JohnMc

Well, I went to "Hutchie" and I took up following Rangers because they won the first football match I was taken to see by my grandfather, Rangers v Third Lanark in 1957. I'm pretty sure that if my grandfather supported anyone it would have been the "Thirds" for cultural reasons and also because he lived just up the road from Cathkin in Mt Florida.

 

So I'm sorry but I still don't get your point. Let's say that Mr Yousaf's father and grandfather didn't support any team , let alone Celtic; and he was not influenced by peer pressure at school. (Although one of my cousins who went to Hutchie supports Celtic, so maybe there's an underground movement going on, all this was years ago.)

 

What are the "other" reasons, for Mr Yousaf supporting Celtic, please spell them out for us.

You'd need to ask Mr Yousaf his reasons, I don't know them. I just know they aren't the reasons most of us choose our team.

As a matter of interest BH, had your grandfather taken you to see Celtic v Third Lanark and they'd won would you be a Celtic supporter today?

For God's sake man, your first post was dripping with disparaging remarks to both cultures.

Okay, in that case you'll have no problem pointing them out.

In fact your second paragraph in this reply almost sounds snobbish. Do you expect me to accept that no one in the West of Scotland knows their history? Who would the exceptions be - only those who are educated at Hutcheson's Grammar?

Firstly it's apostrophe after the s, c'mon man read the thread! :-)

I didn't say "no one". In my experience the exceptions are people who have lived on both islands but I've met some who haven't but seem to understand.

In your third paragraph I believe you are being patronizing. I refuse to believe that a man with you intelligence would purport to miss the point of the information given. I think you know exactly what I mean by an 'opposite culture'. It would be highly unlikely that our own culture would attempt to kill our club stone-dead in 2012. In eleven generations of family heritage I have found no ties to anything Irish. I do speak the Queen's english, and sometimes the Scots' vernacular. I do not consider myself tied culturally or socially to the Irish, so please don't make statements that you have no idea about.

Whether you consider yourself or not Barca isn't important, because you are whether you like it or not. You are culturally, linguistically, socially and ethnically identical to me and the average person living in Dundalk, Ballymena or Coatbridge.

I had to combine a lot of things to make the point that this event was not just an electioneering stunt in ANY pub. The RST made the point that the pub was the base for a CSC who had a history of violence against Rangers fans. Further, the very man who brought in the OBA was front and centre in the picture, Salmond. Surely you would agree that in politics perception is everything. This was not a random choice of venue. In this instance I agree with the RST that this event needed to be challenged.

If I have been unable to sway your opinion then we shall have to agree to disagree.

Read my first post again Barca, obviously that venue wasn't chosen at random. What has it got to do with us though?

Speak for yourself, some of us actually chose to support Rangers...

"Most" Calscot, most. No all.

I reject the premise of your post on several points.

First, I am not a member of the RST.

You have stated and I agree that the Rangers' support is drawn from a broad church. The one thing that is common among the Rangers' fans is that we all support our team, and in our own way. Hence, I don't think it is appropriate for you to attempt to denigrate or attempt to belittle a supporter, or group, for their actions unless they are breaking the law.

Eh? Denigrate and belittle? When did I do that?

I think it is rather presumptious of you to imply that neither the RST, the Rangers' support nor the denizens of the Old Govan Arms are unaware of their history.

I don't, most people in this part of the world have very little understanding of Irish history. There are exceptions but not many. People who sing rebel songs in pubs of a Saturday tend to be pretty ignorant in my experience.

What exactly is this history and why does it impact on the OP? A few quotes ...

 

From a Southern Irish person's point of view ...

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/commemorating-the-1916-rising-1.2114387

... Second, the utter lack of popular support for the Easter Rising at the time of its outbreak makes the “seminal moment” in the birth of our republic somewhat different from that of the American and French republics.

 

From Dr David Hume MBE, director of services, Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland ...

