boabie

Get it up ye. Shower of sheepy bastards.

Well done Kenny Miller !

Windass looks like a wee boy who's wandered onto the park during a senior match. The guy is totally lost.

Garner is either a player who enjoys the physical aspect or he isn't. He can't have it both ways. There was not enough contact for him to fall to the ground. He went down therefore he cheated and I hate to see that from any Rangers player. I never had much time for Lafferty but when he did it I lost what little respect I ever had for him.

Whether it is is red card or not doesn't come into it. Are we now saying we'll get a fair shake from any referee nowadays ?

Garner embarrassed himself and the club. Even if we ran out 7-0 winners todays everything would focus on Garners behaviour.

Get him punted asap. He's nowhere near good enough anyhow.

Garner - what a fecking embarrassment that guy is.

Contradicted themselves though.

 

As for Amy McDonald - never heard of her.

The club should go after the individual responsible for any article containing lies!, not the paper!, these individuals would learn to stop lying if they were chased through the courts

The problem with that one Ian is, do any of the individuals have enough money to chase through the courts ?

Then there's their defence - we put out cash preparing a case, it goes to court and the reporter blames a sub editor. We go after him and he blames somebody higher up the chain, and so on.

There has to be the prospect of a return for us as well as having the lie-peddling stopped.

Rangers v The Record or whoever, with the aim of letting the others in the media know we won't stand for it any more.

Yet millions are rolling in.

Not for much longer imo. I base that on my friends for whom this has been a subject of discussion more and more recently.

I'll stick with it for the moment but will be thinking about pulling out if they don't get this mess sorted out sharpish.

Is there any limit on the amount of times the DR can print lies about Rangers FC then apologise for them in small print later before proper action is taken like a Fine or something?

 

Can they just keep repeating these 'inaccurate' stories knowing they have a loophole?

It's up to the club to determine how many times the paper have printed false stories about us and if it has happened too many times to take up a case that their actions are deliberate and designed to harm our business. I would think there would be some financial penalty that would apply.

The premise of a Supporters lead shareholding group still holds sway with me, so i won't be cancelling my membership anytime soon. However i am worried that club1872 is losing momentum, it needs galvanized with a leader who can take it forward, someone who want's to lead the support and represent us without fear or favour, not chasing a blazer position within the club.

 

Apply within.

Sad to say, imo it has already lost ALL momentum. Speak to anyone with our clubs best interests at heart and you'll see that.

From even before its inception it was subject to internal "best-interests" strife, lies, deceit and general all-round shambolity. Nothing has improved since then. The whole thing is falling apart and is serving nothing other than to provide the manks with even more amusement.

Even sadder to say, none of that comes as a surprise to me. The usual suspects put themselves forward - some have Rangers being better as their first priority. Others simply saw another opportunity to benefit themselves. They couldn't agree on the colour of shyte.

The club but more importantly to me, the fans have lost out yet again.

I'm just not seeing/hearing anything different to what we have all heard for the last two seasons!, it's obvious we need a clear out but I'm not sure we can afford what is required!

As said earlier. he's working with what he inherited.

However I want to see interviews with somebody who looks as if he gives a monkeys.

One Strachan in Scottish football trying to look like the "comical" guy in some stupid double act is enough.

The new manager is forced to work with the dross signed by Warburton and was met by a load of injuries before tonights match. We are where we are.

In saying that, unless Hyndman was injured I fail to see why Miller took his place at half time.

Holt was my motm.

Boyd so far proving what I always thought of him - caught offside yet again, twice in 2 minutes - a lazy bassa and a waste of a clean jersey.

Garner really is a clown.

Why does he not just concentrate on what he's paid to do ?

He's the most frustrating Rangers player I've ever seen.

Wtf is this guy playing at ?

Hyndman off for Miller ?

I'm satisfied so far. Are some maybe forgetting we have a scratch team on the park and to me it's obvious that some like Holt and Waghorn have been advised to protect the youngsters in defence ?

We were in no danger for the first 45 minutes and have certainly looked the better side,

This year's William Hill Scottish Cup winners are set to land a prize worth little more than half of that given to Celtic for lifting the Betfred Cup back in November.

The Hoops landed £200,000 for beating Aberdeen but the victors in next month's Hampden showpiece will take home just £114,000.

