The DA

He was just using language the bears would understand. No point taxing them with complicated terms like 'unregistered'. To be fair, though, it wouldn't be the first time someone in a position of authority misspoke: I seem to recall a Rangers spokesman saying that the club had been sold to Sevco5088.

Just checked and the maximum possible IQ is 200. Seville IQ calculator?

£37,938 million? Worse than we thought then.

We should start watching out for next season's sales slogan. They're bound to start trialling it round about Christmas (earlier if there's another share issue needed).

Or three.

In my experience, many (ex-)OF fans have this terrible urge to give their life purpose and meaning by investing all of their energy and identity in their team, imagining they have some say in how it's run. Some of the posturing on their forums is laughable. If they'd just walk away from football for a few years, ignore the tv and MSM coverage and find other more important interests, they might find that they come out the far end as healthier, happier, better-balanced people. Rangers fans might just have to do that, anyway.

Get stuffed, you condescending chimp. We're not 'helping' you: many of us despise you glory hunters just as much as we do the other arse-cheek.

Like your team? Boom boom!

I'm starting to doubt my own sanity. Did I just imagine the CW reign?

FFS, you've no concept of context, have you? The ban was only deemed illegal when it was to be used as a punishment on an existing member. Legally (and you might need to look that word up, , the SFL were entitled to impose any conditions they wished on your new company's entry into the leagues. Two different landscapes.

It depends on whether you mean Rangers the club or Rangers the company. It also depends on whether you're assessing their behaviour as it was understood at the time they applied for entry or as it seems now, after the LNS decision. [edit for pish typing]

That's a total non sequitor of a challenge, 8. You said you wanted a punishment fitting of the crime and not an illegal transfer ban. I was only pointing out that it wasn't illegal as a condition of entry. Whether the authorities decide to impose this punishment on future applicants would establish the fairness of it. I agree it seems slightly vindictive of them but I also understand the need to punish a club/company that had behaved as Rangers had.

I wasn't commenting on the fairness of it. I was only pointing out that it wasn't 'illegal'. But 'fairness' and The Rangers......

That full stop shows great attention to the rules of grammar. Well done. Maybe a space too many after the smiley but a good try.

The transfer ban was only 'illegal' when it was being imposed as a punishment. When it was imposed as a condition of entry to a new club, it was perfectly legal.

Nobody like us, we don't care. Except you do. No football team, or its supportters, is an island. Or something.

A Tale of Two Shitties, surely?

It's 'losing millions'. If they're 'loosing millions', I'm at the head of the queue. Beam me up, Scotty. (Edit] StonedSailor beat me to it.

Oh, the irony of a Ringers fan referring to other fans as 'low-brows'.

Definitely a flyboy. EDIT: Damn. You edited out my 'joke'.

If Rangers win the SPL or the Scottish Cup by the end of 2020, I'll issue a grovelling, personalised apology to each and every Ted on P&B that requests one. On a scale of probability, I'd say that Hibs winning the Scottish Cup or Not-Celtic winning the league are considerably more likely, largely because most Not-Celtic teams aren't absolute financial and sporting train wrecks in the way that Rangers currently are. They COULD, but if they did, they'd have to have cheated, wouldn't they, and we all know they're above that kind of behaviour.

Damning with faint praise, methinks.

Even 'journeymen SPL level players' are marquee signings for an SFL2 team. Totally unnecessary if you had a manger/coach with the slightest idea of how to manage.

Which you would have been quite happy about if it had worked out.