Hugh_Jazz Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 I couldn't give a fuck if they call themselves Rangers, wear blue, retain their history or any of that shit.They're having to start from scratch in div 3.....completely and justifiably humiliated.As far as I'm concerned, that's enough that the footballing side of the club should have to suffer. Anyone who wants to see them playing in different strips, with a different badge etc etc are just kicking the corpse. It doesn't gain anything. Ultimately, the fans are still Rangers fans....they're still playing at Ibrox. It's Rangers. End of. Get used to it.Let's move on. If this sorry fuck-up of a situation has to be continued, it's by the police rather than by the national embarrassment and collectively incompetence showers of shite that are the SPL/SFA/SFL. Craig Whyte, and MUCH more importantly, David Murray should be fully investigated, prosecuted and if required by law, thrown in jail. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinzHines Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 As far as I'm concerned, that's enough that the footballing side of the club should have to suffer. Anyone who wants to see them playing in different strips, with a different badge etc etc are just kicking the corpse. It doesn't gain anything. Ultimately, the fans are still Rangers fans....they're still playing at Ibrox. It's Rangers. End of. Get used to it. I totally disagree, if you leave an old company saddled with somewhere between 50-150m of debt and you liquidate to start a new company to wipe that debt clear, then you shouldn't be directly connected to the old entity. No history shoud stand. I don't disagree they can be called something like Rangers and their old fans can get behind the new club bla bla bla. But it's not right to shit away people's money/cheat and expect to be historically connected to an old/soon to be liquidated and therefore defunct, company . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Milner Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 I totally disagree, if you leave an old company saddled with somewhere between 50-150m of debt and you liquidate to start a new company to wipe that debt clear, then you shouldn't be directly connected to the old entity. No history shoud stand.I don't disagree they can be called something like Rangers and their old fans can get behind the new club bla bla bla. But it's not right to shit away people's money/cheat and expect to be historically connected to an old/soon to be liquidated and therefore defunct, company .The company that ran Rangers went bust, not the club, they are two separate entities, and they are accepting a fine, and transfer ban, along with paying off the old company's debts, in order to keep the club alive. They are still Rangers as we have known them, same songs, same bigoty, same strip, stadium and training facilities, its just the company that runs the club that has changed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh_Jazz Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 I totally disagree, if you leave an old company saddled with somewhere between 50-150m of debt and you liquidate to start a new company to wipe that debt clear, then you shouldn't be directly connected to the old entity. No history shoud stand.I don't disagree they can be called something like Rangers and their old fans can get behind the new club bla bla bla. But it's not right to shit away people's money/cheat and expect to be historically connected to an old/soon to be liquidated and therefore defunct, company .Since when has football had anything to do with "the company"? As long as the club has the same fans, it's the same club with the same history. Dozens of league titles, cups etc were won quite legitimately by Rangers. You're not seriously suggesting that a club formed in 1872, should have ALL it's history discarded because of a the immoral and illegal acts of a couple of corrupt owners over a hundred years later? Sorry, but that's just total bollocks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattJimF Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 The company that ran Rangers went bust, not the club, they are two separate entities, and they are accepting a fine, and transfer ban, along with paying off the old company's debts, in order to keep the club alive. They are still Rangers as we have known them, same songs, same bigoty, same strip, stadium and training facilities, its just the company that runs the club that has changed.Watching the BBC national news, had a reporter at Brechin, one fan walking past with a St George flag with the red hand of Ulster on it. Nice to see some things never change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinzHines Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 The company that ran Rangers went bust, not the club, they are two separate entities, and they are accepting a fine, and transfer ban, along with paying off the old company's debts, in order to keep the club alive. They are still Rangers as we have known them, same songs, same bigoty, same strip, stadium and training facilities, its just the company that runs the club that has changed.Rangers football club and Rangers as a company are both registered to the same company number (SC004276) so as far as I can tell they aren't separate entities.Charles green bought 5.5m of assets from Rangers FC Plc and has transferred those assests to a new company. While those assest may very well include the physical trophies won under Rangers FC Plc, the actual history of who won those trophies will die with their owners Rangers FC Plc when they are liquidated.This would be my understanding of the situation. And while I'm not arguing that this new club is basically Rangers, it should not hold any right to history won (bought/cheated) under the old company/club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorge Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 Meet the new Scum, same as the old Scum!Biggest laugh of the afternoon was at the Hedgies equaliser and the home support singing 'Are you Forfar in disguise?' Plenty of Sevco mercenaries earning their SPL wage packets on that showing!Nice win for Montrose yesterday, albeit against a ropey HL side.