PDA

View Full Version : Whyte vows to sack anyone at Rangers who talks to BBC



superbear
22-10-2011, 01:15
CRAIG Whyte has intensified his battle with the BBC by stating that any member of the club who speaks to the broadcaster, even in an off-the-record basis, “will never work for Rangers again”.

Incensed by what he calls an “institutionalised bias” against his club within the walls of Pacific Quay, Whyte re-iterates his intention to sue the broadcaster, adding: “Maybe the BBC are going to be paying the [HMRC] tax bill.”

In a wide-ranging interview, Whyte expresses thunderous views on the BBC and, as he sees it, the motives behind their documentary Rangers: The Inside Story, aired on Thursday evening. Whyte says that not only he is suing the BBC but that he is also considering taking legal action against one of the contributors in the programme.

Robert Burns, head of investigations at the government’s Insolvency Service, suggested that Whyte could have faced a two-year jail sentence for his involvement with a firm called Re-tex Plastic Technology in a period when he was disqualified from being a director. Whyte says he hasn’t actually seen the BBC’s investigation but is au fait with the allegations it makes, Burns’s suggestion of criminality being the most serious.

“On the basis of what I’ve heard the Insolvency Service said last night I’m looking into the possibility of suing them personally. For what he [Burns] said, he deserves to be sued personally. Because it’s a lie.”

The Rangers owner also states that his bitter foe and former chairman at Ibrox, Alastair Johnston, has been e-mailing him in the last ten days looking for £30,000 in expenses from when he was still in the chair at Ibrox. Whyte says the communication was friendly at first, but then last midweek it turned nasty when Johnston threatened to sue if the monies were not paid.

“There was this series of e-mails and I was really surprised,” says Whyte. “So then he puts a deadline of last Friday on it and said if I didn’t pay it he was going to sue. There was an overhanging threat of a law suit if I didn’t pay him.”

During the HMRC tax bill segment of the interview, Whyte concedes that he made an error by being so secretive for so long in relation to what he intends to do in the event of a worst-case scenario.

“With hindsight, I should have probably said more about this when I first came in but on the other hand we were battling to win the league at the time and I didn’t want to put negative issues out there. As soon as the league was over, I should have come out and said ‘Look, there’s a big job to be done here’. I should have got my message out a bit sooner.”

Administration, said Whyte, was very much an option in the case of a mammoth tax bill from HMRC. It is, he stresses, something that he is attempting to avoid but he argues that it might not be the nightmare that some have predicted.

“Other than a regrettable event in our history I don’t think it would be as bad as people think it might be.

“But that’s not what I want. It’s something I’d rather avoid, if at all possible.”

Meanwhile, Rangers manager Ally McCoist would not be drawn on any of the controversies that are swirling around his ears at present. “I’m not going to talk about any television programmes or anything like that – all I am going to say is that I spoke to Craig Whyte on Friday morning, as I always do, and we are both in total agreement that the most important thing is Sunday’s game at Tynecastle.

“We had a chat about the team, the players and the squad – as we always do – and we are both of the opinion, which we both feel is the right one, that at this moment in time the fans deserve to know that we are totally focused on the game at Hearts.”
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spl/craig_whyte_vows_to_sack_anyone_at_rangers_who_tal ks_to_bbc_1_1924986

ArnoldRimmer
22-10-2011, 01:23
The Rangers owner also states that his bitter foe and former chairman at Ibrox, Alastair Johnston, has been e-mailing him in the last ten days looking for £30,000 in expenses from when he was still in the chair at Ibrox. Whyte says the communication was friendly at first, but then last midweek it turned nasty when Johnston threatened to sue if the monies were not paid.

“There was this series of e-mails and I was really surprised,” says Whyte. “So then he puts a deadline of last Friday on it and said if I didn’t pay it he was going to sue. There was an overhanging threat of a law suit if I didn’t pay him.”

All coming out now, eh?

Scunnered with this, considering I trusted AJ so much.

rfcjonnya
22-10-2011, 01:23
Get your admin to fu(k whyte. You have to engage the loyal supporters if this goes tits up because we can get us out of this mess.


WATP

RFC_Sooty
22-10-2011, 01:25
The only bit which is of real interest. The rest is just a collection of more odd things, especially Johnston acting like a gun toting Sheriff with absurd demands.


Administration, said Whyte, was very much an option in the case of a mammoth tax bill from HMRC. It is, he stresses, something that he is attempting to avoid but he argues that it might not be the nightmare that some have predicted.

“Other than a regrettable event in our history I don’t think it would be as bad as people think it might be.

“But that’s not what I want. It’s something I’d rather avoid, if at all possible

ArnoldRimmer
22-10-2011, 01:26
Get your admin to fu(k whyte. You have to engage the loyal supporters if this goes tits up because we can get us out of this mess.


WATP

If we get hit with a mammoth tax bill then Administration is the only way out, realistically.

Mostin
22-10-2011, 01:26
Craig Whyte Loyal RSC

I am fully behind our chairman.

JTB
22-10-2011, 01:27
Support him, he unlike the BBC or Alistair Johnston have done nothing to better our situation.


If we allow the press to fool us with their agenda and we turn on the man too what chance does he have FFS?

rfcjonnya
22-10-2011, 01:29
If we get hit with a mammoth tax bill then Administration is the only way out, realistically.

Say we get hit with the £50 mill and we appeal that gives us around a year to raise £50 mill because we would probably lose the appeal. Get the supporters engaged, hold fundraising nights where we can meet the players, play on the pitch, tours of auchenhowie, tours of ibrox with a personal player/legend, history memerobilia that is not in the trophy room. If 50000 people give £1000 each we are sorted...people will give less of course due to their own financial states but people will give more. It would be an effort of proportions nevers before seen but for christ sake we are The Rangers and we have one of the best and the biggest fan bases worldwide.


WATP

LanarkshireBlue
22-10-2011, 01:32
I saw Lee McCulloch buying a Radio Times this morning.

Does that count?

Rioperth
22-10-2011, 01:36
I saw Lee McCulloch buying a Radio Times this morning.

Does that count?

I see what you did there:roll:

williamstown
22-10-2011, 01:39
And quite right too,feck the BBC.

aussiearsenal
22-10-2011, 01:40
I saw Lee McCulloch buying a Radio Times this morning.

Does that count?
Don't be a d1ck. Fans like you rangets do not need.

loyal_bear
22-10-2011, 01:41
Say we get hit with the £50 mill and we appeal that gives us around a year to raise £50 mill because we would probably lose the appeal. Get the supporters engaged, hold fundraising nights where we can meet the players, play on the pitch, tours of auchenhowie, tours of ibrox with a personal player/legend, history memerobilia that is not in the trophy room. If 50000 people give £1000 each we are sorted...people will give less of course due to their own financial states but people will give more. It would be an effort of proportions nevers before seen but for christ sake we are The Rangers and we have one of the best and the biggest fan bases worldwide.


WATP

£50m is an unbelievable amount of money. If we could raise £50m in a short space of time we wouldent be in this mess, but its impossible.

Tagsbear
22-10-2011, 01:43
Say we get hit with the £50 mill and we appeal that gives us around a year to raise £50 mill because we would probably lose the appeal. Get the supporters engaged, hold fundraising nights where we can meet the players, play on the pitch, tours of auchenhowie, tours of ibrox with a personal player/legend, history memerobilia that is not in the trophy room. If 50000 people give £1000 each we are sorted...people will give less of course due to their own financial states but people will give more. It would be an effort of proportions nevers before seen but for christ sake we are The Rangers and we have one of the best and the biggest fan bases worldwide.


WATP

Your kidding yourself on here buddy.

scotts52
22-10-2011, 01:44
How can he sue this guy? if he was suspended from being a director but was still involved then surely that Robert burns guy is telling the truth? I don' get all this pish. But Craig Whyte wouldn't be doing all of this if he knew he was wrong.

bulletproofdunc
22-10-2011, 01:48
Get your admin to fu(k whyte. You have to engage the loyal supporters if this goes tits up because we can get us out of this mess.


WATP

His admin? Sorry, I didn't realise that it was him that was responsible for asset-stripping and mismanaging our club for over a decade and landing us with huge debt and the threat of a massive tax bill.

Tagsbear
22-10-2011, 01:49
How can he sue this guy? if he was suspended from being a director but was still involved then surely that Robert burns guy is telling the truth? I don' get all this pish. But Craig Whyte wouldn't be doing all of this if he knew he was wrong.

He claimed he was a director of a company and should have done 2 years in the clink, thats a big allegation considering no charges were brought.

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 01:49
Support him, he unlike the BBC or Alistair Johnston have done nothing to better our situation.

If we allow the press to fool us with their agenda and we turn on the man too what chance does he have FFS?

Very true. And for this reason he has my support. This is not an attack of Whyte but on Rangers.

Extremely disappointed with AJ. I can say he is a genuine supporter having seen him in our RSC watching a game. He responded to the on-field action as we all did - moans, groans, cheering, celebrating...

Giving "credence" to the BBC documentary and this latest allegation of carcass-picking, however, really does him no favours.

Finbar OFfended
22-10-2011, 01:49
This sounds like nothing more than bitterness and envy by Bain, Johnston et al towards Whyte.

I don't know if this is bore out of support for Murray or just that they thought someone else would be a better (more Murray like) owner that wouldn't upset the apple cart and the status quo would remain.

Either way, I think it's been proven now that those trying to sue Rangers/Whyte are not real Rangers men, have no real love of the club, they are only interested in personal gain, even if that means a threat to the existence of Rangers itself.

910
22-10-2011, 01:55
The thing is, these are very serious allegations and the authorities do not simply let people off the hook if they think this is what they were up to. So how come he was never arrested, charged, or even questioned over these allegations at the time? Presumably because there was no evidence, and all we got the other night was people he has cheesed off taking the chance for a bit of revenge.

Alistair Johnston being one. "we have a phrase we use around these parts" he claims he told Whyte when he asked him to resign. I thought it was going to be "fore" but laughably it turned out to be 'no surrender' which is ironic considering how little the previous administration did to protect the fans in the face of an onslaught from people like Spiers who want to make uttering those two words in public an arrestable offence..

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 01:56
This sounds like nothing more than bitterness and envy by Bain, Johnston et al towards Whyte.

I don't know if this is bore out of support for Murray or just that they thought someone else would be a better (more Murray like) owner that wouldn't upset the apple cart and the status quo would remain.

Either way, I think it's been proven now that those trying to sue Rangers/Whyte are not real Rangers men, have no real love of the club, they are only interested in personal gain, even if that means a threat to the existence of Rangers itself.

I mentioned on another thread that John Greig has been given a bit of advice to distance himself from Whyte, hence the resignation before the documentary. JG can't be seen to be "guilty" by association.

My suspicion is that we're about to see a fight for the ownership of Rangers.

covloyalrsc
22-10-2011, 01:56
Get your admin to fu(k whyte. You have to engage the loyal supporters if this goes tits up because we can get us out of this mess.


WATP

In all the threads about the so called impending gloom and doom this has been the best retort.
It is, us, the Fans money and loyalty that make Rangers tick and it will be the Fans money and loyalty that will continue to make the Rangers tick.
Alienate the Fans and you will alienate the hands that feed you.
In saying that I, blindly, support Mr Whyte in our so called fight for survival.
In spite of many who would love to see the Rangers fail I am certain that the Rangers will not only survive but flourish in these times of adversity.
To those who wish to take us on you forget, the watchword my and other forefathers gave us against all the odds, NO SURRENDER, our fight is right and though we might be outnumbered again in a fight for survival it is a fight that we will win again.

Rioperth
22-10-2011, 01:58
Don't be a d1ck. Fans like you rangets do not need.

Chill the f uck out mate it was a joke and not a bad one at that, east coasters pheeewww:D

aussiearsenal
22-10-2011, 02:01
Chill the f uck out mate it was a joke and not a bad one at that, east coasters pheeewww:D

West coaster pheeeewww. Sick of fans with the sly remarks about players on threads that are not involving them. Rangers forum mate don't abuse the players.


And to be honest it was as fun y as cancer.

