'Setting The Standard' Project Moves Forward

[maineflyer 0]

The debate between MF and I is whether or not these directives are genuine - created by UEFA or created by Rangers FC implicating UEFA.

It's not really a matter of debate Frankie.

 

1. The UEFA directive did not instruct the club to ban TBB - that is a simple matter of fact.

 

2. The club have at no time issued any directive to me not to sing TBB. Unless I'm being granted unique dispensation, this applies to all other fans as well.

 

3. The only instruction not to sing TBB came from a fans organisation (the Assembly), who took that instruction not from UEFA but from the club alone.

 

If you can see an error in the above, please let me know.

[Frankie 8,562]

It's not really a matter of debate Frankie.

 

1. The UEFA directive did not instruct the club to ban TBB - that is a simple matter of fact.

 

2. The club have at no time issued any directive to me not to sing TBB. Unless I'm being granted unique dispensation, this applies to all other fans as well.

 

3. The only instruction not to sing TBB came from a fans organisation (the Assembly), who took that instruction not from UEFA but from the club alone.

 

If you can see an error in the above, please let me know.

 

I'll try again to show you your error...

 

1. The UEFA directive did instruct the club to ban TBB - that is seen from the published public statement which was found on a variety of official and unofficial media at the time. Now you don't believe that is genuine - fair enough - but the text does clearly say the song is 'prohibited'. Ergo, your opinion isn't fact - far from it given the available evidence does point towards a ban.

 

2. The club published the statement on their website and carried out the final directive at every game around the time of the alleged ban specifically mentioning TBB that I recall. That Jumbotron message has now evolved to something different under their 'Follow with Pride' campaign but the TBB instruction did exist previously. The club also used their official (albeit flawed) supporters organisation to convey the message to their supporters. Now, you may not read the official site, nor attend games, or feel represented by the Assembly but the message did get out to many, many fans. That's why we no longer hear the song and that's why we've not been punished by UEFA since.

 

3. Yes, the fan organisation did take advice from the club but the advice was in the form of a debate discussing the directives from UEFA. Now, you or I weren't present at that debate but several respected (and not so respected) fans were and I trust and share in their interpretation of the issue. You think the club have fraudulently falsified (my words) this directive and I can understand why you'd think that. However, respectfully, I think you're wrong.

 

[Frankie 8,562]

Frankie, it can hardly be described as a conspiracy theory - merely a conclusion reached after examining the evidence and discounting convenient assumptions on either side.

 

I'm happy to concede the available evidence isn't completely clear and assumptions have to be made with regard to accepting the generic final UEFA judgement stuck to the principle of its specific intentions which were made clear when we were first investigated. I'm also happy to concede that there has to be an element of trust in our club with regard to how they disseminated this judgement to the wider support. Such trust is difficult to find with a regime that has a record of isolating supporters with a variety of misinformation over the years.

 

However, where your conclusion reaches the conspiracy theory stage is when you do conveniently discount the evidence which is widely available, in favour of suggesting the club purposely fraudulently falsified (my words) the acknowledged UEFA judgement without any evidence whatsoever that backs your own opinion.

 

As such, to help us understand the conclusion you reach, what I'd like for you to do is detail what you think the UEFA judgement relayed to us actually was given you don't believe the club's version of events:

 

1. What was the discriminatory chanting we were punished for?

2. Do you think UEFA would accept us singing this chant again?

3. What kind of directives do you think they did give the club with regard to 1 and 2?

4. What would the club have to gain from falsifying these directives?

5. Why would people with a record of disagreeing with the club, meekly accept their judgement if they weren't shown what they felt was official documentation?

 

[Zappa 0]

4. What would the club have to gain from falsifying these directives?

I'd like to answer this one because the only outcome from such an action would be trouble. As I suggested earlier in this thread, I doubt very much that RFC would be foolish enough to falsify any information regarding UEFA directives or sanctions. You're literally talking about a football club putting a noose round it's own neck.

[maineflyer 0]

1. The UEFA directive did instruct the club to ban TBB

Show me - quote your source where UEFA specifically instruct the club to ban TBB.

 

2. The club published the statement on their website

Show me an example of the club specifically instructing fans in writing not to sing TBB.

