Whilst I agree with Robert McGonigle (Fans with Laptops, June 5) in praising John Boyle's rebuttal of Rangers' approach for Mark Reynolds, even he recognises the futility of such resistance when he states that Reynolds is not currently Ibrox bound.
The lure of the Old Firm is simply too great, and few players can turn down the opportunity; in the past few seasons Kirk Broadfoot, Kris Boyd, Steven Naismith, Gary Caldwell, Steven Whittaker, Scott Brown, Mark Brown, Kevin Thomson, Paul Hartley, Stephen Pressley, Mark Wilson, Barry Robson and Scott McDonald have taken the bait, and, collectively have helped to strengthen the Old Firm position whilst weakening the challenge of their rivals - even forgotten men like Alan Gow and Derek Riordan achieve the latter whilst doing little for the former.
I hope that Motherwell do hold on to their man, but I suspect the only thing stopping a move to Ibrox, would be if Celtic make a better offer.
Graeme Forbes, Edinburgh Seismic shift in Scotland required Dougie Forde poses an interesting dilemma for football's decision makers (Fans with Laptops, June 5). In suggesting the CIS Insurance Cup should be scrapped to help Scotland in the World Cup, unless Partick Thistle have a prospect of winning the former, they would need to decide which is more likely; Scotland winning the World Cup or Partick the CIS Insurance Cup. Both would be seismic events.
Iain Carmichael, by email Sky rugby coverage oversteps the limit I AM surely not alone in being angry and disgusted by BSkyB's treatment of the Scotland rugby team.
Failure to cover the match against Argentina in Rosario on Saturday, while covering games involving all the other home nations, might be construed as racial bias.
I phoned Sky and was told it was because they'd no link with Argentinian rugby. Had England been playing, I wager these would swiftly have been established. We are being treated like a banana republic, and I hope Sky discover this is a costly slip.
I trust Scots will exercise their right to terminate contracts.
I know I shall.
J Brown, Milngavie
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article