JohnMc
-
Posts
1,991 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
23
Posts posted by JohnMc
-
-
I think Aribo's problem is if he isn't creating chances he looks like he isn't doing anything. Hagi's like that too. I actually think both work hard when they don't have the ball and their movement creates space for others, but a lot of that is unseen and not always appreciated. Aribo was great against Celtic a couple of weeks ago, then less effective against a very defensive St Johnstone, but the whole side struggled to break St Johnstone down. I think to many of us look to Aribo, Kent and Hagi to provide the spark and inventiveness that wins those types of games.
2 -
If ever there was an Old Firm match to make your debut in it's this one. There's nothing but pride at stake, it's the perfect match for Simpson to start if Helander is out. Everything we do now should be about getting ready for next season.
That said unless there are injuries I expect a midfield of Davis, Kamara and Arfield and an attack of Morelos, Kent and Aribo. Maybe we'll play Roofe instead of Morelos and maybe we'll give McLoughlin a game for the experience. We've options up front but defence and midfield are down to their bones and we don't have many alternatives.
Can't see King getting a game unless we've more injuries than we know of. Could see him make a substitute appearance before the end of the season though.
1 -
15 hours ago, DMAA said:
It’s all before my time, but I find it interesting that there was a period where old firm dominance was dented as late as the 80s. In 15 years, the top 2 was only Rangers and Celtic once. How did that happen? Because contrary to what many think, the record books show the old firm have always dominated, just not quite as much as they do today. Since 1890, the longest period without an old firm title winner is 3 years, which has happened twice.
Rangers were rebuilding Ibrox during the late 70s and early 80s, had Rangers been able to invest that money on players it might have been a very different time for us. Also home gate receipts were split 50/50 with the away side, an enormous benefit for every other side in the league, there was very little TV money and sponsorship and no one had thought of corporate hospitality yet. So while Rangers and Celtic were still the richest clubs the gap between us and everyone else was much smaller than now. Also the gap between salaries in Scotland and England was much smaller, the top sides in England were paying more but nothing like the difference we see now. Footballers contract's were very different too, there was no Bosman rule then, the club decided if you stayed or left, the player had far less say in it. This allowed clubs to keep good players for longer or cash in on them when they wanted. Lastly Aberdeen and Dundee Utd were managed by geniuses, something we can all hope never happens again!
2 -
17 hours ago, DMAA said:
In reality, most Rangers fans would rather a longer bus/train journey every other Saturday than not being able to attend at all, realistically. It is actually easier to get to Manchester than it is to get to Dingwall.
From Ness? ?
I understand your point but in reality if we assume most Rangers supporters are living in Central Scotland, (simply because most people live there) then away trips to Motherwell, Hibs, St Mirren, Kilmarnock, Hamilton, Livingston, Celtic and St Johnstone are short journeys and even Ross County and Aberdeen are hardly treks. I'm not convinced we'd get much more of an away ticket allocation at EPL grounds either. Belgium, Holland and Denmark aren't much further away than London for most of us.
While any Atlantic type league would involve international travel and make it probably prohibitively expensive for most people to attend regularly, I suspect many would take in a couple of away trips each season making a weekend of it. Most of the guys I know who go on European away trips seem to really enjoy them, I suspect they'd love an Atlantic League, although I'm not sure their wives would!
0 -
On 25/04/2021 at 11:39, Rousseau said:
Thanks for this.
You're saying that to be successful, a team needs to be 'badly run', or at least push the boat out, and that's not something you want to see for Rangers. You want to be entertained, which is what we're getting now.
It seems like I'm being accused of being unimpressed by our success this season? That is not the case. If we have this level of success every few years or so, I'll be more than happy. I've been delighted by our performance this season.
Fair enough, we've been burned quite badly for speculating, pushing the boat out, in the past. That's certainly not something I want to see repeated. However, there are many examples of teams being well-run, living within their means, and achieving success. German sides are the archetype, but even sides like Southampton in the recent past (they've struggled recently because their recruitment has been poor and injuries), or Ajax. Good sides, living within their means. That's all I want. But, Southampton, arguably, have a better quality of squad than us--and Ajax and German sides certainly do. That frustrates me.
