Union Bears statement

[917 191]

Every club in the country seems to have these young teams now. These sort of groups do seem to be popular & encourage youngsters to go to the football, so I suppose the club should accommodate them. But as they no longer get kicked out for Celtic games, I genuinely don’t know what they are whinging about. BF3 isn’t any better a view than BF5. As for wanting to stand for 90 minutes, you can do that at any junior ground, if you want the whole 19th century football fan experience..

 

[MacK1950 2,378]

I am not and have not marginalised younger fans,I have made a point regards the offensive and needless words in songs and have lived through the times you have mentioned.

If safe standing is to be approved eventually,it should not be to the detriment of seat holders so in my vieww very hard for the club to help implement.There is no way I would give up my seat to entertain this if I was asked to do so  and there are probably thousands like me.

[Gonzo79 15,294]

13 minutes ago, 917 said:

As for wanting to stand for 90 minutes, you can do that at any junior ground, if you want the whole 19th century football fan experience..

"I don't want to stand, so no one else gets to".

 

Charming.

 

 

Edited February 28, 2019 by Gonzo79

[cooponthewing 1,139]

5 minutes ago, MacK1950 said:

I am not and have not marginalised younger fans,I have made a point regards the offensive and needless words in songs and have lived through the times you have mentioned.

If safe standing is to be approved eventually,it should not be to the detriment of seat holders so in my vieww very hard for the club to help implement.There is no way I would give up my seat to entertain this if I was asked to do so  and there are probably thousands like me.

I would hope the would just make the BF1 a safe standing area? That way nobody is inconvenienced.

[Big Jaws 570]

1 minute ago, MacK1950 said:

I am not and have not marginalised younger fans,I have made a point regards the offensive and needless words in songs and have lived through the times you have mentioned.

If safe standing is to be approved eventually,it should not be to the detriment of seat holders so in my vieww very hard for the club to help implement.There is no way I would give up my seat to entertain this if I was asked to do so  and there are probably thousands like me.

You may not feel/think you are but you are marginalising them. As I said in my post I've no skin in the game as far as safe standing goes but in saying that there is a further rub in your post in that for example I no longer hold a season book but when I did there was nothing and I mean absolutely nothing that lead me to believe that I was entitled to keep the same seat over multiple seasons.

[917 191]

In saying that, I was standing for 90 minutes in my usual seat in the Broomloan rear for the game on 29th December. So was everybody else. That must have been un-safe standing lol

[Gaffer 1,665]

2 hours ago, Big Jaws said:

Seriously?

 

I've read more than enough of this type of opinion across various different platforms in the last few days and its nothing more than a red herring.

 

These are two separate issues and neither of them have anything to do with the other.

 

The two issues being;

 

1) Successfully housing an organised fans group.
2) Cultural/Societal transition and change. 

 

First of all taking point two. Do you seriously think the board/decision makers in this situation simply reacted to the singing of certain words in songs the most recent being the Clark song and decided to punish the UB? If that was the case then who the f^&k do the board think they are? Do they think they are their [UB] parents putting their kids on the naughty step? As far as I'm concerned that's a ridiculous proposition and that also applies to any fans with the mindset that the UB are insolent children. 

 

Its a ridiculous proposition because although the perception is that ALL UB are youths and teenagers the reality is that they are not. Many are youths and some are adults with families. You cant just naughty step adult paying customers who've organized as a collective. The UB at the moment are in a small section BF1 but looking at various mobile phone footage on internet platforms there are many sub 30 year old supporters dotted through out the BF who also take part in the singing when it starts. From that I've formed the opinion they'd be equally likely to join with the UB during matches if the sections were opened up to accommodate more fans. 

 

If we're going for the Holy Wully angle of abstinence ONLY then we ALL need to have a serious look at ourselves because if TBB starts up when we're playing Celtic home or away I can guarantee 90% of the fans are singing it because rightly or wrongly and irrespective of the words it contains it has served as a tribal rallying call for the 48 years I've been attending Ibrox. Thats not just a UB issue!

 

IMO the only way to resolve cultural change in communities is through dialogue. Instead of condemning them older bears, and I include myself in this demographic, should be helping the UB navigate this modern cultural transition.. Yet all I've seen on message boards and forums is a very polarized opinion of UB and there seems to be very little reasoned discussion from people who should know better. While I'm at it dialogue incidentally is a thing which Rangers have been notoriously bad at, with regards to the fan base, since Murray was Tzar.

 

Going back to point one. The UB are no different to any other Rangers fan that attends Ibrox on a match day and should be respected as such by ALL of us including the board.

