Jump to content

Northampton_Loyalist

New Signing
  • Content Count

    64
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Northampton_Loyalist

  1. With the greatest of respect, people engaging in debate/fighting generally are in a position to look after themselves and if they are not, they shouldnt be there. The articles may have been 'torn apart' but I seriously doubt Boss recieved personal abuse over it, and if he did he could at least ban the perpetrators. That all aside, there is little more for me to say. I have asked for comments from the author and when/if they come, we will see if there needs to be a reply from me. As for the last part, if you (as in the royal 'you', not you Rabbit personally) have not contributed to the fracture
  2. I strongly reject ANY suggestion that the people involved in the protests (on any level above vocal support) gave abuse (which we recieved) or bullshit (which we recieved) to ANYONE who was against them. I approached you and Boss privately and discussed publicising the protests (which despite your obvious disaproval?, and to your credit, you agreed to allow free reign to advertise) and from that moment everyone was in full on courtesy mode. We all knew that fighting would do nothing except push potential helpers away and so avoided getting drawn into anything other than the most civil chats on
  3. Fair enough, I was merely responding to Gunslinger. I have no idea of Boss's (or your) fair mindedness or otherwise.
  4. Bring some clarity? Do AJ's comments not kind prove that the last thing the articles brought was clarity and that they infact served to provide the exact and polar opposite? whatever your opinion on protests, you must surely agree that they are, if peaceful and directed, at the very least legitimate? that those who DO see them as an option have every right to go forward? The article published here came a day before a planned protest in which Muir was to be mentioned as a secondary target. The article, by admission of the author, came directly after a meeting between him and Muir. Now, please f
  5. Well, contacts detailed himself a meeting with Muir and he put his name on the article telling us that Muir was the best thing to happen to the club. Published a day before protests which were known to have Muir as a secondary target. If Boss uses what is certainly his perogative and simply deletes these posts, there is little that can be said. I have been polite, avoided abuse and I have refrained from making any accusations, going so far as to edit out one part that might have been mistaken for one. I would be disapointed to be denied serious and civil answers to serious and civil questions.
  6. He is the chap I was particularly looking for comments from over AJ's statements. A man who sat with Muir and then wrote an article which happened to de-rail the protests. If I were him I would feel sick at this statement because it shows that poster to have colluded with Muir at worst, and at best to have been used by him against the best interests of the people on the board of RFC. (edited out what looked like an accusation of the article being deliberately to derail protests. I cant possibly prove or back up any such accusation)
  7. You are mistaken, I didnt say they were your comments at all, I simply put them into perspective for you. To start with, him saying they are there for Murray does not in any tiny way say that are not there for the bank. MIH was at the time gubbed and doing everything it could to off-set huge losses. If Lloyds told Murray to put Muir on the board, AJ's comments provided by you would be 100% accurate, just hiding the truth a little, exactly what you would expect of a man trying to do his best for the club.
  8. This article and quotes very clearly puts that down as the rubbish it was. There is no way on Earth that AJ would simply make up what has been said tonight; firstly the legal ramifications would be obvious and secondly, a simple denial from anyone would cast more shadow over the clusterf*ck that is RFC today. Previous comments have to be looked at in perspective, the perspective here being a man (AJ) clearly trying to do his best for the club while hamstrung. The comments you give do not in any way directly contradict tonights, they are simply a non commital way of avoiding saying Muir is at t
  9. After taking pelters from people on here, after seeing an article before the protests last year painting Muir as a saviour and all round good guy, I wonder if those same people would like to comment on our chairman's comments in this article http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/8422821/Rangers-chairman-admits-the-club-could-go-bust-if-no-white-knight-is-found.html in particular this part
  10. http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/sport/editor-s-picks-ignore/rangers-chairman-sceptical-about-ellis-takeover-bid-1.1028614 Ellis' spokesman is not allowed to comment but if you read FF, the attention seeking fantasist NorthamptonLoyalist has been on the phone to him again Why dont you, for the good people of RM, copy the post that I put up in here. The one that was up 2 hours ago, contradicted 100% AJ and has just a few minutes ago been 100% corroborated by Ellis in the sporting life article. THAT fantasy. Great wee crystal ball I have there, dont you think? This post is EXACTLY the reason I
