Dick Dastardly

Interesting idea from Hughes. Isn't us restarting from the 3rd division an idea that he tried to implement while he was chairman Being serious for a minute, if you were Rangers and were being forced to restart from the bottom again, would you not look at trying to restart through the English leagues ?

The two contracts is proven and admitted by RFC as being against SFA and SPL rules (this is probably the bringing the game into disrepute which resulted in the transfer embargo). What is not proven is whether it was legitimate tax avoidance (as claimed by RFC) or illegal tax evasion (as claimed by HMRC)

Another £30m put out of reach from Duff and Duffer

McGuigan looks to be a handful. the little knock back when on the deck to set up the opener shows that he is thinking about his game. I do hope we can get him signed up. I also hope it is a good sign that Cairney ran straight to Jackie after the second goal. Please stay Paul.

And how many of the 2002 Scottish Cup semi final squad were on contracts that couldn't be afforded if they were not avoiding paying tax ? We were cheated out of a Scottish Cup final. As for the transfer embargo, that penalty was for a breach of SFA rule 66 - bringing the game into disrepute. The panel will shortly publish exactly why they think that rule was broken. Only £50k of the fine and the earlier 10 point penalty were for going into administration.

As for the original question. I was in the Tee Hee camp, but as the story has dragged on, I am a bit ambivoulent. I just hope that whatever happens brings about real change in Scottish club football. If not, it won't be just Rangers that die.

Is it ? I see this as a bit of a non-punishment, other than making liquidation more inevitable than it already was. The fines will never get paid, other than maybe pennies in the pound if Rangers do go the CVA route. It is just a few hundred thousand onto the total which will get divided by the same amount of money put up by Rangers. The difference now is that via the CVA route, they pick up the transfer embargo. If they go the liquidation route, no fines get paid and the transfer embargo does not apply to the new company, which hasn't broken any rules. There will be the SPL lottery of having Rangers 1690 FC or whatever they call themselves re-elected, but I would put money on how that would turn out. So, via liquidation, this is a meaningless punishment and liquidation was always the most likely outcome.

The one hope that I have is that UEFA have something to say about Rangers re-entering in the SPL, effectively without punishment. If they were to threaten to ban Scotish clubs from European competition and or sanctions against the national side then maybe, just maybe, we would get 5 clubs voting against them. Bit of a long shot as I haven't seen much action from UEFA before and I suspect FIFA are more corrupt than the Rangers board (allegedly) were.

I would say that is dubious. As I understand it,the Rangers case is the first of many EBT cases, so if HMRC were to accept 10p in the pound it would give all of the other offenders a get out clause, so asking Rangers to cough up the lot, forcing liquidation and getting nothing, may actually force the other cases to settle and maximising the HMRC revenue overall. Lots of ifs, buts and maybes, but from everything that I have read, I think that liquidation is the most likely outcome and New Rangers being voted back into the SPL the most likely concequence (why would the other 11 clubs vote for a smaller travelling support and with Rangers share of the pot reduced it would meen more money for the other members).

Maybe it's just me, but I would give my back teeth and my right arm to have a team as boring as County if we could have a 17 point lead at the top of the table.

If there are more points for a score draw than a no score draw then it becomes open to abuse where clubs can artificially create a score draw and they both reap the points benefits. Leave it just as it is please.

Contador was an idiot. He got caught by the Gendarmes in a French hotel with pharmacuticles banned in France ..... Soap, deoderant and shampoo.

16 is by far and away the best option in my view, however if the powers that be insist on giving us smaller leagues and playing 4 times, how about having 4 "periods" that determine the play off places. So the over all league winner gets promotted automatically. Excluding the league winner, the team that had the best record from the first round of games goes to the playoff Excluding the above 2, the team that had the best record from the second round of games goes to the playoff Excluding the above 3, the team that had the best record from the third round of games goes to the playoff Excluding the above 4, the team that had the best record from the fourth round of games goes to the playoff This is used in several other countries (Belgium springs to mind) and it keeps interest for most clubs right to the seasons end. If you have a bad start, there is still something to play for. Also, if your playoff place is safe, you have a great option to blood younger players later in the season. Not ideal as we still have to play teams 4 times (potentially 8 if we get drawn in all the cups and have to face a replay) but it has to be better than what we have.

