johnnygavinscoresagain

[quote user="pete_norw"] [quote user="johnnygavinscoresagain"]Where did I mention the rights and wrongs of the IRA? Or that they were in any way big and brave? Those atrocities you mention are equally dispicable.[/quote] It''s when people keep on saying unarmed peaceful demonstration, this gets people like me who were there feel very bitter towards people who make such statements, Why well because I for one Saw Martin Maguinnes in front of the marchers carrying A F.......g Thomson Machine gun, if this was a peaceful march why have this gun on show,  My last word on the subject [/quote] Fair enough, you have one view, others have another. We''ll leave it there.

Where did I mention the rights and wrongs of the IRA? Or that they were in any way big and brave? Those atrocities you mention are equally dispicable.

[quote user="Billabong"]The guy wasn''t asked to wear a Union Jack on his shirt. The poppy represents all lives lost in pointless conflicts. The poppy is also symbolic to Germans. Considering Irish republicans supported the Germans, you would have to say the lad has been ill advised, which ever way you look at it. It''s his right, sure but wearing a poppy doesn''t make you pro British or celebrate being British, it''s recognition that war is pointless and a tragic waste of life, which ever side you are on.[/quote] Nowt to do with the Germans mate. Ill advised? He comes from a city where 26 unarmed civil rights protesters and bystanders were gunned down in cold blood by the Parachute Regiment. He has every right not to wear the poppy if he so wishes.

[quote user="Billabong"]The guy wasn''t asked to wear a Union Jack on his shirt. The poppy represents all lives lost in pointless conflicts. The poppy is also symbolic to Germans. Considering Irish republicans supported the Germans, you would have to say the lad has been ill advised, which ever way you look at it. It''s his right, sure but wearing a poppy doesn''t make you pro British or celebrate being British, it''s recognition that war is pointless and a tragic waste of life, which ever side you are on.[/quote] Nowt to do with the Germans mate. Ill advised? He comes from a city where 26 unarmed civil rights protesters and bystanders were gunned down in cold blood by the Parachute Regiment. He has every right not to wear the poppy if he so wishes.

[quote user="Ncfc123"]However much Rangers an Celtic claim to be big teams in realtity they have players of a mid-table Championship team, just look a their squards here http://www.rangers.co.uk/first-team http://www.celticfc.net/team the only players who could get into our squard from Rangers are Allan McGregor and Steven Davis, Celtic fare slightly better but still remember their star striker is Gary Hooper, hardly world-beating. The SPL as a whole is of League 1/2 standard this includes the attendences 4,520 for a Motherwell home match, they are 3rd in the SPL, contrast this with Tottenham who are 3rd in the Premier League with an attendence of 36,176 against Newcastle. The SPL''s Cheif Executive is that financial genius Neil Doncaster who''s financial skills and brilliant managerial appointments led us into League 1.  In conclusion the only thing big about these clubs are their stadiums and their tax bills.[/quote] And their support. Two very big clubs, one a winner of the European Cup, both reached a Euro final in the last 10 years. Deloitte''s Top 20 matchday revenue generating clubs: Rank Club Revenue Money League €m ranking 1 Real Madrid 129.1 1 2 Manchester United 122.4 3 3 Arsenal 114.7 5 4 FC Barcelona 97.8 2 5 Chelsea 82.1 6 6 Bayern Munich 66.7 4 7 Liverpool 52.4 8 8 Hamburger SV 49.3 13 9 Tottenham Hotspur 44.9 12 10 Celtic 43.4 n/a 11 Benfica 40.2 n/a 12 Internazionale 38.6 9 13 Atlético de Madrid 35.9 17 14 Rangers 31.5 n/a 15 AC Milan 31.3 7 16 VfB Stuttgart 30.2 19 17 Aston Villa 29.8 20 18 Manchester City 29.8 11 19 Valencia 28.4 n/a 20 Werder Bremen 27.8 n/a "Most strikingly, only three clubs from outside Europe’s ‘big five’ leagues feature in any of our rankings. The Glasgow giants, Celtic and Rangers have not appeared in the Money League since 2006/07 and 2005/06 respectively but they still generated the 10th and 14th highest matchday revenues owing to their phenomenal support. Each club has average league attendances in excess of 45,000. However, the limited size of their domestic broadcast market means that, barring UEFA Champions League success, neither club is likely to reappear in the Money League top 20 in the foreseeable future"

