fourfourtwo 1,990 Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 No twins, but you can see it yeah you can be better with the pic of Boyd with the tash to compare properly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
billythebear1986 307 Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 this is incredible. the wonders of the old thinternet Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMWWBK 0 Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 He isn't actually related to him as our wonderful historian got wrong. Even if he was, it's hardly as fascinating as some make out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoyd 355 Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 He isn't actually related to him as our wonderful historian got wrong. Even if he was, it's hardly as fascinating as some make out. How do you know that? I'd say its interesting at least, that one our current players is related to one of the original players. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedWhiteBlue1872 407 Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 Good find if true Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMWWBK 0 Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 Its been a bit of a red-herring this one, but all is not lost. The researches have shown that Kris's GGG Father William Dunlop did play for Rangers in 1899-00 and was one of the first to play on the New Ibrox Park (as distinct from the original location of the ground slightly east). He played less than 20 matches, having moved from Sunderland. When he left Ibrox, he joined Partick Thistle. He may not have been the William Dunlop that the family perhaps first thought had been involved, but the Rangers connection is still there with 109 years between them. I still think there may be a remote relationship with the original William Dunlop, but I am still exploring this. It is likely that the two families were related on some way, but not on the main lineage. Reply With Quote - Mason. I'm sure there's many players have/had links with players who have played under 20 games. Personally i find it ridiculous that the 'official' historian can make errors like this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoyd 355 Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 Its been a bit of a red-herring this one, but all is not lost. The researches have shown that Kris's GGG Father William Dunlop did play for Rangers in 1899-00 and was one of the first to play on the New Ibrox Park (as distinct from the original location of the ground slightly east). He played less than 20 matches, having moved from Sunderland. When he left Ibrox, he joined Partick Thistle. He may not have been the William Dunlop that the family perhaps first thought had been involved, but the Rangers connection is still there with 109 years between them. I still think there may be a remote relationship with the original William Dunlop, but I am still exploring this. It is likely that the two families were related on some way, but not on the main lineage. Reply With Quote - Mason. I'm sure there's many players have/had links with players who have played under 20 games. Personally i find it ridiculous that the 'official' historian can make errors like this. I'm not sure where/when he came out with the actual "Kris Boyd is related to Dunlop" was it FF? I'm not on that, but i wonder if he just put it up as a in the works thinking idea, like i do with some of my research on rangers, not as a definitive FINAL answer, as he is still researching for a new book he is writing... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Railcard 2 Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 my second name is watt this guy on the back right is gettin investigated Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TunnyLoyal 1,136 Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 He isn't actually related to him as our wonderful historian got wrong. Even if he was, it's hardly as fascinating as some make out. How is it not fascinating? It's the history of our club and I find anything like this interesting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianBacon 2,088 Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 The findings of this report are apparently not all that they seem to be. In other words, it may be an erronious report. That is all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoyd 355 Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 He isn't actually related to him as our wonderful historian got wrong. Even if he was, it's hardly as fascinating as some make out. How is it not fascinating? It's the history of our club and I find anything like this interesting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts