term vision.â? The challenge for Rangers is that plenty of others share the same vision. It is a paradoxical football landscape. There is little money in the domestic league and yet massive crowds at the biggest games, upwards of 120,000 for the elite fixtures. And Indian businesses are in acquisition mode abroad. Venkyâ??s, the poultry giant, owns Blackburn Rovers. An Indian group has long been linked with a takeover at Everton. QPR have had Indian backers. Huge sums are paid out to the English Premier League to screen their games in India. Everton just did a lucrative deal to show their games on mobile phones in the country. Rangers are exploring, but others are well ahead of them. Liverpool run a training camp there already. Manchester United have a presence also. It is said that there are 17 million United fans in India â?? and seven United cafes and bars. Bayern Munich are doing more than anybody, making regular visits while also laying down roots with the Bayern Munich Youth Cup for under-16s in Delhi, held last month. The whole shooting match was organised not by some coaching junior, some inexperienced wannabe but by Werner Kern who was an assistant coach at Bayern in their golden era in the 1970s and who has been instrumental in the coaching of recent stars such as Bastian Schweinsteiger, Philipp Lahm and Thomas Muller. Bayern have even sent a Legends side to play in India. It was captained by somebody called Paul Breitner. Bayern have played to crowds of 120,000 in India. Recently, Argentina played Venezuela in a friendly in Calcutta and they got 90,000 â?? and were pretty disappointed it wasnâ??t a lot higher. The place came to a standstill for Lionel Messi in the same way it was brought to a halt when Pele played there in 1977. â??You see the opportunities out there and it can be overwhelming,â? says Farrelly. â??Thereâ??s something like a 60 per cent growth in football advertising and there is a lot of large multi-national companies who are linked with football in India. Thereâ??s an appetite to work with a club with the history Rangers has. We donâ??t have the world class superstars other clubs have but we have a strategy that is about more than a player walking into a hospital and disappearing for the rest of the year. We have a strategy for a long-term legacy and if we can find the right business partners to develop it then creating an Indian powerhouse is a tangible goal.â? All eyes on Chhetri and Lalpekhlua, then. Not just Rangers eyes, but the eyes of the growing number of football obsessives in a nation of 1.2 billion. http://www.scotsman.com/scotland-on-sunday/sport-columnists/aidan-smith/tom_english_rangers_seek_indian_sign_1_1987329

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/nov/05/celtic-neil-lennon-bolo-zenden

The article headline says it all. Scotzine

It's not easy being a prophet in the internet age. Obviously, in terms of getting your message out, there are advantages. You can quickly build up a faithful following, and with each disciple comes the potential for word to spread further. Twitter, Facebook (FB), blogs and other social media are the stuff of dreams for your modern day David Koresh. However, with this quick and easy access to rumour and gossip comes a major downside. It's easy to verify whether you are talking rubbish and when your miracles don't come to pass you are open to fast and widespread ridicule. With this in mind, the trick to being a prophet these days is to brainwash your followers to such a degree that even evidence of you getting it consistently and totally wrong is not enough to shake their faith. They will instead condemn the media who have failed to report your prophecy. It must have come true, right? "It's a conspiracy of silence" they will cry. In this respect Philip McGillivan has performed admirably. He's managed to get 99% of his prophecies wrong but still has a faithful and increasingly large following amongst the more eccentric in the Celtic support. These poor unfortunates will cling to anything in the face of their team faltering so badly in the title race. His prophecies are in the very narrow, and some would say unlikely, area of Rangers Football Club. It seems odd that a self confessed supporter of Irish Republicanism, the IRA, Sinn Fein and Celtic would be the recipient of information about Rangers but there we have it. God (and Philip's mind) moves in mysterious ways. Philip, we are told, has a hotline to the legal minds involved in Rangers ongoing struggle with the tax man. These legal minds are "staunch Rangers" men and yet have chosen Philip to disseminate the confidential and highly damaging information which he claims to possess. Now Philip, some of you may