barca72

FT 2-1 Juve. penalty.

If the SNP win a huge majority in Scotland, where would you expect your above description of the UK government adapted to the Scottish government to change?

The problem with strict liability is that you are letting the police escape responsibility for security. If the club is dictated to by the police as to what level of police presence is required and what level of private security stewarding is required ( and the club must be since the police closed the youth cup final to the public ), then if the club is to be penalized for any breach of field security where do you expect the police presence to be required? Apart from protecting the public, they should be protecting the players also. I remember in my day there was no need for fences since you had a line of big Glasgow bobbies patrolling the track around the pitch, sometimes a double line moving in opposite directions. I would think that the match commander should be the person responsible for this kind of security and not the club. UEFA, by forcing all responsibility on to the club to cage the fans in by building fences, are risking another Hillsborough.

HT Juve 1-1 Real

Forewarned is forearmed. Maybe he thinks he has given Liewell enough information, and is hesitant to give him any more details of his plans.

It's not about the football anymore, is it?

http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/9192-youth-cup-would-be-nice Here's another article for those who think our youth system is a mess. When you look at the fact we have perhaps five players from the U-20 team who are almost good enough for the big team, and the fact that they have made the cup final that's good. Ally that to the fact that there are three under 17's in the U-20's, and we have this U-15 being selected for the Scotland U-17 squad - you have to ask yourself if our youth setup is really that bad. Maybe if Kingco invest some decent money in the first team over the summer, and with these youths coming through we may not be that far away from getting back to No. 1 after all.

Thanks for your help, Bilel. Happy retirement Jig. Viso gero, Marius. Now, do McGregor and Gasparotto have enough skill an experience to do the job?

Allahu Akbar ...

We are being cynically ostracized again.

Good report, again. Is Mbabu going to be good enough to help us in the playoffs?

I agree, but Motherwell ( or any other former SPL team ) have a better chance of staying in the Premiership if they only have to play one team. Incompetence, or calculated corruption?

This is the SPFL we're talking about. We're lucky the games finish by the end of May.

These are the reported crowd numbers that attended our home matches against our possible playoff rivals. Saturday, 30 August 2014 16:45 SPFL Championship Rangers 4-2 QOTS ATT: 31,851 Monday, 29 September 2014 21:35 SPFL Championship Rangers 1-3 Hibernian ATTENDANCE: 31,619. Friday, 13 February 2015 21:34 SPFL Championship Rangers 0-2 Hibernian ATT: 29,769 Tuesday, 10 March 2015 21:41 SPFL Championship Rangers 1-1 Queen of the South THERE were 35,018 inside Ibrox If we closed the Broomloan & Copeland Rd. stands ( and if needed, the upper level of the Sandy Jardine stand ), would we still be able to accommodate something similar as far as crowd size. If so, we would be able to reduce on policing and security costs, and hence reduce ticket prices to a level that would see us break even for event expenses and reduce the payout to the SPFL. Surely there is something in the 'roolz' which allow a club to be fiscally responsible.

Get promoted, who says so? We could play all of these games, pay the SPFL all of their money and still lose to Motherwell(?), and still lose money. Aren't we so lucky? What game are you watching?

When this no-charge for tickets plan was first intimated by the club, I thought it was a great idea and that it showed that finally the club was going to assert itself and gain some much needed staus in the game again. The last thing they can do now is back down without a whimper. If this rule C26 is the fulcrum of both sides' argument then who would arbitrate this dispute; the SFA, UEFA, FIFA or CAS even ? I mean you need leaders to lead, but clubs have to be able to take care of their customers, the fans. The other point is that perhaps the club knew exactly what they were doing here in an attempt to precipitate a review of the leadership of the SPFL. Surely with the list of incompetances - lack of sponsorship, fixture and TV date fiasco etc., and now this - this review is long overdue. Again, who has the power to fire this guy Doncaster?

DJ, making the best of a bad lot.

Not unless the Lord Advocate and the Justice Minister change their minds.

Horrible. Strength to his family.

