Rangers Banter Archive March 24 2012

24 Mar 2012 22:49:45
think i'll be watching this game through my fingers from behind the sofa!...the thought of them winning the league at ibrox makes me boak,its gonna be a tough day for us bears regardless of the result but all we can ask for is a performance from these guys...far too many have been hiding recently,let's all hope the game passes without incident and the rangers show dignity....unlike some, who spring to mind not too far away!

p. mangan

My prediction for tomorrow, is ally go defensive we will get beat but if he goes with an more attaching formation we will get draw at least. But my guess is he will get the walter smith handbook back out and go with a first eleven with at least 7 defensive players starting hence a probable defeat.

No we all know how you will play, the only you play is the big long ball and hope someone gets on the end of it. that has been the rangers way since your great manager walter took over and sally just plays the same way.That is called luck not football........b

Same as the great saint martin then aye

james rfc 1980

24 Mar 2012 21:15:57
Tomorrows team , IMO

Greegs
Bentfoot Goian boca papac
Aluko Edu Jig Wallace
Davis
Little

I reckon that could work against them, (or start bedoya on the left but I don't think Wallace or Sassa will be left out.
PaulRFC

I agree with the wallace and papac not been left out hence the fact that will spell our demise. Ally has tried either wallace or papac left mid on numerous occassions and it does not work and wont work tomorrow.

24 Mar 2012 20:38:59
Team for tomorrow, was told by a player who i wont reveal...


Mcgregor

Wallace
Goian
Bocanegra
Broadfoot

Edu
Davis
McCulloch
Papac
Aluko

Healy

B****cks Wallace at rb? Edu at right mid? Papac cm? Give me some of what ur smokin?

Lee

Hope Papac not in midfield hes better at LB

Would have Papac at left back, Wallace left midfield,Broadfoot at right back, Aluko right midfield, and maybe Davis playing in front of defence, maybe he could dictate play more, Edu and Jig center mid and play Little up front
4,5,1

I would not have either wallace or papac in left mid both are crap in there and we dont get anything down the left side when this happens

No 4 So who would you play down the left side?

24 Mar 2012 19:05:47
The bears will be out in force tomorrow hope the players do us a good one . Win lose or draw the manky mob will party who really gives a toss what they do .even if the rangers die a for one will always HATE Celtic watp kenny bluenose

Sad, sad little bigot.

Shocking statement from a Rangers fan. Grow up mate you sound like a complete d1ck. No wonder the timmys are having a ball when we have stoaters like you.

You must lead a sad and bitter life i feel sorry for you. Have some jelly n ice cream maybe cheer you up.

Hopefully kenny boy. have a hunch we will do the business tmw, going for a 2-0 win with davis and aluko grabbing a goal in either half. been wrong before, but at least i admit it ! got to be in it to win it. reckon they might be a bit complacent like their fans will be as they have it won tmw already (though its only a matter of time when they do) but you can predict this game so it will be the usual frenetic stuff with ensuing bedlam !

james rfc 1980

Why is he a bigot because he said hate , i hate whiskey does that make me a bigot. think its maybe you that has a problem my friend.

Sorry, meant you CAN'T predict this game. lol !

james rfc 1980

Listen mate am a season ticket holder i hate celtic, and i have loads of celtic frends does that make me a bigot just because i hate celtic

Hate, manky mob and watp= bigot.

Joeshmo1888

Why is it that ? come on, give us an answer ? hail hail what is that all about then ? thought so, its ridiculous. grow up wee man and get a life, just get on with it and enjoy your title win if its possible. another do gooding moral high ground celtic fan here by the look of it

james rfc 1980

I hate bananas, I'm a banana bigot

If truth be told yous hate anyone that beats rangers so whats new....

Don't think so mate a hate anybody that beats rangers a love killie ...kenny bluenose will always hate the manky mob

24 Mar 2012 17:21:47
I'm soooo excited I could wet myself. I'm 31 years old and have waited all my life for a day like tomorrow. Let's grasp the moment bhoys and make yourselves legends and if it happens let's party like never before without any bile or bigotry. Hail, hail!!...............martyc1888

Legends! The same legends that were big headed enough to think the treble was on last week, this week the double. Be careful what you wish for.I for one hope you get humped and are left with jelly and ice cream dribbling down your green and grey hooped tops.PB

Well marty feldman remember to put on your bib when eating your spaghetti hoops before the game dont want to spoil your top and take paper hankies in case your nose runs too lol you wont be celebrating a win tomorrow

