buster.

Some interesting numbers I came accross elsewhere SPFL season 2015/16 (TV ratings) Top 5 Clubs by average rating 1 - Rangers - 155,294 from 17 games 2 - Celtic - 149,857 from 35 games 3 - Hibs - 135,889 from 9 games 4 - Ross County - 123,250 from 4 games 5 - Killie - 116,250 from 4 games Top 5 Domestic Games of the Season (Viewers) 1 - Rangers vs Celtic - Scottish Cup - 17/04/16 - 501,000 2 - Rangers vs Hibs - Championship - 28/12/15 - 273,000 3 - Rangers vs Cowdenbeath - Scottish Cup - 10/01/16 - 244,000 4 - Aberdeen vs Celtic - Premiership - 03/02/16 - 237,000 5 - Hearts vs Celtic - Premiership - 27/12/15 - 233,000 Attendences 2015/16 Top 2 averages in Scottish League Football 1 - Rangers - 45,325 (Championship) 2 - Celtic - 44,849 Top Scottish League Attendances 2015/16 1. Rangers v Alloa - 50,349 2. Rangers v Hibs - 49,995 3. Rangers v Hibs - 49,220 4. Rangers v St.Mirren - 49,216 5. Celtic v Aberdeen - 49,050 Top Scottish Cup attendances 2015/16 1. Rangers v Hibs - 50,701 2. Rangers v Celtic - 50,069 Some of the info comes from: http://www.thefootballlife.co.uk/post/145009173811/the-tv-review-of-the-spfl-season-201516 http://uk.soccerway.com/teams/scotland/rangers-fc/1899/

The programme is obviously given 'guidance' for a number of dates, eg. derby fixtures at New Year, mostly Celtic home games after European midweeks etc. It'd be just another wee adjustment.

Away with your political correctness, appreciate the curves and leave us all in peace. In the main the 70's were fine. We put out the likes of Bayern Munich (72) and Juventus (78) in the 70's which was more or less like beating West Germany and Italy at the time. West Germany were Euro Champions in 72 and WC winners in 74. Juventus had 8 or 9 of the Italian national team.

These guys have their pockets so full of money that there isn't any room for anything else, never mind an ego the size of JM's. There will be more money spent by the two Manchester clubs this summer than the Dutch, the Scottish, the Norwegian, the Swedish and the Danish top tiers combined.

He may not respect or be scared of them, but he's going to have to do what they tell him, 'answer' their questions and he won't like it. At a time when many shareholders in SD want change in the boardroom, the fact that he has been very publicly seen to have to climb down and attend the committee is damaging for him. His marauding panzer division are showing signs of weakness and bad judgement and after an especially bad 12 months, his crisis management team would have been desperate for this not to happen. I hope he does goes in with the 'I'm not sacred of you type attitude' because he'll be more liable to drop a clanger. However I think his advisers & lawyers will be extremely careful to prompt and stop him where they deem neccessary. ------------------ Late last year or early this I was going to try and run a thread with all the Ashley negative articles together but saw that the trickle became a deluge and simply going to The Guardian website you could locate them quickly and as for public opinion (never mind Rangers supporters) any reputation he may have had has become badly tarnished.

Can't agree. Ashley likes to be in control and the last 12 months or so has seen various parts of his empire perform poorly, come under intense spotlight from the media and authorities and have a general perception forming that 'Goldfinger' is turning into 'Shitefinger'. At the committee Ashley, (who doesn't like softball interviews) will be on live TV (I think) having to field difficult questions. He will do it in an enviroment he won't be comfortable in and the national media will be watching and waiting with their fingers on a keyboard. If nothing else it should help maintain the negative focus on Ashely (if committee have done homework properly, are prepared for the obvious tactics SD will employ and within reasonable bounds, be prepared to call a spade a shovel). I'd pay to be given a seat on that particular committee the day Ashley rolls into town.

The Man Utd board have got two appointments badly wrong. You could argue that Sir Alex was responsible for the Moyes appointment but I'd say that the board were equally if not more responsible for allowing it and then only supporting him in a half-hearted fashion. LVG was 'yesterdays man' and was never going to work. The board went for what they saw as big club experience / safe pair of hands and got it way wrong, pishing away a LOT of money at the same time. Third time lucky ? They again see a big club experienced manager with a good track record (tbf, it's excellent) but he's not a safe pair of hands anymore and his once winning personality seems to be becoming a handicap within the politics of big clubs, eg. Real Madrid, Chelsea (2nd spell). JM isn't known for playing 'the MU way' either but if he wins, he'll be ok and I think MU will be throwing the kitchen sink at the transfer market to try and ensure success........but that doesn't always work. I watched Zlatan on 3 or 4 occasions this season and whilst still an excellent player, I think he is definately on the way down. MUtd need a top player in his pomp as per Cantona, Ronaldo back in the day. Whether Martial could be that player or they need to buy him I don't know. Could easily go either way with Jose............

It's not a pro-unionist party that would significantly eat into the SNP powerbase. You need the Labour party to eventually get their act together and become a party worthy of their name and show the SNP up to be 'Left of centre', only in rhetoric.

