|
Lurker
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 810,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xThe crazy thing about this draw, it is possible that Celtic could end up winning the League in the match against the other lot (unless I have missed/overlooked something which is quite possible). If Celtic beat Ross County in our first game of the split, along with the other lot failing to take maximum points in their game again Motherwell, it would see Celtic extending the gap by either 8 or 9 points. Take that potential 8 or 9 point gap followed up with Celtic winning the next/last League Glasgow derby, that would see Celtic's lead at the top of the Table to 11 or 12 points with only three League matches remaining. That would see the Huns mathematically out of contention. Although it is highly unlikely to unfold as mentioned, the possibility is still there (as mentioned above - unless I have missed/overlooked something). As Sutherlandbear mentioned last week, one of the reason for the way the draw for split rounds work is to limit the chances of one of the Glasgow sides winning the League against the other Glasgow side due to how volatile the fixture is. So the above scenario was either a huge oversight on the SPFL part, or they are confident that the above scenario won't come into fruition. If it is the latter, then that's a huge gamble on their part. I personally feel/think they decided to take the gamble so not to have back-to-back-to-back succesive Glasgow derby matches. It was payback for the horrendous Cinch deal. Two old firms back to back has been done many a time. There is, no longer, an old firm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xThe crazy thing about this draw, it is possible that Celtic could end up winning the League in the match against the other lot (unless I have missed/overlooked something which is quite possible). If Celtic beat Ross County in our first game of the split, along with the other lot failing to take maximum points in their game again Motherwell, it would see Celtic extending the gap by either 8 or 9 points. Take that potential 8 or 9 point gap followed up with Celtic winning the next/last League Glasgow derby, that would see Celtic's lead at the top of the Table to 11 or 12 points with only three League matches remaining. That would see the Huns mathematically out of contention. Although it is highly unlikely to unfold as mentioned, the possibility is still there (as mentioned above - unless I have missed/overlooked something). As Sutherlandbear mentioned last week, one of the reason for the way the draw for split rounds work is to limit the chances of one of the Glasgow sides winning the League against the other Glasgow side due to how volatile the fixture is. So the above scenario was either a huge oversight on the SPFL part, or they are confident that the above scenario won't come into fruition. If it is the latter, then that's a huge gamble on their part. I personally feel/think they decided to take the gamble so not to have back-to-back-to-back succesive Glasgow derby matches. It was payback for the horrendous Cinch deal. Two old firms back to back has been done many a time. There is, no longer, an old firm. Woeful schoolboy patter Timmy. If not, then why did your rancid mob renew the copyright they co own with Rangers ?
|
|
|
|
|
Lurker
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 810,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xThe crazy thing about this draw, it is possible that Celtic could end up winning the League in the match against the other lot (unless I have missed/overlooked something which is quite possible). If Celtic beat Ross County in our first game of the split, along with the other lot failing to take maximum points in their game again Motherwell, it would see Celtic extending the gap by either 8 or 9 points. Take that potential 8 or 9 point gap followed up with Celtic winning the next/last League Glasgow derby, that would see Celtic's lead at the top of the Table to 11 or 12 points with only three League matches remaining. That would see the Huns mathematically out of contention. Although it is highly unlikely to unfold as mentioned, the possibility is still there (as mentioned above - unless I have missed/overlooked something). As Sutherlandbear mentioned last week, one of the reason for the way the draw for split rounds work is to limit the chances of one of the Glasgow sides winning the League against the other Glasgow side due to how volatile the fixture is. So the above scenario was either a huge oversight on the SPFL part, or they are confident that the above scenario won't come into fruition. If it is the latter, then that's a huge gamble on their part. I personally feel/think they decided to take the gamble so not to have back-to-back-to-back succesive Glasgow derby matches. It was payback for the horrendous Cinch deal. Two old firms back to back has been done many a time. There is, no longer, an old firm. Woeful schoolboy patter Timmy. If not, then why did your rancid mob renew the copyright they co own with Rangers ? It’s not patter, it is fact. The old firm died with Rangers in 2012 and the term is redundant. Scottish football history can’t be changed and no attempt to ignore it can succeed. Your club was not relegated to the bottom tier of the SPFL. The new club applied for and was denied membership of the SPL. It then successfully applied, as a new member, for membership of the Scottish Football League and was placed in the bottom tier. The SPFL along with Celtic now refer to the fixture as the Glasgow Derby. Your clubs fans and the hun parts of the media ignore the fact that the old firm ceased with the demise of the original Rangers and only exists in their deluded minds. The new club (Rangers) has nothing to do with the holding company that owned the club and never had any ownership of the Old Firm name prior to Celtic agreeing to the renewal of the trade mark because the term has commercial value and has mutual benefits. You must find it strange that Celtic never refer to the old firm. Don’t come back with UEFA allowed a maintenance of the history of the old club. It was merely a decision to recognise the previous achievements of the old club whose assets were acquired by a new entity. Someone wrote “The only people that think that Sevco is the same club as the dead club, are either too thick to understand a simple 4 syllable word: Li-qui-day-tion or people who know damn fine well that Sevco is a New club, but it suits their own vested interests to deny this salient fact.”
|
|
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xThe crazy thing about this draw, it is possible that Celtic could end up winning the League in the match against the other lot (unless I have missed/overlooked something which is quite possible). If Celtic beat Ross County in our first game of the split, along with the other lot failing to take maximum points in their game again Motherwell, it would see Celtic extending the gap by either 8 or 9 points. Take that potential 8 or 9 point gap followed up with Celtic winning the next/last League Glasgow derby, that would see Celtic's lead at the top of the Table to 11 or 12 points with only three League matches remaining. That would see the Huns mathematically out of contention. Although it is highly unlikely to unfold as mentioned, the possibility is still there (as mentioned above - unless I have missed/overlooked something). As Sutherlandbear mentioned last week, one of the reason for the way the draw for split rounds work is to limit the chances of one of the Glasgow sides winning the League against the other Glasgow side due to how volatile the fixture is. So the above scenario was either a huge oversight on the SPFL part, or they are confident that the above scenario won't come into fruition. If it is the latter, then that's a huge gamble on their part. I personally feel/think they decided to take the gamble so not to have back-to-back-to-back succesive Glasgow derby matches. It was payback for the horrendous Cinch deal. Two old firms back to back has been done many a time. There is, no longer, an old firm. Woeful schoolboy patter Timmy. If not, then why did your rancid mob renew the copyright they co own with Rangers ? It’s not patter, it is fact. The old firm died with Rangers in 2012 and the term is redundant. Scottish football history can’t be changed and no attempt to ignore it can succeed. Your club was not relegated to the bottom tier of the SPFL. The new club applied for and was denied membership of the SPL. It then successfully applied, as a new member, for membership of the Scottish Football League and was placed in the bottom tier. The SPFL along with Celtic now refer to the fixture as the Glasgow Derby. Your clubs fans and the hun parts of the media ignore the fact that the old firm ceased with the demise of the original Rangers and only exists in their deluded minds. The new club (Rangers) has nothing to do with the holding company that owned the club and never had any ownership of the Old Firm name prior to Celtic agreeing to the renewal of the trade mark because the term has commercial value and has mutual benefits. You must find it strange that Celtic never refer to the old firm. Don’t come back with UEFA allowed a maintenance of the history of the old club. It was merely a decision to recognise the previous achievements of the old club whose assets were acquired by a new entity. Someone wrote “The only people that think that Sevco is the same club as the dead club, are either too thick to understand a simple 4 syllable word: Li-qui-day-tion or people who know damn fine well that Sevco is a New club, but it suits their own vested interests to deny this salient fact.” It wasn’t just UEFA, it was FIFA, SFA, SPFL and the ECA amongst others. Your wet dream is just that. BTW, I find nothing strange that your putrid club does.
