buster.

There must be a reasonable confidence within police investigation/prosecution circles that what evidence is gathered/being gathered can produce a 'result' and in such a high profile case in times when the British public tends to be sceptical that 'white collar crime' is treated 'differently', it would be damaging if the case was to collapse due to carelessness or a technicality. I just want a fair and straightforward trial where the evidence generates the outcome. I'd also want and expect the state to use the very best legal team it has at it's disposal. It should realise that the country will be watching (if we get that far).

I'd agree that messageboards are unwise to pretty much give posters free reign to post what they like on an 'active case'. A "freedom of speech stance" doesn't really cover it as where it crosses the line, it's potentially contempt of court and whatever else that it may or may not lead to. After so many hours and words dedicated towards 'the struggle', it's perverse that a site like FF seems ok with supplying defence lawyers with mulitple screen grabs. Maybe it looks for the increased traffic that this will have provided but after the Crown Office warning, it certainly doesn't seem as if it was on good legal advice. Personally, I think there are several reasons why a panel of judges should be considered instead of the normal jury, as per the Lockerbie case. 1. Public nature of case and the high profile and unbalanced public comment on it over a number of years within both traditional and social media. 2. Difficulty of forming a jury. Demographics and 'divisions' predominately in the West of Scotland, taking into account points made in #1. If you were the lawyer of CW, you could make a good case that given his clients widespread and unbalanced media coverage over a number of years that to find a 12 or 15 man jury who were impartial and thought of him as 'innocent' when the trial started. 3. Length of trial. Could be a long one. 4. Complexity of case material over long trial.

Can't really envisage institutional investors forming a queue to invest whoever the auditor is. I think the vast majority of funds invested would be coming from those with 'emotional connections.

Spier's hasn't got an original thought in his head. He surfs social media and sees the way the wind is blowing and thereafter looks to curry favour/plagarise with certain opinions/moods.....whilst trying to be that wee bit controversial to bring attention to himself. In reality, he is a poor journalist/professional, who doesn't know a great deal about the subjects he covers. He is like a footballer who people once thought could go places (when he started using long words in the SoSunday) but never made it and has come back to pontificate in the low quality enviroment of Scottish football, where he can get away with his pretence.

If many teams in the Championship follow the example of QotSth and the way they kicked out at our 'middle to front' then I think the squad will be too light.

The Polis don't seem to buy the ''e-mail' that I'll show you later' line.

http://news.stv.tv/west-central/1327848-ex-rangers-chief-executive-charles-green-detained-in-police-custody/ Aye, try wrapping that up in mitigating language and giving it to Chris McLaughlin to publish........

Perhaps you dould delete the pic's from the post that you quote to save 'space'. Rab, you don't even seem able to grasp what my post is saying but then you've been calling it mostly wrong for years, no reason why you would suddenly stop doing so....... There has certainly been a conspiracy or two but IMO you tend to go down some weird and wonderful paths that fit with how you swallowed the dodgy geezer bullshit along the way, ie. if taken in easily by "smalltime crooks" I'm not sure if I'd follow what you said about the 'bigger picture'.

Another part of what may be considered the more important and current issue(s)........ concerns MASH / Sports Direct commercial relationship with Rangers. How did they enter into play and...............

You have been chasing your tail for years and following most of the ****s into the bargain but at least you have provided entertainment for some on here who like a wind-up. You did this whilst others warned against the procession of dodgy geezers who carefully took advantage of a situation that had got away from Sir Duped's control. LBG/Muir got what they wanted, Sir Duped / LBG got some collatoral from property purchases and the rest where left trying to outsp.iv each other in a very public enviroment with an ever more comprehensive social media network following their apparent moves. They even had sp.iv administrators lined up to facilitate the ongoing and longterm 'con'. However, the on-sight dodgy geezers were to ambitious, greedy and ultimately transparent (but not in a good way) and are getting collared one by one. We can only hope that there is an end result to the long and complicated investigations that have been going-on. The question might be.........Will the authorities be happy enough with the onsight players or are they willing to go deeper. If they are, have the 'players' back there insulted themselves from such moves ? I think LBG looked to insulate themselves by using Muir. Can Muir be got at via Grier ? Sir Duped is extracting the urine with his stance, it doesn't stack-up. He knew the general overview of what was going-on and chose to facilitate it. An open and honest Mediahouse (no laughing at the back) could tell a story that starts before Sir Duped stood down from the Rangers board (August 2009). It'll take a lot more time but let's hope as many chickens as is possible come home to roost.

double post

The amount of words that this player and his situation has generated throughout the media (including social) is wholly disproportionate with his ability and importance. Get over it and get on with the football....................

It is basically a much needed counter-attack to spell out how Ashley is having the dark arts work for him and his interests. The basic premise is undoubtedly true, a co-ordinated campaign that leads from Ashley interests to Keith Bishop to Mediahouse to various online bloggers and group (RSL). This has been fairly obvious for sometime but this blog has successfully pushed the line into the wider public domain, including background info and an immediate going to ground for mentioned bloggers to regroup/reorganise with Ramsay Smith. Rather than just concentrate on the bloggers, it's the wider Ashley interest and what they are prepared to do (and always have been) that is the main issue.

Sources tell me that it wasn't as bad as all that, with lot's of brotherly love being shared around Ibrox. Directors would even say "Hullo" to guys in corridors without knowing who they represented, honest they didn't !

