aofjays

Kinky has been expertly avoiding that question since a couple of months after rangers died. Good luck mate.

Bloody hell. Closest thing to a handsome 'Asiatic barbarian tribe member' I've ever seen.

I'm curious Kinky, do you honestly think the person simply answering a question is "obsessed" compared with some idiot that pops up to say "Diddies!!!" whenever a ghost of a chance presents itself?

Yeah, if you are going to get annoyed by rangers fans acting like children you're gonna have a bad time. As Dindeleux touched on watching you appeal to a rangers fans non-existent sense if decency for the 76th time is getting tiresome.

Projection is like breathing for you isn't it?

Ah, 'all over social media' is the vaunted P&B perspective is it?

Benny and Kinky are the diddies. He spelt it out for you man!

How dare you call all men good at sweeping!

Why weren't your team in the top league last season? Are you really suggesting a new team being rubbish makes the top league tainted? Incredible corkscrew thinking there.

Alan Ryan? That's no quite the same as a flute band now is it?

I like this one: "The funniest thing about it is they've not beat us at Ibrox in almost 30 years. They will probably do it this season to be honest so will they be celebrating like f**k (and I wouldn't blame them - first time win at a venue in 30 years regardless of how shite we are is still a big feat) or will they just be applauded off the pitch? beating a new team with no history and everything ... I wonder" Because obviously it being exactly the same group of knuckle draggers following the new club has nothing to do with how people react to them.

Sorry, wisnae paying attention, still, I think you need a letter from ASA to prove that one Stoney.

While the SFA could do that unless you can get some idiots to spout rubbish about social unrest I reckon you are going to be disappointed. Maybe you could give one of the heads of the SFA a bunch of money in a brown envelope? That seems to work.

As far as I know titles are the purview of the SFA, so while the earlier part of the letter could possibly say they can keep there ill gotten gains (why they want to is anyone's guess). I disagree that that would negate the summation.

That's not arguing. That's nudging and winking while saying things like, "there's a lot goes on we don't get told". It's pretty much the opposite of an argument. The letter states the old club went into administration and a new club/company (which is the same thing according to UEFA's rules) was ineligible to apply for a license. What on earth do you believe could be in the censored part that somehow twists the summing up to mean it's the same club?