[quote user="Oz Canary"]Maybe it''s time for the FA and SFA to get together for a chat. Scottish league is a joke with only Celtic & Rangers in contention each year. I for one would enjoy seeing Celtic and Rangers in Premiership with the rest scattered within the Championship and League 1. The fact that we have Welsh teams in our competition makes sense that we expand and bring in Scottish teams. Would create additional theatre and great atmosphere if you knew that Celtic and Rangers would come too Carrow Road every year.[/quote] Unlikely to ever happen. It would not be in the interests of most PL clubs to vote in two large clubs who would thrive on the tv money. Celtic v Chelsea for example would be a nightmare to police.

[quote user="vos"]From the Glasgow perspective one would assume they would like Celtic and Rangers to join the Premier League. But hang on a minute, the Scots don''t want anything to do with us. Thank God for that.[/quote] Rangers will always be loyal. Except for when it comes to paying her maj''s taxes it would seem. [8-)]

[quote user="CDMullins"] And the previous ROI managers? Surley Wes is that good that they should fit a system around him? [/quote] Who, Steve Staunton?! Call me gaffer... Yup, very good [:D] I saw young Wessi in 2004 in the Champions League qualifiers for Shelbourne against a very tidy Deportivo La Coruna side at Landsdowne Road. He played against Valeron, Duscher and Sergio that night. IMO Wes was easily the best midfielder on view mate.

[quote user="CDMullins"] So whats your excuse for Trappatoni not picking him? And instead selecting  Keith Andrews, Keith Fahy, Stephen Hunt? If he was as good as this board made out, why when we were relegated to L1 didnt any Championship side want him, Why when he was ''that good'' in League One didnt any Championship side want him, Why when he was ''that good'' in the Championship didnt any Premier League side want him and now he is ''that good'' in the Premier League, cant he still even make the squad for ROI. Paul Lambert didnt buy Wes, he was here when he came. He has had a limited budget, now we have a little cash I feel Wes will be replaced. Lambert as got the best out of him, but for every piece of magic he produces, there are lots of bad play, IMO. Its a shame, cause football brian wise he is very clever, infact at times too clever, but he hasnt been blessed with the physical attributes needed to be a outstanding Premier League player. I always said, if he didnt play for City, who would he play for, I certainally dont think it would be a Premier League side, maybe someone like Middlesborough, Coventry or Leeds. [/quote] Quite simply, Trappatoni has a system and Wes doesn''t fit in it. No shame in that. Football is all about opinions, even at managerial level [:P]

O''Neill to Lambert after the game - You have done well young grasshopper, but I am still the master [^o]

[quote user="Arthur Boreham-Stiffe"]Things are worse for Rangers than you think. HMRC has taken them to court over a claimed unpaid tax bill of 49 million quid , and others are awaiting payment. If they lose the case they will be up effluent creek in a barbed wire canoe , minus paddles.[/quote] This. They''re possibly facing administration before the end of the season. Liquidation if the tax case goes against them. It may be a long time before they will be poaching Norwich players again

Rangers appear to be currently teetering on the brink of administration. They are trying to sell off Jelavic in this transfer window. If they manage to sell him, they''ll want to bring in a replacement target man at a profit. Without being able to answer either of your two questions, I''ll wager that he''d earn less at Rangers than he currently does. For that reason, I''d be very surprised if it would be attractive to him, unless he''s currently unhappy.