Thinker

The "Tim machine" certainly does work against us, but they haven't single-handedly created the current atmosphere where anyone promoting an "ism" gets hammered. There's a perfect example of what I'm talking about on TV tonight: West Ham vs Tottenham. It may be on a lesser scale, but the principle is the same. West Ham fans are going to be closely watched folowing anti-semitic behaviour at the opposite fixture earlier in the season. They should be able to control since it's a home game, so I doubt there will be any trouble. But the club has responded in the perfect way. The Chairmen's statement: “We have made it very clear that we will not tolerate any form of discriminatory behaviour and, one by one, we will root out those fans that do not deserve to represent this great club of ours. We must be clear that we will pursue the harshest sanctions against any individual who goes against what we stand for as a club.” Like I say, there's a general rule that you can shout anything you want as long as it isn't someone-ist. Zenit fans have been roundly condemned for their "We don't want any more black players" statement a few weeks back, and rightly so. 5 or 6 years ago in England there was understandable uproar when Sol Campbell got abused for being "allegedly" gay - yet Sean Wright-Philips gets hit with the chant of "Who's your real dad" and that's seen by many as being banter. Go figure. Basically we have to stop using deragatory terms aimed at generalised groups of people. I don't have a problem with that.

I see the argument behind this but it doesn't give the full picture. We have a problem here that is not present at many other clubs. Essentially, yes, the crux of the matter is that there is a minority amongst our support who can't go to a game of football without getting pissed up and acting the proverbial cunt. But the complication is that they do it in a way that sets alarm bells off at a higher level. When supporters vandalise the place, swear at random passers by or generally act like a hooligans, society tuts and shakes its collective heads. Mention anything racist, homophobic, anti-semitic or sectarian and the authorities and press come down on you like a ton of bricks. It's this specific aspect that we need to address.

It only takes a core of fans making a concerted effort to make a difference. If we were to bombard the switchboards with complaints the way they do ESPN would have to take it seriously. The Fuck UEFA banner got national coverage and it's there on record. They provide us with at least as much ammo as we provide them.

Where did you shoot someone else down? Well, weeblue suggested we "set tripwires" of our own. That we employ the same tactics they use against us by drawing attention to the negative elements in their crowd. And you said it could never work. I say it could. They embarassed themselves bigstyle a few seasons ago with that "Fuck UEFA" banner, and they'll do it again. I'll ask again, what's your suggested plan of attack? Or are you in the same camp as Allan?

Funnily enough, I can see word for word what you wrote. I'll rephrase my question for you then. What are you suggesting we do to tackle the problem we face? Because, no offence mate, it seems like all you are doing is restating the situation in the most negative terms possible whilst shooting down everyone else's plans as being doomed to failure because Celtic fans are so fiendishly clever and ours are hopeless.

So... what? Are you suggesting that it's a hopeless situation and we should all just throw the towel in?

Spot on. We've got to start taking this PR war seriously.

You're right, and the Mike Ashley banner is a perfect example. "Don't prostitute our heritage" makes the point about renaming Ibrox. "Fuck off Mike Ashley" is just mindless abuse. Believing that organised, heirarchical religions are self-serving and corrupt is an opinion. Shouting FTP is antisocial neddery. (As is shouting Fuck Alex Salmond / The Queen / Leonard Nimoy).

The "why" is irrelevant. When you wear our colours, you represent our club and you should behave in an appropriate manner. I know other clubs have problems but that doesn't make it okay. You can't condone it.

I didn't like that it harms the club! Just because our enemies condemn something a section of our support has done doesn't mean I'm obliged to take the opposite point of view.

It's not a question of siding "with the enemy", this is a straight forward case of a right side and a wrong side.

Looking at similar-sized UEFA countires, only Georgia is doing anything like what's being suggested by Doncaster - so not a great blueprint to copy. Having said that, most of the other nations about Scotland's size have opted for a league of 12 playing each other 3 times - which seems an even worse idea to me. I have to agree with the main argument in this article though - the best option for us is to have less teams sharing the money. Even though it's not fondly remembered, probably going back to 10 teams playing each 4 times is the way to go. It's certainly worked for Switzerland and they've really been through the mill. The only positive thing I can say about the 12-12-18 plan is that it would be easy enough to give up on it and go back to the way things are now...