In a normal world spin should be kept to a minimum but the world at Ibrox has been anything but normal fo far too long a time. Indeed, the world itself finds itself with spin occupying an ever greater part within information flows and/or media reporting. Rangers have almost become a testing ground wrt spin, how far it can take you, how recipients can become almost dependent on it and how much you can make on the back of it. Since CW entered the saga, I've always called the Mediahouse association with the club as a 'Continuity Bridge for Robbing Bastards'. A book could be written about this relationship and how it evolved throughout the years. Without the 'expert' facilitation of MH, the last few years wouldn't have been allowed to get so far. I think you have to seperate the type of spin that facilitates the profiteering for individuals or groups and the type of spin that eg. exaggerates things like signing targets. The latter, although often misleading, regrettably seems to be part of football/journalism and it's up to the individual to see through such stories BUT the former is actually doing DAMAGE to the club. As it stands, there is a PR war. The Dark forces of Evil are marshalled by Mediahouse on behalf of 'Robbing Bastards' and their MO and to the keen observer, the results have been all too apparent for the past few years. Level 5 are on the club's side and are forced to react to this. This reaction seems to be on a number of levels and incorporates the counter-attack to the Dark Forces efforts. These are discrediting the current board, the SD boycott and trying to make the club's financial situation weaker (ST numbers). The Exposingtherhats blog is an interesting and IMO an encouraging development. If done carefully with attention, detail, It has the opportunity of changing the Darker PR landscape surrounding Rangers. Mediahouse have been the 'Toxic Constant' throughout the last few years,.....we need to metaphorically blow their involvement with things Rangers out of the water.

I saw the draw being conducted and I'd remove your "obvious" and replace it with 'predictable online bullshit'. It is very common for teams to get drawn against each other a disproportionate amount of times within a relatively short time period. eg. for Rangers in recent years,........ read Dundee Utd in the Scottish Cup and Falkirk in various.

Further to my previous post. The 10 outfield Hearts players that started the Petrofac tie with Livingston last season had an average age of 19 and thus given I can't remember any Hoo-Har about Hearts playing an understrength team, then a precedent has been set.

Could have done without this relatively difficult tie at a time when we'll be finding our way and looking for momentum/confidence. I'd almost be tempted to do what Hearts did last season, play a youth team, take the hit and concentrate on the league,.....although I very much doubt this will happen.

I think it's also fair to mention the resistence (much hidden from view) that both Wallace/Nash and now the current regime have to encounter as they look for viable and workable solutions.

If the support want full blown access to all details then become 51% owners of the club. It is asking too much for a business to have an open book policy with no commercially sensitive details allowed to be kept from the public domain. Given that some of the main individual shareholders are supporters and we can't be far from having 51%, then it comes down to trusting the people (individual supporters/ reps of shareholder groups) who are in and around the boardroom. If you can't or won't trust them then you're unlikely to ever have a satisfactory solution. I think it relevant to mention: - that the loud noise being made by some is disproportionate to the size and number of those involved. I refer to the general spin being put out there by the 'usual suspects' (eg. McMurdo, etc. from - Irvine - Bishop - Ashley camp). - that the vast majority trust / want to trust / want to have confidence in the current board. - that the current board have inherited a black hole of an Onerous Ibrox Treasury and their task is Herculean. - that they are desperately trying to hold it together, never mind move forwards. - that the current board may not be ideal is some respects but are in their own way, fighting for Rangers interests. It is far from a perfect situation but it's the dark reality of so many years of so many board members, that have done everything so as to best position themselves and related parties interests at the forefront of beneficiaries, with the club/support always paying the bill. Actual turmoil will continue because of it and efforts from the Irvines of this world will continue to maintain confusion and division. I hear people talking of paying Ashley the 5m to get rid of him and liken it somewhat, to back in the summer of 2012 when the WS led consortium were looking to make an offer to the Green led consortium, post sale of assets. I think the former were offering the latter a Million or two more than the 5.5M price that CG&Co had paid. CG&Co knew how much Rangers could make them and would have needed the offer multiplied by X (IMO more than x4). Well to get rid of Ashley and his influence.interests, we can use a similar multiplication. When Green&Co / MASH / SD got in the door they made sure that they made use of the boardroom control and put in place such onerous deals that would put Rangers in financial chains for years to come. Ironically, some still don't appreciate the difficulties and even support Ashley, by default. I can only hope that the possibility of a legal route out from the clutches of the onerous, may yet surface.

No quotes and I can't find similar references to exact figures/'warchests' in the Spanish press. Sarver is definately involved in talks with Levante, the go-ahead for club to negotiate having come from a formal vote, taken by the relevant body on Tuesday 23rd. I look at the Herald article, read the Spanish press and wonder if this event isn't being used (and possibly abused) by interested parties.

Without absolute knowledge, I'll respectfully disagree and not push any further. However, I'd be interested to hear what other general alternatives you think there might be, or even a very general outline of such.

Do you answer posts that you haven't read properly ? I didn't state that I knew exactly why the DM went with the article but put up two alternatives and it generally comes down to one or tuther. It is related (one way or other) to the leak (re.meeting) aimed at PMGB, again.......read my previous post.

The root leak is that to PMGB and that is why The Daily Mail have it up today, even if todays article came from a Rangers source, in an effort to counter the traction that the PMGB blog had established online, ie. no leak to PMGB and you'd have no Mail article today. The other possible reason is that The Mail have it today, is that the newspaper has seen the online 'noise' that the issue has provoked and for commercial reasons, want a share of the attention.

I'm looking at the question objectively and gave outline reasons as to why I came up with my best guess. Perhaps you could do similar as to why DK (or close) might like to furnish PMGB with info that looks to damage DK personally and may confuse and dilute the supports attitudes regards the surrounding issues.