Famine Song Statement

[Bluedell 5,513]

Breach......

 

But justified how?

[Bluedell 5,513]

The Billy Boys meant fukk all to you obviously, because if it did you would have done your digging then.

 

I wrote to the "pope of rules" at yoofa at the time and recieved a reply from a Peter Limacher Head of Disciplinary Services.

 

Oh and bytheway mate all the rst guys that I spoke to said the same thing, "They had not seen the document but had been assured that TBB was banned.

 

And then it was spread all over the papers, funny that.

 

I spoke to an RST guy who did see it, and I don't believe he had any reason to lie.

 

Whether the letter was kosher is another matter.

 

BTW, do you have to have witten off to UEFA for TBB to mean something to you?

[JMS 0]

I was not doing it just for myself, I was also aware of said person who had seen it as I spoke to one of guys [NO names] personally after the meeting.

 

I wrote to yoofa with the intention of being pro-active and with the gut feeling that it was just the start,and sadly I have been proved correct in this.

 

Also one of the rst guys [NO names]was fully aware of what I was doing.

 

I do feel that the more you care about something the more you will fight your corner, don't you mate.

[JMS 0]

But justified how?

 

You and I both know how the system works and unfortunately we the punters are the losers.

 

Whether it will, or would, stand up to scrutiny will depend on the various circumstances surrounding each case but bottom line is sadly we will be the losers as they will get their way.

[maineflyer 0]

Certain questions keep returning to me.

 

If a UEFA ban (specifically identifying TBB - words and tune) actually exists, why didn't UEFA make it public?

 

If it actually exists and for some strange reason UEFA only made their judgement known to Rangers, why haven't Rangers put this in the public domain?

 

Since Rangers have certainly been asked to do so, why have Rangers chosen to keep the evidence of a UEFA ban secret, since that is effectively what they have done?

 

Am I the only one who sees the absurdity and sheer unbelievability of this situation, After all this time, why are we still talking about knowing someone who in turn heard of someone else who had "seen" this mysterious document? I'm afraid this really just isn't credible, any more than the pixies at the bottom of my garden are credible.

 

I see no alternative than to see this for the fudge it undoubtedly is. I believe Murray had his usual knee-jerk reaction to the UEFA situation and tried to embellish things by persuading certain RST/FF people that it was real. His purpose here was to use the RST/FF network to bolster and spread his message. Murray noted the UEFA focus on TBB and decided it had to go, as much because it was symbolic of the entrenched attitude he had already been trying to eradicate. He believe the media message and that was his biggest mistake. Whether the RST?FF folks were in any way complicit in the subterfuge is another matter but I believe Murray misread the situation and overstated the UEFA position - now he either admits his gaffe and completely loses face, or he buries it and waits for the passage of time to do its job.

 

Frankie talks about doing some digging but bigger shovels than Frankie can wield have already dug there. nothing will be found. Whatever your stance on Murray, ask yourself if its likely in such an emotive subject that the evidence would not have been flaunted, rather than buried? Nope, I don't either.

Edited November 2, 2008 by maineflyer

[Frankie 8,394]

The Billy Boys meant fukk all to you obviously, because if it did you would have done your digging then.

 

I wrote to the "pope of rules" at yoofa at the time and recieved a reply from a Peter Limacher Head of Disciplinary Services.

 

Oh and bytheway mate all the rst guys that I spoke to said the same thing, "They had not seen the document but had been assured that TBB was banned.

 

And then it was spread all over the papers, funny that.

 

The loss of BB did mean a lot actually. It still does.

 

I trusted the people who had said they'd seen the document and advocated following the directive. Thus, I was happy to do that at the time in the absence of other strategies then.

 

After that I worked extremely hard in personally trying to expose the double-standards by formulating a full report on the sham. No-one else has done anything similar as far as I can see.

 

So what did Limacher say to you? Surely he confirmed the banning?

[Frankie 8,394]

Certain questions keep returning to me.

 

If a UEFA ban (specifically identifying TBB - words and tune) actually exists, why didn't UEFA make it public?

