Leaderboard

The Bear Necessities.

I hope this thread lasts forever.

Surely 'equality' is about equal access to opportunity rather than forced distribution of wealth? In a country like the United States there can be little doubt that the colour of your skin has a direct impact on the opportunities you are given. This sits uncomfortably with the 'American Dream' narrative that's so important to many there as well as the belief that 'anyone' can 'make it' and the whole "give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses" idea that's so intrinsic in American culture. That's how I've always understood it anyway. I don't think that idea is as set in the DNA of our culture here though. Class has always been a much bigger barrier in this country and it's fairly colour blind. While plenty of people from modest backgrounds have found success in various fields in the UK the concept is not as important in our culture as in some other countries. Anyway, back to Rangers. Sport is one of the areas where you will see black people have high profiles and success. In our current culture being good at sport brings not only wealth and profile but also a platform. I think that's why many black sports men and women feel the need to speak about political matters, there is an unseen pressure on them to use their profiles that equivalent white sport's people perhaps don't always feel. As football is the highest profile sport in this country footballers have the biggest platform. The current Rangers team has a far higher percentage of black players in it than the support does. That's not racism, simply that the black population of Scotland is less than 1% and it's smaller again in Northern Ireland, the two main areas we draw our support from. So, in all honesty, 'black issues' aren't high profile among our support or indeed in our country. You could argue the black players at our club and the club as a whole should keep out of these topics, after all what have they got to do with us? But then if these subjects matter to them perhaps we should encourage them to speak about them, to teach us, to help us understand what being a young, black man in 21st century Britain is actually like. I've almost no insight into that. I've a lot of respect for Jermaine Defoe. Not only is he a talented footballer but he's an impressive human being as well. He's a consummate professional who has made sacrifices to ensure he's made the most of his talent. He's also demonstrated empathy and enormous responsibility for others. His friendship with the terminally ill child Bradley Lowrey seemed genuine and heartfelt and his use of his profile to help that boy and raise awareness and money for his condition and others like him was exemplary. So if Jermaine Defoe wants to use his profile this time to raise awareness of racism in society, I'm okay with that. I think that's a good thing. If that involves 'taking a knee' or wearing an armband or some other symbolic gesture that might make someone like me, who has known very few black people and gives the subject little time, pause for thought then I suspect that can only be a good thing. If the club want to support him in this I'm okay with that too, if some, or all, of his teammates want to join in then I'm pretty relaxed with that. It won't change the world, but it might help enlighten some of it. As for politics and football not mixing I tend to disagree. Football clubs used to be a reflection of the communities they came from, we certainly were. This is hardly new. I read an obituary of Jack Charlton at the weekend and was reminded of the money and time he gave to striking miners during the 80s, Robbie fowler was fined once for wearing a T-shirt in support of striking Liverpool dockers and recently Pep Guardiola was reprimanded for wearing a label badge raising awareness of issues in Catalonia. Most modern football clubs want to keep sponsors and broadcasters on side and so tend to take a very corporate view of 'politics', fearing a backlash or criticism if they make a misstep. Rangers will be no different I suspect. They'll follow the mood and media narrative and take their lead from that. Forgive my cynicism. As someone who started watching football when many ground's idea of a toilet was a wall with a trough at the bottom and which by half time was ankle deep in urine the idea that we're speaking about toilets for trans people is almost amusing. I suspect the club will wait for the politicians to deal with this and legislate one way or another. As we're responsible for voting for them that feels like a wise move.

Hoax? Fuck off and tell that to the relatives and friends of the people that have died from it!

I don't want to stray too much off topic but we've never distanced for any corona virus in the past so I've no idea why this one is any different. The rate of infection and death rate is hugely exaggerated as is being proven by NHS whistleblowers. I hope this scandal is exposed at some stage but by that stage the damage is already done. I expect history will show that lockdown and social distancing killed more people and ruined more lives than the so called virus will. And yet no one in the media is strong enough to challenge the obvious holes in this horrible 'hoax'. As it's the Rangers forum, my particular concern here is the effect it's having on our club, and yet I don't see anything being done to mitigate the risk of what will happen if the stadiums remain empty. I'm still very worried about what this is likely to do to the viability of our league and club. With Doncaster and co in charge of the wider league I've got even less confidence. I'd love someone to give me a reason to be hopeful.

Thankfully they don't. They do a nice Belhaven Best for £3.20.

