Rangers FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2012/2013

Dempsey · 01-02-2012 12:25am

dartbhoy wrote: »

Supposedly on tomorrow's Scottish Sun there's a story that the 2 giant TV screens that were in Ibrox are up for sale online on e-bay!

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4097979/Rangers-screensbr-for-sale-on-eBay.html

FOOTY fans can net a historic Rangers double — their stadium's two giant screens.

The massive structures, made up of 900 panels, are up for grabs for £15,000.

The Sony Jumbotron screens had been in place at the Light Blues' home since 1997 but were replaced recently.

Asset resale specialists GARC Ltd are flogging them on eBay for a leasing firm.

A spokesman said: "It's a competitive price."

Read more: http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4097979/Rangers-screensbr-for-sale-on-eBay.html#ixzz1l56OcCdf

Selling old stuff, non story really

bobbysands81 · 01-02-2012 12:25am

RoryMac wrote: »

Am I right thinking no accounts means no licence to play in Europe?

I'm now not sure if these accounts are those of RFC.

Dempsey · 01-02-2012 12:27am

RoryMac wrote: »

Am I right thinking no accounts means no licence to play in Europe?

Not sure but any tax liability means no european licence

bobbysands81 · 01-02-2012 12:27am

lubo_moravcik wrote: »

one in and ten out, that's 11 pieces of business by the rangers

Much did you spend on Cellik?

I can add to those outgoings

Jamie Ness

Is Matt McKay also gone?

dartbhoy · 01-02-2012 12:27am

Dempsey wrote: »

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4097979/Rangers-screensbr-for-sale-on-eBay.html

Selling old stuff, non story really

Some websites dramatising the story as it's Rangers related! Rubbish story really!

Jelle1880 · 01-02-2012 12:33am

So far McKay is still at Rangers.

dartbhoy · 01-02-2012 12:33am

Any sign of BBE,EB or The Builder on the thread today?

lubo_moravcik · 01-02-2012 12:48am

dartbhoy wrote: »

Any sign of BBE,EB or The Builder on the thread today?

I don't know the last time BBE or EB were on :rolleyes:

Eirebear · 01-02-2012 1:28am

lubo_moravcik wrote: »

I don't know the last time BBE or EB were on :rolleyes:

:rolleyes:
BBE's over here for a bit and doesnt have a good internet connection.

I'm busy with work and uni, and tbh can't be arsed going round in the same circles. The Builder is in the same boat.

Anyway, you called?

lubo_moravcik · 01-02-2012 8:41am

Eirebear wrote: »

lubo_moravcik wrote: »

I don't know the last time BBE or EB were on :rolleyes:

:rolleyes:
BBE's over here for a bit and doesnt have a good internet connection.

I'm busy with work and uni, and tbh can't be arsed going round in the same circles. The Builder is in the same boat.

Anyway, you called?

Ah knew you wouldn't be you far away.
Was that yous outside Murray Park last night?

Eirebear · 01-02-2012 10:15am

lubo_moravcik wrote: »

Ah knew you wouldn't be you far away.
Was that yous outside Murray Park last night?

lol, nah - was there folk protesting?

I was up to my eyes all day yesterday so havnt really caught up on all the fall out tbh.
Not overly surprised though, we had no choice but to accept Whyte - and now he's proved himself to be a dirty lying ****.

But tbh, the combination of gloating and denial in this thread doesnt particularly make me want to partake in it.

bobbysands81 · 01-02-2012 11:04am

This just gets worse and worse.

Look at the last pic, it's a list of players that McCoist had to show Whyte to spell out who was injured etc... yet still no money forthcoming.

Jelle1880 · 01-02-2012 11:20am

I don't think that's the problem though, the fact there are no players coming in (Or at least none that require a transfer fee) can't be solely blamed on Whyte's reluctance to give McCoist money.

Look at what McCoist did with money that was given him, he's signed a few duds, hasn't played one of the better transfers (imo) and plays other ones out of position on a weekly basis.
I think Whyte never wanted McCoist to start with.

RoryMac · 01-02-2012 11:30am

Jelle1880 wrote: »

I don't think that's the problem though, the fact there are no players coming in (Or at least none that require a transfer fee) can't be solely blamed on Whyte's reluctance to give McCoist money.

Look at what McCoist did with money that was given him, he's signed a few duds, hasn't played one of the better transfers (imo) and plays other ones out of position on a weekly basis.
I think Whyte never wanted McCoist to start with.

I think the real problem is that there is no money, the Jelavic fee is needed to try to balance the books. Whyte himself said the books are around £10m short which is unsustainable year on year. I'm guessing the money available for McCoist to offer potential signings in wages etc was tiny, it's hard to attract signings that will improve your squad when you can't pay the going rate.

For all of Whyte's failings a lot of the anger at the present situation should be directed at Murray IMO. It was under his leadership most of these debts were run up, he also sold off some of your potential revenue streams and left Rangers on the brink.

Jelle1880 · 01-02-2012 12:53pm

Aye, but there's tons of free agents who are available without any fee.

I just don't think Whyte trusts Ally to get the job done, and I can't really blame him in that.

