DMAA

7 minutes ago, Bill said:

Buster raises a valid point above about developing future generations of Rangers fans

Well that's what it's all about, that's why it's so damaging. A football club needs coverage. Why do you think so many kids primarily support English clubs these days? Because they're watching their games! They don't miss Match of the Day. When I was young I supported Inter Milan on the side because I would watch Football Italia with James Richardson on Saturday mornings. You can't underestimate the importance of having coverage of your games. And that applies to the hundreds of thousands of lukewarm fans out there too, it's not just about recruiting new fans.

7 minutes ago, Bill said:

If I understand you, you want to have BBC coverage but accept that it will be dripping with anti-Rangers sentiment

Surely nobody is alleging that literally all their coverage of us is "dripping with anti-Rangers sentiment"? I've listened to who knows how many Rangers games over the radio over the years and have very rarely had an issue with any of it. After all 99% of it is live coverage of facts with no opinion.

It's not true that every single BBC employee is anti-Rangers. I'm pretty sure most Celtic fans would allege Chick Young is anti-Celtic.

5 minutes ago, trublusince1982 said:

Only if the material as in hosting where you get it from hasn't paid licencing fees. As rangers have then it's not applicable. You paid for the product you are only breaching the usage agreement. Nothing to do with piracy unless you sell access or use it to create material gain

5 minutes ago, Frankie said:

It's obviously a grey area and the laws are changing fairly regularly with regard to such stuff (usually they're always playing catch-up).

 

As such, I'd recommend people be wary but, with specific regard to RTV, I don't think people have anything to worry about.

Thanks, that clears things up. It's difficult for a layman to know where the red line is with digital stuff and I didn't want to get caught on the wrong side of the law because of football.

6 minutes ago, Bill said:

Do you honestly think BBC discrimination against Rangers only started with us withdrawing privileges from Chris McLaughlin ... or that it would stop if we returned those privileges? If you do then I truly feel sorry for your blindness.

I addressed that in my first reply to you. It's a change in coverage I want to see. You can't change their attitude. But this stand-off isn't the most productive way to address the problem and another method needs to tried, including regular and rational exposing of bias.

8 minutes ago, trublusince1982 said:

When you say not comfortable using VPN what do you mean exactly?

 

6 minutes ago, Frankie said:

Using a VPN is fine in this context.  Whilst RTV don't actively encourage it, they don't stop it either.

4 minutes ago, Bill said:

Absolutely right. Anyone NOT using VPN is failing to protect themselves as they should.

I haven't researched it but my understanding is that using VPN to access services not available in the UK would be a form of piracy because you're breaching the rights that companies like BT and Sky have paid for.

8 minutes ago, Frankie said:

with social media etc, it's quite easy to follow games through that

This is fine but not nearly as convenient as listening to the radio and getting some stuff done at the same time. And obviously not the same experience either.

9 minutes ago, Frankie said:

Not sure if Radio Clyde also cover the games?

Unfortunately I've seen no alternative radio coverage. I've used other clubs coverage in the past when free.

10 minutes ago, Frankie said:

If you are able to get online then you can also access RangersTV via a paid subscription using a VPN.

I could do this as RTV is one subscription I do pay but I'm not totally comfortable using VPN.

17 minutes ago, Bill said:

Any Rangers fan who thinks extending press privileges to Chris McLaughlin will result in a change of attitude by the BBC is sadly deluded. 

Haven't said that, only a change in coverage.

17 minutes ago, Bill said:

The withdrawal of privileges from this one individual was proportionate and whole justified

The problem with the action is that it is in the category of press freedom and will always be met with the kind of response we've seen from the BBC. Trivia question, what is the one issue that has united Fox News and CNN in 2018? Trump's banning of a journalist from press conferences. Very similar situation really where there are complaints of ongoing unfair coverage and then a ban of 1 individual who was judged to have gone further than the rest. But for all journalists, press freedom is a fundamental right and they'll never back down on that.

18 minutes ago, Bill said:

Who needs them?

I subscribe to Rangers TV too but amn't comfortable using VPN so I miss the BBC's radio coverage.

19 minutes ago, Bill said:

What on Earth would persuade any Rangers supporter to place value on a predictably unacceptable "normalisation" of relations with the BBC?

