amms

When they say 'in males of Cypriot origin' I wonder what they mean. That could be taken two ways... I'm so pleased a thread on puritan Bill has turned into a Carry On film, that's how we should always show our displeasure at his nonsense.

I'm a big supporter of swearing, sometimes nothing communicates better what you're trying to express. I love that BH had to look up 'fud', i'd loved to have walked in on him when those Google results returned! Having visited RangersMedia the other day for the first time in a long time I can see why Frankie is keen to keep standards high here. Fud seemed fairly benign to me, liar for example is a far more loaded word, but fair enough, Frankie makes the rules, i'm happy to go along with them. Can we still hurl insults by pm though...!

Without Champions League money it becomes a serious problem. It must help enormously that we're out the way for a few seasons too. They won't find a Wanyama every season either.

C'mon, chips are vegetables, you're almost on a diet eating them.

I'm not sure about that but to further fuel your early morning X-Files diet MediaHouse came into being through the takeover of Celtic by McCan and Dempsey, that was their first job and propelled them forward. So who knows! But I still think this is an old man misreading the landscape.

I don't know. He's become much more vocal on Twitter of late when for a long time his account said almost nothing. I'm guessing he's finally trying to become involved in the internet landscape and is doing it very badly. As for the Sun I don't think they'd publish an interview with Irvine that read like a simple Q&A like Scotzine did. The Sun would need to frame it in more critical terms, they can't be publicly seen to be his mouthpiece even if privately they are.

Well if it is strategic it baffles the hell out of me what strategy is being followed. I think we're sometimes guilty of looking for greater meaning and confusing strategy with stupidity. Irvine's 65, he's an 'old school' newspaper man, I think he relied heavily on others in the recent past, for some reason he's doing it himself just now and struggling. The landscape is so different and I'm not sure he recognises it yet. I've absolutely nothing to back that up mind you.

You could be right, I don't know how involved Ramsay is currently. Nothing else makes sense to me though. Many of us inhabit an internet bubble and assume everyone else understands things they way we do. The truth is many don't, unless you are immersed in it a lot of the nuance and history can pass you by. From the outside Scotzine look independent and important and i'm not convinced Irvine has his finger on the internet pulse.

There are two issues to consider here. Firstly why he gave the interview and secondly what he said in the interview. On the first point it's worth noting a few things. Jack Irvine previously kept a low profile, but then he wasn't the day-to-day contact for Rangers and wasn't particularly involved in setting and executing strategy. For all he's the best known person at MediaHouse don't be fooled into thinking he's all they have, he's got some very able and intelligent colleagues. So perhaps there has been a change in personnel on the 'account' leading to greater involvement by JI. I'm an admirer of his work (believe it or not he's well thought of professionally) and I'm quite sure his decision to go high profile is deliberate and probably because they don't want a magnifying glass put onto the Easedales, but that's just my opinion. Mediahouse specialise in keeping you out of the papers, not in them, that's always been their core skill. So for what it's worth I think this is simply an error of judgement on Irvine's part. His age and background lead me to believe he doesn't fully understand the internet world and it's various cliques, histories and personalities. He's probably taken Scotzine at their word. Scotzine site looks professional, has contributors from various clubs and carries mainstream advertising, to the uninitiated it looks like a serious independent and impartial Scottish football website. Muirhead sells himself as a journalist, and to be fair he does work for some 'real' news organisations. We know different, I don't believe Irvine did, but he probably does now though. The second thing is what he actually said. Whether you think Irvine picked Scotzine deliberately or through misjudgement he still chose to give the interview and will have thought his responses through. For me he'd only one point he wanted to make - "AM: If you could stand in front of the Rangers fans today and talk to them what about the club and the way it is working and those wanting to take over – what would you say? JI: Give the board a chance. The Chief Executive has sunk a million of his own cash into the club. Fellow director James Easdale and his family have put in even more. Let’s all be mature. I know Frank Blin and Paul Murray are passionate about the club but to quote Mr Churchill: “To jaw jaw is always better than to war war.” I think that was the sole reason he spoke, to keep the message of give the board and specifically the Easedales a chance. They are paying him after all (or at least commissioning him, we're probably paying him) so it makes sense. Also remember there's a section of our support open to this message, a read of some posters on here shows they are still more than willing to give Mather and co a chance for a number of reasons. Irvine is reaching out to them. I think Irvine is making some mistakes here but he's far shrewder and capable than I am so what do I know.

On that subject, and I know it isn't exactly 'Rangers Chat' but this was posted on 200% at the weekend http://twohundredpercent.net/?p=24026 I've tangled with the author before when he's written about Rangers, he's a London based Tim and can't hide it normally. However he makes some interesting points and most of the Tims who read it went into full meltdown mode. Even with Champions League money they've got some problems looming.