 

If it actually exists and for some strange reason UEFA only made their judgement known to Rangers, why haven't Rangers put this in the public domain?

 

Since Rangers have certainly be asked to do so, why have Rangers chosen to keep the evidence of a UEFA ban secret, since that is effectively what they have done?

 

Am I the only one who sees the absurdity and sheer unbelievability of this situation, After all this time, why are we still talking about knowing someone who in turn heard of someone else who had "seen" this mysterious document? I'm afraid this really just isn't credible, any more than the pixies at the bottom of my garden are credible.

 

I see no alternative than to see this for the fudge it undoubtedly is. I believe Murray had his usual knee-jerk reaction to the UEFA situation and tried to embellish things by persuading certain RST/FF people that it was real. His purpose here was to use the RST/FF network to bolster and spread his message. Murray noted the UEFA focus on TBB and decided it had to go, as much because it was symbolic of the entrenched attitude he had already been trying to eradicate. He believe the media message and that was his biggest mistake. Whether the RST?FF folks were in any way complicit in the subterfuge is another matter but I believe Murray misread the situation and overstated the UEFA position - now he either admits his gaffe and completely loses face, or he buries it and waits for the passage of time to do its job.

 

Frankie talks about doing some digging but bigger shovels than Frankie can wield have already dug there. nothing will be found. Whatever your stance on Murray, ask yourself if its likely in such an emotive subject that the evidence would not have been flaunted, rather than buried? Nope, I don't either.

 

1. UEFA fined us for singing discriminatory songs - namely the Billy Boys. As such, of course it would be banned thereafter. Or we'd face further punishment - surely that much is obvious?

 

2. Rangers have made the alleged directive public via working with fan groups as well as using clauses of the alleged document via the Assembly site. As a shareholder, I'd have though we could ask for more information though.

 

3. Sometimes the simplest solution has to be taken for complex puzzles. You've already said you cannot justify any conspiracy theory. As such, it's difficult to go with this when we consider the links provided earlier and '1' above. Rightly or wrongly, the song did need to go. The problem I have is that no-one has tried hard enough to bring it back - even sans fen!an.

 

4. Given the club capitulated on the appealed decision, I'm not sure how they could have allowed the singing of the song thereafter given we'd be punished again. Does this mean they were complicit in a fake UEFA directive just to ensure the ban while trying to retain fan credibility? It's not beyond the realms of possibility but I just can't see some of the names present in these meetings (none of them SDM fans) buying this. Remember not all were FF/RST people. And those that were, are hardly the type of people to provide Murray's cover.

 

5. Funnily enough, the issue may come to a head soon. The new 'Edu, Edu' song clearly breaches the alleged directive but no action has been taken and neither has the song had negative media coverage. As such, it won't be long until another BB version is heard - I'm certain of it. It will be interesting to see the reaction then.

 

6. I may not have as big a shovel as some (ask my wife), but sometimes it's not the size of the tool that counts but how it is wielded (ask my wife). Let me look into it as '5' has interested me over the last few home games. I may or may not be able to shed (sic) any more light on the subject but I'll enjoying annoying a few people. I may even write a main site article.

 

Edited November 2, 2008 by Frankie

[maineflyer 0]

1. UEFA fined us for singing discriminatory songs - namely the Billy Boys. As such, of course it would be banned thereafter. Or we'd face further punishment - surely that much is obvious?

 

2. Rangers have made the alleged directive public via working with fan groups as well as using clauses of the alleged document via the Assembly site. As a shareholder, I'd have though we could ask for more information though.

 

3. Sometimes the simplest solution has to be taken for complex puzzles. You've already said you can justify any conspiracy theory. As such, it's difficult to go with this when we consider the links provided earlier and '1' above. Rightly or wrongly, the song did need to go. The problem I have is that no-one has tried hard enough to bring it back - even sans fen!an.

 

4. Given the club capitulated on the appealed decision, I'm not sure how they could have allowed the singing of the song thereafter given we'd be punished again. Does this mean they were complicit in a fake UEFA directive just to ensure the ban while trying to retain fan credibility? It's not beyond the realms of possibility but I just can't see some of the names present in these meetings (none of them SDM fans) buying this. Remember not all were FF/RST people. And those that were, are hardly the type of people to provide Murray's cover.

