boabie

I detest friendlies Pete. In my youth I'd trundle along to every one of them only to either watch a training hour, see ten players changed at half time, or spectate on something resembling a circus. I don't think I've ever seen any one of them for 90 minutes. Still fancy a day out though.

No point in me voting BH. Take it as read that, apart from 21 Jan to 12 Feb I'll be there.

I'll pay for the first bottle of red wine on the table. I feel somewhat embarrassed that before leaving my contribution to the kitty was the same as a lady who'd only had a couple of glasses of juice or similar. I can only plead that a liquid lunch and the agony caused by brand new shoes prevented me redressing the balance at that time. :cheers:

Went there a couple of years ago and was neither up nor down. Had more "effect" from the change of water going on holidays to Port Seton.

Mid of January until February I'll be in Goa. Nothing else planned so far. Any time suits.

Imo, if we were back in the days of having money, our manager would not have lasted the day after the farce in Europe. He is still in place because we can't afford to replace him and for NO other reason.

Rab, this blog explains some of the chicanery behind the company -- https://galluspioneer.wordpress.com/2013/03/15/celtic-newco-the-proof/

RO on DR --- https://www.rangersobserver.com/views/2017/7/11/daily-record-pushes-title-stripping-agenda

Stripping titles ? Here's a thought - if YOU were a Rangers player at the time, didn't receive an EBT and years later the SFA/SPFL asked for your winners medal, what would you say ? I fecking know what I'd be doing in that position.

" You could argue that they – the ticket-buying public – have been conned " What "ticket - buying public" is that ? The Rangers fans who sold out just about every stadium their team played at ? The mank public who closed around a third of their park and covered top tiers in big flags to hide the spaces ? Or the rest of Scottish football where more than 5000 tickets are NEVER sold unless their team make a once in every 20 years trip to Hampden for a final only to become invisible the next home game ?

Is that balloon still commentating ? He said nothing for around 5 years. Another FF poster with multi loggins. He was "Gate 16/19 or whatever Maniac" too. Comments straight from a Private Eye character. I believe the tarred ones "rugger guy" was based on the same. Amusing, but so transparent.

The whole board could have went on holiday. The manager and all the coaching staff could have left a game plan and went too. We quite simply should not have gone out of that competition.

The SPFL were not in existence for any of the titles or League Cups we won. They have nothing to do with the Scottish Cup. That one belongs to the SFA.

Meanwhile on Kiddyfiddler Street forum ---- " Tony-Montana 3 minutes ago Post #6541 [Tweet] Joined: 23 June 2007 Bad idea bringing Celtic into it. Lawwell will destroy him. " Aye, maybe King should just have sat back and allowed the sellik board to call us cheats.

STV news there had an interview with some mank team coach at Glasgow Airport. It got around pretty quickly to title-stripping. "We're aware of it but it's not something we really talk about. Let other teams do what they want." Tell your own board that ya fud.

No newspapers have been purchased by my family since Spiers started his shyte and I gave up The Herald.

It's good to see King addressing the scum board directly. What I want him to do now is comment on Liewell having influence in negotiations between SFA and HMRC on all those bogus film company tax avoidance schemes. Let's see how those at the Paedodome get on with a torch being shone into their dark corners.

they were legal at the time they were used, albeit some of the manners of its usage were wrong. HMRC later decided to impose retrospective fines on companies using them.

Personal statement by Dave King to Rangers supporters on the “Big Tax Case” THIS statement is made in my capacity as a former director and shareholder of Oldco to provide supporters with the true position following the final tax ruling and to correct any false impression created by David Murray’s conflicting evidence in the Craig Whyte trial. It is unfortunate that we have already witnessed typical bouts of hysterical reporting from certain sections of the media and we should continue to ignore those responsible by boycotting their publications and outlets. The Celtic board issued a statement agitating for a re-opening and reversal of the decisions previously made when, in fact, nothing has changed. It is disappointing that they have attempted to influence the footballing authorities to alter its historic football honours by calling on administrators and lawyers to achieve off the pitch what its teams failed to do on the pitch. As an investor and board member during the period of the so-called benefit I can categorically assure all supporters that the Club received no benefit whatsoever. The opposite is true as the effect on the Club was wholly negative. It was charged huge sums for advice from other Murray Group entities and it bore the consequences when that advice proved inadequate. Every single player that was signed during that period would have been signed whether the Murray Group tax scheme was in place or not. The real beneficiary was the Murray Group. All board members were aware during that period that we were often deliberately spending more than we earned and this was reported in the annual financial statements. The cash needed to fund any shortfall came from share placements, shareholder loans, and third-party bank finance. As David Murray was personally dealing with transfer expenditure, I sought assurances in a board meeting each year that he would stand behind any deficit that could not be immediately funded if he over extended in the transfer market. He gave these assurances and he honoured them until the Murray Group got into financial difficulty. Put simply, the Murray Group tax scheme helped David Murray reduce his overall investment into Oldco while simultaneously reducing any reliance on increased third-party bank finance. The benefit went exclusively to David Murray and the Murray Group. Whether the scheme was in place or not, or whether it survived tax scrutiny or not, made no difference whatsoever to the playing squad of the Club during that period and hence had no impact on the performance on the pitch. We won all of our titles fair and square. A good analogy of what happened at the time is the present position following regime change. As we rebuild the squad we are deliberately and transparently spending beyond our income. Once we commit to expenditure it is my job to secure the required funding. If I create a scheme (as David Murray thought he had) that reduced the amount of cash needed to support the Club then I would save on my required investment – but the Club and the player squad would be exactly the same. For the avoidance of doubt, I am not looking at such a scheme. Given the negative consequences for the Club of such financial engineering in the past, I cannot conceive of any circumstances in which that might change. While I am Chairman, Rangers’ overspending will always be on a sustainable and robust basis and one that safeguards the future of our Club. It is reassuring to note that the SFA promptly and correctly put out a statement confirming, against Celtic’s attempt to influence, that the final tax ruling has no impact whatsoever on the practical and legal findings already made. This is now another matter that we can finally put behind us.

Lunatic or dictatorial there are consequences via UEFA and FIFA for anyone allowing a case taking a national ruling body to a civil court. Bosman changed football but apart from his civil claim it didn't do him any good. There is no way any English league would admit Rangers in the knowledge that a civil law case, taking the SFA to court would be required to push it through. It just wouldn't happen.

I've heard that one before Craig. In what scenario would an English league grant us a licence to play down there in the full knowledge that before we'd be allowed to do so we would be taking the SFA to court, a breach of UEFA rules ? We'd be resigning from the SFA before a licence for England was released. We'd then be taking the SFA to court with an English FA as a defence witness. Leagues in England then face the wrath of UEFA. It's a non-starter mate.

I think they are worse than you would seem to BJ. In my opinion there is not a chance in hell that, playing in an English league, the SFA would grant permission for our games to be played at Ibrox. And that's without thinking of what the council and police would say about licencing. No chance.

Coop - I saw this day coming and swore when we went down that I'd never give any of those a clubs another ha'penny. The bottom division wasn't enough for them. Stripping titles and the eventual disappearance of Rangers is what they want. Any Rangers fan funding any of those clubs is .................. well rather than look for a ban I'll leave it at that.

As far as the rules of football are concerned it was "illegal" - against the rules and laws of the SFA/SPL.

But we still return to the point about needing permission from the SFA to play our home games at Ibrox. And that is simply never going to happen.