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/easter-1916-rebels-did-not-care-for-mandates-or-shirk-from-violence-1-7038811

... THE Easter Proclamation of 1916 was signed by seven men.

... But they could hardly have been said to represent the majority of nationalists or Roman Catholics in Ireland. In fact the seven men who led this revolutionary attempt were a small group within a small group, the Irish Republican Brotherhood.

... “Can dead people tell you what to do? Which ones? Didn’t Daniel O’Connell say that a single drop of blood was too much to pay for liberty?” Dudley Edwards asks.

 

Three groups, each with their own motives, participated in the Easter Rising.

 

The Irish Republican Brotherhood (IRB) was a secret revolutionary fraternity founded in the mid-19th century. They were also known as the '******s', and this group planned the rebellion.

The second key group involved in the rising was the anti-war Irish Volunteers who had split from Redmond's Volunteers in 1914.

They were led by Eoin MacNeill, a history professor who opposed the idea of an unprovoked rebellion, but the IRB secretly exercised considerable influence within the militia, controlling many of its leaders and officers.

The third group to participate in the rebellion was the Irish Citizen Army, a small socialist paramilitary organisation led by James Connolly.

 

The decision to rise was also based on the traditional ****** dictum that England's difficulty was Ireland's opportunity.

******s had long believed that only in time of war, with England distracted and the availability of a powerful European ally (Germany), could they hope to mount a successful challenge to the superior might of the British empire.

 

The aftermath

Most Irish people were appalled by the death and destruction unleashed by the rebellion.

The defeated rebels were jeered and attacked by some onlookers as they were led through the streets of Dublin.

But, as had occurred after earlier unsuccessful rebellions, Britain's response - including the execution of 15 of the leaders, the arrest of 3,430 men and 79 women (many of them entirely innocent) and the imposition of martial law throughout the entire country - provoked indignation and sympathy for the rebels.

The sacrifice of the rebels converted previously unsympathetic nationalists to the republican cause.

In the general election of December 1918, nationalist Ireland decisively rejected the Irish Party in favour of the new Sinn Fein party which identified itself with the 1916 rebels.

 

Now we have the connection between Sinn Fein and the residue of the violent gang that would become the IRA.

Why do we care?

******s would gravitate to the West of Scotland and mostly the streets of Glasgow. Here they would be confronted by Billy Fullarton's gang - The Billy Boys.

People being people, would take sides. They would also support the team of their culture. Hence Rangers and Celtic, although they are football clubs, are supported for the most part not only as football clubs but also because they are counter cultures.

Now in all honesty, do you think that the denizens of the Old Govan Arms, and their opposite numbers in numerous pubs of the opposite persuasion, do not know what they are singing and why they are singing it? I don't buy that point of view.

You may, or then again may not, agree that the arguments presented by Prof. Tom Devine and supported by our opposite culture were directly responsible for having The Billy Boys song banned because of the word '******'. The SNP government has made sure by the introduction of the OBA that this word shall remain forever objectionable.

These actions were not football related, but were strictly political.

I'm not sure if you're lionising the Billy Boys here Barca or comparing them to the IRA, or both.

Also, I don't have an "opposite culture" whatever the fuck that is, Martian perhaps? I'm culturally, linguistically, socially and ethnically identical to the Irish and those or Irish origin. So are you.

I don't know about you but I enjoy listening to the Rangers' support when it rotates through the whole songbook. I feel energized when Ibrox is rocking. I especially miss TBB, but that's just an opinion.

The upshot is though, that we can't just go to the match on a Saturday and enjoy the game. We are forced, by the actions of others, to consider a more political environment. I don't have a police record, have never committed a felony, and yet if I want to watch the Rangers I am forced to watch the police filming me as I watch the game. Why? This is not football, this is politics. I never asked to be involved in politics while I watch my football team.

Naivety just won't cut it here. We have to consider the political pressure exerted on us while being a Rangers' supporter. We also have to consider that Celtic and their supporters are entirely aware of the political pressure brought to bear on our club and support. With the outright bias of the media in many areas any slip is hugely exaggerated.

I'm sure that the advisors in Humza Yousaf's campaign are targeting the 'Irish' element of the Labour vote when they staged this event. However, I view this event as a huge mistake. I think he has taken the 'non-Irish' vote for granted and that this will come back to bite not only him but the SNP in other districts.

He can't stage an event in The Louden now, for example, who would believe him?

Finally, you'll remember how the Rangers' support has been devastated in the last five years? Many times they have looked for leadership from somewhere because of the travesties that have taken place in the boardroom. In my view, and remember I am not a member of the RST, I think the RST are to be congratulated for their stance in challenging this obvious political bias by the party who gave us the OBA.

You're conflating an awful lot of things Barca. It was a photo-op in a pub, it had nothing t do with Rangers. Dress that up anyway you want, it doesn't change it though.

As Pete says a well written post but as a former Hutchesonian I would question the above paragraph on two grounds.

 

Firstly there were two brothers Hutcheson; so it should be Hutchesons' not Hutcheson's.

 

Secondly, I don't see the connection between a 'rugby' School and choice of football team to support.

Hah, yeah feel free to correct my spelling and grammar, my comprehensive education was often lacking! :-)

My point on his choice of club to support was because I doubt he's following his grandfather and father's side or it through peer pressure at school, which is usually the case for most of us. He's chosen Celtic for 'other' reasons.

There’s a number of issues here. Firstly to describe the Old Govan Arms as an “IRA Pub” is stretching. It’s a Celtic pub for sure and has been for decades but it’s a jump to describe it as an “IRA pub”. I imagine a number of its regulars might be sympathetic to Irish republicanism and I’m sure it’s not unheard of to hear songs that could be described as ‘rebel songs’ at times too. But does that make it an “IRA pub”? I think there’s a big difference between singing songs they associate with football and actively supporting ethnic cleansing and systematic, cold-blooded murder of people with who you disagree politically and organised gangsterism.

As for why was Humza Yousaf there I’d have thought the reason was fairly self-explanatory; he’s a politician. He’s standing locally against a well known and well established incumbent. On top of that he’s a posh, privately educated, Muslim man trying to get elected in one of the poorest, most deprived constituencies in the country. So let’s be honest his advisors have recognised a number of voters will struggle to relate to him. So photo ops in pubs will be engineered. The fact that it’s a well known ‘Celtic pub’ probably won’t do him too much harm with the previously Labour voting electorate he’s trying to swing.

Now does this have anything at all to do with the RST? Well I’d say no, but I’m not a member. The fact a Celtic supporter’s club is based there and that said club has members who are best described as bams doesn’t really have a lot to do with ‘us’, does it?

Rangers supporters tend not to vote along religious or ethnic lines. I‘m kind of proud of that. Despite being popularly represented to the contrary we’re a broad church politically and this should be recognised by the RST too. I don’t live in that constituency so I’ve no say in that particular battle. But I don’t live far from it and come the election I’ll see which party I feel best fits with what I believe, I’ll then look at who is standing locally for them and make my decision based on that. Photo-ops in pubs will play very little part in that, I imagine the good people of Glasgow Pollok will do similar.

It's also worth thinking on why someone ambitious politically and educated at Hutcheson's Grammar should choose to publicly support Celtic.

Lastly the thorny issue of Irish republicanism. I think many of ‘us’ struggle to view Irish independence in the same way we might view Indian or Jamaican or Kenyan independence movements far less the American one. There will be a number of reasons for this. I’m not sure how much those singing ‘rebel’ songs in Glasgow pubs really know or understand about Irish republicanism or the specific events they sing about. I’m not sure it really matters now either.

The centenary of the Easter Rising is literally weeks away and this is a big event in Ireland. Likewise the centenary of the Somme is this summer. Two huge events in the history of the island of Ireland that still reverberate to this day. A proper understanding of those events would do none of us in the West of Scotland any harm.

Professional footballers, like all professional sportsmen and women, consist of two quite separate ingredients; talent and mentality.

Now we have to assume that if a young player has been signed by Rangers then he has the talent. If he doesn’t then no amount of training or loaning will fix that.

So we’re left with mentality. This takes in a lot of areas such as the drive to succeed, how you take on advice, lifestyle choices and how you apply yourself in training. What also falls into this is mental strength and understanding the demands of professional football. That’s very hard to learn unless you actually play professional football. It’s taught almost by osmosis, it’s very much on-the-job learning. Professional football is actually quite rough. By that I mean if you are not mentally strong you won’t make it. Young players are often deliberately subjected to verbal abuse and behaviour that would constitute bullying in most other workplaces in an attempt to ‘toughen them up’. If a player can be intimidated then word gets round very quickly and you can be sure that player will be intimidated in every match they play from then on. Career over. It’s one thing a slightly built tricky winger being able to ignore another lad of about the same age, it’s quite another to be able to ignore a 32 year old, or at least handle him. You can’t learn that in youth games and you can’t really learn that in training. You learn that on a wet February afternoon at Bayview in front of 500 people who are all cheering the thug and urging him to stick you in the stand.

In that environment players also learn how to stay focussed, where to stand at corners, when to cross and when to pass and all the other vital things professionals know that most supporters barely even notice. You don’t go to college to become a player, at least not in this country, so they need to learn their trade from journeymen. It’s an apprenticeship and the best place to learn that trade is on the field in a real match.

I’m against us being able to field ‘2nd teams’ in the lower leagues. For one it devalues those leagues, we should have more respect having been in them ourselves recently. Secondly it won’t be real. Our players won’t be playing alongside men for who that win bonus could make a massive difference to their salary. Men who won't miss them if they fuck up, who’ll encourage them if they see their head go down and who’ll stick up for them on the park when someone is having a go. That’s how they’ll learn.

I really like what Warburton is doing. All our young players should spend time out on loan in the lower leagues. It’ll teach them the game and remind them of what they’ve got.

Obviously some young players can make the jump to 1st team, but they are outliers, most won’t without some help.

Where does it say you can't have political advertising in football grounds?

The club will have charged a lot for the behind the goals advertising spaces and having them covered up for probably their biggest crowd and TV audience of the season is going to cause a problem for them. I don't know what the lad did or if he deserved to be arrested but let's not conflate what the banner said with where it was displayed, they are different things. There's not a ground in the country you won't be told to remove a banner if it's covering paid for advertising.

So this all comes down to the definition of the word 'legend' and its recent appropriation to mean 'very good'. That isn't what the word 'legend' means though. A legend is a myth or a fairy story, that's not the the right definition here either though. More appropriately 'legend' also means famous or notorious, and by that definition Miller is the closest in our side to being a 'legend'.

For a start has any other player ever signed for Rangers 3 times? That alone surely affords him 'legend' status and a place in trivia questions for years to come. Likewise in 50 years time when our grandchildren are looking at the quaintly named players from the turn of the 21st century the name 'Kenny Miller' will spring out at them. Not only did he sign for Rangers 3 times but he played for Celtic too, really? He is also the oldest ever Rangers player to score a hat-trick for the club, another one for the future trivia buffs to baffle their friends with.

He also played fairly successfully in England, scoring memorably at Old Trafford, as well as being the main point of attack for his country for a number of seasons and someone who signed off by scoring a cracker at Wembley in the oldest international fixture in the world. Miller has 68 full caps and captained his country, that alone will see him revered in the future as legendary.

He's also played abroad during a time that Scots players have rarely ventured further English League 1 Miller has played in both Turkey and the MSL in North America, plus his time at Cardiff City makes him one of the few players to have played for clubs in three UK countries.

Surely though our grandchildren will look at his return to our club whilst we languished in turmoil during the dark days of Ashley/Easdale and co as his greatest move? Not only did choose to return whilst we were at our lowest ebb, he survived the putsch taking place off the field, and the one on it too. It's clear Warburton rates him both for his on-pitch contribution but also for his influence off it. Miller has been signed by 3 different Rangers managers and played for five plus two caretaker managers, has any other Rangers player ever done that?

Is Kenny Miller one of the best players to don the light blue jersey? No, far from it. Has he achieved legendary status (and he's not finished with Rangers yet) during his career? I'd argue yes, he's probably the best known and, at times, most notorious Scottish player of his generation. He's created records and he's made big contributions.

I've no doubt history will judge Miller as legendary.

Sixteen years, bloody hell. Well done Frankie and all involved. Some of your writers are excellent, but you, and your team, create the environment that enables them to contribute in the first place. If the forum wasn't as well monitored as it is you wouldn't attract the good writers in the first place.

A big well done and more importantly a big thank you to everyone who makes Gersnet happen.

Of course,i totally agree with what you say.My point is this-----are there any tradesmen types to vote for------you would have to say NO there isnt----why??

The candidates really dont represent a broad spectrum---------why??

Not that it matters but theres an ex-squaddie, a corner-shop-keeper, a student, a publican, a printer and a guy who started off as an apprentice fitter in a shipyard. As 'boards' go it's a broader selection than most I've seen.

Genuine laugh-out-loud moments there, well played.

It's odd the sports that attract good writing, cricket as you mentioned, cycling and boxing also spring to mind. Perhaps because football is ubiquitous and matches take place so often that genuine thinking about it is replaced with straightforward reporting. One of the best pieces of football writing is Tony Cascarino's biography (seriously). It was written by an ex-professional cyclist interestingly enough. Very few write better on Rangers than Andy.

Anyway, loving the idea of Gersnet radio.

I'm not saying that women should be flattered - and I think we should be civilised enough these days for it not to happen. But it's a fallacy to say it's all men and framing it as some kind of heinous sexual assault for something 30 years ago and pointing the finger at Rangers fans is totally out of proportion.

 

A pretty apt analogy for it, is what’s good for the goose is good for the gander, but there is a problem here where heterosexuals only see offences from the other gender and so negatively generalise that gender.

 

You put a few men into a huge crowd of women and they will likely suffer a few minor bits of attention that could be an annoyance. I’m not saying it’s right, I’m just saying it’s "people" at fault rather than blaming one specific gender as “the common denominator”.

 

All I’m saying is it happens to men also but pointed out that there is less offence taken and so less complaint, so much so it’s dismissed as nothing or laughable. That isn’t a very balanced viewpoint and unhelpful in moving society on.

 

 

That's poor behaviour, but as I said, this could easily happen if the tables were turned. Maybe less likely, but most of us have been there and laughed it off.

No Calscot I'm not with you at all on this. Tell me, if you, as a man, were in a large crowd of other men and they started groping and touching you, how quickly would you laugh that off? The reality is Calscot that when these acts are carried out by men they carry an implicit threat of violence too. That's why the power dynamic is important in these scenarios. You probably could laugh off over amorous female attention because you know the likelihood of them turning violent or raping you is extremely low. However, that's not the case when the perpetrator is male.

Caroline Leckie, is not saying all men are violent or rapists, simply that when large crowds of men choose to harass a female it's a very unpleasant experience. Far more unpleasant than the opposite scenario.

I agree with that, and also that they can be of either gender.

Yes but in far fewer numbers and they are considerably less likely to hospitalise you if the mood takes them.

As for Carolyn Leckie I remain one of the few people to have read It's Rangers For Me? the book she wrote a chapter for.

I've said before, usually to no avail, but it's a good book and worth reading. One of the chapters in it is arguably one of the most powerful things ever written about being a Rangers supporter.

Anyway Carolyn Leckie didn't write that chapter, however the chapter she did write was actually quite good. She was a regular attender at matches, mainly with her brother. She came from a Gorbals family who were all in the Orange Order, her father being quite prominent in it locally. It was interesting that she wrote that her Socialism was created by her Orange background. For her it had been about community and family and she saw socialism that way too.

She explained that as she got older she drifted away from football and 'Orangism' eventually rejecting both, but that her family were still heavily involved. She made a good point about not being embarrassed about her background despite many people she met thinking she would be.

As for her article I've no idea why people are getting upset about it. It happened a long time ago, she didn't claim it happened last week. What's the problem?

I think you have to be a quite unattractive guy to never had you bum pinched by a woman. Can't see how it's a male only thing.

 

One of the differences is that men are flattered and see it as trivial rather than be disproportionately offended.

 

I also see a lot more misandry these days than misogyny - try finding some kind of club that doesn't allow women, it's very difficult. Try finding one that doesn't allow men - they are everywhere.

C'mon Calscot, the power dynamic between men and women, even in supposedly enlightened societies like ours, makes that comparison a fallacy. You must be able to see that? I'm sure you're not suggesting that a women should be flattered when a man 'pinches her bum' but it kinda reads that way.

A friend of mine attended a Rangers game with his girlfriend, this was back in the 90s. Whilst he was getting something to eat a crowd of young, male bluenoses started to chat to his girlfriend in Copland Road, just past the Subway. When she decided not to join in with their 'banter' or respond to their increasingly lurid comments they started to insult her, 'stuck up bitch' that type of thing. When my friend returned and realised what was happening they guys actually apologised, but to him, not her. One of them actually said, and I quote, "sorry mate, we'd never have said anything to her if we'd known she was with you"!

There are dickheads in our society, some of them support Rangers.

I'm surprised at your annoyance here TB, you're really looking for the cloud on this silver lining.

Holt and McKay aren't just important players for us they're assets, their form won't have gone unnoticed elsewhere. Securing them on better contracts is a win-win as far as I'm concerned. Holt hasn't settled at any club and McKay looked like he was on his way out of the club before Warburton arrived, so this gives both some stability and confirms to them they are wanted and important something that's important to any person. It also makes it harder for another club to unsettle them.

I'd also guess that seeing as Halliday's career wasn't going anywhere in the summer he probably signed with the gentleman's agreement that if things go well his contract will be looked at. I'm pleased it has been.

As for the leak, bear in mind how many people would be involved in this; agents, the players themselves, people at the club plus I imagine most of the other players knew about it as did the friends and family of the players, it's probably been an open secret for sometime.

Was going to say I haven't shopped there for 18 years since they refused to honour some Sport Division gift vouchers after taking them over in 1998 - but looking it up, that was JJB - sorry JD. I keep getting them mixed up for obvious reasons.

 

That means I can start shopping there now... I'm ashamed to say I've given MA a fair bit of my coin before his connection with Rangers and before I knew about their working practices.

 

But as an off topic aside - gift vouchers are a really poor present, you may be able (if you're lucky) to spend them in say 200 shops around the country but with this thing called "cash" you can spend it in ANY shop and it will always be honoured - and at least you can definitely find something to spend it on...

I was given vouchers for Greaves about a decade ago, they accepted them from me in June of last year. Greaves is a proper sports shop though.

I read this article a few days ago. It's about FC United of Manchester but it feels relevant to this thread. http://www.afinelung.com/?p=7297

It strikes me as profoundly sad that someone would feel there is a conflict of interest between the board of the club and of Rangers First. It's a little dispiriting.

If we had appointed any decent board we'd be playing in the SP.

 

As for the manager, I think you're wrong. No decent manager would have finished last season without resigning - and the mananger with the best track record in the country had everything there for promotion and he failed (not McCoist) - if it were that simple, promotion would have been simple for him.

 

I think the blind distaste of McCoist clouds people's memory of the full circumstances of the last few seasons and it should be remembered that while there is a slim chance we could have been promoted one season earlier with a better manager, it could more likely have been at the expense of a multitude of previous trophies.

