westway 0 Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 A raw deal? Someone who constantly gave the Rangers support rude gestures and behave like the two Bob gangster he obviously is, aye misunderstood. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 (edited) It's pretty f*&king clear who got the raw deal in the Easdales plan to ingratiate and attempt to legitimise themselves in Scottish society. They allowed themselves to be taken in, used by and eventually f*&ked over firstly by the man you yourself anointed saviour of Rangers and again by Ashley and all the time to the detriment of Rangers, but the one that really f*&ked them over is their "family spokesman" who must be absolutely pissing himself that he's found such a cash cow in Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber. Claiming they're not badly intended is a bit like claiming Harold Shipman always put his patients welfare first. I mentioned their use of Jack Irvine in this thread before you did. It must be understood that giving a bit it leeway to someone's character is not making them out to be wonderful or showing a desire for them to still be in position, you're well aware of my views on the previous board especially the last few weeks. I don't know the Easdales either so I completely accept I may be well off the mark. As ever I don't believe that you should hold back an opinion because it will likely be unpopular. Although you're kind of backing up my view that they just weren't bright enough Edited March 11, 2015 by simplythebest 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 The statement backed up that he hasn't had a salary from us and he's taken a sensible exit route while Llambias and Leach still seem to went to drag everything out and cost the club more money STILL doesn't mean he had good intentions. The hole you are digging is large 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Poor Sandy Easdale - so misunderstood. Chris Graham - A rat and wanker. [/stb_logic] Never said they were misunderstood, end of the day they failed badly 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 STILL doesn't mean he had good intentions. The hole you are digging is large It helps me form a view, only Easdale himself knows his intentions for sure. For all the hassle they and their families have had and lack of salary not to mention their reputation being made worse than before they've certainly not gained much on the face of it 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 I mentioned their use of Jack Irvine in this thread before you did. It must be understood that giving a bit it leeway to someone's character is not making them out to be wonderful or showing a desire for them to still be in position, you're well aware of my views on the previous board especially the last few weeks. I don't know the Easdales either so I completely accept I may be well off the mark. As ever I don't believe that you should hold back an opinion because it will likely be unpopular. Although you're kind of backing up my view that they just weren't bright enough So making a decision which was obviously not in the club's best interests which was proven to be made in order to save the blazer means these two are "not badly intended" ? I swear you are contrarian just for the sake of it and without even thinking through what you are saying ! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 You really don't know anything about him.Absolutely true 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 It helps me form a view, only Easdale himself knows his intentions for sure. For all the hassle they and their families have had and lack of salary not to mention their reputation being made worse than before they've certainly not gained much on the face of it What they have gained is irrelevant. Whyte gained little from Rangers but his intentions were clearly not good. So what point are you making ? Not taking a salary means shit too. They do ok for money from other interests, not taking a salary whilst nice on the face of it still tells you absolutely nothing of the underlying intentions. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 (edited) So making a decision which was obviously not in the club's best interests which was proven to be made in order to save the blazer means these two are "not badly intended" ? I swear you are contrarian just for the sake of it and without even thinking through what you are saying ! I've also said that they were in too deep with people more powerful than them, try and read everything I say rather than making a headline. Saying the Easdales came in with reasonable intentions doesn't excuse the mess that was made and I'm hardly saying they should be given a lifetime seat at the stadium, however both are gone now with minimal fuss and I'd like to think they can just get on with their lives running businesses more at their level. Difference with the two L's is that they should be hounded forever IMO. Edited March 11, 2015 by simplythebest 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Both of the Easdales' positions were untenable, it's that simple. They were in bed with the enemy as far as most Rangers fans were (and are) concerned and they've been directly involved in voting through some absolutely despicable boardroom decisions which weren't in the best interests of the company or the Club. Then there's their use not only of Jack Irvine, but of arseholes from Pacific Quay CSC and lawyers they instructed to threaten and take legal action against Rangers fans, websites and forums. Your sympathies are beyond comprehension yet again and completely misplaced. I'm not really arguing against most of that. Believe me, I'm not lying awake at night crying with sympathy for Sandy Easdale. Let's not exaggerate a couple of internet messages 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.