cyderspaceman Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 On 2/9/2017 at 13:23, bennett said: What was the outcome of yon bookie court case? Demotion is not relegation would be my guess. Reddie awarded for quoting the whoooooooole article. Just annoys me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florentine_Pogen Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 What was it I heard on the Radio? King saying that Rangers will need to keep running at a loss for a few more years to get where they belong? How exactly do they belong in a place they can't afford to inhabit? Sub-prime loans............. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florentine_Pogen Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 Next seasons uptake will be interesting. There are many who honestly believed we were going for 55 this season. SevcoRangers2012 have not won 54 trophies, have they ?[emoji849]???? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CityDave Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 One from the archive, a Dave King interview with the Daily Record from 2010 + a link to gersnetonline with comments on the same article. Interesting reading. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/dave-king-rangers-and-me---tycoon-1062647 http://www.gersnetonline.co.uk/vb/archive/index.php/t-18678.html 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CityDave Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 (edited) From RangersMedia July 2010 titled Dave King the one man who can save gers, but wont http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/topic/157145-dave-king-the-one-man-who-can-save-gers-but-wont/ XXXXL size underpants in a twist or what! Edited February 13, 2017 by CityDave 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever_blueco Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 1 hour ago, CityDave said: From RangersMedia July 2010 titled Dave King the one man who can save gers, but wont http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/topic/157145-dave-king-the-one-man-who-can-save-gers-but-wont/ XXXXL size underpants in a twist or what! Get a life man . Trawling a rangers forum and digging up seven year old threads suffering fuck -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever_blueco Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 On 9 February 2017 at 15:40, mjw said: There's only one Rangers fan posting on here who doesn't. You've got a collective rap sheet that's an absolute minter for all of you. Internet , serious business ! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 [emoji38] Internet , serious business ! Must be to get banned from a loosely moderated football forum then come slithering back because you really need the place. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 9 minutes ago, Forever_blueco said: Internet , serious business ! Rangers, dead business! Sevco, ridiculous business! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever_blueco Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 5 minutes ago, mjw said: Must be to get banned from a loosely moderated football forum then come slithering back because you really need the place. your right my life would be not worth living without pie and bovril . You must really need rangers the amount of time you spend discussing us 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sugna Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 The continued involvement of Dave King is still a baffling factor. Both club statements, and especially the second one that was ascribed specifically to King, were highly obfuscated and certainly not the words of anyone who wanted to get incontestable facts into the public domain. It was all a bit smear-the-truthy, conflating performance with an alleged sequence of events, as though deficiencies in the former could justify inaccuracies in the latter. Similarly, the "speaking to another club, but it fell through" narrative has nothing at all to do with the facts of any resignation process. (I call it a "process", as it is at least reasonably likely that both sides wanted some sort of termination, and were negotiating on that basis.) As for the "£18m of the £30m" part, I don't think even the most dyed-in-the-wool want-to-believer could see that as anything other than insulting dissembling. Although I see that some people have either swallowed that or are pretending to have swallowed it. King was very clear in his "£30m of £50m" pitch that it was money to challenge Celtic, i.e. injections of cash on the playing side, not loans to keep the lights on. It appears - if you give him the benefit of the doubt and repeat the "New Oasis (Dave King)" conflation (which reminds me of "Dave King gave the former club £20m"; as opposed to "A company in which Dave King was involved invested in a company in which David Murray was involved, and the return on that investment for the investing company is not at all clear"), then it appears that "he" has loaned somewhere between £0 and £4m. That's a loan, not what he implied, and is to keep the club/company afloat, not to challenge Celtic. So the whole statement reeks of trying to get "information" into the common consciousness while spinning that information furiously in ways that are pretty obviously mendacious - but not quite obviously enough to be reported as blatant lies. In other word, his modus operandi surrounding the SARS case, such as the "favourable settlement". Now, given that King has more criminal convictions with a tariff of 2 years than anyone in the history of Scottish football - perhaps everyone in the history of Scottish football - and that a forensic examination of what he has says versus what is objectively true came to the conclusion that nothing he says should be taken as the truth (yes, that's nothing), it seems incredible at this juncture that what he says is still accepted by the media and fans as not being a pack of lies. Worse