Jump to content


First Team
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About BoydsFavouriteDonut

  • Rank
    Fringe Player

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. They can’t get anyone decent in at the moment due to cost, the mental fans etc. Anyone they brought in would be a cheap temporary option (former player etc), which wouldn’t go down well. By new year either Lennon will have steadied the ship and they can justify giving him to the end of the season, or they will be so far off it that they can bring someone new in without any real expectation to win the league. New person can be funded with player sales and given a long term contract given they need a rebuild. If they had the cash and ability to bring a top class manager in now, th
  2. What we need today is a goalkeeping horror show from Bain to remind them why they felt the need to spend £5m on a goalie.
  3. The £5m shite keeper and Brown dropped by the looks of it.
  4. Think I read somewhere it's 50% of gate receipts before costs. So, in real terms the club's cut will be significantly less than 50%. Scandalous. Can't see this going through - why would they pass up on free cash - although I obviously hope it does. Don't know if Rangers were asked to support this - if so the board have done the right thing staying out of it. Don't give the fuckers the satisfaction.
  5. I had a look at the Parkhead title sheet that's up on the footballtaxhavens website. In my view it doesn't show that Wille Haughey owns their ground. That title sheet relates to the Superiors' interest under the old feudal land system. Superiorities were all abolished a few years ago. The feu has now been converted to absolute ownership. So, the true owner of the ground is the successor to the original feu granted in 1911 - one of the Celtic companies I'd expect - and the Co-op will have a security over that interest. There's plenty other dirt for the Commission to wade through though!
  6. His firm are also appointed as "official lawyers to the Glasgow Commonwealth games". They never shut up about it and are doing the lot. Fingers in every pie.
  7. 100% behind this. A one word change would make no real difference to the impact of the song. I always felt some people stopped singing or mumbled when they got to that line before the song got banned. Take away the word and there's no reason why everyone can't be belting this out. The scum would hate it and there would be fuck all that anyone could do about it.
  8. I'll be over the moon if they are shown to have been in cahoots with GCC and get a heavy fine. Justice could never be more poetic. Further up the thread it was suggested that it would be easy for a reader to trace the title. It was also asked what the deal would be if it turned out the scum didn't actually own the land. Pre-recession I was involved in this type of work for more than ten years and just tried to answer those questions. It's somewhat self defeating for the guys trying to publicise this stuff if, when posters like me get involved, folk question our motives.
  9. Tannerall - it's not always possible to work out who owns a bit of land, especially if it hasn't been conveyed for years. In this case I'd be very surprised if you could come up with anything definitive without a lot of searching, and even then you might draw a blank. What will have happened is that the council will have conveyed the land without a demonstrable title. The council won't have given that lot any title warranties or title guarantee. The scum wouldn't have cared though - all they would have wanted is a title capable of being registered so as to start the process of prescription. B
  10. Was there not talk a while back of them trying to claim back the legal costs that the SPL racked up on the "investigation" and the enquiry (again at Rod's suggestion)? That's all gone a bit quiet. Bottom line is that they spent a fortune on this, are skint, and are scratching around trying to find some cash. What concerns me is that I don't think the 5-way carve up has ever been released (along with the Sky contract its the one thing that never seems to get leaked). Do we know for a fact that Charles didn't agree to pay any financial penalty imposed? If that isn't specifically in the agreement
  11. If PLG was such a footballing genius why could/would he not address the obvious problem with his team that everyone else in Scotland could see - namely that we could not defend crosses. It was even worse that Criberi and co. Every single time the ball came over a goal looked likely. Walter came in and the first thing he did was sign big Ugo to provide some height and presence in the middle - immediately the defence looked more solid, we stopped losing soft goals every week and we had a decent finish to the season. We started that season under PLG playing some really nice football but a number
  12. Did fat Rod not write the rules? Now he's being asked to interpret them. This should be easy, unless of course Doncaster and co are desperate to avoid Hearts going down... This is just the start for Hearts. They are totally fucked. Why would a detached insolvency practitioner in Lithuania accept pennies in the pound for the debt if the assets can be stripped and sold for more (the only asset being the land under Tynecastle)? Suppose they are fortunate that there is not nearly the demand for residential development land in central Edinburgh as there was when the Pie Man was running the show. Pe
  13. I'd like to see an official response from Rangers to the scum's statement mentioning some or all of the following points: - 1. Green was dragged before the discipinary committee for, it was alledged, questioning the integrity of the tribunal. Celtic's statement questions the tribunal's decision (it suggests they think it is ludicrous) and Lennon in his usual style hinted that he always thought Rangers would "get their way", which seems to undermine the integrity of the tribunal. 2. Given that the EBT scheme has been held to be legal it would be perverse to conclude that using it is cheating. T
  14. I love it how he always responds to a question about us by saying "I don't want to talk about them", and then proceeds to talk about us for the next 5 minutes. Clown of a man. This clearly hasn't gone the way Fat Rod told them it would. Hahahahahahahaha.
  15. Wasn't at the game and didn't see it as I don't have EPSN so I'm just going on what has been written on here and the stuff on You Tube. A few themes seem to be developing: - 1. Anger that the Club may have had a hand in the singing being raised as an issue: I think people need to accept that the leadership of the Club are not traditional Rangers people who are in any way engrained in this stuff. They are predominantly English and otherwise foreign. I suspect they don't understand or give a shit about this stuff. What they do care about is the reputation of the Club as this affects sponsorship
  • Create New...