GreenockRover

Done. On my phone

Oh of course! I mentioned elsewhere, I think, that the ongoing and continual scrutiny they now attract will be a constant source of both annoyance to them and a restrictive presence in any future attempts to have the protected species status utilised in the manner it was over the last twenty years or more. Maybe the song should go: We're The Rangers The Super Rangers No one likes us, Leave us alone Just give us money, loads of money We canny do it, on our own

To be fair No.8 it is a debate worth having... if only to expose the insidious nature of how it has been allowed to fester by the games governing authorities. 1. Do Rangers fans believe they follow the same club ? Of course they do. 2. Do their detractors and critics believe they are a different club ? Of course they do 3. Will either group change their beliefs because the other side wants them to ? Nope. So, where to get some clarity on the whole debacle I wonder? Faced with the self-induced implosion of RFC Ltd, the SFA had 50% of their only (perceived) marketable product suddenly disappear. The media concurred as their headlines clearly proclaimed. The panic at the offices in Hampden was palpable. TV deals were at risk of revocation. Written, as they were, with only one certain fixture in mind showed the short sightedness of both SPL/SFA and the TV Execs. Once the penalty of expulsion from the SPL had been agreed, strenuous efforts were made by the SFA/SFL to minimise the impact with a proposal to put them into the then 1st Division. Nothing to do with appropriate penalties you understand. This was solely to try and protect the TV deal by having them return as swiftly as possible. Running in parallel to all this was the thorny, and massively problematical issue of the potential for the actual demise of RFC Ltd (as incorporated) should Administration become Liquidation. What to do? Well, the idea was floated that the SFA could rewrite their rules to somehow circumvent Company Law concerning Admin/Liquidation events by viewing the "Footballing Club" as a seperate and continuous entity not subject to its' owners financial shortcomings. The only fly in their ointment here is the pesky Law. It forbids companies "phoenixing" from the ashes of failed businesses by purporting to be the "same" as the defunct one. Sure, if the assets can be utilised to run a similair business, no problem, after all, it protects the "industry" from reckless "companies". However the "new" company cannot lay claim to be the "old" company so as to protect customers past and future. So you see No.8. The self protectionists of the SFA/SPFL have had to find a way of maintaining your Clubs' continuation and, (in conjunction with their rewriting of definitions in their rules) will always be sufficiently ambiguous as to the status of the club now referred to as The Rangers Football Club (As opposed to Rangers Football Club Ltd) so as not to fall foul of the law regarding company failures. So, in reality BOTH sides can be seen to be correct in their own view and the very fact that the SFA/SPFL are actively seeking the continuity really allows people like the ASA to say that it exists because the governing body say its ok. The non-believers point to Company Law, the subtle (but lawfully enforced) name change and point and laugh. In all of this of course, Ibrox houses a football team in blue followed by that wondrous mix of socio-political weirdos, glory hunters and football fans of all ages. So nothing new at all there. Rangers F.C. or The Rangers F.C. matters not to them.....They are Rangers, no one likes them, they (say) they don't care. Yet they do. Very very much.

Now now WRK.... we ALL know how easily bought they are. The 'victory' of keeping Ibrox a non securitised asset will draw a considerable percentage back. The King fantasists will always be agitating from the sidelines of course but Ashley will ignore them and, potentially, get the team competitive enough to be a genuine domestic challenger at a value for money price tag as opposed to the profligacy that has gone before. Once that is achieved, the revenue stream will be proof of exactly how well Ashley has played the game.

Agreed, but it's all likely to be about the level of 'austerity' now I suspect. Given my earlier post comparing Ashley and Green, I can certainly see the sense in this potential (nothing confirmed yet you understand) 'compromise' between the factions seeking to take control at SevCo. However Ashley still holds the trump card by virtue of his wealth and negotiating T3B involvement is a clever move by Ashley to work the fans back into their seats. The idea of not using Ibrox as security after all may well have come from Ashley himself as a means to cut King adrift (finally) As they say, everyone has their price. Clearly T3B (well Park and Latham at least) have a reasonably sound business sense and perhaps they also understand the new reality that is Scottish Football and its stature and relative value in 2015. Only time will tell. Interesting times ahead.

