The bitter bigotted twisted people not on these boards have started already !

[Ace 3,556]

Paranoia is alive & well & living on RMed.

The East extention of the Subway isn't just running to Parkhead ...it has around 6 other stops as well, for which i am happy as i won't need to get into town anymore to get to Ibrox, i can drop into a local staion. Glasgow City Council serving me.

Does anyone SERIOUSLY believe that the whole Subway extention is to help Celtic fans get to Parkhead easier ..... i mean ... seriously !!?!?!!?!?

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

Paranoia is alive & well & living on RMed.

The East extention of the Subway isn't just running to Parkhead ...it has around 6 other stops as well, for which i am happy as i won't need to get into town anymore to get to Ibrox, i can drop into a local staion. Glasgow City Council serving me.

Does anyone SERIOUSLY believe that the whole Subway extention is to help Celtic fans get to Parkhead easier ..... i mean ... seriously !!?!?!!?!?

I suggest you refer to BIC's earlier post...

There is evidence of this with the way GCC are planning the Subway link to the East End. Originally the plan was to have three stops at Bridgeton, Dalmarnock and Parkhead. But due to "funding" they have now decided that only one stop will be made, this being Parkhead.

[ricardopatrese 0]

Paranoia is alive & well & living on RMed.

The East extention of the Subway isn't just running to Parkhead ...it has around 6 other stops as well, for which i am happy as i won't need to get into town anymore to get to Ibrox, i can drop into a local staion. Glasgow City Council serving me.

Does anyone SERIOUSLY believe that the whole Subway extention is to help Celtic fans get to Parkhead easier ..... i mean ... seriously !!?!?!!?!?

I suggest you refer to BIC's earlier post...

There is evidence of this with the way GCC are planning the Subway link to the East End. Originally the plan was to have three stops at Bridgeton, Dalmarnock and Parkhead. But due to "funding" they have now decided that only one stop will be made, this being Parkhead.

at least when porkheid gets a subway, we wont be the only glasgow club with 10,000 fans leaving 10 minutes early!

[Gaffbear 4,096]

Subway to the phiggery a priority. First phase to be a link from the SECC to the bheggardome, games village and THE NEW INDOOR ARENA. Wonder who'll get the use of that when it's all over and done with Eh ? They are just softening you up as well for when they hit you with further body blows like how much will be spent on celtic park. Seven years to go and and it's all hands to the pumps to improve the bheggars lot as quickly as possible at the hand of the mug taxpayer. Never mind we'll have the revenue thats generated by the rugby sevens in 2014 !

Once the subway goes to Tin Pan Alley then lets see if there are anymore Subway strikes on European nights....

[finzster 0]

Minstral, can you clarify something that I'm unsure about:

DO you actually support Rangers, or are you just anti celtic? I'm not sure as I never see your posts on football related 'Pro RFC' discussions; all your posts involve moaning about the tims getting this or that!

[Frankie 505]

You don't look very far then finzster...

As much as we'd all may like to restrict the forum to Rangers chat, debate about Celtic is always going to happen because of their relevance to our own success. Sometimes people may go a bit OTT in that regard but I don't see anyone on here being more concerned about Celtic than our own team.

The issue about the Commonwealth games is an interesting and very valid one. While the regeneration of the East End and the sporting side of the games is certainly agreeable and much needed there is also no doubt that Celtic will profit from this while others (such as ourselves) won't.

To what extent is certainly debatable but that doesn't mean it's not worth discussing - preferable without personal jibes from either 'camp'.

[minstral 5,375]

Minstral, can you clarify something that I'm unsure about:

DO you actually support Rangers, or are you just anti celtic? I'm not sure as I never see your posts on football related 'Pro RFC' discussions; all your posts involve moaning about the tims getting this or that!

no i dont support rangers i know nothing about them, i just try and bluff my way around and find all the old clips i post to make it look good and try to get by that way, and i have done okay so far, and if you have time to go through all my posts then you will see how good i am at hiding the fact that i support another team, maybe you can educate me. <_<

[finzster 0]

You don't look very far then finzster...

As much as we'd all may like to restrict the forum to Rangers chat, debate about Celtic is always going to happen because of their relevance to our own success. Sometimes people may go a bit OTT in that regard but I don't see anyone on here being more concerned about Celtic than our own team.

The issue about the Commonwealth games is an interesting and very valid one. While the regeneration of the East End and the sporting side of the games is certainly agreeable and much needed there is also no doubt that Celtic will profit from this while others (such as ourselves) won't.

To what extent is certainly debatable but that doesn't mean it's not worth discussing - preferable without personal jibes from either 'camp'.

What about Partick Thistle fans, surely they have a stronger basis for a gripe than the gers; as they get SFA out of the games, at least RFC will make revenue out of the games.