One day I'm going to write about how McCoist is the most important manager in Rangers history. One day soon.

Surely we're not hawking Hardie around if he just signed a new contract? If Waghorn gets injured we're short of options up-front, surely Hardie will feature before the season is out?

Not Falkirk per se but I do rate Peter Houston very highly as a coach and we should have had Mark Kerr when he was at Dundee Utd if not Aberdeen. Couldn't believe QoS let him go to Falkirk. He ran the game against us when they won 2-0 in December 2014.

Got to say I'm in entire agreement with this. Falkirk are having another excellent season with a fraction of the resources Hibs or ourselves have. Also, when you see the shambles Dundee Utd have become you realise just how good a job Houston was doing there. He clearly knows how to develop young players.

Lena Martell, REM, The Monkees and Neil Diamond, that's four musical references not ever seen in the same article before, well played.

I love that you're getting pulled for your 'SNP Stasi' line, that's hysterical. I'm tweeting a link to The Federal Commissioner of the SNP Records, Renfrewshire Branch. You, my friend, have just become Zersetzung!

I know Douglas Rae, he's a decent man. I've no idea if this incident happened or not, and neither does he, he's going by what a couple of supporters have told him. A couple of members of his family were in the away end during the match though.

There's a misconception as to what the 'winter break' is actually for. Forget about the weather, it's not connected to that, the word 'winter' is misleading in this. The winter break is designed to give players, and so teams, a 'break' allowing them to recharge their batteries for the second half of the season. Popular belief has it that most Scottish footballers are unfit, heavy drinking, junk food gobbling feckless morons pissing their careers away. The reality is somewhat different, most are actually fairly diligent when it comes to fitness and conditioning and almost all professional players during the season play with injuries. The winter break is supposed to help players get over these injuries, either through a complete break or through intensive physio, a small op etc.

There is a school of thought that says England, and sides with the majority of their players in the English league, perform poorer at World Cups and Euros because of the lack of a winter break. The intensity and physicality of the football in England leaves players in poor condition by the end of the season.

Anyway, put me in the 'League Cup revamp is a further indication that those running the game don't have a clue what they're doing' camp.

I'd agree with you but I'm sure Richie and Al will be the first to admit they don't get everything right either and in this case I think their sources were wrong.

 

On Tuesday night MW was very clear about staying at Rangers - yet the coverage continued, suggesting he wasn't being truthful or worse. This continues today and I'm sure MW will have noted this ahead of future press calls.

Was he very clear though? I felt all along he could have made the story go away in a second by unequivocally stating 'I've no interest in going to Fulham or any other club at this time and won't be leaving Rangers in the foreseeable future'. Had he said that the story dies, but he didn't, he was ambiguous enough to allow the story to run for another day until he eventually did make a very clear statement.

For the record I don't have any problem with Warburton using the apparent (and I believe Fulham are/were interested in feeling Warburton out) interest from Fulham to remind everyone he has other admirers. I have no problem with Fulham making advances on our manager and I've no problem with our board intimating they'd improve his package rather than see him leave.

Warburton is clearly an intelligent man but I wonder if having not spent his entire working life in football means he sometimes misses the nuances of the professional sport, particularly the media side of it. I'm all for holding the media to account but there was a 'story' here and I don't feel their 'reporting' on it was unfair. By complaining about it we run the risk of being seen to complain about 'everything' and that could lead to us being ignored on the genuinely important things.

Being willing to do something to keep a man who has transformed the team? Gosh, imagine that.

 

They may have been asked 'If someone came for MW would you offer increased contract?' to which the answer is clearly yes. Doesn't mean they HAVE offered it, just that they would if needed.

I agree, but it's still a story, no? When Dundee Utd were looking for a manager John Hughes was being discussed openly in the media as their favourite despite his contract with ICT and him answering all questions about it with the 'I'm the ICT manager and don't want to discuss another club, thanks' type of line. Football is an industry that runs on whispers, inside knowledge and 'say one thing but mean another'.