  11. when I wrote the first conversation up and posted it on FF i was asked to post the next one up here. I do and get comments about Torbetts dong. Nice. Gotta love the claim of a site open to all and more 'user friendly' than it's rivals. The info is there, nothing earth shattering, and if the deal goes through it will all be proven by dint of a wee interview. I will wait for the appologies should that happen with baited breath (but not held, that would be daft). In the mean time, I wont bother next time. Thanks those that dont automatically jump in with 'humourous' quips, shame not all on here
  12. He didnt. He called me (after a text). 3rd time I have spoken to him now. well why the hell would he call somebody he doesnt know????? I have spoken to him a total of three times now. I asked him a question and he called me up to reply.
  13. He didnt. He called me (after a text). 3rd time I have spoken to him now.
  14. It is covered in the last thread (cant find it, few weeks old) I know someone who he knows from his time in a town that my username might be a clue to
  15. Off the phone again. Again, sent a text basically asking if there was any chance of a wee update, if they were still interested and if he could put a time frame on the deal being completed if it was likely it would. I added in 'Appologies for texting rather than phoning again, I simply did not want to disturb you more than this has already nor put you in any awkward situation' because I realize that texting is a pretty shitty way to contact someone but i genuinely wanted to maximise the chance of a reply and minimize pissing him off. Last time I texted a simple question when the rumours of the
  16. Can anyone point me to where anyone involved claimed McColl was involved beyond an adivsory role? For every article, comment or hint from a half credible source you give, I will reply with 5 who contradict you. A paper got half a story and ran with it, selling copy in the process. The RST and McColl both moved to distance themselves from the first report, the herald sells yet more copy. people with an axe to grind, people who would stop drinking water if the RST led a campaign to popularise it, seized it and used it as a stick to beat the RST with. It is no surprise at all to see obviously int
  17. Ties in with what I posted on FF 2 days ago after hearing the deal was still on from the horses mouth. Out of you myself and the herald, I know who i believe
  18. cheers for that. If you know, who scored the second please?
  19. I don't think it was Rangers board members organising said campaign but the anti-Muir sentiment has had different stages to it - the most recent one being the protest led by Iniesta/N_L which I believe was free from inter-site/personality conflict for the most part. Now, it may well be N_L's information is the next stage in the spin being employed by the different sides in the battle to buy Rangers but, personally, I think that is over-analysing the situation. It's not as if anything overly important has arisen out of the conversation as anyone with a modicum of intelligence would take Mr Elli
  20. Apologies NL it was not a dig more an observation, as long as all are treated with the same suspicion as that afforded to Mr Muir, a level playing field so to speak, we may fair better than going for the only show in town, there are said to be others. I have no doubts or cause to doubt the honesty of your posts or contacts and apologise if it appeared I inferred that. Hindsight is a wonderful thing and I am as guilty as any at times of exercising it, I never thought I would ever say this in relation to Murray, but sometimes the old adage about the devil you know proves to be the best route at
  21. sorry baldeagle, im not only on here. Im not quite sure what you want me to say anyway, i didnt pass on any opinion here, simply stated what was said. how any percieved 'judgement' is involved im not quite sure. I didnt like the way our club was heading and got off my arse to try and change it. If that represents an arror of judgement, I can live with it. But, and as I said, I'm not quite sure how any 'judgement' was involved in this thread. If you dont want to believe the conversation happened then that is entirely up to yourself, I hope to be proven right in the future but cant say for sure
  22. When he answered the phone I had a list of things I wanted to say to him and questions I wanted to ask. Within seconds my head was empty After describing who I was and how I had come to talk to him, he made it VERY clear that he did not want to talk about Rangers and he from there volunteered all the information about QPR and Northampton town. after he had said his piece on that, i mentioned that fans were wary of his motives because of his history and he then went on to make his comments about flats etc. Should I have asked more? maybe, maybe not, he probably treated the conversation exactly
  23. very very well written piece by English. Saw through the excuses and bullshit. All they have to do is be quiet for a minute and Rangers' big bad plans to make them look bad are thwarted. But they wont, they will shame themselves again and try to blame everyone else bar the troglodydes who are at fault
×
×
  • Create New...