lebooboo

How quaint.

Such an original post. How did you think of it?

BTW, if anyone is really desperate for one, and can't get them elsewhere, I have a few left.

The traders do NOT contribute to the Erskine Appeal. Those badges are fake. There were some of the genuine badges for sale on Ebay...put on there by the guy who runs the Rangers Supporters Erskine Appeal. There may still be some there.

Bobby Charlton, Geoff Hurst, and Bobby Robson...all of these well deserved imo. When making suggestions that Walter should be knighted, one only needs to look at the likes of Trevor Brooking or Bert Millichip to realise that someone of Walter's stature deserves a knighthood for his services to the game. He has achieved a lot more IN the game, and contributed far more TO the game, than these two for a start.

If Vladdy Weiss Was half as nice As heaven that you take me to Who needs Vladdy Weiss, I'd say that we do

What reason am I here for, Oh Learned One. This should be good.

Jesus. You are certainly one crazy, mixed up individual. A poster on a Rangers messageboard with a preference for t*rriers...how quaint. Care to expand on what I defended, or what questions got me down? Take your time now.

Some of us who have few posts, have come over here to get an idea of the opinion of Bears who don't post on FF. That's as it should be on issues like those discussed on this thread. Personally I don't usually post on RM because I find it a bit slow. You should be glad we're bumping up the traffic a bit.

You're one of those guys who just can't stick to being factual, aren't you? We can agree that he owed £2690....that's easier to type than "nearly £3000". As far as I understand it, the auditor has now made recommendations (I can't remember the correct technical phrase used) that this, and other practices with RST accounting, should not continue. Hopefully this will result in the transparency we all want, whover sits on the RST board in future.

You know why the money was owed, and you know it wasn't a loan, so why the verbal gymnastics? We should be sticking to facts in this affair, so that everyone can eventually get a bit of transparency as to what's been going on, and then everyone can move forward. Muddying the waters with inaccuracy isn't going to help in that pursuit.

But it wasn't a loan, was it? That's why I said it was misrepresented. As you know, he said he owed the money. I don't think that is in dispute. However, you referring to it being "paid back" reinforces your suggestion that it was a loan, which it was not. I don't think there is anything to be gained from trying to represent the money due, as being something that it wasn't.

Someone asks you a reasonable question, and the abuse starts. Very good.

When did putting a post on a messageboard become known as having "released the following statement"?

You deliberately misrepresent the situation on this, do you not? 1. How does late payment for RST function tickets, become a loan? 2. How does someone "pay back the money", if no money was ever borrowed? There may be questions that need answered, but trying to represent what happened, as something it was not, is not the way to go.