Rioperth
22-10-2011, 02:02
Don't be a d1ck. Fans like you rangets do not need.


West coaster pheeeewww. Sick of fans with the sly remarks about players on threads that are not involving them. Rangers forum mate don't abuse the players.


And to be honest it was as fun y as cancer.

Oh yes we have an Uber fan here:p

A Horse With No Name
22-10-2011, 02:04
Get your admin to fu(k whyte. You have to engage the loyal supporters if this goes tits up because we can get us out of this mess.


WATP

He has my total support!

Administration has a possible ramification I've yet to see brought out on ff or elsewhere - I did and the thread was deleted....

rfcjonnya
22-10-2011, 02:04
£50m is an unbelievable amount of money. If we could raise £50m in a short space of time we wouldent be in this mess, but its impossible.

When have we ever been asked to raise that sort of money? I must have missed that period in our history. Come on mate £50 mill for at least 60,000 people to raise isn't off limits. A wee bit of faith in the support might go a long way. The least we can do is try.


Your kidding yourself on here buddy.

No mate I don't think I am. No Surrender mean anything to you? You have given in before the fight has even started. If everyone has the same "What's the point" attitude then we are indeed doomed. Heres me thinking we are The Rangers and have been up against tough times and came out the other side bigger, better and wiser. This is the biggest task we will ever possibly face and we need every supporter to try their best even if we have been treated like shite in the past.


His admin? Sorry, I didn't realise that it was him that was responsible for asset-stripping and mismanaging our club for over a decade and landing us with huge debt and the threat of a massive tax bill.

It is our admin then. Sorry for the mis-use of a word.


WATP

loyal_bear
22-10-2011, 02:09
60,000 to raise £50m is £833 per person. Its not going to happen.

Yorkhill blue
22-10-2011, 02:12
I mentioned on another thread that John Greig has been given a bit of advice to distance himself from Whyte, hence the resignation before the documentary. JG can't be seen to be "guilty" by association.

My suspicion is that we're about to see a fight for the ownership of Rangers.

Do you want to expand a bit on that Brooklyn?

From which parties and under which terms?

Shotters Nation
22-10-2011, 02:12
Would like to believe we could but IMO too many would not put the money in simply expecting others to do it so they would save a few bob

Also, we're in one of the worst recessions ever ....
When have we ever been asked to raise that sort of money? I must have missed that period in our history. Come on mate £50 mill for at least 60,000 people to raise isn't off limits. A wee bit of faith in the support might go a long way. The least we can do is try.



No mate I don't think I am. No Surrender mean anything to you? You have given in before the fight has even started. If everyone has the same "What's the point" attitude then we are indeed doomed. Heres me thinking we are The Rangers and have been up against tough times and came out the other side bigger, better and wiser. This is the biggest task we will ever possibly face and we need every supporter to try their best even if we have been treated like shite in the past.



It is our admin then. Sorry for the mis-use of a word.


WATP

Rioperth
22-10-2011, 02:14
60,000 to raise £50m is £833 per person. Its not going to happen.

It would be very difficult and take a coordinated international effort, there are groups out there who could organise it but would need a degree of underwriting in the first instance.

Don't believe at all possible from within UK only.

Tagsbear
22-10-2011, 02:15
Would like to believe we could but IMO too many would not put the money in simply expecting others to do it so they would save a few bob

Also, we're in one of the worst recessions ever ....

Most simply don't have it, and the logistics of trying to organise it make it pie in the sky.

rfcjonnya
22-10-2011, 02:15
60,000 to raise £50m is £833 per person. Its not going to happen.

Nah maybe your right. But what's the harm in trying. Your not wanting to try. We do have some rich supporters who may be interested in donating a bit of money and the rest of the average joe punters can give what they can. It can be achieved but you have closed your mind to it being a rediculous idea. Why so pessimistic about this idea. Why slate it. We need to give it a go if this is the only possible way of avoiding humiliation.


WATP

NATERFC1
22-10-2011, 02:16
I like his style, Mr Whyte has my support 100%.

**** the BBC :beeb:

:cool:

dublinbear
22-10-2011, 02:18
He has my full support.

He is now pishing into a hurricane as fae as the Scottish press te are concerned.

I think admin is inevitable and I think it always has been. It's now a matteeet of how go forward from it.

rfcjonnya
22-10-2011, 02:18
Most simply don't have it, and the logistics of trying to organise it make it pie in the sky.

I am obviously not an expert on the logistics side of it but if it where simply raising the money I reckon we could do it. People give alot of money to Erskine and other charities on this board so why not give a bit of money to the Rangers. If it was a an effort from the club and supporters together it is achievable.


WATP

A Horse With No Name
22-10-2011, 02:20
60,000 to raise £50m is £833 per person. Its not going to happen.

Spot on! Stupid to suggest the fans would cough this up at any time never mind at this period of austerity!

Not only stupid but dangerous - if the tax people get wind of shite like this they will ask for most of that £50 MILLION back!

I'd ask the poster to withdraw this dangerous thread but now it has been put out the possible damage is done!:mad:

rfcjonnya
22-10-2011, 02:21
He has my full support.

He is now pishing into a hurricane as fae as the Scottish press te are concerned.

I think admin is inevitable and I think it always has been. It's now a matteeet of how go forward from it.

Sadly it looks likely. With what we are possibly faced with and the way supporters are looking at it we are probably doomed. Fu(king Administration what a pile of fu(king shite, how did The Rangers get in this mess and why did we let it happen. Murray has a lot to answer for.


WATP

dublinbear
22-10-2011, 02:21
Spot on! Stupid to suggest the fans would cough this up at any time never mind at this period of austerity!

Not only stupid but dangerous - if the tax people get wind of shite like this they will ask for most of that £50 MILLION back!

I'd ask the poster to withdraw this dangerous thread but now it has been put out the possible damage is done!:mad:



Please STFU you hysterical woman.

Kirbys House
22-10-2011, 02:21
It would be very difficult and take a coordinated international effort, there are groups out there who could organise it but would need a degree of underwriting in the first instance.

Don't believe at all possible from within UK only.

It's not going to happen, end of. A nice idea but impractical.

I have no doubt most bears would contribute what they could if need be but near £1k each isn't going to happen.

rfcjonnya
22-10-2011, 02:22
Spot on! Stupid to suggest the fans would cough this up at any time never mind at this period of austerity!

Not only stupid but dangerous - if the tax people get wind of shite like this they will ask for most of that £50 MILLION back!

I'd ask the poster to withdraw this dangerous thread but now it has been put out the possible damage is done!:mad:

Wind your neck in. I can imagine an employee at HMRC sitting at the computer looking at followfollow saying "hey boss the supporters are willing to give according to a poster on ff, make them pay the whole lot".


WATP

Stuart_WATP
22-10-2011, 02:23
Mr Whyte is certainly not taking any prisoners, i like that :D

loyal_bear
22-10-2011, 02:24
Nah maybe your right. But what's the harm in trying. Your not wanting to try. We do have some rich supporters who may be interested in donating a bit of money and the rest of the average joe punters can give what they can. It can be achieved but you have closed your mind to it being a rediculous idea. Why so pessimistic about this idea. Why slate it. We need to give it a go if this is the only possible way of avoiding humiliation.


WATP

I would absolutley love if the fans could raise that amount of money, but whith the club facing administration we need to look at serious investment and expecting fans to cough up £50m isnt the way forward.

Tagsbear
22-10-2011, 02:24
He has my full support.

He is now pishing into a hurricane as fae as the Scottish press te are concerned.

I think admin is inevitable and I think it always has been. It's now a matteeet of how go forward from it.

Theres another thread laying down the scenario's should admin occur, whilst none of us want it, it may not be as bad as we think.

dublinbear
22-10-2011, 02:25
Unless the support get a percentage of the club that equates to the bailout supplied then it's a no go.

rfcjonnya
22-10-2011, 02:25
I would absolutley love if the fans could raise that amount of money, but whith the club facing administration we need to look at serious investment and expecting fans to cough up £50m isnt the way forward.

That is fair enough. I could not agree more that we need to look at serious investment and hopefully we can get it. Surely some rich bear out there. What's the Euro millions Jackpot might stick a couple lines on.


WATP

Tagsbear
22-10-2011, 02:26
Mr Whyte is certainly not taking any prisoners, i like that :D

He is ****ing bonkers, it must be said!

forlanssister
22-10-2011, 02:27
CRAIG Whyte has intensified his battle with the BBC by stating that any member of the club who speaks to the broadcaster, even in an off-the-record basis, “will never work for Rangers again”.

I doubt the legality of his "threat", his previous utterances are already being used in court against him.

dublinbear
22-10-2011, 02:27
Theres another thread laying down the scenario's should admin occur, whilst none of us want it, it may not be as bad as we think.

It's now an ego thing I think.

We will be stronger afterwards no doubt. It's just a matter of timing now.

A Horse With No Name
22-10-2011, 02:29
what's the harm in trying.

I know you mean well but if you can't see the possible harm of even suggesting such a stupid thing we are in more trouble than I thought.

Please withdraw this thread!

rfcjonnya
22-10-2011, 02:33
I know you mean well but if you can't see the possible harm of even suggesting such a stupid thing we are in more trouble than I thought.

Please withdraw this thread!

No I don't see the harm in it. Spell it out for me. Are you seriously suggesting that because I suggested that the support try and muster up £50 million the HMRC are going to make us pay the full whack because one poster on an internet site merely suggested the idea? Is that what your are seriously saying to me?


WATP

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 02:41
Do you want to expand a bit on that Brooklyn?

From which parties and under which terms?

Greig's resignation was on advice to distance himself from Whyte. It was a calculated action at a deliberate time from a non-businessman and club legend. It was always going to have an impact.

CW is simply being isolated. He has no concrete links to the club and it's easier to attack under the premise of the target being Whyte, rather than Rangers. Thus the pretense is concern for Rangers and CW's suitability.

Johnston and Murray provided "credence" to the BBC documentary. The BBC may be delighting in this but the drive is coming from elsewhere - and the intention is illustrate that CW is unsuitable and should not be allowed to be the owner of Rangers.

Who gains by him being forced out? And maybe the likes of AJ are suddenly realising the tax case isn't as bleak as once forecast...

rfcjonnya
22-10-2011, 02:43
Greig's resignation was on advice to distance himself from Whyte. It was a calculated action at a deliberate time from a non-businessman and club legend. It was always going to have an impact.

CW is simply being isolated. He has no concrete links to the club and it's easier to attack under the premise of the target being Whyte, rather than Rangers. Thus the pretense is concern for Rangers and CW's suitability.

Johnston and Murray provided "credence" to the BBC documentary. The BBC may be delighting in this but the drive is coming from elsewhere - and the intention is illustrate that CW is unsuitable and should not be allowed to be the owner of Rangers.

Who gains by him being forced out? And maybe the likes of AJ are suddenly realising the tax case isn't as bleak as once forecast...
Well if they where trying to get the supporters to distance themselves from Whyte it certainly has backfired. Everyone I have been speaking to is in favour of Whyte banning the BBC and taking them all to task.


WATP

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 02:47
Well if they where trying to get the supporters to distance themselves from Whyte it certainly has backfired. Everyone I have been speaking to is in favour of Whyte banning the BBC and taking them all to task.

WATP

Ultimately we don't matter and have little influence upon proceedings.

Another thread has been started:

http://forum.*****************/showthread.php?p=15359848&posted=1#post15359848

A challenge is coming for CW.

EDIT: And as for failing to distance the support from CW, have you read some of the stuff from "respected" posters on here the past couple of days?

Although I'd say it's more about their ego than anything.

rfcjonnya
22-10-2011, 02:48
Ultimately we don't matter and have little influence upon proceedings.

Another thread has been started:

http://forum.*****************/showthread.php?p=15359848&posted=1#post15359848

A challenge is coming for CW.

I love how certain you are...would this be a good thing for Rangers?


WATP

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 02:52
I love how certain you are...would this be a good thing for Rangers?

WATP

Nothing's certain, mate. And I definitely don't want to come across as someone "in the know". Apologies for that.

