Jump to content

 

 

Hildy

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,747

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Hildy

  1. Hildy
    This is what Nimmo said: "The Tax Tribunal has held (subject to appeal) that Oldco was acting within the law in setting up and operating the EBT scheme. The SPL presented no argument to challenge the decision of the majority of the Tax Tribunal and Mr McKenzie stated expressly that for all purposes of this Commission's Inquiry and Determination the SPL accepted that decision as it stood, without regard to any possible appeal by HMRC. " If HMRC wins, and let's face it, it is going to appeal again and again until there are no more places left to appeal to, on the face of it, it would seem that there are no further grounds to re-open the title-stripping issue. That said, the football authorities seem to make it up as they go along, so nothing can be taken for granted. If HMRC wins the appeal, the usual suspects will most definitely start complaining again in the hope that the issue is revisited.
  2. Hildy
    Re the 'pointless comparisons', people were criticising Rangers for having an ugly style of football before Ally McCoist carried on from where Walter Smith left off. It's nothing new. People are sick and tired of Rangers' well-paid, supposedly highly-trained professionals playing a brand of football that leads to thousands of fans spending more time on their smartphones than actually observing the game. Some have chucked it while others spend their time at the match conveniently distracted or counting down until they can disappear to the pub. The only way to make Rangers watchable again is to bring in enlightened management. Until we do that, the club will be avoided by thousands of fans until the temptation to return fades and dies and then they will lose interest completely. Rangers needs to be all it can be just to get by nowadays. It is a long way short of doing that.
  3. Hildy
    Three years away from the top tier is an eternity. Before the implosion, we had fans suggesting that the League Cup should be abolished or for under 21 teams only. Now, the winning of it would be lauded as one of our greatest triumphs. Before the implosion, we had fans dismissing the UEFA Cup as the Thursday Cup - a poor man's CL. Now, just being in it would be hailed as an achievement. Before the implosion, we thought we were invincible. Now, at last, the penny has finally dropped. We're not, and we never were. This romantic journey has been notable for one thing only - the complete absence of romance.
  4. Hildy
    It may come as a surprise to you, but there are many people who do not take their club allegiance as strongly as we do. They have helped fund the game over the years and are not afraid to vote with their feet if they feel they are being short-changed. Some of those people spend their working lives performing to exacting standards and they will not easily tolerate a level of football which is mediocre even on a good day. Rangers used to be a club that had standards, at least, this was what most people believed. Now, it is a shoddily-run club with an uninspiring team. People will walk away from this. It is our failure to accept and understand this that is troubling. Don't expect or demand loyalty. In the 21st century, it has to be won.
  5. Hildy
    It's generally a good day out. I know people who travel to Arsenal, Manchester City, Chelsea and Manchester United, and they tend do it in style. They are Rangers fans. Instead of tolerating the dismal experience of watching Rangers, though, they choose to venture south to sample a more robust offering. I'm not really a fan of the English game myself but I can see the appeal of it to Scottish fans who want a different type of day out.
  6. Hildy
    The 'park the bus' mentality is what is wrong with Scottish football. We have forgotten how to actually play. I see the accompanying survey is blaming Lawwell and the Celtic board far more than any of the other reasons offered.
  7. Hildy
