Gers confirm McGregor "incident"

[bmck 117]

Bit of an unnecessary slur there? So if any massive golf fan took interest in Woods situation, he's not sensible?

Bit of s smear that.

 

That's my view. While they may be sensible in every other facet of their life, they're not in that. I don't think it's right that people are interested in the 'scandal' of people they don't know. If that's a 'smear', so be it.

 

I think you're quite wrong. The fact this thread exists proves you wrong. An incident involving our own goalkeeper and we're all discussing it, his future, what happened etc etc.

 

Oh, and in your view, sorry to say it, but anyone in this thread making comment on this story isn't sensible.

 

People who care one way or another what Alan McGregor does with his personal life aren't sensible (in that respect). To me it's voyeurism of the most uninteresting sort. It's not newsworthy. Alan McGregor's private life should be of no more concern to a person than someone they walked past on the road without noticing. I just can't understand why either the papers or the readers of the papers would be interested.

Edited February 22, 2010 by bmck
fixing english

[Super_Ally 0]

In Barry's world there'd be no Big Brother.

[Danny 0]

That's my view. While they may be sensible in every other facet of their life, they're not in that. I don't think it's right that people are interested in the 'scandal' of people they don't know. If that's a 'smear', so be it.

 

I'm glad you've clarified your view here, because previously you were tainting all these people who might be curious about these things as not being sensible, which was a pretty clear slur on their character rather than reasonable advice to them that they shoud, in your view, disregard such publicity.

 

People who care one way or another what Alan McGregor does with his personal life aren't sensible (in that respect). To me it's voyeurism of the most uninteresting sort. It's not newsworthy. Alan McGregor's private life should be of no more concern to a person than someone they walked past on the road without noticing. I just can't understand why either the papers or the readers of the papers would be interested.

 

Allan McGregor is a famous person and because he's carried out acts which have left him with women going to the paper - in his position that's irresponsible and foolish.

 

Just because you seem to have installed yourself as, no offence, a slightly morally righteous individual with regards this issue, it doesn't mean that these stories should be ignored.

 

bmck, there's no bubble in which people are cocooned from the outside world - rumours, salacious news, scandal - they travel fast and like it or not sensible and unsensible people take interest in them in equal measure.

 

The word you used...'voyeurism' - it's spot on. And I'm sorry to say that even the thickest and smartest people are guilty of indulging in it.

 

Oh, I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I am saying it happens and is human nature. And it's not really fair to smite someone for doing it under certain circumstances. And discussing this story is one of those.

[Zappa 0]

People who care one way or another what Alan McGregor does with his personal life aren't sensible (in that respect). To me it's voyeurism of the most uninteresting sort. It's not newsworthy. Alan McGregor's private life should be of no more concern to a person than someone they walked past on the road without noticing. I just can't understand why either the papers or the readers of the papers would be interested.

.

Not quite following your point here. The guy's a Rangers player, one of our star players in fact, so why wouldn't it be a topic of interest and legitimate for discussion on a Rangers forum if he's been injured in a city center incident on Saturday night? Hopefully his injuries aren't too serious, but they could easily have been VERY serious, even life threatening! Then there's the fact that if McGregor doesn't play in the old firm game, Alexander will be stepping in, so that's another point of discussion, since the fans are quite split on who is the better keeper. There's even new threads today on other Gers forums suggesting that we should try to cash in on McGregor in the summer, make Alexander our No.1 and find another No.2. Such discussion simply has to be as a result of this latest McGregor incident because had it not happened I can't imagine discussions about cashing in on the guy cropping up at this stage of the season.

[bmck 117]

I'm glad you've clarified your view here, because previously you were tainting all these people who might be curious about these things as not being sensible, which was a pretty clear slur on their character rather than reasonable advice to them that they shoud, in your view, disregard such publicity.

I dont quite see the distinction, but thats fine.

 

Allan McGregor is a famous person and because he's carried out acts which have left him with women going to the paper - in his position that's irresponsible and foolish.

Who he does what with is none of my concern. I dont care if he acts in a manner the papers like or if he doesnt.

 

Just because you seem to have installed yourself as, no offence, a slightly morally righteous individual with regards this issue, it doesn't mean that these stories should be ignored.

I am not sure where you get morally righteous from. I was really originally annoyed by that very thing in you, no offense. Again, its the morally righteous that want to start being outraged by the ongoings of celebrities. The only high horse being rode is who-ever starts shouting about it in the first place. It was your moral righteousness that managed to take a moral stance on what McGregor should and shouldnt be doing, talking about "irresponsible", "foolish" etc. You want to take the moral high ground with him, but then accuse me of doing that thing when I tell you its not worth bothering abut. Doesnt make sense to me.

 

bmck, there's no bubble in which people are cocooned from the outside world - rumours, salacious news, scandal - they travel fast and like it or not sensible and unsensible people take interest in them in equal measure.

So, wait. Its being morally righteous to not start morally condemning, and think its not sensible to start morally condemning, people who Ive never met and what they do with their dick? But its not being morally righteous to read the paper and say "Oh, this is terrible, look what he has done". Honestly, I am lost.

 

The word you used...'voyeurism' - it's spot on. And I'm sorry to say that even the thickest and smartest people are guilty of indulging in it.

Thats why I qualified it with "Of the mst uninteresting sort." Seriously, I am not asking you to abstain if you enjoy, I am just saying I dont think its sensible. If you think its weird not to care, then I am not going to be offended by that.

 

Oh, I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I am saying it happens and is human nature. And it's not really fair to smite someone for doing it under certain circumstances. And discussing this story is one of those.