Lots of conjecture that T3B have secured an agreement over providing loan cash/funding for board inclusion (possibly the 2 places they were after).....providing they dump King? Raises as many questions as answers in all honesty. The beginning of the beginning or the delay of the, seemingly, inevitable ?

The Unbelievable

Telt...... again.....

Oh we all understand the meaning within the phrasing WRK It is 100% genuine. He owns his own Company but I do like the location it comes up with when he is at home

Off my facebook page... "Kenny 1 hr · Bearsden · Is it wrong to auction two tickets for the Rangers -v- Celtic game to the highest bidder and use the proceeds to buy shares and donate them to The Rangers Supporters Trust ? Not sure if I can go or not !! Like · · Share 2 people like this." Wrong???? Not at all... Futile ? f**k yeah!

Grant Russell ‏@STVGrant 12m12 minutes ago None of the 55 games Steve Simonsen is accused of betting on were Rangers matches. OMFG! Was he putting them on for Black ?

Errrrr..... Yes. The majority of their fanbase don't see the Minty years as a failure either. It won them lots of shiny silverware and that's ALL that matters. It's not how or who could afford it, it's the fact they won stuff. Sure, Minty had to conceal the debt in his specially set up companies within MIH Group but - hey, who cares they WON STUFF! Bought big in the transfer markets. Were courted by ALL the press / media. They WERE THE PEOPLE! Now, we all know (?) the story of Icarus and how his demise was pretty much inevitable, well Rangers fans would sooner blame the sun than admit they flew too close in the first place. The fanbase, and, it must be said, some of the would be owners/directors of the entity at Ibrox have become addicted to their (self) perceived stature and do indeed want to return to the discredited model of financing the ridiculous by means of the incredulous (maybe that's better the other way around ?) Unfortunately for them the days of being able to call upon ludricous/dubious sources of finance to fund these ridiculous gambles or ego trips has pretty much gone the way of the dodo. At the very least, the idea that that kind of behaviour can be embarked upon un-noticed now has gone. There will always be a spotlight on them now. Questions will always be asked, by others if they can't be relied upon to do it for themselves. Any credibility they ever had (lol) has gone forever. Any strong governing authority, not conflicted by one of its' members being entangled in the web of deceit, would have been far more transparent and effective in dealing with this sleazy mess... but that's another subject. I simply wonder how MANY versions of their Club they will see before the penny drops. ETA: sloppy grammar and spelling ffs!

To be honest.... we were never OFF that list since Turnbull called them out for what they were. ...and are ...and continue to be.

Completely agree.

"Rangers are angry that Raith Rovers are selling tickets directly to the Light Blues' fans for next month's match at Stark's Park because the Fifers are concerned about Rangers' financial position and fear they may be left out of pocket." It's called Corporate Governance Berrz..... ... it's also a sign of the true level of distrust your club/company can expect for the forseeable future. Pleasing.

A shot accross the bows of the drifting, powerless ship called the SFA.... http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30911000 Watch our favourite idiot attempt to belittle it on the basis of the author... sooooo predictable.

The irony of this is fukkin awesome !

Good rant indeed... For some reason only appears aimed at "The other half" too ? As a confirmed diddy-team fan I resent not being properly identified as "an enemy" However, to summarise: LEAVE US ALONE !!! STOP WATCHING EVERY MOVE WE TRY TO MAKE !!! LET US DO WHAT WE'VE ALWAYS DONE !!! WE'RE THE FUCKING PEOPLE YA BASTURDS !!!! GO AWAYYYYYY !!!!

....and while I'm sitting here, perhaps you could link to this for me as well. Must have slipped my mind this claim of intelligence thing...

Oh hang on.... let me pull up a chair here and you can explain this "delaying tactic" idea you have. Should be good this....

Nail. Head. Hammer. They just keep doing it to themselves - it must be a disease or something...

Four Men Had To Cream?

If you listen carefully, you can actually hear Corporate Lawyers laughing their arses off over that piece of over-emotive, irrelevant shite. Marvellous.

Hope he has his application in then