Drooper

Harsh.

Correct. Incitement to violence by way of gross nincompoopery is the appropriate legal provision I believe.

In keeping with the philosophical theme, I have a suggestion for a new sign on the gates at Ibrox: Abandon All Hope Ye Who Enter Here I particularly enjoy the fact that Dante is considered a moral philosopher. There is an exquisite irony in there.

Magnificent!

He had to speak slowly - the spoken word equivalent of large print.

Fixed it for you.

In true P&B tradition, a perfectly good thread is being spammed with philosophy

They've taken my comments out of context - I'm suing them! Nah, the edit works well enough to get the point across. TBH, I think we are the oxygen that allows the lazy hacks in the Scottish sports media to survive. They must derive a huge amount of their material from the articulate, knowledgeable, and polemic musings on here. I reckon we should close the thread down for a week and leave them floundering. By next weekend, they'd all be demoted and hanging about outside Glasgow Sheriff Court waiting to report on a guy from Easterhouse biting the ear off a guy from Ruchazie and feeding it to his Staffy

Every little helps On another, not unrelated, matter.... My missus has been a bit irritating throughout this whole Rangers debacle in her endeavours to maintain a degree of sympathy and understanding for the 'ordinary' Rangers supporters. Much as I would consider myself as a reconstructed and forward thinking chap, I actually found myself telling her that she simply didn't understand the situation yesterday. As you can imagine, this went down well. We then caught the brief BBC Scotland TV news report at 10.35pm last night, and 3 Rangers supporters were offering their erudite and measured responses. The missus watched in barely disguised disgust, then commented that 'they could at least have found a few who look remotely normal'. I explained that this was the very point, these guys ARE the norm. I think the penny might have dropped

If Rangers burn, the tawdry rag I work for will have less call on my inane slabberings, and this could directly impact upon my capacity to purchase buns and sweeties

Correct, and I pretty much said as much to the St Mirren chairman, Stewart Gilmour. My question was simply this: taking the Rangers situation and OF matches out of the equation for a moment, what would the clubs - all of them - do if Sky decided that the product on offer was shite, and/or that they didn't want to renew their contract. This is scenario that is entirely feasible, it is the prerogative of the TV companies so you would have to assume that the clubs have taken this into account and have contingency planning in mind. No? I have to say that the response I received wasn't terribly compelling - ie: I'm not sure if any such contingency plans are in place. It seems to me that clubs have a very short-termist approach to their fiscal management - season to season it would appear. I can appreciate why this must be the case to a degree given the vagaries of the system - league positioning; ST sales; sponsorship etc. - but, to my mind, this only reinforces why clubs shouldn't be winging it on the basis of scraping by from year to year (let's face it, several aren't even doing that in reality).

Have the vultures plucked out its eyeballs, and have swarms of flies descended on the bloated corpse yet?

TRaynor is scared that Ra Peepul will boycott the Daily Retard, and Dodds is simply a lickspittle wee gnome with barely an independent thought in his head. I know I shouldn't let a pair of non-enitites such as them get to me, but.... All this does is make me ever more eager to see Rangers and every handmaiden in the media and beyond suffer a grisly fate.

Billy Dodds and Jim Traynor on the BBC just now. What a pair of whining apologists. They are letting this David Whitehouse specimen trot out the line that Rangers are more sinned against than sinning. FFS, this is making my fucking blood boil. ETA: fair play to Jim Spence for attempting to bring some balance. 'Mon the gingers!

I wonder if the SFA are simply trying to be discrete in their statement in order to avoid entering into an all too public war of words with Rangers. Hopefully, they are keeping their powder dry, as surely they must be mightily pissed off with the sabre-rattling coming from Ibrox today. My other (perhaps a little optimistic) hope is that the SFA have one eye on how UEFA are viewing how they deal with this situation. UEFA recently issued a statement to the effect that they are satisfied that the Scottish football authorities will deal with the Rangers situation in an appropriate manner. Something tells me that, like the Swiss authorities over Sion and others, the SFA are conscious that they are being scrutinised from across the Continent.

That bit caught my eye, too. If they back down over this is will be the biggest and worst decision they will even make as an organisation, and boy, have they made some humdingers. Against the backdrop of a team of administrators trying to publically strong-arm them into a U-turn using wholly inapappropriate language, they absolutely MUST ensure that the integrity of the game is their paramount concern, not the future of Rangers. They should have strenuously berated D&P for their statement, not acknowledged their frustration and anger. A massive test of the SFA's mettle lies ahead. Personally, I fear that they will buckle. If they do...? The baw's well and truly burst, and possibly for good, this time.

The grossly intemperate language from D&P in the long statement posted a couple of pages back earlier will backfire on them. They are effectively using, as grounds of appeal, their perception of those who made the ruling decision as clueless buffoons. Now, in my world, this isn't a prudent approach to achieving what you want. In my world, we try to use reasoned argument to define and defend our position, as opposed to ridiculing anyone who doesn't give us what we want, regardless of whether it is the correct and proper thing to do. Indeed, if I were an official of the SFA, I might be inclined to slap a charge of misconduct on the current custodians of the Big Hoose. Isn't what they are saying (ie - that the SFA are clueless and incapable of reaching an appropriate decision) effectively much the same as Neil Lennon's various rants at SFA officials, minus the throbbing veins and spittle? Surely when you lodge an appeal, you simply do that....lodge your appeal, and then quietly and efficiently build your case. These guys are trying to publically bully the governing body into performing a U-turn, and I think they're merely further demonstrating their own idoicy in the way in which they are going about this. Dearie me. This house of cards cannot collapse and spontaneously combust soon enough.

Rangers demand urgent appeal hearing over SFA sanctions By Matt Slater BBC sports news reporter A Scottish Football Association panel could hear an appeal against the sanctions imposed on Rangers as early as next week. Hmm....it'll be very interesting to see how this pans out. Anyone care to place a bet? William Hill, of course

FFS

1. We don't need rangers; 2. We don't want Rangers; 3. Rangers supporters have nothing but contempt for everyone else involved in Scottish football; 4. Rangers supporters are beneath the contempt of everyone else (Celtic excepted) in Scottish football; 5. Rangers, as an 'institution' is a festering, cancerous lesion on the Scottish game. How could we possibly need that? 6. Even if we did need Rangers, I'd rather they suffered a hellishly excruciating and squalid demise, and that the rest of us took our chances thereafter; Simple as that.

Succulent lamb perchance?

Tell me I'm not dreaming: http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=217787

Tremendous, isn't it