    I watched most of Celtic's game tonight. I didn't see the first leg. How strange it was to see a Celtic team populated by names I didn't know and faces I didn't recognise. To be fair, they had their moments and could have edged it, but Maribor had more guile and quality although it took them a while to threaten Celtic's goal. Their manager - another face I struggled to recognise - will survive and he has an opportunity to put together a more effective side using his own methods and maybe with a few new faces of his own choosing coming in. He will have the advantage of being a league-winning manager in his first season so he has time to get things right and make improvements. Individually, Celtic were down on quality compared to recent seasons and there were definitely a few weak links in tonight's line-up. Changes will have to be made - and with much less money than had probably been anticipated. It will be interesting to see how Celtic fans react to this reverse. I believe they had 55,000 at Parkhead tonight which shows how hungry they are both for the CL and for competitive football. They have another bore of a season to look forward to domestically now, so crowds will likely be disappointing. They at least have the Europa Cup to keep them sweet though - although hopefully for not too long.
  8. Hildy
    I'm sure it will be studied extensively for the next few hours.
  9. Hildy
    Great result for Maribor. Great result for football. Great result for Rangers.
  10. Hildy
    It says in the opening article - which I have inadvertently given a thumbs-up - that Sandy Easdale and George Letham are due to be repaid. This would tend to suggest that it hasn't happened yet.
  11. Hildy
    There is a suspicion in some quarters that our current predicament was engineered, at least in part, by our city rivals. Maybe it was and maybe it wasn't, but the influence of the Rangerstaxcase website was considerable in forming a negative view on our club. It appeared to have an inside track on what was going on and several Celtic websites seemed better informed about Rangers matters than us. This could not have happened the other way round. They hate Rangers and pore over every detail of our affairs. We dislike them but turn our noses up at the idea that we should look closely at the way they conduct their business. I believe Rangers should have Celtic constantly under observation. It will do no harm but might help us to anticipate future problems before they get out of hand - and there will be more problems. You can bank on it. Celtic is playing the game off the field as well as on it. Rangers is labouring to get by on the park and is a perennial dunce off it. We need to up our game, but of course I say that safe in the knowledge that we won't. In Old Firm matters, one club is cute and politically aware and opportunistic - and the other club is Rangers.
  12. Hildy
    Doesn't this just sum up our manager, the club and Scottish football? The manager is running scared. The club is actually prepared to inconvenience fans who have stuck by it after thousands have given up season tickets. Scottish football is happy to tolerate this situation despite the game being widely believed to be in irreversible decline.
  13. Hildy
    I don't think we can look at our situation in isolation. What goes on across the city at Celtic should be our concern too because Celtic is the one force in Scottish football that can crush our dreams, destroy our aspirations and inhibit our progress. They have suffered dreadfully with reduced attendances but regular participation in the CL has made up for the shortfall and they are favourites to become part of the gravy train once again. With luck, Maribor will surprise them but I'm not betting on it. If we are poor and struggling and they are solvent and healthy, we know that this will have a significant effect on what happens on the pitch. I just wish we knew Celtic's financial details as well as they seem to know ours.
  14. Hildy
    As we know, there are very long memories in the Celtic-minded ranks, and episodes like this are probably well remembered by the likes of Michael Kelly, John Reid and George Galloway: Letters reveal SNP crisis over ‘bigoted’ president’s anti-Catholic diatribes (From The Times 11-9-2010) It was February 1982 and Pope John Paul II’s pastoral visit to Scotland was just months away. The Vatican’s diplomatic representative to the United Kingdom had recently been upgraded to ambassadorial rank and Billy Wolfe, leader of the SNP from 1969-79 and a Kirk elder, wrote to*Life and Work*– the “pre-eminent voice of the Church of Scotland” – to voice his opposition. The Vatican, he argued, was “not much larger than a town’s public park” and its population (“I understand, nearly all priests”) “only about 700”. As such, it was “neither a city nor a state” and therefore not entitled to send a diplomatic representative to the “Protestant United Kingdom”. Furthermore, Wolfe complained that the Roman Catholic Church had failed to consult Scotland’s national church. From an ordinary member of the SNP this letter might have gone un-noticed, but Wolfe was the party’s president, a former leader and one of its most respected elder statesman. Papers belonging to Gordon Wilson, Wolfe’s successor