 

 

 

.......and carried out the final directive at every game around the time of the alleged ban specifically mentioning TBB that I recall. That Jumbotron message has now evolved to something different under their 'Follow with Pride' campaign but the TBB instruction did exist previously.

I'm not a ST holder and I could have missed it but I've never seen anything on the big screens other than the generic "don't act in a sectarian manner". Do you have any evidence or can anyone confirm that the club ever stated on the big screens that specifically TBB should not be sung?

 

The club also used their official (albeit flawed) supporters organisation to convey the message to their supporters. Now, you may not read the official site, nor attend games, or feel represented by the Assembly but the message did get out to many, many fans.

Which is what I've said all along - although, for the record, I've made no comment whatsoever about the Assembly. Again, this is something you alone are introducing into the debate

 

.....and that's why we've not been punished by UEFA since.

That's your assumption and it may be a very fair one - but we both know you haven't a single shred of evidence to support it.

 

3. You think the club have fraudulently falsified (my words) this directive and I can understand why you'd think that. However, respectfully, I think you're wrong.

With respect, I've never once accused the club of fraudulently falsifying anything. Those were words introduced by you alone. What I have done is call into question the decision by the club not to relay the UEFA directive directly and verbatim to the fans. I believe, and there seems ample evidence for it, that the club chose to spin the UEFA directive in order to achieve what the club wanted, ie, removing TBB song immediately and for good. I'm not saying that the club and UEFA necessarily had opposing objectives or even had significantly different objectives. But the club chose not to argue the case for removal of TBB and instead waved the UEFA flag to avoid having to do so. Where is it exactly that you think I'm going wrong here?

 

EDIT..... If you're going to challenge this again, please try to restrict your comments to what I've actually written, rather than what you assume might be between my lines. That way I might be able to leave this alone for a while. I appreciate my conclusions might be a bit uncomfortable for some but I'm only interpreting the evidence as I see it - if there is other evidence I'm not aware of then I'm very open to taking that into account and, if appropriate, altering my interpretation. However, you've worn me down on this issue and I don't think I can bring myself to repeat the same thing over again - on that basis I willingly withdraw from the debate.

Edited September 8, 2009 by maineflyer

[maineflyer 0]

I'd like to answer this one because the only outcome from such an action would be trouble. As I suggested earlier in this thread, I doubt very much that RFC would be foolish enough to falsify any information regarding UEFA directives or sanctions. You're literally talking about a football club putting a noose round it's own neck.

 

I agree with the spirit of what you say here and, in case this is being misunderstood, I have never once accused the club or anyone else of fraudulently falsifying anything. Those are not my words and I wouldn't like anyone to think they were.

[Frankie 8,562]

Show me - quote your source where UEFA specifically instruct the club to ban TBB.

 

Show me an example of the club specifically instructing fans in writing not to sing TBB.

 

 

 

I'm not a ST holder and I could have missed it but I've never seen anything on the big screens other than the generic "don't act in a sectarian manner". Do you have any evidence or can anyone confirm that the club ever stated on the big screens that specifically TBB should not be sung?

 

Which is what I've said all along - although, for the record, I've made no comment whatsoever about the Assembly. Again, this is something you alone are introducing into the debate

 

That's your assumption and it may be a very fair one - but we both know you haven't a single shred of evidence to support it.

 

With respect, I've never once accused the club of fraudulently falsifying anything. Those were words introduced by you alone. What I have done is call into question the decision by the club not to relay the UEFA directive directly and verbatim to the fans. I believe, and there seems ample evidence for it, that the club chose to spin the UEFA directive in order to achieve what the club wanted, ie, removing TBB song immediately and for good. I'm not saying that the club and UEFA necessarily had opposing objectives or even had significantly different objectives. But the club chose not to argue the case for removal of TBB and instead waved the UEFA flag to avoid having to do so. Where is it exactly that you think I'm going wrong here?

 

EDIT..... If you're going to challenge this again, please try to restrict your comments to what I've actually written, rather than what you assume might be between my lines. That way I might be able to leave this alone for a while. I appreciate my conclusions might be a bit uncomfortable for some but I'm only interpreting the evidence as I see it - if there is other evidence I'm not aware of then I'm very open to taking that into account and, if appropriate, altering my interpretation. However, you've worn me down on this issue and I don't think I can bring myself to repeat the same thing over again - on that basis I willingly withdraw from the debate.

