RayBees Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I'll guess this has been posted but this is wonderful. I'm a Ranger, I'm a Ranger! That is fantastically shite. That tune will be in my head all night. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pollymac Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Well no effectively they bought themselves promotion. As a new club the highest division they should have got into was the third. But they bought their way into the second. Even if the Clydebank take over had been allowed by league rules they should have started in the third division But that's the point, they weren't a new club, they were Clydebank. Then they were bought over by someone who owned the name of a non-existent club 'Airdrie United', renamed and moved to Airdrie. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Would they even have the man power to do such a review I'd be a pretty pointless exercise too, insofar as they couldn't apply any sanction on Rangers (apart from the fairly nuclear and rather meaningless scenario of stripping them of league titles from before 1998). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdTheDuck Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I'd be a pretty pointless exercise too, insofar as they couldn't apply any sanction on Rangers (apart from the fairly nuclear and rather meaningless scenario of stripping them of league titles from before 1998). Ooooh more title baulbles to be handed out 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Not really sure why other than the fact that the clubs were happy to see the back of Clydebank 99/00 season, Saints turned over Clydebank 8-0 at love street, it was shambolic. The groundsharing after they left Clydebank went in far too long. Letting any club sell it's ground is wrong. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I'd be a pretty pointless exercise too, Don't be too hard on yorself. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pollymac Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I'd be a pretty pointless exercise too, insofar as they couldn't apply any sanction on Rangers (apart from the fairly nuclear and rather meaningless scenario of stripping them of league titles from before 1998). Pretty much that. Why waste hard to come by money for an outcome that doesn't justify it? Simply wait for the SPL/SFA and Tax Case to decide on it, then just run an update script on the honours won database table. Costs next to fook all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I'd be a pretty pointless exercise too, insofar as they couldn't apply any sanction on Rangers (apart from the fairly nuclear and rather meaningless scenario of stripping them of league titles from before 1998). Ask the punters HJ! We'd enjoy it! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaffenThinMint Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Thing is what Airdrie did shouldnt have been allowed. In 1970 Dumbarton were about to buy over Clyde. However they were told by the league that they could not take Clyde's place in the first division. Yet Airdrie were allowed to take Clydebank's place in the second. Not really sure why other than the fact that the clubs were happy to see the back of Clydebank Airdrie were basically coerced into doing the SFA & SFL's dirty work. They wanted rid of Clydebank as it would mean getting rid of that clown Dr John Hall for good, and so many SFL clubs deciding at the last minute not to back Airdrie but Gretna (after mumping their gums about them being "too far away") forced their hand. There wasn't any Clydebank FC left by the time Airdrie bought them out, Hall had seen to that. It's one of the reasons Jim Ballantyne is probably the most cynical chairman in the entire Scottish league, and his view of those in charge at Hampden is probably unprintable. At least they did the right thing and gave the club's name back to the UCS that had battled so long to stop Hall destroying their club, and they're doing pretty well for themselves back in the Juniors, although having problems getting a permanant ground. The rules were changed after this, as the SFL had to keep face and pretend to "tut tut" about it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagfox Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Players proposing wage cuts of 75% for top earners, 50% for squad players and 25% for youth players. Duff and Duffer allowing to wait until tomorrow before deciding on cuts despite reiterating they cannot enforce wage cuts.... What a farce, get the bin liners handed out.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Airdrie were basically coerced into doing the SFA & SFL's dirty work. They wanted rid of Clydebank as it would mean getting rid of that clown Dr John Hall for good, and so many SFL clubs deciding at the last minute not to back Airdrie but Gretna (after mumping their gums about them being "too far away") forced their hand. There wasn't any Clydebank FC left by the time Airdrie bought them out, Hall had seen to that. It's one of the reasons Jim Ballantyne is probably the most cynical chairman in the entire Scottish league, and his view of those in charge at Hampden is probably unprintable. At least they did the right thing and gave the club's name back to the UCS that had battled so long to stop Hall destroying their club, and they're doing pretty well for themselves back in the Juniors, although having problems getting a permanant ground. The rules were changed after this, as the SFL had to keep face and pretend to "tut tut" about it. It's a real shame about Clydebank and Airdrieonians. Both were clubs with decent supports in the eighties and it went wrong for them. Airdrie United just won't come back to the levels before Broomfield was sold off and the idea now about Clydebank being in the top league seems strange now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaffenThinMint Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 It's a real shame about Clydebank and Airdrieonians. Both were clubs with decent supports in the eighties and it went wrong for them. Airdrie United just won't come back to the levels before Broomfield was sold off and the idea now about Clydebank being in the top league seems strange now. The way those twats at Hampden are running things, it might not be that long before they're asked back. "Hello, Clydebank? Er, it's Donkeymaster at the SFA. Would you like to join the First Division as of next year? We've rationalised the entry criteria owing to the current problems our members are having. Yes Spartans, Cove Rangers, Gretna and Third Lanark have already said yes. Ground criteria? Well, can you guarantee your club can provide four tracky tops for goalposts? Hello? Hello? You still there?" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 It's one of the reasons Jim Ballantyne is probably the most cynical chairman in the entire Scottish league, and his view of those in charge at Hampden is probably unprintable. He's The SFL President! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordieBoy80 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 99/00 season, Saints turned over Clydebank 8-0 at love street, it was shambolic. The groundsharing after they left Clydebank went in far too long. Letting any club sell it's ground is wrong. The same season Dunfermline turned them over 6-0 at EEP with the farcial situation of the kick-off being delayed for about 45 minutes after Clydebank's clapped out minibus kept breaking down. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaffenThinMint Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 He's The SFL President! He's been promised time off for good behaviour I understand! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nelsjfc Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Did the bankies not also have a home crowd of just 29 towards the end? Might have been something to do with a protest (or not)? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 He's The SFL President! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz FFC Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 (edited) This thread is on course for 200 pages exactly 3 weeks into the administration, it may hit meltdown and 300 if Haudit and Daudit actually do something. I'm seriously thinking about phoning rogue traders about these pair. you see it all the time wi plumbers etc taking 2hrs to do a 5min job and the bill is through the roof. Edited March 5, 2012 by Gaz FFC 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunning1874 Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 Did the bankies not also have a home crowd of just 29 towards the end? Might have been something to do with a protest (or not)? Yeah, they were groundsharing with us and boycotting. The 29 was against East Stirling IIRC. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 He's The SFL President! Actually that's worth a :lol: As if Rangers go and liquidate, they are going to have no chance. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.