If we win all the better but we will party nonetheless. We'll leave the idiotic singing to you lot as per usual (a bit like ur idiotic replies). We know you are hurting but our Jelly n Ice cream will taste sweet regardless. You can buy aww the flags in the world tae hide ur greetin faces but there will be a green and white party in the Broomloan. Cannae wait to see our hero lenny lift the trophy cause you lot will no be able to take it. You proved it last year with ur death threats and letter bombs and as a result ur tainted title. This year however u will get to see it happen - this is only the beginning. P.S. How's that fighting fund getting on, lol. Complete embarassment...............martyc1888

Ah deary deary deary me bears, typical. as the no2 team in scotland (and always will be) have a chance of winning the championship at our home tmw the tims are out in force - what a surprise eh. where were they last week ? hiding as per when they lose, just like tmw. well, hopefully !!

james rfc 1980

24 Mar 2012 16:55:28
had 20 on super ally cheers bhoys
welshbhoy

24 Mar 2012 16:42:19
Hi Ed please correct me if I'm wrong but you need 75% or more of creditors debt to to agree to a pence in the pound offer to create a CVA now with HMRC being owed 15m if we lose the BTC that will rise to nearly 65m (total debt being close to 90m) this amount would give HMRC main creditor status as far as CVA concerned taking Ticketus out of the picture if as reported we can agree a deal 30 or 40p in the pound I would think meaning it would cost new buyer approx 35m to pay off creditors and be debt free so in a weird sort of a way losing the BTC might just help save the club

10p in the £ would be better. There will never be £30- 40m left/ going into "the pot" for the CVA. 9 or £10m is more realistic. One would have to assume that other bids (from the blue knights) would be better for the creditors as a whole. Following the judge's wooly direction on Friday, this surely gives credence to setting aside ticketus issue. I guess that's why they were quick to align themselves with blue knights- to attempt to protect their investment. No sure why blue knigt bid so readily accepted them on board. It's just complicated the issue and given ticketus the opportunity to point to the blue knight bid and say it's best for RFC, when all they're obviously bothered about is their money. If ticketus were no aligned with any bid it would be pretty plain that their presence discourages any potential investor and could thus be set aside, following the judge's "verdict" on Friday.

24 Mar 2012 15:28:40
Here's an idea lads what about turning ibrox into the terraces again and that way we would get more fans packed into ibrox meanin we would get more season tickets up for sale extra cash to get rid of that ticketus ASAP , just a thought what u guys think ?

Who is going to pay for this ?

Is it even legal?

24 Mar 2012 14:50:32
ok "B"...firstly ...agh wasnt drunk...secondly i stand by ma comment ....rangers fc forever ....newco wi moneymen makin a fortune ....no chance .....the moneymen should put the money where their moths are .....save rangers fc ....who the f*** wouldve wanted kennedy anyway ...just another ego lookin for attention and he got it......cmon blue knights ..show us what you got .....rangers fc forever....the other names PLUMS...deecee

You like they...... full stops don't yae!........
dee.......jay.....

24 Mar 2012 14:15:24
 

Yesterday Lord Hodge issued his decision in the application by D&P for “Directions” in connection with their handling of the Rangers administration – [2012] CSOH 55.

 

New or Extra Information from the Case

 

1                     Rangers Football Club PLC (Rangers) was and remains unable to pay its bills as they fall due.

 

2                     The application for the Administration Order referred to a £9 million liability to HMRC.

 

3                     The administrators (D&P) want either to rescue Rangers with a share issue, or to sell off the assets of the company, in either event with a CVA.

 

4                     D&P wanted the court to give them carte blanche to breach the Ticketus deal, without fear of legal action by Ticketus.

 

5                     D&P based their original sale prospectus on the Ticketus deal being void, but had to amend this to include the possibility of it staying in place.

 

6                     “Ticketus” is a combination of two Limited Liability Partnerships, Ticketus LLP and Ticketus 2 LLP, both consisting of a large number of companies under the Ticketus umbrella.

 

7                     The Ticketus agreement was with Rangers, not with Rangers FC Group Ltd (Group) or anyone else.

 

8                     The agreement was signed, and first payment of £20 million made, on 9th May, 3 days after the takeover.

 

9                     It was proposed that Rangers would lend Group £16 million.

 

10                 A second payment of £5 million was made six days after Martin Bain was granted a court order freezing sums in the Rangers accounts.

