The DA

Have you got anything constructive or interesting to say about these real world proceedings?

Kinky scrambling for relevance.

I've been following the Corals case via Doleman's tweets (I know but I really am sick at the moment - nothing better to do). Coral's counsel seems all over the place with his questions. There's no 'narrative' at all, just a scattergun approach. Just when you think he might be heading down the 'new club shoehorned in' route - he refers to the 'team' being bought rather than the 'club' - he veers off to ask about the odds. Verra, verra strange.

And we shouldn't discuss what's going on in the real world?

So do we. Fair enough, it's only one league title but I suspect that'll be beyond them for a few decades yet.

This is the first series I've watched and it was good enough to make me go back and watch the first three series. I can't work out whether that final scene, with the Fabulous Baker Street Boys bursting out of a doorway side by side, is supposed to be Batman and Robin (1966) or Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. If the latter, this is the last series.

You'd be the only Rangers fan who took that stance then. BTW that sly mention of 'conspiracy theories' is a good one. Fans of The Rangers can keep trying to tell us that there's nothing to see here, move along, which is exactly why so many diddies will keep reminding you - forever - that your club was liquidated chasing a dream that you couldn't afford.

That's not the point of this particular exchange though, is it Kinky? You claimed that you'd only tease Newco Celtic for a week before it was back to business as usual. That's only tangentially related to the fact that your club went into liquidation.

Nonsense, you'd be reminding them every time they tried to claim the Oldco's titles. Forever.

I'm heading into work after a couple of days off with a cold. But I'm even worse today - absolutely knackered, pain in all my joints, barking like a doggie, splitting headache, runny nose, blurred vision. I wonder which will come first - me giving up and heading back to my bed or the boss telling me to f**k off and take my germs with me.

So, if the other arse-cheek had gone into liquidation and a new club started playing out of Celtic Park and claimed to be the original Celtic, you're saying you wouldn't be all over every related post?

Obviously you do.

You only die once (Hebrews 9:27).

This has been said before, Beano, but well put.

I'm not so sure, Monkey. I suspect Coral's case will rest on their proposal that only a club can be relegated (whatever meaning you want to put on the word 'relegated') and that, in this case, the club ceased to exist and therefore could not have been relegated. If that really is their argument and a court finds against the complainant on that basis, and not on some obscure point of law, then we've learned that Scots law (I assume it will be heard up here) disagrees with the club continuity myth. The fans are still free to accept or reject any other flavour of continuity.

What's the betting that one of their new signings will get crocked during one of these friendlies? You read it here first.

'It comes after a minority of yob Gers fans trashed toilets in the away end at Parkhead during the clash back in September '. Is that because they could only fit twenty of them in the bogs? Stupid and inflammatory reporting. Of course it was a minority - if a majority of visiting fans had gone on the rampage, they could probably have dismantled half the stand.

If that argument is the basis of the court case, we're going to get a black-and-white answer and, ether way, this thread will need to be shut down.

That's pretty much my take on it, too. There was no such things as 'separate club and company' in 2012 but there's now an element of continuity of support.

I find it hard to accept that Rangers fans really believe this interpretation of events. We were all there at the time and we all know how things went down.

Yes there was a vote but Rangers had already left by then. The vote was to allow the new club IN.

Revisionism at its best. Keep on believing, mate.

Given the gulf in finances between them and Celtic, Rangers would need a top manager to have any hope of closing the gap. In fact, if Rangers were to live within their means, i.e. break even on an annual basis without taking out further soft loans, they might not be second either. Imagine ditching two or three million quids worth of salary from the current Rangers squad and see what is left. Short of some black swan catastrophe (or miracle, delete as appropriate), I can't see Celtic being knocked off their perch for the foreseeable future. They might screw up once every ten years but it has been shown that there's a strong correlation between the cost of a squad and its final league position (for example https://tomkinstimes.com/2014/01/money-buys-success-the-proof-you-need/). Someone would need to break Celtic's stranglehold on CL money to have any chance of shifting the balance, and that would have to be more than a one-off, too. Going back to your point, I wonder how Rangers support will hold up if they only manage the odd win against Celtic. Will that be enough to keep the myth of 'closing the gap' going?

Nae surrender, Kinky.

Cos if lies are left unchallenged, they eventually become the truth?