Jump to content

 

 

RANGERRAB

  • Posts

    12,969
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

Posts posted by RANGERRAB

  1. On 31 January 2018 at 08:55, BeardyGuts said:

    I have no idea how it works between Queens Park and SFA but is this all a scheme to get a lower rate for using Hampden?

     

    Personally would rather it went to Murrayfield. Better stadium and bigger capacity. But that is completely ignoring all the implications that has been mentioned here.

    Why do the SFA need a bigger capacity stadium for internationals when they struggle to fill Hampden ? 

  2. On 30 January 2018 at 21:34, StuGers said:

    To be honest, this highlights the absolute ridiculousness of all that money spent at Septic Park in the name of the Commonwealth Games.

    Look at the “legacy” that money spent has given sport in general, it hasn’t benefitted one team only at all...

    Questions need asked.

    why would the SFA want to move from Hampden(a UEFA elite class stadium) to the national rugby stadium ?

    if Hampden's unsuitable because the areas behind the goals then Murrayfield is pretty much the same as well as a running track.

    Or is there, as I suggest, another reason ?

     

     

  3. On 30 January 2018 at 19:23, Uilleam said:

    I am convinced that the SFA will not accept the SRU offer. 

     

    There is an ulterior motive in all this, though, and it's all about what is best furrasellik.

    Not if their stadium's fecked

  4. On 30 January 2018 at 19:10, Uilleam said:

    It is not just Ibrox;  the piggery, too, and provincial grounds, as I understand it, will not have the pleasure of hosting,  and gaining the  substantial income accruing from,  internationals, etc. 

     

    I can only speculate that there is some physical problem which precludes use of the swinefold. I suspect that, if this is true (and we are told that structural monitoring is current), fhilthfootballclub will 'move' to Hampden, which will be retained as 'The National Stadium'.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Got it in one.

  5. There are no guarantees with any signing but we've signed a highly rated 21 year old MF player with nearly 100 games under his belt in our top division.

     

    I'd rather we did that than spunk millions on players in their thirties who are past their best & mostly interested in topping up their pensions.

  6. On 24 January 2018 at 22:55, Waltersgotstyle said:

    But by that point we were up 2-0. You have to look at it in context.

     

    You could say we should have been 3 or 4 up by half time.

    But we weren't 3 or 4 up by half time. We were very wasteful in front of goal.

     

    We were never out of sight in that game tonight despite dominating the game.

     

    Until we finish off teams like we should have done tonight we can forget about winning the title

  7. On 20 January 2018 at 18:11, MacK1950 said:

    A "rhetorical" question,when making signings do we get players who will be the same as they are with the club whom they are signed?,it's a case of suck it and see at first.

    Naismith is on loan at hertz until the end of the season. Levein is already on record saying hertz couldn't afford him at the end of the loan.

     

    if he does well at hertz we may well be interested in him at he end of the season but I don't think he's played enough games this season for us to be interested at this stage

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.