Not every BBC journalist is the same and I think coverage of the Maribor game would have been an advert for the club, as big European games always were in the past. Relations are strained just now but I don't think you would see the negativity we saw the other night if you looked back on their coverage of the road to Manchester. Celtic and even Hibs now are benefiting from this free advertising now.

12 minutes ago, Frankie said:

We don't particularly need the BBC when we have several other outlets we can access.

If you can't afford all the tv subscriptions though I don't think there are alternatives. I've relied on the radio for this reason quite a lot over the years but lately I have no options because they don't cover our games.

10 minutes ago, Frankie said:

Attend the press conferences and use the facilities (e.g. wi-fi, telephone).

 

BBC are welcome to send other reporters along with McLaughlin who can access these but choose not to.

Thanks for the clarification. Just my opinion but I think it’s time to end it and start getting coverage of our games again. It’s so damaging to the club and can’t go on until his retirement. 

9 minutes ago, Frankie said:

McLaughlin isn't banned.  He, and Spiers for that matter, are welcome to report from Ibrox without the privileges afford to members of the press who are fairer in their coverage of our club.

Pardon my ignorance, what are the privileges? 

On 10/08/2018 at 13:01, 26th of foot said:

BBC Scotland again decided to base themselves at Easter Road

They aren’t going to come to Ibrox until we un-ban McLaughlin. Which it’s time to do. Fed up of getting no coverage of our games. It’s doing far more damage now than his bias could do. 

1 hour ago, Gaffer said:

It's to prevent a double punishment for a single incident.  Hopefully that clarifies the difference and the reasons for the decisions.

The double/triple punishment rule only applies if the player attempts to play the ball apparently, therefore wouldn't apply in Ball's case. However given Coulibaly was offside and interfered I'd be reluctant to complain too much.

I thought McCrorie's was probably a red, but consistency is the issue as I'm sure we've seen yellows given to our opponents in similar circumstances.

18 minutes ago, der Berliner said:

... maybe we watch him for another 10 games and see - on average - what he looks like.

That's all I said, maybe one for for us to watch

18 minutes ago, der Berliner said:

Same with our players. If we disect each game on its own  and have minute accounts on each player, we soon may tear our hairs out or have to be recalled from orbit. At the end of the day, it is results and performances over a number of games that count. Else we'd chop and change the starting eleven quicker than a Gatling gun revolves. I would assume SG and Co. know exactly what they do and if people don't click on the day, they will be subbed. I see, e.g. numerous people going bananas about Halliday being used or actually still being at the club, or indeed Hodson. Yet, if that chap called Steven Gerrard deems them good enough to be at Rangers still, or even play them, who are we to give them - at times - dogs abuse?

 

Of course, the above shall stop no-one from voicing their opinion.

I find it bizarre that you have a problem with a fan discussing how a few players did on the match thread on a fans forum. I wasn't overly critical of anyone and didn't say Gerrard should have done anything differently. Just a few observations on the game as I saw it.

1 minute ago, DMAA said:

Again I'm only 50 minutes in to the game, but couldn't but notice Kyle Magennis (no7) looks to have a lot of quality. He played a sublime through ball at one point which I think was possibly the best chance they had. 19 years old and was linked to Sunderland, could be one for Rangers to watch.

Can't imagine Stubbs would be difficult to deal with...?

Again I'm only 50 minutes in to the game, but couldn't but notice Kyle Magennis (no7) looks to have a lot of quality. He played a sublime through ball at one point which I think was possibly the best chance they had. 19 years old and was linked to Sunderland, could be one for Rangers to watch.

1 hour ago, der Berliner said:

so why hare after this or that player and a non-high-octane performance for a full match?

30 minutes ago, Bill said:

Why not focus on those who are and cut some slack for those who aren't? 

I can't tell if these comments are directed at my comment. I just gave my thoughts on how players got on, how the new player looks etc.

Quite incredible if it's true they've turned down Wallace plus cash. I think even a straight swap is pretty generous. Having said that, they've just brought in a young LB all the way from Australia who has made a good start so you can see why they might not be keen on bringing in Wallace with his wage in a position they have covered.

I like Lafferty but if he comes in then why did we sign Sadiq? Did Roma really expect him to be 3rd choice and not making the bench? 

