Rangers Banter Archive October 29 2012

 

Use our rumours form to send us rangers transfer rumours.


29 Oct 2012 23:29:09
Hi Guys'

See the usual "p@@@" doing the rounds; well done ed's.

On a positive note; great result away from home against Clyde; big Jig needs to relax a bit more as his goals will come, no need to take the responsibility all on his own shoulders.

Young boys again showing the way forward, once Ally introduced McLeod & Aird the play was more direct and at a much higher tempo.

Opportunity now to stretch the advantage.

Carling1873

Believable12 Unbelievable15

Brilliant result against the mighty Clyde, the rest of Europe will be quaking in their boots when they see how the world famous Clyde FC from the lowest senior professional league in the UK were taken apart (:
Finbar

Agree12 Disagree10

You jest this was against 10 man part-time clyde in div 3 (4th level )... ?

Remember yous need 10+ point advantage in case share float flops and another administration event - drops you back down the table.

reality check ?

Agree14 Disagree8

Very good Finbar. It was a good performance given we are where we are.

You should concentrate on a terrible, lacklustre performance (from what my mate who is a Celtic season ticket holder told me) against the mighty, world famous Kilmarnock team made up of free agents and journeymen. The disparity between Celtic's much vaunted 50m squad and Kilmarnock's 1m (probably being generous there) squad is not much different to our 10-15m (probably being generous there too) squad and Clyde's 1-200,000k squad. Why aren't you blowing these teams away by six, seven or eight goals as you clearly expect us to do every week? You are right, the rest of Europe will be quaking in their boots if that is the best you can come up with.

Brian

Agree12 Disagree5

That you oot o the jail again rabnif what was it this time 3 months for shoplifting at the barras ,you have a nerve coming on here after my 2nd favourite team killie pumped yous at the weekend lol doug t.s.o

Agree1 Disagree0

Brian go and lie in the darkened room again mate, your getting pulled in again, remember Killie won a trophy last year,when was the last time Clyde won anything.
Tam

Agree0 Disagree1

Tam. No darkened room required this time mate. Finbar was having a bit of banter (I am aware of that) and I replied in kind by using his own words and phrases, just changing the teams, in my initial response to him. I've no probs with you sticking together and supporting your mates but if I was going to bite I would have replied to poster 2 who was clearly deep sea fishing. It is also a valid point I proceeded to make though, despite it being mostly tongue in cheek. So, since it is your good self and I assume you aren't on an expedition, I will elaborate upon it.

We are expected to absolutely hammer these teams by a barrow load of goals every time we step on the pitch and the reasoning behind it is that we have a far more expensive squad on far higher wages than anyone else in the Division. With Rangers no longer in the SPL Celtic have, by a country mile, the highest value squad and wage bill in the country, not just the SPL. When we don't score four or more (even then we still get it in the neck anyway) home or away it is automatically a poor result (even from some of our own fans). I don't agree with the criticism and used the similar disparity in wages and value that exists between Celtic and Kilmarnock to, albeit cheekily, ask why Celtic aren't winning games by the same scorelines we are expected to, and are lambasted for when we don't, each and every week. The bottom line is it cannot be done. 2-0 against Clyde was a good result, not great but not less either. Even Barca lose the odd game to 'minnows' or win by the odd goal or two against teams with a lesser wealth of talent in their squad (i.e. Kilmarnock - its irrelevant that they won a trophy last year, Celtic, when you compare the squads, wages and transfer value should be hammering them every time). We will probably lose more games this season and just scrape out a win in others as will Celtic. That is simply footballing reality and for me a win is a win, be it 1-0 or 10-0. Finbar et al can laugh all they like at the results and the level of teams we are playing against if that makes them happy, it makes no odds to me just as long as we gain promotion at the seasons end and start our progression up the leagues (hopefully).

On a side note. How many current Rangers players would make it into the Celtic squad as things stand in your opinion? Absolutely none, player for player Celtic, whether we like it or not, are streets ahead of us at the minute, yet you only beat Peterhead 3-0 at the turn of the year with a full strength squad. Why are we then expected to get a cricket score against these teams every week when all we currently have, with possibly a couple of exceptions, are lower SPL journeymen and kids who are currently incomparable, quality wise, to Celtic's first team players? Teams raise their games, as we will if we are drawn together in a cup this year, and sometimes the favourites win in the manner they are expected to (like last night for example) and sometimes they lose (Killie) or don't win as handsomely as they should. Ce la vie, as they say.

