Jump to content

Turkeys vote for Christmas


gogzy

Recommended Posts

as daviecooper01 states above I don't see much that is beneficial to Scottish football as a whole, or to Rangers as a club, within this decision. But as he further states we as a club are far from helpless for it is in our power as fans to deprive the other clubs of that which they crave, and in some cases that need is desperate, namely the Rangers pound. This shouldn't be seen as a clarion call for boycotts but simply a desire to support our club to its upmost financially by ensuring that every pound we spend goes to Rangers and benefits only Rangers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 99
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

You do know that the SFA have to act under the auspices of UEFA & FIFA? The SFA can determine which league is the top league and can decide what positions to award the Euro places for, or not.

Any split which removed a chunk of the existing SPL plus a number of other teams could have a legitimate voice to be the top tier.

Will never happen though, people will still trek along to a dying sport moaning about it, whilst the blazers make off with what cash is left.

Can you really see the SFA deciding to give us a European place if they didn't have to?

Me neither!

Link to post
Share on other sites

In a word gogzy....no!

i hope we don't accept no. The club or RRF should be taking legal advice on this and not just shrug our shoulders and carry on. IMO we will be judged in history for not standing up for ourselves. No surrender to the cabal.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Boycotts will never happen, we couldnt even do it for 1 game never mind every other game.

The place is fucked now.

Have to disagree with this there was a massive reduction in the amount of Rangers fans

who went to the DUFC game, maybe not 100% effective but it worked.

Link to post
Share on other sites

as daviecooper01 states above I don't see much that is beneficial to Scottish football as a whole, or to Rangers as a club, within this decision. But as he further states we as a club are far from helpless for it is in our power as fans to deprive the other clubs of that which they crave, and in some cases that need is desperate, namely the Rangers pound. This shouldn't be seen as a clarion call for boycotts but simply a desire to support our club to its upmost financially by ensuring that every pound we spend goes to Rangers and benefits only Rangers.

Spot on. :541:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Resign and apply for the lower reaches of English football, it really is that simple.

The big chance for leaving was last year when we didn't have a league to play in. I cant see it happening anytime soon now unless we see a British league appear.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if these clubs new to the SPL fold insisted on an indemnity clause written into this agreement in respect of Harry Hood's claim against the SPL.

http://www.dailyreco...ry-hood-1785059

What is the point of an indemnity clause? They now have Rangers to pay that bill so won't affect any other team :pipe:

Link to post
Share on other sites

This says it all really

Jim Ballantyne, president of the SFL, described the restructuring as a "takeover" rather than a merger.

"We are joining their company, their organisation," he explained. "They have swallowed us up. We could use nice words about it, but it is a takeover.

"It is very sad that the Scottish Football League has had to be a casualty but unfortunately we were left with one option.

"Did I want to see the end of the Scottish Football League? Absolutely not. Did I want to see football strive forward? Then yes. It will be for others to decide if this step takes us to where we want to go."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do all these officials keep coming out to say "there was only one option"?

Why was there only one option?! What are the specific consequences should this "option" not be chosen? There is a distinct lack of detail being given out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do all these officials keep coming out to say "there was only one option"?

Why was there only one option?! What are the specific consequences should this "option" not be chosen? There is a distinct lack of detail being given out.

The only one option on the table is to keep screwing Rangers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...