I think you should qualify that's Straferjack and Parkdrive...Ladygooner is off cam getting the bruschettas in

Now that Man C's £400m sponsorship deal with Etihad has been declared "an improper transaction" what measures do the panel think the light blue billionaires will use to qualify under the FFP regs in the future?

I have heard that a "Platinum Elite" service is available - a private box and all the trimmings but also a personalised peg in the changing room, choice of picking two subs per game and a lift home from Balotelli (home games only). Cost is £450m/season and the first taker was a Mr. Smith.

Quote:

As for the 'low hand' nonsense, I think it
speaks volumes that even LFC didn't bring
this up as an excuse in the aftermath...if
they thought there was the merest hint of
credence in it's substantiality we wouldn't
have heard the last of it.

Have to disagree with that, as I think by that stage, the powers that be at LFC were on damage limitation, and just wanted to start putting it behind them.

Suarez is definitely a loose canon, but I'm not sure he is the evil spawn of Satan that some people have been making him out to be.

United have a stinker in the first half, poor passing and defending.

Blimey, Bilbao are a bit tasty, what pills have they been popping?..would be happy with a scrappy win

Bilbao sticking it to the rags, both on the pitch and in the stands.

Are the Bilbao fans singing "is there a fire drill"?

Obligatory penalty at old stratford

Ferguson checking his watch at full time was a peach of a picture. Clearly the ref doesn't know about Fergie time. Love the result, especially in the rags back yard.

Where's the rags fans this morning? Crying in to their cornflakes no doubt.

5 posts in a row.Must be some sort of record that! A scratched one methinks.

Yes. Every parkdrive post says "show/hide".

The Blue Knights are set to save Rangers. A huge relief for their fans if it comes off.

Don't know if they will want to cover the potential 49m though. Also most players taking the huge pay cuts will need to make a decision as to what to do in close season. Surely the consortium does not have sufficient funds to pay full footballing wages plus 49m?

The possibility of rangers going into liquidation was slightly amusing for Celtic fans but at the end of the day its a two team league and without Rangers then supporting Celtic would not be much fun.

Surely Rangers are too big a club to go under?
Isn't it just a case of interested investors waiting in the wings before they pounce at the 11th hour in order to get the best deal?

Would you want to invest in a company with a 49m potential liability? I don't think any deal will be a good one for investors but instead it will be a case of people being willing to put their hand in their pocket to save a great club.

As a kid most boys had either Celtic or Rangers as a second team - but then there was some kind of disconnect - don't know whether it was the SPL or what but since then - and up to now - I haven't really followed or cared about either.

I certainly don't 'get' what seems a bonkers format for a league - top six/bottom six, seedings and the subsequent possibilty of an inbalance of home and away games - and I only know this much thanks to wiki...

An outsider must look at the table at the end of the season and wonder how 12 teams could play so many games against each other. Isn't it killing interest?

Mick Mac Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes. Every parkdrive post says "show/hide".

Love reeling you and your croonies in, its too easy. Speaking of which , mind the gap Spuds.

Alan Medic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 5 posts in a row.Must be some sort of record that!
> A scratched one methinks.

You think? That's novel.

HMRC have said they are willing to do a deal. As long as Whyte is out of the picture, which hopefully he will be.
The big tax case findings are yet to be released so no one knows what the full liability could be.... and of that, HMRC will maybe deal at something like 10p in the pound.
Liquidation is a very unlikely option now, as the administrator said.
Rangers are looking at a fighting fund which will assist through til the end of the season if we don't get the money that is being battled over in court that Whyte has "stolen".
The players agreeing cuts in wages is hugeky commendable - saved all 177 staff at Ibrox and Murray Park.

Maybe it'll be Celtic's turn next when thier 30million "soft" loans from Desmond get called in??!!

I have sympathy for Pompeys plight but don't give a rats arse about Rangers.

Why?

Mick Mac Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Would you want to invest in a company with a 49m
> potential liability? I don't think any deal will
> be a good one for investors but instead it will be
> a case of people being willing to put their hand
> in their pocket to save a great club.

Would depend how much money I had and could afford to lose.
Small change compared to the alleged £2 billion Abramovich has spent at Chelsea.

SCSB. You have to make everything personal. Celtic stared bankruptcy in the face before and as such put a code of.conduct in place to ensure they did not have problems in the future. Rangers will do the same..

SCSB79 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why?


More to the point, why should ?

I don't make it personal - you just take everything I say to heart. I can't help it if you are insecure and can't take a bit of banter. Why is it Man U and Man C fans, and Spurs and Arsenal fans can mock each other and no one seems to get as offended as you??
Also, in response to your point on finances... Check the small print. You'll find Celtic are £30m in the red. It might be in the red to their sugar daddy, but the loans are there. Would you say £30m in the red is a good financial 'code of conduct'?

Parkdrive - no one is saying you should. I just wondered if you had a specific reason.

[www.bbc.co.uk]

Love both these lads.

I was surprised how good Balotelli's English is. Much better than Capello who was here for years. Who is the other guy?

Consider this. Liverpool brought back Dalglish in the expectation of turning things around, to boost that ambition they spent huge amounts of money, a luxury they did not extend to Hodgson. Given all of that, had Hodgson done the same, can you imagine the grief and abuse he would have got. God alone knows what the EDFers would have said if the Arsenal had spent as much and we had performed like Liverpool. Yet nobody seems to think Dalglish isn't up to the job, another poor result yesterday. So much for the return of the king, more like the emperors new clothes.

Well I do wonder why you spend £35M on a player you don't use very much. You would expect the finished article for that amount. Martin O'Neill would appear to be a much better manager. Wonder what he would have done at Liverpool.

Parkdrive Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Consider this. Liverpool brought back Dalglish in
> the expectation of turning things around, to boost
> that ambition they spent huge amounts of money, a
> luxury they did not extend to Hodgson. Given all
> of that, had Hodgson done the same, can you
> imagine the grief and abuse he would have got. God
> alone knows what the EDFers would have said if the
> Arsenal had spent as much and we had performed
> like Liverpool. Yet nobody seems to think
> Dalglish isn't up to the job, another poor result
> yesterday. So much for the return of the king,
> more like the emperors new clothes.

Liverpool record under Roy Hodgson

10 wins out of 20 got him the sack. £20m spent.

Liverpool record under Dalglish

10 wins out of 27. £100m spent.