andy steel

I apologise unreservedly. I was going to write Johnstone Burgh, but I thought that was taking it too far.

I doubt the celtc fans who bought into the Establishment cobblers have the brain to notice that if there was a vast conspiracy in our favour, it hasn't exactly worked. Most of the ones I know don't buy into it, though. It's for the ubers amongst them.

Peter Lorre for Whyte is inspired! Going to spend my afternoon thinking about this instead of studying.

It's a shame, as a 16 team league is what I've wanted for years. But you can't blame the SFL clubs for standing up to an attempted bullshitting.

The only fans not crawled to for their opinions over our debacle has been us. This needs to be challenged! With the quality of writers on this site - and I mean everyone, not the people you mention above - we should be putting out articles from our point of view which destroy the myths and legends, challenge preconceptions (amongst ourselves and others), offer a fresh take on events as they happen at least every couple of days. Berliner's piece has already led to more than one news outlet in Germany amending their 'facts', which they get from the Bheeb, in order to give a more accurate picture. Not a rosy one, given our position, but accurate. We can make a difference, and we should do so.

Well, it was just a thought.

Although the time when any self respecting Rangers fan could tune in to Radio Scotland is long gone, I still enjoy having 'Off the Ball' on while I polish the car of a Saturday lunchtime. Well, I enjoy bits of it, or used to...before they, or rather Stuart, decided to join the ranks of obsessives who can talk of little other than Rangers, all day every day. He was never the reason I listened. Like most, I reckon, I tuned in for Tam's humour, which, while hard to take sometimes when it's your team on the receiving end, is really needed in the dismal, bitter world of our football (all clubs, us too, included). What Cosgrove brings to the show, other than the ability to roar into a microphone so loudly you don't actually know what he's saying, I don't know. Sure ain't humour! I missed the last couple of shows, but according to another forum Stuart has bought into the revolution theory sweeping all before it at present. An epistemological change, is how it was described. Would that it were so! Revolutions often start out with the highest of hopes, only to fall into the same traps and foibles of whatever regime they changed. And the history of revolutions in this country isn't so great, either. It's a historical irony that the last revolution was brought about by Rangers, the Souness era of 86-on being credited with saving the game from dwindling into League of Ireland status. Considering the same fear is being voiced at present, you can see how successful that was, both for us and the game as a whole. Not a great advert for the concept of revolution, you might think. The Rangers support were certainly taken for a ride by the architects of that revolution, especially our fallen and disgraced leader, David Murray. As long as we were winning I didn't care, so I certainly qualify for useful idiot status during those years. What's surprising is considering the abuse we receive from others for not having our eyes open, they are more than willing to fall into pretty much the same trap. Any notion that the fans were running the game must surely be dispelled by the gerrymandering of the leagues currently under way from SFA, SPL and SFL headquarters. Seemingly designed to prevent SPL clubs suffering financial realities during Rangers absence and to hurriedly propel Rangers back into a 'top flight', if that's not an oxymoron in Scottish terms, it goes against the wishes of all fans in the country, us included, who want to see division 3 and a rebuilding for The Rangers. Once again, it's all about the money - even those who consider the SFL somehow virtuous in this would do well to examine their list of demands before the agree to the rejigging (and jigging is the operative word!) suggested. They want more money, and the chance to gain more money. It is, as it always is, about those who have money and those who want to get some. A 16 team league would be great, except there will be some more fiddling to ensure at least an extra Old Firm game for TV revenue purposes. A pyramid system would be great, except that Junior clubs don't want to join the professional game for social and insurance reasons. Strip away the idealogical manifesto and all you are left with is pound signs. All revolutions need useful idiots, as Lenin is supposed to have said. This doesn't mean people like Stuart or his Tayside comrade, Soviet Jim Spence, are actually stupid, though in the case of the latter I wouldn't be so sure. It merely means that they have been manipulated, used, in order to fulfill an ulterior motive by those who actually pull the strings. That this is so clear now ought, you might think, to persuade them to draw back a little and see what is happening rather than what they would like to see happening. But in revolutions, you have realists and you have True Believers. It is not usually the latter who emerge from the dust and wreckage holding the reins of power, and it won't be this time either. No doubt people will brush what we think aside, since we are evil Rangers fans. But we lived through a revolution and it did not end happily for us. Just don't say you weren't warned.

