Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

THE Charles Green consortium have told
Rangers supporters that it would take at least
£50 million for them to sell the newco club – a
figure which would give them an astonishing
900 per cent profit on their initial £5.5m
investment.


m.scotsman.com/sport/football/spl/rangers-newco-charles-green-consortium-put-50m-sale-price-on-club-1-2400417



Apologies if already posted. From this morning's Scotsman.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim44

THE Charles Green consortium have told
Rangers supporters that it would take at least
£50 million for them to sell the newco club – a
figure which would give them an astonishing
900 per cent profit on their initial £5.5m
investment.


m.scotsman.com/sport/football/spl/rangers-newco-charles-green-consortium-put-50m-sale-price-on-club-1-2400417



Apologies if already posted. From this morning's Scotsman.

---

I read that in the voice of the Dragon Den's presenter:greengrin

The Burley article is the worst one yet! An absolute idiot of a man who clearly is not capable of forming a coherent argument so resorts to petty namecalling against people that have done absolutely nothing wrong! He should be ashamed of himself, but the worrying thing is that he probably genuinely believes what he is saying!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peterdouglas

That statement is from the supporters club, not the actual club.

Hibs have said nothing as the matter is now out of their hands.

---

But it isn't, in fact, since the SPL Board is the one bullying the SFL clubs and Hibs are, by extension, very much a part of that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim44

THE Charles Green consortium have told
Rangers supporters that it would take at least
£50 million for them to sell the newco club – a
figure which would give them an astonishing
900 per cent profit on their initial £5.5m
investment.


m.scotsman.com/sport/football/spl/rangers-newco-charles-green-consortium-put-50m-sale-price-on-club-1-2400417



Apologies if already posted. From this morning's Scotsman.

---

Saw this too. It's basically a rehash of the scotslaw blog from a few days ago. Just goes to show that the dead tree journalism is days behind a story.

Any decent full time journo could have picked this up and made a big deal out of it before now. What we've seen from this is that the tinternet is where the story is at. The papers are either machines of propaganda and one sided opinion pieces or days behind the story.

A general level of very poor sports journalism in Scotland is one of the revelations or maybe confirmations, of this saga.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steakbake

Saw this too. It's basically a rehash of the scotslaw blog from a few days ago. Just goes to show that the dead tree journalism is days behind a story.

Any decent full time journo could have picked this up and made a big deal out of it before now. What we've seen from this is that the tinternet is where the story is at. The papers are either machines of propaganda and one sided opinion pieces or days behind the story.

A general level of very poor sports journalism in Scotland is one of the revelations or maybe confirmations, of this saga.

---

This story should have been covered by financial / business journalists. The bloggers are leading the way here because they are experts in their field. The newspaper industry will have it's work cut out to compete in future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marinello59

This story should have been covered by financial / business journalists. The bloggers are leading the way here because they are experts in their field. The newspaper industry will have it's work cut out to compete in future.

---

I believe the support given by the Scottish mainstream media to, all the variations of, Huns FC is based on job protection.

They have done no more than publish what the Huns' media dept. want them to publish, and Burley's statement is the prime example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeeJay

Considering RFC made a huge PR disaster by not apologising for their previous misdeeds and instead trying to blame all and sundry for a predicament that only they as a club/company are responsible for, I can only assume Burley is not very bright if he feels that calling people 'nonentities' and 'muppets' will benefit his/their cause in any way ... surely some of his "friends" must have pointed out to him that this article was anything but a good idea? :confused:

In publishing this, the Daily Drivel only confirms what a poor excuse for a newspaper it really is...

---

It's entirely deliberate. I've worked on the sports desk of the Record and I can tell you that there will have been tears of laughter from many, many members of staff at the Burley and Hateley pieces. But they generate debate, sell papers (for a title which is plummeting) and appeal to a certain section of football fan/society who think these columns are fair comment.

It's the same with The Sun (for whom I write fairly frequently) and their Goram pieces.

Having worked on both papers, I can tell you that the production people, who actually put the paper together, are mainly fans of 'diddy' teams and there's also a surprising number of English people at both papers in sport (there's a reason for this, but it's not interesting).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WindyMiller

I believe the support given by the Scottish mainstream media to, all the variations of, Huns FC is based on job protection.

They have done no more than publish what the Huns' media dept. want them to publish, and Burley's statement is the prime example.

---

Job protection to an extent, but not for the reason you cite (my bold).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by magpie1892

It's entirely deliberate. I've worked on the sports desk of the Record and I can tell you that there will have been tears of laughter from many, many members of staff at the Burley and Hateley pieces. But they generate debate, sell papers (for a title which is plummeting) and appeal to a certain section of football fan/society who think these columns are fair comment.

It's the same with The Sun (for whom I write fairly frequently) and their Goram pieces.

Having worked on both papers, I can tell you that the production people, who actually put the paper together, are mainly fans of 'diddy' teams and there's also a surprising number of English people at both papers in sport (there's a reason for this, but it's not interesting).

---

Please elucidate ... got me interested! ;)

Just when you thought it was safe to go read the Record...there's slavering pile of pish today from Murdo McLeod :rolleyes:

The first paragraph states that he once scored the winner in a six goal Old Firm thriller and it just goes downhill from there. Apparently the league will be pointless as we all know who will win it...Welcome to the real world outside Glasgow, Murdo! :bye:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cabbage East

Burley's article. Unbelievable.