Entertainment can be separated from the level at which we play--one can be entertained in League 2 and CL finals (in theory...). So, surely it doesn't matter if we play in Scotland or in the PL or in an Atlantic League?
To see a better level of quality, in the playing squad and its performance, you'd need to be in a bigger pond.
I too want to be entertained by Rangers, but I also want to see better quality players, see more success in the bigger competitions. At the moment we hit a wall. We could appoint the next big managerial genius tomorrow, but we'd still hit a wall with the level of player we can afford. So, if there is a chance of us moving to a bigger pond, to then attract and afford that better calibre of player, then I'm in favour of it. I don't think I'll ever change in that regard.
Like I said elsewhere, if there is a sudden change, whereby Scottish football improves and becomes that bigger pond, then that's the same for me; I'd be delighted.
Southampton made a loss of £76 million last year and a loss of £41 million in 2019, apparently they have a wages to turnover ratio of 90%. They finished 11th last season. Even Ajax make an operating loss most seasons (nothing like Southampton's to be fair), they rely on selling players to make up the shortfall. I can't think of any side in the UK that has had tangible on-field success while while being run like a normal business. Much as it pains me to say it the closest in recent years was Celtic, but they had the league and access to Europe all to themselves. As soon as we put a challenge in their model fell apart.
I'm not accusing you of being unimpressed by this season, I don't think that. I do think your desire to join another league because there's more money available in it is mis-guided. As I said in my original post I'm not closed to against another league, but it has to be for the right reasons. For me access to more money isn't one of those reasons.
For what it's worth I think your view is probably the majority one among our support.
2 -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
On 23/04/2021 at 18:21, Rousseau said:Being badly run has nothing to do with the amount of money a team possesses.
To progress, teams need investment. We're never going to move on from where we are now without it.
Getting into the group stages of the CL is pretty much the extent of it now--and that's a superb season. It's still nowhere near the elite.
(I'm intrigued to see how Queen's Park get on now, after ending their amateur status. I think they're a well-run club, but without investment they've not moved from the bottom tier. With investment, I expect them to move up the leagues.)
I applaud the 'entertainment' post - I agree with the sentiment. I'm just of the opinion that investment is needed to progress, which is what I want to see. If we're well-run, can utilise our fan base and stature, and be provided with the investment that some PL sides receive, we can move up in the world, so to speak.
Queens Park won the league at a canter, not only are they now professional but the core of their side is also full-time. That will give them an advantage next season too as League 1 is largely part-time. It would be no surprise to see QP in The Championship within a few seasons.
Unfortunately being badly run is inherent in football. Football is almost unique in its ability to attract and accept incompetence, nepotism and corruption at its administrative levels. I was told of a club who appointed a former player to a senior position within its PR department. Not only did this former player have no qualifications for the job he was literally unable to turn on a computer and use basic Microsoft programmes. In no other industry would that man be even considered for a job in that department. This type of appointment is endemic in football. The current Chief Executive of the SFA, Ian Maxwell, has only spent 10 years in any kind of administrative position, yet apparently he's the best qualified person in the world to head up our entire association and its nearly £40 million turnover.
Whatever his many faults Sir David Murray was a shrewd and capable businessman, as is Dermot Desmond. Yet Celtic will lose millions this year and I don't need to remind anyone of what state Sir David's tenure left Rangers finances. Being well run in football is very, very difficult if you actually want to challenge for titles and trophies. Look at the finances of the top teams in England. Despite having access to an almost bottomless pit of TV, sponsorship and prize money less than six sides in that league breakeven on a regular basis and none of them challenge for trophies. Leicester City, the one side who've been able to break the 'big club' monopoly in England lost £20 million in their last published accounts. Occasionally one of the big six clubs will make a profit, but that usually involves a run to at least the semi-finals of the Champion's League, and it doesn't factor in the debt they've built up or the colossal investment put in by owners to get them to that point in the first place.