If an Eastern European League is formed, surely the rest of the continent would have to follow suit to keep up? We should see a Western European league shortly after that. (Or maybe Western and Central). That would be extremely good news for any Rangers share-holders...

The Dundee decision seems utterly moronic. They're getting relegated anyway, and it's plain to see it's not really the managers fault. If they have a team that would walk the First Division why not take relegation, properly strengthen it for the SPL, and come straight back up?

In the past, when the most important thing was bums on seats, the press could try to knock us all they wanted and it wouldn't have had an effect. Crap written in the papers won't stop a fan being a fan, and when that was the main source of income that was fine. If it was still like that, the OP's mate would be correct. These days though, when a much bigger percentage of income comes from attracting interest from overseas, opening up "new markets", expanding the brand, getting sponsorhsips and all that other marketing-related stuff, having a good image is much more important. When the press deliberatlety set out to tarnish our image, they can cost us a lot of money.

True, but I suppose that criticism would apply to any cross-border league. For example, it's not beyond the realms of possibility that Dutch teams could dominate a BeNe league if they go ahead with that. I suppose that would just be hard lines for Belgium. But (ideally) the Scottish cup would continue to carry a Europa spot - so there would be that to aim for from the word go. Beyond that, hopefully we'd get to the Premiership in 3 or 4 seasons, and the fusion of the leagues might result in a higher league co-efficient and an increased number of European qualification places. TBH though, I'd sacrifice the certainty of European competition to be in a higher quality league week in week out. I'm very jealous of Cardiff City's position.

Every so often on a Scottish football forum, somebody will post a mad-dog suggestion about pan-European, UK or Atlantic leagues... So I thought I'd have a go. Obviously this is just a day-dream, but I've spent a while trying to come up with a plausible plan for getting us (and other Scottish, Northern Irish and Welsh teams) into a bigger league. Cheers to anyone who finds the time to read this and please get ripped in with your criticisms - it's very possible I've missed a glaringly obvious flaw that shoots the whole thing down. Outside that, likely responses would be: "Nah mate, it'll never happen." - You're almost certainly right, this is just for fun really - but I've tried to come up with the least objectionable idea possible. "I don't want to play in England, Rangers are Scottish." - Fair play if that's how you feel, but being stuck in a small-scale league is a massive restriction on our otherwise colossal club. "I want to ditch Scottish football and leave the rest of them to rot." - Me too, but I doubt UEFA will ever allow individual clubs to be exceptions. A Football League for the whole UK The main problems with creating a unified UK league are: It would threaten the footballing independence of the home nations. (While a lot of people may welcome a permanent “Team GB”, it would never pass a vote). Most suggestions are complicated and involve disruptive reconstruction of the English league system. (Why would clubs in such a successful set-up agree to this?) I’ve tried to come up with a suggestion which would allow clubs from the leagues of Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales to gain promotion into the Football League (alongside teams from the Football Conference), with a minimum of disruption to the English clubs - the only change being an expansion at the lowest level to make space for an initial, fair representation of non-English teams (See below). Governance Each national football association would continue to govern its own clubs, run its own national cup competition, national side etc., but the Football League and the Premier League would expand their remit to become UK-wide bodies. This should not threaten the footballing autonomy of the home nations as it is in keeping with the numerous, cross-border leagues currently being proposed around Europe (e.g. The Balkan League, the combined Belgian\Dutch and Russian\Ukrainian Leagues). Making Space I propose that, in order to create a number of new league places for Northern Irish, Scottish and Welsh sides, League 2 be expanded into 2 parallel, non-regionalised divisions (League 2A and League 2B). This type of organisation is fairly common across European football. The existing 24 League 2 teams would be split evenly between the 2 parallel divisions (12 in each) with the new clubs making up the numbers. The benefits of this format are that: It would prevent any one division from being “swamped” with non-English clubs. It would allow all English clubs to retain their level in the league hierarchy. The top 3 flights of English football would be completely unaffected. It would create enough space for each of the home nations to be fairly represented. I suggest that Leagues 2A and 2B should each initially be of 20 teams - creating 16 new league places (an overall increase from 92 to 108). Subsequently, over several seasons, these divisions could be expanded to 2 x 22, then 2 x 24 teams. This would better allow for a measured, gradual introduction of non-English teams. Representation There are many factors that could be taken into account when deciding how many teams from each of the home nations should be granted the extra places in the expanded league (UEFA co-efficient, attendances, turnover, quality of facilities, etc.) but I think the fairest baseline would be to ensure that representation is roughly proportional to population. Once in the Football League, clubs from smaller scale set-ups would have a far greater opportunity to develop. The Football League currently consists of 90 English teams and 2 Welsh, so an absolute minimum of 9 Scottish, 3 Northern Irish, and 3 further Welsh teams should be considered (See Table 1 below). Note: At the time of writing, both Newport and Wrexham are vying for promotion from the Conference, so the minimum number of extra Welsh teams required may well change. Table1: Proportional club numbers [TABLE=width: 603] [TR] [TD] Nation [/TD] [TD] Population [/TD] [TD] % of Population [/TD] [TD] Proportionate Number of Clubs [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] England [/TD] [TD] 53,013,000 [/TD] [TD] 83.90% [/TD] [TD] 90 [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] Scotland [/TD] [TD] 5,295,000 [/TD] [TD] 8.38% [/TD] [TD] 9 [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] Wales [/TD] [TD] 3,063,500 [/TD] [TD] 4.85% [/TD] [TD] 5 [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] Northern Ireland [/TD] [TD] 1,811,000 [/TD] [TD] 2.87% [/TD] [TD] 3 [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] Total [/TD] [TD] 63,182,363 [/TD] [TD] 100.00% [/TD] [TD] 107 [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] The single remaining place (required to make Leagues 2A and 2B up to 20 teams each) could be awarded to the winner of a 4-way play-off contested by the next best candidate from each country. As Leagues 2A and 2B are expanded (eventually to 24 club divisions) the additional league places could be awarded via similar competitive play-offs. Relegation and Promotion In the system I propose, relegation from the UK League (to the Conference and Northern Irish, Scottish and Welsh Leagues), would be via separate streams (i.e. the lowest placed Scottish team would be replaced by the Scottish League Champions, the lowest placed English team by the Conference Champions etc.). This means that the number of clubs from each nation would stay constant, and therefore guarantees each a set level of representation. Relegation could be made fairer by taking the actual league position into account and, say, making demotion automatic for a team which finishes bottom of a League 2A or 2B, but giving a team which finishes second-from-bottom (or higher) the opportunity to defend their league status through a play-off. The nations with a higher representation (England and possibly Scotland) could have 2 relegation/promotion places. Development Periodically, (perhaps every 4 seasons) the performance of each nation’s teams could be assessed and their quota of places adjusted accordingly. Also, should it be decided that having parallel divisions is too much of a departure from tradition, Leagues 2A and 2B could eventually be reshaped into 2 separate flights. Once the non-English clubs have found their level through promotion, and all the divisions are suitably mixed, the top halves of the parallel divisions could be merged back into a League Two, and the bottom halves into a new League 3.

