comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 8 minutes ago
Rule 7 section 3, states this is a formality if you refuse an allocation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sakes
I imagine we’ll conduct a risk analysis that determines we can’t guarantee safety and therefore won’t accept any liabilities.
After which we sell the tickets prior to the 14 day deadline. Job done.
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 49 minutes ago
comment by Why the pallaver (a little more apathetic) (U10168)
posted 1 hour, 52 minutes ago
The silence from the SPFL is ludicrous
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why should they say anything? The clubs have until 14 days prior to the game to try and reach an agreement. If they can’t, then the SPFL can step in and make a decision. I’m sure we’ll have thought that through.
What’s a reasonable allocation? Amongst all the bile, zero is about right. It’s fwcked now and I for one never want to see us or Rangers being “forced” to accommodate 708 fans. Fwcking ludicrous.
European allocations or just forget all the waffle in between. It’s just not worth it and we were actually all accepting it (not liking it) until we refused these 708 tickets and Rangers started demanding theirs. Get Tae fwck as far away from that pisssh as is possible.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's tongue in cheek based on the fact they hide rather than get involved. One might expect the ruling body to try help resolve issues instead of letting things get out of control. But they never do. That's all. 🍻
Its not tot for tat. Rangers started it becuase we were humping ye
comment by Why the pallaver (a little more apathetic) (U10168)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 49 minutes ago
comment by Why the pallaver (a little more apathetic) (U10168)
posted 1 hour, 52 minutes ago
The silence from the SPFL is ludicrous
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why should they say anything? The clubs have until 14 days prior to the game to try and reach an agreement. If they can’t, then the SPFL can step in and make a decision. I’m sure we’ll have thought that through.
What’s a reasonable allocation? Amongst all the bile, zero is about right. It’s fwcked now and I for one never want to see us or Rangers being “forced” to accommodate 708 fans. Fwcking ludicrous.
European allocations or just forget all the waffle in between. It’s just not worth it and we were actually all accepting it (not liking it) until we refused these 708 tickets and Rangers started demanding theirs. Get Tae fwck as far away from that pisssh as is possible.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's tongue in cheek based on the fact they hide rather than get involved. One might expect the ruling body to try help resolve issues instead of letting things get out of control. But they never do. That's all. 🍻
----------------------------------------------------------------------
. Not a chance mate
How many times do we have to remind Rangers fans?
Yeez goat repeatedly pumped rotten, and took the big cream puff.
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 1 hour ago
Is there not a rule on seat allocation? If you’re breaching that sure we’ll be happy to just take the 3 points forfeited
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A new low for 606.
comment by I'm not as think as you drunk I am.......Schizophrenia was my idea!.....No it wasn't!.....You are never alone with a Schizo :D (U2115)
posted 5 hours, 7 minutes ago
No-one said that Celtic had to follow suit? The rest of your bigoted bile I'll just ignore
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry...this was worse.
comment by Zico - Celtic Treble Winners 22/23 (U21900)
posted 20 minutes ago
How many times do we have to remind Rangers fans?
Yeez goat repeatedly pumped rotten, and took the big cream puff.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Absolutely ragdolled. Took the huff.
Celtic cheated by putting an extra man up for a corner.
It was lustig ffs🤣🤣
Must be the only professional footballing country in the World who have had a situation like this because one team took a massive huff, so entitled they felt that it was so unacceptable that they decided to be spoilt weans and cried to their maw about it. The maw being DK and she said we just won’t play with those big boys anymore fooking embarrassing tbh
I don’t blame rangers or their fans half as much as those responsible for the awful drafting of the rule and indeed the whole framework of the game here that is vague as to who wields responsibility and power meaning that not only is there no obvious way forward but that there seems no predefined route to resolution ?
And be in no doubt that ALL the clubs will have been complicit in allowing that rule get worded the way it was.
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 11 minutes ago
I don’t blame rangers or their fans half as much as those responsible for the awful drafting of the rule and indeed the whole framework of the game here that is vague as to who wields responsibility and power meaning that not only is there no obvious way forward but that there seems no predefined route to resolution ?
And be in no doubt that ALL the clubs will have been complicit in allowing that rule get worded the way it was.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
100%
Except for the thing about not blaming Rangers.🤣🤣
Scheiting the bed since 1967.
comment by Magnum (2 in a row easy) (U22391)
posted 48 minutes ago
comment by I'm not as think as you drunk I am.......Schizophrenia was my idea!.....No it wasn't!.....You are never alone with a Schizo :D (U2115)
posted 5 hours, 7 minutes ago
No-one said that Celtic had to follow suit? The rest of your bigoted bile I'll just ignore
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry...this was worse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So it is true. You are an arrogant snob
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 1 hour, 42 minutes ago
Rule 7 section 3, states this is a formality if you refuse an allocation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Normally, I’d look to see if this was true-but even if it was, there’s not a chance they’ll impose it. The reason for that is they’ve never imposed it before, if it’s even there…
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 1 hour, 46 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 1 hour, 42 minutes ago
Rule 7 section 3, states this is a formality if you refuse an allocation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Normally, I’d look to see if this was true-but even if it was, there’s not a chance they’ll impose it. The reason for that is they’ve never imposed it before, if it’s even there…
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Never even bothered looking it up. Just smells of bulleshiete. I’m convinced there is no rule for awarding 3 points other than perhaps a deliberate no show.