As football stands it's impossible to apply normal business rules to it and expect success, if success is measured by on-field performance. The vagaries of prize-money and the effect of a down-turn in form make projecting beyond the immediate future near impossible. Liverpool, arguably the best side on the planet last season, will lose a fortune next season if they fail to qualify for the Champion's League as looks increasingly unlikely. Who would have predicted that this time last year? I can well understand why senior executives brought into football from 'normal' industries take one look at it and decide that even the remote possibility of not qualifying for the Champion's League and access to its money is a risk that must be managed. Which is where ideas like the Super League or even the proposed changes to the Champion's League come from. If you're the Rangers finance director do you pass a budget that allows for Champion's League football? If you don't the budget for signing and paying players will be significantly less, making even qualifying for the tournament even harder and perhaps giving our main rivals an opportunity to claw back some of the lost ground. If you do give a budget that allows for Champion's League football and we sign players based on that income what happens if we don't qualify? Look across the city to see what happens.
For me this is why applying many best business practices to football is a waste of time. It's also why I've become so wary of phrases like "investment is needed to progress" and "can utilise our fan base and stature, and be provided with the investment that some PL sides receive, we can move up in the world" because, and I'm mean no disrespect, but they're meaningless phrases when faced with the reality of football in the UK.
The reason German club football is healthier is because the entire structure has embraced a different ownership or economic model. Their league is still dominated by one big club, but big clubs can be relegated and smaller clubs can progress without fear of bankruptcy. It's not just the fabled 50% plus one ownership model, although that's a huge part of it, it's the culture around the sport where the focus is on the supporters as much as the players. That simply isn't the case in this country, and hasn't been for a long time. We're playing a cup tie at 6.30pm on a Sunday today and the only legal way I can watch the match is to subscribe to yet another TV channel on top of the the main two I'm already expected to subscribe too, find me a supporter who thinks that's a good idea. I remain unconvinced the popular uprising sparked by the Super League will lead to any genuine change in how football is governed or run in this country, but who knows, maybe it's a turning point.
I didn't arrive at this overnight. It's taken decades for me to realise what I actually want from Rangers. They're currently providing it. Unfortunately our finances remain precarious, but at least by focussing on football we've a chance of selling a player or three and balancing the books this summer. How that leaves us for next season only time will tell. In the meantime I look forward to simply being entertained, and that can happen at any level of football.5 -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
What's the purpose of Rangers? It's a serious question. Why do Rangers exist, why do we continue nearly 150 years after a handful of teenagers fancied a game of football instead of mucking about in boats?
Arsenal, Manchester Utd and Liverpool now exist to provide a handsome income for their main shareholders, sports clubs are their livelihood and they'll follow the path of greatest profit. Chelsea and Man City are more complicated, they can be seen as vanity projects, as 'sports-washing' to put a respectable shine on some people who otherwise might not have the best PR in the west. But it's important for their owners that their clubs are always at the top, whether that's for ego or profile reasons. Barcelona and Real Madrid are intertwined with politics and identity in Spain, both seen as representatives of competing ideologies, and important vehicles for the political and business interests of the people at the top of them. It's similar in Italy too for their big 3 clubs.
What are Rangers for then? Our current owners don't seem to be interested in politics and if they're looking for a livelihood they've made a terrible error. In reality I suspect it largely boils down to them wanting the team they support to do as well as possible. Maybe ego and profile play a small part too, but largely it's about the football I think.
I've really enjoyed the last 3 years football wise, and I realise that a huge part of that has been down to getting entertained again. Watching Rangers play decent passing football, properly competing in European competition again, developing players into fan heroes and, of course, winning the league. But even last season and the season before, despite the collapse in the league, I enjoyed watching Rangers. We had players that were capable of exciting you and a style that was very pleasing to watch, even if it didn't always prove successful.