But this isn't about some tim-infested attack on the CW for the sake of it. There are deliberate, tactical moves. Unfortunately the desires of different parties have joined for the time being - the removal of CW.

Yorkhill blue
22-10-2011, 02:54
Greig's resignation was on advice to distance himself from Whyte. It was a calculated action at a deliberate time from a non-businessman and club legend. It was always going to have an impact.

CW is simply being isolated. He has no concrete links to the club and it's easier to attack under the premise of the target being Whyte, rather than Rangers. Thus the pretense is concern for Rangers and CW's suitability.

Johnston and Murray provided "credence" to the BBC documentary. The BBC may be delighting in this but the drive is coming from elsewhere - and the intention is illustrate that CW is unsuitable and should not be allowed to be the owner of Rangers.

Who gains by him being forced out? And maybe the likes of AJ are suddenly realising the tax case isn't as bleak as once forecast...

Then you are hinting that the likes of King/Murray/Johnston/Park could
resurface if the tax case is lost and pick up the pieces from Whyte if we go
into administration and starting afresh?

jorgsleftpeg
22-10-2011, 02:58
Yes, there are still a lot of unanswered questions after the "documentary" (deliberately put in commas). They call it journalism. I would suggest that its rabble rousing and trouble making for starters... The BBC decide to air this garbage at prime time, canceling their flagship show for this p1sh. I dont ever remember any other programme having this kind of effect.

We have seen the bias against Rangers from the Scottish Biased Broadcasting Corporation for too long. Stuart Cosgrove is allowed to call us 'Orange Wankers' and is still employed by these rhats? (I recommend following jcdgow on twitter...) There appears to be no shame at Pacific Quay... This is a time for us to all come together, for our club, for ourselves, for the way we live.

We are Rangers. This is our time to come together. Circle the wagons, and let us all stand together against all.

But hey, just my opinion... I'm just saying...:) :) :)

hillheadbear
22-10-2011, 03:00
Nothing's certain, mate. And I definitely don't want to come across as someone "in the know". Apologies for that.

But this isn't about some tim-infested attack on the CW for the sake of it. There are deliberate, tactical moves. Unfortunately the desires of different parties have joined for the time being - the removal of CW.

I think there is an anti-Rangers and an anti-Whyte strand here which are coming together.

The first are a number of very embittered former board members ... Bain, McIntyre, Johnson and Murray.

The second is an institutionally anti-Rangers element in the BBC which is taking the opportunity to put the boot in. If they can be instrumental in bringing Whyte down then it sends a message to every Chairman and every manager in Scotland and gives the BBC immense power and prestige.

Greig and McLelland, IMHO, have resigned because they don't want to get caught in the crossfire and they have nothing invested in Whyte being successful. They probably identify more with the ancien-regime than with Whyte. I'm not sure what King's position is but, given his issues with the South African revenue, a low profile is the wisest tactic.

hillheadbear
22-10-2011, 03:02
Then you are hinting that the likes of King/Murray/Johnston/Park could
resurface if the tax case is lost and pick up the pieces from Whyte if we go
into administration and starting afresh?

They already tried to buy Rangers on the cheap. Ultimately, they loved their bank balances more than the club.

Yorkhill blue
22-10-2011, 03:10
They already tried to buy Rangers on the cheap. Ultimately, they loved their bank balances more than the club.

I know they have had various proposals turned down in the past and that's my
point.

These are the only people I can think of who would be players for the
ownership and the only incentive for them I can think of is if they can once
again throw their hat's into the ring on terms that suit them.

The club going into administration, Whyte being the preferred creditor, people
such as these buying his stake and starting afresh is the only way I can see
the scenario unfolding as I don't think anyone will invest otherwise.

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 03:10
Then you are hinting that the likes of King/Murray/Johnston/Park could
resurface if the tax case is lost and pick up the pieces from Whyte if we go
into administration and starting afresh?

I would hint that the outcome of the tax case is no longer an issue. CW has been a little more courageous and suggested contingencies that if the worst did happen - we'd still be alive and he'd be the owner.

Murray has been quoted as saying that he's heard of no one taking on a business with such a potential penalty hanging over them. While King/Murray/Johnston/Park differed, CW stepped in.

There's now the realisation of a missed opportunity. Thus the desire to isolate CW and discredit his suitability, primarily by casting aspersions on his past dealings.

Yorkhill blue
22-10-2011, 03:14
I would hint that the outcome of the tax case is no longer an issue. CW has been a little more courageous and suggested contingencies that if the worst did happen - we'd still be alive and he'd be the owner.

Murray has been quoted as saying that he's heard of no one taking on a business with such a potential penalty hanging over them. While King/Murray/Johnston/Park differed, CW stepped in.

There's now the realisation of a missed opportunity. Thus the desire to isolate CW and discredit his suitability, primarily by casting aspersions on his past dealings.

I still think the outcome of the tax tribunal would be a major issue.

The rest of what you say I don't really disagree with save to say that they
may well be sitting and thinking they have missed an opportunity to take the
risk Whyte did had they been given that opportunity on those terms.

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 03:17
I still think the outcome of the tax tribunal would be a major issue.

The rest of what you say I don't really disagree with save to say that they
may well be sitting and thinking they have missed an opportunity to take the
risk Whyte did had they been given that opportunity on those terms.

Why would AJ appear on the BBC documentary?

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 03:22
I think there is an anti-Rangers and an anti-Whyte strand here which are coming together.

The first are a number of very embittered former board members ... Bain, McIntyre, Johnson and Murray.

The second is an institutionally anti-Rangers element in the BBC which is taking the opportunity to put the boot in. If they can be instrumental in bringing Whyte down then it sends a message to every Chairman and every manager in Scotland and gives the BBC immense power and prestige.

Greig and McLelland, IMHO, have resigned because they don't want to get caught in the crossfire and they have nothing invested in Whyte being successful. They probably identify more with the ancien-regime than with Whyte. I'm not sure what King's position is but, given his issues with the South African revenue, a low profile is the wisest tactic.

As I mention, the strands have overlapped. The anti-Whyte have become fodder from the anti-Rangers crew at the BBC and is the reason I'm so disappointed with AJ - someone I had supported and defended.

I don't agree with the BBC attempting to illustrate muscle, however. This is specifically Rangers-based.

Rioperth
22-10-2011, 03:34
Nothing's certain, mate. And I definitely don't want to come across as someone "in the know". Apologies for that.

But this isn't about some tim-infested attack on the CW for the sake of it. There are deliberate, tactical moves. Unfortunately the desires of different parties have joined for the time being - the removal of CW.

Or in other words I'm just guessing like the rest of you phffffffff

Yorkhill blue
22-10-2011, 03:35
Why would AJ appear on the BBC documentary?

Personally I think because it was convenient for him as they visited him, to give
his version of why the IBC were apprehensive about the Whyte takeover and
to reiterate the reservations they have about Whyte even now.

I think it was simply an opportunity for him and Murray to give their account
and put into the public domain some things that hadn't previously come to light
such as the LBG matter.

skipz
22-10-2011, 03:42
He claimed he was a director of a company and should have done 2 years in the clink, thats a big allegation considering no charges were brought.

my thoughts exactly, as for the rest of the programme, i dont understand a single prt of it:mad:

whitecap
22-10-2011, 03:42
I do not think the BBC are attacking Rangers, it is Mr Whyte they went for in the programme.

No doubt Mr Whyte plays the big business game and I am sure he plays in the Grey Market area which is not too uncommon in that field,

I also feel he has plan A, B, and C ready and we have a winner in this man and I for one am fully behind him, good luck Craig,go get them sorted out and bring back the family we know as Rangers FC.

Yorkhill blue
22-10-2011, 03:46
I do not think the BBC are attacking Rangers, it is Mr Whyte they went for in the programme.



I've watched the program twice and I agree.

It's wasn't Rangers they were trying to discredit (for once) that show was all about
attempting to discredit Craig Whyte.

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 03:50
Or in other words I'm just guessing like the rest of you phffffffff

Of course. Don't let it get to you. Know what I mean...

sonowilliam2
22-10-2011, 03:51
Greig's resignation was on advice to distance himself from Whyte. It was a calculated action at a deliberate time from a non-businessman and club legend. It was always going to have an impact.

CW is simply being isolated. He has no concrete links to the club and it's easier to attack under the premise of the target being Whyte, rather than Rangers. Thus the pretense is concern for Rangers and CW's suitability.

Johnston and Murray provided "credence" to the BBC documentary. The BBC may be delighting in this but the drive is coming from elsewhere - and the intention is illustrate that CW is unsuitable and should not be allowed to be the owner of Rangers.

Who gains by him being forced out? And maybe the likes of AJ are suddenly realising the tax case isn't as bleak as once forecast...

Eh ? So Alastair Johnston and Murray provided credence - Really ? In what ear lug,cause i must have missed it.

Kenny Powers
22-10-2011, 03:51
I've watched the program twice and I agree.

It's wasn't Rangers they were trying to discredit (for once) that show was all about
attempting to discredit Craig Whyte.

It was definitely geared more towards him, but why call it "Rangers - The Inside Story" ?

Why dedicate more time to talking about Mo Johnston signing for us than talking about Whyte's succesful side?

It was an absolutely awful production as an aside.

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 03:57
Personally I think because it was convenient for him as they visited him, to give
his version of why the IBC were apprehensive about the Whyte takeover and
to reiterate the reservations they have about Whyte even now.

I think it was simply an opportunity for him and Murray to give their account
and put into the public domain some things that hadn't previously come to light
such as the LBG matter.

I think you're being kind. There would have been no shortage of willing publications to take on a similar interview before now. Indeed, during the Summer and the early weeks of the season may have been a more relevant moment.

There's a reason AJ & PM are talking. Their concern for the club is genuine, I have no doubt. But they are now talking business.

Rioperth
22-10-2011, 04:01
Of course. Don't let it get to you. Know what I mean...

Here's a tip mate preface your points with stuff like "in my opinion" "dont know for sure but this could be " etc.

You worded it as if you had information we are not privy too, make you feel good did it.

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 04:01
Eh ? So Alastair Johnston and Murray provided credence - Really ? In what ear lug,cause i must have missed it.

Firstly I put credence in quotation marks which suggests a doubt.

Secondly if prominent and high-level Rangers employees start agreeing with the premise of the programme, wouldn't that suggest to the layman that there's foundation to the accusations?

Rioperth
22-10-2011, 04:03
Firstly I put credence in quotation marks which suggests a doubt.

Secondly if prominent and high-level Rangers employees start agreeing with the premise of the programme, wouldn't that suggest to the layman that there's foundation to the accusations?

Would that be the same high level employees who were implicit in getting us into this mess?

Yorkhill blue
22-10-2011, 04:03
It was definitely geared more towards him, but why call it "Rangers - The Inside Story" ?

Why dedicate more time to talking about Mo Johnston signing for us than talking about Whyte's succesful side?

It was an absolutely awful production as an aside.

Probably because they knew if they called it "Craig Whyte-the inside story"
the viewing figures wouldn't be so high, but by attaching our name to it then
the majority of football fans in Scotland (even many Tims) would watch it, or
certainly take the opportunity to do so later.

The Johnston mention I don't think was as important as some others have
said. They were trying and abysmally failing to highlight how under Murray's
initial reign things that had previously been unexpected occurred alongside
continued success.

They also stated that Murray personally bankrolled signing after signing and I
haven't seen as many posts on that piece of nonsense as I have about them
mentioning us signing Johnston.

As you say it was an awful production and it failed on so many levels.

sonowilliam2
22-10-2011, 04:06
Here's a tip mate preface your points with stuff like "in my opinion" "dont know for sure but this could be " etc.

You worded it as if you had information we are not privy too, make you feel good did it.

The Brooky doesn't deal with opinions,cause all his opinions are Fact - FACT

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 04:06
Would that be the same high level employees who were implicit in getting us into this mess?

Yes. Not sure what point you're making.

Rioperth
22-10-2011, 04:07
Firstly I put credence in quotation marks which suggests a doubt.

Secondly if prominent and high-level Rangers employees start agreeing with the premise of the programme, wouldn't that suggest to the layman that there's foundation to the accusations?


