Uilleam

There were some suggestions, from Radio and other media, last night/this morning, that the management team was to be dismissed next week, anyway, and irrespective of the result versus Greenock Morton. It seems to me that, if you are planning to sack your management team, rather than, say, handing them their cards after a bad result, then you are likely to have replacement in hand. Mind you.......

They could have a draw after that for the next round of the Scottish Cup on Sunday.

Graeme Murtry is in charge for Morton game.

I am told, although I cannot warrant this: The agent of the 3 Amigos (pace the bunnet hustler) told the Club, Mon, that they wished to resign and leave the Club, with no compen either way. The Club agreed. The agent prevaricated, as the Forest gig was not cut and dried. This appointment fell through, and the agent returned to the Club, saying he wanted to negotiate a financial package for his clients. The Club said "No, your clients have already resigned, on agreed terms." Hence the Club, tonight, announced/confirmed the resignations.

Verbal offer accepted under the Law of Scotland? Binding and, of course, with corroboration ?

The Daily Record?

I think that the authorities have a duty to pursue. convict, and sanction these vermin. They have broken the law, severally, and there should be consequences therefrom. Pour encourager les autres.

So it was "Buy 2, get 1 free" Day at Glasgow Sheriff Court. One has to ask, if the 3 charges were before the beak in the first place, surely his sentence would have been greater than that handed down for only 2 offences?

The worst of it is that, by all accounts, there are board members playing footsie with this rag and its laptop whores, briefing off the (ahem) record, against the manager and others. Behaviour such as this is completely reprehensible, permitting dissension, discord and disharmony to be placed in the public domain. It is also dismally stupid; placing information in the hands of an organ, whose contempt for all things Rangers is clear for even the meanest intellect to see, gives total control over presentation, indeed content, to it, and there is no come back, without revealing one's part in the sorry affair. Note also that anonymous discussions or briefings by necessity sub rosa, leave the informant in the hands of those informed, control over exposure being a formidably persuasive factor in any future conversazione involving the parties.

I think that you have missed the letter 'n' from "cuts", my friend.

From today's Daily Bedlam. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4209188/Brentford-transfer-analysis-continues-pay-dividends.html'>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4209188/Brentford-transfer-analysis-continues-pay-dividends.html Brentford made a 2,000 percent profit on striker Scott Hogan as their transfer analysis continues to pay dividends... just don't call them Moneyball Brentford working wonders in the transfer market thanks to analytical approach Scott Hogan was bought for just £650,000 but sold to Aston Villa for £12million Andre Gray, James Tarkowski, Moses Odubajo have also been sold for big profit Owner Matthew Benham says Brentford will continue astute attitude to transfers By Simon Jones for MailOnline sale of Scott Hogan was another example of how their analytical approach to transfers has worked under owner Matthew Benham. Hogan's departure to Aston Villa followed on from other recent sales such as Andre Gray, James Tarkowski and Moses Odubajo. They were bought for a collective £2.55million initially and sold on for £33.5m giving the club a healthy profit. Benham, who established Smartodds, a business based on using data to predict the outcome of sports events to customers including professional gamblers, has spoken in the past of his dislike for the phrase 'moneyball' believing it has a bad press and is open to misinterpretation. He prefers to say he uses scientific data alongside the human appraisal of a player. Aston Villa paid £12million to sign Scott Hogan from Brentford in the January transfer window Aston Villa paid £12million to sign Scott Hogan from Brentford in the January transfer window THE MONEYMAKERS PLAYER Andre Gray James Tarkowski Moses Odubajo Scott Hogan BOUGHT £550,000 £350,000 £1m £650,000 SOLD £9m £6m £3.5m £12m Former director of football Frank McParland was brought in from Liverpool to help instigate Benham's plans and signed Andre Gray from Luton Town for £550,000, Tarkowski from Oldham for £350,000, Odubajo from Leyton Orient for £1m and Hogan from Rochdale for £650,000. Further astute additions were made with the £250,000 signing from Blackburn Rovers of Alan Judge, a target for Newcastle United, and the £1.2m signing of coveted Spanish midfielder Jota from Celta Vigo. The approach has continued under Rasmus Ankersen and Phil Giles. Manager Dean Smith, who re-signed Sergi Canos and added Florian Josefzoon last month before agreeing a new contract extension himself, said: 'People are paying crazy money. Andre Gray was sold to Burnley for £9m in 2015, earning Brentford a profit of £8.5m 'We might get a lot of money in for Scott (Hogan) but you can’t go and replace a player for the money he’s gone for at a club like this. 'We are not an Aston Villa or a Sheffield Wednesday. We have to be more astute in the market. Value is the important thing and nobody came to the fore that was of value to us.' Brentford have scored a goal every 30 minutes since Hogan left. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4209188/Brentford-transfer-analysis-continues-pay-dividends.html