That's only £14,000 more than the Dons received for coming runners-up to the Hoops in the first final of the Scottish season.

The figures, obtained by Record Sport Online, call into question the League Cup's reputation as the poor relation of the oldest trophy in world football.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/revealed-scottish-cup-winners-pick-10164143

That rings a bell...

The estate on the hill above Dumbreck Road facing onto Haggs Castle GC was Lawrence built . My dad worked on it and would tell us that every single time we drove past it on our way to Ibrox.

The end of another era. I remember them doing away with New Years Day games against the manks and making trips to Firhill carrying 12 cans of beer and a half bottle trying to recover from the night before.

Life goes on.

Rangers boss Pedro Caixinha has announced his first eleven more than 24 hours in advance of his side’s trip to Rugby Park to face Kilmarnock. Keep up to date with all our sport news on The Scotsman’s Sport page on Facebook The manager has made five changes to the first eleven that drew 1-1 with Motherwell, with Lee Hodson missing out due to illness and Lee Wallace due to undergo stomach surgery. There are starts for youngsters David Bates and Miles Beerman and returns to the eleven for James Tavernier, Andy Halliday and Martyn Waghorn. The changes represent a continued willingness for Caixinha to make changes, following three substitutions at half-time on Saturday. Caixinha told the press conference that Rob Kiernan might have been fit to play but felt it best to rest the defender for Sunday’s clash against Aberdeen. He said: “It is very important to have players with character. This is a massive club, a huge club and not every player is a Rangers player. “I expect Clint and Rob to be ready for Sunday’s match. I could have used Rob but he wasn’t 100 per cent and I want 100 per cent players playing.”

Read more at: http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/rangers/pedro-caixinha-announces-rangers-team-a-day-early-1-4411577

I just finished reading the latest load of shyte from the Scot who thinks he's Irish, the one tarred by sectarianism. Basically his pal, another fool with a website started a rumour last year that the stands at Ibrox are about to fall down. This began a feeding frenzy by those unable to live without believing lies about Rangers. So much so that the Rangers chairman felt the need to pass comment.

The Irish Scotsman contacted GCC asking for correspondence under freedom of information legislation in relation to the Ibrox safety certificate. Todays blog is GCC telling him that Ibrox has a safety certificate and giving him the bums rush. Naturally this isn't good enough for the obsessed specimen so he's written back to them.

It all reminds me of the late great Spike Milligan when he wrote, " In Ireland, nothing happened."

Scotland is not a sovereign nation. The UK is the sovereign nation made up of 4 countries: England, Scotland , Wales & Northern Ireland.

 

We're British because we live in the British Isles whose largest island is called Great Britain which consists of 3 countries: England, Scotland & Wales

I'll correct what I posted - Scotland was a sovereign nation until the treaty of union. Should Scotland decide to leave the UK it would once again become a sovereign nation.

a wee point of note....

 

Unless someone physically separates Scotland from England, we can always be termed as British, due to being part of the British isles - it refers to the physical land mass. It's the same as referring to someone from Kenya as African.

Were Scots "British" before the treaty of union ?

Scotland is a sovereign nation. We made a union with other parts of these isles but that doesn't change the fact that we are Scots ......... and British of course.

When the Kenyan is asked his nationality I doubt very much that he would write down "African".

I'm happy to be both, and obviously if you are Scottish you are also British.

 

If I'm asked where I come from, I'd generally say Scotland as it's more interesting than saying Britain. If I'm asked my nationality I'd say British.

 

However this whole independence push has been divisive as is shown by the reaction on the other forum. Some people are feeling that they have to make a choice.

I couldn't agree more mate. I'm Scottish and British. When I see folk taking either extreme point I instantly switch off. The same when politics are brought into it.

My family came from good Labour stock and all without exception were Rangers supporters. I couldn't care less whether the guy sitting next to me is black, gay, Jewish, votes Tory or drapes himself in Edinburgh Rock tartan. For 90 minutes he's a bear and that'll do me.

Not sure what relevance it is. Is that an attempt to try and make out that nationalists are more Scottish/better Scots than unionists?

During a past debate on another forum BD it became very apparent that the vast majority of unionists there not only denied their Scots heritage, they seemed to be ashamed of it. They appeared to be saying they were British. Scotland didn't come into it.