Tannochsidebear

Link to statement: http://www.nithsdaleloyal.com/ Needless to say we are absolutely gutted at the ridiculous verdict, but would like to thank all Bears out there who have supported us on these boards since we started our fight for justice about 11 months ago.

It would be interesting to hear a bit more about this, and what UB are referring to when talking about "poisonous bias and actions against our club and support" I knew the Germans had safe standing areas, but wasnt aware of any upcoming campaign on Oct 30. Any more info would be appreciated.

Didnt realise Number Eight caused so much resentment. Dont know the guy or can remember much of what he posts/writes, just thought that was a decent piece and thought I would share it with Gersnet. I also like the Jan Fable article, but that was posted up later, after I had posted this one.

Pray tell why?

Got a PM from one of the VB guys over on RM as someone had told him about this. He explained the situation re Newsnow and I understand it now. As the info was sent to me by PM, i'll respect the privacy nature of it.

I dont think he regrets leaving us at all, given both he and his close family are all Tims, they would rather not play at all (while earning good dosh) than play for us. Boy did well when asked to play for us and earned his move, I just cant see him being the slightest bit regretful at this time, or in the future.

Number Eight on FF has published this article which I enjoyed and thought the good people of GN would also enjoy. Why do you support Rangers? Why do you commit a significant amount of cash, time and energy to following one football club over all the rest? Be frank; lay it on the line, tell it like it is, don't duck the truth; the real truth, the unadulterated truth, the reason you follow the team in blue and not the club in green and white. This should rank amongst the easiest questions you will ever be asked. Why do you follow the team you do? Some will proudly boast that Rangers is their local team and that their allegiance is therefore natural and legitimate. Can we assume then that those same people would follow Celtic if their home turf was near to that unfortunate edifice on London Road? Somehow, I don't think so. Others will claim a fatherly or even grandfatherly influence rather than spell out the detail of why they attend Ibrox and not Parkhead. If a father or grandad followed Rangers due to religious tribalism, and if a son or grandson is inclined to stand behind the same line, perhaps they should have the good grace to admit the role of religious identity in delivering them to where they are now. If people follow Rangers for "football reasons", what could they possibly be? If it's because Rangers play in a certain way, will these supporters walk away when the team plays in a different way? Again, I don't think so. Rangers FC was chosen by Protestant people to be their preferred football club, and they warmed to It because they were at ease and at home amongst their own. They might have had friends, colleagues and family members who were Catholic, but they could never have settled into the Catholic environment that has long lingered at Celtic. All across the world Rangers and Celtic are defined as being the flagbearers of two groups in Scottish society; Protestants and Catholics, and yet amongst supporters of both clubs, there's a pretence that religion has no bearing on whether a person opts for blue or green. Some people see Rangers as a unionist club, but the Rangers support is no more unionist than a Celtic support which staunchly backs a leading unionist party: the Labour Party. Indeed the unionist vote may be more widespread amongst the Celtic support than it is amongst the Ibrox legions who cast their vote significantly less "en bloc" than their rivals. There can be no denying that society has changed and that active religious allegiance is on the wane in Scotland, but the loyalty to a once-strong family faith doesn't easily get left behind. Our religious heritage still defines us even although many think that a new-age atheism is the enlightened place to be. The enmities of the past are enmities still today as historical tribal allegiances live on despite the growing abandonment of regular worship and Christian belief. Our Protestant and Catholic backgrounds are still as important in defining us - and separating us - as they were when supporters were more inclined to visit Church and Chapel. Celtic has tried to re-invent itself as part of the Irish family, but this Scottish club is waving the Irish banner to mask its one true faith: Catholicism. Rangers waxes on about being open to all, which it is, but is still reluctant to associate itself with the Protestant tribalism which swept the club along at the top of the Scottish game for decades - and still does today. If ever a football club had a Catholic ethos, that club was Celtic, and if ever a club was the standard-bearer for its surrounding Protestant community, that club was Rangers. Irishness, unionism, monarchy, republicanism, Conservatism and Labour are all strands that play a part in making up the identities of fans of Rangers and Celtic, but they pale into insignificance next to an evolving constituency based on religious tribalism. It is a corruption in society that intimidates people into thinking that a free country can't have football clubs whose fans have made a choice based on their faith and the faith of their fathers. If there's bigotry afoot, it comes chiefly from politically correct zealots who have attempted to create a climate where any deviation from the official party line is a dissent that should be crushed. Even when faith is replaced by atheism, football allegiance in Glasgow is still mostly determined by which Christian sect is, or was, most prominent in the lives and backgrounds of Rangers and Celtic fans. Surely only a bigot would have a problem with that?

