Toonpack

Disputed the "boring" bit with you after the group game, so I'm not in the "today" camp. Spains recent record: TOTAL P 46 W 41 D 4 L 1 F 103 A 22 24/3/07 Denmark (h) ECQ W 2-1 28/3/07 Iceland (h) ECQ W 1-0 2/6/07 Latvia (a) ECQ W 2-0 6/6/07 Liechtenstein (a) ECQ W 2-0 8/9/07 Iceland (a) ECQ D 1-1 12/9/07 Latvia (h) ECQ W 2-0 13/10/07 Denmark (a) ECQ W 3-1 17/11/07 Sweden (h) ECQ W 3-0 21/11/07 Northern Ireland (h) ECQ W 1-0 10/6/08 Russia (n) ECF W 4-1 14/6/08 Sweden (n) ECF W 2-1 18/6/08 Greece (n) ECF W 2-1 22/6/08 Italy (n) ECF D 0-0 26/6/08 Russia (n) ECF W 3-0 29/6/08 Germany (n) ECF W 1-0 6/9/08 Bosnia and Herzegovina (h) WCQ W 1-0 10/9/08 Armenia (h) WCQ W 4-0 11/10/08 Estonia (a) WCQ W 3-0 15/10/08 Belgium (a) WCQ W 2-1 28/3/09 Turkey (h) WCQ W 1-0 1/4/09 Turkey (a) WCQ W 2-1 5/9/09 Belgium (h) WCQ W 5-0 9/9/09 Estonia (h) WCQ W 3-0 10/10/09 Armenia (a) WCQ W 2-1 14/10/09 Bosnia and Herzegovina (a) WCQ W 5-2 16/6/10 Switzerland (n) WCF L 0-1 21/6/10 Honduras (n) WCF W 2-0 25/6/10 Chile (n) WCF W 2-1 29/6/10 Portugal (n) WCF W 1-0 3/7/10 Paraguay (n) WCF W 1-0 7/7/10 Germany (n) WCF W 1-0 11/7/10 Holland (n) WCF W 1-0 3/9/10 Liechtenstein (a) ECQ W 4-0 8/10/10 Lithuania (h) ECQ W 3-1 12/10/10 Scotland (a) ECQ W 3-2 25/3/11 Czech Republic (h) ECQ W 2-1 29/3/11 Lithuania (a) ECQ W 3-1 6/9/11 Liechtenstein (h) ECQ W 6-0 7/10/11 Czech Republic (a) ECQ W 2-0 11/10/11 Scotland (h) ECQ W 3-1 10/6/12 Italy (n) ECF D 1-1 14/6/12 Republic of Ireland (n) ECF W 4-0 18/6/12 Croatia (n) ECF W 1-0 23/6/12 France (n) ECF W 2-0 27/6/12 Portugal (n) ECF D 0-0 1/7/12 Italy (n) ECF W 4-0

All true, plus the rule changes, a 70's Italy would have been down to 5 men by half time.

Agree totally. How anyone can say they are boring is beyond me to be honest. I think they are sublime, with or without strikers.

Cough cough http://www.scotsman.com/scotland-on-sunday/sport/richard-bath-most-successful-era-when-gate-receipts-were-split-equitably-1-2386654

Preposterous, not just the bold bit. Only owner we have EVER had who's chucked a penny of his own money in at any stage.

We're in debt as much as your left pocket can owe your right pocket. Different animal completely.

They are there, in the holding company, and he absolutely won't want to "take a hit" but if he want's to call the loans in, he has to have that conversation with himself. It's not like a third party calling in the money with no concern over consequence or where the money comes from. IF we were indebted to a bank they'd want their repayments (with interest) come what may,whether the club could afford it or not, in the current scenario Ashley would have to pay Ashley the repayment if the club was to continue to trade. The debt has inflated any prospective selling price of the club, there's only two ways he gets his money back really, through a sale where the club either has to rocket in value (the only way to make that happen is to be succesfull) or the club has to be succesfull enough to be able to pay him back over time, the "easy" way for him to cover his position would be to charge interest, or simply take periodic sums out as repayments. So far as we know as yet, he's done neither.

Sadly I DO actually think you are thick as pigshit

I can see many chairmen of said "ground with no stands" not wanting them either tbh, despite the alleged cash bonanza, they'd have to have ground improvements (very short notice) and the policing costs would be ridiculous (there's no segregation for a start). The small clubs run on a shoestring, Brechin (whilst a really tidy little ground) has a hedge.