A travesty, or a tragedy, for which you might well blame the "authorities". It has long been my belief that The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service has not the wisdom, the wit, nor, critically, the will to pursue this matter to a conclusion. If an organisation does not have particular, essential, skills in-house, then it will out-source, sub-contract as those less inclined to current jargon might say. If COPSF had really wanted to pursue a case, and realising that the knowledge and experience of its staff fell somewhat short, it would have appointed an Advocate, and others, versed in the appropriate areas of law. Maybe it considered this; maybe it took advice; I am inclined to scepticism.

Speaking candidly, and looking at it with an objective -some might say cynical, jaundiced- eye, the whole shooting match has been pretty average, drifting to nauseating at times.

Are you a gentleman, Sir?

I could do the "Social", if someone was minded to do the "Media", on a job-share basis.

Find a goalscorer, provide him with chances, Mark, and, suddenly, the random nature of events will not conspire against you. Of course, there will continue to be random events in midfield, and in defence, but a solid centre back, or two, and a proper defensive midfielder, and you will be laughing in the face of probability, and randomness.

It would mean, perhaps, that MCR had had a window into the nebulous world of Murray's Rangers' finances. As my horseracing friends attest, all insight is helpful, if not today, then tomorrow. In this case, perhaps, particularly useful, when you are consultants of choice to assorted hyenas, jackals, and carrion crows.

In the lexicon of sharp practice, "binding" means the cover, and "irrevocable" refers to a trick won by playing a Trump rather than following suit.

A shift which Whitehouse and colleague were more than happy to accommodate, without, it would seem, consulting their old friend and client, the chiseller Whyte. Such a parcel of rogues, eh?

Of course, we should remind ourselves that Duff and Phelps, a multinational consultancy, of repute, as far as I know, had the bad luck, or bad judgement, to buy a UK accountancy mob, the name of which eludes me, the directors of which included Whitehouse and the other bloke who "handled" Rangers' administration. (Due diligence? Wtf is that?) It wasn't Duff and Phelps which had enjoyed a long, cosy, and profitable relationship with the corner boy, Whyte. Of course, it now carries the can.

The most random factors in Scottish football are refereeing decisions, which often seem to occur without reason. However, I do harbour a suspicion that, in many match situations, the decisions open to the referee -especially, eg, to award, or not to award, a penalty to, or against, fhilth fc- do not have an equal probability of being chosen.

I thought that young Mr Ball was actually, now, a Rotherham player, having signed for The Millers at the start of the season.

I agree that the Dodoo scenario seems odd. The signing that vexes me, most, is that of Garner, following which, that of MO'H. These are his two most expensive players, and one rarely starts, while the other is an automatic choice, despite seeming to be a striker who doesn't, well, strike. I am sure that Garner is a good runner, and that his metres covered stat will be impressive, but really, is this what the team needs?

That was a response to an enigmatic reference by Mr. Forlanssister. The news of BDO's pursuit of Nanker & Phelge was not the piece of "good news" to which he had referred in an earlier post. I am not "itk"; if I was, you would be the first to hear the story.

How often does the anti Rangers headline contradict the article?