The squad and the radar are two different things.

I don't think you are liable to get a 'measured reaction' if the problem to be addressed has been evident for a longtime, has been allowed to fester because of a lack of unified, organised & coherent action. All within what is perceived to be an increasingly hostile enviroment. That said the club and the new fans group seem to be on the same page and something more constructive may come of it. I'd agree that forcing Petrie out and forcing our side of the argument into the mainstream are realistic goals. Police investigations and the independent commission will take care of themselves.

The response from those in positions of 'responsibility', ie. Rod Petrie, said it all. He defiantly and repeatedly refused to categorize as 'disgraceful', any attacks on Rangers players by his clubs fans. His disdain and indifference were written all over his face. 7 minutes into the video linked below http://stv.tv/sport/football/1354888-see-hibs-chairman-rod-petrie-respond-to-cup-final-crowd-disorder/ --------------- If the Hibs chairman and SFA Vice President can get away with it then 'throw away the keys'.

To do anything constructive about it, the club and the support together have to act. It's been years of our support suffering, the club keeping their distance and the cornering of both the support and club (that generally looked the other way and refused to recognize/deal with problem). The players being attacked on Saturday and subsequent aftermath was the crossing of a line that appears to have the club and support on the same page regards the general 'political' situation.

In many parts of the world the political scene is shifting. That includes many 'Western Democracies' where the many of the electorate are unhappy, confused and worse off in several ways, including their pocket. This has opened the door to political opportunity for both 'progressives' and 'extremists'. What may have been wild speculation and unthinkable a decade ago is becoming considered speculation, very possible and in some cases probable or has happened. Politicaly, Scotland has become much more polarised and active but is a bit of a basketcase with no credible opposition. The UK is now a place where the government run/back electoral campaigns that include overt racism as a tool, eg London Mayor campaign run by Lynton Crosby. Far-right parties are getting closer to actual government in several countries, eg. last week it was Austria. I guess what I'm pointing towards are some dangerous tendencies within political attitudes/change,...where in time the denial, attempt to mitigate and deflection from attacks on football players because of the colour of their jersey.......... is a stage towards an altogether darker and more dangerous chain of events.

Listening to the tone of his interview I doubt he'd of resigned even if he'd come out with 'they desreved all they got'. The narrative being peddled is that he wasn't in full possession of the facts when talking about 'exuberence' but the refusal to use 'disgraceful' if there had beemn an on-field attack on footballers is what corners him. This is what should be being used.

He refused to call his clubs fans attacking Rangers players disgraceful when repeatedly given the opportunity by RB of STV. Instead he preferred the word 'unacceptable'* .....ie. indifference. Not to mention not getting in touch with Rangers after the event, either with his club hat (violent fans) or SFA hat (security mgmt)...ie. disdain and lack of responsibility that comes with being chairman of a FC and VP of ther SFA. * video unacceptable/disgraceful at 7mins in http://stv.tv/sport/football/1354888-see-hibs-chairman-rod-petrie-respond-to-cup-final-crowd-disorder/

Editor must be being told by more than one person that story is kosher but I'd very much doubt he's got more to go on than their word and it's doubtful any footage will be released prior to the commission. I'd be interested to know if Irvine/MH is currently contracted and doing work for the Police Federation.

She may end up being thrown to the wolves with the DR citing here tweeting history as a reason, in an effort to 'stop the bleeding'. ps. Have I used enough cliches to be able to apply for a job as a SMSM hack ?

Good Important to get all the available facts to hand and use them well.

The interests of Rangers and the fans group should be more closely aligned than the comparitive example you give. Neither can fans do much about your comparitive example but can re. fans group if they see something they don't like.

There would seem to be various opportunities opening up but we have to be careful about how we go about taking them and not fall into traps. The club and main supporters group should maybe get together for 'a chat'. As Frankie inferred on Saturday night, boxing clever will be more effective than instintive anger.

It's the obvious starting place from the moment it became clear our players had been attacked.

MW won't be changing the general way we play but may make tweaks for certain matches. It's about improving the quality and mitigating/removing any weak links that he may see. This would mostly be about player recruitment, which he wants done asap. Then in pre-season trying to fit it together, make it work and be ready for the 16th of July. I think it'll suit us having the League Cup group games to get up to speed.

To a degree but I don't think he is blameless for the waste. Good luck to them but we won't miss any of the three.

Spiers at work. 1. No need to go to game. 2. Write line/conclusion about Rangers fans, blame and term 'fenian bastards' 3. Figure out a way to reach this conclusion that loosely fits events and also states a case for both sides of opinion on social media before reaching conclusion. 4. Go over text and stick a couple of 'long words' in. ------------------- His MO in recent years has been to give an impression of taking into account both sides of story before always falling off the fence into the same garden. He has tried to be more controversial at times to get more radio gigs but only comes accross as a pathetic attention seeker with no original thought.

I think it's an opportunity to have it ripped up or heavily ammended. If something isn't working (listen to police, judiciary, football fans, other political opinion) you can either change it or stick your head in the sand, up the stakes and make it worse for yourself.