Rangers Banter Archive September 24 2012

24 Sep 2012 23:16:45
stone me!! william hill 3-1 to us 16/1 3-1 to the well 22/1?? we are a 3rd div team against a spl leader... the bookies are having a laugh.. total joke.

Money dictates prices not quality.

To 1.) Yes bookies cover their butt, so with the current standings m'well should be favourites by a distance but the bookies are seldom wrong.

Cant work out why Motherwell are Favs,newco have 10 times the wage bill and spl players,added to that wee McColl will lie down as usual,much as it pains me I think Newco will win by 2 or 3

25 Sep 2012 22:11:09
Thanks for the info ... that 22/1 looks a great bet for motherwell ..... just a wee bit of worry as to where the sevco goal is coming from ......... but banking on a penalty for rangers ( tribute act or not ) is always a feesible proposition though .

Odds are set by amount of money being betted. Its been a bonanza for punters so far. Rangers fans are pushing up the odds on opposition teams. In a proper market 'well would be hot favourites. They are a cracking bet. Only problem is et and pens. 90 minute result is what primary bets are on and teams will be geared up to go the whole way. I take 'well to win in 90 though. They are bang in form and rangers defence will really struggle to deal with their attack. They took the foot off against the dons and will come out fighting.
The prophet.

24 Sep 2012 20:15:21
Serious question Bears. How will you feel or even react if the Nimmo Smith enquiry clears you of wrongdoing and the HMRC EBT case outcome puts you in the clear. That would mean your old club (Rangers) would have went through all the sh@t in the last year for nothing. Marching through Glasgow for justice again?

Worth it to get rid of the management. If it wasn't now, it might have been in a few years but worse.
Build our team back and look forward.

Hehe that's no going to happen!

But its not your team now its greens new club formed 2012by a yorkshire man ... thats the point the op is making

Absolutely no chance for a happy result for Rangers from the Big Tax Case. Murray knows that and Green knows that.

And I wouldn't hold out much hope for the Nimmo Smith/panel investigation either or Green would be talking up the chances of it going in Ranger's favour.

Just being realistic.

BARNEY BEAR

Just being defeatist actually. Absolutely no chance?????? Depends what you class as a good result.

24 Sep 2012 18:31:53
with the announcement that JJB are preparing for administration, what does this mean for rangers? i know they pay us 2m a year but what now. is the deal still alive or does it go void? would love to see the rangers store back on its own again away from JJB.

Haha nothing, JJB don't have a contra ct with us anymore mate.
Dtp89

Have you been living on the moon for the last 6 weeks or so?

Lol rangers don't deal with jjbs anymore they are with sports direct wakey wakey keep up that happened weeks ago

Charles green foresaw this coming and has already ditched jjb. and signed with sports direct

24 Sep 2012 23:02:41
Charles green ditched no one . Sports direct bought the right off sports direct .

Rangers could not ditch them as you can't ditch a contract which has already been payed.

Charles Green didn't ditch them the liquidators did. Something else he didn't buy

24 Sep 2012 18:17:18
just watched the re-run of the game and I have to admit I didn't see anything wrong with Cribari - two minor mistakes but he strolled though the game and hardly put a foot wrong.
The worst man in the defence was Perry - by a mile. His tackling was poor and his distribution was woeful so much so that Cribari had to cover TWO positions.
Ally needs to drop Perry and put Jig at the back with the brazilian.
That WILL steady the shop considerably.

Wee Bill

Id like your opinion after the Motherwell game good sir. Big higdon is a diddy but will batter the sh*te out of Cribari all night, wait and see. He is as big jessie.

24 Sep 2012 14:58:16
David Murrays father was in jail in the 1960's for financial corruption, interesting that eh?

Not in the slightest actually.

Apples not falling far from the tree comes to mind. In the DNA.

24 Sep 2012 14:14:32
I expect the SFA and SPL will use the title stripping to say it's time to draw a line under this whole sordid afair.