Didn't SDM have a share issue? It's only sustainable if we don't end up with one person owning us. Share issues, particularly in this economic climate are not the answer, we've no control over who we attract and so who owns us. Look at our board just now, that's the danger.

That's the problem with sugar daddies though, they've brought you a lovely necklace and a BMW and you've let them shag you all ways. By the time you've asked how they could afford it they've ran off with some new young thing you're being repossessed. Nobody questioned Murray's money at the time, we all bent over and let him pleasure himself. Rangers don't need bankrolled, they just need to be run well. That's how all football clubs should be run.

It's one of the great 'what might have beens' had Grieg left Rangers for a period instead of going straight from team to manager. That's an obvious case of poor man-management, you wonder if a more experienced manager would have dealt with it better. Advocaat thought very highly of Grieg, put a lot of store in his views.

Okay, i'm in a contrary mood. Seriously, playing in Division Three is no preparation for playing international football though, is it? I like Wallace, he's easily one of our best players and reaching his peak, but should he be getting picked for Scotland? I've no issue with the young players getting into the under 19s and under 21 sides but full internationals should be playing at as high a level as possible. I'm pleased for him but it doesn't say much for the quality of player available.

Of course he was, he brought you gifts and you put out for him, that's what it is. You never asked him to show you the receipts. In the end you got all the things from the sweetie shop you wanted, you gorged yourself on Wham bars and Red Kola, as far as you were concerned someone else was paying for it so why worry. The fact they were congealing round your heart and would kill you a few years later was neither here nor there.

Yes, that makes sense, before your earlier post it didn't really make sense to me and nothing STB was posting was making it any clearer. The part you highlighted was in reply to STB who seemed bewildered why I questioned how this had come about.

No it's not, it's exactly the same, hindsight is all very well but at the time most were perfectly happy to swallow SDMs bullshit and assume he'd pick up the bills. We've no guarantees the next 'sugar-daddy' won't be the same, as such we're better off without them. Have we learned nothing?

It was horrendous, a horrible murder and a shocking incident on many levels, no doubt about that. Anchorman has explained the circumstances in his post, it makes more sense now. I'm sure you'd agree that dying in a horrific way isn't normally the precursor to having a flag with your name on it paraded round the ground.

No, there really isn't. Far to many of us were more than happy to go along with SDM as long as he signed a few big names and promised us the stars. Some didn't, but most of us did. It's exactly the same.

Perhaps not. I'm just wondering why it was arranged. Is there a connection between the man and our club that I'm unaware of? It's difficult because I don't want to seem callous or to cause offence but it surprised me that was all. I remember last season or the one before Ally McCoist made a club statement of condolence for a soldier who'd been killed in Afghanistan but I recall the man who died was a local guy and a Rangers supporter. I was unaware of the link in this case.

Yes it was him and many of us happily cheered him on never asking where the money was coming from. The fact he didn't actually have the money is surely the point. Perhaps for a one off capital project like building a stand or similar, but to fund players and wages I think it is a bad idea. Run properly we shouldn't require any external financing.

Yes I know that. Why did it happen again on Saturday, was there a reason for it?

I disagree entirely with that. We need a club that is self-sustaining, we should never, ever get back to requiring external investment to compete. If King (or anyone else) comes into the club it should be to ensure it is run correctly, not to become another sugar-daddy. One of the things I like about McColl is his insistence that he doesn't want to put money (or take it out). Grant overplays the gulf, we are still very capable of competing with the Tims over a season.

I thought it was just me. Why did we do it, does anyone know?