 

5. Funnily enough, the issue may come to a head soon. The new 'Edu, Edu' song clearly breaches the alleged directive but no action has been taken and neither has the song had negative media coverage. As such, it won't be long until another BB version is heard - I'm certain of it. It will be interesting to see the reaction then.

 

6. I may not have as big a shovel as some (ask my wife), but sometimes it's not the size of the tool that counts but how it is wielded (ask my wife). Let me look into it as '5' has interested me over the last few home games. I may or may not be able to shed (sic) any more light on the subject but I'll enjoying annoying a few people. I may even write a main site article.

 

 

All you're doing is dancing around the same bonfire Frankie. You've just used a lot of words to say nothing at all and the complexity is all yours. My position is really very simple.

 

If there is a ban, where is the evidence?

If there is evidence, why isn't it available to all?

Whose ban is it and what are the details?

If certain priveleged individuals saw something, what did they see and why haven't they clarified this beyond doubt?

Why were minority groups like RST/FFchosen by Murray to represent the wider support in this matter? (perhaps herein lies the most revealing aspect of the entire issue)

 

There should be no need for all the conjecture and interpretation that continues to surround this issue. The fact there there is only confirms that the truth is still beyond our grasp. If another version does emerge, it is this continuing uncertainty that will provide the platform to have it banned as well - whatever a ban actually means in the very confusing world of Rangers FC.

[Frankie 8,394]

The evidence is clear enough though - we were fined for singing the Billy Boys.

 

As such, the song was banned thereafter to avoid further censures. The club were hardly going to allow the singing of it, given this. Sure, we can debate whether or not they should have done more to defend us (and we may also debate how they enforced this ban) but the ban itself is obvious enough.

 

You do agree with that simple reasoning as you seem rather keen to ignore that in favour of more complex theories?

 

Also, the Assembly were consulted as well so all supporters were represented in 'official' sense even if we know the Assembly may not be properly constituted.

 

What do you propose doing to investigate further?

[maineflyer 0]

The evidence is clear enough though - we were fined for singing the Billy Boys.

 

As such, the song was banned thereafter to avoid further censures. The club were hardly going to allow the singing of it, given this. Sure, we can debate whether or not they should have done more to defend us (and we may also debate how they enforced this ban) but the ban itself is obvious enough.

 

You do agree with that simple reasoning as you seem rather keen to ignore that in favour of more complex theories?

 

Also, the Assembly were consulted as well so all supporters were represented in 'official' sense even if we know the Assembly may not be properly constituted.

 

What do you propose doing to investigate further?

 

The evidence is NOT clear. If it is then show it to me but don't confuse punishment for disciminatory singing with the ban of a specific song - words and tune. I got fined for speeding a few months ago but I didn't get banned from driving.

 

I agree with you that the song was banned by the club but that is hardly the same thing as the club claiming that the song - words and tune - was banned by UEFA. That appears to be the club's stated position but where is the evidence of this? You would have thought the club would have been only too keen to publicise that specific UEFA directive rather than conduct quasi-clandestine meetings with club-selected individuals who were then apparently asked to mind their P's and Q's. Following the meeting, I seem to remember one Mr Dingwall being especially verbose about what had been banned but surprisingly short on detail about the source of this ban.

 

If you're saying it is a Murray ban then I can accept that. If you're saying it is a UEFA ban then I'll believe it when I see the evidence. I'm perfectly happy to accept this is the case, just mystified why it has never been clearly demonstrated. I still feel Murray overstepped the mark and had to massage the situation to save face. It simply makes no sense otherwise.

 

For all your protestations Frankie, if I'm wrong then show me the evidence. If you can't then stop doing Murray's job for him. And since you talk about doing more digging, you obviously don't have any evidence of a UEFA ban.

 

Too many meetings have taken place with Murray that so-called fans' representatives have then been unable to comment upon freely afterwards. This only emphasises the fact that Murray seeks to manipulate rather than communicate, and brings into sharp question whose purpose these representatives actually served.