The_Kincardine Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 By just assuming from the last paragraph on an article you can deduce what ?, the whole article was more aimed at the corruption of the authorities when faced with the death of Rangers FC and the lengths they went to give the newco Rangers as much help as possible and apparently at any cost available to ensure Rangers FC were still viewed as a big club. It wasn't just about £250K paid to a TV company to compensate for their costs of televising the newcuntos games. And had he said that I wouldn't have an issue. He didn't. He fucked it right up. Then again, he clearly knows his audience. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 you completely missed the fucking point completely about the article and what it contained if you just read the minimal of material. It begs the question why was there a TV contract written out for 15 Rangers games a season when the target audience would just about rival a paint drying competition in terms of viewers watching. He also asks why didn't the TV companies just strike a deal with the SFL for fixtures without incurring costs because no one wanted to watch the newest club in Scotland in the bottom tier of Scottish football. Why was the deal signed off only days after sevco gained a temporary licence and why include 15 fixtures of the painters & decorators league ? Why was the SPL so adamant about including said 15 games a season and why include a refund because there wasn't the amount of viewers needed to fulfil the TV companies target audience strategy. Too many questions and no fucking answers and all you can post is ?, didn't read it all and must be some sort of timmy propaganda. No wonder your club is a clusterfuck !, none of you imbeciles care enough. That guy must have been on some drugs when he typed that up lol There is no conspiracy, just the fact that the SPL was desperate for a tv deal, any tv deal. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 And had he said that I wouldn't have an issue. He didn't. He fucked it right up. Then again, he clearly knows his audience. Mehhhhhh 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 That guy must have been on some drugs when he typed that up lol There is no conspiracy, just the fact that the SPL was desperate for a tv deal, any tv deal. That is all ffs 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 That guy must have been on some drugs when he typed that up lol There is no conspiracy, just the fact that the SPL was desperate for a tv deal, any tv deal. That's it in a nutshell...No Rangers no TV deal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 The fact that you're here trying to discredit the article as a whole ... is amusing .. I can imagine your wee red face as you hammer away at the keyboard .. pleasing. I'm sure that those who read the whole, will make up their own minds. The fact you condemn it without reading it, speaks volumes. I find it amusing as well the fact that he can summarise a lengthy article from the first and last paragraph and nail it down to £250K ?, and not only that, the article actually says the £250K was for recompense to the TV companies but then goes on to ask why bother showing 15 games in the bottom tier when it was a bad deal in the first place. Why bother showing 15 Rangers FC games in the bottom tier at all ??? , erm actually they did broadcast a few howlers for the newco though so might be money well spent as the whole of Scottish fitbaw logged online to see these most glorious of occasions !, an embarrassing Rangers FC defeat in the lowest tier. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 That's it in a nutshell...No Rangers no TV deal. Actually the TV companies had already struck a deal with the SPL, the SPL was too busy trying to shoe horn in 15 Rangers FC games into the deal. And if you had read the article the article made it quite clear this SPL deal did not need to have those Rangers games written into the deal. The TV companies could have struck their own deal with the SFL. So Kinky !, why did the SPL have to write in 15 Rangers FC games a season when the SPL had it's own deal ?, or was this clause already written into the 5 way agreement that these 15 games were part of the sweetener deal to Green to accept those meaningless punishments ?. I'll repeat again so as to let it sink in, the TV companies had already said they'd support Scottish football even if Rangers were not a part of the SPL which the newco Rangers before the deal was made was already a SFL 3rd division member. So why the 15 Rangers FC games that actually cost the SPL now SPFL money to show ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Can't you shorten your posts to give him time to read them ? ... He's an educated person and it's a novel way to enlighten him. I just took on board what he posted and made two paragraphs at least so he gets the message clearly by reading the first and last paragraphs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Koop Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 You really are not worth the time or effort. Your nit picking is beyond tedious. The point is yet again your 'circle of friends' is trotted out and we all know it is nonsense. Rangers supporters are not thin on the ground where you live near to Sheffield which boasts one of the largest RSCs in England Now, now. Play nice. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 Is King in jail- no. Is King free to do what he likes within the law-yes, is King walking around without restraint on his every move- yes. Irrespective of what was imposed on him, he walked. Now i' think we'll end this futile argument. Conmen like big Dave tend to skulk, not walk. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 Actually the TV companies had already struck a deal with the SPL, the SPL was too busy trying to shoe horn in 15 Rangers FC games into the deal. And if you had read the article the article made it quite clear this SPL deal did not need to have those Rangers games written into the deal. The TV companies could have struck their own deal with the SFL. So Kinky !, why did the SPL have to write in 15 Rangers FC games a season when the SPL had it's own deal ?, or was this clause already written into the 5 way agreement that these 15 games were part of the sweetener deal to Green to accept those meaningless punishments ?. I'll repeat again so as to let it sink in, the TV companies had already said they'd support Scottish football even if Rangers were not a part of the SPL which the newco Rangers before the deal was made was already a SFL 3rd division member. So why the 15 Rangers FC games that actually cost the SPL now SPFL money to show ? Over the last two seasons which Scottish club matches have attracted the largest TV audiences? Over the last two seasons Sky have broken their record for the smallest audiences for live football. They have been SPL games. Now taking this into consideration are you telling me that Sky dont know their market? You keep trotting out the old...'Sky had already said they would back Scottish football without Rangers'.. of course they said that. They could hardly say anything else. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyWellFan Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 Over the last two seasons which Scottish club matches have attracted the largest TV audiences? Over the last two seasons Sky have broken their record for the smallest audiences for live football. They have been SPL games. Now taking this into consideration are you telling me that Sky dont know their market? You keep trotting out the old...'Sky had already said they would back Scottish football without Rangers'.. of course they said that. They could hardly say anything else. Source for this please. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 I got bored with this. Not the posters - plenty of decent folk on here I'm sure - just the endlessly cyclical rehashing of the already rehashed. Yes, but you'd always seemed perfectly happy doing that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehoss Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 (edited) Source for this please.Didn't they have to stump up another 200k because the viewing figures for those matches were not as high as expected??http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/spfl-chief-neil-doncaster-defends-3586020 Edited May 22, 2014 by thehoss 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyWellFan Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 (edited) Didn't they have to stump up another 200k because the viewing figures for those matches were not as high as expected?? 'not as high as expected' isn't the same as 'broke their records for the smallest audiences for live football'. I suspect he's talking pish. Edited May 22, 2014 by MikeyWellFan 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingrodent Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 I'd say that the thing that's being missed in all this TV-deal nonsense is that it's nobody's fault but Rangers' that they went out of business and had to reapply to the third division. Not the SPL's fault or the SFA's; not Peter Lawell's or any other chairman's, but Rangers' fault. You can certainly blame the football authorities for making it clear to potential buyers that they thought the SPL broadcast rights were worthless without Old Firm games, which is pretty much the opposite of what they should be saying in public, and amounts to knocking megabucks off any deal. Nonetheless, this is yet another example of the way in which Rangers' stupidity has impacted negatively on everyone else in Scottish football, and the glee with which their fans have greeted the news speaks volumes about their mentality - if they're not free to win however they like, by fair means or foul, then they want the entire game to feel as much pain as possible. This is probably worth remembering if they hit the administration buffers again and need more favours. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florentine_Pogen Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 I'd say that the thing that's being missed in all this TV-deal nonsense is that it's nobody's fault but Rangers' that they went out of business and had to reapply to the third division. Not the SPL's fault or the SFA's; not Peter Lawell's or any other chairman's, but Rangers' fault. You can certainly blame the football authorities for making it clear to potential buyers that they thought the SPL broadcast rights were worthless without Old Firm games, which is pretty much the opposite of what they should be saying in public, and amounts to knocking megabucks off any deal. Nonetheless, this is yet another example of the way in which Rangers' stupidity has impacted negatively on everyone else in Scottish football, and the glee with which their fans have greeted the news speaks volumes about their mentality - if they're not free to win however they like, by fair means or foul, then they want the entire game to feel as much pain as possible. This is probably worth remembering if they hit the administration buffers again and need more favours. This should be pinned to the front door at Hampden, Martin Luther style. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyWellFan Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 I'd say that the thing that's being missed in all this TV-deal nonsense is that it's nobody's fault but Rangers' that they went out of business and had to reapply to the third division. Not the SPL's fault or the SFA's; not Peter Lawell's or any other chairman's, but Rangers' fault. You can certainly blame the football authorities for making it clear to potential buyers that they thought the SPL broadcast rights were worthless without Old Firm games, which is pretty much the opposite of what they should be saying in public, and amounts to knocking megabucks off any deal. Nonetheless, this is yet another example of the way in which Rangers' stupidity has impacted negatively on everyone else in Scottish football, and the glee with which their fans have greeted the news speaks volumes about their mentality - if they're not free to win however they like, by fair means or foul, then they want the entire game to feel as much pain as possible. This is probably worth remembering if they hit the administration buffers again and need more favours. Great post. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 This should be pinned to the front door at Hampden, Martin Luther style. I thought we were trying to "move on" from that sort of stuff... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagfox Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 This should be pinned to the front door at Hampden, Martin Luther style....following its walls being blackened by a baying mob 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.