I realise that's pretty much all I want from Rangers; entertainment, excitement and hope. I want to believe we can win the league or the cup, I want to see us play football that's not kick and rush or punt it up the channels, I want more than that. And I want moments that lift me off my seat, that make me shout out loud, that make me want to post on message-boards and jibber on podcasts. I don't think I'm alone in that either.
Football changes. In 1888 Rangers had a rivalry with Vale Of Leven, who were a top side at that time. Within a few years Vale had dropped out of the newly introduced league system. They've been a Junior team for nearly a century now. For much of our history the Glasgow Cup was a competition we took very seriously, both as a club and as a support. It's been a youth competition for nearly 20 years now. Arguably the greatest achievement in our history is winning the European Cup Winners Cup, yet it's not existed as a tournament for over 2 decades now. Football changes, no matter how much I don't want it too.
In the future the competitions we enter will change and the rivalries we'll have with clubs will change too. I think, as a club and a support, we have to be open to change. Much as I lament the ending of the old European club competitions, much as I blame the Champion's League and the EPL for most of the problems football now faces, I have to deal with the reality of where we are today.
I can be entertained playing in the Scottish leagues, but something needs to be done to improve the standard of player and of football being played. That might involve some pain for us. We might need to share revenue more evenly with our fellow clubs, we might need to increase the number of sides in the league, play each other fewer times, introduce incentives for home grown players. What's not practical is continuing as we are in Scottish football. The standards have been dropping gradually for 30 years, that needs to be arrested soon or we'll need to start seriously looking elsewhere.
I'm not against leaving Scotland either. Whether that's a UK wide league, a European League, a hybrid all-the-medium-sized-countries league, whatever, I'm open to it. New rivalries can be created, new trophies can be won.
But, and I think this is important, whatever we do we should do it so we can keep entertaining our support. So we can create new heroes, play scintillating football and, hopefully, win things along the way. It should never be about chasing money and money alone. I never want to see us in a league where finishing fourth is a celebrated achievement. I never want to see us in a league where failure isn't punished by relegation.
Rangers need finance, I understand that, and I understand that better players command higher salaries and so on. But Rangers don't currently have the best players in the world, indeed you could argue we never have, but they can still thrill and entertain us, that's what Rangers should be about.
10 -
7 hours ago, Rousseau said:
I've always been in favour of us moving.
Last season Norwich City, finishing bottom of the league--by some distance--had revenues of £119.3 million.
Rangers, £59 million (?).
Money shouldn't be the motivating factor for moving, we're a football club not a merchant bank. Real Madrid's revenue this season is estimated at over 600 million Euros yet the club's a financial basket case, football should never be measured by money. Norwich might well have revenues double ours, but it didn't stop them being relegated.
1 -
Is "reputed to be extremely wealthy" meant to make us feel better or worse do you think? Reputed to support Rangers? Reputed to be interested in football? Reputed to have a love of Scotland? Nah, just extremely wealthy. No wonder the game is in the state it is.
3 -
Ironically the Czech Republic national side are basing themselves in Edinburgh for the tournament so I wonder if Kudela would have travelled anyway. He's a first choice centre half for them currently so he'll be missed. He's had a strange career, he was in his 30s before making his international debut, his move to Slavia and their manager seem to have transformed him from a journeyman into a full internationalist. Shame he couldn't manage to be a normal human being at the same time.
4 -
There seems to be a determination to keep this incident in the public eye and a few minutes on the national News At Ten certainly helped that. I wonder what the next step is if UEFA's reaction isn't to the club's liking.
2 -
Pretty sure this is something that happens after every match as one of the protocols for allowing games to be played. I can't see any way there will be fans back this season and I think we're still months away from a full Ibrox. The issue isn't the stadium itself it's the movement of 50,000 people across the country, sharing cars, trains, buses and of course the subway. Until we're back to level 0 right across the country I think large crowds will remain restricted.
1 -
In my mind Cove Rangers are a Highland League side but I see in fact they're second in League 1 with a very decent chance of promotion to the Championship next season. In reality there won't be much between them and the sides at the bottom of the SPFL in terms of player ability, we'll need to ensure against complacency.