Moreover, I'm pretty sure the dhims were making similar arguements when a subway station was created outside Ibrox, and the fact that the only stadium that the subway fully caters for is Ibrox. It's all horses for courses as far as I can see: Yes the dhims are profitting out the games by the creation of a subway station, however Rangers have profitted from the tax payers expenditure for years due to the subway at Ibrox.

Regarding the facelife, I couldn't give a monkeys. I would have thought that Celtic will be expected to contribute to the works within their stadium; indeed they will require to commission it all; otherwise it would be very messy regarding warranties and liability should any of the renovation damage existing untouched parts of the stad. In any case, if it were solely funded by GCC, then you can bet yer buttons that it wont be high spec, low maintenance systems that are installed!

Fair point regarding Minstral, I checked his posts after I posted and he does post in football related matters, so apologies for the unwarranted accusastion big man :beer2: !

[minstral 5,375]

You don't look very far then finzster...

As much as we'd all may like to restrict the forum to Rangers chat, debate about Celtic is always going to happen because of their relevance to our own success. Sometimes people may go a bit OTT in that regard but I don't see anyone on here being more concerned about Celtic than our own team.

The issue about the Commonwealth games is an interesting and very valid one. While the regeneration of the East End and the sporting side of the games is certainly agreeable and much needed there is also no doubt that Celtic will profit from this while others (such as ourselves) won't.

To what extent is certainly debatable but that doesn't mean it's not worth discussing - preferable without personal jibes from either 'camp'.

What about Partick Thistle fans, surely they have a stronger basis for a gripe than the gers; as they get SFA out of the games, at least RFC will make revenue out of the games.

Moreover, I'm pretty sure the dhims were making similar arguements when a subway station was created outside Ibrox, and the fact that the only stadium that the subway fully caters for is Ibrox. It's all horses for courses as far as I can see: Yes the dhims are profitting out the games by the creation of a subway station, however Rangers have profitted from the tax payers expenditure for years due to the subway at Ibrox.

Regarding the facelife, I couldn't give a monkeys. I would have thought that Celtic will be expected to contribute to the works within their stadium; indeed they will require to commission it all; otherwise it would be very messy regarding warranties and liability should any of the renovation damage existing untouched parts of the stad. In any case, if it were solely funded by GCC, then you can bet yer buttons that it wont be high spec, low maintenance systems that are installed!

Fair point regarding Minstral, I checked his posts after I posted and he does post in football related matters, so apologies for the unwarranted accusastion big man :beer2: !

no problem.

[Frankie 505]

What about Partick Thistle fans, surely they have a stronger basis for a gripe than the gers; as they get SFA out of the games, at least RFC will make revenue out of the games.

Moreover, I'm pretty sure the dhims were making similar arguements when a subway station was created outside Ibrox, and the fact that the only stadium that the subway fully caters for is Ibrox. It's all horses for courses as far as I can see: Yes the dhims are profitting out the games by the creation of a subway station, however Rangers have profitted from the tax payers expenditure for years due to the subway at Ibrox.

Regarding the facelife, I couldn't give a monkeys. I would have thought that Celtic will be expected to contribute to the works within their stadium; indeed they will require to commission it all; otherwise it would be very messy regarding warranties and liability should any of the renovation damage existing untouched parts of the stad. In any case, if it were solely funded by GCC, then you can bet yer buttons that it wont be high spec, low maintenance systems that are installed!

Fair point regarding Minstral, I checked his posts after I posted and he does post in football related matters, so apologies for the unwarranted accusastion big man :beer2: !

Erm, I did say others - I include all clubs in Glasgow.

I also didn't argue about the Subway station at any point. That's is arguably required for that area and although I'm not based in Glasgow myself I can imagine this is necessary for the Games itself. Is it worth the money it will cost? Well again that's debatable depending on the existing infrastructure.

I do take issue with regard to any improvement of their stadium though. Celtic Park is not required for the opening ceremony and as such more money could be spent on other parts of the games rather than spending it on a stadium we don't need to use - low spec improvements or not.

Like I say, the extent of how Celtic will benefit is debatable. In addition, no club should profit out of hosting any event. Any monies made should be shared or donated to other projects and I include Rangers in that. Similarly, no stadium should have independent money spent on it unless they pay it back.

[finzster 0]

Quite right actually Danny, I agree that no club should profit from the public purse when it is as black and white as that! I rescind my ealier post about not being bothered about the actual porkheid stadium getting a cheap refurb, unless they pay for it.

[Frankie 505]

Please don't EVER confuse me with Danny again.

Ever!

;)

[finzster 0]

Please don't EVER confuse me with Danny again.

Ever!

;)

Ooopsie!