Jump to content

Larsson.

Gold Members
  • Posts

    231
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Larsson.

  1. Then in my opinion you are as low and spiteful as any former Rangers fan I have met or read posts from. This was about justice not revenge, you are the type of supporter which Archie MacPhearson described on TV last night.

    Rangers were the only villains in this situation.

    If fans want to find out the rats who voted yes then boycott said club then they have every right to do so,

  2. For what it's worth, I'm glad that particular thread was closed. It seems to me that this site is one of the more tolerant out there, but some things are just too close to the bone. Now, you could say "well don't post in it then", but with regards to mental illness, let's just say it's a bit close to home and leave it at that. If people get a genuine kick out of coming out with statements that a psychopath could see would disturb some contributors, fair enough. Those posters, and it's obvious who they are, could deny the holocaust for a bit of a laugh. That's a matter for their own conscience. I think the mods in general don't tend to overreact. In this case, noone was banned, and had the thread carried on, I probably would have been.

    I appreciate that it's just the internet. I appreciate also that censorship is not something that we would like to see. But outright mocking of a very specificand vulnerable part of the population really isn't a matter for "general nonsense" IMO. And the irony of Larsson apparently annoyed because he can't spread more verbal diarrhoea over the net is not lost on me.

    Not being funny, but you really need to try and lighten up a wee bit, lifes to short.

  3. What happened to policy? Do WLC apply "sustainable" criteria to all of its tenants? The council did NOT evict a sitting tenant. The tenant was Livingston Football Club...............and it still is. C'mon Jimbo, this isn't about grudges. Look at the relationship for what it actually is, not for what they want you to believe it is. The council have opened a can of worms with this. It's up to the tax payers whether or not they want to take issue with it. The council have made ot very easy for the right lawyer to tear them to pieces. Look at it in square foot terms..........as the council supposedly do, and it ain't right. It seems that the council have chosen to look at it in terms of turnover. Do the council afford this facility to all of their business tenants? You know the answer to that one. It's a helluva push to paint this as a straightforward business decision that meets existing policy criteria, because it doesn't.

    Here's a comparable version of events and tell me if this is something the council would do. A family ain't paid their rent for months and months and months. The council take them to court, and force Dad out of the house, but allow the family to stay. They then tell the family to forget about all the old rent that they owe. They also tell them not to worry about the rent, because as a gesture, they'll knock off 85% for the next year. It'll have to go back up, but it will only ever go up to one third of its original figure until the family start earning top money.

    Is that how WLC negotiate with all of their tenants? The only bit that is missing so far would be the cherry on the top. That would be the council then selling the house to the family for a fraction of its value, and allowing them to move it on for whatever they can get. But that will never ever happen, will it.

    .........and was it not just three days ago your illustrious council leader said he "hoped to get back some of the money owed". Fast forward three short days, and he presides over a decision to not only write it off, but to reduce future rent by 85%. Sounds like a man that should either be listened to, or watched. I know which one I would choose.

    So why are the good people served by WLC not up in arms about all of this.

    Surely it must be front page local news.

  4. Piss off. The SFA have NO jurisdiction over the SFL in terms of the SFL rules.

    Tight vote though today - 16-10. Too close for my liking and shows there are still some numbskulls kicking about the clubs. It should have been 26-0.

    Anyone know who the 10 clubs who voted to help Livi are?

    Dundee.

    East Stirlingshire.

    Elgin.

    Clyde.

    Dunfermline.

    Ayr Utd.

    Brechin city.

    Forfar.

    Queens park.

    Albion Rovers.

  5. If as has been hinted at, McGruther and his backers are prepared to go to the law courts if and when the appeal falls tomorrow - things will really start to get interesting, costs will increase as will the stakes.

    Amazing what money will be spent and risks taken to make money and aquire real estate....

    If true what i don't get is the part Gordon McDougall is playing in all this, the guy loves football

    and is not short of a few bob so why go through all this, when i'm sure he prob could build livi

    up to a level from div 3.

×
×
  • Create New...