Having slept on this, I feel it ought to be accepted for the benefit of the game as a whole - if we have a 16 team league, surely that means an end to the dismal spectacle of playing the same teams 4 times a year? Maybe not...Sky are unlikely to continue with their present offer if we're down to two OF games a year, which would leave us in the same position as now, ie financial crisis. So there will no doubt be a mechanism to ensure at least a third OF game. But there are big old holes in their dream, not least that more than a few junior sides don't want to go professional for social and insurance reasons. The temptation would probably prove too much in the long run for them, though, the likes of Arthurlie or Cumnock might end up going for it. But in order to swallow this bailing out of the SPL diddy clubs, I need something to balance it out. What weapons do we have available to deny these pricks revenue in the future? Certainly I won't be going to any non-Rangers ground, but is there anything more I can do to hurt those who have so hurt us?

Since the two leagues appear to be at loggerheads, with accusations of corruption and falsehood being levelled at the SPL by the SFL, and the SPL warning the SFL of meltdown should they do what the SPL have been calling for and operate on grounds of sporting integrity, it doesn't look like a solution acceptable to everyone is going to happen anytime soon. What about this? In the US, they have two football leagues (American Football, that is) which operate together quite smoothly, the winners of the two leagues coming together to contest the Superbowl. I can't see any reason why we don't do the same; the SPL can be won by celtc every year, while the SFL ought to be far more competitive given our likely chronic status for the foreseeable. Clubs can apply to join whichever league they like, as long as they agree that there has to be a split of 20 clubs in each league. Home and away once a season, instead of the drivel 4 times a year we currently inflict on fans. Cup competitions not a problem, under the auspices of that bastion of competence, the SFA. Do away with the League Cup, since a 38 game season is long enough. Biggest problem is the lack of OF games for TV coverage. I wouldn't miss them. The trouble surrounding the next one is going make all the handbags we've seen previously seem like nothing; supposing it's only once a season to decide our own Grand Final, that might be manageable. And there's nothing at all I will miss about playing the rest of the SPL diddies; been there, done that, no interest in doing it again. No doubt there are huge holes in this idea, not least the urgent drive atm to bring the tripartite system into a more streamlined shape means the idea of two seperate leagues is likely to be unpopular. But then, so is everything else!

Yes, I can't wait to see all the clubs which go under in the future labelled thusly. Not to worry. Can't go through life getting upset about what every turd on the planet thinks.

That's what occurred to me too (Juancornetto's point). If Brown is on the money with this, we are still neck deep in doo-doo and not from the SFA/SPL nitwits, either. I hope to goodness he is wrong, not because I don't like him but because the alternative is another year of torture. On the topic of his bid, anyone who berates Brown for not 'just doing it' should plough through the interim report - nothing, absolutely nothing, happens quickly in these kind of affairs, other than the fees for lawyers etc racking up.

First thoughts and questions: Can anyone identify party 3? I assume it is Brian Kennedy but am no expert in such matters; The 'fair play' rules that appeared out of nowhere certainly screwed us over, in terms of time, money and interest; The transfer embargo was another spanner in the works and I feel we ought to pursue the SFA for damages over it, in the course of time; Overall players assets of £2.749m? Who came up with that figure? Seems waaaaaaaay low; Gate receipts from admin to the end of the season of £4.4m. How the hell are we in this state?