|
|
|
|
|
Lurker
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 810,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xThe crazy thing about this draw, it is possible that Celtic could end up winning the League in the match against the other lot (unless I have missed/overlooked something which is quite possible). If Celtic beat Ross County in our first game of the split, along with the other lot failing to take maximum points in their game again Motherwell, it would see Celtic extending the gap by either 8 or 9 points. Take that potential 8 or 9 point gap followed up with Celtic winning the next/last League Glasgow derby, that would see Celtic's lead at the top of the Table to 11 or 12 points with only three League matches remaining. That would see the Huns mathematically out of contention. Although it is highly unlikely to unfold as mentioned, the possibility is still there (as mentioned above - unless I have missed/overlooked something). As Sutherlandbear mentioned last week, one of the reason for the way the draw for split rounds work is to limit the chances of one of the Glasgow sides winning the League against the other Glasgow side due to how volatile the fixture is. So the above scenario was either a huge oversight on the SPFL part, or they are confident that the above scenario won't come into fruition. If it is the latter, then that's a huge gamble on their part. I personally feel/think they decided to take the gamble so not to have back-to-back-to-back succesive Glasgow derby matches. It was payback for the horrendous Cinch deal. Two old firms back to back has been done many a time. There is, no longer, an old firm. Woeful schoolboy patter Timmy. If not, then why did your rancid mob renew the copyright they co own with Rangers ? It’s not patter, it is fact. The old firm died with Rangers in 2012 and the term is redundant. Scottish football history can’t be changed and no attempt to ignore it can succeed. Your club was not relegated to the bottom tier of the SPFL. The new club applied for and was denied membership of the SPL. It then successfully applied, as a new member, for membership of the Scottish Football League and was placed in the bottom tier. The SPFL along with Celtic now refer to the fixture as the Glasgow Derby. Your clubs fans and the hun parts of the media ignore the fact that the old firm ceased with the demise of the original Rangers and only exists in their deluded minds. The new club (Rangers) has nothing to do with the holding company that owned the club and never had any ownership of the Old Firm name prior to Celtic agreeing to the renewal of the trade mark because the term has commercial value and has mutual benefits. You must find it strange that Celtic never refer to the old firm. Don’t come back with UEFA allowed a maintenance of the history of the old club. It was merely a decision to recognise the previous achievements of the old club whose assets were acquired by a new entity. Someone wrote “The only people that think that Sevco is the same club as the dead club, are either too thick to understand a simple 4 syllable word: Li-qui-day-tion or people who know damn fine well that Sevco is a New club, but it suits their own vested interests to deny this salient fact.” It wasn’t just UEFA, it was FIFA, SFA, SPFL and the ECA amongst others. Your wet dream is just that. BTW, I find nothing strange that your putrid club does. LOL. The club is less than 10 years old. The legal entity was the limited liability company that went bust. That is indisputable at law. The shame is the punishment for its fiscal misdeeds was no harsh enough. The club had to be reformed within a new company structure. Translation, new club. The effect, no old firm. Walter Smith acknowledged that when he said "We wish the new Rangers Football Club every good fortune"
|
|
|
|
|
sydneyfc1987
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 10K,
Visits: 0
|
lol lurker and sutherland bear going at it feels so forced. +x+x+x+x+xThe crazy thing about this draw, it is possible that Celtic could end up winning the League in the match against the other lot (unless I have missed/overlooked something which is quite possible). If Celtic beat Ross County in our first game of the split, along with the other lot failing to take maximum points in their game again Motherwell, it would see Celtic extending the gap by either 8 or 9 points. Take that potential 8 or 9 point gap followed up with Celtic winning the next/last League Glasgow derby, that would see Celtic's lead at the top of the Table to 11 or 12 points with only three League matches remaining. That would see the Huns mathematically out of contention. Although it is highly unlikely to unfold as mentioned, the possibility is still there (as mentioned above - unless I have missed/overlooked something). As Sutherlandbear mentioned last week, one of the reason for the way the draw for split rounds work is to limit the chances of one of the Glasgow sides winning the League against the other Glasgow side due to how volatile the fixture is. So the above scenario was either a huge oversight on the SPFL part, or they are confident that the above scenario won't come into fruition. If it is the latter, then that's a huge gamble on their part. I personally feel/think they decided to take the gamble so not to have back-to-back-to-back succesive Glasgow derby matches. It was payback for the horrendous Cinch deal. Two old firms back to back has been done many a time. There is, no longer, an old firm. Woeful schoolboy patter Timmy. If not, then why did your rancid mob renew the copyright they co own with Rangers ? The new club (Rangers) has nothing to do with the holding company that owned the club and never had any ownership of the Old Firm name prior to Celtic agreeing to the renewal of the trade mark because the term has commercial value and has mutual benefits. You must find it strange that Celtic never refer to the old firm. So it's not the old firm anymore, until someone gives Celtic money, in which it becomes the old firm?
(VAR) IS NAVY BLUE
|
|
|
|
|
Lurker
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 810,
Visits: 0
|
+xlol lurker and sutherland bear going at it feels so forced. +x+x+x+x+xThe crazy thing about this draw, it is possible that Celtic could end up winning the League in the match against the other lot (unless I have missed/overlooked something which is quite possible). If Celtic beat Ross County in our first game of the split, along with the other lot failing to take maximum points in their game again Motherwell, it would see Celtic extending the gap by either 8 or 9 points. Take that potential 8 or 9 point gap followed up with Celtic winning the next/last League Glasgow derby, that would see Celtic's lead at the top of the Table to 11 or 12 points with only three League matches remaining. That would see the Huns mathematically out of contention. Although it is highly unlikely to unfold as mentioned, the possibility is still there (as mentioned above - unless I have missed/overlooked something). As Sutherlandbear mentioned last week, one of the reason for the way the draw for split rounds work is to limit the chances of one of the Glasgow sides winning the League against the other Glasgow side due to how volatile the fixture is. So the above scenario was either a huge oversight on the SPFL part, or they are confident that the above scenario won't come into fruition. If it is the latter, then that's a huge gamble on their part. I personally feel/think they decided to take the gamble so not to have back-to-back-to-back succesive Glasgow derby matches. It was payback for the horrendous Cinch deal. Two old firms back to back has been done many a time. There is, no longer, an old firm. Woeful schoolboy patter Timmy. If not, then why did your rancid mob renew the copyright they co own with Rangers ? The new club (Rangers) has nothing to do with the holding company that owned the club and never had any ownership of the Old Firm name prior to Celtic agreeing to the renewal of the trade mark because the term has commercial value and has mutual benefits. You must find it strange that Celtic never refer to the old firm. So it's not the old firm anymore, until someone gives Celtic money, in which it becomes the old firm? It can never be the old firm again, despite how much The Rangers want it to be,
|
|
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+xlol lurker and sutherland bear going at it feels so forced. +x+x+x+x+xThe crazy thing about this draw, it is possible that Celtic could end up winning the League in the match against the other lot (unless I have missed/overlooked something which is quite possible). If Celtic beat Ross County in our first game of the split, along with the other lot failing to take maximum points in their game again Motherwell, it would see Celtic extending the gap by either 8 or 9 points. Take that potential 8 or 9 point gap followed up with Celtic winning the next/last League Glasgow derby, that would see Celtic's lead at the top of the Table to 11 or 12 points with only three League matches remaining. That would see the Huns mathematically out of contention. Although it is highly unlikely to unfold as mentioned, the possibility is still there (as mentioned above - unless I have missed/overlooked something). As Sutherlandbear mentioned last week, one of the reason for the way the draw for split rounds work is to limit the chances of one of the Glasgow sides winning the League against the other Glasgow side due to how volatile the fixture is. So the above scenario was either a huge oversight on the SPFL part, or they are confident that the above scenario won't come into fruition. If it is the latter, then that's a huge gamble on their part. I personally feel/think they decided to take the gamble so not to have back-to-back-to-back succesive Glasgow derby matches. It was payback for the horrendous Cinch deal. Two old firms back to back has been done many a time. There is, no longer, an old firm. Woeful schoolboy patter Timmy. If not, then why did your rancid mob renew the copyright they co own with Rangers ? The new club (Rangers) has nothing to do with the holding company that owned the club and never had any ownership of the Old Firm name prior to Celtic agreeing to the renewal of the trade mark because the term has commercial value and has mutual benefits. You must find it strange that Celtic never refer to the old firm. So it's not the old firm anymore, until someone gives Celtic money, in which it becomes the old firm? They manage to contradict themselves at everything they spout.
|
|
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe crazy thing about this draw, it is possible that Celtic could end up winning the League in the match against the other lot (unless I have missed/overlooked something which is quite possible). If Celtic beat Ross County in our first game of the split, along with the other lot failing to take maximum points in their game again Motherwell, it would see Celtic extending the gap by either 8 or 9 points. Take that potential 8 or 9 point gap followed up with Celtic winning the next/last League Glasgow derby, that would see Celtic's lead at the top of the Table to 11 or 12 points with only three League matches remaining. That would see the Huns mathematically out of contention. Although it is highly unlikely to unfold as mentioned, the possibility is still there (as mentioned above - unless I have missed/overlooked something). As Sutherlandbear mentioned last week, one of the reason for the way the draw for split rounds work is to limit the chances of one of the Glasgow sides winning the League against the other Glasgow side due to how volatile the fixture is. So the above scenario was either a huge oversight on the SPFL part, or they are confident that the above scenario won't come into fruition. If it is the latter, then that's a huge gamble on their part. I personally feel/think they decided to take the gamble so not to have back-to-back-to-back succesive Glasgow derby matches. It was payback for the horrendous Cinch deal. Two old firms back to back has been done many a time. There is, no longer, an old firm. Woeful schoolboy patter Timmy. If not, then why did your rancid mob renew the copyright they co own with Rangers ? It’s not patter, it is fact. The old firm died with Rangers in 2012 and the term is redundant. Scottish football history can’t be changed and no attempt to ignore it can succeed. Your club was not relegated to the bottom tier of the SPFL. The new club applied for and was denied membership of the SPL. It then successfully applied, as a new member, for membership of the Scottish Football League and was placed in the bottom tier. The SPFL along with Celtic now refer to the fixture as the Glasgow Derby. Your clubs fans and the hun parts of the media ignore the fact that the old firm ceased with the demise of the original Rangers and only exists in their deluded minds. The new club (Rangers) has nothing to do with the holding company that owned the club and never had any ownership of the Old Firm name prior to Celtic agreeing to the renewal of the trade mark because the term has commercial value and has mutual benefits. You must find it strange that Celtic never refer to the old firm. Don’t come back with UEFA allowed a maintenance of the history of the old club. It was merely a decision to recognise the previous achievements of the old club whose assets were acquired by a new entity. Someone wrote “The only people that think that Sevco is the same club as the dead club, are either too thick to understand a simple 4 syllable word: Li-qui-day-tion or people who know damn fine well that Sevco is a New club, but it suits their own vested interests to deny this salient fact.” It wasn’t just UEFA, it was FIFA, SFA, SPFL and the ECA amongst others. Your wet dream is just that. BTW, I find nothing strange that your putrid club does. LOL. The club is less than 10 years old. The legal entity was the limited liability company that went bust. That is indisputable at law. The shame is the punishment for its fiscal misdeeds was no harsh enough. The club had to be reformed within a new company structure. Translation, new club. The effect, no old firm. Walter Smith acknowledged that when he said "We wish the new Rangers Football Club every good fortune" But speaking about the recent dramatic events in the Scottish game for the first time, Desmond insisted Rangers will not be in the basement of the game for too long.Giving a rare interview at the Dunhill Links tournament at St Andrews, Desmond, left, said: “Rangers is a fantastic club with a great history.