First home game v St MIrren moved to Sunday Aug 9th 3pm

There's a difference between us preventing black players protesting and the club actively supporting BLM. The club should stick to the Everyone Anyone campaign, Anti-racism without the politics. It also avoids the element of bullying players into actions they may not be comfortable with.

That won’t do at all. How then would you let everyone know how virtuous you are? ?

Jeez, BD you're grumpy this morning! I'm delighted to read that you've never found class a barrier in your life, others will have different experiences. With only one UK Prime Minister this century not attending a private, fee paying school at some point (the only one who didn't was Gordon Brown and he wasn't elected) I'd suggest the class system remains in place. That's not to say social mobility doesn't exist. If you extrapolate Rangers supporting Jermaine Defoe, or any of our players, use of the statement 'Black Lives Matter' as supporting defunding the police or having any interest in Middle Eastern politics I'd say you're mistaken. On some subjects I describe myself as conservative, on others as liberal, this doesn't mean I support either of the parties that carry those words in their name. Likewise I'm entirely comfortable with the phrase Black Lives Matter and the sentiment behind it, without it conferring my support for anything else they might espouse. It's possible to support organisations without agreeing with everything they say or do. When I lived in Belfast a couple of decades ago now it amused me to see the Israeli flag flown from lamp posts in Loyalist areas of the city. I'm fairly certain it was solely as a response to the Palestinian flag being flown in Republican areas. If one side said 'black' the other side had to say 'white', that's how it was. I've seen the Star Of David flag at the occasional Rangers match too, as I'm sure you have. I suppose if it becomes a big topic here, something the population and the support become involved in it's inevitable the club will become involved on a superficial level at least. But no, it's not something I'm in a hurry for any of us to get involved in. I can only speak as a man. My rather flippant remark was meant to highlight how far football toilets have come in 40 years, not who uses them. In all honesty I struggle with the 'trans debate', it's so niche and irrelevant to my day to day life, I also don't think I'm alone in that. On balance I'm yet to be convinced a biological man should freely use female only facilities, particularly if it makes females uncomfortable. That's my view just now, it might change as I learn more about the subject, or it might not.

I've never come across class as being a barrier. If Defoe want to do something personally then that's fine. However the club should not be supporting an organisation like BLM UK due to their policy of wanting to defund the police or supporting Palestine. Do you believe that Rangers should be supporting the defunding of police or an anti-Israel/pro-Palestine agenda? Should they be involving themselves in Israeli politics? Spoken as a man. Would you find it amusing if you were a woman and a guy with a dress on was allowed to walk into the same toilets as you?

I almost fell asleep when reading the list of options. It seems to have caused quite a stir in some quarters.

I can't believe some people still think Rangers playing in England is a possibility.

FFP must be the biggest joke of all time. Man City with no debt fell foul of it but neighbours Man Utd with £500m debt were okay. Then there’s Barcelona & Real Madrid with their soft loans, property deal, non-payment of taxes etc, etc

What clubs going tits up? English football doesn't need Rangers sooner you wake up to that fact the better. UEFA would also be required to rubber stamp any move, so that's it scuppered before it's even started (unless English football is willing to forgo European football).

Well done GersNet on the freedom of speech front. I posted the same message that started this thread the same day on Follow Follow and they had me banned from the site within ten minutes. A badge I will wear with pride. Kudos to you. I only wanted to start a debate

Paddy's market?

I see the Sun UNDERSTANDS as always will wait for Ibrox to release anything.

Not to derail the thread, but how do you suggest we get a fresh start in England , or any other national league for that matter? Genuinely interested.

Looks to me this is a last ditch effort by the SFA to save the SPFL. I think the SFA know if hearts & partick thistle win the SPFL is finished

No chance. A vaccine for it will be along any minute. I already have one but I’m waiting until the price goes up.

The big bad Gers!

SFA are worried about celtc gifted title too it seems.

Interesting debate this... I think it should be raised with the club and debated. The whole SJW movement weeds it's way in to practically every walk of life now it seems. Who knows what the outcome will be but this will likely be a hot topic in the game in the years ahead. The BLM stuff, well I think like a lot of movements, they start out with good wholehearted intentions and then often become a pawn for a certain ideology or used for personal gain. We saw this with the whole #metoo movement. I personally wouldn't like the club to align itself with the BLM movement knowing what is known about them currently, however I don't have a problem with individual players doing what they think is correct. I think it's a good opportunity for the club to once again promote the "Everyone anyone" message. That's our message and that's what we promote. We're saying all we need to within our own message without having to get dragged into anything else.

