Walterbear

8-1 and the Tims count mcgrory’s solitary goal in the octothrashing in his official record so that’s good enough for me.

Personal John. Scotland is a small place. Need to leave it at that I’m afraid so won’t comment further. I also know 2 serious attempts were made at resolution from same person thru an ex director at the club but the problem now is what was a principled journalistic warning shot across the bow has been seized upon by lower order more visible people at BBC (the sort referred to in the podcast) who have had an agenda against Rangers pre EBT and post EBT and it has snowballed into something that I doubt Mackinnon can/will resolve. There is no shortage of folk there who quite frankly think we are ‘Orange barstewards’. My personal view is ‘Hell mend them’ but then I’m not a licence paying pensioner or digitally excluded person who only has the radio and council telly. Any resolution that is sought must insist not only on the BBC Trust ruling being respected but the BBC to show more fair minded journalism and to employ more fair minded pundits. The rot is set deep. We know who the haters are and we know they are being led. Only external resolution and a change in culture will fix this to any degree of normality and any concession from BBC Scotland will be superficial Put it this way , even when we get 55, unless peace is made the jibes from the low order pundits will not stop. They may intensify and the narrative from the likes of Miller , Gordon and Spence are only going to go along the lines of ‘they won this one without EBTs’, ‘is this Rangers first league title’, ‘look at Rangers budget’ , ‘where did they get the money’, ‘FFP’ etc. Without a major change they will continue to marginalise us in all the variety of ways that are well documented even down to childish stuff like the Morelos ‘offside’ goal at Killie. For example my guess is there is a lot of support in the BBC for the stance of Chairman Reid (and it must have been him) in wanting Rangers to be offered no assistance. Any other country and that would be much bigger news and the broadcaster would run at least one major show on the self harm in Scottish football and the lack of sportsmanship and interest in the development of our game. They would question the sporting integrity of that club from Japan tours to their attempt to influence officials to be prejudiced. Throw in the referees strike and it becomes a rancid putrid stew of sporting disintegrity involving Celtic. A club like no other that’s for sure. I haven’t looked at BBC sport today but I’ll guess the chairman of Celtic wanting to damage Rangers chances in Europe out of pure hatred does not get a mention of any real note. Imagine the roles were reversed. I don’t think they are capable of balance and that’s why I would rather they were open with their bias and hatred and shown up for what they are.

Apart from one thing John. The decision was made at the top of the shop in the organisation in Scotland not by a department.

The distinctive thing about our kit is our socks. We should never play in any different colour socks no matter the top.

He’s a big player for us no doubt. I didn’t expect a goal threat from him. He is way above any of our 2nd tier rivals midfield. The test against the Tims is still to come but I am very confident he and Jack can deal with their midfield at Ibrox. We have an attacking midfield who can exploit their weaknesses so long as our defence is solid. Put them on the back foot and they are very beatable. Proven many times. We are acquiring the tools to do it.

Good podcast and thoughtful contributions from reasonable folk. Just a point on our rubbish PR. It’s not all the fault of the Scottish media, our club media or a plot against us by the Spanish Inquisition. A lot of decent folk support Rangers and we need to make our voices louder. we have a fair number of zoomers in our fan base who do harm us (we have a big support so it’s inevitable). Fan sites like this give folk a platform to have rational discussion and be passionate. Long may it continue and well done to Frankie. Apart from winning trophies and having good financial management the biggest part of our PR is our fan base. Here’s a simple suggestion to start and we can all do it tomorrow. If you see unacceptable stuff on social media for example (and there’s loads from Rangers fans and our enemies) go on there and call it out and tell folk it does not represent your club or you.

Many in Scotland hate us Rab. Labour , Tory, SNP, liberal, and the common denominator is they support other football teams. I know a lot more labour unionists who hate Rangers than I do SNP folk who hate Rangers. They often masquerade as Hibs, Celtic, Aberdeen, Raith, Hearts, Spartans, DUFC fans etc etc. I want the Rangers fan base to expand and the danger in telling people how to vote or not vote is we end up as an insular, negative, paranoid, curiosity. It’s hard to create positive PR around a club if we fall into ever decreasing circles of negativity and become embroiled in political identity. Im a Rangers fan and scoring goals and winning things is all that matters. Who I vote for or who anyone else votes for should only be their business. It looks like the Tories are going to create a Brexit disaster which has the potential to screw my life like Thatcherism they imposed on me. Labour took us into Iraq and sold our gold and pensions and deregulated the banks. They will all have to try harder than tell me they support Rangers to get my vote. Maybe Ill vote Green.