The Brooky doesn't deal with opinions,cause all his opinions are Fact - FACT

I understand, cheers mate

Rioperth
22-10-2011, 04:10
Yes. Not sure what point you're making.

That maybe, and I'm just spit balling here, they will do anything to distance themselves from the disaster of their own making, ya think?

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 04:10
The Brooky doesn't deal with opinions,cause all his opinions are Fact - FACT

Ok. Have I used FACT anywhere or even implied that - why are you so sensitive?

Feel free to disagree with all comments, discuss them and offer your perspective.

sonowilliam2
22-10-2011, 04:13
Firstly I put credence in quotation marks which suggests a doubt.

Secondly if prominent and high-level Rangers employees start agreeing with the premise of the programme, wouldn't that suggest to the layman that there's foundation to the accusations?

Seriously mate is that your best defence,firstly i put quotations in... Blah blah blah..

****ing hell :D

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 04:13
That maybe, and I'm just spit balling here, they will do anything to distance themselves from the disaster of their own making, ya think?

Again, I don't know what this means. If you have a specific question or issue, articulate it. What's the problem with that?

Incidentally, why did Greig resign this week - thoughts?

Rioperth
22-10-2011, 04:15
Yes. Not sure what point you're making.


Again, I don't know what this means. If you have a specific question or issue, articulate it. What's the problem with that?

Incidentally, why did Greig resign this week - thoughts?

I will rephrase it for you, BLAME WHYTEY!

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 04:17
Seriously mate is that your best defence,firstly i put quotations in... Blah blah blah..

****ing hell :D

You can insert "blah" and "****ing hell" but it doesn't actually have much relevance, beyond a little cheap laugh. Feel good?

Instead of jumping on the wording on my posts, why not respond to the content?

Yorkhill blue
22-10-2011, 04:18
I think you're being kind. There would have been no shortage of willing publications to take on a similar interview before now. Indeed, during the Summer and the early weeks of the season may have been a more relevant moment.

There's a reason AJ & PM are talking. Their concern for the club is genuine, I have no doubt. But they are now talking business.

There may well have been many publications that would have been willing to
give Johnston and Murray a platform during the summer and in the early weeks
of the season but the climate was different then in a lot of ways.

Whyte had publicly warned Johnston to stop speaking out during their early
spats and Johnston had stated he'd be making no more comment on the
matter, that events unfolding would show who was the true Rangers man.

Now we have a situation where the tax tribunal is ready to deliver it's
verdict, the courts have ruled in favour of two ex directors to have funds
frozen in their dismissal cases for possible future payout and HMRC has also
successfully had money frozen.

I think the timing allowed Johnston and Murray to be able to give their
account when the focus had shifted and questions were beginning to be
asked of Whyte when they hadn't been before. I don't think it necessarily
points toward a challenge for ownership from them and other parties.

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 04:19
I will rephrase it for you, BLAME WHYTEY!

Ok, thanks for that. We'll move on.

Kenny Powers
22-10-2011, 04:21
Probably because they knew if they called it "Craig Whyte-the inside story"
the viewing figures wouldn't be so high, but by attaching our name to it then
the majority of football fans in Scotland (even many Tims) would watch it, or
certainly take the opportunity to do so later.

The Johnston mention I don't think was as important as some others have
said. They were trying and abysmally failing to highlight how under Murray's
initial reign things that had previously been unexpected occurred alongside
continued success.

They also stated that Murray personally bankrolled signing after signing and I
haven't seen as many posts on that piece of nonsense as I have about them
mentioning us signing Johnston.

As you say it was an awful production and it failed on so many levels.

Somebody said it was akin to something you would expect of the work experience kid, I wasnt expecting Panaroma levels of insight and actual investigation along with Spielberg-esque direction and production..... but it was just so utterly awful I really cannot get myself worked up over it like some have.

sonowilliam2
22-10-2011, 04:22
You can insert "blah" and "****ing hell" but it doesn't actually have much relevance, beyond a little cheap laugh. Feel good?

Instead of jumping on the wording on my posts, why not respond to the content?

Okay appologies i'll allow others to laugh.

hillheadbear
22-10-2011, 04:24
There may well have been many publications that would have been willing to
give Johnston and Murray a platform during the summer and in the early weeks
of the season but the climate was different then in a lot of ways.

Whyte had publicly warned Johnston to stop speaking out during their early
spats and Johnston had stated he'd be making no more comment on the
matter, that events unfolding would show who was the true Rangers man.

Now we have a situation where the tax tribunal is ready to deliver it's
verdict, the courts have ruled in favour of two ex directors to have funds
frozen in their dismissal cases for possible future payout and HMRC has also
successfully had money frozen.

I think the timing allowed Johnston and Murray to be able to give their
account when the focus had shifted and questions were beginning to be
asked of Whyte when they hadn't been before. I don't think it necessarily
points toward a challenge for ownership from them and other parties.

I think that we should remember under whose watch the HMRC issues arose.

The ex-directors who are now suing the club were amongst those that dropped us in the shit.

Yorkhill blue
22-10-2011, 04:24
Somebody said it was akin to something you would expect of the work experience kid, I wasnt expecting Panaroma levels of insight and actual investigation along with Spielberg-esque direction and production..... but it was just so utterly awful I really cannot get myself worked up over it like some have.

To be fair they did try and replicate that "60 minutes" deal on certain interviews
and almost pulled it off.:D

That's got to be worth a bit of credit.:D

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 04:27
There may well have been many publications that would have been willing to
give Johnston and Murray a platform during the summer and in the early weeks
of the season but the climate was different then in a lot of ways.

Whyte had publicly warned Johnston to stop speaking out during their early
spats and Johnston had stated he'd be making no more comment on the
matter, that events unfolding would show who was the true Rangers man.

Now we have a situation where the tax tribunal is ready to deliver it's
verdict, the courts have ruled in favour of two ex directors to have funds
frozen in their dismissal cases for possible future payout and HMRC has also
successfully had money frozen.

I think the timing allowed Johnston and Murray to be able to give their
account when the focus had shifted and questions were beginning to be
asked of Whyte when they hadn't been before. I don't think it necessarily
points toward a challenge for ownership from them and other parties.

You highlight a relevant point regarding the climate.

Do you think this documentary would have arisen had we been 10pts off the pace? Would there have been the concern about the Scottish institution being under the ownership of CW?

As I’ve said, two strands have interwined.

72 Blue
22-10-2011, 04:28
To be fair they did try and replicate that "60 minutes" deal on certain interviews
and almost pulled it off.:D

That's got to be worth a bit of credit.:D


Is that because it was only on for 30. :p

Yorkhill blue
22-10-2011, 04:30
I think that we should remember under whose watch the HMRC issues arose.

I know who's watch those issues arose and I'm not sure what that has to do
with my post there.

I'm responding to a post that suggests that Murray and Johnston used that
opportunity to appear on the show as a stage of a challenge for the ownership
from Whyte.

I don't think they did.

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 04:30
Okay appologies i'll allow others to laugh.

You come across as a dick, mate. I've articulated my opinions and the likes of Yorkhill Blue are questioning them. And my thoughts are certainly open to debate and disagreement

You, however, want to get into something else. Relax.

Kenny Powers
22-10-2011, 04:31
To be fair they did try and replicate that "60 minutes" deal on certain interviews
and almost pulled it off.:D

That's got to be worth a bit of credit.:D

No.





;)

Cuddles
22-10-2011, 04:32
Does this threat of sacking apply to Rangers supporters' representatives?

I fecking hope so!

sonowilliam2
22-10-2011, 04:34
You highlight a relevant point regarding the climate.

Do you think this documentary would have arisen had we been 10pts off the pace? Would there have been the concern about the Scottish institution being under the ownership of CW?

As I’ve said, two strands have interwined.

What's the ten points in front of the tarriers got to do with it ? Nope,you've not for the first time on this thread lost me.

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 04:36
Does this threat of sacking apply to Rangers supporters' representatives?

I fecking hope so!

Ha. A lil' grenade.

I'm a lifetime member of the RST and have belief in their intentions & they have my support. I guess you're referring to McMillan and I agree with you.

Our problem is individual self-interest and it's very sad.

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 04:38
What's the ten points in front of the tarriers got to do with it ? Nope,you've not for the first time on this thread lost me.

Do you read anything?

It's a simple question. Do you think the CW documentary would have appeared if we had been 10pts behind them at this point in the season?

hillheadbear
22-10-2011, 04:39
I know who's watch those issues arose and I'm not sure what that has to do
with my post there.

I'm responding to a post that suggests that Murray and Johnston used that
opportunity to appear on the show as a stage of a challenge for the ownership
from Whyte.

I don't think they did.

I don't think they did either. I think it is more to do with personal antagonism between them and Craig Whyte.

However, I distinctly remember Johnson telling us that the HMRC issue was not "material". So, either he is a liar or he is financially illiterate. Either way, I prefer Whyte over him.

Yorkhill blue
22-10-2011, 04:40
You highlight a relevant point regarding the climate.

Do you think this documentary would have arisen had we been 10pts off the pace? Would there have been the concern about the Scottish institution being under the ownership of CW?

As I’ve said, two strands have interwined.

If you actually think about it that would have been the ideal circumstances
for anyone wishing to challenge Whyte for the ownership and smear him, even
more so than at the moment.

I get where you're coming from with the shaking hands with the devil bit but
I'm still not convinced on that one as Johnston himself has had problems with
the BBC in the past.

Basically we'd be looking at factions wishing to oust Craig Whyte being clever
enough to manipulate the BBC into compliance or the BBC giving a willing
hand to help Rangers minded people oust Whyte and take the throne? I can't
see either I just think it was a marriage of convenience borne more out of
spite rather than containing the sinister undertones you are hinting at.

williamstown
22-10-2011, 04:41
The BBC are scum,always have been,nobody made a documentary on them and their employment policy from Queen Margeret drive to pacific Quay yet? even Billy Connolly had a joke back in the 70s about not hearing the typewriters for the rosaries rattlin,sack anycant that talks to them,and dont mention GCC or the jobs for the bhoys shite in Airdrie/ coatbrig,cmon Mr Whyte do your stuff,No Surrender boys .

Yorkhill blue
22-10-2011, 04:42
I don't think they did either. I think it is more to do with personal antagonism between them and Craig Whyte.

However, I distinctly remember Johnson telling us that the HMRC issue was not "material". So, either he is a liar or he is financially illiterate. Either way, I prefer Whyte over him.

My post # 104 is along those lines.

Rioperth
22-10-2011, 04:43
Does this threat of sacking apply to Rangers supporters' representatives?

I fecking hope so!

Now that is a good idea, are we allowed to nominate:D

sonowilliam2
22-10-2011, 04:44
Do you read anything?

It's a simple question. Do you think the CW documentary would have appeared if we had been 10pts behind them at this point in the season?

So in your way of thinking the BBC said hey!!! Let's wait until we're at least ten points behind The Rangers and we'll bring out this ducu on them hammering CW ?

And you had the audacity to call me a prick,there's only one on this thread.

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 04:52
If you actually think about it that would have been the ideal circumstances
for anyone wishing to challenge Whyte for the ownership and smear him, even
more so than at the moment.

I get where you're coming from with the shaking hand with the devil bit but
I'm still not convinced on that one as Johnston himself has had problems with
the BBC in the past.

Basically we'd be looking at factions wishing to oust Craig Whyte being clever
enough to manipulate the BBC into compliance or the BBC giving a willing
hand to help Rangers minded people oust Whyte and take the throne? I can't
see either I just think it was a marriage of convenience borne more out of
spite rather than containing the sinister undertones you are hinting at.

Elements within the BBC, and the general media, are always open to attack or ridicule us, as we saw with the chortling over the Jelavic bid, which subsequently had substance to it.

The BBC documentary only becomes “credible” when Rangers ex-employees start granting interviews. It confirms inside insight. If that documentary did not quote AJ and featured a disparate bunch of outsiders, how would you have taken it?

Our enemies are only interested when we’re successful. And I think your “marriage of convenience” sums it up perfectly: a biased organization + embittered ex-employees.

