The DA

You'll have to wait while he checks the company line.

I know how you feel.

Can't remember when I was last called 'young man'. Chapeau, you young fart.

Have you seen James Galway in action?

Do Rangers fans really not look outside their own squad? Are they capable of naming anyone even from their Championship rivals?

Why, yes. Yes, he did. I think he said, "We wish the new Rangers Football Club every good fortune."

Your last sentence might be right but I wonder if this is the future of reporting. Physical newspapers are near enough dead so maybe people will start paying for micro-services, instead. After the Persicope episode during the week, I'm starting to wonder about the future of paid-for TV sport as well. If half the crowd are kitted up as cameramen, who's going to pay 20 quid a month for Sky Sports? Back to JJ, what's his main source of income? If this is it, I'm surprised he can run a reporting service and pay his living expenses on 24K pa. Or is this just his pocket money?

I'll bet you're no oil painting. WTF have her looks got to do with her journalistic skills?

You say that now. Just wait 20 years and it'll be skimmed milk, sugar substitute and lo-salt. Still kicks the shit out of cornflakes, though.

Should we expect any protests when Father Michael O'Flaherty is appointed chairman?

Or through not having his earpiece turned up loud enough.

Your club are suffering plenty of the former and little from the latter.

A fair summary, Tedi. Nothing is going to persuade either side to change their minds. But to say that it isn't an argument to be had is absolute toss. I suspect the reason Rangers fans don't point out any favourable court comments (is that true - I can't be bothered trawling back through a thousand pages to check) is because they're wary of where the arguments might lead, worried about the gotchas. It's a bit back-to-front though: normally when someone makes an extraordinary claim such as life-after-death, the onus is on them to provide the evidence to back it up. I've thought about this over the past couple of days and there are really two issues here. The first one, about Rangers being a new club or having some level of continuity, is to the fore at the moment. When it comes down to it, you're right to say that it doesn't really matter. It's all about bragging rights over the previous 100 years of history. I couldn't give much of a feck myself. It rankles a bit since it offends my sense of fair play but I'm more interested in today and tomorrow not leagues and cups won before I was born. The other issue, how Rangers ended up in the situation that led to them going bust is a bit more serious and needs to be addressed so that we ALL know we have a fair and level game in the future. If any club is allowed to cheat the system (side letters on EBTs, over-spending to the point of recklessness), go bust and then start all over again with history intact, what's to stop another club doing it again?

Deflecting much? BTW the fact that the hearing was not about old or new clubs is exactly why I referred to some of the judge's and counsel's comments as causing 'collateral damage'. Why do you need everything explained twice, benny?

Please highlight these 'telts'. You do realise that, while we will have to wait for the decision on the case between Ashley and the SFA, the collateral damage was much more entertaining? Even if Doleman was being selective in his reporting, and I've no doubt he is, what he reported must be worrying for Rangers fans. We're never going to see a court case explicitly asking and answering the question of ''new Rangers or not?' but the fall-out from this case and the upcoming Green and Whyte trials is going to answer it to most people's satisfaction.

Rangers fan tells diddy fan to think for himself. Anyone else hearing the Twilight Zone theme music?

To what end, though? Has he just gone into revenge mode?

Second for how many years? Enough for Celtic to get to ten-in-a-row? How will that go down with the masses?

True. I'll defend myself by claiming I was using 'you' in the more general, all-inclusive Rangers-family sense.

You'd have 300 years of catching up to do, would you no?

The old 'divide and rule'approach, Kinky? There are thousands of supporters who believe Rangers died or, more euphemistically, had an interruption to their continuity. No parallel universe required. This whole thread is dedicated to the topic.

That's the one.

I'll just keep reminding you of the break in your continuity. You know, the one that allowed you to shed all that debt and still keep the tainted titles?

To be fair, you still call yourselves Rangers...

Agreed. Sensitive ol' me is being exposed to history that I've no wish to learn more about.