It is appropriate to have individuals from both main faiths on such a panel and also supporters of football clubs as the problem manifests itself around football. However the motivation and past actions of those who are on the panel needs to be considered, because some of those mentioned don’t appear to have credibility with a large part of society in terms of their ability to tackle the causes of sectarianism and contribute constructively to its eradication. In fact many will see them as actively contributing to distrust between communities. Not because of their political or football allegiance but because of language they use, pubs they associate themselves with and organisations such as Govan Emerald who they follow. I would imagine there is a role for Club 1872 here to raise concerns (I know everything falls on them) and to contact the standards committee or a sympathetic MSP as they are currently deciding on whether this new CPG gets approval with the proposed MSPs as the constituent members. They may need to collate info and act very quickly if they think appropriate. http://www.parliament.scot/S5_Standards/Meeting Papers/SPPAPublic_20180913.pdf http://www.parliament.scot/maps/102153.aspx

I didn’t express myself well gonzo. All I meant is I suspect the club were founded purely for football and sports reasons so people are entitled to support them for those reasons. They are also entitled to support Rangers because they were born close to the ground, because they like blue, because Ibrox was the first ground they visited, because their dad or big brother supported Rangers and for all sorts of non political reasons. They are also entitled to support Rangers because they can express political identity amongst many like minded people and watch their favourite sport at the same time. No one group or person who supports Rangers owns the identity of Rangers (obvious copyright issues excepted). Going back to your question unless someone can point out that the club was set up as an exclusive club for a particular theme other than sport then all are welcome imo. Because a significant number choose to take the club identity in one direction doesn’t invalidate the support of those who support Rangers for their own personal reasons and who may have different politics. They may think it makes those folk less of a supporter but I would challenge that for the reasons given. If the 4 lads had specified Rangers can only exist in a specific political or idealogical context then that would have been the single biggest threat to the existence of the club as politics, identity and ideologies change through time. The reason I referred to the founders rationale is its clear some who support Rangers on here and have leanings towards independence feel as if they are being valued as less than Rangers fans. If I have picked that up wrong apologies.

I defer to your greater experience soulsinuc and Hampden was a shocker I agree and I can sense fans are treated like cattle and second rate citizens. From reading about it we get treated badly abroad as well so the only comparator in Scotland due to scale would be the Tims. I don’t know if we get treated differently to them which if true would support claims of bias. I haven’t travelled much tbh. Did a bit round Scottish grounds in the 70/80s when we basically went where we wanted and drank in any pub we fancied (which saw the increase in Hibs and Aberdeen casuals). I can see it’s totally different now but I can’t comment on last ten years.

What I don’t get about any of this debate and the attutude of some Rangers fans to others is why anyone thinks they know what was going through the minds of the founding fathers. I bet they were just wanting a kick about and would have played with and against whoever. Seriously if the other 51,999 fans at Ibrox dont like or want me there because of what I look like or what my politics are then as far as Im concerned they can all feck off and do something else on a Saturday and I’ll watch Rangers on my own. So long as I don’t have to put up with BO then you’re welcome to sit next to me so long as you support the Rangers.

Funnily enough that’s the thing that annoyed me most about this. We already use the car park for parking cars surprise surprise and what we are asking for is an opportunity to expand. If any other business asks for land to be rented to expand there services do they just say ‘use what you’ve already got!’ and not bother going through a reasonably transparent discourse. It was dismissive and arrogant, smacks of bias and reflects badly on her skill set. If I was trying to get one over on someone I’d at least use a bit of skill. This was basically an ‘FU’.

I don’t think the cops are politicised to that level Soul I just think when Rangers are involved they think crowd control as opposed to crowd management. Not sure if that’s coz of our history of volatility such as Manchester, the demographics, match day logistics, scale etc.

Quite a few Rangers fans have a dim view of catholic doctrine but we’ve had plenty of catholic players and a catholic manager and a proportion of catholic or half catholic fans. The question for true Rangers fans might be; which is bigger a) your religion b) your politics c) your nationality d) your club. If you think you cannot support Rangers unconditionally because of a/b/c are you a true Rangers fan? If the UK ceased to incorporate Scotland because England wanted independence would folk support Rangers less? Would Rangers become the quintessential British but non-English club? People who support independence may be perfectly happy with supporting a club with a British identity in the same way British kids support Barcelona with a Catalan identity. The reality is that no independence supporting Rangers fan is actively fighting against Rangers, it’s just that British ‘nationalist’ fans don’t like independence Rangers fans because they think they are a threat to their existential well being. You could argue that football fans who only care about the team winning and let nothing else detract from that, are the purest form of fan. I wonder if sitting next to an independence supporting Rangers fan at Ibrox makes the Unionist fan feel less of a Rangers fan and that is the real problem. In other words they are seen as a threat to the club when there is no rationale for that. If they don’t like them just because they have different politics then that has nothing to do with football. Keep politics out if football imo. The Tims can’t do that and they look ridiculous and sound thick to me.