You've missed my point totally MF. I genuinely haven't a clue (I did say that at the end) but find it hard to believe that they got banned from an independant news organisation for accurate articles, no matter how much Timmy didnt like it. So therefore I am guessing that there must have been either unsubstantiated comments passed off as facts, or language used that could be sectarian or offensive enough for Newsnow to uphold complaints from MOPE's. I was wondering if you knew which way it fell and as you post on VB, I thought you would know. BTW, my bit on legally offensive language is trying to just say offensive, but they chunts find everything offensive, so in order for a complaint to be upheld, I was assuming it would have to be clearly defined as offensive, legally. (Not sure this is any better as an explanation but hope you can get the jist of what I am trying to say)

I agree that in their quest to be autonomous they have not made any ground in 7 years, and that they do follow the official club line on almost everything. There are, like the other organisations, very good Bears at the heart of it on the board, but that underneath the few active guys there is very little going on. As far as representing ALL Rangers fans, while I can agree that there is no actual representative for ST holders as a group, I would guess a large number of ST holders are covered already through RSC's. It would be interesting to see if they have figures for how many of our ST holders are RSC members. There could also be a number of ST holders who are members of the RST, and therefore represented at RSA board level through the RST representatives on the RSA board. Until we see the numbers, we have no idea how many ST holders are not covered by the RSA, it could be significant, it could be minor, it doesnt mean however that they should be ignored either way i'll agree but I am sure whatever number you get to, the majority of them will be of the non-interested category (i'll obviously exclude yourself and Frankie from that list BD!!)

So you are telling us that VB got banned from Newsnow for telling the truth, and the truth alone? If there were no inaccuracies or legally offensive language how can they possibly get banned, even by MOPE's? Is Newsnow not an independant and respected news site? (I genuinely dont know as I dont go on newsnow or VB)

A good article, almost as good as the similar one posted on the FF front page.

More physical as in the players need to be fitter, the game is faster and more physically demanding than the good old days. Not physical as in when tackling was allowed and if someone kicked you, you got up right away to show you weren't hurt and stared at the guy that done it in a "i'll get you back" type way.

I didnt think I had much of one anyway MF, but thanks for your help anyway

Yes he had a poor game yesterday, but show me any winger (apart from Godrup) that has a level of consistency where they continually have MOTM performances, beat the defender with ease every time and set up goals every week. It just doesnt happen every week for that type of player, but as long as you are getting far more good performances than bad ones, you should be able to accept that for what it is. Add in that the boy is only 20 and youthful players are also famously inconsistent as they learn their trade. I was told yesterday that Walter is working him hard on the defensive side of his game, and it is this lack of awareness that has cost him a CL start to date, as we set up as a defensive unit first and need everyone to be aware of their defensive responsibilities. Rather than moan about it, the lad is trying to learn fast in training, and is keen to learn, which is good news. I also heard he is loving it here, and is not ruling out a permanent move, although I fail to see how we could afford a package for him, it is nonetheless positive news.

Unfortunately, the real world is very alien to these pampered prima donnas, and I have no doubt they actually buy into this "too many games, too tired, fixture pile-up" nonsense that the papers produce in spades every year. Not helped by managers who keep banging on about "long hard season" and "need to keep players fresh" and "a squad game now". Yes the game is more physical and much faster than it was in bygone days of yore, but (its on the 12th.....sorry, got sidetracked there!) but I cant buy for one minute that a game where the one sub named was only used in case of injury, and not a wee kick on the leg injury, but a broken bone or torn muscle injury, just 40 years ago, could have changed to one where, like in the last 2 games, I am screaming for the manager to make changes because some of our players, having played less than a dozen games since a 3 month break, are looking "tired".

FFS, agreeing with MF shocker :spl: Exactly my POV on this subject, I dont need to add anything.

I have found over the last few years that the games AFTER the European games are when the players feel it the most, the performances tend to suffer, and points dropped. It is also stating the obvious that away games in our league are still difficult fixtures, whilst home fixtures tend to be easier won. Just my opinion mind, but going to watch the team live every single week, and closely monitoring this over the last few years is where I get my opinion from. With that in mind, of course it would be some small concession if we were allowed to move our games to saturday lunchtime (Friday night anyone?), before Euro games, and Sunday afternoon after Euro games. Wether these games are at home or away is a separate matter, but one I would have no argument with if it was at the very least balanced equally, 3 and 3.

It was aimed at the powers that be at the SPL/SFA, not us who can see through their pathetic attempts to portray neutrality.