 

11                 Notwithstanding any other argument D&P have, they are trying to have the Ticketus deal declared unenforceable on “financial assistance” grounds.

 

I aim to discuss the new information revealed in this case below in more detail.

In later posts I want to explain some of the implications of the case for Rangers’ future and potential sale of the Club.

Finally, it is also the case that the decision could have serious consequences for the Scottish finance sector, which I will try to address. As always, I am happy to be educated and corrected by those wiser than me.

 

Do We Learn Anything New From The Decision?

Yes.

This case and Lord Hodge’s decision are the first public acknowledgement of many issues which have been causing confusion since the Rangers situation started to deteriorate.

The relevant, and in some cases, newly revealed facts are as follows:-

Rangers Insolvency

As we know D&P had to go back to the court on the basis that their original appointment by Rangers was defective, because of a failure to notify the FSA. When Mr Sellar (D&P’s QC) asked the court to grant an administration order backdated to 14th February, this confirmed (a) that Rangers accepted that it had been insolvent as at 14th February and (b) that D&P accepted that Rangers remained so on 19th March when the retrospective administration was dealt with.

Mr Sellar referred the court to a debt of over £9 million to HMRC. That is assumed to relate to the unpaid VAT and Income Tax accrued by Rangers whilst under the control of Mr Whyte, or more correctly of his companies.

 

How Do D&P Aim to Get Rangers out of Administration?

D&P have come up with two alternative ways of achieving the purposes of administration. They are laid down in the Administration Rules. The primary purposes are, in order, to rescue Rangers as a going concern, which failing, to achieve a better result for the creditors as a whole than if it was wound up without first being in administration.

D&P have identified, and told the court, that they see two realistic options.

Option one is a “subscription of new shares in Rangers and a sale of the present majority shareholding combined with a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) between Rangers and its creditors”.

The alternative is “a sale of the business and assets of Rangers, again combined with a CVA”.

I will come back to these later.

 

What Were D&P Wanting the Court to do, and Why?

The Administration Rules allow administrators to approach the court for “directions”. These can be sought to give the “green light” to planned actions, or to validate steps taken by the administrators. In addition, this procedure can be used to clarify matters which may be in dispute regarding the administration.

In this case D&P initially asked the court for a direction as follows:-

“as to whether the administrators can be prevented from causing [Rangers] to terminate, albeit in breach of their terms, the [Ticketus agreements].”

As the hearing continued, the application was amended to request, in the alternative:-

“a direction as to the legal nature of the rights which the agreements confer on Ticketus in respect of (i) the Company’s Stadium, and (ii) the proceeds of future sales of season tickets for that Stadium;”

and

“a direction as to the legal test which is to be applied by [the] administrators or by the court in determining whether those administrators can be prevented from causing the company to terminate the agreements, albeit in breach of their terms.”

What does this mean?

From the limited press coverage of the court hearing, it seemed that the only issue was that D&P found the Ticketus deal inconvenient as regards a sale, and therefore they wanted permission to “rip it up”.

As we can see, there was a lot more than that!

The initial application was to for confirmation from the court that D&P could not be stopped from breaching the Ticketus agreement on behalf of Rangers. This was based on the premise that the Ticketus deal was valid (to which I will return) and that there was no contractual reason permitting the breach of contract.

If D&P decided to breach the contract with Ticketus, they wanted to be sure that Rangers would not be on the receiving end of a court action either preventing the breach by interdict, or ordering Rangers to perform it.

Whilst in administration no such action could be pursued without consent of D&P or the court. However, if Rangers emerged from administration, D&P did not want the company to be saddled with the Ticketus deal, and if the deal was broken, then the Ticketus claim would, at best, be an unsecured claim in the CVA.

The first added request was for a direction on the nature of the Ticketus “rights” and what legal form this took as regards Ibrox and the proceeds of future ticket sales. This part is probably the most legally complex, and the area of broadest legal impact (of which more later).

The second added request was for Lord Hodge to lay down a formula to be applied by D&P and the courts in deciding if D&P could be stopped from breaking the Ticketus contract. This was an attempt to get round the possibility that, under the originally formulated request, the direction could have been refused, whereas this new method would, even if refused, tell D&P what they had to do.

 

Why Was This Important?