Impartial arbitrators then

Occasionally dipping into Jum Spence's Twitter feed can be interesting. He Tweets lots about Dundee United and ra Sellik, keeps you up to date on happenings at his local parish church, and splits the rest of his time keeping us abreast of Dundee University and providing teasers on that day's Dundee Courier news items. The last two are motivated by being Rectum of the Uni' and reminding us all he remains a columnist at the blat. Like all those that have been Hollicomed, often it's the stuff he doesn't flag up, that prove most interesting. We know Jum is as thick as sh1t pouring from the neck of a bottle; highlighted by his second and last resignation from PQ. He told us all he knew all about the law because he lectured on it at the local Polytechnic. He demanded Rangers be stripped off their assets, because they profited from crime. The example of gangsters and yachts was offered. Of course, such a Law Lecturer had ignored the fact no crime had been committed by Rangers in his prejudicial rant. Today, in the Courier, in his role as football columnist, he failed to highlight a football connected story. If we go back four months, the biggest story in Scottish football and it continues to rumble; is Dundee's missing vote in the SPFL fiasco. Remember, the vote was sent by e-mail by Dundee FC Secretary, Eric Drysdale. It went missing/awry/rogue for several hours, then we were informed it was recovered from the SPFL quarantine folder at one in the morning. Suffice to say, Dundee had changed their vote from the one they had intended to make. Rather, the vote they told other clubs they intended to make. Eric Drysdale, what's he like? Eric Drysdale is also an SNP Councillor on Perthshire and Kinross Council. Over the weekend, he attended a Council meeting to decide on the merits of a proposed 187 house construction project in the small village of Stanley. The villagers objected to the construction, and Drysdale gave the impression he intended to vote for the project to go ahead. However, on reading the impact reports provided by those opposed, he was mindful to change his mind. During the on line vote, Eric's computer had technical glitches and his vote was not registered. This ensured a 6-6 tied result, allowing the Chair to cast his/her vote in favour of construction. One can only wonder at Eric beset by computer difficulties again? One can only wonder at Jum, being a Law Lecturer, a Rectum, and a football columnist; NOT finding this story worthy of highlight? At the very least, he should persuade his BIG mate, Stuart Cosgrove to utilise his production company to commission a public information film, 'Eric Drysdale contemplates the ballot box'. Was Eric waiting on the soft thud of a brown envelope, was he promised a pre-season friendly, was he guaranteed a lucrative TV match to be played in the States, .... etc? We should be told ................. by Jum.

“So called virus”? ”Horrible hoax”? Do you think it doesn’t exist?

Yeah, I don't think what they are doing is unreasonable. Happy to pay my fiver to know I'll get in, that everyone's temperature is checked and get my drink once we're in.

I don't know where you get this manifesto from; I must have missed the bit about closing prisons. Capitalism maintains itself by fostering division - that's the real point.Racism cannot be stopped just by wishing it away.

Well, it skews competition completely when one, or more, competitors have no incentive, or obligation, to operate commercially, and generate by their own activities the wherewithal to invest and reinvest. Abu Dhabi's Manchester franchise, and "Paris" Saint-Germain perhaps are the most egregious examples of this. That the Manchester concession has not completely dominated the league is down to the fact that other teams seems to have generated sufficient income to challenge. I do have to note that the recent UEFA charges relate to several years ago, although I am loathe to assume that the franchise is now wholly self financing, and that its income contains no disguised subsidies. I have no time for UEFA -or FIFA, for that matter, (nor for the SFA, but I don't wish to lower debate to the level of music hall comedy)- although it seems to be on a hiding to nothing, here. Quite clearly it can't police the game, effectively, and equally clearly, the Clubs have, at present, little appetite for doing so themselves. For the Clubs to take charge would require removing themselves from UEFA's ambit, almost entirely, and coming to rather complex agreements on financing the game, involving salary caps, strictures relating investment to income, rules on state aid, and so forth. They would, in other words, need to move towards an American model of sports/business, which is, after all, successful..... It would be football, Compo, but not as we know it.