recall, was the mastermind behind the "Fakeover" campaign on Twitter and FB. The Craig Whyte takeover was all a sham. It was never going to happen. Craig Whyte was a front and a distraction invented by David Murray. All of this, of course, turned out to be total nonsense. Undeterred however, Philip just moved on to his next prophecy, putting the mistake down to an unreliable 'source'. Who knows, perhaps this voice in his head has now been banished, never to return. Suddenly, Philip had a new 'source' to which he gave credence with the news that this "staunch Rangers" man had actually told him that the "Fakeover" information was incorrect. If only he had listened... So it was with confidence that Philip and his band of brainwashed minions moved on to the next day in the 'Philipian' calendar. The 27/28th of October (it never pays to be too specific when making things up). This, we were told, was going to be a "momentous day in the history of Rangers Football Club". The inference being that the momentous nature of the day was not going to be positive for the club. In fact as the date drew nearer we were informed with increasing certainty, and not a little gloating, that this would be the day that Rangers went out of business for good. I believe the phrase "Game Over" was overused. Well Philip - Aberdeen, Celtic and the SPL league table would disagree. Philip to his credit does not give up. Even at 10pm on the night of the 28th we were told that Craig Whyte was holding a crisis meeting at Ibrox at which his 'source' was present. Rangers had "ceased to trade" he told us. Ibrox seemed like an odd venue for this meeting. Presumably somewhere more cloak and dagger would have been appropriate, had the meeting actually taken place, but this sent Philip's minions on blog sites and Twitter into a frenzy. The "huns" were out of business. Praise be to Philip. Well it turned out to be pish again. This prompted even Graham Spiers, no friend of Rangers and a serial apologist for any unpleasant behaviour at Celtic Park, to label Philip as journalism's "ultimate chancer". Personally I thought this was quite generous since Philip isn't really a journalist at all but Graham did then undermine his point somewhat by making a prophecy of his own - that Rangers would in fact be out of business within 14 days. It's difficult to resist the allure and attention of the prophet's life apparently. Now it seems increasingly likely that Rangers are going to face some form of administration unless they win the tax case or come to some mutually acceptable arrangement with HMRC. This will no doubt be met with cries of "told you so" from Philip and his minions. However, let us not forget that Craig Whyte himself has already acknowledged that administration is a likely outcome if the tax case cannot be resolved in our favour. It's hardly breaking news. Presumably guessing that every week is going to be the week that it happens is now enough for Philip's disciples. If, or when, he eventually get's it right he'll be hailed as a Celtic hero. The man who brought the "huns" to their knees. Well that's not really the truth but truth doesn't play a large part in the minds of these people. If Rangers emerge from this whole affair unscathed then something along these lines will happen. It will be declared a disgrace by Philip. Some shadowy, 'establishment' organisation will have taken matters into it's own hands and will be blamed for rescuing the club. Indeed this conspiracy theory is already being prepared and has been given some major consideration - just in case he's got it wrong again you understand. Disciples have been urged to contact Celtic (and any other SPL clubs they can pretend to be fans of) to ensure that they do not give any support to the idea that a "New Rangers" should be allowed to continue in the SPL. This of course ignores the financial realities of life in the SPL without either of the Old Firm, but reality, like truth, is not the currency in which Philip deals. If it does come to pass that somehow Philip has got it totally wrong again, then his disciples can be assured of one thing. Philip will strive to expose any Rangers related miscarriage of justice - if only his disciples can keep his website alive a bit longer with all their kind donations......

Here's a couple of link to Rangers past shirts,they're both the same site, just diffirent secrtions. I thought they might be of interest to anyone that's not managed to find this site. http://www.historicalkits.co.uk/Scottish_Football_League/Rangers/Rangers.htm http://www.historicalkits.co.uk/Scottish_Football_League/Rangers/Rangers-change-kits.html There's a wee bit of history at the end, which I've not read myself yet.

