Big Jaws

First of all I didn't go off on one and secondly I was never patronizing nor condescending in my reply posts and I certainly don't expect it in return. Other than that there is very little left to say as @Gaffer has now covered all the relevant points, that I felt needed inspection and which I absolutely agree with, highlighting the weakness in your argument in his follow up post to you. Finally for clarity... both the Compliance officer enquiry and the TAB/TOP panel which incidentally has nothing to do with TRFC perse' are minor inconveniences in comparison to the far more important potential corruption, cronyism and nepotism at the heart of the SPFL its chairman and others appointment.

You're saying more or less the same thing in your posts in response to both myself and @Gaffer. I'll address it the statement may not be addressing MA's injunction and there may well be NDA's here that means they cant but I'm sorry @buster. you cant possibly describe the Clubs statement as a deflection when its in fact dealing with at least one of the points of attack I already mentioned. You'd prefer to attack MA first I get that however to me it doesn't matter what order we take them in. If that means slight of hand and keeping powder dry on other things then I'm perfectly comfortable with that. The SPFL refusal to act accordingly and above board is for me absolutely incredulous. I'll repeat it again in this case its the SPFL Chairman's appointment which is clearly a conflict of interest that has been met with their refusal to hold an independent investigation. Not only that but as far as the Private Eye article goes Chris Jack sites it in his article which although some what woolly round the edges is in agreement with the Rangers position. Added to that the SPFL either never bothered to consult Robertson who is a member of the SPFL board or they bypassed him altogether. Who the f&*k do they think they are thats not how you operate a board room? It doesn't matter how they cut it there is no escaping this for the SPFL and whether or not the other teams are public about it at at the moment there will come a time when they will have no choice on the matter and will have to issue a statement themselves. Of course we want to see the team kicking a ball around but it is important that the body who runs our game, appoints CO's chairmen, referees etc etc etc is held to account.

Hold on a second here? By whom? By The Club or by the SPFL? If you are suggesting that its a deflection tactic from the Club I've got to take issue with you on that. The Club, its brand, the fans and the chairman have been under attack since before the administration event and consequently the team which took over the Club and removed the spivs. Admittedly it would take some time to prepare a strategy but once said strategy is in place its just a matter of time before all the ducks are in a row. At the moment there is a three point attack on the Club a) Through the SPFL CO, b) TAB/TOP contempt papers served on Dave King and c) MA's temp injunction. I would suggest that there is a slight of hand here but make no mistake about it there will be a strategy in place and I for one am starting to see where the weakest point in the opposition might be.

No Rab. I'm no expert in the field in the slightest but regardless here's how I understand it. As D'Artagnan says above we wrapped up the previous onerous contract with the 7 year clause in it and created a new one with SDI that was more favourable to us financially. However in this new contract there is a clause that says that if we obtain a new partner/contract then SDI have the right to call first refusal on it and to do that they have to match it (there is also an argument for the court to settle here too). OK so heres where it gets slightly complicated SDI are arguing that, in this first refusal clause, there are three rights clauses that have to have their financial details broken down and that Rangers haven't done this. Rangers are arguing that the JD deal is a whole package and have submitted the details of it to SDI. Its for the court to decide if SDI or TRFC are in compliance with this contract. Whats interesting to me is if TRFC are seen to be in compliance with the contract with SDI and SDI have not submitted their matching offer then they [SDI] have failed to abide by the contracts terms. EDIT: Again though there are subtleties and language used in the document that I haven't forensically studied nor have I any desire to either that the court will test on Tuesday. At that point we'll then have a much better understanding of how the court sees the details of the TRFC/SDI contract.

I've absolutely no doubt of what Josh Windass is capable of you only need to look at some of the goals he's scored for us especially the one against Celtic in the 2-3 game to put us 1-0 up to see that. I'm sure he does that day in day out in training also. In fact I know he does and you can see some of it in the training camp videos with SG being impressed too. You're right he made a fair few decent runs last night, his positioning was much better than it was last season to cut out opposition passes and runs etc. However and I am being objective... when it comes to a competitive game more often than not he struggles to reproduce that. From the half way line to 18 yard box he can be absolutely devastating for teams but I feel that once he's made up that grass he gets forced into taking shots that he shouldn't be taking because he is rarely able to deliver a ball to find a blue shirt in the box. Some of the shots come off for him but others just don't, what we used to call wasteful. Its early doors at the moment and there may be time for him to improve that part of his game with SG and if he can then he will be a great player. If he isn't able to improve that side of his game then SG wont play him its as simple as that.