Oh, and there's more.... if the eyes have not glazed over.. Manchester City v Uefa final score: New Money 1 Old Money 0 (aet) Barney Ronay Overturning their two-year Champions League ban should not be seen as a reason for celebrating in the streets, but this is football so it probably will be @barneyronay Mon 13 Jul 2020 18.23 BSTLast modified on Mon 13 Jul 2020 23.34 BST If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine. If there was ever any doubt that Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed was playing this game to win, such thoughts will have been erased for good by the success of Manchester City’s stunning, potentially transformative appeal against the judicial processes of European football. This being football, the success of City’s supremely powerful legal team in junking a flawed two-year ban will no doubt be cast in the most binary terms. For the most partisan areas of the club’s support, and indeed for some of the surrounding media, the judicial panel’s decision will be seen as “a sensational victory” in the classic football style: cause for dancing in the streets, beer thrown in the air, taunting memes, perhaps even a kind of heartwarming underdog story. Who knows, perhaps it really is testimony to the beauty of sport that previously unknown boundlessly wealthy billionaires can stand up to rules framed to protect the interests of more established boundlessly wealthy billionaires. Either way the scoreline looks decisive. New Money 1 Old Money 0 (aet). At the other extreme there will be a temptation to see City’s victory as another strand in a wider global truth. Plate sin with gold and the strong lance of justice hurtless breaks. Or in other words, if you don’t like the justice you receive, please ask your sales adviser as there are other, more expensive versions available. Financial fair play was put in place to control the richest players at European football’s table. But the richest players can also afford the best lawyers. Certainly, they can afford better lawyers than those at Uefa’s disposal, judging by an oddly brittle case reliant on time-barred complaints. A two-year ban seemed punitive at the time. No ban at all, despite having obstructed Uefa’s process, seems lenient, but is perhaps a reaction to the former. As ever, the truth is more nuanced than either of those polarities. There are probably two things worth saying right now. First, this is not in any sense a victory for the little man. The little man was never involved in this battle in the first place. No doubt they will be dancing in the streets of global billionaire overclass this evening, but this would also have been the case had the decision gone in Uefa’s favour. Advertisement This argument has always been about the divvying up of wealth and privilege among the already wealthy and privileged. By way of example, one likely upshot of City losing this case would have been Manchester United taking their place in the Champions League next season. Which of these outcomes makes the most sporting sense? Which feels most like evidence of life-affirming social mobility? Which model of hyper-capitalism – state-backed, or leveraged buyout – do you prefer? It is worth remembering this in any debate about fairness. There are no Ewoks here. Everyone is Darth Vader. And money – either the money you like, or the money you don’t like – is always winning this game. This is not to say City’s victory will leave European football unchanged. The FFP rules were always a strange construct, born out of the sensible idea of restricting unsustainable debt, but also shot through with a grandiose pseudo-socialism cooked up during Michel Platini’s time at Uefa. Platini talked about wanting to “protect football from business”, and argued that cultural protectionism was justified, that the unfettered free market was not applicable to football. In the years since the debt burden has been stabilised. But the rules have also protected this notion of ancestral privilege. In 11 seasons of FFP football the Champions League has still been dominated by the same top 10 wealthiest clubs from the year it first came in to play, clubs that have become ever more untouchable each year. Barcelona, member-owned but with a historic dual-stranglehold on Spanish football, are deemed good. The arriviste overspending of a jobbing billionaire is bad. But how is anyone to break into this world? And what kind of appalling mismanagement would it take to actually fall out of it (ladies and gentlemen, may I introduce you to: Arsenal)? All of which brings us on, finally, to football and to the immediate future of a City squad whose basic existence had been cast as a crime against sport, but which is now free to continue its pursuit of a more familiar kind of glory. There was no public indication Pep Guardiola might have left had the ban been upheld. Those in the know seemed to suggest he was staying in any case. But Guardiola can now see out his contract with the added boost of two shots in 10 months at the competition he covets most. The talk of late-20s star players agitating for a move is also dead in the water. This team have a free run from here, invigorated by a galvanising sense of righteousness, and with players fit and in form. Signings will be required: a high‑class centre-half, perhaps a better heir to Fernandinho, perhaps even another centre‑forward. But who would bet against this sublime City team storming their way through Uefa’s mini club Euros in Portugal next month, or indeed against the narrative gold of a meeting in the final with a strong and settled Paris Saint-Germain? As a season-ending Uefa showpiece it is hard to imagine a better reminder that this has always been about money versus money: new, old, or even newer. Or indeed that the greatest failure of FFP in the last few years isn’t City’s case, but the absurdity of PSG spending £1bn on transfers, successfully skewing their own domestic league in perpetuity, and still escaping any real restraint. In the wake of such cases there is a view the greatest legacy of FFP will be to undermine Uefa’s own notions of centralised control, ushering ever closer some kind of private equity breakaway league. This is still some way off. But Uefa’s authority, not to mention its basic sense of competence, is seriously undermined. And let’s face it, fair play was never really a part of this argument in the first place.