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 04:58
So in your way of thinking the BBC said hey!!! Let's wait until we're at least ten points behind The Rangers and we'll bring out this ducu on them hammering CW ?

And you had the audacity to call me a prick,there's only one on this thread.

Again, I'll say: have you actually read anything in this thread?

You are the one casting aspersions rather than responding to the content of my posts. For whatever reason, you want to take it personal. And you're coming across as a dick. Probably time to put down the drink, mate. Or hey, actually involve yourself in the conversation instead of trying to bait me... ****.

eric's cantina
22-10-2011, 04:59
Does this apply to 'fan rep' McMillan?

bluenosecaby
22-10-2011, 05:00
There is a agenda at The BBC Scotland anyone who doesn't think so needs to read between the lines, the big picture is out there,is everything 100% at Ibrox hell no, are Ex directors baying for blood I would say yes, but where were they why the previous owner bleed Rangers almost to Exsanguination sitting on there over paid posteriors playing at being yes men... Is MR Whyte the real deal only time will tell is he sticking it to the BBC yes better than the previous custodian ever did.

sonowilliam2
22-10-2011, 05:00
Elements within the BBC, and the general media, are always open to attack or ridicule us, as we saw with the chortling over the Jelavic bid, which subsequently had substance to it.

The BBC documentary only becomes “credible” when Rangers ex-employees start granting interviews. It confirms inside insight. If that documentary did not quote AJ and featured a disparate bunch of outsiders, how would you have taken it?

Our enemies are only interested when we’re successful. And I think your “marriage of convenience” sums it up perfectly: a biased organization + embittered ex-employees.



Our enemies are only interested when we’re successful.

Me now thinks you live in planet Zorro - Fact

manchester man
22-10-2011, 05:00
Greig's resignation was on advice to distance himself from Whyte. It was a calculated action at a deliberate time from a non-businessman and club legend. It was always going to have an impact.

CW is simply being isolated. He has no concrete links to the club and it's easier to attack under the premise of the target being Whyte, rather than Rangers. Thus the pretense is concern for Rangers and CW's suitability.

Johnston and Murray provided "credence" to the BBC documentary. The BBC may be delighting in this but the drive is coming from elsewhere - and the intention is illustrate that CW is unsuitable and should not be allowed to be the owner of Rangers.

Who gains by him being forced out? And maybe the likes of AJ are suddenly realising the tax case isn't as bleak as once forecast...

Do you have a credible source for this ? Or this is your opinion as this post is same as reading a sun newspaper to be fair. No source, no evidence.......hearsay maybe

eric's cantina
22-10-2011, 05:01
If the club, which it did, ban the biased broadcasting corporation, why does this cocksocket feel the need to conduct an interview with them?

Surely the penny must drop even with the low IQ'd?

Yorkhill blue
22-10-2011, 05:01
Elements within the BBC, and the general media, are always open to attack or ridicule us, as we saw with the chortling over the Jelavic bid, which subsequently had substance to it.

The BBC documentary only becomes “credible” when Rangers ex-employees start granting interviews. It confirms inside insight. If that documentary did not quote AJ and featured a disparate bunch of outsiders, how would you have taken it?

Our enemies are only interested when we’re successful. And I think your “marriage of convenience” sums it up perfectly: a biased organization + embittered ex-employees.

I'm not familiar with the Jelavic incident you mean regarding the BBC.

I took the documentary the same way as I would have without the
participation of Johnston and Murray as the only insight to come out of it
from either that I hadn't heard of before was the alleged threat by LBG to
cut of our credit line if the IBC attempted to block the deal and Johnston
saying that Murray told him it was too late to stop the deal. I didn't give
the documentary as much credence as some have, although there was
enough to cause concern among many bears, mainly those who don't keep
abreast of the off field matters.

Revelations about Whyte? The only thing that was new to me was the fact
that he'd been barred from being a company director for seven years.

I honestly don't think the participation of the ex directors was anything to
do with any challenge for ownership of the club in the offing.

bullit
22-10-2011, 05:04
Can he actually sack someone for talking?

sonowilliam2
22-10-2011, 05:05
Again, I'll say: have you actually read anything in this thread?

You are the one casting aspersions rather than responding to the content of my posts. For whatever reason, you want to take it personal. And you're coming across as a dick. Probably time to put down the drink, mate. Or hey, actually involve yourself in the conversation instead of trying to bait me... ****.

When you first come out with a valid point i'll put you down and answer - Deal :D

williamstown
22-10-2011, 05:07
Can he actually sack someone for talking?

I think McCoist should be at least able to tell Chick Dung to GTF,that should be allowed,apart from that sack the bastards.

Virgil Hilts
22-10-2011, 05:08
“Maybe the BBC are going to be paying the [HMRC] tax bill.”

I like the sound of that... :clap:

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 05:10
When you first come out with a valid point i'll put you down and answer - Deal :D

Mate, how f'n empty is your life when you're pursuing and baiting someone on anonymous message-board?

Relax. Or join in with the chat.

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 05:17
I'm not familiar with the Jelavic incident you mean regarding the BBC.

I took the documentary the same way as I would have without the
participation of Johnston and Murray as the only insight to come out of it
from either that I hadn't heard of before was the alleged threat by LBG to
cut of our credit line if the IBC attempted to block the deal and Johnston
saying that Murray told him it was too late to stop the deal. I didn't give
the documentary as much credence as some have, although there was
enough to cause concern among many bears, mainly those who don't keep
abreast of the off field matters.

Revelations about Whyte? The only thing that was new to me was the fact
that he'd been barred from being a company director for seven years.

I honestly don't think the participation of the ex directors was anything to
do with any challenge for ownership of the club in the offing.

And this is where we differ. There is a genuine effort to discredit and undermine CW and it comes from debating his past, which AJ questions and contributes to in a negative manner. Unfortunately – or deliberately – he does so as part of a rather speculative and unsubstantiable hit on Whyte.

It’s apparent that AJ does not want CW to be the owner of Rangers.

sonowilliam2
22-10-2011, 05:18
Mate, how f'n empty is your life when you're pursuing and baiting someone on anonymous message-board?

Relax. Or join in with the chat.

But yet your taking the bait ? And you've almost got as many posts ?

Yorkhill blue
22-10-2011, 05:20
And this is where we differ. There is a genuine effort to discredit and undermine CW and it comes from debating his past, which AJ questions and contributes to in a negative manner. Unfortunately – or deliberately – he does so as part of a rather speculative and unsubstantiable hit on Whyte.

It’s apparent that AJ does not want CW to be the owner of Rangers.

I don't disagree with most of that but a concerted effort as a precursor to a
challenge for the ownership?

No. Not in my opinion.

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 05:35
But yet your taking the bait ? And you've almost got as many posts ?

Ha. I do, mate. Beyond emails to my brother, friends, and conversations at the local RSC, there's little to go on. But a couple of drinks and FF is the place.

I spoke with my Dad tonight and he declared he's bored with Scottish football, couldn't be arsed watching the documentary last night and was happy for my Mum to watch whatever. He doubts McCoist but truly hopes the lad is a success because his sons grew up worshipping our current manager. And he doesn't want to see his boys disappointed.

I gave opinions on this thread. You didn't. For whatever reason you wanted to steer it elsewhere. Good luck.

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 05:40
I don't disagree with most of that but a concerted effort as a precursor to a
challenge for the ownership?

No. Not in my opinion.

Yes. The discrediting of CW leads to accusations of him being unfit to hold ownership. "Criminality" are headlines being bandied about. He's forced to step aside... and?

hagi9uk
22-10-2011, 05:40
Say we get hit with the £50 mill and we appeal that gives us around a year to raise £50 mill because we would probably lose the appeal. Get the supporters engaged, hold fundraising nights where we can meet the players, play on the pitch, tours of auchenhowie, tours of ibrox with a personal player/legend, history memerobilia that is not in the trophy room. If 50000 people give £1000 each we are sorted...people will give less of course due to their own financial states but people will give more. It would be an effort of proportions nevers before seen but for christ sake we are The Rangers and we have one of the best and the biggest fan bases worldwide.


WATP

The rally cry. In complete agreement.

Good post.

Yorkhill blue
22-10-2011, 05:44
Yes. The discrediting of CW leads to accusations of him being unfit to hold ownership. "Criminality" are headlines being bandied about. He's forced to step aside... and?

He doesn't appear to me to be the type who will be forced aside.

If and when he does leave I don't think it will be because of this attempt to
discredit him and I don't think it will open the door for Johnston or Murray to
assume ownership on anything other than his terms.

sonowilliam2
22-10-2011, 05:46
Ha. I do, mate. Beyond emails to my brother, friends, and conversations at the local RSC, there's little to go on. But a couple of drinks and FF is the place.

I spoke with my Dad tonight and he declared he's bored with Scottish football, couldn't be arsed watching the documentary last night and was happy for my Mum to watch whatever. He doubts McCoist but truly hopes the lad is a success because his sons grew up worshipping our current manager. And he doesn't want to see his boys disappointed.

I gave opinions on this thread. You didn't. For whatever reason you wanted to steer it elsewhere. Good luck.

The simple reason i directed this at you was for your abuse at a fellow poster,let it happen again and i will personally make sure your username is swept off this forum.

Debate by all means,but abuse ?

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 05:52
He doesn't appear to me to be the type who will be forced aside.

If and when he does leave I don't think it will be because of this attempt to
discredit him and I don't think it will open the door for Johnston or Murray to
assume ownership on anything other than his terms.

I agree with respect to CW and him not stepping aside with ease. He seems a fighter. But I'd refer back to one of my early posts this thread and suggest this is the beginning of a battle over the ownership.

There's a reason CW's past is being dragged up. It's to demonstrate that he's not fit to control one of the nation's greatest institutions. It's not simply a tim-attack. There's pressure from elsewhere meaning Rangers men...

jules58
22-10-2011, 05:54
It would be very difficult and take a coordinated international effort, there are groups out there who could organise it but would need a degree of underwriting in the first instance.

Don't believe at all possible from within UK only.

I'm not in the UK and I would send what I could. It's easy now with the likes of paypal.
Also, I'm sure some of our wealthier fans could put in more if we set up some kind of incentives (although the survival of our club should be incentive enough).
Dundee collected a few hundred grand in no time, from their 5,000 fans, who are still donating money yet.
Not a stonewaller, but not impossible either IMO.

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 05:55
The simple reason i directed this at you was for your abuse at a fellow poster,let it happen again and i will personally make sure your username is swept off this forum.

Debate by all means,but abuse ?

Who did I abuse and please provide specifics? Thanks.

And your threats are a little comical.

Rioperth
22-10-2011, 06:04
I'm not in the UK and I would send what I could. It's easy now with the likes of paypal.
Also, I'm sure some of our wealthier fans could put in more if we set up some kind of incentives (although the survival of our club should be incentive enough).
Dundee collected a few hundred grand in no time, from their 5,000 fans, who are still donating money yet.
Not a stonewaller, but not impossible either IMO.

It probably is but the subscribers would need to get something for their money i.e. a shareholding in the club

lone_ranger
22-10-2011, 06:34
Maybe I am guilty of naevity,maybe blind loyalty.But my perception is the media,particulary the BBC have made it their objective to work against Whyte from the very beginning.No more cosy chats with Murray,no more idiotic interviews for Dung...I am behind Whyte all the way on this.

opersson
22-10-2011, 07:04
From today's Herald

To have me linked to some kind of criminality is an absolute outrage. There is no evidence at all behind what they were saying. There are a lot of people at the BBC who just do not like Rangers

Craig Whyte last night trained his sights on the BBC and the former members of the Rangers board who contributed to a controversial documentary on the Rangers owner’s past business dealings.

The programme was aired on Thursday evening and has left the venture capitalist in a rage at what he believes has been a ‘hatchet-job’ on his character. Before the programme had even finished, he refuted any allegations of criminality centering on his involvement with Re-tex Plastic Technology, and instructed his lawyers to commence legal proceedings against the broadcaster. That action began yesterday, when Carter Ruck, a London legal firm, lodged papers over ‘unfounded and defamatory remarks’.