---

Beyond belief :bitchy: what a ****in' prick he is, I hope all those SFL chairmen have a look at that, hopefully it will persuade those that were dithering tae vote no tae even let them in the league at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve-O

Just when you thought it was safe to go read the Record...there's slavering pile of pish today from Murdo McLeod :rolleyes:

The first paragraph states that he once scored the winner in a six goal Old Firm thriller and it just goes downhill from there. Apparently the league will be pointless as we all know who will win it...Welcome to the real world outside Glasgow, Murdo! :bye:

---

Is it just me being pedantic? How can one score the winner in a 6-goal match?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Is it just me being pedantic? How can one score the winner in a 6-goal match?

---

Exactly my point, but that is what the idiot says :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Is it just me being pedantic? How can one score the winner in a 6-goal match?

---

4-2?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by magpie1892

4-2?

---

Not a winner though is it? One team has won by 2 goals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by magpie1892

4-2?

---

But there are two goals scored to win the game in that scoreline. A winner would be the 3rd goal in a 3-2 win (after it sitting at 2-2).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by magpie1892

4-2?

---

Was the winner the 3rd or 4th?

3.5-2.5? :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrSmith

Please elucidate ... got me interested! ;)

---

Doubt anyone else is interested so drop me a PM and will explain in due course (busy, busy ATM)

There's a thread on FF about a petition to get rid of Regan and Lawwell. http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/...r-purpose.html . One of the posts on the thread asks - can someone post this on the Hibs wed site as they are keep to get rid of Regan... Why single us out? - I'd have thought most clubs wanted him out. Of course our reasons for getting rid of him are different. We want rid of him as he is making a mockery of rules and procedures. They want rid of him mainly because he is trying to force them into Div 1 while they want Div 3 in order to 'cripple' (their words) other SPL clubs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by magpie1892

It's entirely deliberate. I've worked on the sports desk of the Record and I can tell you that there will have been tears of laughter from many, many members of staff at the Burley and Hateley pieces. But they generate debate, sell papers (for a title which is plummeting) and appeal to a certain section of football fan/society who think these columns are fair comment.

It's the same with The Sun (for whom I write fairly frequently) and their Goram pieces.

Having worked on both papers, I can tell you that the production people, who actually put the paper together, are mainly fans of 'diddy' teams and there's also a surprising number of English people at both papers in sport (there's a reason for this, but it's not interesting).

---

Interesting insight - thanks for sharing it. In other words the Daily Record thinks it is OK to sell newspapers by insulting people ("muppets" and "nonentities")? I get that the media is there to provoke debate and should provide reasoned perspectives - but your post suggests there is an institutionalised acceptance by the DR that insulting people to increase revenue is OK? Interesting corporate philosophy....:greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Offside Trap

Interesting insight - thanks for sharing it. In other words the Daily Record thinks it is OK to sell newspapers by insulting people ("muppets" and "nonentities")? I get that the media is there to provoke debate and should provide reasoned perspectives - but your post suggests there is an institutionalised acceptance by the DR that insulting people to increase revenue is OK? Interesting corporate philosophy....:greengrin

---

Burley's insults could backfire on him as the very people he attacks will read the DR and will take offence and hopefully action.

Burley knows what he is talking about. You would never see him sign for a team on mythical wages and then not see a penny of them......
That would be a real description of a muppet.

Jane Lewis‏@JaneLewisSport#Fifa have no concerns over latest developments re. #Rangers Newco. Preference is always to leave with National Association, so #sfa

brian mclauchlin‏@BBCBMcLauchlin
Rangers have refused International clearance for the transfers of Davis, Lafferty, Ness, Whittaker and Naismith. more soon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steakbake

saw this too. It's basically a rehash of the scotslaw blog from a few days ago. Just goes to show that the dead tree journalism is days behind a story.

Any decent full time journo could have picked this up and made a big deal out of it before now. What we've seen from this is that the tinternet is where the story is at. The papers are either machines of propaganda and one sided opinion pieces or days behind the story.

a general level of very poor sports journalism in scotland is one of the revelations or maybe confirmations, of this saga.

---

absofu--inlutely

Cracking article by STV summarising the current known feelings in the SFL, with all statements available etc.

http://sport.stv.tv/football/108222-...-on-the-issue/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by magpie1892

Job protection to an extent, but not for the reason you cite (my bold).

---

Magpie -

Would I be right in supposing that job protection is also to a certain extent, behind the statements that people like Chick Young and Jim Traynor have been coming out with?

It seems to me that without Rangers, these two in particular would run out of things to talk about. They might actually have to do some work to find out what goes on at places beyond Ibrox.

Seems also that people like Young and Traynor have lots of contacts in the Glasgow sporting world, specifically at Ibrox and with them gone or out of the way for some time, well, that's more than half of what they've got to say rendered totally irrelevant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steakbake

Magpie -

Would I be right in supposing that job protection is also to a certain extent, behind the statements that people like Chick Young and Jim Traynor have been coming out with?

It seems to me that without Rangers, these two in particular would run out of things to talk about. They might actually have to do some work to find out what goes on at places beyond Ibrox.

Seems also that people like Young and Traynor have lots of contacts in the Glasgow sporting world, specifically at Ibrox and with them gone or out of the way for some time, well, that's more than half of what they've got to say rendered totally irrelevant.

---

Be interesting to find ot how good their contacts are amongst Third Division clubs

http://www.scottishfootballleague.co...nt-2010-11-01/ :hmmm: