amms
-
Posts
1,807 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by amms
-
I admire your persistence, keep it up!
-
Angela Haggerty -Intimidation over Rangers story left me in fear
amms replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
I've a feeling I'm going to be unpopular. I've some sympathy for her. I don't know her, I've not knowingly read anything she's ever written until the piece above but I see her name regularly denounced on the internet by other Rangers supporters. My sympathy comes from my observation that too often people play the man (or woman in this case) rather than the ball. I notice her called a 'hag' and I get that it's a play on her name, but it's also a derogatory term for an unattractive female, why is that a necessary observation? I also see her called a cow, a boot, a witch, a slag and accused of performing various sex acts on other 'Celtic minded' bloggers fairly regularly on my Twitter timeline and I try not to follow the moronic element. Again, what's all that about? If she writes stuff you/we disagree with then challenge the piece, use facts but don't call her names simply because she's a young female. I've no idea if she's been threatened but to be honest it wouldn't surprise me, the internet is full of hardmen. I'm not naive, I understand this is all part of the Spence rearguard action taking place currently. If she's writing for The Drum she must be about 20 because Gordon Young pays pennies and anyone who can actually write leaves the second they have the chance so he pretty much staffs the place with interns and graduates. So, I don't know, I guess I'm just uncomfortable with grown men calling young women offensive names that seem to be based on their gender more than anything else. -
It's a mental argument. No doubt they'd be furious if we signed Jelavic again after all he's had his chance with us.
-
I think most people accept he wasn't fixing matches and that he's guilty of stupidity more than anything more sinister. However English is correct to question the club stance on this. Why is it acceptable for a Rangers player to bet Rangers won't win a match? Even if he didn't think he'd be playing do we still feel that's okay? Really? I've an issue with Black, I can accept he's not actively looking for Rangers to lose (or not win). But it tells you something about the man and his mentality that he'd make those bets. I've a big issue with that. I'd say that alone tells you he isn't fit to wear our shirt. But in truth i've got a bigger issue with the club now. McCoist backing his player in public is one thing. I disagree with him, I think Black should, at the very least, been suspended by the club and torn a new one by the manager and that made public although I still feel he should have been put on the transfer list if not fired. But I can just about understand why McCoist is backing him publicly even if I disagree with it. However where are the directors in all this? They 'run' the club, they should be the final arbiters of what's allowed and what isn't, of what's expected from Rangers employees and what isn't. This is no longer about whether Black is a cheat. It seems he isn't, he's just got very poor judgement and a twisted idea of what's okay. What this is about is the demise of our club. What it stands for, what is expected of it's players, management and directors. This isn't about harking back to the days of Struth and so forth this is about the club having certain standards, about playing for Rangers meaning you need to 'up-your-game' both on and off the field. It's about knowing that our club demands certain standards from everyone. It's not about the morality of gambling, I've no issue with that. Our club now seems to condone players betting against them, yet it condemns people being caught out by prank callers. What does our club stand for anymore, anything? With every passing week it seems our club is closer to the gutter than the stars.
-
Have to say I find it hard to disagree with a single word of that article, English is spot in. The public statements and actions of our club on this affair have been less than satisfactory. Kind of sums the club up just now though.
-
That's what gives you faith? Jeez, a Mormon will ring your bell one morning and you'll be moving to Salt Lake City by lunchtime if that's all the substance you need to have faith.
-
Why? What's he done that gives you faith? 'His' statements are cringeworthy.
-
Who said he had? You said he gave up, he clearly hasn't, not yet anyway.
-
The whole story has been spun away by 'someone' towards protecting free speech and journalists rights to report as they see fit. My feeling is that's been the NUJ but I might be wrong. Personally I think the club are better to say nothing and let this run its course. Anything the club says now simply gives the story more oxygen. I hope the original complaints are taken forward to the next level and eventually Spence is severely censured.
-
That's interesting. You don't feel we've some responsibility on that score, the moral code I mean?
-
Surely if he's still involved in 'takeover' attempts 14 months later he hasn't given up?
-
I wanted Black sacked when this first came to light. I've still to see what he actually bet on but if he did bet on us to lose I still think he should be sacked. However if he bet on us to win I've no huge problem with it. As for who set this thing in motion that would be Black himself. If he chose to bet against sides he played for then he is to blame no one else. Lastly this isn't about the morals of gambling it's about the professionalism of our club. Our players and manager claim not to know the rules of their own association, that should alarm every one of us, we've a huge number of employees, there's a big failure of management at many levels there. A defence of 'ah didnae know the rules' is almost worse than knowing and choosing to break them. It says a great deal about the culture of the club and of the sport in general in Scotland. We should be demanding higher standards not looking for conspiracy.
-
Housing estates that lack aesthetic value, I'm sure glad we don't have any of them here.