“The allegations that were made are untrue,” Whyte told Herald Sport. “I find the conduct of the BBC throughout this to be disgusting. To have me linked to some kind of criminality, well that’s just an outrage, an absolute outrage. There is no evidence at all behind what they were saying. The very fact that the so-called files they had on me have been destroyed, what does that tell you? There is no evidence, it’s just not true.

“I will be taking this all the way with them – and I will be looking at what has been said by some of the individuals as well. They [the BBC] have claimed they followed editorial guidelines throughout the making of this programme, but they didn’t. They refused to give us access to things we asked for when we were being asked for responses to allegations. We were also not told who else was contributing to the programme, when that should have been part of the guidelines.

“They knew what the implications would be, legally, if they went ahead with the programme and they chose to do so.”

Rangers announced on Monday that all co-operation with the BBC was being withdrawn. In July, the same broadcaster was banned after footage was shown of Ally McCoist, the club’s manager, appearing to smile and dismiss a question regarding sectarianism and fan behaviour ahead of the new season. That ban was lifted when the BBC apologised, but Whyte was unequivocal when asked why he felt the documentary had been commissioned.

“There is a clear anti-Rangers bias at the BBC, and there has been for some time,” he said “There are a lot of people working there who just do not like Rangers.

“I think there has been plenty of evidence of that down through the years, and that’s maybe been behind their decisions to run what they did. Look at what happened with Ally McCoist. They edited footage when he was asked to comment on sectarianism and made it look as though he was dismissive and didn’t care. We banned them for that. Did that happen by accident, the editing?

“They are an absolute disgrace. Any time it’s anything to do with sectarianism, it’s Rangers fans getting the blame or being shown. Any negatives, it’s Rangers. All I want is a level playing field with the coverage every other club gets. But with the current policies at the BBC, it’s nothing more than an agenda against Rangers, and now me.”

Whyte then turned his attentions to Alastair Johnston, the former Rangers chairman, who was interviewed in Cleveland, Ohio. Johnston claimed that Lloyds Banking Group forced through Sir David Murray’s sale of the club to Whyte, and that an official at the bank warned Rangers credit would be withdrawn if the independent board set up to evaluate any potential buyers continued to question the credentials of Whyte’s bid.
Johnston – who was removed just weeks after his takeover in May – also claimed that there were serious concerns over Whyte’s capabilities to provide the cash to pay bills and take the club forward.

“Firstly, I never asked him to resign. I told him he was being removed,” Whyte said. “It’s been going on for a while, and it’s tiresome. The sniping away, the comments – these guys have been involved at Rangers whilst all the problems were happening.

“They were against my takeover from day one. They didn’t want me to get the club, they wanted it for themselves. And they were surprised when the deal went through. I think it’s sour grapes, but it’s up to them to decide whether they think it’s wise to keep harping on about me when people know only too well that I have inherited a mess.

“As for what he said about the bank, I think it’s pretty obvious that Lloyds were keen to get a sale. They wanted to move the club on. But at no point was I ever under the impression that Sir David was being forced to sell to me. He could walk away at any time, as could I. It was his choice who to do a deal with, that was my understanding, and that almost happened on a few occasions for several reasons.”

Another former director, Paul Murray, also questioned why Whyte has taken Rangers on when they are in a dispute with HMRC that could result in a tax bill of £50m. “Paul seemed to question why anyone would take a deal like I did. We had that conversation. I told him that Rangers was a special situation, that I had a back-up plan to deal with the worst case scenarios. He knew exactly where I was coming from on that,” Whyte explained. “I told him that someone had to step up to the plate and begin the process of sorting the club’s problems out. Paul had that opportunity and didn’t take it.”

Darrell King

Rioperth
22-10-2011, 07:10
I'm not in the UK and I would send what I could. It's easy now with the likes of paypal.
Also, I'm sure some of our wealthier fans could put in more if we set up some kind of incentives (although the survival of our club should be incentive enough).
Dundee collected a few hundred grand in no time, from their 5,000 fans, who are still donating money yet.
Not a stonewaller, but not impossible either IMO.


From today's Herald

To have me linked to some kind of criminality is an absolute outrage. There is no evidence at all behind what they were saying. There are a lot of people at the BBC who just do not like Rangers

Craig Whyte last night trained his sights on the BBC and the former members of the Rangers board who contributed to a controversial documentary on the Rangers owner’s past business dealings.

The programme was aired on Thursday evening and has left the venture capitalist in a rage at what he believes has been a ‘hatchet-job’ on his character. Before the programme had even finished, he refuted any allegations of criminality centering on his involvement with Re-tex Plastic Technology, and instructed his lawyers to commence legal proceedings against the broadcaster. That action began yesterday, when Carter Ruck, a London legal firm, lodged papers over ‘unfounded and defamatory remarks’.

“The allegations that were made are untrue,” Whyte told Herald Sport. “I find the conduct of the BBC throughout this to be disgusting. To have me linked to some kind of criminality, well that’s just an outrage, an absolute outrage. There is no evidence at all behind what they were saying. The very fact that the so-called files they had on me have been destroyed, what does that tell you? There is no evidence, it’s just not true.

“I will be taking this all the way with them – and I will be looking at what has been said by some of the individuals as well. They [the BBC] have claimed they followed editorial guidelines throughout the making of this programme, but they didn’t. They refused to give us access to things we asked for when we were being asked for responses to allegations. We were also not told who else was contributing to the programme, when that should have been part of the guidelines.

“They knew what the implications would be, legally, if they went ahead with the programme and they chose to do so.”

Rangers announced on Monday that all co-operation with the BBC was being withdrawn. In July, the same broadcaster was banned after footage was shown of Ally McCoist, the club’s manager, appearing to smile and dismiss a question regarding sectarianism and fan behaviour ahead of the new season. That ban was lifted when the BBC apologised, but Whyte was unequivocal when asked why he felt the documentary had been commissioned.

“There is a clear anti-Rangers bias at the BBC, and there has been for some time,” he said “There are a lot of people working there who just do not like Rangers.

“I think there has been plenty of evidence of that down through the years, and that’s maybe been behind their decisions to run what they did. Look at what happened with Ally McCoist. They edited footage when he was asked to comment on sectarianism and made it look as though he was dismissive and didn’t care. We banned them for that. Did that happen by accident, the editing?

“They are an absolute disgrace. Any time it’s anything to do with sectarianism, it’s Rangers fans getting the blame or being shown. Any negatives, it’s Rangers. All I want is a level playing field with the coverage every other club gets. But with the current policies at the BBC, it’s nothing more than an agenda against Rangers, and now me.”

Whyte then turned his attentions to Alastair Johnston, the former Rangers chairman, who was interviewed in Cleveland, Ohio. Johnston claimed that Lloyds Banking Group forced through Sir David Murray’s sale of the club to Whyte, and that an official at the bank warned Rangers credit would be withdrawn if the independent board set up to evaluate any potential buyers continued to question the credentials of Whyte’s bid.
Johnston – who was removed just weeks after his takeover in May – also claimed that there were serious concerns over Whyte’s capabilities to provide the cash to pay bills and take the club forward.

“Firstly, I never asked him to resign. I told him he was being removed,” Whyte said. “It’s been going on for a while, and it’s tiresome. The sniping away, the comments – these guys have been involved at Rangers whilst all the problems were happening.

“They were against my takeover from day one. They didn’t want me to get the club, they wanted it for themselves. And they were surprised when the deal went through. I think it’s sour grapes, but it’s up to them to decide whether they think it’s wise to keep harping on about me when people know only too well that I have inherited a mess.

“As for what he said about the bank, I think it’s pretty obvious that Lloyds were keen to get a sale. They wanted to move the club on. But at no point was I ever under the impression that Sir David was being forced to sell to me. He could walk away at any time, as could I. It was his choice who to do a deal with, that was my understanding, and that almost happened on a few occasions for several reasons.”

Another former director, Paul Murray, also questioned why Whyte has taken Rangers on when they are in a dispute with HMRC that could result in a tax bill of £50m. “Paul seemed to question why anyone would take a deal like I did. We had that conversation. I told him that Rangers was a special situation, that I had a back-up plan to deal with the worst case scenarios. He knew exactly where I was coming from on that,” Whyte explained. “I told him that someone had to step up to the plate and begin the process of sorting the club’s problems out. Paul had that opportunity and didn’t take it.”

Darrell King

Oh yes I like this A LOT>:), he is saying exactly what we have for some time now, sounds like a supporter

manchester man
22-10-2011, 07:19
Who did I abuse and please provide specifics? Thanks.

And your threats are a little comical.

And your threads are drivel

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 07:23
And your threads are drivel

Cheers, mate. Appreciate it.

manchester man
22-10-2011, 07:28
Cheers, mate. Appreciate it.

Not a personal attack my friend but you are making statements without any source or evidence being produced. John Grieg advised to move aside, range rs men waiting to takeover etc I hope you not working for the BBC >:)

bloo
22-10-2011, 07:32
Don't be a d1ck. Fans like you rangets do not need.

I think that was meant to be tounge in cheek tbh

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 07:35
Not a personal attack my friend but you are making statements without any source or evidence being produced. John Grieg advised to move aside, range rs men waiting to takeover etc I hope you not working for the BBC >:)

"drivel" - sounds like you're making an editorial comment. I don't care, go ahead. There's already someone saying :"i will personally make sure your username is swept off this forum."

I'd suggest people get a grip and stop embarrassing themselves. It is, after all, an anonymous messageboard. But hey, good luck.

lone_ranger
22-10-2011, 07:36
Cheers, mate. Appreciate it.Hi mate.this manchester man seems to following you around threads and abusing you.

MCKAY72
22-10-2011, 07:45
The rally cry. In complete agreement.

Good post.

I'm completely against the administration route. Hagi9 has got me thinking if we were to take the hit, would we not be better to raise the 50m and rebuild our club rather than pay of HMRC?

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 07:45
Hi mate.this manchester man seems to following you around threads and abusing you.

No worries, mate. For whatever reason a couple of folks wish to get personal:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJM7VAB3QiI

bluefrew2
22-10-2011, 07:55
Say we get hit with the £50 mill and we appeal that gives us around a year to raise £50 mill because we would probably lose the appeal. Get the supporters engaged, hold fundraising nights where we can meet the players, play on the pitch, tours of auchenhowie, tours of ibrox with a personal player/legend, history memerobilia that is not in the trophy room. If 50000 people give £1000 each we are sorted...people will give less of course due to their own financial states but people will give more. It would be an effort of proportions nevers before seen but for christ sake we are The Rangers and we have one of the best and the biggest fan bases worldwide.


WATP

Do it over three years and I'm in-but it must be properly handled. It should also give us a stake in the club via a supporters organisation with the existing supporters organisations should amalgamate.

loyalistpicken
22-10-2011, 07:57
Far too many people underestimate the Rangers support , just look at us now we are not in a very good financial position . PLEASE TAKE NOTE SCUMOTHY

Yet we are 10 points clear of the Yahoos just think for 1 minute what will happen if the supporters of our famous club are allowed to invest even £1000 into Rangers our club would be virtually impossible to catch on the domestic front and Mr Whyte can make this a possibility by allowing us to do so .

Right now if I was Liewell and his puppets in the mhedia along with the Rhats that support his distasteful club Id be a very worried man because they already have a multi millionaire owner who's hands are too small for his pockets and getting smaller by the day . we can have the option to clear any possible action from HMRC and then make this club a very very potent force again and bury those bastards in the East End of Glasgow for good

Rattlers Be very fken worried

Ehiogu49
22-10-2011, 07:59
Don't believe the Shyte in Whyte we trust.

Dalgety Bear
22-10-2011, 08:01
That herald report is a brilliant article. Whyte is calling it like we have over many years. He must have our full support throughout this action against the Biased Broadcasting Corp.

AngryAngel
22-10-2011, 08:05
"drivel" - sounds like you're making an editorial comment. I don't care, go ahead. There's already someone saying :"i will personally make sure your username is swept off this forum."

I'd suggest people get a grip and stop embarrassing themselves. It is, after all, an anonymous messageboard. But hey, good luck.