 

1. I've clearly quoted the link several times now where the Assembly via the club via UEFA say TBB is prohibited as per the UEFA directives from the TBB judgement. Just to be clear are you saying these directives were made up by the club and/or the Assembly as you seem to discount this clear evidence extremely easily?

 

2. The club published the same joint statement quoting from the same directive on their old website. The Assembly is also part of the club and is is this official organisation that the club often use to communicate with the fans. I don't believe the club ever wrote to individual supporters per se (e.g. season ticket holders) so I concede that clouds the issue somewhat. They did use the Wee Blue Book to mention the Directive issue but didn't specify songs. Perhaps they felt they could trust most supporters to immediately link the extremely public UEFA action on TBB with the subsequent directive?

 

3. I don't have evidence but I remember the song being mentioned for a period after the judgement. The FWP wording has now changed and that song isn't mentioned - presumably because it is no longer sung. Another specific song has been mentioned since though - the 'Go Home' song. That shows the club will mention specific songs when required even if I can't prove they did with TBB 3 years after the fact.

 

4. Not sure why you're being defensive about the Assembly comment - that was my statement as I felt it was relevant to make it clear that the Assembly is flawed in how it claims to represent all fans and in its efforts in communicating with them.

 

5. I think if we'd been punished by UEFA since we'd all have read about it in the same way we all read about the TBB issue.

 

6. Again, I made it clear that those were my words. But, with respect, when someone infers they don't believe the UEFA directives exist that were passed by the club to the support, that suggests to me they think they are false. Not sure what other conclusion one could reach based on what you've said. Such club behaviour would then be tantamount to fraud if they were lying about who supplied the directives and why. If I'm making the wrong assumption on your comments, please feel free to correct me and I do apologise if I'm reading them wrong.

 

7. If UEFA said the song was to be banned (and I don't see you providing a single shred of evidence to say it isn't), then I'm unsure what recourse the club had other than to pass on the directive and ensure we weren't punished further. I've already said they couldn't appeal the UEFA appeal and outwith general indignation about the imbalance of their actions, there was not much else they could so IMHO. Given their initial successful defence of the song I doubt they'd suddenly go full circle and ban it themselves.

 

8. Finally I do appreciate we're at odds because of the lack of tangible evidence available to us both but I think it's been an interesting and respectful debate nonetheless. I am trying to find out more behind the scenes as well (not restricted to heresay either)... Honestly!

 

Edited September 8, 2009 by Frankie

[Bluedell 5,624]

(not restricted to heresy either)

 

That's the other team.

[Frankie 8,562]

That's the other team.

 

I forgot to add sic...

[maineflyer 0]

Here we go again.......... I'm sure you're just winding me up.

 

1. I've clearly quoted the link several times now where the Assembly via the club via UEFA say TBB is prohibited as per the UEFA directives from the TBB judgement. Just to be clear are you saying these directives were made up by the club and/or the Assembly as you seem to discount this clear evidence extremely easily?

You keep quoting links and tying them together but you never respond to the point at hand. I'm asking you one simple question here - show me one UEFA directive that bans TBB. If you can't them just say so instead of heading off at some tangent. Here's another I keep asking but you won't answer - show me one instruction by the club to the support that bans TBB. Similarly, if you can't them just say so.

 

2. The club published the same joint statement quoting from the same directive on their old website. The Assembly is also part of the club and is is this official organisation that the club often use to communicate with the fans. I don't believe the club ever wrote to individual supporters per se (e.g. season ticket holders) so I concede that clouds the issue somewhat. They did use the Wee Blue Book to mention the Directive issue but didn't specify songs. Perhaps they felt they could trust most supporters to immediately link the extremely public UEFA action on TBB with the subsequent directive?

