Sting777 Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 (edited) FFS i wish you Ps & Ds would make your mind up. After Rangers were cleared...yet again...by the courts i thought the party line was we went bust for nothing Jeez I must have missed the old Rangers paying back the hundreds of creditors that they owed money to including a fair whack to HMRC!! Edited August 1, 2014 by Sting777 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sting777 Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Limp being about right. Once we reach the top flight the money we can generate through sponsorship etc will increase dramatically and getting back to todays topic. The rate celtic are going backwards the gap will not be nearly as insurmountable as it would have been if they had maintained the level they were at in 2012 or even close to that Changed days from a few years ago when you lot were openly saying you would not entertain going back to the top league after they stabbed you in the back...hahaha! Dear oh dear 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bing (2) Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 But he got his version from KDS, Eh, naw. Read the link, it is from his site. And as you know Tedi, I am not a member of KDS....... It is frightening to think somebody took time to alter that .... Then again hbqc hasn't been around for a while. Maybe he is too busy altering UEFA pages with that oh so expensive new computer gear he was bragging about the other day. nae cunto has altered it. If the dumbass bearz looked they would see the discrepancy between 'co-ef' and 'ranking'. They are 2 different pages you dolts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Jeez I must have missed the old Rangers paying back the hundreds of creditors that they owed money to including a fair whack to HMRC!! That has nothing to do with the time we are talking about which is the 5 years prior to SDM selling the club. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Eh, naw. Read the link, it is from his site. And as you know Tedi, I am not a member of KDS....... nae cunto has altered it. If the dumbass bearz looked they would see the discrepancy between 'co-ef' and 'ranking'. They are 2 different pages you dolts. A clubs Co Efficient is worked going by their results over a five year period. Nice try Wunf.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Changed days Yep it certainly has....SPL no more 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 I don't think the record of clubs that went bust due to financial doping is relevant tbh. Poor form Bud. You use the phrase, "financial doping" and expect to be taken seriously? That is so last year. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bing (2) Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 A clubs Co Efficient is worked going by their results over a five year period. Nice try Wunf.. Yet the year after being the first loser, even with the financial jiggery Rangers were ranked, note the word, 138th. It was you that said RANKED and when you actually go to the RANKINGS for Rangers it clearly says 28th http://kassiesa.home.xs4all.nl/bert/uefa/data/method4/trank2009.html Not for the 5 year Tedi, please point out any part of my post you disagree with, and not refer it to a different page. Yet the year after being the first loser, even with the financial jiggery Rangers were ranked, note the word, 138th. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bing (2) Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 All of it. You said RANKED The link you provided does not mention RANKED or RANKINGS The link I provided was the correct link that you should have supplied. What the word that does not exist on your link? So Rangers are the 'missing link' ? Figures............ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bing (2) Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Tefi, what words would you use to list 239 teams? Clue...........rank could be one..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Tefi, what words would you use to list 239 teams? Clue...........rank could be one..... Oh can I have a shot here? Alphabetical? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bing (2) Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Oh can I have a shot here? Alphabetical? Well I would have thought 'D' for 'Dead' would have ranked higher........... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Well I would have thought 'D' for 'Dead' would have ranked higher........... I am sure that sounded good in your head but you actually asked about 'listed'. You probably forgot this as it was maybe 4 posts ago. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 No he was clarifying "ranked" and your deflection is ridiculous in extreme. He wasn't. He said, "What words would you use to list 239 teams?" Talk me through which part of 'alphabetical' is wrong as a reply to his post. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 No he clearly referred to list in reference to his use of rank in previous posts ... and I never took umbrage to "alphabetical". Did you forget or do you have learning difficulties? Nice to see you sticking up for your pal. How admirable. However nae cut said that you took umbrage. You are making this up. Not for the first time. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 "alphabetical". Why refer to alphabetical, I never did. Making it up ... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 (edited) You absolutely don't get it. The Big 5 nations had this advantage when Rangers reached the last 16 of the Champions League and a UEFA Cup Final. Yes, but the thing that's prompting your fake lament is the form of clubs who had resources which did not compare to those of Rangers back then. Rangers are a frigging massive club - I thought you knew. Obviously, no Scottish club can compete with those from the big 5 financially any more, but Rangers were big news outside that elite and Celtic remain so, despite the marvellous other night. Of course removing Rangers from the equation would dent our clubs' chances of making an impact. Either OF side would not have done what Motherwell did last week for instance. Once more, expressing surprise over this is akin to being shocked at overall top flight gates dropping. Prior to Rangers' departure from the top table, we'd had plenty rotten European results from sides like Motherwell, Dunfermline, Dundee United and Aberdeen. That position has not really shifted. We now have one big club playing at that level rather than two, so we do less well, especially if that one big club, as looks likely this year, bombs. Fine. If you always disliked the OF anyway, there's no further harm done. The truth of this is that you wish Rangers were still playing in Europe. You also like to pursue this spurious line that relies on people having ever said the standard would soar in the absence of Rangers. The problem of course, as with gates, is that nobody suggested these areas would be better without them. They would be worse, but the alternative of treating Rangers as special, would be worse yet, as it would piss on the whole point. For someone who was contrite about Rangers' conduct and did actually accept the idea of a bottom tier re-start ahead of most, you really seem to struggle to cope with the reality of what that means. Edited August 1, 2014 by Monkey Tennis -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 No has ever said that the SPL is booming, ok then..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 No has ever said that the SPL is booming, ok then..... Plenty have said it's bearing up well and I've been among them (assuming you mean the top flight). In many ways, Scottish football is doing well in the ways that matter to those who aren't OF fans though. Cups have been spread round more, as have European slots against a backdrop in which gates have not really suffered. When set against the Armageddon based bullying at the outset, it does seem to be booming, but of course, it's not really. You don't need to adopt an extreme view you know guys, just because those you see as enemies insist on doing so. Call it fence sitting if you think it's smart to do so though Bennett. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Call it fence sitting if you think it's smart to do so though Bennett. It might depend on which school the fence belonged to... 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.