Interesting that you complain about someone else "editorialising". Your entire position is based on the same. You've come to a conclusion unsupported by the available evidence and jump from thread to thread spreading the crap that you've thought up....

Any time you fancy providing some proof, i'm sure the world is waiting....

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 08:11
Interesting that you complain about someone else "editorialising". Your entire position is based on the same. You've come to a conclusion unsupported by the available evidence and jump from thread to thread spreading the crap that you've thought up....

Any time you fancy providing some proof, i'm sure the world is waiting....

Seriously, **** off. It's laughable that you don't wish to discuss the content. Instead you reference what...? Oh, nothing.

Highlight what I say and then argue against it. Let's discuss.

ayr__loyal
22-10-2011, 08:15
Say we get hit with the £50 mill and we appeal that gives us around a year to raise £50 mill because we would probably lose the appeal. Get the supporters engaged, hold fundraising nights where we can meet the players, play on the pitch, tours of auchenhowie, tours of ibrox with a personal player/legend, history memerobilia that is not in the trophy room. If 50000 people give £1000 each we are sorted...people will give less of course due to their own financial states but people will give more. It would be an effort of proportions nevers before seen but for christ sake we are The Rangers and we have one of the best and the biggest fan bases worldwide.


WATP

This is the craziest thing I've ever read on here, truly mental

AngryAngel
22-10-2011, 08:17
Seriously, **** off. It's laughable that you don't wish to discuss the content. Instead you reference what...? Oh, nothing.

Highlight what I say and then argue against it. Let's discuss.

Read the post moron, at what point did i state that i "didn't want to discuss the content"?

You are the one making accusations and assertions, prove them or f*ck off!

Your words:

"I mentioned on another thread that John Greig has been given a bit of advice to distance himself from Whyte, hence the resignation before the documentary. JG can't be seen to be "guilty" by association.

My suspicion is that we're about to see a fight for the ownership of Rangers."

Where is the proof that backs up your laughable theories. hmm..?

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 08:37
Read the post moron, at what point did i state that i "didn't want to discuss the content"?

You are the one making accusations and assertions, prove them or f*ck off!

Your words:

"I mentioned on another thread that John Greig has been given a bit of advice to distance himself from Whyte, hence the resignation before the documentary. JG can't be seen to be "guilty" by association.

My suspicion is that we're about to see a fight for the ownership of Rangers."

Where is the proof that backs up your laughable theories. hmm..?

“Moron?”

I think your language and aggression speaks for itself. You haven't actually countered anything I've said.

Instead, you've simply... actually I'm not sure what you've said. You're bumbling. Take a deep breathe. And articulate. Post again. Once you do I can respond. Thanks.

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 08:42
Note:

I had a glimpse at your posts prior to this thread. It's apparent you're simple. Which is cool. Or you're a tim. Which is not so cool. Which is it?

AngryAngel
22-10-2011, 08:46
“Moron?”

I think your language and aggression speaks for itself. You haven't actually countered anything I've said.

Instead, you've simply... actually I'm not sure what you've said. You're bumbling. Take a deep breathe. And articulate. Post again. Once you do I can respond. Thanks.

Bwahahahahaha. Half an hour and this is the best you can come up with!

I've highlighted what you said and asked for proof. I'll ask for it again. Stop trying to be smarter than you are you idiot. Oh noes, i'm being "aggressive" again...!:roll:

Bowery Boys
22-10-2011, 08:49
The simple reason i directed this at you was for your abuse at a fellow poster,let it happen again and i will personally make sure your username is swept off this forum.

Debate by all means,but abuse ?

Cringe :o........

AngryAngel
22-10-2011, 08:54
Note:

I had a glimpse at your posts prior to this thread. It's apparent you're simple. Which is cool. Or you're a tim. Which is not so cool. Which is it?

Proof, you don't seem to do it do you?! Go on prove i'm a tim and get me banned. I double dare you.....

Adelphi
22-10-2011, 08:56
Say we get hit with the £50 mill and we appeal that gives us around a year to raise £50 mill because we would probably lose the appeal. Get the supporters engaged, hold fundraising nights where we can meet the players, play on the pitch, tours of auchenhowie, tours of ibrox with a personal player/legend, history memerobilia that is not in the trophy room. If 50000 people give £1000 each we are sorted...people will give less of course due to their own financial states but people will give more. It would be an effort of proportions nevers before seen but for christ sake we are The Rangers and we have one of the best and the biggest fan bases worldwide.


WATP

:roll: We cant even get 50000 to give £25 each. And in return for that £25, they get a ticket to watch a game of football against a top European side.

Not knocking your idea, but maybe you can get the ball rolling. How much will you give ??

fourbus
22-10-2011, 08:58
Proof, you don't seem to do it do you?! Go on prove i'm a tim and get me banned. I double dare you.....

You have taken this too far now a "double dare" :D:D

AngryAngel
22-10-2011, 09:00
You have taken this too far now a "double dare" :D:D

I really shouldn't have watched pulp fiction last night!:D

Exiled_Bluenose
22-10-2011, 09:03
I like the cut of his jib, that's for sure. No messing around!

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 09:08
Proof, you don't seem to do it do you?! Go on prove i'm a tim and get me banned. I double dare you.....

Why would I care? FF is a silly free-for-all. Only tims fret about it.

I've just PM you. I think we'll find out shortly who the **** you are... Scared?

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 09:10
You have taken this too far now a "double dare" :D:D

I think you might be betting on the wrong horse. Depends who you are, I suppose?

Top_Cat
22-10-2011, 09:11
This thread has went a bit mental! :D

pennyblack
22-10-2011, 09:15
I saw Lee McCulloch buying a Radio Times this morning.

Does that count?

the bbc sold off the radio times a few months ago.

weebear
22-10-2011, 09:23
Mr Whyte should extend this to any employee talking to anyone or Mhedia about Rangers private business, because at the moment our club has more holes in it's security than a tramps vest.

DiscomBob
22-10-2011, 09:31
I mentioned on another thread that John Greig has been given a bit of advice to distance himself from Whyte, hence the resignation before the documentary. JG can't be seen to be "guilty" by association.

My suspicion is that we're about to see a fight for the ownership of Rangers.

In what way would a fight for ownership happen? Craig Whyte is the majority shareholder - how can they force him out, or are you implying that criminal charges are about to occur? I can't think of any other way to force a majority shareholder out of ownership against his will... :confused:

ikip loyal
22-10-2011, 09:36
£50m is an unbelievable amount of money. If we could raise £50m in a short space of time we wouldent be in this mess, but its impossible.

So the Tarriers can do it but we cant !!!

You obviously believe they care more for their club than we do ours :(

fourbus
22-10-2011, 09:37
I think you might be betting on the wrong horse. Depends who you are, I suppose?

I'm not a gambling man but I canny see how you can get out of this pickle now that you have been double dared::)

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 09:42
Bwahahahahaha. Half an hour and this is the best you can come up with!

I've highlighted what you said and asked for proof. I'll ask for it again. Stop trying to be smarter than you are you idiot. Oh noes, i'm being "aggressive" again...!:roll:

For public record... I've now PMed twice with information to AA. He's yet to respond. Still he's content to make disparaging and unfounded remarks.

I've never claimed to be in the know but every now and again, I get a little nudge. Check the Stone Roses thread...

brooklynblue
22-10-2011, 09:44
I'm not a gambling man but I canny see how you can get out of this pickle now that you have been double dared::)

I'm out of here, pal. It's not worth it.

Psst: anyone want a Noel Gallagher ticket for November show?

panzieloni
22-10-2011, 09:52
There is a smell coming from Whyte and his cohorts. Banned from being a director, appointing unqualified auditors, allegations of defacto directorships, allegations of taking 200k from a company he was not a director of for 'tax purposes',5 of our directors resigning citing 'corporate governance' issues etc. Let's be very careful before we give our full support to this guy.

Pumbas_Nakasak
22-10-2011, 09:54
For public record... I've now PMed twice with information to AA. He's yet to respond. Still he's content to make disparaging and unfounded remarks.

I've never claimed to be in the know but every now and again, I get a little nudge. Check the Stone Roses thread...


For the record I agree with your hypothesis though the battle may be somewhat staged. IMHO, no evidence no info just part of my Scooby Doo prediction.

Braesbear22
22-10-2011, 10:03
I mentioned on another thread that John Greig has been given a bit of advice to distance himself from Whyte, hence the resignation before the documentary. JG can't be seen to be "guilty" by association.

My suspicion is that we're about to see a fight for the ownership of Rangers.

Those former directors that were against the Whyte takeover like Johnstone and Paul Murray seem to have been given a platform by the BBC. I too feel that there is a something going on in the background and this is the first real public view of this battle for the ownership of our club. Others may also be involved such as King.

If this is indeed the case then it will be a dirty nasty battle.

wullie13
22-10-2011, 10:14
in the recent past did Mr Whyte not say something about the tax bill being any more than £15 million would mean administration? therefore does that mean he has £15 million set aside for said bill? which would leave £35 nil to raise?

DiscomBob
22-10-2011, 10:15
Those former directors that were against the Whyte takeover like Johnstone and Paul Murray seem to have been given a platform by the BBC. I too feel that there is a something going on in the background and this is the first real public view of this battle for the ownership of our club. Others may also be involved such as King.

If this is indeed the case then it will be a dirty nasty battle.

I'll ask this question again - in what way can there be a "battle for ownership" against a majority shareholder? :confused: Are you/brooklynblue implying criminal charges are about to be raised against Whyte? :confused:

wullie13
22-10-2011, 10:24
FROM DAILY RECORD

CRAIG Whyte insisted yesterday his club is in BETTER shape now than at any time in the last four years despite the cash demands that threaten to leave Rangers broke.
The tax case that could land them with a £40million-plus bill is due to begin next month but the club’s owner claims a plan is in place to cope no matter the outcome.
And it’s a plan, he says, which will see Rangers emerge from “crisis mode” stronger and better.
Whyte was coming off the ropes after a BBC documentary had shone a dim light on some of his previous business dealings, and his lawyers, Carter Ruck, have started proceedings against the Beeb.
Immediately after the documentary, which suggested Whyte could have faced a jail term, a spokesman for the Rangers chairman described the allegations as “unfounded and defamatory”.
But Whyte was more outspoken when he broke silence yesterday.
He pointed out that he hadn’t watched Thursday’s programme because he’d been spending time with his children.
But Whyte had been briefed on the content and said: “They (the BBC) sent me the allegations about a week ago and I was surprised they actually ran with it given that we told them they weren’t true.
“My view of it? A lot of f****** nonsense.”
The BBC, of course, stand by their documentary, insisting rigorous standards had been applied, but Whyte was dismissive and might also sue the Government’s Insolvency Service for their part in it.
Some of the documents that would be required as evidence to back up one of the allegations made against him have been destroyed but the Beeb are in possession of others.
However, the destruction or downfall of Rangers is not part of Whyte’s grand scheme. He stressed the club will survive no matter what else is thrown at it or him.
Whyte, ensconced in his Castle Grant stronghold, wasn’t for cowering down below the parapets. He added: “I’m not going to get into specifics about any part of that programme but I can talk in general terms. The main allegations made are complete, total and utter nonsense.”
The documentary linked him with jailed fraudster Kevin Sykes and in response to that, and other allegations, Whyte said: “They probably did cast a bad light but at certain times in their lives many people, even you Mr Traynor, will have come across people who may have ended up in the wrong place.
“Is this really such a big deal?”
He does, however, accept Rangers’ image is being tarnished by the barrage of negative headlines and speculation. “It certainly isn’t a positive image,” Whyte admitted.
“Look, I am a Rangers fan and I want Rangers to be shown in the best possible way.
“But it’s important that we make savings. Also, I’m not the one responsible for the legacies we’re having to deal with.
“I’m the one getting my sleeves rolled up and getting things sorted out.
“But we’re going to be in this crisis mode until the tax issue is sorted out.”
Even so, he insists Rangers are better off under his control. Whyte said: “We are in better shape now than at any time in the last two or three years. The tax case and the club’s cost base have to be sorted out but we are still in better shape.
“We don’t have the bank to worry about and whatever happens with the tax case Rangers will be fine.”
Fans fear the club will be plunged into administration if HMRC win their case and Whyte is aware of their concerns. However, he doesn’t believe that would be a doomsday scenario.
“It would be a tragedy if the tradition of this club had to be broken if we were to go into administration,” he said. “But we’ll brush ourselves off and bounce back stronger than ever.
“The intention is this: Firstly, we must sort out the legacies handed to us as quickly as possible. Secondly, we have to reduce the cost base so costs are in line with revenue and, thirdly, we must look to move forward with new opportunities.”
Whyte also refuted strongly the allegations and accusations that he has failed to honour the terms of the circular written up as part of his takeover six months ago. Critics insist he hasn’t spent the amounts he promised and point out he has failed to pay the small tax bill of £2.8m.
Whyte was able to get David Murray’s holding for only £1 because he said he would take care of that bill but the tax man has had to go to court to have that amount of Rangers’ money frozen.
Also, there are fears Rangers are about to run out of money but again Whyte is adamant there is no reason to panic.
There is, he claims, sufficient money in place to cope.
“Lloyds have been paid off,” he stressed. “And Rangers have enough money in their account to keep going.
“But it is not correct, not at all correct, to say that I haven’t done what I said I would. I said it would all be dealt with but my advisors subsequently looked at it and found HMRC should not have issued that assessment because it was more than six year old. We are disputing it.
“I am doing the best for Rangers and I am trying to save the club money.
“I have put in what I said I would in the circular. Even if it hasn’t been used it’s there. I have put it in and it might have to increase. I have done everything I said I’d do.
“But it isn’t helpful at all that money has been frozen by HMRC, Martin Bain and Donald McIntyre
“We are a business that is losing money, a business that needs to bring costs down.
“If money is needed then we’ll have to look to shareholders and borrowings but there is a plan in place to deal with it. There is a plan for the rest of the season.”
Whyte also tried to answer the question that has perplexed many observers who still can’t work out why he was willing to pay the asking price for Rangers when banks were desperate to offload stricken companies.
He said: “I don’t think I did pay the full amount and if you analyse the figures you’ll see that there were two numbers.
“One was the net asset value and the other the market capitalisation value. One was £30m and the other £77m.”
Whyte paid £18m but some of his fiercest critics are now speculating that Murray could legally buy the club back for £1 if it’s shown Whyte hasn’t fulfilled the terms of the circular. Again he laughed that off, saying simply: “B******* to that.
“I’m in the process of sorting everything out but I must admit the intensity of the interest in Rangers has taken me by surprise.
“Already I’ve made some decisions based on what the PR reaction might be rather than what should really have been done.
“I just didn’t think it would be this intense, that everything would be scrutinised so much. But that doesn’t mean I’m not fully aware of what this club means to so many people.”
But does it mean as much to him and will he still be in charge next year? “I imagine so,” he replied, “but to move on I’d have to find someone else to take my place and I don’t think there is a queue of people waiting to do that.
“I’m looking to make some value over time so consequently I would like my shareholding in Rangers to increase in value. I’m a Rangers fan and want to increase the value of this club.
“I don’t think I said as a child I wanted to own Rangers some day but I do have a love for this club.
“There is a sentiment involved in this venture which is different for me because normally the deals I do don’t have any sentiment attached to them.
“The job is in hand. I’m working with my team to sort it all out and we will. We’ll take this club forward. That s*** from the BBC won’t distract me."

surely Murray wouldnt have the balls to do that

britain
22-10-2011, 10:25
I saw Lee McCulloch buying a Radio Times this morning.

Does that count?

Mmm interesting one:D

gennaro
22-10-2011, 10:37
There is a smell coming from Whyte and his cohorts. Banned from being a director, appointing unqualified auditors, allegations of defacto directorships, allegations of taking 200k from a company he was not a director of for 'tax purposes',5 of our directors resigning citing 'corporate governance' issues etc. Let's be very careful before we give our full support to this guy.

Nothing like the smell coming from you :D

EatDolphins
22-10-2011, 10:40
Probably been covered already so apologies if it's been done to death.

With CW's words in the Scotsman that were along the lines of "They (BBC) are totally and utterley out" what does this mean for us?

As I understand it the BBC hold the rights to the highlights of all SPL games and all cup games. With Rangers withdrawing all co-operation does this mean no more highlights this season and any cup games Rangers are involved in will not be shown? Will this leave an avenue for the BBC to sue the SPL and the SPL sue us? Could Rangers then, at the end of the season sell TV rights themselves to, for example, STV?

Is a Rangers representative contractually required to give interviews to the BBC? As CW himself said anyone who speaks to them even off the record will be out the door.

sherbrook_loyal
22-10-2011, 11:04
Loving Mr Whyte's attitude towards the BBC.

How we've longed to have someone in our corner like him.

Sir Duncan Ferguson
22-10-2011, 11:09
Probably been covered already so apologies if it's been done to death.

With CW's words in the Scotsman that were along the lines of "They (BBC) are totally and utterley out" what does this mean for us?

As I understand it the BBC hold the rights to the highlights of all SPL games and all cup games. With Rangers withdrawing all co-operation does this mean no more highlights this season and any cup games Rangers are involved in will not be shown? Will this leave an avenue for the BBC to sue the SPL and the SPL sue us? Could Rangers then, at the end of the season sell TV rights themselves to, for example, STV?

Is a Rangers representative contractually required to give interviews to the BBC? As CW himself said anyone who speaks to them even off the record will be out the door.

They'll continue to show games.

The club will simply refuse them any interviews or allow them access to the Murray Park press conferences.

craigyknows
22-10-2011, 11:15
60,000 to raise £50m is £833 per person. Its not going to happen.

Had a hypothetical discussion amongst our wee loyal and the consensus was that as long as there was a sound and clear plan we would kick in £1,000.

There is a big mix in income levels but as long as there was membership recognition and it would secure our finacial future then it would be worth it.

--posting from iPhone--

Laudrup1
22-10-2011, 11:19
All coming out now, eh?

Scunnered with this, considering I trusted AJ so much.

Nice to see you are the type who can admit that they were wrong.

A good few on here who'll still laud Johnston as "having been vigilant" for us won't have your tact.

I never took to him at all and I'm largely unsurprised that he took part in a hatchet job on our club in collusion with a company who despise us.

Bluekurst
22-10-2011, 11:40
I like his jibe, I like what he stands for but it's a very brave decision to ban the BBC. This will become personal between the club we love and the biggest broadcasting company in britian. It's a giant to take on, and one which will have worldwide contacts. All the high heed bosses, line each others pockets and when we start getting personal with the BBC they will all stand together. I like a chairman with balls, but I'm yet to be convinced this will all end well for our club as a company.

briggsblue
22-10-2011, 11:43
I am sceptical of CW but his attitude here is spot on.

F*ck anyone who stands in the way of the teddy bears. If Murray had this same attitude things may have been very different.

Clark
22-10-2011, 11:44
I am fully behind him and I'm glad to see someone in charge of our club taking things by the scruff of the neck!

Tam Forsyth 1973
22-10-2011, 11:45
I like his jibe, I like what he stands for but it's a very brave decision to ban the BBC. This will become personal between the club we love and the biggest broadcasting company in britian. It's a giant to take on, and one which will have worldwide contacts. All the high heed bosses, line each others pockets and when we start getting personal with the BBC they will all stand together. I like a chairman with balls, but I'm yet to be convinced this will all end well for our club as a company.

I don't share your pessimism, heads need to roll at the Pacific Quay CSC and this is the only way to ensure it happens.

Sam_English
22-10-2011, 11:45
Get your admin to fu(k whyte. You have to engage the loyal supporters if this goes tits up because we can get us out of this mess.


WATP

There's very limited options for Whyte should the club lose it's case against HMRC

FernandoTorres
22-10-2011, 11:45
Good.

Bunch of corrupt bastards.

GingerFurball
22-10-2011, 11:51
I am obviously not an expert on the logistics side of it but if it where simply raising the money I reckon we could do it. People give alot of money to Erskine and other charities on this board so why not give a bit of money to the Rangers. If it was a an effort from the club and supporters together it is achievable.


WATP

Because I already give Rangers hundreds of pounds a year. I cannot afford to donate £1,000 that a) I don't have and b) I'd rather spend on myself and my family.

GioLoyal
22-10-2011, 11:54
AJ is a thick necked bawbag and very much part of the shower that have put us in this position.

BBC Scotland is a taig ridden embarrassment with a clear agenda, one which cares little for facts, objectivity, parity and truth.

The print media are equally scummy and will twist and insinuate as much as they feel they can get away with.

And Craig Whyte is the guy getting it from all angles from these cants. We must back him against this torrent of bullshit.

lochbear
22-10-2011, 12:01
CW has just given interview to Traynor for the record but he is also employed by BBC

georgedoors
22-10-2011, 12:09
Get in there with the boots on no surrender

baselbear
22-10-2011, 12:22
CW has just given interview to Traynor for the record but he is also employed by BBC

Simple question.

Is it for the Record or the Beeb?

turrabear
22-10-2011, 12:37
Say we get hit with the £50 mill and we appeal that gives us around a year to raise £50 mill because we would probably lose the appeal. Get the supporters engaged, hold fundraising nights where we can meet the players, play on the pitch, tours of auchenhowie, tours of ibrox with a personal player/legend, history memerobilia that is not in the trophy room. If 50000 people give £1000 each we are sorted...people will give less of course due to their own financial states but people will give more. It would be an effort of proportions nevers before seen but for christ sake we are The Rangers and we have one of the best and the biggest fan bases worldwide.


WATP
nice thought mate . but simply isn't going to happen . if you really think taht we could rase 50 million do you thin k we would have by now.

Mr Humphrey
22-10-2011, 12:41
If anybody wanted a free transfer would they not just have to give an interview to Chuck Ying?

ClockworkOrange
22-10-2011, 13:01
Traynor's punditry at the BBC is a sideline. First and foremost he's sports editor of the Daily Record and any real journalism work he does is for them.

If you heard him tearing lumps out of Dung on Sportsound not long ago, you'll know his loyalties lie with the newspaper and he's not afraid to have a go at establishment BBC men like Dung when his work at the Record is questioned.

bluger
22-10-2011, 13:06
This ban sounds permanent, it's not going to blow over in a month or so

Pretty serious for BBC sports reporters in a 2 team league

tamtherangersman
22-10-2011, 13:09
Don't be a d1ck. Fans like you rangets do not need.

and its fans like you Rangers dont need ;)

bestservedcold
22-10-2011, 13:10
This ban sounds permanent, it's not going to blow over in a month or so

Pretty serious for BBC sports reporters in a 2 team league

they'll back down like they have in the past

youngsy
22-10-2011, 13:22
Get your admin to fu(k whyte. You have to engage the loyal supporters if this goes tits up because we can get us out of this mess.


WATP

How exactly is the fanbase going to turn this around? We are talking about £50 million here not £50000, i think you fantasising here.

bluger
22-10-2011, 13:43
they'll back down like they have in the past

CW does not strike me as being in any mood for taking prisoners

Reckon it would need to be the retraction to end all retractions

turrabear
22-10-2011, 14:05
no prisnor's mr whyte

berkshiretrueblue
22-10-2011, 14:11
£50m is an unbelievable amount of money. If we could raise £50m in a short space of time we wouldent be in this mess, but its impossible.

If we could raise £50m I would rather we didn't hand it over to the Tax Man! I would much rather take administration then throw the £50m into the pot for the resurrection of teh club post administration.

Kenny Powers
22-10-2011, 14:13
If we could raise £50m I would rather we didn't hand it over to the Tax Man! I would much rather take administration then throw the £50m into the pot for the resurrection of teh club post administration.

I also think this is Whytes thoughts with what to do with investment levels and use of the clubs earnings.

SonOfBunk
22-10-2011, 14:23
they'll back down like they have in the past

I hope not. However it will be interesting next home game as they will have to let a commentary team in and (presumably) Chick the Prick to interview Dundee United players.