Brian

Agree0 Disagree1

29 Oct 2012 19:59:40
Green said: "I'd like to get him (Smith) on the board, as an advisor. He comes to the games.

"What Rangers need at the club now are people who understand football, who understand Rangers and understand the culture.

"There isn't anyone on the board at Ibrox now who knows anything about football and that includes me. Someone like Walter would add great value."

Now this is a worry

Believable29 Unbelievable5

What is a worry about it. WS should be at Ibrox in some capacity. You clearly think it not a good idea to have somebody that knows about football on the board. Rather have only money men?

Think you have had at least one too many

Agree8 Disagree15

Now why would it be a worry? Stating the obvious Buisness side running ok. but needing more football people on the board.

Agree5 Disagree13

What does smith know about the board room of a club ?? green just wants anyone who will help sell shares for a club which doesnt own any assets

Agree15 Disagree4

I agree.It seems to me that Mr Green is just saying whatever will ingratiate him with the support.Are Media House still handling the clubs PR? If so why? They were Whytes PR company so what are they doing there? I think he follows instructions on what to say,but from whom? AB.

Agree18 Disagree3

Agree 100% with the OP, he (Green) is playing to the deluded WATP mentality of both the Oldco and Newco support, unfortunately the only time you will get real is when you go into Admin/Liquidation a second time, the only part for Smith is to take over from that idiot you have as a manager at present.

Agree9 Disagree3

Well how many ex-EBT'ers do you want on the board?

Agree9 Disagree1

The question for me is why now?

Has he not thought about this idea before?

And on a similar note I see the DR "has revealed today that Rangers bosses knew about Craig Whyte's shady business deadlings BEFORE Ibrox takeover."

Strange timing to run a very negative story on David Murray. Surely they now know the result of the Big Tax Case and that's it's not the the result Murray wanted.

And CG must know the result by now too as well and believes it it won't help persuade investors to plough into his proposed share issue hence some postive spin.

BARNEY BEAR

Agree6 Disagree1

Actually this is just more comedy gold.
somebody stop him.

Agree1 Disagree0

29 Oct 2012 18:39:50
A few days ago:

Charles Green - "Craig Whyte did not introduce me to Duff & Phelps".

Today:

Charles Green - "Craig Whyte did introduce me to Duff & Phelps".

The man is a liar and treating Rangers fans with total distain.

Yet he is getting away with it ant not being asked searching questions by the media and Rangers Supporters Groups.

Whatever he says is just accepted.

My God - is this not what happened with Whyte?

Believable27 Unbelievable13

Are you really as silly as you sound - Green said on both occasions that Whyte introduced him to Duff and Phelps - what he said earlier was that it was Imrad Ahmed that introduced him to the Rangers project, not Whyte as Whyte stated - he was already part of the consortium when Whyte introduced him to D and P - why are eejits like you getting away with access to the Internet ?

Agree12 Disagree18

I have been posting for a while now about Mr Green and his habit of changing stories to suit.Sadly this seems to be another example.Where on earth are the supporters groups? If this unravels in the worst case scenario we might be left with nothing,no ground or team or league to play in.The sad thing is no one knows how this will end,the various outcomes are all guesswork,till Mr Green is asked proper questions and gives straight,provable answers. AB.

Agree15 Disagree5

Don't you mean isn't this what happened with Murray? All those years of dodgyness and no questions to even come close to upset him, friendly media friends for your new club even today. They dot ask the hard questions because they,the media, love rangers old and new so they don't ask hard real questions to make you fans happy. But when the questions do get ask ex channel 4 reporter yous go crazy saying that's not true and how dare he and he and all of he media are Celtic fans. Yous are in such denial that when the normal and right questions asked you shoot them down putting your heads I the sand because yous are afraid to hear the truth so you rather just believe everything green/whyte/Murray say without upsetting them, as they are the ones with the answers. What don't you get.

Agree18 Disagree6

So when charlie turns out to be a charlatan, what then ? get fully behind the next guy who comes from nowhere ? start your own club for gods sake. no football club was ever laughed at this much.