D&P issued a “Memorandum of Offer” inviting expressions of interest in acquiring either the majority shareholding in Rangers or most of its business assets. The Memorandum of Offer issued on 14 March 2012 invited interested parties to assume that “no future revenue needs to be committed to Ticketus” both in the context of a CVA and a trade sale of Rangers’ business and assets. D&P issued a revised Memorandum on 16 March 2012 which contained a third option of a CVA in which the arrangements with Ticketus continued to have effect.

Any bidders for either Rangers or the assets needs to know if there is an ongoing liability to Ticketus.

In the same way, any bidder for Rangers, as opposed to the assets, needs to know the outcome of the Big Tax Case first.

 

Who or What is Ticketus?

One of the apparent mysteries in this case related to the identity of Ticketus.

The press statement released by Octopus on 17th February did not really help make things crystal clear.

“Octopus Investments would like to clarify the position of Ticketus with regard to the current Glasgow Rangers coverage.

Ticketus is one of the many entities into which Octopus Protected EIS invests. Ticketus has purchased tickets for Glasgow Rangers games for a number of seasons in advance, as it has done for a number of years previously with the club.

Ticketus does not lend money; Ticketus is the owner of assets – the tickets. Octopus is continuing to work with the administrators and Glasgow Rangers on this matter.”

Lord Hodge notes that “Ticketus” for the purposes of this action consists of two limited liability partnerships registered in England, namely Ticketus LLP and Ticketus 2 LLP.

Both of these are, as stated, limited liability partnerships. The “partners” in each are a large number of Ticketus companies, each with an individual number.

The first LLP has, as per its last accounts (July 2010), over £92 million of net assets, with the second just over £70 million. Between the pair at that time they had cash as per the balance sheets of £131 million. Therefore, even though these are wealthy organisations, and they exist primarily to provide tax breaks to investors, the Rangers deal is a large and risky one for them.

Ticketus LLP formed in November 2008 and Ticketus 2 LLP in June 2009.

For such large organisations, in monetary terms, the combined total number of employees was only 23.

 

What Was the Ticketus Deal?

Lord Hodge describes it thus:-

“Ticketus operates a business of buying and selling tickets for, among others, sporting events. The two contracts with Ticketus, which I discuss below, in summary involve the sale by Rangers to Ticketus of season tickets and an agency arrangement by which Ticketus is to receive the income flow from the sale of the season tickets. On or about 9 May 2011 Ticketus paid £20,300,912 for the first tranche of the season tickets which covered the seasons 2011-2012, 2012-2013 and 2013-2014. On or about 21 September 2011 Ticketus paid a further £5,075,213 for the second tranche of season tickets, which covered the seasons 2013-2014 and 2014-2015. I am informed that the expected income flow from the sale of the season tickets is likely to represent about 60% of the cash flow of Rangers in those seasons. Accordingly, the sale of that income flow is likely to have a significant effect on what interested parties may bid for the majority shareholding in Rangers or for that company’s business and assets.”

This clarifies a lot of the misinformation and speculation about the Ticketus deal.

 

1                     It was not and is not a loan.

2                     The contract was between Rangers Football Club PLC (Rangers) and Ticketus.

3                     It was not a contract directly involving Group, Liberty Capital Ltd or anyone else.

4                     The money was not paid until after the takeover had been effected.

5                     Therefore, whilst the arrangements were put in place prior to the sale, the purchase of shares by Group proceeded in advance of the Ticketus payment.

6                     The takeover was not paid for by Rangers.

7                     Ticketus paid a second tranche in excess of £5 million on 21st September 2011.

 

I find point 7 particularly interesting. The payment was made to Rangers six days after Lord Hodge granted an order in favour of Martin Bain permitting him to freeze a substantial sum within Rangers bank accounts.

This might help to explain how Rangers managed to keep going when some observers were guessing that the money would have run out by then. In addition of course the non-payment of tax at a rate of around £1 million per month would also have helped with the cash flow!

The contract for the sale of season tickets was dated, as I have said, 9th May and it provided that the sale would take place in two tranches. It seems very fortuitous for Rangers that, six days after a judge decided that there was, in light of the Big Tax Case, a serious risk of insolvency, Ticketus paid for more tickets for 2013-2014 and for 2014-2015!

By that stage of course, HMRC had already arrested £2.3 million in Rangers accounts.

Were Ticketus looking to get out of the deal, or were they in a position where the only realistic way of protecting the investment was to pay over more money? If the latter, that fully explains why Ticketus is involved with one of the consortia trying to buy Rangers.