Let's keep it straight and avoid playing with words. The club isn't the Assembly and the Assembly isn't the club. You also know that the club often communicates its message to the wider support without writing to individual ST holders so why the diversion? As for the Wee Blue Book - I've said again and again that this makes absolutely no mention of TBB at all, not once, never - so again, why the diversion?. It isn't a matter of who the club felt they could or couldn't trust, it's a basic matter of record that the club has never issued a statement specifically banning TBB. PLEASE - if you can show otherwise then do so - if not then do the decent thing and concede I'm right. It's one thing or the other, they either have or they haven't.

 

3. I don't have evidence but I remember the song being mentioned for a period after the judgement. The FWP wording has now changed and that song isn't mentioned - presumably because it is no longer sung. Another specific song has been mentioned since though - the 'Go Home' song. That shows the club will mention specific songs when required even if I can't prove they did with TBB 3 years after the fact.

You're right, you don't have evidence. Neither do I.

 

4. Not sure why you're being defensive about the Assembly comment - that was my statement as I felt it was relevant to make it clear that the Assembly is flawed in how it claims to represent all fans and in its efforts in communicating with them.

I'm not being defensive, only accurate.

 

5. I think if we'd been punished by UEFA since we'd all have read about it in the same way we all read about the TBB issue.

By "the same way" do you mean on the Assembly website? No, you're wrong again. We would have read about it on the UEFA website, the same as all previous directives, including those that did not ban TBB.

 

6. Again, I made it clear that those were my words. But, with respect, when someone infers they don't believe the UEFA directives exist that were passed by the club to the support, that suggests to me they think they are false. Not sure what other conclusion one could reach based on what you've said. Such club behaviour would then be tantamount to fraud if they were lying about who supplied the directives and why. If I'm making the wrong assumption on your comments, please feel free to correct me and I do apologise if I'm reading them wrong.

If you'd stop making assumptions then there wouldn't be any mis-judgement. You infer what you want, I'm simply distancing myself from you're assumptions.

 

QUOTE]7. If UEFA said the song was to be banned (and I don't see you providing a single shred of evidence to say it isn't), then I'm unsure what recourse the club had other than to pass on the directive and ensure we weren't punished further. I've already said they couldn't appeal the UEFA appeal and outwith general indignation about the imbalance of their actions, there was not much else they could so IMHO. Given their initial successful defence of the song I doubt they'd suddenly go full circle and ban it themselves.How can I possibly provide you with evidence of something that didn't happen? The only possible recource is to show you that what DID happen never included banning TBB. But please, for the sake of my ebbing sanity, show me one solitary UEFA directive that specifically bans TBB - please, it's not complicated - just copy and paste and everyone will see either what I see or what you see.

 

8. Finally I do appreciate we're at odds because of the lack of tangible evidence available to us both but I think it's been an interesting and respectful debate nonetheless. I am trying to find out more behind the scenes as well (not restricted to heresay either)... Honestly!

We're not at odds, I wouldn't let that happen. But our understanding of what happened is very much at odds. I'm trying to look at the facts as they exist, without prejudice and without drawing inferences or assumptions. I think perhaps you misunderstand what conclusion I'm trying to draw from all this. It isn't that UEFA somehow didn't want TBB banned and it isn't that the club didn't want it banned - they both undoubtedly never wanted it sung again. Neither am I campaigning to have it return on the basis it was never banned. I'm simply irritated that the club cannot communicate its wishes to the support without some kind of cloak and dagger bollocks. If the club wanted TBB banned (and it did/does) they should have said so openly in the Wee Blue Book, on their website, the matchday programme or in any one of many other ways available to them. I can't understand the coy stupidity of the club somehow not wanting to be seen or heard referrring directly to TBB by name - as if to name it somehow conceded that the problem actually existed. Why deal with it by the back door? The fact this concerns TBB isn't important, this is about how the club chooses to communicate with the support. It's about how the club under Murray has shouted good news but been embarrassed and inept at dealing with difficult issues.

 

The point is relevant and I decided to raise it in this thread because STS depends ultimately on the club being willing to engage in open, honest, meaningful and constructive dialogue with the project's authors. If the club isn't willing to engage with the support in a new and positive partnership then STS is already dead in the water - and no one wants that. However, unless we can recognise and acknowledge the strategies that have typified Murray's tenure, how can we ever have confidence in our prospects for change in the future.