Toonpack

I wouldn't give a shit about anything on a message board tbh. If I took real offence I'd just stop frequenting said offending board. You also have Ashley blindness, I don't support him at all, I am glad of his deep pockets (didn't have to be his) and I can rationalise some of what he does, end of. re the "herbert", check the difference between operating profit and retained profit, especially when the source which states the operating profit itself says "operating profit of x£ before this this and this")

The level of debt is secondary to it's "supportability". If we owed the current debt to a bank we'd be fucked (in fact we wouldn't have been allowed to accumulate that level of debt in any case).

Who is MacBeth FFS

He didn't call me a coward I called him a coward. The kid would stand in front of me and shit himself and the way I am, I'd stand in front of him and ruffle his hair as if to say ya daft little cunt. I'd go as far to say I haven't seen anyone make a bigger tit of themselves on a message board. He did the same with Alex and bottled it then too, he's a little man. oooooh internet hardmen, lose an argument or be shown up and resort to threats or offerings out. Fucking laughable and pathetic :D

There's none debating with you, because you are unwilling and unable to admit you're wrong at any point, even when it's been proven you are. Whenever you find an accountant for your new business venture you should ask him if generating operational profits year on year while making overall losses is good business. If he agrees with you then you'll know not to hire him. He's thick as fucking mince man. From the accounts in the year in question: a retained profit of £0.215m which compares favourably to the retained profit of £0.172m in the previous year. £12 Million loss the next year

Be funny if this happened only for the FA to tell them to fuck off. If they bought an existing "member" and then relocated that member, doubt the FA could do owt about it, MK Dons precedent is set, as is the non-English one. European law being what it is, in terms of restraint of trade etc etc it could be a runner. I can't see it myself but it's an interesting supposition.

Rumours some Hun-fans are spouting isthat they could liquidate and the new "Rangers" company will buy up Ibrox etc and rather than re-apply to the SFA they'll buy a 3rd Div/Conference club and do a MK Dons. Faced with a likely work back up the ladder situation in Scotland, why not do it in the richer pyramid. Back door into the English leagues. Dunno how viable/possible it is, but an interesting (nightmare!!) possibility and I would guess the "Non English" precedent's set due to Cardiff, Swansea etc.

They shouldn't but they all are becasue of the football creditors rule. Clubs that should have died and gone back to the start: Charlton 1984 Middlesbrough 1986 Tranmere 1987 Newport County 1989 Walsall 1990 Northampton 1992 Kettering 1992 Aldershot 1992 Maidstone 1992 Hartlepool 1994 Barnet 1994 Exeter 1994, 2003 Gillingham 1995 Doncaster 1997 Millwall 1997 Bournemouth 1997, 2008 Darlington 1997, 2009 Chester 1998, 2009 Hereford 1998 Portsmouth 1999, 2010 Crystal Palace 1999, 2010 Oxford Utd 1999 Barrow 1999 Swindon 2000, 2002 Scarborough 2000 Hull 2001 QPR 2001 Chesterfield 2001 Leicester 2002 Barnsley 2002 Carlisle 2002 Notts County 2002 Bury 2002 Bradford 2002 Port Vale 2002 Lincoln City 2002 Swansea City 2002 York 2002 Halifax Town 2002, 2008 Derby 2003 Ipswich 2003 Huddersfield 2003 Oldham 2003 MK Dons 2003 Wimbledon 2003 Wrexham 2004 Cambridge 2005 Crawley Town 2006 Rotherham 2006, 2008 Leeds United 2007 Boston United 2007 Southampton 2008 Luton 2008 Stockport 2009 Salisbury 2009

The taxman's out for blood, becasue of the very example's you state above and their "protected" status as football clubs. Accrington and Aldershot are the only two that went tits up during the season and couldnt continue to fulfill their fixtures. But both their names lived on and the new clubs formed in those towns have both regained their league status. The "companies" may die but the clubs don't because theyre based on civic or regional identity and not a balance sheet. AFC Wimbledon are similar in a way but for different reasons. Reckon you're right about the taxman though. The only club I can think of in "recent" times who didnt come back is the Scottish club Third Lanark who went pop in the 60s and havent resurfaced. Clydebank FC now play in the Junior leagues in Glasgow. Maybe thats where Rangers will end up. Apparently theres a "Mr Big" in the wings waiting in the wings for this all to unravel and then he's going to bankroll them. Wouldnt hold my breath on that though. The identity always "lives on" as you say due to the regional/civic thing. But the wider issue is, clubs just re-emerge having overspent and owing huge debts virtuallu unscathed. Leicetser was the one that caused the - 10 points to be brought in I think. HMRC wants the full amount possible paid back and proper liquidations (as in clubs losing their ground etc if they own it), ergo clubs should start at the bottom again. If they are so over-extended anyway.

The taxman's out for blood, becasue of the very example's you state above and their "protected" status as football clubs.