0 -
12 hours ago, the gunslinger said:
if it was a sliding scale surely the second offense would be worse than first.
It's just making it up as they go along
Aye, good point!
0 -
I assume there is an appeal process with this? Six games feels excessive, even if two are suspended. I assumed a 3 match ban in keeping with Bolingoli at Celtic. Maybe as it's the club's second public breach there's some kind of sliding scale. Of course a fair percentage of our support wanted them thrown out of the club when it happened so maybe some don't feel it's harsh enough.
Potentially damaging bans for the club with 2 Scottish Cup rounds falling during it. If we beat Cove Rangers we could get a much stiffer match in the next round and really miss a natural right back and cover at left back. That said perhaps Tav will be back by then.
0 -
You've hidden depths Gonzo, I didn't think the North Macedonia v Liechtenstein match would be of much interest to you. ?
1 -
13 hours ago, Bill said:
You bring back distant memories of being captivated by world cup finals, the exotic mystery of fabled countries like Uruguay, Brazil and Argentina. Players you'd never heard of became heroes overnight. It was like opening a window on the world but without the bad taste of politics, poverty, etc. I remember falling in love with the game in 1970, it was like being introduced to champagne. Where did all that go eh? Now these tournaments are like watching the Champions League - same players, same football, different shirts. I haven't watched a CL game in years and the magic of international football died in the money pit long ago.
Other than the semis and finals I've not watched much Champion's League either, it's lost it's sheen in recent years. I do hope to watch some next season though.
Nostalgia is a big part of football. Harking back to a seemingly happier, easier time when youth and ignorance combined with naivety to make the world seem a simpler, happier place, particularly at 4 or 5 decades distance. Now, jaded, cynical and harder to surprise and excite (at least I am) modern tournaments feel like corporate events with a uniformity and shallowness, controlled by PR companies and bland media executives.
Yet they still throw up surprises in ways the club football is now geared to avoid. Iceland and Wales reaching the Euro 2016 semi-finals is a magical story and nothing similar could happen in European club football, likewise Croatia and Belgium reaching the semis of the 2018 World Cup should give all similar sized nations hope. None of those 4 associations are high up for sponsors or TV deals, the money pit hasn't been able to consume everything, not yet anyway.
I also think today there's a generation of school age supporters who'll recall wistfully back to the current day, when you could send a direct message on social media to a favourite player or something else that seems normal today. National sides have struggled to dominate football in recent times. The first 7 World Cups were shared by 4 nations, but in the 21st century no country has won it twice. I still think international football is where legendary status is achieved, by even the greatest players.
Anyway, tonight we have the magic of a country that didn't exist 70 years ago taking on a country that doesn't exist as a country today. Riveting...
2 -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Griffith's goals against England were fantastic both in terms of their quality but also their timing. Scotland, of course, managed to still mess it up with only seconds to go. I remember seeing a young Charlie Nicholas score a cracker against Switzerland I think on his Scotland debut. He was cheered to the rafters by the Scotland support that night, the majority of who must have been Rangers supporters.
I did look at the Scotland side last night and think 'could they get anymore Celtic players or supporters into that side!' but once the match started I can temporarily suspend allegiances. In the end I accepted Maurice Johnson scoring for Rangers, I can accept Griffiths scoring for Scotland.
5 -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
I enjoy an international tournament. Unlike so much top level club football there's still an element of the unknown about the Euro's and the World Cup. Yes, the bigger nations have an inbuilt advantage, but less so than the big European clubs have in my opinion. I like that smaller countries like Croatia, Uruguay, Denmark, Portugal and Holland can reach the semis and even the finals of major tournaments. Although the grandparent rule and creeping trend of the nationalisation of players there's still a purity to international football that is long gone from the club game. I like that a player like Gareth Bale has to play for Wales alongside some guy from Div 2, that Ronaldo can't just decide to play for Italy or China, he can only play for Portugal, no matter how good or bad the rest of the team are.
