andy steel

I'm a bit amazed, if you can be such a thing, that no SFL chairmen have given a statement on this. Something is up, alright.

I don't share your brand of passion. And I wouldn't ever want to share your brand of passion. So your chastisement has the same effect on me as a tim's would. You'll just have to get used to sharing The Rangers with handwringers/self-loathers/traitors such as myself.

Reckon we should leave the other clubs to it. They seem keen enough to get rid of Regan without any encouragement from us, plus we have more than enough on our plates. Course, should he remain, I would then change my position.

Every word of that could be true. But writing it like that makes only fannies believe you. Where does this guy get the balls to talk about sane and rational Rangers fans when he's off the fucking scale?

Doesn't bother me in the slightest if we are called The Rangers. In fact I prefer it to just Rangers. Like The Macallan, like The Open, we are the definitive article. We are The People. We are The Rangers.

Symptomatic, mate. Systematic was by Five Star. System addict...never can get enough.

GDS, SDM, BDO, BCH, CW, D&P, SFA, SPL, BhBC... FFS!

That's really tough. I feel terribly sorry for Claudio and his family.

Thank goodness, a bargaining counter in our hands for once. I would hope this deal can be struck within the week, as then the SFA, should they deny us membership, would be obliged to explain how depriving SFL3 clubs of £xxx over the coming season benefits Scottish football. In this light, Charles not coming to a quick agreement with the SFA takes on a new significance.

I would point out, just so no-one can rebut your points, that Walters was not showered with hundreds of bananas. It was 'merely' about 20.

No doubt a warm welcome will await those BBC staff who have been so balanced and accurate in their coverage of our problems.

While I realise its for TV revenue and that the fans would be pretty low down the list of considerations, fwiw I wouldn't go near this nor watch it on the box. I am in no mood to financially compensate those who have put the boot in.

Anyone spoils this and I'll personally boot their baws myself, and I'm a shitebag.

Well, I can't exactly explain why I think they won't go in with both feet. Probably why I'm no good at business. I think PR is at the back of it. Sky, while no philanthropists, will not wish to be in the position of the people who killed Dundee Utd, St Mirren or whoever. The 'fans' of these teams may contribute the square root of fuck all to Scottish football but do Sky really want to be the bad guys in quite such a public way? Doesn't sound like good practice. While renegotiations, which ought to save the company hunners, can hardly be argued against . £80m for the OF, what will it be without? You wouldn't budget for much more than £20m tops.

I really don't see this being the rip it up scenario some are looking for. Renegotiation yes, complete removal of the deal I doubt.

That's the best q&a summary I've seen, tho I have issues with bits of even that one! I note that the SFA document, which outlined a 'worst case scenario', included yet another made up punishment, the stripping of Scottish Cup wins.

double post

The logical extension of such a sanction would have to be a retrospective withdrawl of Scotland's co-efficient points Rangers accrued in Europe, since we are being said to have been there illegally. Do the SFA ever think these things thru? I imagine whatever clubs are below us in co-eff. table are hurriedly preparing an appeal to UEFA as we speak. Everything that happens just seems to damage the game more and more.

'with my partnet Guy Gisborne' Isn't that the guy out of Robin Hood? Basil Rathbone played him in the best version?

Not the greatest endorsement in the world, tbh.

Can you see the reaction if the Bheeb cover our games? I wouldn't mind having a chat with a good few reporters outside a ground, mind you. See what they've got to say in person, so to speak.

Perils of Twitter! I don't want to sound like Giovanni Di Stefano, either.

First minute - "The question of Rangers Football Club has taxed me for a while! Ouch. Also, the Court of Session is not called the Court of Sessions. I know English people struggle with Scots law, but this hardly fills the onlooker with confidence in his legal skills. And I'm sure Saddam was grateful that he was nearly not executed. Still, what harm can one more loon do?

Subtle bargaining indeed, 3909 04! I don't envy Charles this one at all. No matter what his decision, he'll be seen as wrong, often by the same person - I can see why he'd accept, and I can see why we should emphatically resist. Wisdom of Solomon is needed, but the wisdom of Regan is all that is on offer.

I see in today's 'Keep the Mhanks Happy' statement about what they are going to do to us, Super's chastisement of the SFA tribunal lackeys will come under scrutiny by the compliance officer. This, as we know, is SFA code for he will be punished. There's going to be quite a queue outside Lunny's door, then. The board of Clyde, for a start, have slammed the SFA and the SPL. As have Dunfermline. St Mirren's suicidal chief, if he can persuaded down from his window ledge, must be skelped for blaming the SFL clubs for the incipient meltdown; all those who have called for Regan and Doncaster to go/accused them of bullying/claimed they were acting in a corrupt fashion to help Rangers would be next up. Doncaster, on radio yesterday, stoutly defended Regan over the amount of personal abuse he's received; no doubt the people who have been dishing out this abuse will be hauled up a la Super. And finally, for a bit of humour, I suggest that everyone who has mouthed off about us while getting their facts wrong should also be dragged up. But we know it will just be McCoist!