Jump to content

 

 

andy steel

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,054

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by andy steel

  1. andy steel
    McMurdo: The Rescuers of Rangers, the Easdale Brothers, have made it clear this morning that should the SPFL fine Rangers for OldCo debts they would fight it vigorously. But the real issue for all Rangers fans must be the silence of Jim McColl on this subject. Haggis munching McColl, rarely seen in public without his trademark kilt and claymore, must set aside his lunatic separatist agenda once and for all and tell the Light Blue Legions what his take on the SPFL sanctions is. For if he does not, he stands accused of self-interestedly causing trouble for the Easdales, as they attempt to steer Rangers onto a steady course, like the No.45 to Knightswood. Leggat: I understand that the idea for the fine came from Alan 'Pussy' Rennie, the discredited editor of the Celtic-publishing Daily Record, who once called me a fat waste of space. All Rangers fans must boycott this openly pro-Parkhead organ, to send a message on my behalf that he was mean to me.
  2. andy steel
    No-one likes a thorough examination. It could be a test for English, it could be a check-up at the dentist. God forbid, it could even be the prostate exam from an overweight medico with fingers like fairtrade bananas. This week saw the appointment of that bogeyman figure for many Rangers fans, Peter Lawwell, to the Professional Game Board of the SFA. Leaving aside the hilarious irony of anything connected with the game in our country having the sheer balls to call itself 'professional' - the name of the new league was, for me, the highlight of the summer, an act of self-mockery and criticism not seen since the Red Guards were touring the Chinese countryside in the 1960's - you'd think the raising of another Celtic employee to another administrative role ought to have aroused some examination. As things stand now with the SFL gone, the SPFL Board consists of Steven Thompson of Dundee Utd, Eric Riley of Celtic, Aberdeen’s Duncan Fraser, Les Gray from Hamilton, Mike Mulraney of Cowdenbeath and Bill Darroch of Stenhousemuir plus CEO Neil Doncaster. Even Celtic fans must realise Mssrs Riley and Lawwell's various roles raise some interesting questions. Is it good for the game, or their club? Is it good for them, personally? Can they avoid conflicts of interest, and can they operate best with a work-load of this nature? What does it say about the structures which oversee the much vaunted reconstruction of the game in Scotland? Gersnet poster Brahim Hemdani sums up the bemusement may feel when he said "Quite why the other clubs think that having two represetatives from one club in the top echelons of power is appropriate is beyond my comprehension but that is the state of play that we have to live with." I ask these questions because they will affect us, like every other club, and because the overall coverage of the move has been muted to the point of fearful censorship. Tom English has taken refuge in slating OF fans for being loonballs rather than look at the appointment itself, while no-one else seems to have mentioned it at all. Maybe no-one is a little concerned that one club looms quite so large over the landscape (you may recall Kenny Shiels swift demotion by the ever sensitive Pacific Quay from colourful entertainer to highly suspicious proto-bigot when he touched on this subject), or, more likely, maybe they're worn out by all these saga and don't care anymore. Dangerous attitude, if true. We need to care. My own view is that no-one from either Rangers or celtc should be on any governing body, nor anyone with a connection to them. Rules out a hell of a lot of people, doesn't it? But look at the history! Since the mid-1980's, the Old Firm have more or less run the game. First them then us have been, during that time, complete basket cases. Prior to that, with faceless, anonymous men who enjoyed the benefits, yes, but were primarily upholders of the game as a concept - that is, as a sport - Scotland actually did not too badly, certainly by comparison with its later, hideous self. Of the two potential scenarios - well meaning if possibly bumbling amateurs, or corporate OF types - one would have to be a follower of either side to support the elevation of the latter to the running of the game. If that maybe sounds like accusations of bias toward the media, maybe it is - given the outrage we saw over such issues as contentious capitalist contract practices and internal SFA inquiries, surely they would feel the make up of game boards also need a revolution? No? Happy to carry on as we have for thirty years, are you? Thirty years of continual decline and failure? Quite content to see the setup which has brought the game to the laughable stance