dave.j Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 .......... Good statement, hopefully an end to all the pettiness Rangers fans being petty about what Montrose printed in their programme, i take it? Genuine question, not seen anything written about this... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 PRESS RELEASE Following our match against Rangers last saturday it was brought to our attention 2 pages within the programme referred to several Rangers players transferred from "oldco" to "newco" and indeed ignored the history of Rangers Football Club over 140 years. Due to time restraints in producing the programmes our Programme Editor had accepted the pages submitted by our correspondent however Montrose Football Club readily accept any content printed within the programme must be our responsibility. At no time was the information on players or the club printed to create a slight to anyone connected with Rangers Football Club or indeed ignore a proud and successful history therefore, Montrose Football Club very much regrets the pages included may have caused offence and we unreservedly apologise to Rangers Football Club, the management, players and supporters if they felt this was the case. Last Saturday's match was played in a great atmosphere and spirit therefore we are equally saddened these pages caused offence. The Directors Montrose Football Club Good statement, hopefully an end to all the pettiness I must disagree with part of the Montrose statement. The transfer of players from Oldco to Newco is actually a big part of Rangers / The Rangers history and well played to the programme contributer for not ignoring it. (facts - not pettiness!) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 I would call it over sensitiveness from (some) Rangers fans, personally it never bothered me In fairness, it was you who called it pettiness, in the OP (original post). Def: Petty: Characterized by an undue concern for trivial matters, esp. in a small-minded or spiteful way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beermonkey Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 PRESS RELEASE Following our match against Rangers last saturday it was brought to our attention 2 pages within the programme referred to several Rangers players transferred from "oldco" to "newco" and indeed ignored the history of Rangers Football Club over 140 years. Due to time restraints in producing the programmes our Programme Editor had accepted the pages submitted by our correspondent however Montrose Football Club readily accept any content printed within the programme must be our responsibility. At no time was the information on players or the club printed to create a slight to anyone connected with Rangers Football Club or indeed ignore a proud and successful history therefore, Montrose Football Club very much regrets the pages included may have caused offence and we unreservedly apologise to Rangers Football Club, the management, players and supporters if they felt this was the case. Last Saturday's match was played in a great atmosphere and spirit therefore we are equally saddened these pages caused offence. The Directors Montrose Football Club Good statement, hopefully an end to all the pettiness I take it links park was threatened with an arson attack then ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shull Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 PRESS RELEASE Following our match against Rangers last saturday it was brought to our attention 2 pages within the programme referred to several Rangers players transferred from "oldco" to "newco" and indeed ignored the history of Rangers Football Club over 140 years. Due to time restraints in producing the programmes our Programme Editor had accepted the pages submitted by our correspondent however Montrose Football Club readily accept any content printed within the programme must be our responsibility. At no time was the information on players or the club printed to create a slight to anyone connected with Rangers Football Club or indeed ignore a proud and successful history therefore, Montrose Football Club very much regrets the pages included may have caused offence and we unreservedly apologise to Rangers Football Club, the management, players and supporters if they felt this was the case. Last Saturday's match was played in a great atmosphere and spirit therefore we are equally saddened these pages caused offence. The Directors Montrose Football Club Good statement, hopefully an end to all the pettiness Obviously, terrified for their personal safety and that their Stadium might be torched by the sectarian f*ckwits. Blue Vermin are dead !!! The Newcunto F.C. will hopefully be deceased very soon. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Take it I can sing for that apology Tedi? I'm fine with that. As long as consistency prevails and you also brandish the BBC, The Daily Mail, The Daily Record and the one and only Charles Green as liars too. They must be. They said the same as me and you called me a liar for it (was it 2,3 or maybe more times?). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 I am with you brother I put the money aside a while back, but something does not ring 100% true about Charlie He said we were debt free, we are not 365,000 is a silly amount of bonus to take for taking the club out of the SFL, either he has no sense of ambition or he is a money grabbing ......... His patter about the EPL team was embarrassing There are many other worries or points that are relevant Anyway it looks like he is going to get the cash without help from the fans Did he ever show they Title Deeds for Ibrox and the still named Murray Park? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 An apology will be easy for me to give, simply admit you took a liberty with your original statement when you used the following words GRANTED ASSOCIATE, I know it suited your argument to use them, but the SFA simply did not use these words Took a liberty? I used a descriptive term. The same one The BBC, The daily mail, the daily record and Charles Green used. You called me a liar because of the word I used. Therefore, the above must be liars too. So are they? Sorry seems to be the hardest word. