Jump to content

Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!


Recommended Posts

I'll give an honest reply here and it may be one that a few Bears disagree with.

I admire Chris. He has done a huge amount of work to engage the fans/support/money and his engagement in our recent change of board/ownership is creditable. He has my admiration.

Here's the bit where I depart from a fair-few fellow Bears:

Stop with the boycotts and boycotting

Stop with banning and 'withdrawing press privileges'

Stop with making martyrs out of journalists

Stop regarding The SFA and The SPFL as the enemy.

My Rangers are leaders and we have to be more broad-shouldered than this petty shite.

:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup. I am firmly of the view that the challenger is the dick.

Had I been accused of sittinggate I'd have said, simply, "No, I stood". End of story.

The grey and green hordes and their fellow travelers (like you) need to call hauners and lawyers.

Doubt it, If you're accused of using an apostrophe wrongly you spend a week on here greetin about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

graphics-laughing-590695_zps368927a1.gif
You've made a kunt of it again young sir.
Had he done merely that, we'd be left wondering whether he did stand or not and the rumour would have gained a significant hold among those inclined to believe ill of him. The seriousness of the charge merited the swiftness and weight of the response. What he's done here is disabuse people of the notion, while putting Graham in his nasty little place.Cheers for the STV offer, but I'll give it a miss, thanks.
Well its down to differing opinions again, I felt that he doth protested too much.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like The Rangers mentality.

Reporter submits report of sectarian singing to his boss. Boss runs it as a headline, not the reporters choice. Do the Rangers fans slate those in their fanbase for sectarian singing? No! Slate the reporter for reporting the truth. He's got it in for us.

Confirmed bigot tweets a derogatory statement regarding a reporter disrespecting a recently passed player. Do the Rangers fans slate said bigot for tweeting a lie? No! They jump on the reporter. He's wan ae thaim, after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've made a kunt of it again young sir. Well its down to differing opinions again, I felt that he doth protested too much.

What's an acceptable level of protestation, if someone is lying about you in the public domain?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like The Rangers mentality.

Reporter submits report of sectarian singing to his boss. Boss runs it as a headline, not the reporters choice. Do the Rangers fans slate those in their fanbase for sectarian singing? No! Slate the reporter for reporting the truth. He's got it in for us.

Confirmed bigot tweets a derogatory statement regarding a reporter disrespecting a recently passed player. Do the Rangers fans slate said bigot for tweeting a lie? No! They jump on the reporter. He's wan ae thaim, after all.

Sounds simplistic, but that really is pretty much the size of it, as far as I can see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like The Rangers mentality.

Reporter submits report of sectarian singing to his boss. Boss runs it as a headline, not the reporters choice. Do the Rangers fans slate those in their fanbase for sectarian singing? No! Slate the reporter for reporting the truth. He's got it in for us.

Confirmed bigot tweets a derogatory statement regarding a reporter disrespecting a recently passed player. Do the Rangers fans slate said bigot for tweeting a lie? No! They jump on the reporter. He's wan ae thaim, after all.

It's about perspective though. When one fancied Championship team humbles another in their own midden what does an honest sports journo think of first? Oh aye, what were the songs that were sung?

Mind you, that appeals more to the prurient so-called football fans on here who care little for kick-ball but looking for ways to be offended or to indulge in sweetie-wife title tattle.

Which segues neatly to Peter Onesie Martin who needs to cite his big pals and his lawyers over the simple issue if he stood or sat. In normal society he'd rightly be regarded as a self-important buffoon but amongst the febrile Ps&Ds he's becoming something of a cause célèbre.

So were Chris Mclaughlin and Peter Martin right? Yes, of course, Does their self-indulgent, pompous narcissism strike a chord with the needy, emotionally undernourished, small-dicked fandans who hang on every word from such dolts? Absolutely..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's about perspective though. When one fancied Championship team humbles another in their own midden what does an honest sports journo think of first? Oh aye, what were the songs that were sung?

Mind you, that appeals more to the prurient so-called football fans on here who care little for kick-ball but looking for ways to be offended or to indulge in sweetie-wife title tattle.

Which segues neatly to Peter Onesie Martin who needs to cite his big pals and his lawyers over the simple issue if he stood or sat. In normal society he'd rightly be regarded as a self-important buffoon but amongst the febrile Ps&Ds he's becoming something of a cause célèbre.

So were Chris Mclaughlin and Peter Martin right? Yes, of course, Does their self-indulgent, pompous narcissism strike a chord with the needy, emotionally undernourished, small-dicked fandans who hang on every word from such dolts? Absolutely..

Jeez.

I'd actually say that your descent was now complete, were I not sure that I'd be tempting fate.

You probably can post something even more embarrassing and might yet do so.

It won't be easy though.

I'd never heard of This Martin bloke until the last few days and I doubt if he's of huge consequence.

Your suggestion however that this is all about whether he "stood or sat", while divorcing that from context, is just ridiculous and you really don't need me to tell you why. It's like implying that a gunman's actions can be reduced to a judgement in terms of whether he moved his finger.

Your concluding paragraph, I'll just leave alone as a monument to your spiteful, yet impotent idiocy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's about perspective though. When one fancied Championship team humbles another in their own midden what does an honest sports journo think of first? Oh aye, what were the songs that were sung?

Mind you, that appeals more to the prurient so-called football fans on here who care little for kick-ball but looking for ways to be offended or to indulge in sweetie-wife title tattle.

Which segues neatly to Peter Onesie Martin who needs to cite his big pals and his lawyers over the simple issue if he stood or sat. In normal society he'd rightly be regarded as a self-important buffoon but amongst the febrile Ps&Ds he's becoming something of a cause célèbre.

So were Chris Mclaughlin and Peter Martin right? Yes, of course, Does their self-indulgent, pompous narcissism strike a chord with the needy, emotionally undernourished, small-dicked fandans who hang on every word from such dolts? Absolutely..

This does seem very close to saying that

- Rangers fans should be able to tell lies* about whoever they like, without the people that they tell lies about getting annoyed, and also

- that Rangers fans are absolutely correct to throw their toys out of the pram and hurl a hissy-fit, if broadcasters tell the truth about them.

That is, you seem to be claiming what looks to be an unlimited right to tell whopping great porkies yourselves, while also forbidding others from reporting the truth, if their manner displeases you. And any objections can only be motivated by spite, and are thus automatically illegitimate.

Which is the kind of for-me-but-not-for-thee logic that you'd usually expect from children, rather than adults.

*Or, charitably, make major mistakes. "Tell lies" seems more likely to me, but let's not leap to conclusions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This does seem very close to saying that

- Rangers fans should be able to tell lies* about whoever they like, without the people that they tell lies about getting annoyed, and also

- that Rangers fans are absolutely correct to throw their toys out of the pram and hurl a hissy-fit, if broadcasters tell the truth about them.

That is, you seem to be claiming what looks to be an unlimited right to tell whopping great porkies yourselves, while also forbidding others from reporting the truth, if their manner displeases you. And any objections can only be motivated by spite, and are thus automatically illegitimate.

Which is the kind of for-me-but-not-for-thee logic that you'd usually expect from children, rather than adults.

*Or, charitably, make major mistakes. "Tell lies" seems more likely to me, but let's not leap to conclusions.

That's an excellent post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...