-
His style of play invited injuries yet his physique and natural gifts meant he shouldn't have been playing in that style in the first place. He had a lovely touch and awareness yet to often he tried to be some sort of midfield enforcer. His lack of goals was an issue too, poor return for a midfielder.
-
I was a supporter of Le Guen and bitterly disappointed when it fell apart. However his post Rangers career has been less than stellar and with hindsight the decision to leave when he did was the right one.
-
Yeah, yeah, I knew, it was my poor attempt at humour, it could have done with an emoticon.
-
Software in East Lothian is when you're wife puts Lenor in the wash.
-
Hang about, I thought the Bourne Supremacy was a documentary. You might be surprised to know there were people, and a good number of them too, who lived very close to where Andy, me and many of the guys on here live in Central Scotland who were card carrying communists and firm believers that East Germany in particular was the ideal state. I knew a man who used to go to the May Day parade in Moscow every year and would send my girlfriend's father a postcard back with the same message 'Greetings from Red Square, comrade'. Your take on the Stasi is interesting. For what it's worth I very much doubt Speirs is as enlightened on their activities as you. Rightly or wrongly it is used as shorthand to describe people who would suppress free speech or dissent.
-
Kevin Thomson drove me mad, I found him far more frustrating than even Whittaker. I thought Thomson was a really immature footballer, he clearly had a ability yet for me his decision making was hugely flawed. He gave away stupid fouls and was booked far too regularly. I thought he made our side poorer when he played and was glad when we sold him. The potential was there but for some reason he couldn't realise it.
-
It's going to come down to his word against theres, I doubt there are many witnesses to this. As Frankie says if he denies it was him and can prove someone close to him had access to his account I can't see him getting anything but a slap on the wrists or perhaps even vindicated.
-
Having watched 'Goodbye, Lenin!', 'Run Lola Run' and the excellent 'The Lives Of Others' (all three were excellent actually) I feel I'm now an expert on East Berlin... I think what we can conclude from this is that DB remains a sleeper for either the Stasi or the Red Army Faction awaiting further instruction from the 'east'. He's like Gersnet's own Manchurian Candidate, the Mikhailichenko Candidate if you like. One can only conclude that when he's reactivated Speirs and Spence will not sleep soundly in their beds.
-
He had that issue throughout his career. Players like Lee Sharp, Paul Ince, Jaap Stam, Cantona, Roy Keane and Beckham were all jettisoned by Ferguson while they were at the height of their popularity. With hindsight it's easy to forget that selling each of those players was a gamble, they were revered by the support and the media and looked up to by their team mates.
-
Leggo: The rangers audit, deloitte man, sean beech and the charles green link
amms replied to Zappa's topic in Rangers Chat
Probably not, Deloitte are part of a conspiracy to screw everyone though in my experience! #Embittered -
I agree with what you say, I'm short on solutions though. How do you change that mindset, how do you convince someone you don't know that aggression online is as unacceptable as aggression in 'real life'? The anonymity afforded by the internet undoubtedly lulls people into believing anything goes. But in some cases i've seen these people do it in their own name, with avatars featuring their kids and themselves for all too see. The club won't allow that behaviour in the ground (indeed the law won't), places like this won't allow that behaviour online but email and Twitter are ungoverned. It comes down to the law then, and prosecutions. It's frustrating, what can be done about it I'm not sure though.
-
The closing of ranks by journalists on this has been telling. If Spence has been subjected to 'vile and disgusting emails and texts' that's regrettable and should be condemned. However, as a football journalist working in Scotland I very much doubt it's the first time he has been subjected to this, indeed it does seem to come with the territory, I've seen many a sport journo laugh them off and make light of them, part of the job was the feeling given. Why Spence has been particularly 'hurt' this time only he knows. It's a diversion though, because if he did receive communications like that he undoubtedly also received many that were considered, thoughtful, to-the-point and angry but not in anyway vile or disgusting, I've read plenty of them on Twitter for example, and they should be addressed. Plus he's happy to commend those who react the 'other way' and congratulate him for his views, and let's be frank Spence knows his constituency and he always plays to the gallery. If you court it you should be able to take it. Spence is trolling, but he's the worst kind in that he uses his position to have a dig knowing it will upset some then cries foul when people get upset. I had to tell off my five-year old last week because along with his friends he was antagonising a boy in primary three knowing the lad would get angry and chase them. Needless to say the lad eventually caught one of them and hurt him. The older lad got into trouble with the school but it was the younger kids that provoked him I blame. Spence reminds me of my son saying he only did it because all of the other boys were and they were only joking anyway, the older lad should have realised that. As I explained he might think it's funny but the other lad didn't, it upset him, and I think they knew it would upset him. Actions have consequences, Spence's personal feelings on our club shouldn't cloud his professional conduct. His producers, his directors and himself knew that phrase would provoke a reaction, knew it had already been adjudicated on and knew it shouldn't be used. Crying over it later simply underlines the childishness of the whole industry.