“With the support they have, they will come back. They will, in not too long a time, be back in the SPL. I have no doubt about that. https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/349917/Desmond-We-need-a-strong-Gers
|
|
|
|
|
Lurker
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 810,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe crazy thing about this draw, it is possible that Celtic could end up winning the League in the match against the other lot (unless I have missed/overlooked something which is quite possible). If Celtic beat Ross County in our first game of the split, along with the other lot failing to take maximum points in their game again Motherwell, it would see Celtic extending the gap by either 8 or 9 points. Take that potential 8 or 9 point gap followed up with Celtic winning the next/last League Glasgow derby, that would see Celtic's lead at the top of the Table to 11 or 12 points with only three League matches remaining. That would see the Huns mathematically out of contention. Although it is highly unlikely to unfold as mentioned, the possibility is still there (as mentioned above - unless I have missed/overlooked something). As Sutherlandbear mentioned last week, one of the reason for the way the draw for split rounds work is to limit the chances of one of the Glasgow sides winning the League against the other Glasgow side due to how volatile the fixture is. So the above scenario was either a huge oversight on the SPFL part, or they are confident that the above scenario won't come into fruition. If it is the latter, then that's a huge gamble on their part. I personally feel/think they decided to take the gamble so not to have back-to-back-to-back succesive Glasgow derby matches. It was payback for the horrendous Cinch deal. Two old firms back to back has been done many a time. There is, no longer, an old firm. Woeful schoolboy patter Timmy. If not, then why did your rancid mob renew the copyright they co own with Rangers ? It’s not patter, it is fact. The old firm died with Rangers in 2012 and the term is redundant. Scottish football history can’t be changed and no attempt to ignore it can succeed. Your club was not relegated to the bottom tier of the SPFL. The new club applied for and was denied membership of the SPL. It then successfully applied, as a new member, for membership of the Scottish Football League and was placed in the bottom tier. The SPFL along with Celtic now refer to the fixture as the Glasgow Derby. Your clubs fans and the hun parts of the media ignore the fact that the old firm ceased with the demise of the original Rangers and only exists in their deluded minds. The new club (Rangers) has nothing to do with the holding company that owned the club and never had any ownership of the Old Firm name prior to Celtic agreeing to the renewal of the trade mark because the term has commercial value and has mutual benefits. You must find it strange that Celtic never refer to the old firm. Don’t come back with UEFA allowed a maintenance of the history of the old club. It was merely a decision to recognise the previous achievements of the old club whose assets were acquired by a new entity. Someone wrote “The only people that think that Sevco is the same club as the dead club, are either too thick to understand a simple 4 syllable word: Li-qui-day-tion or people who know damn fine well that Sevco is a New club, but it suits their own vested interests to deny this salient fact.” It wasn’t just UEFA, it was FIFA, SFA, SPFL and the ECA amongst others. Your wet dream is just that. BTW, I find nothing strange that your putrid club does. LOL. The club is less than 10 years old. The legal entity was the limited liability company that went bust. That is indisputable at law. The shame is the punishment for its fiscal misdeeds was no harsh enough. The club had to be reformed within a new company structure. Translation, new club. The effect, no old firm. Walter Smith acknowledged that when he said "We wish the new Rangers Football Club every good fortune" But speaking about the recent dramatic events in the Scottish game for the first time, Desmond insisted Rangers will not be in the basement of the game for too long.Giving a rare interview at the Dunhill Links tournament at St Andrews, Desmond, left, said: “Rangers is a fantastic club with a great history.“With the support they have, they will come back. They will, in not too long a time, be back in the SPL. I have no doubt about that. https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/349917/Desmond-We-need-a-strong-Gers I agree, Scottish football needs a strong Rangers, its just a shame about its brainless and bigoted supporters, Billy Boy.
|
|
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe crazy thing about this draw, it is possible that Celtic could end up winning the League in the match against the other lot (unless I have missed/overlooked something which is quite possible). If Celtic beat Ross County in our first game of the split, along with the other lot failing to take maximum points in their game again Motherwell, it would see Celtic extending the gap by either 8 or 9 points. Take that potential 8 or 9 point gap followed up with Celtic winning the next/last League Glasgow derby, that would see Celtic's lead at the top of the Table to 11 or 12 points with only three League matches remaining. That would see the Huns mathematically out of contention. Although it is highly unlikely to unfold as mentioned, the possibility is still there (as mentioned above - unless I have missed/overlooked something). As Sutherlandbear mentioned last week, one of the reason for the way the draw for split rounds work is to limit the chances of one of the Glasgow sides winning the League against the other Glasgow side due to how volatile the fixture is. So the above scenario was either a huge oversight on the SPFL part, or they are confident that the above scenario won't come into fruition. If it is the latter, then that's a huge gamble on their part. I personally feel/think they decided to take the gamble so not to have back-to-back-to-back succesive Glasgow derby matches. It was payback for the horrendous Cinch deal. Two old firms back to back has been done many a time. There is, no longer, an old firm. Woeful schoolboy patter Timmy. If not, then why did your rancid mob renew the copyright they co own with Rangers ? It’s not patter, it is fact. The old firm died with Rangers in 2012 and the term is redundant. Scottish football history can’t be changed and no attempt to ignore it can succeed. Your club was not relegated to the bottom tier of the SPFL. The new club applied for and was denied membership of the SPL. It then successfully applied, as a new member, for membership of the Scottish Football League and was placed in the bottom tier. The SPFL along with Celtic now refer to the fixture as the Glasgow Derby. Your clubs fans and the hun parts of the media ignore the fact that the old firm ceased with the demise of the original Rangers and only exists in their deluded minds. The new club (Rangers) has nothing to do with the holding company that owned the club and never had any ownership of the Old Firm name prior to Celtic agreeing to the renewal of the trade mark because the term has commercial value and has mutual benefits. You must find it strange that Celtic never refer to the old firm. Don’t come back with UEFA allowed a maintenance of the history of the old club. It was merely a decision to recognise the previous achievements of the old club whose assets were acquired by a new entity. Someone wrote “The only people that think that Sevco is the same club as the dead club, are either too thick to understand a simple 4 syllable word: Li-qui-day-tion or people who know damn fine well that Sevco is a New club, but it suits their own vested interests to deny this salient fact.” It wasn’t just UEFA, it was FIFA, SFA, SPFL and the ECA amongst others. Your wet dream is just that. BTW, I find nothing strange that your putrid club does. LOL. The club is less than 10 years old. The legal entity was the limited liability company that went bust. That is indisputable at law. The shame is the punishment for its fiscal misdeeds was no harsh enough. The club had to be reformed within a new company structure. Translation, new club. The effect, no old firm. Walter Smith acknowledged that when he said "We wish the new Rangers Football Club every good fortune" But speaking about the recent dramatic events in the Scottish game for the first time, Desmond insisted Rangers will not be in the basement of the game for too long.Giving a rare interview at the Dunhill Links tournament at St Andrews, Desmond, left, said: “Rangers is a fantastic club with a great history.“With the support they have, they will come back. They will, in not too long a time, be back in the SPL. I have no doubt about that. https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/349917/Desmond-We-need-a-strong-Gers I agree, Scottish football needs a strong Rangers, its just a shame about its brainless and bigoted supporters, Billy Boy. Seriously , you think your lot are not bigots and brainless ?
|
|
|
|
|
CanberraHarry
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.1K,
Visits: 0
|
I find the whole Rangers aren’t Rangers thing quite odd. As a lawyer myself, sure, I understand the legal argument that says they are a different legal entity. As a human being and passionate sports fan, I say, so what? If hundreds of thousands of people want to support a club, give it the same name, and, most importantly, still have the same feeling in their heart, who is anyone to tell them otherwise? If boys can be girls and girls can be boys etc, who is anyone else to say that a certain group of fans can’t say who their club is or what it means to them? It seems a bit needlessly spiteful to say otherwise. But hey, I know the whole history of these two clubs is based on spite and vitriol, on both sides.
|
|
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+xI find the whole Rangers aren’t Rangers thing quite odd. As a lawyer myself, sure, I understand the legal argument that says they are a different legal entity. As a human being and passionate sports fan, I say, so what? If hundreds of thousands of people want to support a club, give it the same name, and, most importantly, still have the same feeling in their heart, who is anyone to tell them otherwise? If boys can be girls and girls can be boys etc, who is anyone else to say that a certain group of fans can’t say who their club is or what it means to them? It seems a bit needlessly spiteful to say otherwise. But hey, I know the whole history of these two clubs is based on spite and vitriol, on both sides. The thing is Harry, hundreds and hundreds of clubs around the world change their holding company as Celtic have done a few times themselves. Everyone in Scotland was told "you can't liquidate a football team," The holding company, yes. If we really did die, then they would have nothing to talk about !
