flyingrodent

To be fair, at least a couple of them are savvy enough to spot that a general "Cheats should be stripped of their ill-gotten gains" rule might rebound on them.

At Rangers media, enthusiasm rises for stripping of trophies awarded to teams that may have cheated... http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=267352&st=0

Yes, I was including the fact that you're a new member, and still stoking a grudge-match, somehow. That was the point. Do you have any games against senior football teams that aren't grudge-matches, now?

Isn't it weird, that Rangers can stoke a grudge match out of a tie with Raith Rovers, who they haven't played for years? Doesn't that strike anyone else as strange?

I, for one, am thoroughly chastened on reading this post. Truly Rangers, super Rangers, are the bestest ever - I'm now convinced. Thanks for joining in.

To butt in, I'd like to wish Rangers all the best in their cup final on Sunday. Edit to add: I'd like to wish that, but can't bring myself to. Hoping youse get brutalised.

A touch of Hirohito and the surrender of Japan to that CEO announcement, there: "The financial situation has developed not necessarily to Rangers' advantage, but we will remain" etc. and so on.

"Material uncertainty" time

Would Accept Thirty Pounds

This kind of attitude could be understandable, if it was coming from someone who hadn't watched his club overspend massively and die as a result. It'd still be ridiculous and self-destructive, but you could understand it - daring to dream, etc. To come out with this kind of patter now though is just total insanity, and doubly so because the only reason Dave is making these statements is because he knows it's what he has to say to get the supporters onside. He's saying it because it's what the Rangers fans want to hear, incredibly. If some smooth-talking businessman now offered Leeds or Hearts a ludicrous, all-or-nothing, win-or-die spend-spend-spend solution to their current woes, a few of those teams' fans would probably support it, but the vast majority of supporters would surely regard it as a lunatic idea. Having a club to support is more important to most fans than risking absolutely everything on making sure that that club never loses any games, I would've thought. Not so, these ones. I don't know if there's another bunch of supporters quite like them anywhere in the world, and I don't mean that in a good way.

Ten in a row? Well, much like Fraser Forster going for the clean sheet record, it'd be nice if it happened, but I'll probably manage to restrain my suicidal urges if it doesn't.

Very true, that.

I don't think it's just mere stupidity, although there's plenty of that. I reckon it's more like that old Upton Sinclair quote - ""It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it".... Except with a raging sense of superiority and entitlement, rather than salaries.

Comedy, as the Bears pretend not to understand the difference between "Paying some of your bills, by agreement with your creditors" and "Paying none of your bills, and all of your creditors can get to fvck": http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=266389 It's noticeable how far "being a Rangers fan" is now coterminous with "pretending that you don't understand basic notions about debt, even though you do in fact understand basic notions about debt". To be honest, I'm starting to think that you can't support Rangers unless you're willing to pretend that you don't understand certain basic facts that you do, basically, understand very well.

The nearest V&C is up in Leith, Hibbyland. We're in deepest, darkest Spartans territory down here.

Radio 4 and red wine!? Jesus, I live in Comely Bank, and even I find that painfully middle class, and living here is like watching two guys named Finlay comparing agas with the Archers theme playing in the background. At the deli counter in Waitrose.

Worth noting that only a year or two ago, they could get £25m up-front on season ticket sales. £1.5m minus expenses doesn't say "box office" to me, but I am biased.

Probably optimistic, but you never know.

This week, apparently. And it's administration number 1, by the way - your club has never been in administration before.

Phil's record on predictions is a good bit less than 50-50, I'd say, but let's at least recognise that if New Rangers enter administration for the first time due to massive financial skullduggery, they are at least carrying on the traditions of the old, dead club.

That's surely the central question here. Oh my, it is a mystery and a puzzle and an enigma - if Rangers were in fatal financial distress, why not call in these massive cash loans? Answer: Because they weren't loans.

Robert Frost! Not even I'm that wanky, and I am quite wanky.

Which would seem to be Dave King's intention - I imagine that a club in administration would be cheaper to buy into than one that's just barely ticking over. Funny that he's not saying this directly. If anything, it sounds like he wants to con Rangers fans into bankrupting the club again, so that he can save a few million. Assuming he has any intention of buying in, that is.

Not really. Call the Scottish Court Service if you want an explanation - probably a scheduling clash.

Good God. Are judges in Spain or Italy subjected to this kind of Sniff-sniff, what school did ye go tae? nonsense as well, or is it just in Scotland that this kind of thing happens? It seems utterly bizarre and backward to me.