...forgot to mention the silence as our players were pelted with coins. Just see the reaction if the reverse happens at Ibrox. Btw. Our players should refuse to take corners if that is happening. The previous game our player asked for help from the ref who ignored him, as did the commentator and the BBC. It has become acceptable for fans to physically assault Rangers players at Porkheid, Fir Park and Hampden.

Overtures have been made from the BBC to Rangers about 18 months ago but no solution was found. It may be my imagination but since then the veto of Rangers has extended way beyond not sending people to games. They put us on sufferance to the absolute margins of football news, unless it’s Morelos or McGregor kicking someone. Their boycott has intensified and become more bitter and is full on aggression. The reason is simple it is because we didn’t die and that has upset them. You can hear it in the tones of people like Willie Miller. I first noticed the extent of marginalisation when I tuned in to get the Marseille friendly score and it wasn’t mentioned as there were first round league cup group fixtures taking place. 50,000 fans attended Ibrox on a summers day. You wouldn’t have known there was a game at all listening to BBC football coverage that day. Recently Tom English (who funnily enough I normally don’t mind too much) when answering a tweet asking him why he didn’t report positive things about Rangers responded that there hasn’t been much good news since 2012. I can see where he’s coming from and I think it has been pretty sh*t too but the converse worth noting if you are being fair is a massive positive that any other country’s national broadcaster would be proud, of which is world record 4th tier crowds, sell outs for 5 years in lower divisions, ploughing money into small clubs around the country, going from Brechin to the EL league stages in 6 years. He couldn’t think like that because his brain appears to have been rewired to suit the anti-Rangers agenda. In any other country it is a negative story but with a massive positive outcome, but in Scotland it isn’t because in truth they didn’t want it to happen. The BBC had been quite content to tell us Scottish football is better and more competitive without Rangers despite the fact our UEFA coefficient has plummeted, Celtic have been given a walkover for 5 years and Dick’s ‘2nd best in the country’ Aberdeen have won one league cup in 60+ attempts at domestic trophies over 20 years, and Celtic are going for a treble treble. To build bridges the BBC boycott now requires more than a few reporters turning up for games. It requires a cultural change where impartiality is the key and that isn’t going to happen with the likes of Dick Gordon at the helm of Sportsound. When Rangers start to win things - and we will - the BBC will be the ones who suffer and they may well rue the day they beat us when we were down.

I’ve felt a lot of these things but so long as it’s safe to do so I’m of an age where I’m not going to hide from anyone. If folk have problems with me being a Rangers supporter without knowing me then feck them.

And the answer required a bit of self examination as well as critique of others.

I started ‘supporting’ Rangers when I was a toddler. I didn’t have a political view at that age and 50 years later politics will never alter my feelings about what football team I support. Noone can tell you you are not a Rangers supporter. If other people don’t want to accept you for political reasons then ask them if Scotland became an independent country would they stop supporting Rangers? I’d put the fruit loop element of nationalists who assume you are a sectarian bigot because you support Rangers in the same camp as someone who has no idea about who you are and where you come from in life telling you you’re not a Rangers supporter. I wouldn’t let either group in my house tbh.

Technically you are correct Darther but I disagree politically. If anyone wants my vote they have to prove to me they are above board. So if they do what Aitken was trying to do (bully Rangers to avoid scrutiny) that will affect our perception and vote. Now clearly if 1872 are shown to be completely wrong then it is another matter but if the council are found to have technically behaved correctly but there is still a suspicion of cloak and daggers (for example if they don’t clearly explain the decision the 3 of them and head of licencing made and offer some more detail of the Ibrox and Cessnock June CC meeting which justifies their position) they will not come out of it well politically, at least not with Rangers supporters and possibly not with some others. I don believe the CC meeting is a red herring. I think it is part of the story. If the councillors did not have the competency to act outside the licensing board (and you have to expect 1872 have done their homework) it is damaging to Aitken & co, but if a reconvened licence Boad meeting then simply refers to a “show of hands” from Ibrox & Cessnock in June that will not satisfy me as I will want to know what the level of discussion was, how man folk were there, what was the evidence Dornan presented etc. In all of that, from a political perspective GCC have to prove they are acting impeccably and not just following a technical process which has potential been hijacked or abused. Once trust has gone it’s gone.