CRAIG Whyte has intensified his battle with the BBC by stating that any member of the club who speaks to the broadcaster, even in an off-the-record basis, â??will never work for Rangers againâ?. Incensed by what he calls an â??institutionalised biasâ? against his club within the walls of Pacific Quay, Whyte re-iterates his intention to sue the broadcaster, adding: â??Maybe the BBC are going to be paying the [HMRC] tax bill.â? In a wide-ranging interview, Whyte expresses thunderous views on the BBC and, as he sees it, the motives behind their documentary Rangers: The Inside Story, aired on Thursday evening. Whyte says that not only he is suing the BBC but that he is also considering taking legal action against one of the contributors in the programme. Robert Burns, head of investigations at the governmentâ??s Insolvency Service, suggested that Whyte could have faced a two-year jail sentence for his involvement with a firm called Re-tex Plastic Technology in a period when he was disqualified from being a director. Whyte says he hasnâ??t actually seen the BBCâ??s investigation but is au fait with the allegations it makes, Burnsâ??s suggestion of criminality being the most serious. â??On the basis of what Iâ??ve heard the Insolvency Service said last night Iâ??m looking into the possibility of suing them personally. For what he [burns] said, he deserves to be sued personally. Because itâ??s a lie.â? The Rangers owner also states that his bitter foe and former chairman at Ibrox, Alastair Johnston, has been e-mailing him in the last ten days looking for £30,000 in expenses from when he was still in the chair at Ibrox. Whyte says the communication was friendly at first, but then last midweek it turned nasty when Johnston threatened to sue if the monies were not paid. â??There was this series of e-mails and I was really surprised,â? says Whyte. â??So then he puts a deadline of last Friday on it and said if I didnâ??t pay it he was going to sue. There was an overhanging threat of a law suit if I didnâ??t pay him.â? During the HMRC tax bill segment of the interview, Whyte concedes that he made an error by being so secretive for so long in relation to what he intends to do in the event of a worst-case scenario. â??With hindsight, I should have probably said more about this when I first came in but on the other hand we were battling to win the league at the time and I didnâ??t want to put negative issues out there. As soon as the league was over, I should have come out and said â??Look, thereâ??s a big job to be done hereâ??. I should have got my message out a bit sooner.â? Administration, said Whyte, was very much an option in the case of a mammoth tax bill from HMRC. It is, he stresses, something that he is attempting to avoid but he argues that it might not be the nightmare that some have predicted. â??Other than a regrettable event in our history I donâ??t think it would be as bad as people think it might be. â??But thatâ??s not what I want. Itâ??s something Iâ??d rather avoid, if at all possible.â? Meanwhile, Rangers manager Ally McCoist would not be drawn on any of the controversies that are swirling around his ears at present. â??Iâ??m not going to talk about any television programmes or anything like that â?? all I am going to say is that I spoke to Craig Whyte on Friday morning, as I always do, and we are both in total agreement that the most important thing is Sundayâ??s game at Tynecastle. â??We had a chat about the team, the players and the squad â?? as we always do â?? and we are both of the opinion, which we both feel is the right one, that at this moment in time the fans deserve to know that we are totally focused on the game at Hearts.â? http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spl/craig_whyte_vows_to_sack_anyone_at_rangers_who_talks_to_bbc_1_1924986

Published on Sunday 23 October 2011 00:12 In the wake of the BBCâ??s documentary about him, and his extraordinary response in yesterdayâ??s The Scotsman, what have we learned about the Rangers chairman? IMAGINE for a second if Sir David Murray had listened when Alastair â??No Surrenderâ? Johnston had asked him to put the brakes on the deal to sell Rangers to Craig Whyte. Imagine if Murray withdrew from the negotiations and kept hold of the club himself, allowing Whyte to walk away and resume the life of privacy he so obviously desires. What then? Johnston wanted the Whyte deal blown out of the water. And yet, if he is to be believed, the kiboshing of the deal would have meant that Lloyds Banking Group would have instantly withdrawn Rangersâ?? line of credit, thereby tightening ever further the financial strait-jacket the club had been wearing for two years. The other night, in the BBC documentary, Rangers: The Inside Story, Johnston spoke about a phone call he received from a representative of Lloyds who, Johnston alleges but Lloyds denies, threatened