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+xI find the whole Rangers aren’t Rangers thing quite odd. As a lawyer myself, sure, I understand the legal argument that says they are a different legal entity. As a human being and passionate sports fan, I say, so what? If hundreds of thousands of people want to support a club, give it the same name, and, most importantly, still have the same feeling in their heart, who is anyone to tell them otherwise? If boys can be girls and girls can be boys etc, who is anyone else to say that a certain group of fans can’t say who their club is or what it means to them? It seems a bit needlessly spiteful to say otherwise. But hey, I know the whole history of these two clubs is based on spite and vitriol, on both sides. Hahahahah you should have a chat to a few new dawn Aleague fans on this site, let alone the brainstrust over at Plastic FA headquarters... CH....... They can fill you in in exactly who can tell who what.... lol
|
|
|
|
|
Lurker
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 810,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe crazy thing about this draw, it is possible that Celtic could end up winning the League in the match against the other lot (unless I have missed/overlooked something which is quite possible). If Celtic beat Ross County in our first game of the split, along with the other lot failing to take maximum points in their game again Motherwell, it would see Celtic extending the gap by either 8 or 9 points. Take that potential 8 or 9 point gap followed up with Celtic winning the next/last League Glasgow derby, that would see Celtic's lead at the top of the Table to 11 or 12 points with only three League matches remaining. That would see the Huns mathematically out of contention. Although it is highly unlikely to unfold as mentioned, the possibility is still there (as mentioned above - unless I have missed/overlooked something). As Sutherlandbear mentioned last week, one of the reason for the way the draw for split rounds work is to limit the chances of one of the Glasgow sides winning the League against the other Glasgow side due to how volatile the fixture is. So the above scenario was either a huge oversight on the SPFL part, or they are confident that the above scenario won't come into fruition. If it is the latter, then that's a huge gamble on their part. I personally feel/think they decided to take the gamble so not to have back-to-back-to-back succesive Glasgow derby matches. It was payback for the horrendous Cinch deal. Two old firms back to back has been done many a time. There is, no longer, an old firm. Woeful schoolboy patter Timmy. If not, then why did your rancid mob renew the copyright they co own with Rangers ? It’s not patter, it is fact. The old firm died with Rangers in 2012 and the term is redundant. Scottish football history can’t be changed and no attempt to ignore it can succeed. Your club was not relegated to the bottom tier of the SPFL. The new club applied for and was denied membership of the SPL. It then successfully applied, as a new member, for membership of the Scottish Football League and was placed in the bottom tier. The SPFL along with Celtic now refer to the fixture as the Glasgow Derby. Your clubs fans and the hun parts of the media ignore the fact that the old firm ceased with the demise of the original Rangers and only exists in their deluded minds. The new club (Rangers) has nothing to do with the holding company that owned the club and never had any ownership of the Old Firm name prior to Celtic agreeing to the renewal of the trade mark because the term has commercial value and has mutual benefits. You must find it strange that Celtic never refer to the old firm. Don’t come back with UEFA allowed a maintenance of the history of the old club. It was merely a decision to recognise the previous achievements of the old club whose assets were acquired by a new entity. Someone wrote “The only people that think that Sevco is the same club as the dead club, are either too thick to understand a simple 4 syllable word: Li-qui-day-tion or people who know damn fine well that Sevco is a New club, but it suits their own vested interests to deny this salient fact.” It wasn’t just UEFA, it was FIFA, SFA, SPFL and the ECA amongst others. Your wet dream is just that. BTW, I find nothing strange that your putrid club does. LOL. The club is less than 10 years old. The legal entity was the limited liability company that went bust. That is indisputable at law. The shame is the punishment for its fiscal misdeeds was no harsh enough. The club had to be reformed within a new company structure. Translation, new club. The effect, no old firm. Walter Smith acknowledged that when he said "We wish the new Rangers Football Club every good fortune" But speaking about the recent dramatic events in the Scottish game for the first time, Desmond insisted Rangers will not be in the basement of the game for too long.Giving a rare interview at the Dunhill Links tournament at St Andrews, Desmond, left, said: “Rangers is a fantastic club with a great history.“With the support they have, they will come back. They will, in not too long a time, be back in the SPL. I have no doubt about that. https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/349917/Desmond-We-need-a-strong-Gers I agree, Scottish football needs a strong Rangers, its just a shame about its brainless and bigoted supporters, Billy Boy. Seriously , you think your lot are not bigots and brainless ? Bigots. Nowhere near the extent of Rangers fans. Brainless: Celtic fans don’t throw broken bottles onto the pitch nor do they fight themselves with bottles when celebrating in George Square. You forget that Celtic fans were voted the best in the world in the Best 2017 FIFA awards. Anyway, let’s hope for an entertaining and trouble free game tonight.
|
|
|
|
|
Lurker
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 810,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xI find the whole Rangers aren’t Rangers thing quite odd. As a lawyer myself, sure, I understand the legal argument that says they are a different legal entity. As a human being and passionate sports fan, I say, so what? If hundreds of thousands of people want to support a club, give it the same name, and, most importantly, still have the same feeling in their heart, who is anyone to tell them otherwise? If boys can be girls and girls can be boys etc, who is anyone else to say that a certain group of fans can’t say who their club is or what it means to them? It seems a bit needlessly spiteful to say otherwise. But hey, I know the whole history of these two clubs is based on spite and vitriol, on both sides. The thing is Harry, hundreds and hundreds of clubs around the world change their holding company as Celtic have done a few times themselves. Everyone in Scotland was told "you can't liquidate a football team," The holding company, yes.If we really did die, then they would have nothing to talk about ! They can't change their holding company when it is liquidated. The team dies with them. A new team with the same name can be reformed. That is what happened with Rangers and they were excluded from the SPL as a result of it. And you believed what you were told? Think about it. Without owners there is no team.
|
|
|
|
|
Lurker
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 810,
Visits: 0
|
+xI find the whole Rangers aren’t Rangers thing quite odd. As a lawyer myself, sure, I understand the legal argument that says they are a different legal entity. As a human being and passionate sports fan, I say, so what? If hundreds of thousands of people want to support a club, give it the same name, and, most importantly, still have the same feeling in their heart, who is anyone to tell them otherwise? If boys can be girls and girls can be boys etc, who is anyone else to say that a certain group of fans can’t say who their club is or what it means to them? It seems a bit needlessly spiteful to say otherwise. But hey, I know the whole history of these two clubs is based on spite and vitriol, on both sides. Of course Rangers are Rangers. They are just a new Rangers, playing out of their old stadium, who have only won one SPL trophy since their rise from the dead. Enjoy the semi final tonight.
|
|
|
|
|
CanberraHarry
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xI find the whole Rangers aren’t Rangers thing quite odd. As a lawyer myself, sure, I understand the legal argument that says they are a different legal entity. As a human being and passionate sports fan, I say, so what? If hundreds of thousands of people want to support a club, give it the same name, and, most importantly, still have the same feeling in their heart, who is anyone to tell them otherwise? If boys can be girls and girls can be boys etc, who is anyone else to say that a certain group of fans can’t say who their club is or what it means to them? It seems a bit needlessly spiteful to say otherwise. But hey, I know the whole history of these two clubs is based on spite and vitriol, on both sides. Of course Rangers are Rangers. They are just a new Rangers, playing out of their old stadium, who have only won one SPL trophy since their rise from the dead. Enjoy the semi final tonight. Of course I will enjoy it. Very happy Kayo are showing it. Kayo has been great this season, by the way. I hope Celtic wins and Ange’s reputation is solidified further. He is doing well at a big club, handling the pressure-cooker atmosphere of Glasgow like a boss, and many Celtic fans have quite taken to him (this could sour quickly though, a fickle bunch it seems). I understand the romanticism of the Cup but the League is the big prize (stating the obvious) as that will most likely put Ange and Celtic into the group stage of the Champions League (coefficients and all that going well) and that is the football I am really looking forward to. Ange’s Celtic going up against Manchester United or Real Madrid - wow! Could be a six nil drubbing or could be a shock win, who knows?!
|
|
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xI find the whole Rangers aren’t Rangers thing quite odd. As a lawyer myself, sure, I understand the legal argument that says they are a different legal entity. As a human being and passionate sports fan, I say, so what? If hundreds of thousands of people want to support a club, give it the same name, and, most importantly, still have the same feeling in their heart, who is anyone to tell them otherwise? If boys can be girls and girls can be boys etc, who is anyone else to say that a certain group of fans can’t say who their club is or what it means to them? It seems a bit needlessly spiteful to say otherwise. But hey, I know the whole history of these two clubs is based on spite and vitriol, on both sides. The thing is Harry, hundreds and hundreds of clubs around the world change their holding company as Celtic have done a few times themselves. Everyone in Scotland was told "you can't liquidate a football team," The holding company, yes.If we really did die, then they would have nothing to talk about ! They can't change their holding company when it is liquidated. The team dies with them. A new team with the same name can be reformed. That is what happened with Rangers and they were excluded from the SPL as a result of it. And you believed what you were told? Think about it. Without owners there is no team. The holding company is NOT liquidated. And you keep believing your fantasists in Scotland. Even Dermott knows the score.
|
|
|
|
|
Lurker
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 810,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xI find the whole Rangers aren’t Rangers thing quite odd. As a lawyer myself, sure, I understand the legal argument that says they are a different legal entity. As a human being and passionate sports fan, I say, so what? If hundreds of thousands of people want to support a club, give it the same name, and, most importantly, still have the same feeling in their heart, who is anyone to tell them otherwise? If boys can be girls and girls can be boys etc, who is anyone else to say that a certain group of fans can’t say who their club is or what it means to them? It seems a bit needlessly spiteful to say otherwise. But hey, I know the whole history of these two clubs is based on spite and vitriol, on both sides. The thing is Harry, hundreds and hundreds of clubs around the world change their holding company as Celtic have done a few times themselves. Everyone in Scotland was told "you can't liquidate a football team," The holding company, yes.If we really did die, then they would have nothing to talk about ! They can't change their holding company when it is liquidated. The team dies with them. A new team with the same name can be reformed. That is what happened with Rangers and they were excluded from the SPL as a result of it. And you believed what you were told? Think about it. Without owners there is no team. The holding company is NOT liquidated. And you keep believing your fantasists in Scotland. Even Dermott knows the score. This is above your pay grade Billy. I suppose you think it is ok for Bobby Madden to be refereeing a Glasgow Derby as well?