still, it is often reported as fact. That's what I consider to be the main underlying problem with the current Ibrox set-up: not the players, the board, certainly not Ashley, and probably not even the in-Limbo management team: it's the fact that the biggest criminal and liar known in the history of the sport in this country is calling the shots. There's no need to try to work out if he's a liar or a criminal in financial affairs: he is warranted as both. Conveniently, the world and his wife knows from the public record that King lies about everything and that he is a multiply-convicted financial criminal. The fact that the media report on his egregious statements without stamping the reports as, "This statement just in from the lyingest, criminalest [as they would say in the US] man in the history of Scottish sport" is a bit Trump-like: no one calling the self-promoting fantasist on his tenuous grasp of truth and reality. Comparing to Warburton on the basis of known lack of integrity only, I would say that there is virtually no chance that Warburton considered that "a resignation had been completed" (so to speak). He has no history of being caught in any Big Lies (let alone months of them, on every subject where his statements were checked). So in short, I can't see why King's account of events is being repeated in the media with "expert comments" interpreting the made-up details, rather than Warburton's forming the more reliable thread: "Mark Warburton made it clear that he hasn't resigned. Rangers have yet to correct or clarify their statement alleging otherwise." I have a lot more time for the Rangers supporters on here than I have for Dave King. They are being worked over by him big time; and are generally not as fervid and partisan as the average Old Firm fan, as they are a self-selecting group who opt to engage with others on here. The "must believe" fans on either side of the OF - and indeed at any club - deserve what they get. But there's collateral damage to the minority who are reasonable and rational, and whose club is being manipulated by the glib and shameless liar. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 your right my life would be not worth living without pie and bovril . Obviously not Forever_twoaccounts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 please stop laughing at us. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever_blueco Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 2 hours ago, mjw said: Obviously not Forever_twoaccounts. Outstanding , again you seem have a bee in your bunnet over my two accounts 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever_blueco Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 1 hour ago, dave.j said: Laugh away 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sugna Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 3 hours ago, sugna said: Comparing to Warburton on the basis of known lack of integrity only, I would say that there is virtually no chance that Warburton considered that "a resignation had been completed" (so to speak). He has no history of being caught in any Big Lies (let alone months of them, on every subject where his statements were checked). So in short, I can't see why King's account of events is being repeated in the media with "expert comments" interpreting the made-up details, rather than Warburton's forming the more reliable thread: "Mark Warburton made it clear that he hasn't resigned. Rangers have yet to correct or clarify their statement alleging otherwise." Listening to Radio Scotland at lunchtime, Tommy Wright was dismissing speculation liking him with Rangers. The reporter helpfully explained that "... the board accepted Mark Warburton's resignation on Friday". So a man with no history of lying says he didn't resign , thereby disagreeing with a man who is chiefly known for being a compulsive liar; and the latter's account is propagated as fact. The BBC isn't proving any more interested in the facts than are the tabloids. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CityDave Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 4 hours ago, Forever_blueco said: Get a life man . Trawling a rangers forum and digging up seven year old threads suffering fuck Some football fans are so fickle 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever_blueco Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 18 minutes ago, CityDave said: Some football fans are so fickle It's the fact that when some weird behavior is brought up such as the post you brought up earlier that many on here just see it as normal behavior . Honestly baffles me so much the time and effort so many put into discussing us on here by some , it genuinely can not be healthy 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 15 minutes ago, Forever_blueco said: It's the fact that when some weird behavior is brought up such as the post you brought up earlier that many on here just see it as normal behavior . Honestly baffles me so much the time and effort so many put into discussing us on here by some , it genuinely can not be healthy The really unhealthy things are the rancid state of the whole rangers ethos - and the state of your 'reliant on loans to keep the lights on' finances. Laughter is healthy. We are all healthy as fuck now after five years laughing at your disfunctional clubs and companies. fair do's on your multi-thread wall guarding though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 Honestly baffles me so much the time and effort so many put into discussing us on here by some , it genuinely can not be healthy I think it says more about you. That you would think that it takes some sort of exertion to converse with fellow football fans on a message board.Is rangers the only subject that takes such an effort? do all other subjects take less effort?What makes you think that convesing with people would be unhealthy? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.