a withdrawal of the credit line if the chairman and his fellow members on the Rangers independent board committee were seen to block the takeover process with Whyte. Regardless, Johnston and chums did all they could to block the sale to Whyte, but failed. They were doomed to failure, but imagine if they had succeeded. If Johnstonâ??s recollection of the phone call from Lloyds is accurate, Rangers might have been dynamited there and then. No credit line, no funds to buy players, no funds to offer players new contracts, a possible exodus of the best players with all the proceeds going to their bank to whom they would have still owed £18 million. The sale of Allan McGregor, Steven Whittaker, Steven Davis, Steven Naismith and Nikica Jelavic might have broken the back of it. Maybe. Of course, there still wouldnâ??t be a shilling to give to the tax man, be it for the smaller bill, in the region of £4m, or the howitzer relating to the Employment Benefit Trusts which, depending on the outcome of the case, could come in at a cataclysmic £49m. That is a possible â?? you might say probable â?? repercussion of Whyte being told that he was far too enigmatic for the independent boardâ??s liking. Murray did the deal because heâ??d no time for Johnstonâ??s vague protestations and his astounding willingness to halt the negotiations so that the board could give due consideration to a counter proposal from fellow director, Paul Murray, the detail of which would not have filled the back of a box of matches. Murray torched the idea of a delay and did the deal with Whyte because he had to. Heâ??d had enough. He didnâ??t have the money to invest any more. And he could see this possible calamity with HMRC coming at him like a runaway train. He didnâ??t want to be the one to put Rangers into administration â?? or worse. Somebody else could do it, if they had to. He didnâ??t want that on his legacy. Of course it will, if it happens. All the successes, all the good times, all the hubris will look altogether different if Whyte feels that he has no other option but to place Rangers into administration in the wake of a mammoth tax bill. Itâ??s by no means certain that the HMRC case will go against the club but theyâ??re certainly mobilising the troops in readiness for it. Murrayâ??s legacy would be dirt at that point. He off-loaded the club for a quid to a guy he knew little about, a guy whose first, second and third instincts in business are to reveal as little as possible about where he came from, where heâ??s been, whatâ??s he done and what he plans to do next. The air of mystery has resulted in speculation and investigation. Thatâ??s only natural. Whyte has brought some of this on himself â?? all the gossip online, all the doubtful words about his wealth, or lack of, all the allegations that heâ??s a chancer with ulterior motives. By revealing nothing, he opened up a vacuum that was always going to be filled, either by truth or by fiction or a combination of the two. In yesterdayâ??s Scotsman, Whyte was quizzed about all manner of things. The response to that interview has been instructive. Those who already believed in him now believe in him even more and those who never believed seem to have had their prejudices confirmed. In Whyte, people are seeing what they want to see. On one hand, he is a crusader against a biased BBC, a defender of Rangersâ?? reputation. On the other, heâ??s paranoid and attempting to intimidate the organisation with threats of legal action. When he refuses to name even one other company that he is involved in â?? he says he doesnâ??t want the publicity â?? his supporters say, â??Good, give â??em nothingâ? and his detractors say â??Ah, whatâ??s he got to hide this time?â? There is no doubting that the allegations in the BBC programme â?? that for a period of seven years he was disqualified from being a company director â?? are damaging, but the connection the BBC then made to alleged criminality was far from nailed down. It is on that basis that Whyte has engaged the heavyweight legal firm, Carter Ruck, to represent him in a legal suit against the broadcaster. Given all that he has said about his outrage at the BBC and his promises to take them all the way to the courts, Whyte cannot back down and hope to save face. From talking to him at length on Friday, he sounded like a man who was sure of his ground. Only the courts can satisfactorily decide on Whyte versus the BBC. Somebodyâ??s reputation is going to be set ablaze, though. A ban here and a law suit there, Whyte is, by his own admission, bloody-minded and stubborn. Many will say he is a lot more than that, naive and daft to be picking some of the fights he has picked and dense to buy Rangers in the first place, but there is no doubting his focus, no doubting his ruthlessness either. From day one, administration was an option in his mind in the event of