|
|
|
|
|
tsf
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
Love rangers and Celtic fans. Have a complete monopoly on the league yet both think they’re hard done by 😂
|
|
|
|
|
sydneyfc1987
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 10K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe crazy thing about this draw, it is possible that Celtic could end up winning the League in the match against the other lot (unless I have missed/overlooked something which is quite possible). If Celtic beat Ross County in our first game of the split, along with the other lot failing to take maximum points in their game again Motherwell, it would see Celtic extending the gap by either 8 or 9 points. Take that potential 8 or 9 point gap followed up with Celtic winning the next/last League Glasgow derby, that would see Celtic's lead at the top of the Table to 11 or 12 points with only three League matches remaining. That would see the Huns mathematically out of contention. Although it is highly unlikely to unfold as mentioned, the possibility is still there (as mentioned above - unless I have missed/overlooked something). As Sutherlandbear mentioned last week, one of the reason for the way the draw for split rounds work is to limit the chances of one of the Glasgow sides winning the League against the other Glasgow side due to how volatile the fixture is. So the above scenario was either a huge oversight on the SPFL part, or they are confident that the above scenario won't come into fruition. If it is the latter, then that's a huge gamble on their part. I personally feel/think they decided to take the gamble so not to have back-to-back-to-back succesive Glasgow derby matches. It was payback for the horrendous Cinch deal. Two old firms back to back has been done many a time. There is, no longer, an old firm. Woeful schoolboy patter Timmy. If not, then why did your rancid mob renew the copyright they co own with Rangers ? It’s not patter, it is fact. The old firm died with Rangers in 2012 and the term is redundant. Scottish football history can’t be changed and no attempt to ignore it can succeed. Your club was not relegated to the bottom tier of the SPFL. The new club applied for and was denied membership of the SPL. It then successfully applied, as a new member, for membership of the Scottish Football League and was placed in the bottom tier. The SPFL along with Celtic now refer to the fixture as the Glasgow Derby. Your clubs fans and the hun parts of the media ignore the fact that the old firm ceased with the demise of the original Rangers and only exists in their deluded minds. The new club (Rangers) has nothing to do with the holding company that owned the club and never had any ownership of the Old Firm name prior to Celtic agreeing to the renewal of the trade mark because the term has commercial value and has mutual benefits. You must find it strange that Celtic never refer to the old firm. Don’t come back with UEFA allowed a maintenance of the history of the old club. It was merely a decision to recognise the previous achievements of the old club whose assets were acquired by a new entity. Someone wrote “The only people that think that Sevco is the same club as the dead club, are either too thick to understand a simple 4 syllable word: Li-qui-day-tion or people who know damn fine well that Sevco is a New club, but it suits their own vested interests to deny this salient fact.” It wasn’t just UEFA, it was FIFA, SFA, SPFL and the ECA amongst others. Your wet dream is just that. BTW, I find nothing strange that your putrid club does. LOL. The club is less than 10 years old. The legal entity was the limited liability company that went bust. That is indisputable at law. The shame is the punishment for its fiscal misdeeds was no harsh enough. The club had to be reformed within a new company structure. Translation, new club. The effect, no old firm. Walter Smith acknowledged that when he said "We wish the new Rangers Football Club every good fortune" But speaking about the recent dramatic events in the Scottish game for the first time, Desmond insisted Rangers will not be in the basement of the game for too long.Giving a rare interview at the Dunhill Links tournament at St Andrews, Desmond, left, said: “Rangers is a fantastic club with a great history.“With the support they have, they will come back. They will, in not too long a time, be back in the SPL. I have no doubt about that. https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/349917/Desmond-We-need-a-strong-Gers I agree, Scottish football needs a strong Rangers, its just a shame about its brainless and bigoted supporters, Billy Boy. Seriously , you think your lot are not bigots and brainless ? Bigots. Nowhere near the extent of Rangers fans. Brainless: Celtic fans don’t throw broken bottles onto the pitch nor do they fight themselves with bottles when celebrating in George Square. You forget that Celtic fans were voted the best in the world in the Best 2017 FIFA awards. Anyway, let’s hope for an entertaining and trouble free game tonight. From the outside looking in I'd say both clubs are sharing in/encouraging the same bigotry. And football fans are generally brainless as a rule so nobody can claim not to have that as an element of the fanbase.
(VAR) IS NAVY BLUE
|
|
|
|
|
Lurker
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 810,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe crazy thing about this draw, it is possible that Celtic could end up winning the League in the match against the other lot (unless I have missed/overlooked something which is quite possible). If Celtic beat Ross County in our first game of the split, along with the other lot failing to take maximum points in their game again Motherwell, it would see Celtic extending the gap by either 8 or 9 points. Take that potential 8 or 9 point gap followed up with Celtic winning the next/last League Glasgow derby, that would see Celtic's lead at the top of the Table to 11 or 12 points with only three League matches remaining. That would see the Huns mathematically out of contention. Although it is highly unlikely to unfold as mentioned, the possibility is still there (as mentioned above - unless I have missed/overlooked something). As Sutherlandbear mentioned last week, one of the reason for the way the draw for split rounds work is to limit the chances of one of the Glasgow sides winning the League against the other Glasgow side due to how volatile the fixture is. So the above scenario was either a huge oversight on the SPFL part, or they are confident that the above scenario won't come into fruition. If it is the latter, then that's a huge gamble on their part. I personally feel/think they decided to take the gamble so not to have back-to-back-to-back succesive Glasgow derby matches. It was payback for the horrendous Cinch deal. Two old firms back to back has been done many a time. There is, no longer, an old firm. Woeful schoolboy patter Timmy. If not, then why did your rancid mob renew the copyright they co own with Rangers ? It’s not patter, it is fact. The old firm died with Rangers in 2012 and the term is redundant. Scottish football history can’t be changed and no attempt to ignore it can succeed. Your club was not relegated to the bottom tier of the SPFL. The new club applied for and was denied membership of the SPL. It then successfully applied, as a new member, for membership of the Scottish Football League and was placed in the bottom tier. The SPFL along with Celtic now refer to the fixture as the Glasgow Derby. Your clubs fans and the hun parts of the media ignore the fact that the old firm ceased with the demise of the original Rangers and only exists in their deluded minds. The new club (Rangers) has nothing to do with the holding company that owned the club and never had any ownership of the Old Firm name prior to Celtic agreeing to the renewal of the trade mark because the term has commercial value and has mutual benefits. You must find it strange that Celtic never refer to the old firm. Don’t come back with UEFA allowed a maintenance of the history of the old club. It was merely a decision to recognise the previous achievements of the old club whose assets were acquired by a new entity. Someone wrote “The only people that think that Sevco is the same club as the dead club, are either too thick to understand a simple 4 syllable word: Li-qui-day-tion or people who know damn fine well that Sevco is a New club, but it suits their own vested interests to deny this salient fact.” It wasn’t just UEFA, it was FIFA, SFA, SPFL and the ECA amongst others. Your wet dream is just that. BTW, I find nothing strange that your putrid club does. LOL. The club is less than 10 years old. The legal entity was the limited liability company that went bust. That is indisputable at law. The shame is the punishment for its fiscal misdeeds was no harsh enough. The club had to be reformed within a new company structure. Translation, new club. The effect, no old firm. Walter Smith acknowledged that when he said "We wish the new Rangers Football Club every good fortune" But speaking about the recent dramatic events in the Scottish game for the first time, Desmond insisted Rangers will not be in the basement of the game for too long.Giving a rare interview at the Dunhill Links tournament at St Andrews, Desmond, left, said: “Rangers is a fantastic club with a great history.“With the support they have, they will come back. They will, in not too long a time, be back in the SPL. I have no doubt about that. https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/349917/Desmond-We-need-a-strong-Gers I agree, Scottish football needs a strong Rangers, its just a shame about its brainless and bigoted supporters, Billy Boy. Seriously , you think your lot are not bigots and brainless ? Bigots. Nowhere near the extent of Rangers fans. Brainless: Celtic fans don’t throw broken bottles onto the pitch nor do they fight themselves with bottles when celebrating in George Square. You forget that Celtic fans were voted the best in the world in the Best 2017 FIFA awards. Anyway, let’s hope for an entertaining and trouble free game tonight. From the outside looking in I'd say both clubs are sharing in/encouraging the same bigotry. And football fans are generally brainless as a rule so nobody can claim not to have that as an element of the fanbase. You are clueless. "We as a club, and the overwhelming majority of our supporters, oppose and abhor bigotry in all its forms. We have a strict anti-sectarian and non-political approach to the running of the club. Celtic has been at the forefront of efforts to eradicate sectarianism from football, yet Mr Fanning chooses to make no mention of this. He either disregards, or is not aware, of the initiatives supported by this club for many years - Bhoys against Bigotry, Sense over Sectarianism, our community and schools programmes and most recently our participation in the Scottish Executive's Working Group on these matters. No club does as much as Celtic in seeking to eliminate bigotry from football. Those efforts and successes extend to our away matches, where unprecedented work has been done to identify and take action against those who behave unacceptably." Peter T Lawwell, Chief Executive, Celtic Football Club, Celtic Park, Glasgow
|
|
|
|
|
tsf
