Briton

I had a feeling we might win this one but shocked at how dominant we were.  Just what the doctor ordered.

On 22/11/2018 at 12:57, craig said:

False accusations (not suggesting this is the case here) actually deter real victims from coming out.

That's interesting...what's your source?

On 22/11/2018 at 12:47, craig said:

Any chance you could bring yourself to saying "alleged victim" ?  Or are you another who has jumped to conclusion ?

 

She isn't a victim.... yet.  So why use terminology which suggests she is ?

Okay sorry...another I've triggered.  Okay alleged victim or complainant (as I originally said).  Interesting that you don't jump on Bill who has jumped to the conclusion that publicity would have stopped this women making any complaint.

On 22/11/2018 at 13:39, Bill said:

What "victim" is that then? Or are you a victim in your world if you merely claim to be one? In my world you are a victim only if you are proven to be one in a court of law.

 

This also answers the last question you put to me.

No it doesn't; it's avoiding the question with semantics.  What you say is nonsense in any case.  You can be a victim of a crime without there ever being a court case but let's call her the alleged victim to avoid any triggering. Could you answer the question; why would the women have been sure not to have made any complaint if she didn't have anonymity? 

6 minutes ago, Gaffer said:

Both sides should be given the same courtesy.  In my opinion, neither side should be named.  This would protect the victims (whether that be the accuser or defendant) and prevent so much speculation around motives, as this just isn't helpful.

That's reasonable but there are very good reasons why the victim's identity is protected in these cases.

15 minutes ago, Bill said:

No

So why are you sure this case would never have come to court if the complainant's identity were to be revealed? 

On 21/11/2018 at 08:34, Bill said:

Is that one of those questions that only ever gets asked when you already know the answer but don't agree with it? The same as my previous sentence? ?

I think I know the answer; you don't want her to 'enjoy' anonymity at this stage as the hassle she would face from the media/misogynists could likely lead to her deciding it's not worth it and to not press charges.  Am I right?

10 hours ago, Bill said:

If his accuser had to declare her identity you can be sure this case would never have come to court. Either both should enjoy anonymity ... or neither

Why do you think it would not have come to court if the alleged victim could not 'enjoy' anonymity?

Do you mention the Marquis of Lorne?  I think his early involvement is intriguing but I've noticed that historians always seen ignore the fact that such a famous person was our patron in the very early days.  

26 minutes ago, Gonzo79 said:

We win 7-1 and that's your comment?

Actually I thought I was commenting in the Katic thread but when I do choose to post maybe I'll run it past you first to make sure it meets with your approval eh?  

9 hours ago, onevision said:

Sorry pete but katic had a poor 45mins.

Katic has looked like a cart horse at all times recently.

3 hours ago, Darthter said:

Is he REALLY picking up any more than the rest of the team???

 

As I mentioned in the Candeias thread - His 1st yellow in the last game was stupid & completely avoidable (the 2nd an embarrassment for the ref)....but as a result, he will miss the next game.  I don't see anyone commenting on his "silly booking"...

Allan McGregor is another; has shown real stupidity on a couple of occasions this year in big games.  He's got away with it so this experienced player in his  late 30's is not considered so much a risk temperament wise as young Alfredo Morelos.

15 hours ago, aweebluesoandso said:

As usual with those repugnant republican types...

Most of the people of the world are republicans. The idea that people are repugnant because they don't want to be 'reigned over' by someone just because they are, or claim to be, the descendant of some ancient scummy war lord (no, they aren't really majestic).  Get a grip.

1 minute ago, Briton said:

 

Sorry double post.

6 hours ago, ian1964 said:

ST MIRREN keeper Craig Samson has branded Daniel Candeias as “lacking class” after his Paisley red card.

The Rangers star was shown a second yellow card by ref Willie Collum after a tangle with Anton Ferdinand.

But TV pictures suggested the Portuguese frontman did nothing wrong and Ferdinand was the aggressor — and boss Steven Gerrard branded the decision “embarrassing”.

The footage showed Samson putting his arm around the winger and the keeper said: “I was asking him to stop being so disrespectful. When they scored the second goal he ran past and gave Anton a bit of stick, telling him to ‘shoosh’ and blowing him kisses.

“So when he ran past me I just grabbed him and said ‘Look, there’s no need to be so disrespectful. You’ve won the game so go and celebrate with your team-mates.’

“To be honest, he agreed with me and apologised. But Anton wasn’t very happy with what was happening.

“I don’t know what was said between the two of them — but I thought Candeias was lacking a wee bit of class in doing what he was doing.”

Candeias had hit the opener with a speculative cross-cum-shot with ten minutes to go.

