buster.

A few posts ago you talked about... "I really don't think you help the situation by carrying on its shoulders the tainted history of the old Rangers Supporters Trust" and now you complain about......."throwing around words like toxicity". Your flip-flopping only shows that you wanted to make a one-sided point and didn't want to hear any balance. It's usually best to face up to realities if you want to look to solve a problem, to ignore them is folly.

Take the money and run (aswell as selling Foderingham) and let McCrorie be McGregors understudy.

Don't call him 'Jesus Craig', it'll only encourage him

Why bump this back up the board ? Thread has run it's course and could do with being locked.

I think you only help illustrate the toxicity that remains. I don't think anyone will try and claim that Club1872 have been perfect but the tendency would seem to be one of improvement on a number of issues whilst dealing with ongoing challenges. Now they are forced down a road which in different circumstances they probably wouldn't have went down, but the situation is what it is.

The toxicity of the politics did leave a mark and our culture probably focuses more on loyalty toward the team and that I think is more easily expressed by attending football matches. There are those who seem determined to ensure the political confrontation continues. Club1872 seem to have gradually getting through teething problems and correcting mistakes that were rightly crictised and also gave encouragement to those who are still hell bent on tearing it apart.

I think you exaggerate and I'd replace it with 'a few'. The few tend to be loud and tend to look to stir 'the many'. Club1872 have had their teething problems and that has to an extent, mirrored the complications and difficulties the club and it's board have went through during acrimonous corporate war against people that 'the few' occasionaly went to bed with in their pursuit of interests. As you say, I think this is probably about swelling the funds so as not to be diluted and whilst there appears a degree of desperation at how it has to be done, we live in what can be called desperate times.

I'm not really bothered about Rodgers in this conversation. It's about what Steven Gerrard and his staff bring to the table and I'd emphasise 'the staff' rather than concentrating on SG on his own. Looking at the manager plus back-up team gives more reason to be optimistic about a positive change IMO. When we are able to see how the squad is shaping up, we'll have a better idea what type of place the optimism occupies.

Alves started tonights 3-0 WC build-up friendly win against Algeria and was subed after 57 minutes.

What did Gerrard do as a player who was a proven leader and had notable tactical awareness ? If we are being objective: - He never won a league title..........because the odds were stacked against his team. - He never did anything with England........because of various reasons. - He did inspire to help win various Cup competitions, notably the Champions League against AC Milan. ie. he was a fantastic player but apart from that night in Istanbul, he is human and doesn't have magic dust. It's about him and his staff building something that we might not see the fruits of in the first season.

Have always loved a joker Part of the deal regards playing a joker is to have an ample and wide ranging choice as to what games to play it. eg. Group stages (x3 / 1 per fixture round), last 16 and quarters would be a total of six.

Raw but when he's on it, he makes things happen and would make a decent impact sub. Thing we have to watch is stunting the growth of our own players, eg. Middleton.

Ach well, maybe next year.

They struggled to beat China, 0-1 down at HT, scored a winner in the last minute. Couldn't score against Mexico. Haven't looked good today but have some decent players on the bench. We'll need to score again.

They may well come back into this but I don't think this England team are as good as some think. The bookies weren't rating them that highly.

Scotland 1-0 at HT Long way to go..........

Open doors don't equate with investigations into what is and has been going on.

Within a business plan, you can understand the need to overinvest in the football operation for several years and justify it if there are those who will commit that money. Pretty much what happened from 2015, As you say it's about finding the right balance because the 'overinvestment' can only go on for a limited amount of time. With that in mind, it should be partly aimed at the development side and then on the first team squad. Unfortunately, the year we played 'our joker' and committed to a figure close or at 8 figures is when we made a horlicks of it, both majority of players and management team. (That said, if we were to get say 6M or so for Morelos those mistakes would be mitigated). No more 'institutional failure'................This is why Mark Allen is getting more of a say and we can only hope he does well. If we spend relatively big this summer, we need to get it right.

The Specials got to Number One the week I joined the Marines but I don't think I'm your real Dad.

The tax bill came from a wreckless approach (volume) to using EBTs and the ensuing risk that came with that. Hence, we (under Sir Duped) were committing to more than we should and 'Gaffer' rightly IMO calls it a 'mistake of the past'.

Reminds me a bit of Jordan Rossiter without the bonus of a relatively low fee. Rated / Potential / not played much due to illness. IMO the apparent lack of interest from other clubs down south at such a relatively low fee for them waves an amber flag.

The priority is providing the best set-up for the youths coming through. If Murty fits in with that then fine, if not......

I think the message has already arrived,....... it's about how they react and what happens in and around the two SPFL charges.