I've great memories of watching international football. My first big football memory was the 78 World Cup, I was transfixed by the colour and spectacle of it all. Of course I also believed Scotland were going to win it but that disappointment aside players like Boniek, Hans Krankle, Jonny Rep and Mario Kempes were huge stars for me during the tournament and huge currency in playground sticker swaps.
Ten years ago I watched Spain beat Germany in the World Cup semi final in a bar in Pamplona. The San Fermin festival was on and the first big bull fight of the festival was taking place at the same time so the bar was surprisingly quiet. Pamplona is Basque country, I got talking to a couple of guys from San Sebastian who had driven down to watch the game. They wanted Spain to win, Xabi Alonso was Basque so they felt they could support this Spain side, just not publicly in San Sebastian. As the bull fights finished the bar filled up and when Spain scored the only goal of the game late on pretty much everyone cheered. The consensus in Pamplona that evening was that while many of them didn't consider themselves Spanish and were very uncomfortable with outward signs of Spanish nationalism, that Spain team, dominated by Catalans, was one they could get behind.
International football has lost some of its sparkle for me though. It's rare now for a player you've never heard of to light up a tournament anymore. That used to happen every couple of years in the 70s and 80s. Nowadays some fleet-footed Scandinavian catches your eye and when you Google you discover he's been a Man City for 2 years playing only one first team game and is currently on loan in Holland. Likewise a hot prospect from South America is almost always in Madrid or Barcelona by the time they've left their teens.
I think the truly great players achieve true greatness on the international stage. By either dragging their small, normally also ran nation to a tournament in the first place or by simply excelling on the world stage while the whole world is watching. I remember watching Brian Laudrup go toe to toe with Brazil at France 98, demonstrating to everyone just what a player he was. That same tournament Zidane announced his greatness, following in the footsteps of Pele, Cruyff, Beckenbaur, Platini and Maradona, players who reminded you why love this game in the first place.
As for Scotland, well, I'm typing this as we're playing. It's hardly transfixing me and in all honesty their games don't interest me in the same way as Rangers matches do. They did once upon a time and who knows maybe they will again someday in the future. I did cheer Leigh Griffith's goals against England a couple of years ago as enthusiastically as any Rangers goals, and I was gripped by the penalty shootout last year that saw us qualify for the Euros. But I've not been to a Scotland match for decades and the tartan army and their fancy dress leaves me cold. I'll watch their matches whenever the Euros come around, but with little hope and no expectation. I do still take pride in Rangers players doing well on the international stage, whoever they play for.
8 -
There was a very good article in The Athletic about Tav at the weekend dB. Aside from interesting background stuff the article was at pains to underline how settled he is in Glasgow now and that whatever happens in his career he plans to make Glasgow his home when he retires. I actually wonder if there's more chance of us selling Paterson than Tav. Tav isn't going to get a crack at Champion's League football in England, I think if we offer him the right contract he's here for the rest of his career.
As for the game we left our right hand side exposed. Aribo isn't a midfielder and playing him there means we lose the good parts of his game, it also means we're playing with 2 midfielders and Celtic over ran us in there because of that. Our best spell came when we brought on Wright, suddenly him and Patterson opened the right side and offered attacking options and defensive cover. Had we started with them, or with Zungu sitting allowing Kamara to cover the right it might have been a different match. Either way that was a full strength Celtic, all of their main players are fit and their manager was desperate to make a claim for the job full time. We came off the back of our hardest match of the season and with some big holes in the squad through injury. They still couldn't beat us.
2 -
24 minutes ago, Ieatbats said:
Blaming the victim? How is saying they should have walked off the pitch blaming the victim? Surely that is supporting the victim or has Scottish wokeness now turned right into wrong, genuinely confused at your response
Let me be clear then. The only player you've criticised on this forum is Glen Kamara for not walking off the pitch. How a black man responds to racism seems to be exercising you far more than the actual racism itself. You've offered no support to the victim, only criticism.
1 -
2 hours ago, Ieatbats said:
Well what good did taking the knee do? If our player was racially abused then walk off the pitch, that's making a stance and going to get a proper reaction.