Has anyone told Jackie about this ? If we don't get a reaction from the squad from being back in the promotion race then we never will.

Have to agree with you. I absolutely don't want sanctions against the national side, but I wouldn't mind if UEFA were to threaten it

If Rangers do get liquidated, as seems likely, I can envisage a scenario where football in Scotland doesn't start next season. With so many conflicting interests, it is likely that whatever the authorities do with Rangers 1690, someone will take it to the courts and get an injuction to prevent the season starting. That said, I think that this is the crossroads where the league reorganisation that has been talked about for years will finally happen.I just hope that they listen to the fans and get rid of this rediculous playing each other 4 times nonsense. The 12-10 or 10-12 structure is a joke and answers nothing. We need a top league of 16 minimum, 18 better.

Don't they sing about potatoes ?

Whilst I agree that is the most likely outcome, I just wonder (and hope) what the UEFA reaction to that would be. Platini is keen on financial fair play, so would they take sactions against the SFA (even kick us out of UEFA) if that were to happen ?

Are they paying their debts to the satisfaction of their creditors ? If so, why are they cheats ? That is like saying that I can't buy a box of cornflakes because I have a mortgage on my house. Having debt and paying it off is just good business practice, The problem comes if the debt doesn't get paid.

Is the St. Mirren statement not in response to speculation that someone could buy them (or another SPL club) and rename them Rangers 1690 FC or something. I would be very surprised if there is not a club called "Rangers" playing in blue and white in the SPL next season.

And if I am allowed one more observation that realy gets on my wick, can we stop all this pish about entertaining football. Supporters want their club to win. Period. If Jackie had a team that had won every match tis season 1-0 with games tied down in midfield, would we be giving him pelters ? If we had lost every game 5-4 with umpteen more chances hitting the woodwork would we be criticising him ? Which of these Jags teams would bring in more supporters ?

Yes I do think that we are being a little unfair to Jackie. First of all, I think he has at times been a little unlucky. Remember the start we had - Dundee, Hamilton, Falkirk and Hamilton again. We could have easily won all 4, but ended up with just a point after some bizarre refereeing decisions. The fact that we didn't win them maybe contains the reason that Jackie is under threat. Now I will admit that I have been to just 3 games this season (I live in Stockport and would go to more if I could) however what I have seen is that Jackie has tightened up the defence significantly. Last season we looked like a bombscare for every ball that came into the box. Although we still look vulnerable to free kicks, we now look far more organised and that can be seen from the fact that (until the Livvy game) no one had put 3 past us in the league. Sorting out the defence doesn't make for entertaining football, but ask any Ross fan if they are bothered about that. Sadly for Jackie it looks to have been at the expense of the forwards, so with them being goal shy and Fox dropping his form from last season, I do think that Jackie is close to putting out a Jags side that could challenge. If we had scored 10 more goals (or let in 10 less) we would be challenging, such is the fine line between success and failure in this league. Having said all that, I do think that something has changed since the turn of the year. I don't know if Jackie is trying something different (Paton to holding midfield has worked for Paton, but has it worked for the team ?). I hope that Jackie can turn it round as I think that he will one day be a realy good manager. I just hope that he is given time at Firhill to do it for us.

Was it Dools that got the goal ? BBC is saying Naismith.

I don't know if there is any truth in the visiting supporters claims or not, but isn't there a bigger issue here. We are struggling to get our own supporters through the turnstiles, so shouldn't we be doing all that we can to make Firhill the number 1 attraction for visiting fans ? I'm not suggesting that we let them in cut price, but lets atleast make the accomodation comfortable and offfer them decent food and facilities.

Nah ! We'd only miss them both. Actually, if Thistle were awarded a penalty, would the world explode. It would meen that someone would have to have a direct shot at goal, unless there is an option to lay it off to a player in a worse position.