Famine Song Statement

[Zappa 0]

I respectfully disagree Mainflyer. The threat may well have been one much more serious than most people surmise. I honestly don't know, but if I was charged with the decision as to whether or not to condone singing TBB, I'd have to opt on the side of caution, purely through common logic.

[maineflyer 0]

I respectfully disagree Mainflyer. The threat may well have been one much more serious than most people surmise. I honestly don't know, but if I was charged with the decision as to whether or not to condone singing TBB, I'd have to opt on the side of caution, purely through common logic.

 

a. How right you are. It MAY have been more serious. My point is we will never know, and we should know - since we are the people this so-called ban is directed at.

 

b. No one is being asked to condone TBB, least of all by me. My point isn't about the desirability or otherwise of the song, it's about the club treating its supporters openly with honesty.

Edited November 3, 2008 by maineflyer

[Bluedell 5,614]

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

I wouldn't dispute that, having written to UEFA a couple of times myself (They must be sick of us Scots by now!) The point I was trying to make is that just because you don't write doesn't mean that you don't care.

[Frankie 8,552]

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.

 

 

Did you read the links I supplied?

 

The song in question was the Billy Boys and was specifically referred to in the original UEFA charge where they first found us not guilty. After this was bizarrely appealed, they then fined us so it goes without saying that specific song was the reason for the 'discriminatory' charge.

 

Considering the club capitulated, then we had no option other than to stop singing it because BB was the focus of the earlier censure.

 

If you can't see that, then what do you think we were punished for?

 

And I'm certainly not doing SDM's job for him. I'm merely trying to look at the situation from an objective point of view. Of course, I don't have the clear evidence but I don't think we really need it when we follow the time-line above.

 

Were we hard done by? Of course...

 

Did the club bend over too easily? Of course...

 

Is there some conspiracy theory of whether or not UEFA or Rangers banned this song? I don't think so...

 

So until you can provide some concrete evidence of what you allege, then I'll thank you for allowing me to have my own opinion based on the evidence that does exist.

 

In the meantime, I've offered to try and find out a bit more because, at this moment in time, the most interesting thing for me is that no matter who invoked the directive, we are clearly breaking it without punishment.

[maineflyer 0]

Did you read the links I supplied?

 

The song in question was the Billy Boys and was specifically referred to in the original UEFA charge where they first found us not guilty. After this was bizarrely appealed, they then fined us so it goes without saying that specific song was the reason for the 'discriminatory' charge.

 

Considering the club capitulated, then we had no option other than to stop singing it because BB was the focus of the earlier censure.

 

If you can't see that, then what do you think we were punished for?

 

And I'm certainly not doing SDM's job for him. I'm merely trying to look at the situation from an objective point of view. Of course, I don't have the clear evidence but I don't think we really need it when we follow the time-line above.

 

Were we hard done by? Of course...

 

Did the club bend over too easily? Of course...

 

Is there some conspiracy theory of whether or not UEFA or Rangers banned this song? I don't think so...

 

So until you can provide some concrete evidence of what you allege, then I'll thank you for allowing me to have my own opinion based on the evidence that does exist.

 

In the meantime, I've offered to try and find out a bit more because, at this moment in time, the most interesting thing for me is that no matter who invoked the directive, we are clearly breaking it without punishment.

 

 

Frankie, you can thank me for whatever you like but I've never pretended to have any evidence. I'm simply challenging the suppositions and conclusions that seem to have taken the place of evidence. While you might regard "goes without saying" as sufficient test of the fact, I'm less easily convinced.

 

All you say may be correct but if this is a UEFA ban then it is applied exclusively to Rangers without any sign of enforcement that I can see. If UEFA fined Rangers for discriminatory chanting and the punishment specifically included banning TBB - words and tune - why did Rangers not simply publish this UEFA directive verbatim on the official website? I understand completely that the UEFA charge included a judgement that TBB formed part of the discriminatory behaviour - what I'm less certain of is that a ban on TBB - words and tune - was part of the actual UEFA punishment.

 

Is the ban mandatory and specific from UEFA - or voluntary and general from Rangers?

 

If UEFA, is it European games or all games?

 

Why words AND tune? Why are similar words and identical tune apparently allowed to be used by fans of other clubs - at Ibrox and elsewhere?

 

To say that the situation lacks both clarity and resolution would be an understatement. I'd like the wool removed from the eyes of the Rangers support and I would like Murray to do the removing.

[Frankie 8,552]

No idea why they didn't publish it on the website. Perhaps they didn't want all the dirty linen made public for interlopers to use?

