I thought we had good shouts for penalties in the first half. I thought Partick were the better side early in the second half but the sending off galvanised Celtic. Gordon had a decent save and our defensive frailties were threatening to reappear but thankfully we got the goal.

Using Franco-logic it should have finished 63-74.

Puts the pressure on Aberdeen tomorrow.

It seems Franco-esque logic is rubbing off on Mixu Paatelainen who thinks that passing the ball is what wins games, not putting it in the net.

Our ground only holds 2,000 mate.
Local authorities won't let us add any extra capacity to it either, since there is only 1 road in/out, access wise.

St Johnstone v Aberdeen is off.

The ground holds 2000. Using your Seville calculator it would have been a crowd of 45000 no doubt.

Seen more people in the pie queue at Ibrox. 11000 is about the entire audience for that diddy derby. Rangers had 50000 at a game against their 4th or 5th rivals.

That goal was good as that dud staying in a job is helpful to Rangers. Using timbo logic you hoofed the ball in the direction of the goal so it was just as good a chance as any other and should have won 5-0.

As for Aberdeen under pressure, the league is over. You might as well pretend Deila is a good manager and can take Europe by storm whist you're living in a fantasy world of Aberdeen challenging.

I was down at the game, thought Dumbarton looked pretty poor although should have scored when Wes came out and flapped at a cross. First half was poor and the second Dumbarton were being ripped apart on the flanks.

I'm fully aware of what The Rock holds. Franco thinks the attendance at a Dundee away game 150 miles from Dundee says something about Dundee FC so I'm just following that to its logical conclusion that the attendance yesterday says something about the The Rangers support.

The ground holds 11,500.

You're certainly tying yourself in knots here.

The Dumbarton ground, Mastermind.

Rangers could have sold the stadium about 5 or 10 times over. Dundee can barely sell out that derby, which isn't surprising as it is meaningless like all their games.

Yes, I know that's what you were referring to.

So if Whyte, Green and the rest are found guilty of the multiple fraud charges against them what will happen with the 'assets'?

They won't be allowed to remain where they currently are as they were put there by fraud.

Who knows? Time will tell but it will also mean that the club were fraudulently put into administration, fraudulently liquidated, fraudulently thrown out of the SPL and put in Division 3, fraudulently deprived of prize money and a champions league qualifier place. Where will that leave all the never "sell out Saturday" clubs, the SFA, the SPFL etc. As guilty as those in court today.

Well,that's a crop of crap! They may have been fraudulently put into liquidation but, once they were, the SFA, SPL etc were just following the rules. There is no blame attached to them as I am sure you well know.

That'll be the rules they made up as they went along as there weren't any in place to cover such scenarios.

Same rules that Rangers used in their advantages with the EBT scandal?

The assets, including the football club, will stay where they are. The current owners came by them legitimately.

Dundee are set to sign Darren O'Dea until the end of the season.

It will be up to the courts to decide who retains the assets.

You've got almost everything there completely wrong.

But at least you admitted it was the club and not a company that is currently in liquidation.


LOL. Surely you can't believe that to be correct?

"LOL". What a great argument.

And yes, limited companies are the things that go into liquidation.

Do you really want to bore the bahookie off other folk by going through all that stuff yet again?

As soon as the club were incorporated they were a company. That is fact.

That is why fans of Rangers had a "Show liquidation the red card" display and were so vehemently opposed to the club going into administration and subsequently going into liquidation. If it didn't mean anything they wouldn't have been up in arms about it and marching on Hampden.

This pish about the club and company being different entities was never mentioned anywhere, and I'm willing to be corrected, until it was obvious the CVA was going to be rejected, it always was going to be, and folk had to make up a lie about it being the 'same' team.

Same team, same old obsession from folk such as yourself. You're mixing up two different things. What was incorporated back in 1899 was a "Club" in the sense of an unincorporated association - and we certainly haven't started a new one of those, incidentally! What continues now is the football club (or football business, if you prefer), operated by a new limited company.