JohnMc

11 hours ago, 26th of foot said:

 

 

One must marvel at Nestle, there's a diktat for everyone. Milk chocolate, dark chocolate, orange flavoured, mint flavoured, cookies and cream flavoured, ...... etc.

 

There's even a Discriminatory Diktat, wrapped in vivid green'n'grey packaging. 

 

Peter has a break, has a diktat.

I've tried that one, it's quite bitter. 

There's no way Hampden, Queens Park or the SFA were going to waive the match fee, why should they? This mess isn't of their making. They'll have budgeted for that fee, why should they take the hit because Aberdonians can't hire coaches and don't own cars.  

3 hours ago, pete said:

I haven't heard that in dunkey's years.

Really, I'd have thought that kind of patter was all the rage in Westphalia! ???️

Celtic used Murrayfield as a home venue for European matches in recent seasons, as well as a lengthy sojourn at Hampden when rebuilding their own ground. Frankly I don't really mind where we play, but it sticks in the craw that firstly Aberdeen and their supporters in BBC Scotland and now Celtic are getting to decide it. 

Barrie McKay is a forward player and played over 100 matches for us but he's not an out and out striker. John Spencer and Gary McSwegan didn't make 50 appearances between them and they're the last forwards of any talent I recall us producing. Before that it was Fleck and John MacDonald before him. Not exactly a stellar record. 

To be fair we've not got a stellar record developing young players full stop, although we're not alone in that. 

The BBC Scotland coverage of the semi finals is approaching hysterical. At what point is someone going to point out that 150 miles actually isn't all that far do you think? It's the same distance as Newcastle to Manchester and I've never heard anyone complain about that being some kind of insurmountable distance. 

From a players perspective it evens out, both sides will stay in a hotel locally the night before. Lunchtime kick-offs aren't perfect for preparation but it's the same for both sides. 

For the support of both sides Sunday matches create inconvenience. Public transport is generally less frequent and non-essential road works take place. This isn't news, it's always been that way. Add to that the fact that Aberdeen in particular were one of the main driving forces behind the SPFL and are directly involved in the running of the body and the appointment of its officers I find the hysteria over this hard to stomach. 

Now they want half the tickets, for a match they apparently are unable to attend because their entire support takes the fuckin train everywhere. 

He's not a journalist, he's a presenter. He can read an autocue whilst someone speaks in his ear piece. It's not the hardest thing in the world but it's not something everyone can do. He started out as a journalist but he's not done that for decades now. I knew his late mother and from what I understand he's a bluenose. Maybe he feels he needs to be harder on us to avoid accusations of bias, I'm only guessing though.  

Mmm, do I feel solidarity and sympathy for Aberdeen and their supporters? Just checked and turns out I don't. Play the game at 9am, in Dumfries. I missed the concerted outrage when our match at Pittodrie kicked off at 1pm earlier this season. You'd think Aberdeen was 3 time zones away to hear them whine. It's a 3 hour drive on a quiet sunday morning, they'll be home in time for them to watch their beloved Celtic later in the day. 

12 minutes ago, ranger_syntax said:

I'm not being defeatist.  Go back and read my post again.  I'm specifically advocating a difficult battle.

 

I think it is really lame, on your part, to resort to calling people defeatist.  It doesn't support your argument in any way.

Okay, I read it again. When you said "This will never happen" what did you mean? Because it reads awfully like you've already given up to me. 

I'm not "resorting" to anything, it's how I read your post. If I've misunderstood it I'm happy for you to correct me. 

26 minutes ago, Soulsonic5791 said:

I think you are wide of the mark John. I know of several Rangers fans who would never think of participating on Twitter, forums or blogs for that matter and are fully aware of the BBC situation.

 

Can I ask you a serious question and I'm not being snide here - how often do you attend Rangers games?

Well I'm fairly confident many don't, but I'm not sure I know of a way to prove it either way so I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

A serious question? As opposed to all the humourous ones that've been coming my way up to now!  ?

My first Rangers match was John Grieg's testimonial and my last Kilmarnock at home last season. I'd a season ticket for 20 years. I'm no longer a season ticket holder, I probably attend around five to ten home matches a season these days and the occasional away match. 

10 hours ago, ranger_syntax said:

This will never happen.  Even if the B.B.C. were to agree it would not live up to the agreement. 

 

Much better to win and make them look foolish.

 

We should also do our best to attract the attention of England based B.B.C. sports journalists.

I'm surprised at how defeatist you are, would you prefer to give up than fight a difficult battle? 

'Fixing' what's wrong with BBC Scotland won't be done in a week, or a month, or even a year, it'll take time and patience. BBC Scotland already look foolish and petty, and if we can keep winning and playing the most attractive football in the league their foolishness will only be magnified, and external pressure from London or Manchester will help too. 

21 hours ago, Soulsonic5791 said:

I can't believe my eyes.

 

Is there a suggestion that only some of the Rangers support would be annoyed if McLaughlin's privileges were re-instated?

 

Try 99.999%. There must be a parallel universe somewhere...

I'd confidently say that a significant percentage of our support are barely aware of what caused all this and just want it resolved. One of the downsides of inhabiting a virtual Rangers world (and I assume this applies to all football clubs, political viewpoints etc) is the creation of echo-chambers. Twitter allows us to select who we hear from, people tend to gravitate to forums or blogs that represent our views, and over time we get fooled into thinking everyone thinks like us. 