Agree2 Disagree0

@2 Where are the supporter group's ?.Don't expect any question's from them,for a start you need someone with brain's at their head,it is plainly obvious they do not have this.
Tam

Agree1 Disagree0

29 Oct 2012 17:48:09
Can anyone tell me what greens on about? Last week he said he's sticking with gers until we're back in Europe, this week saying gers won't play in spl until his regin? So how we gonna get back in europe??Im personally behind the guy but, mixed signals??
Big C {The Ed039's Note - I think he is hinting at a restructure in the Scottish game)

Believable9 Unbelievable4

Celtic CEO and Dundee utd chairman said there be no leauge restructure and rangers will have to play there way back. I know the fans would say they'd want it that way. Green is clutching at straws and needs to let this hatred of the spl go.

Agree11 Disagree2

He said he will get the champions league back at ibrox and keep ally untill then ... so does that mean he gets bumped as soon as your back in europe ... now that is forward thinking

Agree2 Disagree2

OP. That very question was asked by Andy Gray and his answer was pretty straight forward. If we ever reached a scenario where reconstruction had not occurred yet promotion to the SPL was available to us then he would let the fans decide whether we remained in the SFL or accepted promotion into the SPL. If the fans selected the First Division (unlikely in my view) then he would remain in his role and if we chose the SPL he would stand down from his position. He believes league reconstruction is essential. If it happens his current ambition is to stay until European nights return to Ibrox once again; if not then someone else will take us into the SPL from the SFL as he is not willing to do it personally as he feels the SPL have not kept its word to him over certain issues.

There were more interesting parts to the interview for me than that though. He hinted at playing hardball with the SKY deal as the withholding of SFA membership cannot be levied at us next time, as it was this season. Be that in the form of increased revenue percentages or only agreeing to it if reconstruction is secured either way he will be in a far stronger position to negotiate or withdraw from the deal altogether next time. A valid argument against this would be that it would be five years time before this would arise and therefore be a moot point.However, the deal was ratified because of the agreement to show x amount of Rangers Division 3 games which would suggest that if we gain promotion then next year our inclusion in the deal would be open for renegotiation once again (which we currently make nothing from as a club - the SPL/SFA saw to that) as we would be playing in Division 2. I could see him pulling out of it altogether in that scenario unless Celtic and Dundee United changed their current view on potential reconstruction or we were satisfactorily recompensed.

He did make his usual off the cuff silly comments throughout to be fair, like staying until we win the champions league, which will get jumped upon (quite rightly - stupid comment to make) but he did quite eloquently, for me, highlight the inconsistent Oldco/Newco issues he has with the SPL/SFA in terms of payments out (Hearts, Dundee Utd, Rapid Vienna etc - all to be paid by the new company as we are still Rangers and therefore liable to pay them) and payments in (Jelavic, Davis, SPL monies due etc - all withheld as we are Newco and not due to receive them).

I'm not a huge fan of his but I thought he came across quite well to be honest and raised some interesting points.

Brian

Agree4 Disagree9

So Green is happy to be part of an Organisation which will claim to be the same as before but has a slightly different name, new top men but still contains the same bunch of bampots? Think I just answered my own question. D'oh!

Shuggy

Agree4 Disagree3

Green can not play hard ball with Sky deal. He is part of SFL and TV deals are handled by the SFL. The SFL might want to play hard ball, but then again they might not. The SPL might want to play hard ball as well. I understand the deal is for 3 years so Green might not be around any way.

One thing to note is that although you have been getting big home crowds I don't think you've been getting big TV audiances. If you like at say the BBC website Rangers are actaully quite low profile.

Agree2 Disagree1

@5 You make some decent points regarding the SFL deciding whether or not Rangers games can be shown, but Rangers are not duty bound or legally contracted to consent to their games being shown live on SKY either. Their permission must be gained. The deal, as you say, is with the SPL and SFL and not their individual member clubs. Green, as stubborn as he is, could turn round next season and say no without genuine fear of reprisals as, as far as I am aware, the deal was done on the basis of x amount of div3 games THIS season under the threat of membership being withheld if he did not consent to it. Obviously it would have ramifications in terms of sponsorship etc but given very few of the games shown are at Ibrox anyway it may not have that adverse an effect financially on the club nor, given the paltry percentage given to the SFL as a pay off, the other SFL clubs who receive minimal sums from it.