as National Convener of the SNP, have revealed for the first time the extent of a row which cast a sectarian shadow over the party and ultimately destroyed Wolfe’s political career. Leading SNP figures were appalled. Winnie Ewing forwarded press coverage of Wolfe’s remarks to Wilson and his fellow MP Donald Stewart with the note: “Is the SNP now part of the Orange Movement?” And when the*Daily Record*conflated Wolfe’s views with the SNP’s, Wilson took the unusual step of issuing a statement publicly repudiating Wolfe’s “personal opinions”. Wolfe refused to apologise or resign as president, arguing instead that the SNP ought to remain “neutral” on the Pope’s visit rather than welcoming it, as Wilson had already done. “If the slogan ‘Home Rule is Rome Rule’ becomes widely current again”, Wolfe wrote to Wilson privately, “it will become impossible for us to get a really significant and secure support out of the 80% of the population who are non-R.C.’s." Wolfe then set out his “constitutional and political” reasons for opposing the Papal visit in a lengthy memo that he planned to publish. This argued that the visit was a “clear violation of the statutes establishing the U.K. and securing the Protestant Religion in both England and Scotland”. “The aim of the R.C. Church was and is world domination in the belief that the Pope is destined to rule over all nations and all men,” added Wolfe. “Who will benefit from a State visit to these countries by the Pope? From a Protestant point of view, certainly not the non-R.C. majorities in them." He went on to describe the Roman Catholic church as the world’s “largest and most widespread political organisation” which had “centuries of experience, infinite patience and Machiavellian skill, using good or evil, wealth or poverty, left or right political parties, black men or white men, in fact any person, organisation or circumstance which is likely to serve the ultimate aim of the church”. Wilson, clearly appalled, replied that he “disagreed completely with your personal view” and urged him not to publish something that “would be very damaging to the Party”. The Glasgow Hillhead by-election – in which Roy Jenkins would make his political comeback – was just weeks away and Wilson dreaded the electoral consequences of another intervention from Wolfe. The row then died down, although the SNP lost its deposit in the Hillhead by-election. Then, the following month, Wolfe wrote another letter, this time to the*Scotsman, expressing concern that the predominantly Protestant Falkland islanders might fall under the control of a “cruel and ruthless Fascist dictatorship of a Roman Catholic State”. Coming as it did on the eve of elections to Scotland’s regional local authorities, the SNP was once again plunged into crisis. Alan McKinney, the SNP’s National Organiser, told Wolfe that his “continuing attack on the Roman Catholic Church is causing great concern within the Party”. “I have spent the last three hours,” he wrote, “dealing with telephone calls from Press, ministers, Nationalists and members of the public attempting to staunch the wound you have opened – an analogy which fits one view expressed: ‘amputation’.” Gordon Wilson was also furious, writing to Wolfe to condemn his “bigoted anti-catholic views” and asking him to resign as party president. Wilson also wrote to Cardinal Gray, who had been asked to comment on Wolfe’s Falklands comments, to apologise. Gray replied graciously, expressing concern that “Mr. Wolfe’s letter might have caused problems for Catholics who are members of the S.N.P. or those who have sympathy with the Party’s aims and policy”. Although Wolfe refused to resign as president, he did agree to withdraw his nomination for another term. As one journalist commented, it was “sad to see such a distinguished political career end over statements so very much out of character”, while Wolfe would not be re-elected to party office for another 16 years. Later he expressed genuine regret about his comments while ironically his second wife, Kate Mac-Ateer, was a Catholic. Nevertheless it planted a suspicion that the SNP was sectarian, something that still lingered in 1994 when the party endured the Monklands East by-election. It then took the efforts of Alex Salmond to correct the damage, forging deep links with the Catholic Church in Scotland, while “warmly” welcoming this month’s visit which he predicted would be a “wonderful occasion”. Scotland, not to mention perceptions of the SNP, have changed a lot in 28 years. DAVID TORRANCE http://davidtorrance.com/letters-reveal-snp-crisi-over-bigoted-presidents-anti-catholic-diatribes-from-the-times-11-9-2010/ Perceptions have indeed changed, but for the Celtic-minded, I seriously doubt if they have changed enough.