the tax bill coming in at an eye-watering level. He denied it was way back when and he says he regrets not laying his cards on the table a bit earlier. Heâ??s open to flak on that front. To hear him talk, not quite matter-of-factly about administration but certainly without any emotion of what it might mean to the fabric and history of the club, was fascinating. It would be a horrendous episode in the clubâ??s story, a mortifying chapter, a stick they would be beaten with for years to come by those across the city of Glasgow. Whyte says that, should the case go against the club, heâ??d rather not go into administration, but he wouldnâ??t shed any tears if he thought that was the best thing to do. â??Other than a regrettable event in our history I donâ??t think it would be as bad as people think it might be,â? he said in The Scotsman. Itâ??s a dispassionate way of looking at it. Take the emotion and the sentiment out and apply some hard business savvy to the situation. In fairness to Whyte, any bill due to HMRC was not accumulated on his watch. This is a Murray legacy, a hangover from the previous regime. Whyte is there to sort it out, not apologise for it. All the financial challenges are ones he inherited. He knew all about them and says he has a plan to deal with them and woe betide anybody who gets in his way. The truth is that for all the conclusions that have been drawn about him â?? good and bad â?? itâ??s still too early to make any hard and fast calls on Whyteâ??s controversial regime. How events at Ibrox unfolded: 26 Aug 2009: Alistair Johnston is named as Rangers chairman after David Murray announces he is to step down. 6 Mar 2010: Murray confirms that he is considering his shareholding in the club after speculation regarding a possible takeover. 8 Mar: Rangers confirm that Murray is in talks with interested buyers. Nov: Whyte tells the Stock Exchange that he is considering making an offer for Murrayâ??s share of the club. Whyte holds initial talks with Murray International Holdings and registers an interest with the Takeover Panel, suggesting that his takeover would be complete by January 2011. Dec: A deal is agreed in principle between Whyte and Murray International Holdings for an 85 per cent stake in the club. 31 Mar 2011: Whyte meets the Rangers board to discuss his plans for the club. 19 Apr: Johnston claims that the board are yet to see any proof of Whyteâ??s proposed £25 million investment in the club over the next five years. 6 May: Details of an offer from Whyte for 85 per cent of Rangersâ?? shares is received by the Takeover Panel. The deal is accepted. 24 May: Chairman Johnston and director Paul Murray leave the club. 24 June: Suspended chief exectutive Martin Bain resigns from the club. 17 Oct: Club legend John Greig and former chairman John McClelland resign as non-executive directors and claim that they had been â??excluded from participating in corporate governance at the clubâ? since Whyteâ??s takeover. 18 Oct: Ahead of a documentary on the takeover saga, Rangers â??withdraw all co-operationâ? with the BBC after â??repeated difficultiesâ? with the broadcaster. Former director Donald McIntyre wins a plea to have £300,000 of the clubâ??s assets frozen as part of his case against the club. 20 Oct: BBC Scotland Investigates: Rangers â?? The Inside Story is aired, detailing Whyteâ??s previous business history. It is received with anger by Whyte who says he will take legal action against the broadcaster. http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spl/tom_english_craig_whyte_in_focus_1_1925881

The ownership of Rangers by Craig Whyte is entering a crucial phase as the tax tribunal approaches The key passage in the story of Craig Whyte and Rangers will happen in the not too distant future. That much is certain, after yet another week in which the Ibrox club found themselves courting front as well as back pages of newspapers. The occasionally warped situation where football fans have more of an interest in directors and balance sheets than full-backs and strikers has one positive offshoot. That is, scrutiny of those purchasing clubs should limit the potential for ruinous scenarios. Notwithstanding the fact boardroom change is inevitable following most company buyouts â?? let alone hostile ones such as this â?? the departures from Rangers directorships of John Greig and John McClelland were notable. Both made it clear they felt hampered and frustrated by Whyte's management. Greig is the former player perhaps most symbolic of the club. McClelland remains a respected figure in Scottish business circles. Both were part of an old regime at Rangers that expressed concern about Whyte's takeover in May; now, the old guard has been all but eliminated. Two of that group, Martin Bain and Donald McIntyre, have between them successfully frozen £780,000 of Rangers' assets as they pursue breach-of-contract