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 I do not believe he has misled us over the ownership of Ibrox or Murray park, nor do I care about the renaming of Murray Park It's not me that needs convincing about the ownership 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 I am with you brother I put the money aside a while back, but something does not ring 100% true about Charlie He said we were debt free, we are not 365,000 is a silly amount of bonus to take for taking the club out of the SFL, either he has no sense of ambition or he is a money grabbing ......... His patter about the EPL team was embarrassing There are many other worries or points that are relevant Anyway it looks like he is going to get the cash without help from the fans Same as you, once we went into admin i started saving and have a few grand in an isa (not that much in the grand scheme of things but what i can spare) but i can't hand it over to Green. I know a few bears who think the same but have stuck a £125 or £150 into the RST scheme. Greens only himself to blame, it's been one whopper after another with him and if he'd cut out the bullsh1t then maybe we'd have reason to trust him more. Also apart from the timing of the issue, all his big talk about inverstors pledging money into the club may backfire on him if it isn't true. I've a feeling we may need to hold on to our money as the whole has smelled wrong from the start. P.S I do not claim to be an expert in business or share issues, infact i know next to nothing about those subjects. Just incase any P&Bers decide to take issue with anything i've posted. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 I do not believe he has misled us over the ownership of Ibrox or Murray park, nor do I care about the renaming of Murray Park isn't there an 'ownership' versus 'occupancy' unresolved issue that showed up in the Prospectus? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oscar mad Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Chucky boy on the radio begging Sevco fans to buy shares ,,,,"I've kept my promise ,please buy shares"Talk about desperation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Aye, difference is I cant debate with them nor point out their mistake, if I could and they continued to use these words despite bening shown the actual words the SFA used. then yes I would call them liars My offer still stands to you though They wouldn't be liars. There are others who have used "given", "allowed", there might even be some that used "issued". None of them were/are liars. E.g. If I say that someone "struck" me in the face, yet the police statement says "hit", then neither of us are liars are we? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oscar mad Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 1355763531[/url]' post='6901093']It's not me that needs convincing about the ownership Go compareeee... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenolly Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Same as you, once we went into admin i started saving and have a few grand in an isa (not that much in the grand scheme of things but what i can spare) but i can't hand it over to Green. I know a few bears who think the same but have stuck a £125 or £150 into the RST scheme. Greens only himself to blame, it's been one whopper after another with him and if he'd cut out the bullsh1t then maybe we'd have reason to trust him more. Also apart from the timing of the issue, all his big talk about inverstors pledging money into the club may backfire on him if it isn't true. I've a feeling we may need to hold on to our money as the whole has smelled wrong from the start. P.S I do not claim to be an expert in business or share issues, infact i know next to nothing about those subjects. Just incase any P&Bers decide to take issue with anything i've posted. Bennett very rarely I agree with anything you post but I think your spot on with your stance and gut feeling about this 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oscar mad Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 1355764204[/url]' post='6901120']Did he tell them he was kissing the badge ... that should convince them, He was draped in a red hand of ulster flag whilst wearing an orange top. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 I do not accept they mean the same thing (issued and granted) nothing you can say or do will ever convince me of this It was not by accident you substituted those words, we both know this, the fact remains the SFA did not use the word granted That's fine. A) Now the BBC, The daily mail, the daily record and Charles Green, having all used the same term, lied about it? B) Or did they use the same word to describe the act of "giving" (is that one ok?) Rangers membership? Making me not a liar. A or B Tedi? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 I do not accept they mean the same thing (issued and granted) nothing you can say or do will ever convince me of this It was not by accident you substituted those words, we both know this, the fact remains the SFA did not use the word granted A bit like how i feel about the word transfer. As far as i'm concerned, to transfer is to change hands (ownership) certainly in football parlance. E.G: the transfer of a player from one club to another... like the licence. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 He was draped in a red hand of ulster flag whilst wearing an orange top. some orange tops 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 C) They are wrong and would probably admit they were wrong if it was pointed out that the SFA never used those words at any time "probably"? Hypothesising to give you a way out of admitting to being wrong. I've already given you an example of where different words can be used to describe the same action, which you ignored. You can't go around calling people liars, especially on the flimsy (and frankly pathetic) basis that you did and are. I never expected you to say sorry. You don't have the good grace and manners to do that. You look incredibly foolish and immature. 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.