  15. Hildy
    Our Celtic-minded friends have been wooed by the nationalists in recent years because they are perceived to be the nearest thing to a block vote in Scotland. In a referendum, getting this vote to switch sides would likely heavily influence the outcome. Amongst younger Celtic fans, a nationalist anti-English movement has a certain appeal, but Celtic-minded roots in the unionist Labour Party are just to deep to abandon. The Scottish Celtic-minded vote has been entrenched Labour for decades. It will not easily give up a party that it believes it owns in the west of Scotland. Salmond has had an effect though - he is utterly despised by every Celtic-minded person I know.
  16. Hildy
    As amms said: "Now none of us would associate supporting the British army with the Tims or with overt Unionism yet I'd venture more of their support are committed to voting 'No' in September than ours." We make a big deal about being THE unionist club and yet our fiercest rivals stand beside us on this issue and have done so for many decades. They are at least as enthusiastic about the Union as we are.
  17. Hildy
    Sadly, the club and its support are two separate entities. The club that more senior fans grew up with probably ceased to be even before our current troubles. The fanbase has some recognisable features and a view on certain political issues, but while there may have been a time when the club was in tune with some of them, these days, Rangers has to produce dubious surveys just to find out what supporters are thinking. When Rangers is owned and run by people who are not Rangers fans, it is fairly obvious why it is not in tune with many of its fans. Celtic has managed to retain its Celtic-mindedness while Rangers has long since moved away from being Rangers-minded. Some people think that it is progress becoming a club run by complete strangers with little or no understanding of the past and the complex relationship that exists between Rangers and Celtic, but I'm not one of them. Celtic is a club that knows the score with regard to how the land lies in the west of Scotland. Rangers, however, is a club that hasn't got a clue how the game is played off the field, never mind on it, in these parts. How could it? It is populated by people who have about as much feeling for Rangers as I have for croquet.
  18. Hildy
  19. Hildy
    It's a valid point, but it gets worse. If people who cling to certain traditions are perceived to be hardline and uber, it is not just they who get marked down by more moderate mindsets - what they stand for gets tarnished too, and then change is accelerated as the more fundamentalist wing becomes marginalised. The Protestant aspect of Rangers' past is undeniable, but in a rapidly changing world, it is going to be a far less visible part of the club's future. The traditionalist is going to have to come to terms with the more modern fan who is happy to support a team in blue, while he must understand that religious tribalism has played an almighty part in delivering Rangers - with an abundance of silverware - to where we are in the 21st century. Denial of Rangers' Protestant tradition is akin to claiming that Celtic has been open to all since its first breath.
  20. Hildy
    Ask yourself this: why do you support Rangers? For thousands of Rangers fans over many years, religion would have been what guided them to Rangers, and contrary to what many would have us believe, there's nothing wrong with this - not if we live in a free country. Equally, Celtic drew in Catholics from all over Scotland because Celtic was widely perceived to be a Catholic club. In a free society, this is perfectly acceptable. People run from this now, though, because society has changed and no-one wants to be accused of being a bigot - even though the choice of a football club where religion is clearly a factor does not automatically make someone a bigot. Rangers is not as 'staunch' as it used to be, but to deny or even suggest that religious tribalism has not played a massive part in the long history of the club - and at another club just across the city - is utterly beyond comprehension. Rangers has a Protestant tradition. It has long gone from within the club and it is eroding within the support, but it is still a factor today in drawing people to Ibrox. Celtic has probably retained its identity internally more successfully than Rangers, and maybe within its support too. Today, Celtic still looks to be Celtic-minded. Rangers, however - within the club itself - has no identity at all.
  21. Hildy