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe crazy thing about this draw, it is possible that Celtic could end up winning the League in the match against the other lot (unless I have missed/overlooked something which is quite possible). If Celtic beat Ross County in our first game of the split, along with the other lot failing to take maximum points in their game again Motherwell, it would see Celtic extending the gap by either 8 or 9 points. Take that potential 8 or 9 point gap followed up with Celtic winning the next/last League Glasgow derby, that would see Celtic's lead at the top of the Table to 11 or 12 points with only three League matches remaining. That would see the Huns mathematically out of contention. Although it is highly unlikely to unfold as mentioned, the possibility is still there (as mentioned above - unless I have missed/overlooked something). As Sutherlandbear mentioned last week, one of the reason for the way the draw for split rounds work is to limit the chances of one of the Glasgow sides winning the League against the other Glasgow side due to how volatile the fixture is. So the above scenario was either a huge oversight on the SPFL part, or they are confident that the above scenario won't come into fruition. If it is the latter, then that's a huge gamble on their part. I personally feel/think they decided to take the gamble so not to have back-to-back-to-back succesive Glasgow derby matches. It was payback for the horrendous Cinch deal. Two old firms back to back has been done many a time. There is, no longer, an old firm. Woeful schoolboy patter Timmy. If not, then why did your rancid mob renew the copyright they co own with Rangers ? It’s not patter, it is fact. The old firm died with Rangers in 2012 and the term is redundant. Scottish football history can’t be changed and no attempt to ignore it can succeed. Your club was not relegated to the bottom tier of the SPFL. The new club applied for and was denied membership of the SPL. It then successfully applied, as a new member, for membership of the Scottish Football League and was placed in the bottom tier. The SPFL along with Celtic now refer to the fixture as the Glasgow Derby. Your clubs fans and the hun parts of the media ignore the fact that the old firm ceased with the demise of the original Rangers and only exists in their deluded minds. The new club (Rangers) has nothing to do with the holding company that owned the club and never had any ownership of the Old Firm name prior to Celtic agreeing to the renewal of the trade mark because the term has commercial value and has mutual benefits. You must find it strange that Celtic never refer to the old firm. Don’t come back with UEFA allowed a maintenance of the history of the old club. It was merely a decision to recognise the previous achievements of the old club whose assets were acquired by a new entity. Someone wrote “The only people that think that Sevco is the same club as the dead club, are either too thick to understand a simple 4 syllable word: Li-qui-day-tion or people who know damn fine well that Sevco is a New club, but it suits their own vested interests to deny this salient fact.” It wasn’t just UEFA, it was FIFA, SFA, SPFL and the ECA amongst others. Your wet dream is just that. BTW, I find nothing strange that your putrid club does. LOL. The club is less than 10 years old. The legal entity was the limited liability company that went bust. That is indisputable at law. The shame is the punishment for its fiscal misdeeds was no harsh enough. The club had to be reformed within a new company structure. Translation, new club. The effect, no old firm. Walter Smith acknowledged that when he said "We wish the new Rangers Football Club every good fortune" But speaking about the recent dramatic events in the Scottish game for the first time, Desmond insisted Rangers will not be in the basement of the game for too long.Giving a rare interview at the Dunhill Links tournament at St Andrews, Desmond, left, said: “Rangers is a fantastic club with a great history.“With the support they have, they will come back. They will, in not too long a time, be back in the SPL. I have no doubt about that. https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/349917/Desmond-We-need-a-strong-Gers I agree, Scottish football needs a strong Rangers, its just a shame about its brainless and bigoted supporters, Billy Boy. Seriously , you think your lot are not bigots and brainless ? Bigots. Nowhere near the extent of Rangers fans. Brainless: Celtic fans don’t throw broken bottles onto the pitch nor do they fight themselves with bottles when celebrating in George Square. You forget that Celtic fans were voted the best in the world in the Best 2017 FIFA awards. Anyway, let’s hope for an entertaining and trouble free game tonight. From the outside looking in I'd say both clubs are sharing in/encouraging the same bigotry. And football fans are generally brainless as a rule so nobody can claim not to have that as an element of the fanbase. You are clueless. "We as a club, and the overwhelming majority of our supporters, oppose and abhor bigotry in all its forms. We have a strict anti-sectarian and non-political approach to the running of the club. Celtic has been at the forefront of efforts to eradicate sectarianism from football, yet Mr Fanning chooses to make no mention of this. He either disregards, or is not aware, of the initiatives supported by this club for many years - Bhoys against Bigotry, Sense over Sectarianism, our community and schools programmes and most recently our participation in the Scottish Executive's Working Group on these matters. No club does as much as Celtic in seeking to eliminate bigotry from football. Those efforts and successes extend to our away matches, where unprecedented work has been done to identify and take action against those who behave unacceptably." Peter T Lawwell, Chief Executive, Celtic Football Club, Celtic Park, Glasgow Is singing IRA songs included in that? Go to a pub tonight and guaranteed you’ll hear them.
But thats a minority - point is there are good and bad on all sides. Like everything in life.
I lived in Scotland for a while, can confirm that some Rangers fans are twats - but also some good ones too.
|
|
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xI find the whole Rangers aren’t Rangers thing quite odd. As a lawyer myself, sure, I understand the legal argument that says they are a different legal entity. As a human being and passionate sports fan, I say, so what? If hundreds of thousands of people want to support a club, give it the same name, and, most importantly, still have the same feeling in their heart, who is anyone to tell them otherwise? If boys can be girls and girls can be boys etc, who is anyone else to say that a certain group of fans can’t say who their club is or what it means to them? It seems a bit needlessly spiteful to say otherwise. But hey, I know the whole history of these two clubs is based on spite and vitriol, on both sides. The thing is Harry, hundreds and hundreds of clubs around the world change their holding company as Celtic have done a few times themselves. Everyone in Scotland was told "you can't liquidate a football team," The holding company, yes.If we really did die, then they would have nothing to talk about ! They can't change their holding company when it is liquidated. The team dies with them. A new team with the same name can be reformed. That is what happened with Rangers and they were excluded from the SPL as a result of it. And you believed what you were told? Think about it. Without owners there is no team. The holding company is NOT liquidated. And you keep believing your fantasists in Scotland. Even Dermott knows the score. This is above your pay grade Billy. I suppose you think it is ok for Bobby Madden to be refereeing a Glasgow Derby as well? And whit the fuck is your pay grade ? And you will think it is ok for Willie Colum or Kevin Clancy to do it ?
|
|
|
|
|
Lurker
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 810,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe crazy thing about this draw, it is possible that Celtic could end up winning the League in the match against the other lot (unless I have missed/overlooked something which is quite possible). If Celtic beat Ross County in our first game of the split, along with the other lot failing to take maximum points in their game again Motherwell, it would see Celtic extending the gap by either 8 or 9 points. Take that potential 8 or 9 point gap followed up with Celtic winning the next/last League Glasgow derby, that would see Celtic's lead at the top of the Table to 11 or 12 points with only three League matches remaining. That would see the Huns mathematically out of contention. Although it is highly unlikely to unfold as mentioned, the possibility is still there (as mentioned above - unless I have missed/overlooked something). As Sutherlandbear mentioned last week, one of the reason for the way the draw for split rounds work is to limit the chances of one of the Glasgow sides winning the League against the other Glasgow side due to how volatile the fixture is. So the above scenario was either a huge oversight on the SPFL part, or they are confident that the above scenario won't come into fruition. If it is the latter, then that's a huge gamble on their part. I personally feel/think they decided to take the gamble so not to have back-to-back-to-back succesive Glasgow derby matches. It was payback for the horrendous Cinch deal. Two old firms back to back has been done many a time. There is, no longer, an old firm. Woeful schoolboy patter Timmy. If not, then why did your rancid mob renew the copyright they co own with Rangers ? It’s not patter, it is fact. The old firm died with Rangers in 2012 and the term is redundant. Scottish football history can’t be changed and no attempt to ignore it can succeed. Your club was not relegated to the bottom tier of the SPFL. The new club applied for and was denied membership of the SPL. It then successfully applied, as a new member, for membership of the Scottish Football League and was placed in the bottom tier. The SPFL along with Celtic now refer to the fixture as the Glasgow Derby. Your clubs fans and the hun parts of the media ignore the fact that the old firm ceased with the demise of the original Rangers and only exists in their deluded minds. The new club (Rangers) has nothing to do with the holding company that owned the club and never had any ownership of the Old Firm name prior to Celtic agreeing to the renewal of the trade mark because the term has commercial value and has mutual benefits. You must find it strange that Celtic never refer to the old firm. Don’t come back with UEFA allowed a maintenance of the history of the old club. It was merely a decision to recognise the previous achievements of the old club whose assets were acquired by a new entity. Someone wrote “The only people that think that Sevco is the same club as the dead club, are either too thick to understand a simple 4 syllable word: Li-qui-day-tion or people who know damn fine well that Sevco is a New club, but it suits their own vested interests to deny this salient fact.” It wasn’t just UEFA, it was FIFA, SFA, SPFL and the ECA amongst others. Your wet dream is just that. BTW, I find nothing strange that your putrid club does. LOL. The club is less than 10 years old. The legal entity was the limited liability company that went bust. That is indisputable at law. The shame is the punishment for its fiscal misdeeds was no harsh enough. The club had to be reformed within a new company structure. Translation, new club. The effect, no old firm. Walter Smith acknowledged that when he said "We wish the new Rangers Football Club every good fortune" But speaking about the recent dramatic events in the Scottish game for the first time, Desmond insisted Rangers will not be in the basement of the game for too long.Giving a rare interview at the Dunhill Links tournament at St Andrews, Desmond, left, said: “Rangers is a fantastic club with a great history.“With the support they have, they will come back. They will, in not too long a time, be back in the SPL. I have no doubt about that. https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/349917/Desmond-We-need-a-strong-Gers I agree, Scottish football needs a strong Rangers, its just a shame about its brainless and bigoted supporters, Billy Boy. Seriously , you think your lot are not bigots and brainless ? Bigots. Nowhere near the extent of Rangers fans. Brainless: Celtic fans don’t throw broken bottles onto the pitch nor do they fight themselves with bottles when celebrating in George Square. You forget that Celtic fans were voted the best in the world in the Best 2017 FIFA awards. Anyway, let’s hope for an entertaining and trouble free game tonight. From the outside looking in I'd say both clubs are sharing in/encouraging the same bigotry. And football fans are generally brainless as a rule so nobody can claim not to have that as an element of the fanbase. You are clueless. "We as a club, and the overwhelming majority of our supporters, oppose and abhor bigotry in all its forms. We have a strict anti-sectarian and non-political approach to the running of the club. Celtic has been at the forefront of efforts to eradicate sectarianism from football, yet Mr Fanning chooses to make no mention of this. He either disregards, or is not aware, of the initiatives supported by this club for many years - Bhoys against Bigotry, Sense over Sectarianism, our community and schools programmes and most recently our participation in the Scottish Executive's Working Group on these matters. No club does as much as Celtic in seeking to eliminate bigotry from football. Those efforts and successes extend to our away matches, where unprecedented work has been done to identify and take action against those who behave unacceptably." Peter T Lawwell, Chief Executive, Celtic Football Club, Celtic Park, Glasgow Is singing IRA songs included in that? Go to a pub tonight and guaranteed you’ll hear them.