I wrote a review of Follow We Will which Frankie has added to the website. Great book, give it a read. http://www.gersnet.co.uk/index.php/latest/book-reviews/162-book-review-follow-we-will-the-fall-and-rise-of-rangers The phrase ‘history is written by the victors’ is one of the great mis-attributed quotes of our time. Widely credited to Winston Churchill, its origins are actually unknown. Not only is its origin usually mistaken, but its accuracy is wanting, too. History is littered with events where the narrative differs widely depending whose version you read. The search for the truth is often subjective and far from impartial but that, of course, does not make it any less truthful. The story of the Vietnam War, for example, is almost always told from an American viewpoint. Whilst it could be argued the Americans didn’t lose that war they certainly did not win it. Similarly most of us are familiar with the celebrated against-the-odds British victory at Rorke’s Drift, yet how many of us are aware of the absolute pasting the British forces took the day before from the Zulu army during the battle of Isandlwana which led to the siege in the first place? The reality of history is that it’s the people who control the media that set the story and that is why ‘Follow We Will; The Fall and Rise of Rangers’ is both a timely and important book. Don’t be misled into thinking this book is an attack on the Scottish media; it’s not, indeed two of its best chapters are written by Scottish journalists. It is an attempt to tell the story of Rangers over the last couple of years through the eyes of those who were affected most by it, the victims if you like. It contains thirteen chapters, an introduction and two forewords. Its contributors come from different walks of life and each tells a different strand of the story, and those strands weave together to create the overall tapestry, the big picture. Chronologically it ends towards the culmination of season 2012/13 and whilst it focuses heavily on the last 18 months or so it touches on other periods too. Iain Duff’s experiences, both formatively in the late 70's and early 80's through to his eventual disillusionment with football a couple of years ago resonated with my own and Gail Richardson’s chapter on the reaction of other club’s supporters to our plight mirrored my personal thoughts too, only in a far more coherent and engaging way. That’s one of the great things about the book, you hear your own voice echoing back to you from many of its pages. Some of the contributors will be familiar to Rangers supporters who choose to follow the online discourse on the club that ebbs and flows through many websites, messageboards and social media platforms. Chris Graham for example has proved to be an assured and forceful voice who has publicly articulated many of the frustrations felt by a support whose impotence was rendered absolute during the Administration period. He contributes two chapters, one of which focuses on the media reporting, and he remains sure-footed on a subject he’s made his own. John DC Gow adds much needed context to how Rangers, and more specifically their support, seem have become some sort of pariah in Scottish society and a convenient scapegoat for many. It’s an important contribution, well written, balanced and well researched. It is unfair to single any chapter out because all are thoroughly readable and are fine contributions; but I’m going to anyway. Alasdair McKillop’s chapter is as fine a piece of writing on modern football as you’ll find. Whilst its focus is Rangers its tenor is broader and relevant to anyone who loves the sport in this country. His line “Has football destroyed the best of itself by allowing capitalism to triumph over community?” is a question all football supporters should ask themselves. Likewise Herald writer Richard Wilson’s final chapter is tremendous and should be read by all supporters. That it’s even more relevant today than it was several months ago when first written simply shows how prescient it is. I write this in the week it’s being reported that Gareth Bale, an undoubtedly talented player, is being bought for a new world record fee. Our entire club was bought for £5.5 million, less than one fifteenth of what a single Welshman who has never won a medal in his career will cost. Something is far wrong. As the book points out, something is indeed far wrong, or at least was. However this book is not just a wake: it’s also a celebration. For out of the adversity, the criticism, the stigma and the vitriol that came Rangers way nobility, integrity, togetherness and a collective identity rose above it. This is acknowledged and celebrated in Follow We Will. My quibbles are minor. It has fourteen different contributors and this leads to a change in style and tempo from chapter to chapter that sometimes disrupts the story’s natural arc. The ‘Social Media and the Rangers Ownership Battle’ chapter is deserving of a book of its own, as 14 pages aren’t nearly long enough to do this subject justice. I’d have enjoyed more of the author’s thoughts on this topic rather than what felt like slightly guarded interviews with others. However, social media is picked up by many of the other chapters though so its influence is examined elsewhere. I don’t personally agree with everything that’s suggested in some of the chapters - the ideas on future merchandising and increasing revenue felt unrealistic to me but they are certainly worthy of consideration and exploration, although I’d be surprised if they haven’t been before. The book ends on a positive but cautious note and we’d do well to heed it. The seeds for Rangers’ fall were sown a long time ago when supporters stopped being involved in the running of the club. As this book proves so very well, a football club is nothing without its supporters, and those supporters are a varied and diverse bunch capable of achieving a great deal. That should be embraced by the club, not kept at arms length. An example of some of that latent talent is evident in the pages of Follow We Will, a book that is professional, thought provoking, insightful and balanced, run through with a bond between supporter and club that feels unbreakable. History is all about perspective. The Siege of Sarajevo is recognised as one of the darkest episodes in modern Europe history. It’s estimated that between 12,000 and 15,000 people lost their lives during the four years it endured. Yet I know someone who spent six weeks there during that time. As a photographer with an international news agency he had some experience of war zones but his view that ”it was brilliant, one of the best experiences of my life” took me aback. He explained that professionally he’d had the opportunity to document the city and life there, which he’d found fulfilling. However he further explained that he was one of only 30 or so men in the entire city, the only other males were the very young and the very old since all the others had left to fight. He was basically in a city full of women, NATO had to drag him out screaming and kicking, he was having the time of his life! I don’t imagine too many other people think of it that way. We all have different views on what happened to Rangers, who was to blame and what should happen to them, but at some point we’ll look back on this period and feel differently than we do now. We are living through an enormously important period in the club’s history, arguably the most important since it was founded. An accurate record of this time needs to be kept by all who are involved, not just those paid to fill pages and airtime. ‘Follow We Will’ should be an important book in our history. I encourage you to buy it as it articulates a lot of your own thoughts and provides a record of a time none of us believed possible but which we all lived through. This book is in the best traditions of Rangers. A club formed by teenagers for the love of the sport, this is a book written by supporters who love the club. It’s important we know our story, for we are the ones who will pass it on. We can’t rely on others to do it for us. Perhaps we shouldn’t rely on others ever again.