[quote=colinstein;565593 James Connolly was a socialist and would not have supported what became of the south of Ireland dominated by a religious sect. I haven't got a problem with that banner in the photograph. To paint Connolly as a beneficent socialist only is incorrect. For his socialist work he no doubt deserves credit. But the man was also a leader in the 1916 Easter uprising. James Connolly was born in June 1868. Connolly was born in Edinburgh, Scotland. His parents were originally from County Monaghan. The area he lived in was nicknamed ‘Little Ireland’ and was one of the city’s slum areas. In an effort to bring on board Connolly and to tame his more wild displays of militancy, the IRB ( Irish Republican Brotherhood ) took him into their confidence. Connolly was told about the planned rebellion for Easter 1916. After this, Connolly took an active part in the preparations and he was appointed Military Commander of the Republican Forces in Dublin, which encompassed the Irish Citizens Army. When the rebellion started on Monday 24th April, James Connolly was one of the seven signatories to the Proclamation. Connolly was in charge of the General Post Office during the rebellion – the rebels headquarters. It is worth pointing out that the group carrying Connolly's banner also include banner holders of the Irish tricolour and the IRA Lily. No doubt the SNP are truly grateful that they have the support of these terrorist sympathisers.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/celtic-striker-john-guidetti-gets-5608812 ... " THE SFA have today given John Guidetti a slap on the wrist for singing "the huns are deid". Hampden chiefs ruled he was guilty of making a "comment of an offensive nature". But they stopped short of handing him a ban and instead censured him. The SFA have now stated quite clearly that the word 'HUN' is offensive. The Offensive Behaviour Act states that a person using offensive behaviour in or near a football ground is breaking the law. We know that the CFC fans sing this song many times during a football match and yet nothing is done. According to 26th of foot in post#6 he states that "The Lord Advocate, Frank Mulholland has let it be known to PFs, that he is NOT interested in pursuing anyone for usage of the 'H' term. The Justice Minister, Michael Mathieson agrees. The Police have been informed.". Maybe that is why nothing is done about the fact that the CFC fans sing the song of, 'Go Home Ya Huns'. To summarize at this point, the SNP government bring in an Act to curb offensive behaviour at football matches, the footballing authorities - namely the SFA - have decided that the term 'HUN' is offensive, however, the judiciary in the form of the Lord Advocate and the Justice Minister have decided that for their purposes the word 'HUN', although proven to be offensive by others - namely the SFA and the fans of the team to whom the offence is directed - shall not be acted upon as a possible source of inciting a riot or any other severe public disorder (quite how they come to that conclusion I'm not clear). Okay, let's look at a different angle. The word '******' has in the past been proved to be political in nature and yet has been deemed to be offensive ( whether sectarian or not) when the sheriff has decided that when it is sung the singer does not mean ****** but does in fact mean catholic and hence for his purposes if you are a 24 year old man and on your way to a football match you can in fact be jailed for singing a political word which the sheriff decides is offensive enough to cause a possible public disturbance and even a riot. Perhaps someone would tell me why a government, the SNP, would introduce an act - the OBA, and then let individuals summarily decide which words deserve to be treated as actionable under the law and which words are not. Is the law to be used to maintain public order by the government - and therefore without fear or favour on any particular sect of the populace - or only in a selective manner as decided by individuals within the judiciary. Who is running the show here, the government or someone else? If you have any particular doubt as to the clarity of purpose of the way the government is upholding its own laws, would you not then have an intense interest in the character of those people the incumbent party would allow to stand as their representatives in the coming election, perhaps candidates like Brendan 0'Hara who are known to have used the offensive term of 'Hun' in the past? Further, if the government can successfully ( it would seem ) navigate through the mire that is the state of the law above, then one is left to wonder what is next to come down the pipe for the unoffensively ( for some) termed Huns. It would seem unlikely that what football team you support would be a factor in deciding what political candidate would be best suited to represent your community, however, as we can see with this present government and the obvious inconsistencies in its laws, that may no longer be the case whether you consider that insular or not.

An excellent decision by the club. Quite apart from the superb gesture to the ST holders, it would appear to bolster those who enjoy giving a GIRFUY to the SPFL.

Finally, one of our mhedia reporters has come out from under Peter's blanket and penned an honest piece. Be warned, GW, that will mean no more trips to Japan for you.

Forget it. No other country or different sport requires that a referee explain himself for every call in every game. The referee made a call, live with it. This is just a guise to put the referee on trial. Should a referee misspeak one word in any explanation you can be sure that the CFC PR machine would go into overdrive. Bloody arrogance.

Having watched the game, do you think we can beat Motherwell in the playoffs?