But thats a minority - point is there are good and bad on all sides. Like everything in life.
I lived in Scotland for a while, can confirm that some Rangers fans are twats - but also some good ones too. Yes, you will hear them. But in 2013 a Celtic fan who sang an IRA song at a match was cleared in a landmark court ruling of behaving in an offensive manner likely to incite public disorder. So there is little that can be done to put an end to that. There are a lot of decent people who support Rangers. It is a shame that the behaviour of the majority tarnishes that.
|
|
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe crazy thing about this draw, it is possible that Celtic could end up winning the League in the match against the other lot (unless I have missed/overlooked something which is quite possible). If Celtic beat Ross County in our first game of the split, along with the other lot failing to take maximum points in their game again Motherwell, it would see Celtic extending the gap by either 8 or 9 points. Take that potential 8 or 9 point gap followed up with Celtic winning the next/last League Glasgow derby, that would see Celtic's lead at the top of the Table to 11 or 12 points with only three League matches remaining. That would see the Huns mathematically out of contention. Although it is highly unlikely to unfold as mentioned, the possibility is still there (as mentioned above - unless I have missed/overlooked something). As Sutherlandbear mentioned last week, one of the reason for the way the draw for split rounds work is to limit the chances of one of the Glasgow sides winning the League against the other Glasgow side due to how volatile the fixture is. So the above scenario was either a huge oversight on the SPFL part, or they are confident that the above scenario won't come into fruition. If it is the latter, then that's a huge gamble on their part. I personally feel/think they decided to take the gamble so not to have back-to-back-to-back succesive Glasgow derby matches. It was payback for the horrendous Cinch deal. Two old firms back to back has been done many a time. There is, no longer, an old firm. Woeful schoolboy patter Timmy. If not, then why did your rancid mob renew the copyright they co own with Rangers ? It’s not patter, it is fact. The old firm died with Rangers in 2012 and the term is redundant. Scottish football history can’t be changed and no attempt to ignore it can succeed. Your club was not relegated to the bottom tier of the SPFL. The new club applied for and was denied membership of the SPL. It then successfully applied, as a new member, for membership of the Scottish Football League and was placed in the bottom tier. The SPFL along with Celtic now refer to the fixture as the Glasgow Derby. Your clubs fans and the hun parts of the media ignore the fact that the old firm ceased with the demise of the original Rangers and only exists in their deluded minds. The new club (Rangers) has nothing to do with the holding company that owned the club and never had any ownership of the Old Firm name prior to Celtic agreeing to the renewal of the trade mark because the term has commercial value and has mutual benefits. You must find it strange that Celtic never refer to the old firm. Don’t come back with UEFA allowed a maintenance of the history of the old club. It was merely a decision to recognise the previous achievements of the old club whose assets were acquired by a new entity. Someone wrote “The only people that think that Sevco is the same club as the dead club, are either too thick to understand a simple 4 syllable word: Li-qui-day-tion or people who know damn fine well that Sevco is a New club, but it suits their own vested interests to deny this salient fact.” It wasn’t just UEFA, it was FIFA, SFA, SPFL and the ECA amongst others. Your wet dream is just that. BTW, I find nothing strange that your putrid club does. LOL. The club is less than 10 years old. The legal entity was the limited liability company that went bust. That is indisputable at law. The shame is the punishment for its fiscal misdeeds was no harsh enough. The club had to be reformed within a new company structure. Translation, new club. The effect, no old firm. Walter Smith acknowledged that when he said "We wish the new Rangers Football Club every good fortune" But speaking about the recent dramatic events in the Scottish game for the first time, Desmond insisted Rangers will not be in the basement of the game for too long.Giving a rare interview at the Dunhill Links tournament at St Andrews, Desmond, left, said: “Rangers is a fantastic club with a great history.“With the support they have, they will come back. They will, in not too long a time, be back in the SPL. I have no doubt about that. https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/349917/Desmond-We-need-a-strong-Gers I agree, Scottish football needs a strong Rangers, its just a shame about its brainless and bigoted supporters, Billy Boy. Seriously , you think your lot are not bigots and brainless ? Bigots. Nowhere near the extent of Rangers fans. Brainless: Celtic fans don’t throw broken bottles onto the pitch nor do they fight themselves with bottles when celebrating in George Square. You forget that Celtic fans were voted the best in the world in the Best 2017 FIFA awards. Anyway, let’s hope for an entertaining and trouble free game tonight. From the outside looking in I'd say both clubs are sharing in/encouraging the same bigotry. And football fans are generally brainless as a rule so nobody can claim not to have that as an element of the fanbase. You are clueless. "We as a club, and the overwhelming majority of our supporters, oppose and abhor bigotry in all its forms. We have a strict anti-sectarian and non-political approach to the running of the club. Celtic has been at the forefront of efforts to eradicate sectarianism from football, yet Mr Fanning chooses to make no mention of this. He either disregards, or is not aware, of the initiatives supported by this club for many years - Bhoys against Bigotry, Sense over Sectarianism, our community and schools programmes and most recently our participation in the Scottish Executive's Working Group on these matters. No club does as much as Celtic in seeking to eliminate bigotry from football. Those efforts and successes extend to our away matches, where unprecedented work has been done to identify and take action against those who behave unacceptably." Peter T Lawwell, Chief Executive, Celtic Football Club, Celtic Park, Glasgow Except if you are Protestants, British, Jewish or Ukranian. I don't think you have ever stepped foot inside Scotland and are just a google man. Happy to be proved wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe crazy thing about this draw, it is possible that Celtic could end up winning the League in the match against the other lot (unless I have missed/overlooked something which is quite possible). If Celtic beat Ross County in our first game of the split, along with the other lot failing to take maximum points in their game again Motherwell, it would see Celtic extending the gap by either 8 or 9 points. Take that potential 8 or 9 point gap followed up with Celtic winning the next/last League Glasgow derby, that would see Celtic's lead at the top of the Table to 11 or 12 points with only three League matches remaining. That would see the Huns mathematically out of contention. Although it is highly unlikely to unfold as mentioned, the possibility is still there (as mentioned above - unless I have missed/overlooked something). As Sutherlandbear mentioned last week, one of the reason for the way the draw for split rounds work is to limit the chances of one of the Glasgow sides winning the League against the other Glasgow side due to how volatile the fixture is. So the above scenario was either a huge oversight on the SPFL part, or they are confident that the above scenario won't come into fruition. If it is the latter, then that's a huge gamble on their part. I personally feel/think they decided to take the gamble so not to have back-to-back-to-back succesive Glasgow derby matches. It was payback for the horrendous Cinch deal. Two old firms back to back has been done many a time. There is, no longer, an old firm. Woeful schoolboy patter Timmy. If not, then why did your rancid mob renew the copyright they co own with Rangers ? It’s not patter, it is fact. The old firm died with Rangers in 2012 and the term is redundant. Scottish football history can’t be changed and no attempt to ignore it can succeed. Your club was not relegated to the bottom tier of the SPFL. The new club applied for and was denied membership of the SPL. It then successfully applied, as a new member, for membership of the Scottish Football League and was placed in the bottom tier. The SPFL along with Celtic now refer to the fixture as the Glasgow Derby. Your clubs fans and the hun parts of the media ignore the fact that the old firm ceased with the demise of the original Rangers and only exists in their deluded minds. The new club (Rangers) has nothing to do with the holding company that owned the club and never had any ownership of the Old Firm name prior to Celtic agreeing to the renewal of the trade mark because the term has commercial value and has mutual benefits. You must find it strange that Celtic never refer to the old firm. Don’t come back with UEFA allowed a maintenance of the history of the old club. It was merely a decision to recognise the previous achievements of the old club whose assets were acquired by a new entity. Someone wrote “The only people that think that Sevco is the same club as the dead club, are either too thick to understand a simple 4 syllable word: Li-qui-day-tion or people who know damn fine well that Sevco is a New club, but it suits their own vested interests to deny this salient fact.” It wasn’t just UEFA, it was FIFA, SFA, SPFL and the ECA amongst others. Your wet dream is just that. BTW, I find nothing strange that your putrid club does. LOL. The club is less than 10 years old. The legal entity was the limited liability company that went bust. That is indisputable at law. The shame is the punishment for its fiscal misdeeds was no harsh enough. The club had to be reformed within a new company structure. Translation, new club. The effect, no old firm. Walter Smith acknowledged that when he said "We wish the new Rangers Football Club every good fortune" But speaking about the recent dramatic events in the Scottish game for the first time, Desmond insisted Rangers will not be in the basement of the game for too long.Giving a rare interview at the Dunhill Links tournament at St Andrews, Desmond, left, said: “Rangers is a fantastic club with a great history.“With the support they have, they will come back. They will, in not too long a time, be back in the SPL. I have no doubt about that. https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/349917/Desmond-We-need-a-strong-Gers I agree, Scottish football needs a strong Rangers, its just a shame about its brainless and bigoted supporters, Billy Boy. Seriously , you think your lot are not bigots and brainless ? Bigots. Nowhere near the extent of Rangers fans. Brainless: Celtic fans don’t throw broken bottles onto the pitch nor do they fight themselves with bottles when celebrating in George Square. You forget that Celtic fans were voted the best in the world in the Best 2017 FIFA awards. Anyway, let’s hope for an entertaining and trouble free game tonight. From the outside looking in I'd say both clubs are sharing in/encouraging the same bigotry. And football fans are generally brainless as a rule so nobody can claim not to have that as an element of the fanbase. You are clueless. "We as a club, and the overwhelming majority of our supporters, oppose and abhor bigotry in all its forms. We have a strict anti-sectarian and non-political approach to the running of the club. Celtic has been at the forefront of efforts to eradicate sectarianism from football, yet Mr Fanning chooses to make no mention of this. He either disregards, or is not aware, of the initiatives supported by this club for many years - Bhoys against Bigotry, Sense over Sectarianism, our community and schools programmes and most recently our participation in the Scottish Executive's Working Group on these matters. No club does as much as Celtic in seeking to eliminate bigotry from football. Those efforts and successes extend to our away matches, where unprecedented work has been done to identify and take action against those who behave unacceptably." Peter T Lawwell, Chief Executive, Celtic Football Club, Celtic Park, Glasgow Is singing IRA songs included in that? Go to a pub tonight and guaranteed you’ll hear them.