Technically you are correct Darther but I disagree politically. If anyone wants my vote they have to prove to me they are above board. So if they do what Aitken was trying to do (bully Rangers to avoid scrutiny) that will affect our perception and vote. Now clearly if 1872 are shown to be completely wrong then it is another matter but if the council are found to have technically behaved correctly but there is still a suspicion of cloak and daggers (for example if they don’t clearly explain the decision the 3 of them and head of licencing made and offer some more detail of the Ibrox and Cessnock June CC meeting which justifies their position) they will not come out of it well politically, at least not with Rangers supporters and possibly not with some others. I don believe the CC meeting is a red herring. I think it is part of the story. If the councillors did not have the competency to act outside the licensing board (and you have to expect 1872 have done their homework) it is damaging to Aitken & co, but if a reconvened licence Boad meeting then simply refers to a “show of hands” from Ibrox & Cessnock in June that will not satisfy me as I will want to know what the level of discussion was, how man folk were there, what was the evidence Dornan presented etc. In all of that, from a political perspective GCC have to prove they are acting impeccably and not just following a technical process which has potential been hijacked or abused. Once trust has gone it’s gone.

Quite a few Rangers fans I know do not belong to the SNP but they do want a looser relationship with a Westminster govt (of whatever colour) because they believe that Scotland has been let down by Labour and Tory on more serious issues than football. The SNP seems the only vehicle to get more control. The behaviour of some within the SNP needs exsmined however as it is clear the trust has gone from a large number of people in this example. I dont think for one minute Labour running Glasgow will see pro Rangers or even handed behaviour (just look at the land favours they gave Celtic) but if any politician of any colour is harming my club for reasons of bias I want them exposed. If the SNP politicise the Rangers support in Glasgow against them I suspect they will pay a heavy price. That doesn’t mean they should be seen to be bullied by Rangers but it does mean they need to respond in a far more measured way than Aitken and they need to demonstrate no bias has been applied by McDonald and Dornan in the fan zone situation. What they don’t seem to understand is that the burden of proof is on them to demonstrate fairness, it’s not on us to demonstrate bias - we vote them in or out depending on our perception and nothing more.

Celtic could have won by 3 but they didn’t. The ball could have gone in instead of hitting the woodwork. You don’t get points or goals for hitting the woodwork or we would have KOd Niederkorn. We had teenage loans, new signings who have never seen anything like that atmosphere and hatred at football and our team has been together for 13 games versus their 150. If we had played out our skins and got beat 1-0 we would still have been 4 points behind. Objective 1 of getting to the EL is what we all wanted and what we all thought was beyond us in May before Gerrard arrived. There is no question Gerrard would have wanted to risk the feel good factor which is why I think we were negative - possibly excessively so but UFA was a big drain but don’t expect the manager to admit that as it sets the wrong tone for all. EL should provide finances and credibility to further strengthen the squad. Beating Celtic and getting KOd from EL would not. Guys like Ejaria and Kent and the defence were immense in Russia and that must have taken its toll. Celtic are the ones who had the chance to really demoralise us and imo they didn’t take it and as Nicholas said they will find us harder next time. We need one win against them and probably a bit more quality in the middle to reverse their dominance and give us a real step change because they undoubtedly have a massive psychological advantage at the moment and believe in their superiority which has built up over the ‘banter years’. December will be a far more important assessment of where we are against them. I still expect them to win the league this year but they might find it a strain and then next year again We were very unfortunate to lose points in Aberdeen and against Motherwell we were asked questions the manager must find an answer to but short of signing a few players from Hull KR I’d rather the manager and the team worked out how to play round and through teams like them - much as Celtic do. Again I’d be looking at the next round of matches to assess progress in games like that. There is no doubt we have to face teams like Motherwell physically but we have to also put them on the back foot and that achievable with the squad we have. Winning the next few games and learning from EL quality matches will close the gap on the scum. Beat them in December and they may wobble. The international break has also come at a very good time for us in terms of the players and management taking stock because in Abetdeen, Motherwell and Celtic (and St M sitting in) we have more or less seen the spectrum of styles we are likely to encounter in this league.

Coulibally, Ejaria have both been very good for me. Kent has been reasonable but wouldn’t have played him at Parkhead. Sadiq hasn’t had a game other than a few mins v St M.

Uk and Denmark don’t use Euro Rab.