Monkey Tennis Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 I reckon that some people just can't handle a positive Rangers story after years of pushing negative Rangers stories, there was no trolling in that post. Can't we discuss the positives? I just did. Some would prefer however to sweepingly generalise about diddies. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Some would prefer however to sweepingly generalise about diddies. And talk me though why we shouldn't? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 And talk me though why we shouldn't? Because it's hopelessly inaccurate and unjustifiably disparaging. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Because it's hopelessly inaccurate and unjustifiably disparaging. Hm? Are you suggesting that The Diddies should not be lumped together? Are there a nuances in Diddyspeak that I've missed 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Hm? Are you suggesting that The Diddies should not be lumped together? Are there a nuances in Diddyspeak that I've missed Yes, loads. I'm not sure why you do this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Yes, loads Take the stage then, MT. Talk us through why you'd want to distance yourself from your fellow diddies. Why are you ashamed of them? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Take the stage then, MT. Talk us through why you'd want to distance yourself from your fellow diddies. Why are you ashamed of them? Oh, stop being so to tiresomely infantile. Shame is not a feature, but neither is there any factual basis in the idea that we all view things identically. Would you not rather just discuss what Bennett posted, as some of us have done, rather than run with this rubbish? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Would you not rather just discuss what Bennett posted, as some of us have done, rather than run with this rubbish? Happy to discuss the very sane Ben's post..but it's all part of The Rangers' ecosystem. You diddies thrive posting about Sevco and your clubs benefit by playing us. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Happy to discuss the very sane Ben's post..but it's all part of The Rangers' ecosystem. You diddies thrive posting about Sevco and your clubs benefit by playing us. Up to a point, there's benefit in sharing a division with a big club. The ecosystem does not however belong to but one part of it. Rangers of course benefit massively from playing against diddy sides and could not exist - in any form - without doing so. It's in everyone's interests to recognise the reciprocal nature of this, even if power is far from evenly balanced. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 It's in everyone's interests to recognise the reciprocal nature of this, even if power is far from evenly balanced. We handsome and even-handed Bear are always very happy with the quid. A tragedy is that too many diddies are not forthcoming with the pro quo. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lubo_blaha Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 RANGERS’ journey back to the top flight netted their lower-league rivals a £4.5million windfall, The Scottish Sun on Sunday can reveal. Smaller clubs cashed in on bumper crowds and juicy TV paydays from clashes with the Ibrox giants after their demotion to footie’s bottom tier. Sponsorship, hospitality and merchandising boomed, while a travelling army of Bears fans splashed out in local shops, eateries and pubs on matchdays. And football finance expert Neil Patey, of accountants Ernst & Young, urged the minnows to make the most of their unexpected bonanza. He said: “Rangers moving through the leagues has had a significant positive impact. “But the halo effect won’t last so building a legacy is important. “The temptation will be to bump up wages to attract better players — but that strategy has got teams into trouble in the past. “My advice is to pay off debt and invest in the future.†League chief Neil Doncaster warned of financial “armageddon†when Rangers were booted down to League Two in 2012 following the club’s liquidation. But figures for the three seasons to 2014/15 reveal 22 of the game’s smaller clubs turned a combined £3.28million loss into a £1.23million profit. In the three years before 2012 their assets shrank by £1.69million — but rose by £144,000 in the three years after. Meanwhile, total cash reserves bounced back from £1.08million in the red to £1.63million profit, a £2.71million turnaround. Biggest winners were Championship side Falkirk who pocketed £2million from eight Gers clashes, helping to boost their total coffers by £608,000. Queen of the South took in £1.7million to add £401,000 to their reserves. Dumfries local Mr M Tennis told us that Rangers were the dugs baws and he'll always have a soft spot for the blue nosed heroes. And League Two outfit Berwick Rangers enjoyed a £189,000 cash injection from four games, while clubs like Livingston, Stirling Albion and Alloa also shared in the total £4.5million boost. Paul Goodwin, of the Scottish Football Supporters Association, said: “Many clubs paid off debts thanks to having a large travelling support visit twice a season. “Rangers fans also benefited far-flung local communities by spending in shops and restaurants.