 

Nevertheless they did discuss the directive with fans' representatives and clauses from the directive were made available via the Assembly link I provided.

 

With regards to the alleged ban, well, again, if the song was part of the censure (and it was the only one specified) then of course it would then be banned thereafter. That may well be supposition but I can't see any other conclusion to take. They'd hardly fine us for it and allow us to keep singing it.

 

There's no doubt the issue leaves a bad taste in the mouth for all of us but I'm not sure denying the ban exists really helps address the other more valid issues with the decision.

[maineflyer 0]

No idea why they didn't publish it on the website. Perhaps they didn't want all the dirty linen made public for interlopers to use?

 

Nevertheless they did discuss the directive with fans' representatives and clauses from the directive were made available via the Assembly link I provided.

 

With regards to the alleged ban, well, again, if the song was part of the censure (and it was the only one specified) then of course it would then be banned thereafter. That may well be supposition but I can't see any other conclusion to take. They'd hardly fine us for it and allow us to keep singing it.

 

There's no doubt the issue leaves a bad taste in the mouth for all of us but I'm not sure denying the ban exists really helps address the other more valid issues with the decision.

 

It's becoming circular but I'm not denying any ban. I'm saying there is no evidence of a ban and there should be if it exists. I personally don't give a monkeys about the song but I do about the dishonesty and manipulative tactics of a chairman who has been allowed to get away with too much and for far too long.

 

If you have been party to information that is obviously too privileged for the likes of me, was the tune specifically and unambiguously banned and by what means were grown men persuaded to believe such arrant nonsense.

[JMS 0]

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?

 

 

I still have that partcular letter and he did not confirm the ban mate.

 

He did say that I would recieve a copy of the written grounds if I contacted the club, so I duly did, in fact one of letters was sent to Carol Paton amongst others and I did not even recieve an ackowledgement from any of them, then of course we had all the rst stuff that basically said we were to drop it as it was gone.

 

I did upon being cautioned on the PRW have a full and frank discussion with the police in Helen St about the subject and recieved an apology, and yes it was about TBB, I could go into it more but suffice to say I have always been of the opinion that their is an agenda against the support and all fingers point in the one direction.

[maineflyer 0]

I still have that partcular letter and he did not confirm the ban mate.

 

He did say that I would recieve a copy of the written grounds if I contacted the club, so I duly did, in fact one of letters was sent to Carol Paton amongst others and I did not even recieve an ackowledgement from any of them, then of course we had all the rst stuff that basically said we were to drop it as it was gone.

 

I did upon being cautioned on the PRW have a full and frank discussion with the police in Helen St about the subject and recieved an apology, and yes it was about TBB, I could go into it more but suffice to say I have always been of the opinion that their is an agenda against the support and all fingers point in the one direction.

 

 

I'll go further and say that certain elements of the RST were almost certainly and knowingly complicit in this "game". This was the single act of treachery that killed the RST stone dead, in which condition it remains today.

[Frankie 8,552]

It's becoming circular but I'm not denying any ban. I'm saying there is no evidence of a ban and there should be if it exists. I personally don't give a monkeys about the song but I do about the dishonesty and manipulative tactics of a chairman who has been allowed to get away with too much and for far too long.

 

If you have been party to information that is obviously too privileged for the likes of me, was the tune specifically and unambiguously banned and by what means were grown men persuaded to believe such arrant nonsense.

 

It sure is becoming circular.

 

Again I can only say read the links I posted earlier. But to save you the time here is what was written on the Assembly website:

 

This meeting coincidently coincided with UEFA�s written grounds for the decision rendered by the Appeal Body in relation to Rangers two Champions League matches against Villarreal. UEFA have issued the Club with certain directives in order to combat sectarianism more efficiently.

 

Firstly the Club has been ââ?¬Ë?ordered to announce measurable targets in order to reduce sectarian behaviour amongst its supportersââ?¬â?¢.

 

Secondly ââ?¬Ë?to control their anti-sectarian activities by producing comprehensive statistics that are communicated to the publicââ?¬â?¢.

 

Finally ââ?¬Ë?to make a public address announcement at every official fixture, be it international or domestic, stating that any sectarian chanting and any form of ââ?¬Ë?Billy Boysââ?¬â?¢ songs is strictly prohibited.ââ?¬â?¢

 

As such, TBB is 'specifically and unambiguously banned' from any venue for Rangers fans.

 

Now, I don't know for a fact if these words are UEFA's or Rangers' but I'm pretty sure they are from UEFA as I simply don't believe there would be any reason for the club to make such stuff up - given the censures mentioned on the UEFA websites.