Sign in if you want to comment
Old Firm away tickets
Page 2 of 2
posted on 18/8/23
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 8 minutes ago
Rule 7 section 3, states this is a formality if you refuse an allocation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sakes
posted on 18/8/23
I imagine we’ll conduct a risk analysis that determines we can’t guarantee safety and therefore won’t accept any liabilities.
After which we sell the tickets prior to the 14 day deadline. Job done.
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 49 minutes ago
comment by Why the pallaver (a little more apathetic) (U10168)
posted 1 hour, 52 minutes ago
The silence from the SPFL is ludicrous
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why should they say anything? The clubs have until 14 days prior to the game to try and reach an agreement. If they can’t, then the SPFL can step in and make a decision. I’m sure we’ll have thought that through.
What’s a reasonable allocation? Amongst all the bile, zero is about right. It’s fwcked now and I for one never want to see us or Rangers being “forced” to accommodate 708 fans. Fwcking ludicrous.
European allocations or just forget all the waffle in between. It’s just not worth it and we were actually all accepting it (not liking it) until we refused these 708 tickets and Rangers started demanding theirs. Get Tae fwck as far away from that pisssh as is possible.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's tongue in cheek based on the fact they hide rather than get involved. One might expect the ruling body to try help resolve issues instead of letting things get out of control. But they never do. That's all. 🍻
posted on 18/8/23
Its not tot for tat. Rangers started it becuase we were humping ye
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Why the pallaver (a little more apathetic) (U10168)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 49 minutes ago
comment by Why the pallaver (a little more apathetic) (U10168)
posted 1 hour, 52 minutes ago
The silence from the SPFL is ludicrous
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why should they say anything? The clubs have until 14 days prior to the game to try and reach an agreement. If they can’t, then the SPFL can step in and make a decision. I’m sure we’ll have thought that through.
What’s a reasonable allocation? Amongst all the bile, zero is about right. It’s fwcked now and I for one never want to see us or Rangers being “forced” to accommodate 708 fans. Fwcking ludicrous.
European allocations or just forget all the waffle in between. It’s just not worth it and we were actually all accepting it (not liking it) until we refused these 708 tickets and Rangers started demanding theirs. Get Tae fwck as far away from that pisssh as is possible.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's tongue in cheek based on the fact they hide rather than get involved. One might expect the ruling body to try help resolve issues instead of letting things get out of control. But they never do. That's all. 🍻
----------------------------------------------------------------------
. Not a chance mate
posted on 18/8/23
How many times do we have to remind Rangers fans?
Yeez goat repeatedly pumped rotten, and took the big cream puff.
posted on 18/8/23
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 1 hour ago
Is there not a rule on seat allocation? If you’re breaching that sure we’ll be happy to just take the 3 points forfeited
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A new low for 606.
posted on 18/8/23
comment by I'm not as think as you drunk I am.......Schizophrenia was my idea!.....No it wasn't!.....You are never alone with a Schizo :D (U2115)
posted 5 hours, 7 minutes ago
No-one said that Celtic had to follow suit? The rest of your bigoted bile I'll just ignore
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry...this was worse.
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Zico - Celtic Treble Winners 22/23 (U21900)
posted 20 minutes ago
How many times do we have to remind Rangers fans?
Yeez goat repeatedly pumped rotten, and took the big cream puff.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Absolutely ragdolled. Took the huff.
Celtic cheated by putting an extra man up for a corner.
It was lustig ffs🤣🤣
posted on 18/8/23
Must be the only professional footballing country in the World who have had a situation like this because one team took a massive huff, so entitled they felt that it was so unacceptable that they decided to be spoilt weans and cried to their maw about it. The maw being DK and she said we just won’t play with those big boys anymore fooking embarrassing tbh
posted on 18/8/23
I don’t blame rangers or their fans half as much as those responsible for the awful drafting of the rule and indeed the whole framework of the game here that is vague as to who wields responsibility and power meaning that not only is there no obvious way forward but that there seems no predefined route to resolution ?
And be in no doubt that ALL the clubs will have been complicit in allowing that rule get worded the way it was.
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 11 minutes ago
I don’t blame rangers or their fans half as much as those responsible for the awful drafting of the rule and indeed the whole framework of the game here that is vague as to who wields responsibility and power meaning that not only is there no obvious way forward but that there seems no predefined route to resolution ?
And be in no doubt that ALL the clubs will have been complicit in allowing that rule get worded the way it was.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
100%
Except for the thing about not blaming Rangers.🤣🤣
Scheiting the bed since 1967.
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Magnum (2 in a row easy) (U22391)
posted 48 minutes ago
comment by I'm not as think as you drunk I am.......Schizophrenia was my idea!.....No it wasn't!.....You are never alone with a Schizo :D (U2115)
posted 5 hours, 7 minutes ago
No-one said that Celtic had to follow suit? The rest of your bigoted bile I'll just ignore
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry...this was worse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So it is true. You are an arrogant snob
posted on 18/8/23
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 1 hour, 42 minutes ago
Rule 7 section 3, states this is a formality if you refuse an allocation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Normally, I’d look to see if this was true-but even if it was, there’s not a chance they’ll impose it. The reason for that is they’ve never imposed it before, if it’s even there…
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 1 hour, 46 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 1 hour, 42 minutes ago
Rule 7 section 3, states this is a formality if you refuse an allocation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Normally, I’d look to see if this was true-but even if it was, there’s not a chance they’ll impose it. The reason for that is they’ve never imposed it before, if it’s even there…
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Never even bothered looking it up. Just smells of bulleshiete. I’m convinced there is no rule for awarding 3 points other than perhaps a deliberate no show.
Page 2 of 2