†Cash-strapped Ayr United, Montrose, Peterhead, Albion Rovers, Cowdenbeath, East Fife and East Stirling failed to improve their bank balances in the three years. Five teams were excluded from our probe. Annan Athletic, Brechin City and Stranraer don’t produce accounts. Dunfermline went bust in 2013, and Queen’s Park’s ownership of Hampden clouds the results. Rangers won promotion to the Premiership at the second attempt last month. A club spokesman said: “We’re delighted all these teams benefited from our journey.†The SPFL said: “These clubs can now build strong financial health Some creative use of language there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Waldo Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Credit where credits due. A couple of season's ago, we benefited by over one million pounds thanks to Rangers. Thanks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Credit where credits due. A couple of season's ago, we benefited by over one million pounds thanks to Rangers. Thanks. You're always welcome. Looking forward to the league cup games with you. How's your team set up for the new season? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 So do we..but the problem lies squarely with you diddies. Hm? Are you suggesting that The Diddies should not be lumped together? Are there a nuances in Diddyspeak that I've missed Take the stage then, MT. Talk us through why you'd want to distance yourself from your fellow diddies. Why are you ashamed of them? Happy to discuss the very sane Ben's post..but it's all part of The Rangers' ecosystem. You diddies thrive posting about Sevco and your clubs benefit by playing us. We handsome and even-handed Bear are always very happy with the quid. A tragedy is that too many diddies are not forthcoming with the pro quo. Nearly every post I see from you has this word in it. Could you provide a definition of diddies? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Nearly every post I see from you has this word in it. Could you provide a definition of diddies? A Diddy: Someone who links to 5 of my posts containing the word (or variant) 'diddy' and who would post more if the forum allowed him to make more quotes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 A Diddy: Someone who links to 5 of my posts containing the word (or variant) 'diddy' and who would post more if the forum allowed him to make more quotes. Is five the limit? I just stopped when there were sufficient to make my point. If your definition were to be accurate then you have been consistently misusing the word. An alternative explanation would be that you are a lazy b*****d that resorts to the use of the word to try to find common fault with everyone that does not support the same as yourself. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 An alternative explanation would be that you are a lazy b*****d that resorts to the use of the word to try to find common fault with everyone that does not support the same as yourself. This would agree with Monkey Tennis's view. Do you two meet up for a banjo jam? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 So do we..but the problem lies squarely with you diddies. Explain? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Plenty have denied those benefits though. I would think the article is aimed at disproving those views rather than yours. Well I am assuming the article wasn't directed at me, I would agree. I haven't seen anyone deny the financial benefit for clubs like Peterhead etc having you in town, but if they have then from a financial perspective they are wrong, because it would be stupid to suggest otherwise. But I stress financial there, your presence probably also denied them any chance of winning the league that year, but that is semantics and not something I wish to get into. I could be wrong about this being a troll but given this thread is 99.9% mud slinging between Rangers supporters and diddies, and Bennett's tendency to like a wind up, the article felt distinctly like an attempt to generate a diddy reaction. I may be a cynical p***k but my guess is the Sun has published that article in an attempt to pander to its populace of readers, i.e. not the lower league clubs who have benefitted but to the Rangers support who want to feel vindicated by their existence in the lower leagues. It reads very much like all of these clubs should just be thankful that you graced them with your presence, it seems sycophantic and disingenuous. Like I say, I'm not going to deny the financial gains for these clubs but similarly I find the whole article a bit distasteful and I still don't really see the point of it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xj2011 Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 The idea that all of Scotland's poorer cap in hand smaller clubs won some sort of rangers lottery is farcical, and just plays to the narrative that their rotten institution is somehow a virtue for Scottish football, when indeed we'd all of prefered that you and your ugly sister from the east end fecked off to the English leagues, like you so wanted to, years ago. 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.