Official viewing figures (particularly for SKY) are very difficult to come by (any help on this one eds?) but the unofficial line is that Rangers games are by far the most viewed in terms of Scottish football so far this season. Celtic-Aberdeen 91,000: Peterhead-Rangers 166,000 is just one example I found with the Hearts Hibs game only pulling in 25,000 (the highest non Celtic SPL viewing figure). That may admittedly be attributable in part to non-Rangers fans viewing on the off chance that Rangers will get humbled by teams in the 3rd division which would inflate the viewing figures higher than they would normally be but the novelty factor involved means people are tuning in none the less. If these figures are even remotely accurate then Green would have some leverage as SKY will view retaining Rangers games within their schedule as a must (what other reason would they have to be showing Division 3 games this season) in order to keep the figures up and the SPL would then be under pressure to negotiate, as blackmail (and it was if you are being honest) would not be an option available to them next time around. The alternative being the acceptance of a much smaller figure minus Rangers' participation in the agreement. The only way that I can see the SPL remotely being able to play hardball is the potential for withholding the contractually agreed annual 2m payment to the SFL (which they also hinted at if the SKY deal happened to reduce drastically) but that would surely lead to breach of contract issues between the governing bodies if it did materialise and inadvertently lead toward reconstruction and a fairer split of the pot anyway as a consequence.

Brian {Ed001's Note - I can't help you with the viewing figures, they are difficult to ascertain in these days of plus to watch later TV viewers.}

Agree0 Disagree0

I would tune in just for the comedy like. they could win 10-0 and id still be splitting my sides.

Agree0 Disagree0

Brian a question you might be able to answer,if the SFL make a deal regarding t.v. would Rangers not be duty bound to abide by it,I don't know that's why I am asking ?.What happen's if the home team agree can Ranger's say no ?. Ok that's 2 question's but just wondering.
tam

Agree0 Disagree0

Hey Tam. It is a tricky one to be honest and maybe the Eds or a more informed poster could give you a more reliable answer as these are just my opinions. If Rangers, as is the case this year, give permission for their games to be broadcast then the SFL would act accordingly and secure a deal whereby Rangers would be contractually obliged to appear in x amount of live broadcasts. Breaching such a contract once signed may result in penalties rightly being levied at the club so I could not envisage a scenario whereby, if a deal has been signed on the basis of permission having been granted, Rangers could, or would even want to, renege on the deal. The point I was making was that the interpretation I have of the current deal is that Rangers are contractually obliged to be involved in a certain number of Div 3 games (not SFL games), which implies this year only (if we gain promotion). This would suggest that Rangers could withhold permission once in Division 2 and, if the SFL wanted to pursue another joint deal with the SPL (who would be most affected) next year it would be minus Rangers (obviously they would not be in receipt of the benefits of any TV deal as a consequence in that scenario). If Rangers withheld permission then, in my opinion, it becomes irrelevant whether or not the other teams consent or not. No games could be shown including Rangers home or away as they would not be part of the agreed package with the TV company. However, Rangers would not be able to negotiate their own deal to show live games with anyone else either for the same reasons (unless the SFL and member clubs consented which wouldn't realistically happen).

The reason I believe this to be a possibility at all is that in my dim and distant memory I can remember a point in time where Rangers and Celtic secured a greater slice of a TV deal for themselves after threatening something similar and that is why I feel it may be an option he will consider. He wasn't happy about not receiving what he regarded to be suitable recompense for the number of games we would be involved in nor being backed into a corner and forced to consent to it in the first place. He has recently stated he doesn't forgive and forget and reinforced his dislike of all things SPL so I wouldn't be at all surprised if he is considering something like this in the future.

Brian

p.s. Another poster suggested the deal signed was for three years so it may be a moot point right enough but if it isn't then I could certainly picture him using it as a stick to get the club a better deal and/or continue his personal fight with the SPL. just my thoughts as I say.

Agree0 Disagree0

29 Oct 2012 17:22:53
Herald - Charles Green: Craig Whyte is suing Rangers over shares sale

Charles Green has revealed that Craig Whyte is suing the club for money he believes he is entitled to for agreeing to sell his shares to Green's consortium last summer.....

Does this panto never end? {The Ed039's Note - shares in an insolvent company with a sell on value)

Believable6 Unbelievable1

It gave green first shout on the assets for peanuts. Actually Green owns oldco and the oldco debt now as Whyte sold him the shares.......
Smells like a smokescreen.... {The Ed039's Note - he doesn't own oldco because the sales were never sold, green would have required the shares had oldco been saved from liquidation)

Agree3 Disagree3

Just read the article online and this bit worries me:
""We've got a valuation in the share prospectus in excess of £80m. I might be Green, but I'm not a cabbage. It's just rubbish put out by people trying to disrupt the IPO.""
So CG is valuing assets at £80m when no one wanted them 4 months ago and he picked them up for £1.5m. I think this is a dodgy share sale and cannot see how any reputable properly governed exchange could list this nonsense.