21 hours ago, cooponthewing said:

Until it suits their purpose to continue their prejudiced, biased and misleading reporting. They are like a dog after it’s attacked someone, never be trustworthy again. Only this dog is bitter, bigoted, twisted and hates you to the core.

Quite possibly, but deal with the coverage issue first then deal with whatever comes next when it happens. Don't give up a fight just because it's going to be hard. 

Great Pod again this week. Colin's really pretty good hosting things. 

14 hours ago, ranger_syntax said:

A statement?

 

I've no idea why that would persuade the B.B.C. to cover us.  The B.B.C. is taking issue with the fact that we revoked privileged access to McLaughlin.

 

If you really think that there are alternatives then it would be great if you could describe them for us.

The issue just now is about losing face. Both the BBC and Rangers have taken up positions that make compromise difficult without one looking like it's 'backed down'. If Rangers were to announce they'd reinstated media credentials to Chris McLaughlin they'd take a lot of criticism from a decent percentage of the support. If the BBC announced they'd decided to send someone else they'd be criticised too by some staff, external voices, other club's supporters and so on. Yet, fixing this is really quite straightforward in my opinion. The BBC agree to cover Rangers in the same way they cover every other side and the problem is solved. The issue is then how to 'sell' that to our support and those who who support the BBC's stance. That's where 'the statement' comes in. Both parties should be able to word something that allows both to save face, appeases those who don't want compromise or agreement and then all the rest of us who simply want normal coverage of our football club, coverage we've paid for and continue to pay for, can get on with things. 

It's not in anyone's interests this carries on indefinitely, particularly not the Rangers support who are the only people being properly inconvenienced here. 

1 hour ago, trublusince1982 said:

In all seriousness how can you enjoy coverage from the BBC?  Can't stand listening to the low brow coverage from them or Clyde 

Many words have more than one meaning TBS, enjoy; possess and benefit from. "the security forces enjoy legal immunity from prosecution"

synonyms:benefit from, have the benefit of, reap the benefits of, have the advantage, have the use of, have available, avail oneself of...

When faced with the choice of no coverage or the BBC's coverage I'd rather the latter. Many supporters can't get Clyde where they live, the BBC then becomes their only option for commentary. 

4 hours ago, ranger_syntax said:

Rangers have two options to resolve it.

 

1. Win the league and make the B.B.C. look foolish.

2. Restore privileged access to McLaughlin.

 

Which one are you asking for?

With respect those aren't the only options.  It's not beyond the wit of both organisations to come up with a statement that allows both to save face and allows supporters to enjoy proper coverage of their club again. Intransigence just means no one moves forward. 

24 minutes ago, ranger_syntax said:

This is all down to the B.B.C.

 

Rangers shouldn't budge an inch.

It's Rangers fans who are being greatly inconvenienced RS, that's why Rangers should be trying to solve this too. There are tens of thousands of supporters who can't make matches and who rely on radio coverage to follow the game. The fault lies with the BBC, that doesn't mean both sides should try and solve this. 

The longer we're successful the harder this will be for them. If Rangers and Hearts are still first and second in a couple of weeks time they'll look ridiculous covering rugby and darts while that match plays out at Ibrox. I suspect Hearts fans won't be too pleased at not getting a commentary to listen too either. 

Yesterday's coverage was a disgrace. Rangers and the BBC should both be trying to find a resolution to this. I don't need Richard Gordon's approval, I don't care what Tom English thinks of us, but I do deserve the same coverage as every other side. I have no other choice, no other broadcaster provides radio commentary. I think the SPFL is the next organisation that should be made to explain this, they control the contacts for broadcasting and currently the BBC aren't fulfilling one. 

46 minutes ago, DMAA said:

But it's an assumption that it is all he can do. He's only been given cameos so far and it seems clear he's been asked to do this.

 

But from the evidence of youth games he's a much more rounded and talented player. Last night's through ball was no surprise to me, he's not just a new Gregg Wylde. Clips of him playing for Scotland youth and Norwich youth shows him deployed on the right and able to cut inside as well as having a fantastic shot (both right and left foot).

 

Defensive discipline is something he may be weak with, but I just don't buy the idea that we need someone starting on the left who will run inside and pass back to the defence (which Kent does constantly). Middleton is the kind of winger you want centre mids coming towards and playing a one-two down the line with allowing him to get where we want our winger, in behind the full backs. Man City were doing this constantly last season with Sane and Sterling. We need our wingers in the cut-back position in behind, which is where we got both our goals last night.

 

 

Gerrard himself said Middleton needs to learn about positioning out of possession as well as a number of other things. It's always exciting when a young Scottish attacking player makes an impression on the side, it happens rarely enough after all. But I agree with those who say he's raw, I don't think he's ready for a starting place yet, he only joined the first team squad a matter of weeks ago. Gerrard's use of him has impressed, there's very little pressure on him coming on as a sub, the crowd are less likely to get on his back if he loses the ball (the Ibrox crowd are unforgiving even to young players), he can use his freshness against defenders who might be tiring or carrying a caution and all the time he's learning. 

In the end over the course of the season he might well be required to start a match, suspensions and injuries will happen, so he'll get a chance at some point. 

12 hours ago, BlackSocksRedTops said:

 

I didn't type that? I certainly didn't type it on the 17th, that would have been Brahan Seer levels of prophecy.