cases. These are increasingly bitter battles, with Whyte firing spoken bullets towards the duo who, the owner believes, were complicit in Rangers' previous financial mess. In riposte, former Rangers board members will point to a £40m borrowing at the end of June 2009. By the time Whyte purchased Rangers two years later, he did so by buying out a bank debt of £18m. In that 24-month spell, Rangers won four out of six domestic trophies. Bain was the chief executive and McIntyre the finance director who collaborated with the Lloyds Banking Group on a business plan. The potentially significant impact of Employee Benefit Trust payments came to light during this period, but there has never been any doubt about the origin of these schemes in relation to Rangers: via the Murray International firm, effectively the football club's parent company, several years earlier. The former Rangers management team would also dispute the widely held notion that Whyte's due diligence uncovered a separate tax liability the club continue to dispute. That came about, it is instead argued, because of a precedent ruling that allowed Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs to "revisit" Rangers. A day after the exits of Greig and McClelland, Whyte reopened his war with the BBC by withdrawing all club co-operation with the broadcaster. Central to this move was a documentary about the Rangers owner's business history, screened on Thursday evening, which has since triggered legal action by Whyte. For all the arguments about the public-relations merits of such a stance, one thing is clear: a sizeable chunk of the Rangers support has no problem with Whyte taking on the BBC. They regard this as a fightback against perceived reporting injustices. The blunt reality is that a vocal element of fans care little about the past of directors; they want to know their club is safe and that their team will win games. The entrenched attitude here is similar to that towards Bain and McIntyre. Whyte used another broadcast outlet, Scottish Television, to insist that his Rangers legacy will be a positive one. Which is, external and media wars aside, the most meaningful issue here. After all, that relates to Rangers' very future. The message from Whyte about the onset of administration if Rangers lose their upcoming tax tribunal is now more consistent. The consequence of that turn of events has seemed obvious for months, with the club patently unable to cope with a bill that could reach £49m in the event of defeat to HMRC. Whyte, as the secured creditor, would then inherit a business with only his chosen overheads. A key question that has to be asked to Whyte is: "Who will be the primary beneficiary based on the structure in place if Rangers enter administration?" Without threats from a bank or taxman, Whyte could then be in a position to sell Rangers on for a profit on an investment that was initially £18m and has since increased. Yet the penalties and brutal realities attached to administration go beyond those that would hamper Rangers' SPL title bid; few financial analysts see any sense in this being a chosen course of action for Whyte when he took Rangers on. The man himself insists everything possible will be done to keep Rangers from administration, an entirely understandable public stance. Still, the most bemusing aspect of Whyte's Rangers takeover â?? as has been the case from day one â?? relates to why he completed the deal with such a massive tax liability possibly forthcoming. The other recurring theme around Ibrox is what will happen if Rangers successfully challenge the tax authorities. If that occurs, Whyte will control a business without two of the main creditors that have cast such a long shadow over the club in recent times. Rangers would, in such circumstances, be more attractive to potential investors. Would Whyte, at that stage, seek a short-term profit by selling the club on, or prove that his talk of long-term investment is meaningful? Before he took over, those in the Ibrox boardroom were convinced Whyte did not intend playing a long game at Rangers. It may be no coincidence that Dave King, who has been linked with buying Rangers regularly in the past, has not severed his ties by resigning as a nonexecutive director since Whyte took over. Whyte's hint that Rangers would not challenge any loss of the tax tribunal highlights at least one thing. That is, he wants Rangers' circumstances clarified as soon as possible. In the meantime, a lack of European football in any form leaves an obvious hole in their income stream. The club have been embattled for some time, but how Whyte handles forthcoming events will be more worthy of scrutiny than what has come before. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2011/oct/21/craig-whyte-rangers?CMP=twt_gu