I’ve been watching it through and only reached 50 minutes but my observations so far would be;

·         Barisic’s delivery from open play and dead ball is as good as expected and he’ll get plenty assists this season. He’s also strong defensively. However he’s not as tidy in possession as I thought, touch has been heavy and passes not as crisp as I expected (which led to Murphy’s miscontrol and then McCrorie’s foul).

·         Ejaria has actually won the ball back a number of times with good tackles and interceptions

·         Morelos is still an enigma. Sometimes his link up play is great, muscles off defenders with ease and brings in midfielders brilliantly. Other times he is so easy to dispossess, he turns straight into the defenders and gifts them possession. And even when he scores when through on goal with no pressure he still doesn’t strike it cleanly and it kind of bounces in. He really is not a natural finisher.

·         Flanagan is a fantastic addition to the squad but a weak link as a starter imo, will be a backup to Tav and Barisic

·         Coulibaly has been almost anonymous so far, not the superman he was against Maribor. Could be that we were on easy street so he just hadn’t got his adrenaline going. Could be tiredness or injury too. In possession he is a very limited player, he’s been asked to keep it very simple. That’s fine as long as he keeps doing the other side of the game.

·         Goldson has provided that aerial threat we’ve been lacking for so long. Goals from headers are vital imo for a Rangers team looking to win the league. There’s always going to be time’s that plan a and b don’t work and a header bails you out. Or it just gives you a cushion and lets you relax like today. Could have been a very different game without that second goal.

1 hour ago, Stevie - 4lads Blog said:

Always hesitant to put a timeframe on anything so can’t guard that

 

all signs point towards a successful conclusion of a deal yes ?

 

It’s rumour though lads until confirmed 

Always been a huge Wallace fan but neither party are going to back down so to get his very large wage off our hands would be a big boost for Gerrard as he looks to add the finishing touches to his team. 

32 minutes ago, Rousseau said:

We can't win the league by just having a strong first XI. Even a small injury and we're screwed. 

 

Having cover doesn't mean having the 3/4 options they have, it just means having a couple of options for each position.

 

My point was that we seem to be almost pushing players out the door of they're not first pick. We signed Barisic and people were saying Wallace, John and Tavernier were out the door (John was, in this case). It was Flanagan and Barisic as first picks, and the rest could go. I'm exaggerating, but that's how it feels, at least to me. 

It’s tough to get it right. I would still like to see about 4 senior players out and about 2 in. 

7 hours ago, Rousseau said:

Look at the cover they have, though?

 

I'm bemused at the way we're always so eager to get players off the wage bill if they are not first-choice. You need options. 

 

We've got a decent first-team, but we need more cover. 

I don’t agree with that actually. Celtic have had 4/5 times our income for 6/7 years straight. Even in our second season in the top level that was the case. So of course they have much more strength in depth and a much larger wage bill. By far the best strategy to for us to win the league is to focus on getting the starting 11 as strong as possible. It’s quality vs quantity, you can’t have it both ways. 

As was said on the Record Rangers podcast, I think Scottish teams are going to struggle majorly if we do that level of pressing against them. Maribor struggled majorly with it so I think St Mirren will too. Stubbs like his teams to play on the ground too which could play into our hands. Hopefully the team aren’t too tired. 

I expect the only only changes to be Murphy in for Kent, Barisic for Flanagan. 

Well he dodged the question and then when the journalist came back to it saying the worry is the other clubs will be alerted to him if he keeepa performing well, Gerrard replied “that’s life”. I can’t think of any good reason to deny we have an agreement if we did.  

5 hours ago, Tannochsidebear said:

Happy also to let John go, although under £1M for an international fullback is again dreadful business.

I think you need to think about it in terms of the alternative. Paying his wages when he has no chance of playing and adding to his reputation made no sense. It certainly seems a bargain but for whatever reason, professional scouts didn’t agree with your valuation because there was no competition for his signature despite the fact it was no secret he was going cheaply. Add to all that that another 800k can go towards an addition to the squad who will feature and I think the right decision was made. 

6 minutes ago, craig said:

His challenge last night wasn’t a foul, let alone a booking.

I haven’t seen a a replay but it reminded me May on Jack in that he got the ball but went through the man.