Football doesn't exist in a vacuum, though. If you want all the good things the OP calls for, you'd have to change the way our society operates. If we had these great facilities in every Scottish town, it sadly all too inevitable that it will be burnt to the ground/covered in glass/shoddily built by pals of the council/used as a meeting place by neds/vandalised inside a fortnight. Put simply, as a society we can't have these things.

12,500? <seethes with envy over cuppa> Bad enough that AMMS is thrashing my pieces. Not that I'm in any way competitive.

I'm sitting typing this post on the evening of July 10th, which ought to be the height of summer. In gloomy old Scotland, though, it is raining yet again, as it has been for the last two weeks. Those of you who are keen gardeners will be aware of how long it has been since you needed to fill your watering can of an evening, but also of how reluctant the blooms are to emerge. Who can blame them? I wouldn't want to open my eyes to this Scottish summer if I didn't have to, either. Decisions will have to be made soon about whether to give up on some of my more tender plants, which are already showing signs of suffering from root and leaf rot. The likes of my spuds are loving the weather, but my salad crops are looking sadly yellow instead of a vibrant, appetising green. My roses, my pride and joy, are doing their best, but without sunlight the buds remain unopened. Decisions of a different kind need to be made about The Rangers as well. Do I show humility, as fans of other clubs demand (showing a distinct lack of humility themselves, ironically) or do I raise two fingers? Do I adopt a mature stance regarding the SPL or seek revenge? Do I buy into the 'Rangers are guilty' before any trials or do I defend my club as never before? I don't think it will make any difference. Looking back over the years I've been old enough to follow events outwith the park, nothing Rangers or Rangers fans have done has ever been good enough for other people. Slated for the use of a discriminatory signing policy, when Rangers emphatically consigned that policy to the dustbin of history by signing Mo Johnston, we were told he wasn't really a Catholic. I can remember being told he was the 'wrong kind' of Catholic and so didn't count. I kid you not. What the right or wrong kind was, I never found out. Today is the 23rd anniversary of Rangers signing this classy forward. Yet hardly an online story about Rangers has been published since without a rambling 'comment' from some other teams supporters about this policy. Perhaps there's a statute of limitations, and they will stop worrying about something which hasn't happened for at least 23 years in the year 2525, but somehow I doubt it. Nothing is ever good enough. The many other companies and professional bodies who also operated outrageous hiring policies escape censure; I wonder why? If it's Rangers, it's wrong. You may think I'm making this up. Well, luckily I have kept the papers from that historic day tucked away all these years, and some of the comments from our virtuous media guardians are worth a look. Here's the Evening Times, qualifying their praise in the bottom left hand corner: That line on the right, about Murray being 'nothing if not a realist when it comes to business', tastes slightly sour now, does it not? Something to remember the next time we're blasted for not waking up to Murray soon enough. Here's The Record, which doesn't even get past the first paragraph to throw doubt on whether it really counts as the real deal: The Record again. 'A light Blue boo-boo' indeed. Nothing like welcoming in the new era with gusto, eh? Not all were so hypocritical. Ian Archer, long celebrated amongst those opposed to the backward signing policy for his 'permanent embarrassment, occasional disgrace' quote, took the chance to look forward in hope. It's worth reading this piece in full since, with the aid of hindsight, it is poignant beyond words. Finally, here's a snippet giving the views of some fans. I wonder if any of them are now online users, and whether the lad with the dodgy tache did, in fact, stay away while MoJo was playing for us? Notice, too, the extreme reluctance with which the editorial on the left welcomes the end of the sectarian signing policy. It wasn't just the sectarian signing policy that was chastised. Slated for years over the sectarian songbook, when Rangers fans adopted a hymn - 'Swing Low, Sweet Chariot' - in honour of Paul Gascoigne, we were told it was the wrong kind of hymn because English rugby fans had already appropriated it. I was a bit uneasy at signing it, being a bit of a kilt wearing Nationalist in those days, but I didn't expect people to be as unhappy with it as they were with 'No Pope of Rome'. They were, though. They actually were. No Rangers fan can deny that we walk right into deserved criticism time after time, the last example I can recall being the singing of 'who's the ****** in the black' during a game at the end of last season. All the ammo our haters need, we provide. Just the same, if you tell someone they are always wrong, they may well stop caring. During this current debacle at Ibrox, the New Puritans have been out in force again, seeking out Witches in Blue. Despite spending weeks berating Rangers fans to accept their club's wrongdoing and start again in Div.3 with some humility, when they actually did so, the usual suspects on Radio Scotland wasted no time in assuring us that they were doing so only out of spite, not genuine remorse. The Ginger Revolutionary, Leon Spence, was, as usual, first up on the barricades, bleating about the online abuse he receives and wondering where the decent 'guys and gals' of the Rangers fanbase were. Leaving aside the bizarre Jimmy Saville terminology (I dread to think what he'll be like when news finally reaches Dundee that the white haired DJ is no longer with us), the reason decent Rangers fans don't engage with the likes of Jim Spence is that he's been revealed as a serial hypocrite. If like me, you've been living with people who not only move the goalposts but rip up the whole bloody pitch when it suits their agenda you tend to amend your outlook accordingly. If you continually slam people for not doing something, then slam them for doing it but not in the right fashion, people are going to correctly assume they can never please you, that you are not objective (that's putting it mildly!) and that you can safely be ignored. Make the most of your online abusers, Leon, since the online socially mental ones, such as myself, are the only people likely to be bothered with you. I want Div.3 for a couple of reasons; it will allow the club to rebuild, it seems only fair since we're a Newco and it can't be that much more boring than going to places like Motherwell or Dundee. I doubt the opposition will be that much weaker, either, which is a worry considering how weak we are! But that's all part of the romance - not knowing whether your team is going to win or not will be most refreshing after decades of pumping SPL teams (all of whom were similarly indebted, before obsessives from other clubs start whining about cheating). But I don't think I'll bother with the demands for humility. Since I'm always wrong, no matter what I do, there's really very little point in wasting the time. It would be refreshing if even a single media pundit could see the contradiction inherent in hypocrites bleating about integrity, but I won't be holding my breath.