of not even having a sponsor - bear in mind, this is a league which reaches both Rangers and celtc fans every week, that's market penetration many a company would give their right arm for; you are looking at well over 2,000,000 potential customers on a more than weekly basis being exposed to your product - and think this is a suitable plan for the future? Well, fair enough. Everyone's entitled to an opinion. But you can hardly be surprised when people raise a quizzical eyebrow, and wonder quite what the reason is for your optimism. celtc's current dominance is the reason put forward, I guess. That ignores their two decades of shambolic behaviour since the early 1980's; no doubt our period of insanity will be as quickly forgotten. It also forgets the wasteland that the rest of the game is; perhaps a momentary lapse in memory by our writers, or again, perhaps they just don't care. The game desperately needs diversity, in terms of cup winners and media coverage. We're unlikely to see the latter, since the media is as self interested as the next man. I can't see how having the people from the top club running the leagues will help create that diversity; the logical outcome will be a set up which favours that leading club. Cravenly avoiding the fairly obvious self interest inherent in this move, and whining about how Old Firm fans are loonies while you pretty much cowardly refuse to actually examine the move, won't impress anyone. Maybe, when this blows up in the face of Scottish football (as OF people running the game always will, in my opinion), those who have airily seen it through on the nod will have the guts to examine their own role in it. I won't be holding my breath, though. As the dire Neil Doncaster happily points out "“The relationship between the SPFL and the SFA is a good one and I think a much better one since the reconstruction’s completion on the 27th June.” This is unsurprising when the same people, two of whom are from the same outfit, sit upon these boards. If blissful happiness and an end to dissent is the aim, I can see the point. If running the game in a progressive and accountable way is the aim, it becomes rather more questionable. But questions are good, in a healthy democracy. We need our media writers to question, to examine. Their current craven obedience will be just something else we will all come to regret.
  3. andy steel
    Booooooring.
  4. andy steel
    Any decent examination of Mr Lawwell's appointment would wonder whether it was a good move for celtc, for Scottish football, or the man himself. There's loads of material there to produce 10,000 words, so why he chose to bash out a couple of hundred pretending to be dismayed by some stereotypical knee-jerk OF reaction is interesting. He's about an inch away from joining the people he thinks he is superior to, down there in the obsessed regions where everything revolves around the OF and everything is a provocation. Bad show indeed. ps: and if he really doesn't understand that 'most successful club' only makes sense in a historical context - you can't be the most successful in the here and now, you can only be successful - I stand really, really disappointed. There seems to be something about Scots football which drags intelligent people into acting like idiots.
  5. andy steel
    He may have been a lecturer, but, as the last 4 years of university have shown me, that's no guarantee of either intelligence or the ability to communicate. He's a dimwit whose inability to use the language with the care a broadcaster ought to shines through every time he approacheth a microphone.
  6. andy steel
    I fear your recent plunge into the words of fuds and dobbers has led to this, Brahim.
  7. andy steel
    The thing is, when referring to the OldCo there are loads of expressions Spence could use which would needle us but which we'd be hard put to deny: the club which went into liquidation, the club which collapsed, the scandal hit club which imploded and so on...just about the only expression anyone could use which is actually inaccurate is that the club died, since everything which has happened since (including the ongoing obsession of the likes of Jim) shows that it most certainly did not. It's just another example of someone who is not at home using words making a living from them. A sad reflection on the standards expected in the media in general nowadays, I fear, when people who are barely one notch above the pub bore are considered good enough to get on the radio.
  8. andy steel
    I know some see it as an excuse, but the worst of the weather will have an impact, too. You can see a few draws or worse being played out on a miserable January afternoon, with the wind howling and the rain coming across sideways. Ability is more or less leveled by attritional conditions. But yeah, I can see the team going unbeaten for long stretches. The whole season is a bit unrealistic, I feel.
