Gaffer

Although I have no interest in watching women's football, I do appreciate its importance in attracting more women into football, and that can only be a good thing for Rangers. I've seen how influential this can be in other parts of the world and I'm delighted we are taking strides in this direction too.

Thanks for that @Bluedell That all looks ideal, but I'm assuming version 2 includes the pie and bovril holders.

I don't actually know what safe standing means. I understood it to be just rows of barriers but no seats, meaning that everyone would still be allocated their own standing space. Is that correct? I can understand the concerns regarding this, especially from those of us that experienced those moments of surge when we scored. That was frightening on some occasions and it would definitely not be a situation I'd feel comfortable taking a youngster into. Thankfully those days are in the past and I'd like to think the modern approach would prevent that. If the surge is prevented by decent barriers (notwithstanding @JohnMc's understandable concerns about ongoing maintenance and stewarding), and there were allocated standing places, I'm all for this. However, I can't understand how this can work in just part of a stand. If you have a section of people standing, you cannot see past them and that would spoil it for those in seats. The only way to deal with it is have standing rows at the very back, or have an entire stand (or at least and front or rear part of the stand) allocated for the safe standing areas. As I started off, I don't know what is meant by safe standing, but I personally prefer to stand at matches. If possible though, can someone suggest to Rangers that they provide a drinks and pie holder into the barrier system. I always hated having to ask my father to hold them for me, or put them on the ground, while I read my programme. Both of these options were filled with risk I'd rather we could avoid.

We have been poor today for the majority of the game. Aberdeen are more up for this than I've seen them in any other game. The referee is clearly refereeing us to a different standard. If Morelos has committed as many fouls as Ball, he would have had 4 red cards by now. Ball has yet to be booked. A draw would be a fair result, but we really need to sort this attitude out. We don't appear to be able to string more than 3 or 4 performances together. It's not an issue of skill. It's all about mental attitude and we don't have the mentality of winners yet.

How many fouls does Ball need to commit before he gets booked. I make that 11 now. When does it become persistent?

I never know if Gonzo believes it, or just says a lot of it for effect. Either way, just ignore it. As for th statement, I'm happy we are doing this as a club. The directors, management, staff, players, and the majority of the support are embarrassed by the behaviour of a mintority of our fans, and I think it will take a further generation or two before it's eliminated.

I'm a member of Club 1872 and did so because I just wanted to do something (anything) to reduce the risk of us going through another period like we did recently. I'd have continued to be a member even though I wasn't convinced about buying shares, seats on the board, etc. Now however, I'm more committed than ever. I like the role they are performing on our behalf. Some of the statements are excellent, focussed, and hard hitting. Well done! I really hope that these are the sort of things we all agree on, rally around, and support. Surely this will convince more of us to support the Club 1872 and become members. The more members and funding we have, the more opportunities and likelihood to make a difference. WATP.

There is not a single person who would defend the obvious hypocrisy (and in my opinion, corruption) exhibited by these three, however what I remain unconvinced about is that the SNP as a party cares one iota about football, Rangers, Celtic, or any other club. These three attention seekers are clearly pro Celtic and definitely anti Rangers, but I don't think it does our cause any good when we divide our own support with these party politics. I have however gone down this route before and it gets us nowhere. I will however take the opportunity once again to say that the SNP does itself no favours by failing to address this matter with two of its members who are damaging the image of their party. By failing to address it, it does turn away potential voters. I know a few Rangers fans who voted SNP and who will never vote that way again. This is 100% as a result of the behaviours of Dornan and Humza. It is either because the party leaders agree (which I doubt), or because they are unaware of the effect they're having. Either way, it's a poor way to run a party, and in my opinion demonstrates weak leadership.

I suppose it's symptomatic of our recent history that we feel the need to explain something like this. In any other business this would just be normal and far from newsworthy. The directors should be using credit lines like this, rather than funding end of season cash flow challenges from their own investments. That would be crazy. As 917 said, we should always be vigilant to how it's used because that can be an indicator, but if it's agreed or extended it's just smart business.

So, if they attend the march on 16th, should I expect them (and you) to cover their face? If so, I (and many others) will not go. I cannot be associated with that. If that happens, we will not gather the wider support we need and that's going to be damaging. I am against the intrusion of privacy also, and hate the CCTV big brother state, but I will not bring my club into disrepute by acting in a sinister manner, just because the police state does.

Sorry, but that's not true. I saw the last march and there were dozens from that one alone. This isn't about safe standing. It's about a group of supporters being unable to convince the club of their net value, and I agree with the club. I wouldn't agree to their wishes, and in fact wouldn't even consider it unless they clean up their image. It has a much wider detrimental effect. Many supporters like me don't know the difference between the Vanguard or Union bears (or other supporters groups), and don't really care normally. However, I was then initially put off the BBC demonstration for fear of being associated with that behaviour. If they really expect to get visits from the police after a peaceful protest, can I expect them to be in the same hoodies and balaclavas on the 16th March? If so, they ruin it for the VB and the rest of us. It's completely unnecessary. If they want to be Ultras, then fine, but if they're not going to protect the image of the club (and are not aware enough to realise it), why should the club do this? p.s. I would be in favour of a standing area, but for me (and I suspect the club), that's not the issue here.