The perfect response to the ridiculous arrangement of the fixtures that can see us having back to back difficult away games, with a CL match sandwiched in between, was to go out and win the lot, which we have done. Bring it on SPL, bring it on:box: Still to come in our totally impartial and luck of the draw fixture list are the following fixtures after big CL matches After Valencia at home we play the Tims away After Valencia away we play St Mirren away After Man United at home we play Dundee Utd away After Bursaspor away we play Inverness away Of course our fixtures mirror the tims fixtures, and so therefore if they had qualified for the CL (no laughing at the back) or even the Europa (I said no laughing) they would have had home games to come back to after their Euro games every time from here on. Now while Timmy, Motherwell, United and Hibs all had the Euro campaigns as pre-season games, only one team had definate fixtures planned for the autumn, so surely it would be simple enough for the super-duper SPL mega-computer to work out a fairer call for our representative. I would have been happy with 3 home and 3 away, I dont want special favours from anyone, just a fair and equal playing field, and our talent and desire will do the rest. But please drop all the nonsense that the SPL/SFA want our clubs to do well in Europe, as everything they could do in 2008 to disrupt our campaign was done, and it looks like the same again this season.

The bold bit is the bit that caught my eye over the rest. How many is several?

Normally in any stooshie between those of opposing sides in the ongoing great RST saga, it is important to read both sides, and the input from FF in defending the RST position is always worth a read to balance the opinions of those who are most definately opposed to it, either in principle or in personality. This last week while all this post-AGM story has been developing, multi-page threads on here RM and FF can be read and opposing views given. In amongst the mud-slinging and personal abuse from both sides, you can usually get enough snippets of information, if you know the background, to form a picture of what really happened, and form an opinion of where the truth probably lies. Couple that with some personal emails and PM's and you can just about get to where the story is without any need for the pages and pages of garbage to sidetrack you from getting to where you need to go. So now that Mr Harris's statement that we should have heard at the AGM has been made public, correctly IMO, I have been checking on FF to see the other side of the story being put up. Not that I am doubting the accuracy of his statement, but you always have to read both sides to ensure you get the proper balance, and to hear how the allegations made have been defended. So onto what FF has had to say about this. Which is where I have the problem. There is quite simply nothing about this at all on FF. Not one thread published today on his statement. No debate, no other side of the story, not even any mud. There cannot be any bigger off-field story at the moment than this, certainly not for the online bears who know all the main players pretty well by now, and I am absolutely astonished that it has just been completely blackballed. For the biggest forum to be totally blanking the story is bad news, and further proof that the RST needs its own forum. And I even checked their Facebook page as this seems to be the big new thing (I still dont really get this facebook thing, but im trying!) but there is nothing there either. FF has never ever shirked a story that I can remember in this way before. And that has to be worrying for all those who enjoy reading the thoughts and opinions of Bears on a variety of forums. I know there have been calls from the membership and from board members of the RST for a full, prompt and complete statement to be issued by the board, but continual checking of the Trust website stills draws a blank. Of course Alan Harris's statement was only released late last night, so it could be that the RST have called an emergency board meeting for this morning to discuss the matter and a statement will follow later today. Or perhaps that is only what should have happened. Members not only want, but surely are entitled to a fully disclosed, accurate and frank explanation of affairs, and without any further delay, together with what action has been taken to resolve this sorry affair and to try to rebuild the Trust's broken and battered reputation.

A large amount of the reasoning behind our poor run of form at Sheepy is the fact that Walter has too often given them too much credit, and played 1 up front (Miller), resulting in us not scoring enough (if any)goals. With the squad the way it is now, I cannot see anything other than a Jelavic/Miller front combo, and this should help us enormously, together with the fine form of Weiss and Naismith, to create and take enough chances to win this game comfortably. I'll go for a 2-0 win for the Champions, easing off with the Turks coming up on Wednesday.

You mean they will "park the bus"?

Bain's fortunes are linked to the income generated by the club. A couple of years ago he earned a huge wad when we got to the UEFA final, the year after (Kaunas) his earnings were way down, and this year, with the CL money, he earns more. I disagree entirely that his contract has huge bonus elements attached to it that are really only earned if we make the CL group stages, of which he has very little influence, and I find it even more galling that in a year where our manager and coaches worked on without a contract (and therefore any pay rise), and players were told there was no money for pay rises, and there have been savage cuts all over the club, that he had the balls to accept the bonus element of his salary, which runs into hundreds of thousands of pounds. Perhaps waiving the bonus element and showing solidarity with the rest of the staff at the club would have been a far better move.

It wasnt said to me at all and it was not in open meeting.