  9. andy steel
    From what little I can gather, the statement about the new, plus-size board has come from the present board and been pooh-poohed by McColl's lot, so claims that he is OK with the likes of the Easdales may be a bit premature. Every statement which confuses the issue comes from the board. Very occasionally we get a clarification from McColl's lot. I think that tells its own story, in all honesty.
  10. andy steel
    Sadly, I don't believe anything which comes out of Ibrox anymore, unless it's from Rab on Twitter. I hope - but have no proof or anything - that every time the present lot try to force the issue with their bombastic statements, the other side's resolve to bag the lot of them grows.
  11. andy steel
    Spooky! Shame about the gratuitous religious cobblers, though.
  12. andy steel
    I don't see why McCollCo have to say or do anything in reply to this crass leakage from the usual suspects. Everything that's happened since the requisition was made has been attempts at damage limitation/rapprochment by the current board. We'll accept this, we'll accept that, we'll leak this, we'll leak that...while I'd prefer McColl's side to stand firm and just get the leeches voted off, if it has to be piecemeal over a period of time then so be it. The absolutely vital thing is to get responsible individuals in to clean up the boardroom. Whether it's cleaned out beforehand or afterwards can be fought over later on, but we musn't lose sight of the objective: clean up the boardroom.
  13. andy steel
    Toxic Jack is unfair on the man. Simple Jack, from 'Tropic Thunder', is far more suitable.
  14. andy steel
    It's possible, but it doesn't explain why he would use that outlet. Who is he trying to persuade? Rangers shareholders. Where will he find those online? On Rangers messageboards. Scotzine has to be a deliberate choice, but for what reason I remain at a loss to explain. 5 minutes basic online research or a word with a colleague would reveal that, you don't need to be an experienced PR guru.
  15. andy steel
    How about doing a quietly effective job?
  16. andy steel
    <shrug> Just shows you how much substance there was to other clubs' when they bleated about Old Firm dominance. A once in a lifetime chance to break the OF power base and they merely grovel before the one remaining half with any clout. Pathetic, pathetic, pathetic. They deserve all the will get, which will be the crumbs from celtc's table.
  17. andy steel
    I can do Ayr Utd if no-one else wants it. Writes itself! Ice cream, childhood trips to the seaside, the decay of Scotland and her towns...laugh a minute stuff.
  18. andy steel
    Nothing more than the promised smearing of McColl et al, but done at one remove by one of his minions. How I bitterly regret sticking up for this chap when he interviewed Alex Thomson. Frankly, I would trust Thomson to be more impartial than him nowadays.
  19. andy steel
    Except we aren't talking about his feeble 'give peace a chance' line, we're all scratching our heads and wondering if he is either at it or just plain stupid. Surely that can't have been part of his grand plan?!
  20. andy steel
    Who are the ICF, dB?
  21. andy steel
    Weeeeeeeeeeeeelll........there is always the lurking, paranoid feeling that Whyte was a front for a Tim takeover of the club, and we've been controlled by enemy forces from within ever since....don't like to say it out loud, but, you know.......I'm struggling for another explanation as things just get worse and worse. Put it this way, if you were a Tim and in control of Rangers, you could not have done a better job of screwing the club than the people who have been in situ have done over the last 2-3 years.
  22. andy steel
    Frankie, Phil 3Names couldn't have done a better hatchet job on the club than Irvine did in that interview. Rangers man? I don't buy it.
  23. andy steel
    So why give an interview to an internet outlet, when he plainly has a direct line to The Sun?
  24. andy steel
    I admire all the reasoned, logical analyses put forward by well informed and thinking posters on this, but I don't find them convincing (I don't think the posters find them convincing, either, to judge from their tone). Mr Irvine has simply made a colossal and unforgivable mistake, one from which any shred of reputation he retained amongst the Rangers support cannot recover. You just can't - really, really, can't - discuss our boardroom doings with the online version of The Celtic View and expect to be taken seriously.
  25. andy steel
    £80,000 now, is it? My word, the cost of hiring a hall is sky-rocketing! I kind of like the contempt shown for Mather's stalling tactics, as well.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.