Seen him at the Wrexham game where he constantly tore senior players apart before having to go off injured after a cynical tackle from one of those players.

Clubs don't have to worry about broadcaster in respect of the current situation as Sky/BT and even Auntie do a more than good job of promoting BLM. Regards toilets I too remember the wall and trough at the back of the Govan terracing as you had to endure the drips from above, as well, from those pissing at the back of the terracing.

You really have to laugh at the way "equality" is held up as an immutable truth, as if it held together the fabric of the universe and without it all creation would crumble to dust. It's one of the great dishonesties of our age, that equality is a natural state of the universe, when in actual fact the opposite is the case. Everywhere you look there is inequality. Intellectually and physically, all people are different. All organisations are different, have different strengths and weaknesses, produce greater of lesser success in pursuit of their objectives. Nowhere does "equality" exist in nature, nowhere. If it did there would be no evolution, no progress, no development, no achievement. Only the cold bland soup of the socialist myth. Diversity doesn't need a leg up, it's an inevitable consequence of life. Artificially mixing stable, evolved cultures isn't creating diversity, merely the conflict and instability you see all around you. I could have nothing to do with anything as contrived as equality-worship.

Should've been more clear, I was referring to the fan who brought our club up during his speech at the BLM rally in Glasgow. (Our club being mentioned in more offical capacities regarding these social issues) I am not blaming anyone for anything really - everyone is entitled to their own view. I just feel BLM movement is so big and vast, it stands for so many things but mainly stands firmly vs racism and thats not a bad message for the club to align itself with. You dont have to agree with everything it stands for either. If people have such an issue with BLM would they be happy with the club doing their own thing with the everyone anyone campaign - focusing even more efforts on it? Has there been any chat from fans or anyone else at all regarding the toilets? Otherwise why would the cub just out the blue make an announcement on what toilets trans people can use? If people dont want the club to make a public stance with BLM and getting involved with social / political issues then why would we choose to get publicly involved with this?

Thought this was a Rangers forum I reckon that JFK made up the fixture list so that he could get his template "We are far superior to the sheep despite their claims to the contrary" statement in nice and early Take it easy JFK.... just some light-hearted banter. We ALL know that we are better than Aberdeen, the league table proved it. But we also know that we very, very rarely get an easy game against them. Rather than focus on how superior we are to them my concern would be more aimed at why it is that every single season we get our first game away to what is perennially a tough opponent whilst Celtic get a shoe-in at home in the first game - the away game I get given that Celtic won the league and get to unfurl the flag - no issue there - however, why don't they ever get Aberdeen, Hibs or Motherwell at home in the first game to give them a proper test - every single season it seems to be a team who struggled at the foot of the table the season before - giving Celtic a nice easy start to the season. I completely get that we "have to overcome them all to win the league" but every year they try to handicap us straight out the gate by giving us a difficult away game against opponents that always treat this fixture like a Cup final - every point counts and every year they attempt to get Celtic off to a flyer with 3 easy points and a game under their belt whilst giving us an away game to try to have us drop points against a team of hammer throwers (admittedly pretty much all teams we play are hammer throwers).

These fixtures are another fix, carve-up, stitch-up call it what you want. The first OF game normally takes place end Aug/ start Sept. But it’s been pushed back to the end of October because it’s at CP & liewell is hoping supporters will be allowed back into stadiums by then. Why wasn’t our MD ( someone called Stewart Robertson I’m told) calling this out?

Neil Doncaster has revealed the SPFL Computer is called, 'PETER'. Apparently, the acronym stands for : 'Perfectly Encoded To Enrage Rangers'. PETER is amazing, always ensures ra Sellik do not have a home fixture either side of Remembrance Sunday. To compensate for this, PETER ensures ra Sellik have a home fixture nearest to St Patrick's Day. How does PETER do it? We should be told.

For a random pick, that was very predictable. ?