Uilleam

Would it be bitter, twisted, and downright cynical to suggest that this change comes in when Pederasts FC has to play a qualifier in CL for the first time in a few years ??

Here's luck. Unfortunately, I don 't see any prospect of it running out, any time soon Breakdown of average fouls per booking across the league after 31 games Season 25/26 Aberdeen - 4.7 fouls per yellow Celtic - 10.4 fouls per yellow Dundee - 5.1 fouls per yellow Dundee Utd - 4.9 fouls per yellow Hearts - 5.5 fouls per yellow Hibs - 6.3 fouls per yellow Kilmarnock - 5.9 fouls per yellow Motherwell - 5.4 fouls per yellow Rangers - 5.5 fouls per yellow Ross County - 6.3 fouls per yellow St Johnstone - 6.3 fouls per yellow St Mirren - 5.6 fouls per yellow

The most important thing, surely, is Barry Ferguson's opinion of 'The Banner'

Nae Cerny - Nae Rangers

JOHNSON'S FOR ROLLS

He frequently did, for performances not unadjacent to this complete clusterfuck.

This is humiliating.

FFS!!

There's an engine?

This performance is no joke.

Defending seems to be the last thing on their minds

FFS!!

Don't Bogart that joint, my friend

FFS!!

.....and, thus, perhaps, they deduced, would have not wished to play, or would have experienced 'difficulties' in doing so..... The players I mentioned were all Rangers' supporters in their youth, but were somehow missed by scouts, despite all possessing significant ability.

Another 'One That Got Away'. It's a conversation I've had a few times, in the pub. Among the names that always crop up: Charlie Cooke : bluenose from a bluenose family in The Port/Greenock. George Graham: bluenose from Bargeddie Andy Gray: bluenose from a bluenose family in Drumchapel John Wark: bluenose from a bluenose family in Kingsway, Scotstoun Steve Nicol: from Ayr The Hansen Brothers from Clackmananshire. And none of those hailed from further than, what, 30 miles from Glasgow. And they could play a bit. There are more.....

Soccer, son. Try it out with the family, with friends, with strangers on the bus. Get used to it.

A short, very short, piece on the 49ers from Sports Illustrated https://www.si.com/nfl/49ers/news/why-49ers-owners-suddenly-stopped-spending-big-money#:~:text=So while they're worth,make another Super Bowl push. "From 2017 to 2024, the 49ers spent more cash on football than almost any other NFL franchise. Now, they've suddenly embraced Moneyball and slashed their spending budget. Why?" Might we hope -assume- that the soon-to-be Govan powerbrokers are keeping a massive warchest for the Summer transfer window, stadium upgrades, etc? Or are they just going bust? Why have the 49ers Owners Suddenly Stopped Spending Big Money? From 2017 to 2024, the 49ers spent more cash on football than almost any other NFL franchise. Grant Cohn | Mar 27, 2025 Feb 10, 2025; New Orleans, LA, USA; San Francisco 49ers chief executive officer Jed York at the Super Bowl LIX host committee handoff press conference. Mandatory Credit: Kirby Lee-Imagn Images / Kirby Lee-Imagn Images From 2017 to 2024, the 49ers spent more cash on football than almost any other NFL franchise. Now, they've suddenly embraced Moneyball and slashed their spending budget. Why? Keep in mind, the 49ers are worth nearly $6.8 billion according to Forbes. They're the sixth-richest franchise in the NFL, they have a passionate, global fanbase, they sell out their stadium every week and recently they increased their season-ticket prices. They should be rolling in dough. But they also invest a ton of cash in non-football things. They own 100 percent of an English soccer team called Leeds United, plus they recently bought a controlling share of a Scottish soccer team called Rangers FC. So while they're worth nearly $7 billion, most of that money is tied up in investments. Which means they might be slightly short on cash this year. It's possible the 49ers intend to scale back their spending on football for a year and then bump it back up in 2026 as they make another Super Bowl push. Or, it's possible the 49ers have decided their football team isn't profitable enough and needs to be more cost-effective in the future so they can afford to invest in soccer and other ventures. It's hard to know exactly why the 49ers owners have gone cheap all of a sudden. Fortunately for us, team CEO Jed York will answer questions at the NFL Annual Meeting next week. It will be fascinating to hear his explanation for this bizarre offseason. For those already bored with the takeover......you can browse SI here: https://swimsuit.si.com/

Scrabble, a word game, requires a decent vocabulary and an ability to spell. Hence, in woke parlance, it is certainly elitist, probably patriarchal, and quite possibly racist as well. Not sure that woke leftie pishers would touch it. No idea why it rejects the word 'Jew', though.

The lad is one of the Twelve Tribes, surely? Don't know about this diatribe.

Can't wait for UEFA's reaction to ".....For the Army, and the Navy, And the IDF!!"

You gotta spin to win....

I don't think that the deal stands or falls on the putative land value, or, indeed the developability, of Auchenhowie for housing. Overall, what is interesting about the takeover proposal is that the principals are -an investor with ownership/control of very considerable funds, who has a background in health insurance , and -the investment and development arm of an NFL franchise, who, at first sight might seem strange bedfellows. Perhaps, however, there is method in the mix: Cavenaugh gets to share risk, and to share it with a partner vastly experienced in running a sports' business; the 49ers get to share the risk with an investor with considerable financial backing (and, an interest in sports, it would seem). I don't know who brought whom to the table, but, perhaps, it provides a modicum of comfort that we are not facing ownership/control by some rich guy, bored with cocaine, and looking for a new set of thrills, or seeking merely to asset strip, but with some serious players in the world of sports' business. . The 49ers do not seem to have fucked about with Leeds United, nor have they developed Elland Road for condominiums. (I am sure we would have found out if they had.) Maybe we should take these as good signs.

No dinosaurs, please.