I might give you Brazil 1950 at a push. Brazil hadn't won owt themselves at that stage though so I'm not convinced. I write Italy's first two WC's off for the same reason. In fact if I'm being honest, I probably downgrade everything pre 1970. That's probably overly harsh and summat to do with it being in colour, but I do genuinely feel that was the decade when the World and European competitions had become properly 'established' and football had become a more modern game. I don't do that lightly either because it leaves us without a major trophy ever. You can'y do that, you can only compete with what's in front of you at the time. All are equally valid IMO. The fact that football hadn't got it's house in order in some places as opposed to others don't enter into it.

Probably money Probably Before the qualification competition, George Graham, chairman of the Scottish Football Association (SFA), had said that Scotland would only travel to Brazil as winners of the Home Championship.[3] (England, by contrast, had committed to attending, even if they finished in second place).[3] After Scotland ended up in second place behind England, the Scottish captain George Young, encouraged by England captain Billy Wright, pleaded with the SFA to change its mind and accept the place in Brazil: however Graham refused to change his position and so Scotland withdrew from the tournament.

More names from the dustbin. Great memory. A quick look at Wiki shows in 5 seasons of football between them, the sum total of McCoist, Colquhoun and Robertson's goals in Tyne & Wear was EIGHT. Thinking about it, Mark McGhee was a reasonable signing, but we should never really sign players from Scotland again. We've not had a goodun since Jinky Jim, and when was that Leazes? 1970? 1969 Tony Green was better (even Leazes and I agree on that) I always thought John Blackley was OK an all, no world-beater mind. There's no real talent in Scotland any more, it doesn't get through the ranks.

When they had good international and club sides there were loads of good Scottish players. I think they suffer like the English do from too many foreign imports (without the money to get the really good ones) and from shit grassroots-level coaching (also like the English). The foreign import problem is a factor as you say. They've the added issue that any kid with promise is bought up by the old firm for washers, and to an extent any older player that shines at another club. The money is so low in general and the old firm so much richer by comparison, they can just hoover up any potential at very modest outlay, and in some cases never even play them.

He was crocked Was he? I just seem to remember he was shit. Don't remember a bad injury though. Had a dodgy stomach muscle problem. (Only strated 7 for us + 5 as sub)

He was crocked Also on the rest of the SPL need them, not at all, they'd fucking love it if both fucked off. Their TV share is fuck all, costs them an arm and a leg to host the old firm, they're average attendances would likely go up over a season. They'd earn a little bit less, but they'd probably thrive otherwise.

They won't. Any phoenix club would be allowed directly into the SPL. Given the money that they generate for the league as a whole in sponsorship and TV money then it would be very foolish for the SPL to exclude them. TV revenue up there is only £13Mill a season. I think the majority of the non-old firm Chairmen would gladly see them fuck off tbh. The difference between the "two cheeks of the same arse" (as one of my Aberdonian pals says) and the rest is ridiculous

Be a big problem for the lower clubs and the Police, no way can the smaller clubs segregate fans properly, for example Brechin's ground has a hedge

From the Beeb: An SPL statement said if administrators are appointed "a 10-point deduction would apply immediately to its total points in the League Championship". "The club would also be embargoed from registering any new players," it adds. "A notice of the intention to appoint administrators alone does not trigger the sporting sanctions - it is the actual appointment of administrators which does.

It's more the fact that Rangers have 54 titles and Celtic have 48 or something, compared to 19 for Man utd, 18 for Liverpool, 13 for Arsenal, Everton have 9 or 10, loads of teams on 6,5,4,3 etc the English leagues are far more competitive. Used to be. Not now. The gulf in money has changed all that. The "it's ridiculous up there" argument used to be perfectly valid, it's valid no longer IMO.

There's only two or three in the PL capable of "winning it", in the SPL it's the same two year on year, bugger all difference tbh. The "new" potential winner is hugely bankrolled, which is a distortion of competition, if someone bankrolled Kilmarnock or suchlike, they'd compete as well. It's all based on disparity in fincancial clout. who are those three? because its been a bunch of them, 2/3 potential winners every season that changes a little each year or two is about as good as you get in top european leagues Does it matter, really?? It just goes to show how truly "uncompetitive" top league football is. To state only 2 teams are ever going to win a 12 team league makes it "ridculous" and yet in a 20 team league only one or two teams more than that could win it and that's "competitive", is just daft.

There's only two or three in the PL capable of "winning it", in the SPL it's the same two year on year, bugger all difference tbh. The "new" potential winner is hugely bankrolled, which is a distortion of competition, if someone bankrolled Kilmarnock or suchlike, they'd compete as well. It's all based on disparity in fincancial clout.

The Prem aint much different these days in terms of competition

Hopefully they'd follow the same route

Or you can stand for 19 Yeah but you don't get beer brought to your seat then. I was just illustrating its what people spend on other things at matchday which is probably the difference now under Ashley. I get the feeling people are spending a lot less on variables. A good comparison is that hsv ticket prices are more or less where Spurs prices are. Hamburg is the richest city in Germany. The commercial revenue's are much bigger in Germany as well aren't they??, I seem tor recall reading something somewhere that commercially Bayern blow even Man U out the water. T'was the rambler (again) (Even Shalke are "close" !!!)