At one I would have agreed with them, but now, I want to know just how many people are invovled in this and just how corrupt are our administrators: a man who recieved a £95,000 'gift' from ragers is still president of the SFA. It's laughable. Their arrogance is stunning. How many more people were given gifts?

As always, the establishment will try to protect the higher-ups, it's the British way, no one at the top is ever responsible. But all the dirt must be dug up- and heads must roll.

Scottish football can't be left to fester and die in the hands of these dishonest, corrupt clowns.

The one that'll really shock is when Walter Smith is shown to have taken EBT's, the publicity has so far been elsewhere!

Working class families push their hard earned into their beloved club and the higher ups, who think we're plebs, pocket our money for millionaire lifestyles. DM took over £6m tax free. Totally criminal.

Removing illegally acquired titles is not punishment. That's the same as taking jewellery back off the thief.
Punishments against the thief need to be levied thereafter.

Not a law of the land broken and you guys have them hung, drawn and quartered, bet the witches of the land are glad you idiots aren't calling the shots

To the comment about the thief. Are you suggesting the jewel thief keeps the jewels but get other punishment like put in the slammer for 15 years? magic, least after 7 years with good behaviour he can look forward to a life of luxury with the nice little nest egg you have let him keep eh. lol

No mate, Jewels (titles) taken back and punishment (fines) is morally and logically the correct procedure.

Your analogy was rank rotten pal.

24 Sep 2012 13:16:32
It seems both the Scottish and English footballing authorities are as stupid as each other. John terry was cleared in the court of Law of racially abusing Ferdinand but yet the EFA seem to think he should be punished :-S just like the court cleared rangers of a transfer embargo but the SFA used this to BLACK MAIL rangers so they could get their membership. Someone of a higher authority has to step in for both Scottish and English football before they become even more corrupt. For the last few weeks we have all been saying how corrupt the SFA is but I feel the EFA is just as bad. Opinions?

Terry's a thug in a priveleged position.

The balance of proof in a court of Law is differrent to the balance of proof in an FA hearing. The is not double jerpardy and terry will not have a jury of english men reluctant to brandish thier Captain a racist.

You and Terry are a good match both self centred and think you are above the law,Terry at least has jumped before they pushed him,time for old Rangers to hold up thier hands admit they cheated and stop blaming everyone else

Dannybhoy

A lower standard of proof would be required in the FA hearing. Its not a criminal case so it would likely be decided on the balance of probability' test rather than the 'beyond reasonable doubt' standard needed in a court case.

Do you not pay attention clown? Our supporters group made it perfectly clear that we wanted to start from div3 and build our way up to make up for our "cheating"

Btw.. How did we all cheat? The fans done nothing wrong,
The team done nothing wrong. Think you should consider where you point your big inaccurately accusing finger.

Dtp89

Or just the 'everybody knows what happened' test.

Wasting your time dtp, some of them have prejudice ingrained.

To 5 ,dont make it sound like that was a punishment,the SFA bent over backwards to let you in. Your fans had no say in it

Re the fans done nothing wrong yet we get punished.When fans cause trouble be it europe or home the club gets punished
when they haven,t done anything wrong thats the way it works so we just have to get on with it.

@8 c'mon mate, you really think they tried to help us?
They're making sure they keep us for they're own income. We don't live in a 'help your neighbour' world anymore, all any company cares about is there money.

Dtp89

@9.. Good point mate, but teams pay policing etc.. To keep fans under control. We have absolutely no way of controlling our managements finances.
Take Manchester for example.. When the police were asked directions to a tv for the game after the screens suspiciously! Went out, fans were basically told to F*ck off.
Poor policing! Pathetic attitudes! Not saying the riots were acceptable, but it's no surprise it happened.