I have to disagree with this mate. They are not the same, and I won't respect them when I see them on marches with balaclavas. It is sinister and it brings the club into disrepute. That's something that should be challenged, not respected.

Notwithstanding the obvious error in the petition, I've also signed it. I've just been sent a tweet showing Celtic fans singing about killing Brendan Roges with a bullet from the IRA and yet not a single mention of this from Dornan or Humza. Both of them are corrupt hypocrites who will jump up and down because Steve Clarke received some abuse, and yet not a peep about Boyd, Morelos or Rogers. Why? We know the answer to that, and it's a national disgrace.

I've never attended a demonstration for anything else but this is something I'm bothered enough about to act upon. What concerns me is that I'm seen with people in balaclavas, or banners that have messages about other stuff. I'm just looking to you guys for insights based on your experience. If I have confidence that this is a focused and peaceful demo, I'll go. Anyone know if this is likely?

This is obviously a great indicator of our growing financial strength and we should be really pleased. However, as much as it's so positive, it just shows how impactful the past few years have been and that's frustrating. We have a long way to go because of the previous regimes at the club, in conjunction with the treatment we received wrongly from our 'fellow' league members. We must never forget that and take opportunities in the future to get revenge.

It puts a lot of things in perspective when a loss like this is suffered. Condolences to you and the family Graham.

I've read a number of opinions on here, some suggesting it was the tactics, others suggesting it was player selection, etc. However, for me it was simpler than that. We did not approach the game last night properly. Killie are known to be a team that works extremely hard, and battles for every ball, so why did we appear to be surprised at that? The players did not appear to think that they needed to move as much, make the runs, be quick in moving the ball, or pass sharply. This is an attitude issue, not a tactical or technical one. This is the problem we've suffered from a few times this season and I don't know what the answer is. Our players need to get into the right frame of mind before these games and to me they are clearly not. This demonstrates to me that we lack the right mentality to win the league. Each time we've gone top, we have relaxed (as if this was job done). We need the players to change this attitude quickly. We currently have a winning mentality that enables the team to win games, but it takes a different mentality to win championships, and clearly we don't have it. We don't appear to have a focus on the goal of winning the league and I'm wondering if the team lacks that confidence in itself. I'd have thought that McGregor and Davis could influence that, but it's maybe not enough.

I don't normally do this, but I've had to switch it off. I can't believe what I'm watching in the second half. I just haven't seen us compete nearly hard enough. Everyone in the team should know by now that we have to work hard to beat Killie, but they're much more up for this than we are. We are playing this as if it's a friendly. Killie are playing as if they need to win it. That's the difference, and after the enthusiasm surrounding the club recently, this is a bitter blow, and for this bear it's just too tough to watch now.

He certainly wasn't happy with BB yesterday but my feeling about this press conference is that he just didn't like that particular journo. His whole mood changed as soon as he was directed to that particular guy asking the questions. Anyone know who he was or if there's any substance to this? Gerrard's mood changed again when asked another question by the same guy (about Pena).

Another great read. The authors are correct ..... there is no need to read the mindless nonsense from nowhere-even-close-to-being-in-the-know "professional journos" when our online community is so well informed. I also like that there is a good degree of sense and restraint applied to make sure that our targets aren't completely exposed to our competition. The club needs to keep its business relatively secretive, but equally it's useful allowing some of the news to creep out. It keeps us going back to reliable sources online rather than the usual clowns in the MSM. I like that we are able to quickly dismiss reports linking us with so many players. That helps manage our expectations, and it also helps accelerate the demise of our detractors at the BBC, BTsport, Daily rags, etc. Keep up the great work guys!!!! We need to continue to spread the word about Gersnet, 4LHAD, etc to our fellow bears because everyone needs to know where to find out the real Rangers news.

I'm gutted the game is off. There are loads of reasons why the postponement is a good thing for us, but I'd still been looking forward to seeing us play.

The game is going ahead based on current conditions so unless things change a lot, we will be able to watch Defoe score this evening.

I agree. I'd hate the thought of us helping them in any way John. I was initially all for us building bridges with all clubs when we returned to the premier league, but all of these clubs (or at least most of them) just continually take shots at us. So, burn the bridges I say. Other than St. Johnstone and Kilmarnock (who appeared to abstain from attempts to continually hurt our club), We should do nothing to cooperate with them unless there was a massive benefit to us. A move to United would not help Rossiter in my opinion so I'd rather he went anywhere else. The news about JW remaining with us on loan is welcome news. He's a young guy with plenty of areas to improve, but he's a warrior and I like that about him. We need players that are willing to get stuck in because we are in a fight in every game we play.

Thanks for this Pete. I had never appreciated that there was an earlier disaster in 1902. This is an excellent documentary, but very upsetting too. One thing that sticks in my mind from watching it is the point they make about adversity. These disasters, and the recent issues faced by our club and its supporters just make us stronger, or at least it should. The faces of those remembering what happened are quite haunting.

If it was you finally coming out of the closet and declaring your undying love for KT .... I think someone already leaked that news a while ago mate. As for Stevie's understandable anger, I find that watching the last old firm game's highlights helps a lot with anger issues.