You realise you're blaming the victim here? Black player is racially abused, black player is blamed for not reacting in a fashion leatbats agrees with. That's quite the take.
If anyone is under any doubt why black footballers feel the need to keep awareness of racism high then surely last night is the
0 -
13 hours ago, 26th of foot said:
JohnMc,
My purpose is to stimulate/provoke debate. I feel debate makes us, the grouping of Rangers supporters stronger and it is nothing to be wary/afraid of.
I agree, the then Labour Party dominated Glasgow District Council and had no hesitation in marginalising and demonising Rangers and Rangers supporters. Currently, GCC's Convenor Susan Aitken has a personal PRO, former Herald Journo, Gerry Braiden is over eager to portray Rangers supporters as plague carriers and liars. I have always voted Liberal, but I am persuaded by the tactical voting sites for the next elections.
Today, there has been a gathering of over a thousand folks in Kelvingrove Park celebrating St Patricks Day. I love the Police quote, "understandably, many people are in the park enjoying the sunshine". I wonder if Falls Road born and bred Gerry will adhere to his conditioning and agree with the Police, or will he advise against non socially distanced, maskless youngsters spreading the plague? I fear a convenient Residents Group might be found to support his decision?
I meant that 4 pages of scorched earth SNP bashing/defending might be to the detriment of recording and holding the BBC to account.
The Kelvingrove gathering has made the BBC news app this morning, although so far I've not heard any comments from senior police or politicians.
I drove past Kelvingrove Park a couple of weeks ago and it was mobbed, it was the first kinda mild day and literally thousands of people, most of them young, were enjoying the park. As the weather improves you'll see that happening almost daily without their being any specific occasion to 'blame'. Unless the media highlight this and make it an issue it'll pass without comment. We're in an election cycle now so it'll be interesting to see what gets traction and what doesn't.
0 -
1 hour ago, 26th of foot said:
Murder Polis!
Again, we are a few weeks from a Holyrood election and a real political need existed to remove the Sturgeon/Salmond spat from the front pages. Sincerely, I wish those long term posters on this forum who support Nationalism, would return and debate why being seen to sink the boot into Rangers and Rangers supporters is a recurring theme to the Scottish Government? It has become a habit, even today the FM was speculating on Rangers supporters spreading Covid? David Hamilton is another Nationalist using his Designation to stick it on Bears. PQ are happy to oblige.
I'm possibly not the person to respond as i'm not a 'nationalist' as such, but I have voted SNP in the past and I might do again in the future, we'll see. I suspect, like thousands of Rangers supporters, who I support plays no part whatsoever in who I vote for. Any political beliefs I hold have been formed through 5 decades of experiences in several different countries doing several different jobs. I find myself politically homeless most of the time. I've no time for all types of nationalism, be they Scottish, British, Irish, wherever. I mistrust exceptionalism based on nationality. I'm a man out of step though as increasingly different strands of nationalism seem to be the only options open.
To answer your specific question of "why being seen to sink the boot into Rangers and Rangers supporters is a recurring theme to the Scottish Government?" I'd say that this isn't something unique to this particular flavour of government. When Glasgow Council and the Scottish Government were Labour controlled we were fair game then as well and regularly held to different standards. I feel you should rephrase your question as "why being seen to sink the boot into Rangers and Rangers supporters is a recurring theme from any Scottish Government or Council?"
We'd be here a long time trying to answer that.
I love this thread and the heavy lifting you put into it, and I don't want to derail it from it's purpose. Perhaps this is a discussion for a different thread.
1
Team selection against Celtic
in Rangers Chat
Posted
Undoubtedly, which is why they receive more stick than others when we struggle. If you look at someone like Morelos, even if he's not scoring goals, his work rate and running are obvious and the support tend to cut him a bit more slack. I suspect many of us don't think Hagi or Aribo work as hard as Morelos, so when they're not producing their primary job; creating openings, then some feel they're not contributing anything.