Dtp89

They didnt clear you they just refered it back for a punishment that was on the list you gladly took it as the ones on list where more severe

OP. O J Simpson was cleared in a court of law, but how many people think he was innocent.
He was later found guilty of wrongful death in a civil trial.
Al

24 Sep 2012 12:27:21
How much are tickets for the mwell game?

About 15 mate. I bought 3, the total came to £54 or something (I'm sure that include delivery)

Dtp89

£15 for adults.

£9quid for a stamps a bit steep ......DH

24 Sep 2012 09:48:52
HAPPY BIRTHDAY
SUPER ALLY "YOU CAN DO
IT SON"

To the people who
disagree what are you
disagreeing with ?

@1: I'm guessing the 'you can do it bit'. Quite obvious really.

Ally must stay.

24 Sep 2012 08:34:56
Heard from a good source ally knocked back the chance to sign tom hateley, sums ally up couldn't see a good player if it hits him in the face.

Tom Hateleys not a good player.......DH

Hatleys as good as we bave just now he would have been a good edition to the squad

24 Sep 2012 03:19:34
For all those saying Jig at back... 10 goals already this season arguement over, we need goals as not sorted at the back yet, defence is about consistent pairings and getting to bond with your centre partner I would stick with current two as outside of QOS (offside goal) and peterhead away they are not giving loads away which is okay for a completely new defence and whole team new, still not happy with Allys decisions but rangers for life I agree with the bears saying back him at least till end of season , i was all for dumping him after QOS but on reflection we really need to stick together as fans and as a team, home wins and ****e away will still win league which for new team is all I really ant now, .... on the trophies front a great bit of news they were witch hunting and SFL backing whatever Nimmo and co find I see us keeping all titles now the guilty before tried agenda more or less roves impartiality as they APPOINTED this panel REGARDLESS the best news is that even if we ROBBED of 5 titles we end our Rangers era ahead of celtic by 6 and in the newco era we will catch them up in the next 10 years. LASTLY THE HISTORY ARGUEMENT OFFICIALLY OVER ACCORDING TO NIMMO IF WE WERE TO BE ROBBED OF TITLes ..... THAT IS GOOD ENOGH FOR ME AS SHUTS UP IDIOTS IN TIMMYLAND SAYING WE LOST OUR 140 HISTORY.... hope we beat Well in cup.... george

@george; That is one of the most factually incorrect ramblings i have ever seen on here.Green is on record as saying that the historical timeline is broken,remember the CVA? You are not being robbed of titles,your club is weeks old and has won nothing.The oldco will have titles stripped if dual contracts are found to have been used.Try and think.

Nimmo smith was stating the grounds for the inquiry. He was also taking the legal standpoint on the newco using the oldco image. I think he may be setting the stage for financial penalties, recovering prize money. It's hard to understand but I think it looks like the spl can recover money from newco which was taken under false pretences by oldco. The legal firewall set up by whyte and green may not protect them from this. I'm going to read what he said another couple of times.

24 Sep 2012 01:56:13
A new axe to grind for Rangers fans seems to be winging it's way through the internet. It is remarkable that for all the rule scanning, stat devouring that goes on that ABSOLUTELY NO THOUGHT goes into whether or not it sets a precedent.

I refer you to the SFA rule that "all SPL teams, the top 4 Division One teams from the previous season and the relegated SPL team from the season before all enter the Scottish Cup in round three."

Rangers as you know are entering the competition at round two.

First off this wasn't a straightforward relegation to Division One, as we all already know.

Secondly, with less than 90 seconds of checking, I discovered that, lo and behold, Livingston in 2009-2010 Scottish did indeed enter in round two.

It seemed a fair question but at least have the brains to check it's potential legality first.

Step for step Rangers demotion has followed Livingston's why would this be any different?

Can you please stop the half baked garbage claims, they are becoming increasingly desperate and laughable.

Livingston didn't go out of existence. The Rangers FC are a new club who were voted INTO the SFL. As a new club they have, ad their owner said, no previous history. Why then would they enter the Scottis Cup at a later stage ? They have never played a league or cup game prior to season 2012 - 2013. Simples.