 

D&P Are Trying to strike the Ticketus Deal Down

Lord Hodge also confirms that D&P are trying to have the Ticketus deal declared unenforceable. This is over and above the issues explored in this application, and whilst the judge mentioned it, he offered no view at this time.

The argument by D&P seems to be as follows.

1                     Rangers would use the payment for the first tranche of tickets to “effect repayment” of the £18 million owed by Rangers to the Bank of Scotland.

2                     Rangers would lend Group £16 million to “enable that debt to be repaid” and the “bank’s debt and its securities would be assigned to (Group)”.

3                     Such an arrangement is, according to D&P, illegal under s678 of the Companies Act 2006. This is the so-called “financial assistance” rule.

D&P have a choice about how to deal with the Ticketus deal on the “financial assistance” point.

They can go to court for an order that the contract is unenforceable, or the contract can be repudiated by them, on behalf of Rangers, and they can defend any court action which Ticketus might later bring, subject to the complications caused by administration etc.

Either way, it seems that Ticketus and D&P are likely to be back in court on a regular basis.

Source: Scotslawthoughts

Am no even reading this!! al leave it to the lawyers!
deejay

FFS Perry Mason wouldn't even understand that......DH

24 Mar 2012 12:56:19
Rusty the tim!just a quick word about 2mrw game.hope it's a game we'll remember for all the right reasons and the banter between the fans stay as banter just like these pages!!I think John h is right for you you shouldn't need lifted for this game but the other games you do and thats the games your judged on(maybe his wording wasn't put over the best)he says it how it is unlike some of the other puppets in the media!!deejay you still my rumour page friend?????il buy you a 99 2mrw in the sunshine!! Hail hail rusty the tim

Yeah he says it how it is , ok , here we go, Sunday's cup final, "I disagree with Craig , there was contact an IT WAS a penalty"..... 2mins later..."stokes delayed his DIVE , he took another half step before DIVING"... Ok big chap lol u make all the sense, JH I admire you as a man and what you have been through, you are obviously a fighter and I respect that, but ya don't half talk some jimmy White bold yin!
PaulRFC

24 Mar 2012 12:00:11
The only thing to hope for in tomorrow's match is a good game of football , and may the best team win, if we can show the world that we have a good football team but also great suppoters that might go a long way to silence all the critics wherever they're from.
There must be no hate on or off the pitch, no stupid songs to wind up the celtic fans and the same thing must be expected from them.
We can only hope the match will be incident free, and the same thing applies to before and after the game

Agree mate to be honest, but a wee rant here if you all bear with me, i have to say that i am a bit sick to death with the whole molly coddle so to speak about this old firm thing. i mean, the rivalry should ALWAYS be there and its healthy but some people seem to intervene a bit too much by claiming sectarian undertones to everything. we all know what both clubs are about and what they are, but there is a lot of tradition with these 2 clubs and i love it. not a fan of the bad element but i am a traditionalist of the fixture all the same. it seems to me that certain people play the religion card a bit to easy, when if you look at manchester, liverpool, london or even birmingham where they have passionate rivalry where none of this is relevant in their derby games, yet we cant here without outrage of sectarian hatred (though it does exist) point being we complain to easy about this and that and bitch about this and that. just go to the game and enjoy it. rant over lads !

james rfc 1980

24 Mar 2012 11:04:46
ed, any truth in the rumour Lafferty has played 98 games for rangers and after 99 money is owed to burnley, hence why he hasnt been playing? {Ed001's Note - I very much doubt it would be 99 games that money would need to be paid.}

I have heard this also. He is on 98 but its 100 games the money kicks in. He can play one more game apparently. It might be alot of crap but thats the rumours on both Celtic and Rangers pages i have seen.

Joeshmo1888

Soeone on here said burnley have confirmed we don't owe them anymore money
deejAY

Its 100 games, so in effect hes got 1 game left to play this season. Hes not as injured as Rangers are making out. Hell be fit for Sunday, probably as a sub though as his match fitness isnt upto scratch.

24 Mar 2012 10:23:39
Rangers need to find a total of only
£123 Million to clear all its debts. So
far they have raised £150,000. A long
way still to go but I am sure with lots
of car washing and fundraising we can
get there.