For once, they're not bending/breaking the rules, those are the proper rules, you have to have a league place to apply for SFA membership, can't get SFA without being accepted by a league, whether it's the Highland League of SPL. For a newclub, SFL rules state once a place is granted a club must get SFA affiliation, within 14 days. In this instance the request for the paperwork was actually the SFA being "tough" they demanded the docs by cop Friday and only gave them 72 hours to come up with the paperwork.

Factually incorrect again, there's a surprise

His gambling problem must be biting

You haven't been to a game for 8 years !!!!! Fucking charlatan.

The fundamental point that the blog/opinion, that you bolded, misses, is that the "debt" is owed to the 100% owner, not to a third party (banks). The only way that debt stays with the club after a sale is if that the purchase was leveraged a'la Man U. For that to happen we'd have to be pretty damn good and generating significant cash because whoever funded the leverage would want to know they'd make their money back. The "debt" (although it's not a proper debt IMO) amount is greater because we were overburning by about £20Mill a year, that had to be covered somehow, otherwise bad things would happen. That "debt" could go up to £500 Million for all I care because it poses no danger to the club, there's only one person can foreclose on that money, and that's the owner, he'd be foreclosing on himself. Tom's post above is also spot on. Off the field the club is absolutely rock solid and in an excellent position, on the field is the variable, but the signs are good.

ToonDon/Topcat Canny article: http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/

In McFaul world you must have been shouted at, and or blanked at least, for your accent ????

Aye, they would have pointed at you and laughed in Aberfeldy (she was rubbing it in man !!)

Going off what someone who was hardly of sound mind said, she married you after all, although at least she must have recovered, hence the "ex" bit.

No they absolutely do NOT, for goodness sake do not take Stevie's word on anything. It's beyond preposterous, really it is. You've met a few and they were sound, take as you find, (in real life not football culture world obviously) that's all you can do. Real far north they hate the Weegies and Fifers waaaay before anyone else.

Don't waste your breath mate, the dim one's haven't got the mental capability to take the leap that football related banter isn't "real life". Football is all they've got, it's their world and what happens in it, is the only reality. Sad really. In Stevie's case if your mother's stirrups weren't within sight of the Tyne at the point of your birth you're untermensch It REALLY is that bad.

So if you were out in Sunderland, for example, and Newcastle got scored against, your impression would be ?????????????????? So an Uncle out on the piss watching a game of football, which sort of attracts "banter" etc (I guess that's that football culture you talk about) thus brands everyone anywhere within a few hundred miles as "haters". Maybe it's those who practice "football culture" that's the problem, not wider society eh? just a thought. I was in Aviemore when England played the USA in the WC, banter was excellent almost 50/50 in Tartan Army founders bar (which is in Aviemore), no mailice good old fashioned winding up and beers afterwards. Eyemouth - "Can't be all bad there's even some Toon fans there" you MUST be a parody, as McEnroe would say, you cannot be serious. (btw Eyemouth is in "the borders" not the central belt, it's not "North of Stirling" either). :D :D :D

Ok if you won't accept it from me: http://blogs.channel4.com/alex-thomsons-view/strawpoll-rangers-fans-newco/2029 Second bold bit - You are a lunatic

The sum levied in tax/penalties is under appeal, not the BTC stuff itself. I would guess the first tier tax tribunal will have to publish it's findings before the liquidation can be closed off. That said HMRC always stated if they didn't like the First Tier Tribunal findings they'd appeal it up to the next level, whether that's still the case, given Rangers are being liquidated remains to be seen. Although HMRC have reportedly used Rangers as the "test case" and they really want a formal sanction because there's evidently other clubs in their sights down here for similar.

Still needs the vote on 4th July, only way the mechanism exists to "relegate" them is to transfer the SPL Share (with the SFA membership) and then relegate them fait accompli to Div 1 and SFL. That will take some about face from teams "who have puclicly declared" they've listened to their fans. If the vote doesn't happen and they just "do" this they are breaking all their own rules on how a team gets elected into the SFL but also break all their rules about how they change the rules. Any who vote yes will gain Rangers 2012 away fans, but will lose any Celtic support away. Even most Rangers fans (the decent one's who accept the transgressions) want Div 3 and a fresh slate. That would be RIP Scottish Football for thousands.