Guest Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 This. I like a bit of irony! What we need is someone with a bit of graphical skill to change the dance floor to a picture of a smoking crumbling shell of Ibrox and the two dancers decked out in Tesco uniforms. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 He railed against Whyte on plenty of occasions during Whyte's takeover, so I doubt that he "approved" it. Fair enough but he may not even pass the SFAs fit n proper test seeing he was a director that took a club to insolvency. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 Blue Smurfs considering dumping Ticketus: My link 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 Paul Murray said earlier "I'm making this up as I go along. Fuck knows what'll happen next." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 He railed against Whyte on plenty of occasions during Whyte's takeover, so I doubt that he "approved" it. He also put forward an alternative bid to Whyte's. I think it highly unlikely the SFA would ban him him as a director as he was chucked off the board by Whyte long before Whyte put the club into administration. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 Every time I hear the phrase "Blue Knights" I start thinking about Monty Python and the Holy Grail. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glensburgh Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 Blue Smurfs considering dumping Ticketus: My link So the Bloo Knights submit a bid in conjunction with ticketus, but may now go forward without them. How can Duff and Duffus properly analyse their bid when it may not be the bid the placed prior to the deadline? Surely if they make such a significant change, they should either withdraw or submit their alternative offer. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fozzie Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 So the Bloo Knights submit a bid in conjunction with ticketus, but may now go forward without them. How can Duff and Duffus properly analyse their bid when it may not be the bid the placed prior to the deadline? Surely if they make such a significant change, they should either withdraw or submit their alternative offer. The "deadline" was clearly a load of pish though, as they accepted two more bids after it closed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted March 26, 2012 Author Share Posted March 26, 2012 Haudit and Daudit are making it up as they go along. Deadlines mean nothing. Blue Knights with Ticketus, Blue Knights without Ticketus, in out, in out, shake it all about... Load of old tosh. Unless they dig up an unfathomably rich bluenose Arab or Russian oil billionaire... they're fooked. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cutty Old Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 (edited) The "deadline" was clearly a load of pish though, as they accepted two more bids after it closed. There was a perfectly good reason for that and it was all above board. The administrators announced that the deadline would be "Friday, and everyone must have their bids in before that time...............or else !" One of the two parties who were yet to make an offer replied " Or else what ?" The administrators were forthright in their response " Or else..........we will wait until you;re ready" Edited March 26, 2012 by Cutty Old 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forkboy Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 Every time I hear the phrase "Blue Knights" I start thinking about Monty Python and the Holy Grail. "The Blue Knights always triumph!" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fozzie Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 Haudit and Daudit are making it up as they go along. Deadlines mean nothing. Blue Knights with Ticketus, Blue Knights without Ticketus, in out, in out, shake it all about... Load of old tosh. Unless they dig up an unfathomably rich bluenose Arab or Russian oil billionaire... they're fooked. It would seem that way. The fact of the matter is that until the Ticketus deal and the tax case are resolved, nobody's got any idea how to put any figures together for a bid. Needless to say the "bids" in question are probably nothing more than theoretical notes of interest, plastered with so many ifs, buts, maybes and caveats as to make them impossible to work with until such times as the cases are resolved. Can't see that happening soon. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killingfloorman Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 (edited) I bet H&D are rethinking turning down that bid of 4 empty Irn Bru bottles. It's looking like the most solid bid so far. Edited March 26, 2012 by killingfloorman 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 He also put forward an alternative bid to Whyte's. I think it highly unlikely the SFA would ban him him as a director as he was chucked off the board by Whyte long before Whyte put the club into administration. Even though the rules state and director of a club upto 5 years previous of going insolvent may be deemed unfit, not to mention King ? Looks like rangers could be jumping out of the frying pan....... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 Even though the rules state and director of a club upto 5 years previous of going insolvent may be deemed unfit, not to mention King ? Looks like rangers could be jumping out of the frying pan....... Key word "may". And as far as I know King is not part of the consortium. Do you really think Paul Murray is going to be banned because the guy he opposed made a horlicks of things after he chucked Murray off the board? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordHawHaw Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 Key word "may". And as far as I know King is not part of the consortium. Do you really think Paul Murray is going to be banned because the guy he opposed made a horlicks of things after he chucked Murray off the board? The "horlicks" was made well before Whyte 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 Key word "may". And as far as I know King is not part of the consortium. Do you really think Paul Murray is going to be banned because the guy he opposed made a horlicks of things after he chucked Murray off the board? Aye that's right ..the great hero who opposed whyte ....while keeping his place on the board ,until he whyte bumped him, at the end of the day he was a rangers director within the 5 year period if going inton insolvency , Therefore , an unfit person 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 Aye that's right ..the great hero who opposed whyte ....while keeping his place on the board ,until he whyte bumped him, at the end of the day he was a rangers director within the 5 year period if going inton insolvency , Therefore , an unfit person You don't seem to understand the word "may". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WBR Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 Is there a predictions list to guess what ridiculous twist this entertaining story takes next? My guess is that Ffud & Phelt go into a dreadful funk and declare it's all too much for them, asking HMRC to appoint their own administrator. They'll hand over their scribble pads with all the relevant doodles. Not having been (officially) paid yet, Fuzzy Phelt will also becomes creditors and put together their own bid to buy the club in an attempt to get something back for the wasted time. They steal a Rangers pen on their way out but nobody sees this. To differentiate their bid, they'll use paper clips (taken from the Rangers stationery cupboard - you couldn't make this up!!), as the value of metal is rising all the time. This only serves to get David Murray interested and it all ends in the various bidders competing in a half time penalty shoot out against each other (probably at the Cup Final but don't quote me on that), with Sepp Blatter making an impartial judgement based on the quality of the kicking and possibly on the amount of cash deposited in his offshore account but maybe not. Sky are interested in the penalty shoot out, as is Simon Cowell. Chick Young exclusively offers to hold David Murray's ball for him. Craig Whyte, it transpires, never existed and was simply a hologram to scare off busy bodies and do-gooders. Channel 4's documentary about all the above is mysteriously pulled at the last minute and replaced by a searing, diversionary insight into why lack of investment by lower league clubs is killing Scotland's chances of winning the World Cup. I'm not fully conversant with Scots Law so not all of the above could happen in reality, or could it? Maybe the legal experts out there could tweak the finer details. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 You don't seem to understand the word "may". Eh,'yeah I do?..that's why I said may You could have the situation of the blue knights winning duff and phelps approval only to see the SFA say ,,,sorry Mr Murray you're an unfit person...then what? -1 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.