Totally agreed about Murray though, I can't believe he walked into Auchenhowie

and got away unscathed, or without the least bit of criticism directed towards him.

premierstone · 01-02-2012 1:26pm

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Aye, but there's tons of free agents who are available without any fee.

I just don't think Whyte trusts Ally to get the job done, and I can't really blame him in that.

Totally agreed about Murray though, I can't believe he walked into Auchenhowie and got away unscathed, or without the least bit of criticism directed towards him.

If they are a free agent in January there is usually a good reason, plus they still require wages and most likely a signing on fee, also Rangers with all the uncertainty are'nt exactly a great career move, stability wise etc.

Dempsey · 01-02-2012 1:28pm

McCoist is signing duds, very few of his signings have worked out.

I dont think Whyte could get a better manager at this stage, who would want the job?

McCoist really needs a director of football to help him find the right players for the right price that suits the system he wants to implement. Problem is that McCoist will be too proud to ask/want help and Whyte doesnt want the expense.

The likes of McCelland and Greig need hard slaps in the puss, they are up to their necks in this under the previous regime as yes men. Their comments to the media are a PR stunt to get themselves absolved of any wrongdoing, it shouldnt work but it probably will as Whyte is taking alot of the blame for the mistakes of other. If only the media scrutinised Murray like this, we would of had these kind of headline for several years.

Pompey Magnus · 01-02-2012 1:43pm

Dempsey wrote: »

McCoist really needs a director of football to help him find the right players for the right price that suits the system he wants to implement. Problem is that McCoist will be too proud to ask/want help and Whyte doesnt want the expense.

To be fair he has had a very long training up period under Smith where he was known to be the heir apparent. If he isn't up to speed at this stage then a director of football will be a waste of time and money.

Dempsey · 01-02-2012 1:50pm

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

To be fair he has had a very long training up period under Smith where he was known to be the heir apparent. If he isn't up to speed at this stage then a director of football will be a waste of time and money.

True but this is not a normal scenario and whyte doesnt trust him with money. sacking mccoist really isnt an option at this stage of the season

Pompey Magnus · 01-02-2012 2:01pm

Dempsey wrote: »

True but this is not a normal scenario and whyte doesnt trust him with money. sacking mccoist really isnt an option at this stage of the season

Whyte would be mad to sack McCoist, he has somehow managed to keep a significant number of fans at least neutral to him but sacking a club legend like McCoist would be beyond idiotic.

Jelle1880 · 01-02-2012 2:12pm

Talk about backtracking from traynor...

CRAIG Whyte has admitted Rangers are falling short of meeting their running costs.

Yet only months ago the club owner said Rangers were in their best state of financial health for years.

In an open letter to the supporters yesterday, he wrote: "As it stands at the moment Rangers has operating costs of approximately £45million a year and revenues of around £35m - not including revenue from possible Champions League and Europa League participation."

That means Rangers are £10m short of what they require to function. That would certainly explain why Ally McCoist can't even offer contracts to players from New Delhi.

But it doesn't explain why Rangers' chairman took exception to Record Sport's revelation that he'd sold off chunks of future season-ticket sales. After all, he has accepted £24.4m was generated in this way.

But in his open letter he said: "In the most lurid terms, the Record accuses the club's management and, specifically me, of using supporters' money to help fund the buy-out of Rangers. Not true."

Correct, what he says isn't true. We reported a deal with Ticketus, who gave an advance on this season's tickets as well as two more, which became three when the first repayment was due, helped fund the takeover because Whyte had said the club needed running costs.

The Ticketus money, then, assists the entire process.

But Whyte's letter also pointed out the club were "accused of not paying £5m in VAT. Not true".

Correct again. That isn't true because we didn't say that. We reported that HMRC have made it known that they could be due as much as £5m VAT on the Ticketus deal.

However, Whyte is accurate when he says: "Rangers, like many other clubs, has a financing arrangement in place with a company called Ticketus which enables the club to receive revenue from a portion of season-ticket sales in advance.

"There is nothing unusual or untoward in this arrangement which was put in place at the club long before my takeover last year and was used by the previous management. For members of that regime to criticise the use of a scheme they put in place is, frankly, outrageous.

Dempsey · 01-02-2012 2:35pm

Traynor isnt backtracking, he is accusing Whyte of putting words in his mouth and he is right. Whyte is deflecting like you were for much of yesterday and seems that you are going to bat for Whyte again today.

PauloMN · 01-02-2012 2:37pm

They should be more concerned about this clown rather than people posing in front of murals.
http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4100851/Rangers-star-and-UDA-boss.html

Tiocfaidh Armani · 01-02-2012 2:41pm

PauloMN wrote: »

They should be more concerned about this clown rather than people posing in front of murals.
http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4100851/Rangers-star-and-UDA-boss.html

Looks more like he's getting his picture taken with McDonald rather than the other way around. :rolleyes:

bobbysands81 · 01-02-2012 2:49pm

PauloMN wrote: »

They should be more concerned about this clown rather than people posing in front of murals.
http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4100851/Rangers-star-and-UDA-boss.html

The KeithAFC,

Given your stance regarding the cook sacked by the caterers in Rangers for standing in front of a Republican mural, I presume you are now going to support a call for the sacking of David Healy?