Get him to pull the boots on, sounds like a decent striker.

First thread I read, yeah I agree. And the second. By the time I had read through "The Sash We Never Sang" "Rangers, Protestantism and Scottish Society" "Where is our Protestant identity?" and "Who Do We Think We Are?" I had had too much of a good thing. All good articles (excellent, in fact) and I can quite see why they are proud of them, but it needs leavened with some other chat as well, for me. But that's just me.

Bit of an OTT reaction to a tactic, imo. The threat to ban us should he not get his way is not so much to kick us, as to put the fear of God into other clubs, who would see a massive chunk of their revenue disappear overnight. Now, it does seem like a lunatic tactic which only a control freak who was way out of his depth would employ...but at the end of the day, I doubt of it is for real. Morton, the other lot and probably the rest can see it for what it is, and will no doubt vote accordingly.

Jeebus, man, you make him sound like Jeffrey Archer! 'Even Shakespeare'! Verging on the heretical.

Rangers Standard, hmpff. Went on there today, first time in a fortnight, it was like a flaming revivalist meeting. Protestant Identity! Protestant Identity! Hard Work! Loyalty! Protestant Identity! I wish it well but the heavy focus on matters spiritual is too much for me.

It was Bluepeter9 who wrote the opening post, Blue Moon. Thanks must go to him!

Some of the responses to this on the main site are hilarious.

All hail Kuznetzov's new avatar. That old one was getting on my paps, I don't mind admitting.

A 5 page thread with strongly held but polite opinions on all sides, and your contribution is a bit of personal insult. Plenty of forums which like infantile abuse, you know, no need to do it here.

I should say I don't agree, I want my revenge and I don't care if it's hot or cold. It's just possible that on that issue I am sadly lacking in maturity. But that doesn't take away from a fine piece.