 

When you say things like "irresponsible", "it happens", "foolish", "its not fair to" you are talking about right and wrong. Personally I dont care for right and wrong, I get by fine with fun and dull, beautiful and ugly. Im not really one for morality.

Edited February 22, 2010 by bmck

[bmck 117]

.

Not quite following your point here. The guy's a Rangers player, one of our star players in fact, so why wouldn't it be a topic of interest and legitimate for discussion on a Rangers forum if he's been injured in a city center incident on Saturday night? Hopefully his injuries aren't too serious, but they could easily have been VERY serious, even life threatening! Then there's the fact that if McGregor doesn't play in the old firm game, Alexander will be stepping in, so that's another point of discussion, since the fans are quite split on who is the better keeper. There's even new threads today on other Gers forums suggesting that we should try to cash in on McGregor in the summer, make Alexander our No.1 and find another No.2. Such discussion simply has to be as a result of this latest McGregor incident because had it not happened I can't imagine discussions about cashing in on the guy cropping up at this stage of the season.

 

I was really more talking about people who want to Take A Stance on McGregors private life like Danny did. I want to know if he will fit and ready for our next game, because he is one of our star players, but I dont want to know if he winched some gangsters burd and that caused it. To put it another way, it makes sense to me as a crime story, or as a sport story, but I just think celebrity "scandal" stories are nonsense when they are in newspapers.

Edited February 22, 2010 by bmck

[Danny 0]

I was really more talking about people who want to Take A Stance on McGregors private life like Danny did. I want to know if he will fit and ready for our next game, because he is one of our star players, but I dont want to know if he winched some gangsters burd and that caused it. To put it another way, it makes sense to me as a crime story, or as a sport story, but I just think celebrity "scandal" stories are nonsense when they are in newspapers.

 

I haven't taken any stance on McGregor's life - it doesn't affect me personally so why should I. But it DOES affect Rangers, and THAT personally affects me.

 

I don't really understand your indignation of my view, but I guess we can just leave it there because we're not going to agree.

[bmck 117]

I don't really understand your indignation of my view, but I guess we can just leave it there because we're not going to agree.

 

Cool, cool. Not to carry it on. Just so as you know why I think its quite important. McGregor has an affair or whatever and the paper says "Scandal! Big news!", and I think "not really, just let the guy live his life". Then they say "This is awful, isnt it? Truly awful" and I think "not in the scale f things, no more awful than the reporters who have had affairs writing the story, and the people who have had affairs reading them". You might say "But it reflects poorly on rangers" which you know to be true, and thats harder to disagree with. But the only reason it reflects poorly on rangers is because of the power of the same press that made a nonstory a story in the first place. What does an affair do to rangers without the press? Absolutely nothing. They make it have an effect by making a big deal f it. Even if I think, what you sensibly think, that McGregor should keep the heid and should stay out of the papers, the press benefits because it justifies their having made a big deal in the first place. And so the thing goes on forever. By participating in it at any stage, you make sure that Alan McGregor cant benefit, you cant benefit and rangers cant benefit - the only winners by caring at any stage are the press, and I really hate them. Anyway just so as you know.

[Zappa 0]

I was really more talking about people who want to Take A Stance on McGregors private life like Danny did. I want to know if he will fit and ready for our next game, because he is one of our star players, but I dont want to know if he winched some gangsters burd and that caused it. To put it another way, it makes sense to me as a crime story, or as a sport story, but I just think celebrity "scandal" stories are nonsense when they are in newspapers.

.

I see what you're saying, but at the same time, what's wrong with voicing an opinion? I'm of the opinion that our players probably shouldn't be going to these types of places without a minder/bodyguard, but that's just my opinion. They get paid enough money to employ at least one man, but the key point in this particular facet of the discussion is that they obviously don't want that. It's not the money, it's about them feeling they have some sort of freedom, which they don't have.

[Danny 0]

Cool, cool. Not to carry it on. Just so as you know why I think its quite important. McGregor has an affair or whatever and the paper says "Scandal! Big news!", and I think "not really, just let the guy live his life". Then they say "This is awful, isnt it? Truly awful" and I think "not in the scale f things, no more awful than the reporters who have had affairs writing the story, and the people who have had affairs reading them". You might say "But it reflects poorly on rangers" which you know to be true, and thats harder to disagree with. But the only reason it reflects poorly on rangers is because of the power of the same press that made a nonstory a story in the first place. What does an affair do to rangers without the press? Absolutely nothing. They make it have an effect by making a big deal f it. Even if I think, what you sensibly think, that McGregor should keep the heid and should stay out of the papers, the press benefits because it justifies their having made a big deal in the first place. And so the thing goes on forever. By participating in it at any stage, you make sure that Alan McGregor cant benefit, you cant benefit and rangers cant benefit - the only winners by caring at any stage are the press, and I really hate them. Anyway just so as you know.

 

I don't disagree with much that you say there, but what you're ranting against isn't people who consume the press, but the nature of the press to lure in people to consume the drivel.

 

And it's a bitch isn't it?

 

The modern press is vile, but it is also inescapable.

 

STV News: Allan McGregor in nightclub incident - cue Raman Bardwaj telling us about it.

 

You buy your paper, same story on the back page. You log onto Gersnet, BBC, Sky Sports - it is plastered over all of them.

 

What is one to do? Black themselves out of the entire modern media so McGregor can do what he likes in the privacy of his own skin?

 

Idealistic, yes. Utopian. A wee touch. Impossible - totally.

 

It's the way of the press that everything and anything is reported, and if you complain about it, as valid as your view might be, it's like complaining about the bad weather.