On the face of it, there isn't a lot to be worried about as Rangers fans. After all, a cursory look at the SPL table shows us sitting proudly at the top less than six months after winning the title for the 3rd season in a row. Poor European performances aside, surely the Rangers support should have smiles as wide as the Clyde? Unfortunately the answer is no. While most fans will be enjoying what is happening on the park; off the field we're less confident. Oft-discussed tax 'queries', boardroom reshuffles, legal challenges and confusion over proposed government laws means it isn't easy to find a Rangers supporter who is genuinely certain of the club's competitive future. Indeed, even when Craig Whyte did finally take over the club there wasn't a great deal of real excitement despite the investment promises he made shortly after. Rightly or wrongly, cynicism was more prevalent - perhaps a remnant of failed promises from the previous regime? Moreover, a lack of demonstrable positive business experiences (and finance) from the new owner, coupled with the old and new tax investigations meant that rather than welcoming Whyte with open arms, many fans were guarded to say the least. To that end, the relationship between the owner and the support hasn't really improved. Although we've seen Gordon Smith appointed as 'Director of Football' the other names apparently involved are less well known to fans. Ali Russell, Phil Betts and Gary Withey may all stand up to scrutiny if you examine their business CVs but are they Rangers men in the same way people like John Greig, John McLelland and Alistair Johnston could show? Also, why haven't their directorships been announced to PLUS? Of course, just because someone isn't a Rangers fan per se doesn't mean they won't do a good job in their roles. In fact, it could be argued that having more 'neutral' minds in charge will mean more suitable business strategies. After all, if a self-professed Rangers man like Sir David Murray can run us to the brink of bankruptcy via a string of dubious tax schemes (aided and abetted by those named above) then that perhaps points to the wrong model. Unfortunately, we have no way of knowing just where we stand with Whyte. Despite a low key meeting with the Assembly (and another one with the Trust tomorrow) his intentions are no more obvious than they were before he took over. Clearly, as touched on earlier, our European failures this season means finances will be even tighter than usual, so it is worrying that no updated plan of action has been discussed. We can only hope the Trust can ask the questions that matter. Can we really expect any positive outcome though? Without wishing to be gratuitously negative, the short-term outlook is bleak. In previous seasons without essential European income, we've lost up to £10million unless we sell key players. Given none were sold in the last window, can we really afford to turn down offers come January? How will such potential sales affect our title challenge? Add in £4million of outstanding tax claims; ring-fenced director dismissal costs and what must be large lawyer fees (which we also struggle to pay); then this is indicative of palpable pecuniary issues. If we take that line of reasoning to its natural conclusion, does this mean administration is more likely than ever before - irrespective of the larger HMRC tribunal due to be ruled on next month? If so, what are the ramifications of such a decision? Would a pre-pack agreement and ten point deduction be enough to start again afresh? How would the history and reputation of our existing club be affected? How would MIH and SDM's contribution be examined? Some of the answers may come on Thursday night via what is likely to be a less than positive BBC expose by Mark Daley of Panorama fame. Suffice to say, these answers won't be the ones we want to hear and quite frankly, the fact our club is now under investigation on three fronts (legal, media and tax) isn't just embarrassing but a scandal which should concern every Rangers supporter. Now, some will say our current predicament isn't one of Whyte's making. That's true and it's unfair to suggest the guy is to blame for existing HMRC problems. However, it has been several months now since he bought the club and he has yet to really show us how he intends to run it. With next to no board of directors and minimal investment, how can he possibly do so effectively? To conclude, as Halloween approaches, we certainly do have people knocking on the door of our proud club. They're dressed as tax men, lawyers, and journalists - and all are frightening me to varying degrees. However, the scariest aspect for me is that we've still to see the person who is answering the door to these people. Who is Craig Whyte and what costume is he wearing - the sheep or the wolf? It is beyond time for him to show his hand - no more sweeties and no more small change. What is the future of Rangers Football Club?