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinzHines Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 Since when has football had anything to do with "the company"? As long as the club has the same fans, it's the same club with the same history. Dozens of league titles, cups etc were won quite legitimately by Rangers. You're not seriously suggesting that a club formed in 1872, should have ALL it's history discarded because of a the immoral and illegal acts of a couple of corrupt owners over a hundred years later? Sorry, but that's just total bollocks.The history stops with the company that owns the club and that company is soon to not exist. I'm not suggesting the history won't have existed, it just shouldn't be accredited to what is a new club/company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh_Jazz Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 The history stops with the company that owns the club and that company is soon to not exist. I'm not suggesting the history won't have existed, it just shouldn't be accredited to what is a new club/company.In that case you'd better strip Chelsea, Man City, Man United, Liverpool etc etc of all titles before their foreign owners took over.EDIT: Could we just do it for Liverpool? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinzHines Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 In that case you'd better strip Chelsea, Man City, Man United, Liverpool etc etc of all titles before their foreign owners took over.EDIT: Could we just do it for Liverpool?I'm all with you for Liverpool. And I agree with their famous saying that you can't buy history, very pertinent ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinzHines Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 Also so the question isn't avoided, all those takeovers didn't change company registrations. Uniteds is from 1907, liverpools 1892 and city's Is from 1894. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattJimF Posted July 30, 2012 Report Share Posted July 30, 2012 Just to highlight that nothing has changed:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-19046589 - fans being their typical selveshttp://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19040706 - everyone is against us crap once againThe fact that Green seems to think part of the reason they were kicked out of the SPL due to bigotry just shows he's fitted into the club perfectly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain America Posted July 30, 2012 Report Share Posted July 30, 2012 Whoever said Mertesacker is slow and immobile then I say to that person, you liar!Look at Per go. Moves like Jagger. Etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alkaline Posted July 30, 2012 Report Share Posted July 30, 2012 Whoever said Mertesacker is slow and immobile then I say to that person, you liar!Look at Per go. Moves like Jagger. Etc. He's an athlete for gods sake, of course he can move a bit but the guy has the turning circle of the bismark and the acceleration of a milk float. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain America Posted July 30, 2012 Report Share Posted July 30, 2012 He's an athlete for gods sake, of course he can move a bit but the guy has the turning circle of the bismark and the acceleration of a milk float. I was joking... anyone can see he is slow as hell.Still to good for spuds mind... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alkaline Posted July 30, 2012 Report Share Posted July 30, 2012 I was joking... anyone can see he is slow as hell.Still to good for spuds mind... Haha, touche Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattJimF Posted July 30, 2012 Report Share Posted July 30, 2012 Looks like Carroll is going to West Ham - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19056545 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain America Posted July 30, 2012 Report Share Posted July 30, 2012 Big Sam and Andy Carroll could be fantasy football GOLD! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodsinho Posted July 30, 2012 Report Share Posted July 30, 2012 Is he going to move back in with Kevin Nolan? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain America Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 BBC/Sky sports etc reporting that Cazorla is having a medical at Arsenal tomorrow or Friday. Would be thrilled with that signing, wont believe it until they traipse him out in the traditional manage-newplayer-shirt moment at the stadium though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemonade Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 The Sun today reporting that West Ham are going to sign Carroll Carroll for 21m and pay him 115,000 a week for 5 years, with a yearly pay rise and an option for another 3. Football has officially gone fucking mental. The crash must be round the corner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paranoid Android Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 Cazorla is such an un-arsenal like signing. Why is he not 14? and not French? and not useless until he decided he wants to leave?Could be signing of the season. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundian Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 The Sun today reporting that West Ham are going to sign Carroll Carroll for 21m and pay him 115,000 a week for 5 years, with a yearly pay rise and an option for another 3. Football has officially gone fucking mental. The crash must be round the corner.Either that or the Sun editors/journalists are completely sane and know how to get publicity for their rag. I don't think I've read a redtop in years. If I want unsubstantiated rumours I have the interweb 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delboy Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 I for one am looking forward to the race for the second get knocked straight out the champions league spot race in the SPL next season, should be a cracker. They ought to just give the title to Celtic now and save them the bother of playing! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemonade Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Either that or the Sun editors/journalists are completely sane and know how to get publicity for their rag.I don't think I've read a redtop in years. If I want unsubstantiated rumours I have the interwebThe interweb is for porn. Not football news. You're doing it wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.