Some of the opinions he gave in the interview are in direct contradiction of those he has previously published. He clearly has no problem with going back on earlier statements and I doubt the answers Bill got out of him will go uncontradicted for very long. Worth noting though, that first Spiers and now Thomson have recently adopted a less beligerant stance. Are they backing off or is it the calm before the storm?

He wants to see us "completely and utterly exonerated"? Funny that, I seem to recall, in a recent blog, he declared that we should have our titles stripped because using EBTs amounts to cheating. Is he schizophrenic, or just taking the piss?

How much did they sell them for? Was it below the original purchase price or just below the current market value? (Can't really make it out from the OP).

You're a Bill Struthiomimus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Struthiomimus

He was irriitating, but It's a shame he turned out to be so out-of-line. I didn't much like his goading and trolling but, in a way, it's useful to have a hyper-negative point of view on a forum (regarding football not religion, I mean). It makes you have to work hard to justify your opinions - and occasionally their constant cross-examination of everything brings something noteworthy to light.

The real challenge would be to chase down a satisfactory answer for all the questions - even the ones posed by GersNetters you generally don't agree with.

Why don't we send some brave soul with a list of questions "from the Gersnet users"? He could state at the very beginning that he has some tough questions based on opinions which aren't necessarily his own, Charlie will either answer them or dodge them. BTW, I'm not volunteering - I'm a bigger shiter than any of you when it comes to public speaking.

Cheating is when you break the rules. The notion that having more money than the competition is cheating is even more extreme than many of our detractors' suggestions that using legal tax avoidance schemes (that provide the club with more money) is cheating.