KeithAFC wrote: »

Posing next to IRA murals in 2012 while working at Ibrox? I don't think that is acceptable. But again, that is just my opinion.

PauloMN · 01-02-2012 3:37pm

"Dignity" eh? :rolleyes: Don't make me puke.

Bobby - You are about to get a master class in avoiding the question from The KeithAFC.

Jelle1880 · 01-02-2012 3:45pm

Dempsey wrote: »

Traynor isnt backtracking, he is accusing Whyte of putting words in his mouth and he is right. Whyte is deflecting like you were for much of yesterday and seems that you are going to bat for Whyte again today.

How the **** did I deflect something yesterday ?

As for Traynor:

He implied that Whyte used the Ticketus money to fund the sale of the club, which was denied by Whyte when he said that the Ticketus money was used for the daily running of the club.

And now he goes 'But yeah, that's not how I meant it...'
Just like when he claimed that he never said that Rangers fans deserved a good hiding by the Spanish police, despite literally saying that they did deserve it.

That's what happens when your article is full of 'could mean that', implies that', when you're challenged on some stuff it's easy to backtrack.

The fact that questions about the money should be asked to Whyte doesn't mean that the DR isn't a ****ty paper who hardly check their own articles for facts, and base it all on vague statements which can later be retracted without legal repercussions.

As for Healy: Stupid thing to do.

Dempsey · 01-02-2012 4:05pm

Jelle1880 wrote: »

How the **** did I deflect something yesterday ?

As for Traynor:

He implied that Whyte used the Ticketus money to fund the sale of the club, which was denied by Whyte when he said that the Ticketus money was used for the daily running of the club.

And now he goes 'But yeah, that's not how I meant it...'
Just like when he claimed that he never said that Rangers fans deserved a good hiding by the Spanish police, despite literally saying that they did deserve it.

That's what happens when your article is full of 'could mean that', implies that', when you're challenged on some stuff it's easy to backtrack.

The fact that questions about the money should be asked to Whyte doesn't mean that the DR isn't a ****ty paper who hardly check their own articles for facts, and base it all on vague statements which can later be retracted without legal repercussions.

As for Healy: Stupid thing to do.

A trip down memory lane for the lad that cant remember what he's been writing.

Jelle1880 wrote: »

The article itself is a few pages long, and definitely is more rumour than fact.

Jelle1880 wrote: »

I've heard before that this is indeed a standard way to work, and it only becomes a problem if we can not pay it back.
If I'm correct we paid Jelavic' transfer from Rapid with Ticketus money too.

However, if Whyte has indeed lied then he's ****ed (And the club with him).

Also, I'm baffled as to how, once again, Murray escapes any form of criticism.

lubo: I prefer Auchenhowie

edit: You still going on about that 25m warchest ?
Are we 2016 already then ?
if you add up the numbers from transfers and contract extensions then we're pretty much around the 5m mark now.

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Is that why Ticketus have already responsed that they are happy about the deal struck with Rangers ?

Young knows as much as we do, him and Traynor are two absolute diddies when it comes to all of this.

Jelle1880 wrote: »

@mattslaterbbc
Matt Slater
Ticketus: #Rangers are one of many clubs we deal with. We're happy with terms agreed some time ago & nothing has changed our view...

mattslaterbbc Matt Slater
Ticketus (cont): We do lots of deals with sports clubs and do substantial due diligence on each counterparty #rangers #rfc

If we're skint and on the verge of administration, shouldn't they be worried about ever seeing their money again ?
Instead they come out with this.

Funny though, when it's negative towards Celtic Young and Traynor are slated, but when one of them sticks the knife into Rangers it's all gospel ?

edit: How about actually coming up with something else than 'YOU SO BLIND LOL'

You were trying to downplay the seriousness of the Ticketus deal yesterday. Resisted the idea that selling 4 years of season tickets is a desperate measure no matter what way Whyte spins it. You chirped up big time after Whyte made his statement and tried to bad mouth the newspapers article on the premise that they must be wrong because they have been wrong on occasions.

The papers have their facts right and worded their articles correctly and now you want to argue semantics and possible interpretations. Its desperate stuff from you. How about you deal with the facts which havent been disputed by Whyte?? :rolleyes:

Jelle1880 · 01-02-2012 4:09pm

How would one downplay something by giving extra information, like those twitter quotes ?

You have some serious issues with reading I think, saying that I think it's a good statement is hardly 'chirping up big time'.

All I did in those quotes is give other points of view because the article, as usual, is vague as **** and filled with innuendo.

If you see that as 'sticking up for Whyte' (Because after all, all Rangers fans are blind, loyal morons according to some on here) then that's your problem, not mine.
You're deliberately twisting my words to suit your own agenda, and it's not the first time.

bobbysands81 · 01-02-2012 4:17pm

Jelle1880 wrote: »

You're deliberately twisting my words to suit your own agenda, and it's not the first time.

You accused me of that yesterday too when you also backtracked.

Rangers FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2012/2013

Comments