But thats a minority - point is there are good and bad on all sides. Like everything in life.
I lived in Scotland for a while, can confirm that some Rangers fans are twats - but also some good ones too. Yes, you will hear them. But in 2013 a Celtic fan who sang an IRA song at a match was cleared in a landmark court ruling of behaving in an offensive manner likely to incite public disorder. So there is little that can be done to put an end to that. There are a lot of decent people who support Rangers. It is a shame that the behaviour of the majority tarnishes that. And two Celtic fans jailed in 2008 for wearing 'HUN ' t-shirts, but you don't hold back on that either, do you ?
|
|
|
|
|
Lurker
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 810,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xI find the whole Rangers aren’t Rangers thing quite odd. As a lawyer myself, sure, I understand the legal argument that says they are a different legal entity. As a human being and passionate sports fan, I say, so what? If hundreds of thousands of people want to support a club, give it the same name, and, most importantly, still have the same feeling in their heart, who is anyone to tell them otherwise? If boys can be girls and girls can be boys etc, who is anyone else to say that a certain group of fans can’t say who their club is or what it means to them? It seems a bit needlessly spiteful to say otherwise. But hey, I know the whole history of these two clubs is based on spite and vitriol, on both sides. The thing is Harry, hundreds and hundreds of clubs around the world change their holding company as Celtic have done a few times themselves. Everyone in Scotland was told "you can't liquidate a football team," The holding company, yes.If we really did die, then they would have nothing to talk about ! They can't change their holding company when it is liquidated. The team dies with them. A new team with the same name can be reformed. That is what happened with Rangers and they were excluded from the SPL as a result of it. And you believed what you were told? Think about it. Without owners there is no team. The holding company is NOT liquidated. And you keep believing your fantasists in Scotland. Even Dermott knows the score. This is above your pay grade Billy. I suppose you think it is ok for Bobby Madden to be refereeing a Glasgow Derby as well? And whit the fuck is your pay grade ? And you will think it is ok for Willie Colum or Kevin Clancy to do it ? Not only should a referee be independent he should also be seen to be independent. Madden is a confessed Rangers supporter and alleged (although he denies it) former Rangers season ticket holder
|
|
|
|
|
Lurker
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 810,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe crazy thing about this draw, it is possible that Celtic could end up winning the League in the match against the other lot (unless I have missed/overlooked something which is quite possible). If Celtic beat Ross County in our first game of the split, along with the other lot failing to take maximum points in their game again Motherwell, it would see Celtic extending the gap by either 8 or 9 points. Take that potential 8 or 9 point gap followed up with Celtic winning the next/last League Glasgow derby, that would see Celtic's lead at the top of the Table to 11 or 12 points with only three League matches remaining. That would see the Huns mathematically out of contention. Although it is highly unlikely to unfold as mentioned, the possibility is still there (as mentioned above - unless I have missed/overlooked something). As Sutherlandbear mentioned last week, one of the reason for the way the draw for split rounds work is to limit the chances of one of the Glasgow sides winning the League against the other Glasgow side due to how volatile the fixture is. So the above scenario was either a huge oversight on the SPFL part, or they are confident that the above scenario won't come into fruition. If it is the latter, then that's a huge gamble on their part. I personally feel/think they decided to take the gamble so not to have back-to-back-to-back succesive Glasgow derby matches. It was payback for the horrendous Cinch deal. Two old firms back to back has been done many a time. There is, no longer, an old firm. Woeful schoolboy patter Timmy. If not, then why did your rancid mob renew the copyright they co own with Rangers ? It’s not patter, it is fact. The old firm died with Rangers in 2012 and the term is redundant. Scottish football history can’t be changed and no attempt to ignore it can succeed. Your club was not relegated to the bottom tier of the SPFL. The new club applied for and was denied membership of the SPL. It then successfully applied, as a new member, for membership of the Scottish Football League and was placed in the bottom tier. The SPFL along with Celtic now refer to the fixture as the Glasgow Derby. Your clubs fans and the hun parts of the media ignore the fact that the old firm ceased with the demise of the original Rangers and only exists in their deluded minds. The new club (Rangers) has nothing to do with the holding company that owned the club and never had any ownership of the Old Firm name prior to Celtic agreeing to the renewal of the trade mark because the term has commercial value and has mutual benefits. You must find it strange that Celtic never refer to the old firm. Don’t come back with UEFA allowed a maintenance of the history of the old club. It was merely a decision to recognise the previous achievements of the old club whose assets were acquired by a new entity. Someone wrote “The only people that think that Sevco is the same club as the dead club, are either too thick to understand a simple 4 syllable word: Li-qui-day-tion or people who know damn fine well that Sevco is a New club, but it suits their own vested interests to deny this salient fact.” It wasn’t just UEFA, it was FIFA, SFA, SPFL and the ECA amongst others. Your wet dream is just that. BTW, I find nothing strange that your putrid club does. LOL. The club is less than 10 years old. The legal entity was the limited liability company that went bust. That is indisputable at law. The shame is the punishment for its fiscal misdeeds was no harsh enough. The club had to be reformed within a new company structure. Translation, new club. The effect, no old firm. Walter Smith acknowledged that when he said "We wish the new Rangers Football Club every good fortune" But speaking about the recent dramatic events in the Scottish game for the first time, Desmond insisted Rangers will not be in the basement of the game for too long.Giving a rare interview at the Dunhill Links tournament at St Andrews, Desmond, left, said: “Rangers is a fantastic club with a great history.“With the support they have, they will come back. They will, in not too long a time, be back in the SPL. I have no doubt about that. https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/349917/Desmond-We-need-a-strong-Gers I agree, Scottish football needs a strong Rangers, its just a shame about its brainless and bigoted supporters, Billy Boy. Seriously , you think your lot are not bigots and brainless ? Bigots. Nowhere near the extent of Rangers fans. Brainless: Celtic fans don’t throw broken bottles onto the pitch nor do they fight themselves with bottles when celebrating in George Square. You forget that Celtic fans were voted the best in the world in the Best 2017 FIFA awards. Anyway, let’s hope for an entertaining and trouble free game tonight. From the outside looking in I'd say both clubs are sharing in/encouraging the same bigotry. And football fans are generally brainless as a rule so nobody can claim not to have that as an element of the fanbase. You are clueless. "We as a club, and the overwhelming majority of our supporters, oppose and abhor bigotry in all its forms. We have a strict anti-sectarian and non-political approach to the running of the club. Celtic has been at the forefront of efforts to eradicate sectarianism from football, yet Mr Fanning chooses to make no mention of this. He either disregards, or is not aware, of the initiatives supported by this club for many years - Bhoys against Bigotry, Sense over Sectarianism, our community and schools programmes and most recently our participation in the Scottish Executive's Working Group on these matters. No club does as much as Celtic in seeking to eliminate bigotry from football. Those efforts and successes extend to our away matches, where unprecedented work has been done to identify and take action against those who behave unacceptably." Peter T Lawwell, Chief Executive, Celtic Football Club, Celtic Park, Glasgow Except if you are Protestants, British, Jewish or Ukranian. I don't think you have ever stepped foot inside Scotland and are just a google man. Happy to be proved wrong. Easily done. As a child I was often lifted over the turnstiles at Love Street which was minutes from my home. I played many a game of football at St James Park and was schooled at Camphill.
|
|
|
|