Agree10 Disagree3

Whyte conveniently playing panto villain to distract the audience......smoke and mirrors.

Agree7 Disagree1

Whyte and Green in win-win

If sale to newco stands, then share sale will bring in money to pay them off handsomly - about £20 million maybe

If sale to newco is reversed, then floating charge gives whyte £30 million cover...

either way they win, and gers loose even more money from the club - which does not benefit the game on the pitch ?

Agree1 Disagree1

Green told us all Ed that he paid Whyte £1 and £1, 100% profit for his shares. I saw him on telly saying it.
Green's not denying he got the oldco shares, just that he never needed them eventually. {The Ed039's Note - there is more to buying shares than saying you gave someone 2 quid from your pocket, green did not actually purchase the shares of oldco)

Agree0 Disagree1

ED if Green never bought Whyte's shares for £2 then is that him telling more porkies? {The Ed039's Note - I think it was one for the masses, I can assure you, he never acquired Craig Whytes shares, there was a deal in place, but as soon as oldco was consigned to liquidation, he no longer required them)

Agree0 Disagree0

Yes, follow the logic. these guys work to a well known script. they dont need to know each other. they both know the game and how to play it. right, green says rangers are loaded, so dont give him any more money for a while and see what happens.
the first indicator is the sept vat. was it paid ? about 2 weeks to go.
in life there are upward spirals and there are downward spirals. does anybody see an upward one ?

Agree0 Disagree0

29 Oct 2012 17:01:43
I have just read a match report by a Mr Gow on ESPN,now firstly,yesterdays game was no classic,but Rangers won 2 nil,however,Mr Gow was not satisfied with what he witnessed,bearing in mind,he is a supposed unbiased reporter,still the digs,and snide comments,listen,we are in the lowest league,and doing what is required,winning,so why all the baggage,just report fairly,no side issues please,Rangers Always.

Believable11 Unbelievable17

His points are valid.

Agree11 Disagree9

John Gow is a Rangers supporter so if there is any bias it will be towards Rangers.

Agree8 Disagree4

29 Oct 2012 16:11:06
Hearing Rapid Vienna raising the £1m owed for Jelavic.
Nobody paid them yet neither oldco nor newco.
CG said he would settle all footballing debts to get license to play from SFA.
Hearing third quater (end Sept) tax late.
Hearing Celtic owed £50k still.
Don't believe asset sale and leaseback, asset sale would prove D&P sale was undervalued. Also Whyte has a floating charge over assets. I do believe Murray Park has to be sold to save the club.

Believable18 Unbelievable18

Do you believe in Santa and the tooth fairy?

How can Whyte have a floating charge? Whyte's company (oldco) are going into liquidation. Green bought assets for £5.5m, so what did Green pay £5.5m for? Just to say he owns Rangers? Don't be stupid!

Agree7 Disagree7

End of Sep is 2nd quarter - if your source couldn't get this right I would think the rest is a lot of tosh

Agree4 Disagree3

Whyte is being chased by ticketus for 25 million the administrators sold the assets way under value so whyte can ask the court why the assets where sold so cheaply and why they didnt make more of an effort to raise more money to pay off the debts like selling players and stuff thats his defence against paying ticketus and could raise more questions for duffs especially when they knew about the deal

Agree2 Disagree3

29 Oct 2012 15:03:37
Listened to CG today on T-Sport. He seems to come across as very open and honest about all things Rangers. Lets hope its not all talk and he delivers on all fronts. Optimistic at the moment.. CheltBlue

Believable15 Unbelievable21

You ever watched cowboy and Indian films? "Green man speak with forked tongue"

Agree21 Disagree12

Aye spoke well saying he's not leaving til yous have won the European cup and now he said he met whyte 4 times instead of 0nce .henke7

Agree19 Disagree5

You need to have a good memory to be a good liar.

Green does not have a good memory.

Agree17 Disagree0

This man certainly is charmed When he arrived he promised honesty and transparency. He has been shown up in a few lies and yet the Gers fans (probably motivated by their desire to keep the club alive) still trust him Be careful many people can talk a good game (and thats where I put him) but when its time to deliver .......