Couldn't have said it better myself DB. The big test is whether this team can handle the hammer throwers of the SPFL. The results of the cake will be in the eating of course. In saying that though I think SG has been pretty clever with his friendly selection here. Read into that what you will.

Absolutely mate he hit his mark and the byline every time.

A very satisfactory result. Again reading very little into it and its the first time I've had a look at young Glen Middleton and I have to say he's a prospect very much in the mould of Wee Bud... I'll take that all day long!

Rudden makes it 6. A goal made in the academy... Middleton takes on the defender on the by line crosses into Rudden who puts it into an open goal.

Morelos makes it 5

Nice cut back from young Glen Middleton for the fourth.

He should be in a dinner jacket with tails cummerbund the works.

Poor goalkeeping To be fair to the young goalie it pops up over him when it hits the six yard box line otherwise its a run of the mill save for him.

3-0 up against Bury at half time in a pre-season friendly I'm not reading too much into it but I am liking what I'm seeing from SG Rangers. A high pressing game with a varied pace front to back two CH who read the game exceptionally well a left back in Jon Flanagan who takes absolutely no prisoners in the tackle reads the game well and looks energetic. Scott Arfield, as I've said, not a player who was on my radar but a very intelligent player who is always looking to break the opposition lines, ghosts into positions and is always an out ball. We've got blistering pace in the front line and plenty of support for the 2nd ball its just a matter of getting it up to them. I'll take that all day long!

Arfield isn't a player I have any real knowledge of but what I've seen of him is that he's a very intelligent player he's always breaking the lines making ghosting little runs.

10 minutes in and we've looked like we're comfortable at the back with the two CH looking to play the ball on the ground and both pretty sharp. I like the look of the Croatian who reads the game well. Back to mid, with the ball, we're easy owsy and then when it goes forward theres an injection of pace, passing and movement. Without the ball we're hunting in packs... Its early days at the moment but I like what i'm seeing.

This whole thing stinks to high heaven and the reporting of it by the BBC and other sources isn't much better either. I may well be wrong, as I'm certainly no expert in this field, but its my understanding from various other reports, articles, rulings and interviews that Dave King agreed and produced the paperwork to TOP that was required however TOP decided it would rather the funds be held in the UK as opposed to being held in escrow/RAND. Basically TOP moved the goal posts and instead then issued another request that the finances be held in a UK facility POUND via Investec with this request being issued 14 days before the deadline to comply. DK then asked for a time extension to comply with the order, as this procedure is reported to take up to 6 weeks, which was refused. There are further subtle points held within the court rulings via amendments etc etc that I haven't forensically examined nor do I have any wish to as I've said above its not my field of expertise. Transcription of Dave Kings interview from May as ref below.

Cosmo as Craig has already indicated above is for me probably the best one I've been at and I've been at a couple i.e Linq and Planet Hollywood which were both under par for my liking.

I like the home and away kits they've done a good job on them both.

I was in town Tuesday afternoon for an appointment where I happened upon a fellow who must have been ages with myself (I'm in my 50's) wearing his grey and green hoops. Now I can see the argument of wearing your colours if you're at a weekly 5 a side to keep the motor running as you get older. But what in the world possesses a guy in his mid 50's to say to himself... OK I'm off intae the toon this afternoon what shall I wear? Eureka, I know whats a good look for me, I'll wear my selitc tap!

I'm a pain because I don't edit you? :D Theres not enough hours in the day to edit you @pete. Mate you're a legend!

You have the voice of a Rainbow Unicorn shining like a beacon in a sea of 'ummms' and 'aahhs'

It's not always what is said but what isn't said. I've just watched Sally on a BBC Scotland news report, reading from Autocue, that Torbert committed some of his assaults on boys at a training centre in the east end of Glasgow. I see the BBC continue with their tradition of covering up information.

Its all about what game they envisage as being the easier of the two. The commentators are already talking about it in that way.

£7m you say?