buster.
-
Posts
14,194 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
111
Everything posted by buster.
-
You could try Iran 5 Nigeria 4 and if it comes up I'm sure you'd go top.
-
Suddenly no-one wants to take responsibility for passing on Jack's brief. It's getting a wee bitty confusing as to the plays within.
-
1972nd place has a nice ring to it
-
Zappa, I see bonus points have been awarded. Am I missing something ?
-
Perhaps they are competing in a race to the 'bottom'. 'Omnishambles' doesn't seem to be a strong enough word anymore. ps. Uruguay would have been better off with the Sister of Forlan in their attack the other night.
-
Rangers International Football Club plc (“RIFC”, “Rangers”, “the Company” or “the Club”) http://www.rangers.co.uk/images/staticcontent/documents/RangersBusinessReview.pdf
-
-
I'd be curious, all things considered at this point in time.........who would contemplate giving Green financial support. There seems to be a lot of confusion regards the share issue(s). IIRC the headlines in the Record last week (Irvine briefed story) about the 8M referred to an issue to existing shareholders. Any prospective consortium would have to invest in a share issue that can't be conducted without a successful EGM vote. I mention both because both the Daily Record (11/06/13)* and today's BBC piece smell of Jack Irvine (MH). IMO, this is spin and bluster. * http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-board-set-launch-new-3672935
-
Jack (MH) tends to use BBC Scotland for this type of story. eg. for when the Easdales were being put forward by the 'proxies'. http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/22270973 Remember the interviews 'in the bus' and 'on the doorstep'.
-
Sandy, What about the usual MO.....................why not get your lawyers onto the case ? Did Profesor Watson (Levy & McRae) advise you and his old mate Jack against it ? Don't you want the truth of the matter being found ? So instead we have to take the word of a convicted fraudster with a 'colourful reputation' who has needed to employ spin-doctors to try and paint an acceptable public image. How are your 57,043 shares getting on in a 'Fragile' PLC ? You were lucky that you got them so cheap, about a week after publicly saying the PLC was in a 'fagile' state. You must keep your ear to the ground given you aren't an office bearer in RIFC. Maybe Jack would have been able to congratulate you on last week's flight to London. It was a curious co-incidence that one of Jack's go-to men at the BBC, Alasdair Lamont just happened to be at the Ibrox doorstep with a camera in tow that morning....and that you just happened to break habits and do a 'spontaneous' and Fragile TV interview. If I was a cynic, I might have said that it was all engineered and it included Jack briefing against Graham Wallace around the same time. Didn't take you for the comedian, Sandy but that line about "highly-professional with rigid financial discipline" was a good one. You have a long record in doing so, or was it just a 'record'.
-
One year contract x3 Miller McGregor Hutton
-
It would have taken a brave man to send the 'golden boy' off. Put any 10 ten referees from Europe in those precise circumstances and I doubt even 2 of them would have reached for red. However put the same 10 in the referees shoes at the 'penalty' incident and I doubt more than 1 of them would have given it.
-
Although it's purely a guess, I don't think the average crowds will get near to the mid 40's. My guess would be mid to late 30's.
-
The cuts refer to the business review. This was said to be fundamental to the club going forward. In your analysis, the club seem to be gambling that matchday income will cover the shortfall.........but do they/ can they spend money on infrastructure with money that isn't guaranteed ? They said they would fund any shortfall and thus provide funds with which to implement business review. They now announce a shortfall but say they might not need to fund it (and the business review which was "vital" can go hang). Doesn't make sense unless they are chancing barstewards.
-
The board are in essence saying that the business review wasn't really that important. That we'll bring the likes of Kenny Miller and Spin-doctors in but that fancy modern infrastructure stuff like 'scouting' etc. can go hang. IMO it helps expose them and their 120+ days of buying time....which when you think of it was just a different and more elaborate way for Wallace to put over his empty corporate speak.
-
Getting the thread back on track....... I think that today's annoucement and the provisional cold water it pours on the 43.4M shares being offered to existinfg shareholders is something that isn't getting the attention it deserves. Where in the business review they said that it would be used for a significant shortfall, now they are saying it might not be needed but at the sametime announce a significant shortfall. ------------------------------------------ Can they have reasonable expectations of a sudden very long queue forming up at Ibrox ? Are they doing anything different to make it happen ? When will they make a final decision if short-term measure is required or not ?
-
I always measure DB's posts in 'steins'. A little like how some may rate a lady and her chances of them. ps. I can cause no offence as I'm 'ignored'.
-
A fit Mandzukic will certainly improve them and as for Mexico, as indicated my remark was 'blind' in that I don't know what kind of team they have....but if it's as competitive as recent WC's they'll more than give Croatia a game.
-
-
Croatia did ok, little more. They didn't have the quality up front to take full advantage of their 'moments'. Their 'moments' were restricted and this against a poorish Brazil who didn't get into 4th gear. If Mexico are any good they'll finish in front of the Croats.
-
Have to go and feed the horses some caviar.
-
I think the Brazilian people have every right to protest and personally would like to see them be successful. ie. peacefully protest and disrupt the WC enough to bring more attention to their plight and embarrass their government into action. Also putting further momentum in worldwide anti-FIFA feeling that leads to real change. The corporate and corrupt are getting out of control and a major worldwide event is just the place to remind them that it's not going to be as easy as they thought.
-
Here it is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVEX9S9D8qc If that's a penalty my name is Charles Green and if that really looked like a penalty to the ref then his name is Mr Magoo.
-
GW: If you want me to go along with what others who have a tendancy to bullshit say, you'll have to pay me 600K+ salary. DS: Couldn't do that, wouldn't go down well but we could perhaps do something that has precedent at Ibrox. GW: What's that ? DS: Pay you half of that in salary then the other half via a bonus that we can design to be assured. GW: Sounds good, I'll bring up my 'empty corporatespeak dictionary'.
-
"penalty apart" That was enough to swing the game at a moment when Brazil didn't look like scoring. In this position a ref. can't blatantly whistle for 90 minutes for one team and when for Brazil he'll probably not need to at all in the majority of occasions if the team play well. But if 'bent' / 'influenced', blowing for a non-existant penalty in the last quarter when it's 1-1 is pretty much what you'd expect. You might aswell say that 'X' wasn't hurt apart from the bullet that went between his eyes