Agree14 Disagree3

Charles Green stated this during the interview, hope all you bears get this now.This is also reported in a summary in the Herald Scotland by a Rangers man summarizing the interview. Once again the new CEO has stated that Rangers history was broken with the formation of the NEWCO.

"His consortium would have paid £3m more to save oldco because then Rangers would have had an unbroken history"

Agree13 Disagree4

#5 - he said he wanted the cva to maintain European football - the history of the business is broken - it is a newco - it's the history of the club that is unbroken, hence the share transfer from SPL to SFL - he said absolutely nothing that contradicts this basic fact

Agree6 Disagree10

Did he ever explain his comedy howler he made when he said theirs 3 spl clubs already been liquidated and re joined the spl since it began ?? did he name the clubs ??

Agree2 Disagree1

@6. The SPL clubs (all 12 including Rangers) voted not to transfer the Rangers share to Sevco and agreed that the share should pass to Dundee (hence the reason why they are now playing in the SPL). Sevco applied to join the SFL which they were allowed to do and are now playing in the SFL3. After acceptance into the SFL, before they were allowed to play a game (Ramsden's Cup vs Brechin) they had to apply for membership of the SFA. Which they were, with conditions of entry.
Doesn't sound like an unbroken history of the club to me.
Al

Agree2 Disagree2

Alot of celtic fans going out of there way to follow rangers? even as far as tuning into to listen to CG watching our games and visiting rangers web sites. why's that since they state that we are a newco a brand new club but hit us with the same b*le oh sorry they call banter as oldco...mark.

Agree3 Disagree3

@9 come on, this celtic and rangers. you will be shown no mercy. if celtic beat rangers 99-0 id go home pi%%ed off it wasnt 101.

Agree1 Disagree2

29 Oct 2012 14:39:45
Yet again the players the same ones he blames all the time got McCoist out of trouble yesterday, winning is not enough and I know I will get ripped for saying that but if he cant dominate games against what will happen next season and the following seasons if we get promoted, get rid of him now ffs hes a clown

Believable16 Unbelievable12

Central defence at ibrox is a shambles

Agree4 Disagree1

29 Oct 2012 14:31:55
Worrying times indeed, most of the posts on here are "whats going on" with either money or players, no none knows anything for sure, why are we bring kept in the dark and lied to? Ive got a really bad feeling about all this.

Believable16 Unbelievable7

29 Oct 2012 10:39:14
Listen bears why are we all going on about Celtic defeat on Saturday???

They were defeated by the best team in the world only a week ago and showed the bravest performance I've seen from them in years......

That was until they played the best team in east Ayrshire they were brave there...


bravery to the Celtic brave hearts the bravery shown was really brave we should try and be brave the next time play.... I mean with the 2 brave defeats things are going great at Celtic park.

Now all they need to do is be brave and defeat st Johnstone and Dundee utd the be the bravest team in the world again.

Remember bhoys be brave on halloween the scary green seat costumes are only costumes there not real monsters..

Great for Scottish football my hoop (pardon the pun)

Jimmy the ger

Believable13 Unbelievable21

Mate, Celtic could've got gubbed 5.0 in Camp Nou for all I care the thing is they've pocketed £22m for playing a minimum of 10 CL games so far, putting them light years away from us.
Think about it in monetary terms , maybe that's where we've went so badly wrong!

Agree22 Disagree9

Wow Jimmy, was that a world record attempt to see how many times you can get the word "brave " into a paragraph without it making sense?

Joeshmo1888

Agree19 Disagree9

The was brave of you joeshmo1888

Think jimmy is referring to how many time Celtic have been called brave for bearing defeated by barca no matter who it was you still got defeated barca killie Ross county doesn't matter you still got beat!

Agree8 Disagree9

@3. Ross County? Wishful thinking i think. It was a draw. James D

Agree4 Disagree1

@3. Not in the cup semi final it wasNt

Agree3 Disagree4

Remember the cowboy films of indians surrounding the wagon train that was barca pounding celtic in the nou camp

Agree2 Disagree2

29 Oct 2012 10:35:06
Any idea why Ian Black was booed yesterday? I watched the match on TV and you could clearly hear "Ian Black, you're a person" chanted repeatedly. I thought it was coming from the Clyde fans but I've been told today it was actually Rangers fans. What did he do? {The Ed039's Note - Seems he had words with some fans who gave him a bit of stick for a poor corner)

Believable8 Unbelievable2

They should make a film of this.

Agree0 Disagree0

 
Change Consent