    SHEEP Flag

    Hildy replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat

    I find it sad that a club which has vain aspirations to be a major club should have fans that are so small-minded that they can't have an identifying flag without a hateful reference to another club that the pea-brained in their midst are obsessed by and infatuated with. Fingers are frequently pointed in our direction when it comes to negative aspects of football fan behaviour, but this flag is a reminder that Glasgow doesn't have a monopoly on it. How painful it must be to follow a club whose infatuation with another has overtaken it and substantially diminished it. I don't feel anger for these people - just pity.
  22. Hildy
    Rangers is in a bad place. Fans can either keep funding it in the hope that it will eventually stabilise, or they can stop handing over their money to it in an effort to bring matters to a head. Both points of view are valid and it is reasonable to argue that there is no right or wrong way to proceed. I find myself increasingly sympathetic however to the 'not a penny more' camp. By funding the club, the bad dream will continue. By cutting off financial support, a crisis will follow which will determine which road we follow next - if there is a next. I believe we need to provoke the crisis and all the risks that go with it. It's either that or living the delusion that a full recovery is going to happen. While the club is in inappropriate hands, it almost certainly will not.
  23. Hildy
    Rangers is doing under Ally McCoist what Rangers did under Walter Smith - throwing the fattest wallet down and achieving success by having the greatest financial clout in its environment. Buying the best makes it easier to be the best, but away from domestic environs, even against clubs unable to match Rangers financially, we usually looked like a mismanaged club with no imagination, plenty of fear, and with very little clue how to square up to continental opposition. Our gameplan in Europe and in more competitive domestic games has often been to park the bus for the game's entirety and sometimes with no credible intent to score and no belief that we could anyway. It's submission from the first whistle, but even against the lowliest domestic opposition, the team often found itself out-possessed as it camped and waited - and camped and waited. Under Smith and McCoist, Rangers has emphasised defensiveness, even to the extent of having every player as a defender. In some games our lone 'attacker' could best be described as our most prominent defender. This unimaginative ethos, which some have described as cowardly, is an ill fit at the biggest club in the land. Just as Manchester United have a tradition of adventurous and watchable football, so should Rangers. There has never been a time more difficult for Rangers than the present, and with grander options elsewhere, younger football fans, who would once have unquestioningly followed Rangers, are able choose a continental glamour club instead: indeed, I have already seen so many examples of this that it is an area of great concern to me. I know that some fans worship Smith, but I'm not one of them. He is the man who brought negative football to Rangers with the kind of obscene defensive formations that Craig Levein was roundly panned for. His teams sometimes had great players but they never had an adventurous or cavalier approach as a unit. A few of our top individuals did, but as a team, we were organised without the ball and haphazard with it. It is much easier to double-bank a defence to prevent goals than to have it demonstrating levels of sophistication - as a team - in the chase to get them. Smith brought this to Rangers and McCoist is effectively Smith jnr. Between the two of them, but especially the former, Rangers has become the byword for ugly, brutal and negative football. It is my view that McCoist should be replaced with a brand new face who will transform the team from being feart and negative to one that is bold and positive. It's time to sever the club from safety-first, dull football and attach it to a more enlightened and positive approach. This ghastly era has gone on far too long and beneficial change is now as essential as it is desirable. People will defend McCoist because he was an outstanding player for us. I would defend him too - for what he did as a player, but never as a manager. If people truly want what is best for Rangers, I really have to wonder why they want McCoist to stay in position. Do they seriously believe, even for a minute, that this man will realise their hopes and dreams for Rangers? Rangers simply cannot afford any longer to have a manager who is not a good manager. How many football fans in Scotland would describe McCoist as a 'good manager? How many players, pundits, coaches, managers and CEOs would describe him as a 'good manager'? Rangers must have a good manager as a minimum requirement, and right now, not too many would suggest that we actually have one.
  24. Hildy
    I want to see youngsters blooded but I do not think it is useful to rest the top team and field a shadow team in its place. Young players should be given the opportunity to perform in a first team environment. It sounds as though Hearts put out an entire reserve team in a first team fixture. I'm not sure that this achieves anything other than to rest the top team. Youngsters should be afforded the opportunity to play alongside established players in competitive games - not to play beside their usual team-mates in a game their club is seemingly content to lose.
  25. Hildy
    They were up against an extremely poor team. Put Rangers against the Girl Guides and they'll look like a swashbuckling and ruthless side, but put them against Hearts and Hibs and they have a fight on their hands, as we have already seen. Clyde were shockingly poor. As someone already said on here, it was men against boys. If you want to assess the strengths and weaknesses of Rangers, evaluate them against a decent standard of team instead of a Clyde side that plummeted Barry Ferguson's reputation as a manager, perhaps unfairly, before he has even got his feet under the table. The Rangers Ladies' side won 22-0 at the weekend but no-one is reading into that and pretending that they will win the league. I believe Rangers will get promoted this season, but when we join a more competitive environment, it'll be back to safety-first, backing off basics, and mostly dreadful to watch. The way we played last night is substantially different to the way we will play at Celtic, Aberdeen and Dundee United in the top tier.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.