 

In the 72-73 season my da along with 3-4 of his mates started the Spateston RSC and also ran the supporters bus which is sadly defunct today although some of the members still attend matches from Johnstone. He like many of the UB was under 30 years old at the time was he an upstart too? They organised held dances, dinners and POTY awards liaising with the club on player appearances for a number of years. However, as I understand it, when Murray took over that became a more complicated process as the club became less approachable.From the outside it appears this mode of operation has changed very little in the years that have proceeded Murrays tenure.

 

I was always under the impression that CF was the area that UB had targetted to have set as safe standing? If that is the case then I can see a number of issues arising from it. Legacy seating being just one.

 

Now reading their [UB] statement it appears to me that the clubs position has always been disingenuous as it tabled BF3 as an alternative. To my mind that is at best untenable and the club never intended for the situation to be easily resolved. Siting a safe standing area in that section of the stadium would not have been viable due to various logistics issues and don't forget that area was proposed long before the reduction in away fans ticket allocation. The ticket allocation is a fairly recent development and I urge you to remember that had it not been for the lobbying of  special interest group and one person in particular that would not have come to pass either.

 

Personally I've no skin in the game as far as safe standing is concerned however I am concerned about match day experience, atmosphere, catering and facilities. This isn't the 60-70's where a guy/girl with a strapped on serving tray walked through the terracing crowd shouting to sell their wares, macaroon and spearmint chewing gum, and drunk guys pissed, in empty beer cans, or on each other the contents of which then rolled down the terracing. This is the 21st century and things have moved on and are much more civilized thank f&*k!

 

To those who say that the UB think they are better than the rest of us I'm calling bullshit they don't but they do lack the sophistry of the Main Stand wallers when they are being torn into by folk who really should know better. They're not asking for preferential treatment either but if the organisers of the UB feel that they have outgrown the section allocated to them and have approached the club to discuss the matter then it is entirely up to the club to find a solution with them and rehouse them in an efficient manner, in a suitable position within the stadium, and not string them along and treat them like naughty children as it appears they have. They clearly aren't children as they have enough disposable income to follow the team home and away no matter how far they have to travel, including Europe, which by today's standard isn't cheap.

 

For that reason I'm annoyed by this marginalizing younger Rangers fans for having the temerity to ask!
 

I have to disagree with this mate.  They are not the same, and I won't respect them when I see them on marches with balaclavas.  It is sinister and it brings the club into disrepute.  That's something that should be challenged, not respected.

[BlackSocksRedTops 3,752]

6 minutes ago, Gaffer said:

I have to disagree with this mate.  They are not the same, and I won't respect them when I see them on marches with balaclavas.  It is sinister and it brings the club into disrepute.  That's something that should be challenged, not respected.

Agree 100%. I still cannot believe there are people justifying this as being if "youth culture". Why do they feel need to cover their faces on their marches? The Gallant Pioneers would be turning in their graves

[Gonzo79 15,294]

I reckon, in total, there have been about 15 balaclavas worn by UBs in the last decade - all outside Ibrox.

 

What a lot of fuss about nothing.  They wear them so the Police don't turn up at their doors in a few weeks and lift them for this, that or the next thing.  It would only be sinister if violence was likely and it never has been.  

 

The issues here are safe standing and their location within Ibrox.

[Gaffer 1,665]

6 minutes ago, Gonzo79 said:

I reckon, in total, there have been about 15 balaclavas worn by UBs in the last decade - all outside Ibrox.

 

What a lot of fuss about nothing.  They wear them so the Police don't turn up at their doors in a few weeks and lift them for this, that or the next thing.  It would only be sinister if violence was likely and it never has been.  

 

The issues here are safe standing and their location within Ibrox.

Sorry, but that's not true.  I saw the last march and there were dozens from that one alone.  This isn't about safe standing.  It's about a group of supporters being unable to convince the club of their net value, and I agree with the club.  I wouldn't agree to their wishes, and in fact wouldn't even consider it unless they clean up their image.

 

It has a much wider detrimental effect.  Many supporters like me don't know the difference between the Vanguard or Union bears (or other supporters groups), and don't really care normally.  However, I was then initially put off the BBC demonstration for fear of being associated with that behaviour.  If they really expect to get visits from the police after a peaceful protest, can I expect them to be in the same hoodies and balaclavas on the 16th March?  If so, they ruin it for the VB and the rest of us.  It's completely unnecessary.  If they want to be Ultras, then fine, but if they're not going to protect the image of the club (and are not aware enough to realise it), why should the club do this?

 

p.s.  I would be in favour of a standing area, but for me (and I suspect the club), that's not the issue here.