Thankfully Killie didnt take 3 points.... Lennon must stay !! Sponsored by Celtic boss admits he feared for his job at half time By Stephen Halliday Published on Saturday 15 October 2011 19:46 CELTIC manager Neil Lennon has admitted he feared for his job when his team went in at half-time 3-0 down to Kilmarnock at Rugby Park. On an astonishing afternoon in Ayrshire, Celtic looked certain to sustain a fourth SPL defeat of the season as calamitous defending helped an impressive home side race ahead through goals from Dean Shiels, Paul Heffernan and James Fowler. But for the first time in their history in a domestic fixture, Celtic avoided defeat after falling 3-0 behind. A double from Anthony Stokes and a Charlie Mulgrew header, all of the goals coming in a frenzied seven minute spell, completed a salvage operation which perhaps prevented Lennonâ??s position being seriously considered at the club last night. Asked if that had been a concern at half-time, Lennon replied: â??Of course it was. All those sort of thoughts go through your mind. But you have to try to motivate yourself and your players in that situation. â??It was as important a half-time team talk as Iâ??ve ever had to give. Another defeat, in the manner we were playing, would have been very difficult for me to take. It could have been a huge loss for us. â??I was as angry as I could possibly be at half-time. Defensively we were very, very poor. The midfield were poor, the two front boys were poor. As a collective, their performance was nowhere near acceptable. We did have a great chance to go one up, which Anthony Stokes missed, but the goals we conceded were awful. It was long balls over the top which we just were not dealing with. It is something we have to eradicate very quickly. â??I asked the players to find some belief, will and guts, to dig deep in the second half. They did that. Iâ??ve got mixed emotions now. Iâ??m angry, but Iâ??m also proud of how they came back in the second half. â??Overall, though, Iâ??m disappointed. We canâ??t afford to keep dropping points because Rangers have been very consistent so far. We have to make up a lot of ground already.â? Lennon was scathing in his assessment of Celtic after they completed the first round of 11 SPL fixtures. â??We havenâ??t been good enough,â? he said. â??We have lost three games already and thatâ??s far too many. We have also conceded too many goals. We have problems at the back which we need to find a solution for very quickly. It is the same personnel as last season, but there seems to be a nervousness about them. I donâ??t know where it comes from. We have to look at ourselves as well, the backroom staff, but we are not doing anything different from what we did last season.â? Lennon has a fresh injury concern to contend with ahead of Thursdayâ??s Europa League match against Rennes in France. Striker Gary Hooper failed to reappear for the second half yesterday after suffering ankle damage. â??Weâ??ll just have to wait and see how he is,â? said Lennon. â??But we will have Kris Commons available again after suspension and hopefully Georgios Samaras will be fit.â? Kilmarnock manager Kenny Shiels was left to reflect on another match from which he felt his team did not emerge with their just deserts. â??When you are 3-0 up after 72 minutes, you expect to get all three points,â? said Shiels. â??But the Old Firm always have the quality which can get them back in a game. Thatâ??s 11 games in the SPL now and, apart from against Rangers at Ibrox, we could easily have won them all in terms of our performances. â??Even after it went to 3-3 today, we had the best chance to win it through Paul Heffernan. We dominated the ball for long periods and it wasnâ??t as if Celticâ??s goals came as a result of incessant pressure on us.â?

Taken from his autobiography. And Boozegate