Samson — who had coins thrown at him in the aftermath of the goal — added: “If he scored from a cross, then he celebrates the second goal like that, I thought it was a bit disappointing.

“I’ve no idea why he got a second yellow card. All I know is, you don’t need to act the way he was, rubbing it in and showing complete disrespect to your opponents.

“Anton obviously wasn’t happy because of it.

“I don’t know what the two of them said to each other to make Candeias get sent off, but there was no need for him to do what he did.

“He’d already won the game — just go and shake hands.”

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/3443195/rangers-daniel-cadeias-lacked-class-st-mirren-craig-samson/

No mention of the lack of class from Ferdinand I see; he should recieve a red card and Candeias should have his card scrubbed.   On a side note did anyone see the little piece they did on Anton Ferdinand before the game? Not the sharpest pencil in the box; thick as shit in fact.

On 26/10/2018 at 17:12, BEARGER said:

Been having a wee read of discussions on another site about Poppy wearing and the Rangers Poppy in particular.

 

1. Some are saying that the Rangers Badge Poppy devalues what the Poppy is all about.

2. Also that Poppies are worn far too early, namely by TV personalities. 

 

Tend to agree with No.2. 

I haven't worn a poppy since poppy facism first raised it's ugly head; mind you, it's cost me a few bob extra as I still feel obliged to donate as I explain why I wont take one.  Shame that people are using what was a great charity  for political/tribal ends.

2 hours ago, Gonzo79 said:

We're below Hearts, Celtc, Livi and Killie and on equal points with Hibs, in the league.  We couldn't beat a poor Aberdeen side and our recent record against Hibs isn't much to shout about.

 

Until these things change, there's no point appearing boastful.

 

 

Even when we do, there's no class in being boastful.   

I thought we were decent enough last night but just lacked that bit of quality when it mattered.  Says a lot though when a team like Spartak are now leaving Ibrox grateful of a point.

12 minutes ago, craig said:

Bluedell can answer for himself but I took it to be him suggesting why it may have been a honeytrap !

Actually he stated it was a honey trap.

9 minutes ago, craig said:

What if she encouraged him to do so ? 

Then, as I've already said, that's a different matter.

7 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

Who said it was OK? There's not one person on the thread who says it's OK.

In relation to whether the photo of his genitals was solicited or not, you posted; 'She could have blocked him at the first message but didn't'...so if that's not excusing him then sending a knob pic, what did you mean?

8 hours ago, Bluedell said:

She could have blocked him at the first message but didn't.

So that makes it okay to send pictures of your tackle I guess.  Fucks sake.

Just now, craig said:

Do we know for sure it was unsolicited ?

I admit I'm assuming that; my reasoning is that she is now complaining.  Of course if she requested the idiot to send a picture of his tackle then  that's a different matter. 

9 hours ago, Bluedell said:

Victim?  Someone messages you that you don't want,  you block them. You don't film it and take it to the papers to make cash. 

 

Victim. ?

So you think sending pictures of your genitals, unsolicited, to a women is okay?  Should be classed as a sex offence IMO.  Yes she's a victim but of course she's at fault here. Riiiight.

2 hours ago, pete said:

For me and many others it will always be the famous Glasgow Rangers whether official or not. It will probably die away in the next generation but you will just have to accept that some people use that now. If that is our biggest worry then we are doing okay. You are lucky you don't live in Holland because the most people there just call us Glasgow. I have sent e-mails in the past complaining to the Dutch tv companies about it but never got a response.

I don't have a problem with the Dutch or whoever getting our name wrong but I do with our own fans (and even people working for the club) being ignorant of our name.  I hate the expression 'the famous Glasgow Rangers', it's a contradiction in terms.  If we are so famous why do you feel you have to explain who we are by adding Glasgow to our name?  The founders gave us a unique name; we are the only Rangers, all the rest have to add a qualifier; I don't see why people feel the need to change it. ( I understand the reason it's sometimes added in songs).

To think I wanted Derek McInnes to come to Rangers...dodged a bullet there.

On 20/10/2018 at 19:29, Gonzo79 said:

The narrator says, "Eight seasons since they witnessed European football...".  Did he forget last season (I know we all want to but...?).

 

We refer to ourselves as Glasgow Rangers in a couple of songs (syllable requirements) but it's usually only foreigners and QPR fans who refer to us as that in speech. We have two club crests and neither of them mentions Glasgow.

Sadly that is not the case.  Many Bears also add Glasgow to our name and I have even met some who don't realise we have never been 'Glasgow Rangers'.  Last year even one of our board referred to us as Glasgow Rangers while acting in an official capacity.