£15 Million - HMRC
£75 Million - HMRC
£27 Million - Ticketus
£6 Million - Other Creditors

With a club that still will be running at
a loss of £3-5 Million a season which is
mostly due to managing its debts.
A new buyer could make a lot of cash
over a period of ten years if the clear
all the debts in one go.

I can only think of appealing to Don
Trump / Allan Sugar or Roman Abr
at Chelsea.

Have we been found guilty of £75m tax fraud yet?

Please, keep your calculator in your pocket until such time there is a verdict on the EBT tax case.

TTG

Where are you getting these exact figures from !! Absolute nonsense nobody knows the cost or outcome of the big tax case. Away and read a few facts then come back and change the above figures. Everything the papers write isn't true !

Where does this £70,000,000 keep coming from.
Don?

Did i put 70,000,000 or 75,000,000 cause i ment £75,000,000.
Don

24 Mar 2012 09:23:47
If rangers manage to rip up the ticketus contract and whyte needs to honour it....would we then owe Lloyds again. I don't understand this. Lloyds have had their money paid to them so they're not going to give it back to ticketus. People are saying we would be stuck with Lloyds debt again...what you think ed? Broon {Ed001's Note - if the deal could be ripped up as illegal, I believe that Ticketus would be out of pocket. I would expect them to mount a legal challenge to any attempt to do that though.}

24 Mar 2012 08:34:31
Did whyte arrange tikitus deal when he was not in charge of rangers. If so he should be liable.
I smell a rat! All loans and creditors arranged by whyte being publically challenged by administrators but confirmed as rangers debt (is this the true purpose, is whyte this clever?). I wonder when all is resolved how much whytes wealth will be increased, how much the administrators will make and who will be paying for all of this

Whyte is an expert at this, he knows exactly what he has done and what he stands to gain. Do not under estimate his expertise in this field. Watch this space he will come out of this hated by most but the main creditor. He paid £1 for the shares, the lloyds debt is a side issue. He is a devious and clever.

24 Mar 2012 08:10:16
Pissed off Bear here!
I think Sunday might just be the last game for the club we love.
One big final payday for D&P, and then liquidation before 6th April Tax changes.
A last hurrah for a few players on Sunday, surprise surprise, almost a full team available, when we couldn't even fill the bench the last 2 weeks.
Hope to fek I'm wrong!

Tax changes hav been suspended ?

24 Mar 2012 06:33:05
just a thought ed if rangers are sold to a preferential bidder ..lets say kennedy who has issues regarding ticketus contract can we as fans not rectify this issue by buying half season tickets which legally are not season ticket sales ... alternatively why not pay cash at turnstile ticketus will then have no rights to our cash as this is outwith their remit {Ed001's Note - no, they would still get their cash from the club, no matter how you paid for tickets.}

AAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHH!
deejay

For f*ck sake how many times do we need to go through this. I'm not even explaining it again. Are you the same guy postin this all the time just to take the piss?

Lee

24 Mar 2012 02:19:54
Sorry bears am i missin somethin here? are the dhims suddenly tryin to find a new sayin quick lol? one minute they hate the life out of killie for what happened last week and now they want to best pals with them haha, well guess what motherwell will win 2-1 and the gers will win 1-0 JUST though lol oh and guess what? no title party for you! can see a few dhims takin a portable freezer with them just incase they have to walk home with no celebration haw haw! GLEN-GER

When did Celtic fans "hate the life out of Kilmarnock " .I actually think Motherwell will win and we can have our own title party at home next week "haw haw"........DH

Not if gers win tmw you wont...

james rfc 1980

24 Mar 2012 01:49:01
listen bears you think you are simply the best and every other club are s**te we the tims think you are the only ones that can f**k us every year for a title so unless i am mistaken, you u need us tims. so to every rangers fans please make sure sunday is a game that shows the press that without us they dont have nothing to write about please dont give them that makes them feel good.....b

23 Mar 2012 23:41:17
Are rangers just trying to avoid all debts? The only way this can be done legally is liquidation!!
Jelly & Ice Cream for everyone

I f we go into liquidation, does that not mean no debts will be paid?
Please stop talking about jelly and ice cream and just eat the dam stuff. Might cheer you up angry man.

pappy

Do you not think the jelly and ice cream patter is getting old? You do realise that nobody finds it funny other than the deranged Celtic fans?

I mean, what grown adult celebrates a title win with jelly and ice-cream? Thank Fleck I ain't a Celtic fan!!!

TTG

Because they are all kiddies at heart probably.

james rfc 1980