RANGERRAB

Maybe they'll send Whyte's legal bill to LBG ? After all did they not force SDM to sell Rangers to Whyte? Not to mention, of course, the nice little earner Muir got in the process.

So it was Zaliukas' fault not Bell's?

It was Montrose at Ibrox season 12/13 IIRC.It was a league game & not a premiership play-off game. We need to get shot off Bell ASAP. His latest 'injury' is preventing young Kelly going out on loan somewhere to gain experience. We also need proper cover for Foderingham in case he gets injured( a proper injury mind you)

We now face St mirren and hibz away in the next two league games. I think we should be looking for at leat 4 points from these games. If we do then we should be too far in front. If we don't then hibz will be right on our tails.

I don't think Bell will be going anywhere before the end of his lucrative contract McCoist gave him. Where else would he get that sort of money?

I thought Bell was under contract until the end of NEXT season ? Didnt McCoist give him a 4 year deal?

We should try to come to an agreement with him to terminate his contract.

When we got chucked out the top division all clubs(including the yahoos) started cutting their budgets. The result of that has been that for 'bigger' clubs like Du the difference in their budgets than that of 'smaller' clubs like Ross County ,ICT etc is now minimal. Just ask Hibz. They found out the hard way. They got relegated

I agree. The SFA have to intervene. Is that not what the compliance officer is for? Dive and you might get a ban but go out & committ the sort of foul we saw last night and nothing happens. Where is the sense in that?

Unlike Foderingham, Bell doesn't command his penalty box & opponents can see this.

How funny would it be if Dundee Utd got relegated?

Bell a valuable player? LOL. He's hopeless. One of the worst keepers we've ever had. When you see Foderingham it's like comparing night & day.

The sooner these two shysters are off the wage bill the better. Has there ever been a keeper injured as often as Bell?

if the FBA is infested with the usual anti-Rangers pondlife then it's not worth getting involved in IMO. My only wish is our board would start to take legal action against some of these yahoo sites when blatantly spurious allegations are being made against Rangers

If only Ally had offered likewise.......

How many times do these people need to be proved wrong before the penny drops? They seem to think they're all tax, financial & legal experts.

And people wonder why we can only get derisory sponsorships & TV deals? Never mind. Normal service should be resumed next season. The only show in town worth watching will be back

Was shocked to hear this news. Remember him well when I started going to Rangers games with my grandfather in the 1970's. How old was he? Anyone know?

Waghorn needs someone of better calibre to play alongside him up front. Hopefully this will get resolved in January

Don't worry. Won't affect us.

Dalglish inherited a good side when he became Liverpool manager. When he started rebuilding that's when the problems began. He resigned in 1991 and was replaced by Graeme Souness who fared no better

The problem is that there is simply not enough TV and commercial money in the SPFL. And the ten SPL chairmen who decided to vote Rangers out the SPL in 2012 must take most of the blame for that decision which was commercial madness. However they will all soon be made accountable for that decision when the BTC is won & if Whyte gets convicted. For 'sporting integrity' they can then read ' contingency liability' which their clubs may well end up facing.

There's not a hope in hell of the yahoos moving to England. Their anti-British, militant Irish Republicanism is well known South of the border now. We're stuck with them unfortunately

I don't understand how Green can possibly be entitled to have his legal fees paid by Rangers. I could understand a past or present employee of a company getting legal fees paid by that company for any sort of litigation against them for any actions or work during their service with that company provided they were seen to be at least trying to act in the best interests of the company at that time. But this is direct criminal proceedings against an individual is it not ? Or am I missing something here?

And that's never going to happen is it? That's what their existence is all about.