Leaderboard

I have no interest in my fellow Rangers fans views on anything other than Rangers, I wouldn't expect them to have the same political and cultural opinions that I do, in the same way I wouldn't expect them to agree with my ideas of team selection, tactics, signings etc. We are a broad church, I really couldn't give a flying fuck whether you're Female, Black, Gay, Greek Orthodox, whatever, all are welcome in my eyes. There are other sporting institutions where the fans are expected to have certain narrow views, lets not be that club.

We are going to qualify, yes, but we did not bury the tie. We will have to work harder than we would like in the away match. That is a valid reason for disappointment.

Some of our play is excellent. Progres look shattered already so I hope we can take advantage in the second half. Aribo is unbelievably talented and I still can't believe we've got this guy. Edmundson looks an incredible signing. Is he possibly the best passer in our team? Davis is the puppet master and is a pleasure to watch.

Agreed. A wage thief, who even now is probably trousering a handsome pay off wedge. I actually thought that the Club had moved on from the Treasure Island School of Financial Management.

In case anyone thinks it, let me assure you Neil Cameron is no fool. He hates Rangers but he's no fool. He's survived too long while colleagues have dropped like flies to ever be underestimated. This particular article is quite clever. On the surface of it he's flattering us by saying that Rangers fans have changed and are less bigoted and more inclusive. However, what he's really doing is saying to Rangers fans "if you want people to stop thinking of you as Neanderthals then you need to be less loyalist/unionist and more pro-independence". His aim here is clearly to give confidence to the few Rangers fans who have or are tempted to stray from our core loyalist/unionist/conservative tradition, thereby quietly attacking what he hates most about us. There's always more than one way to skin a cat and Cameron will no doubt pull the wool over the eyes of a few gullible bears with this nonsense.

Neil has a piece in today's Herald, 'Five things we learned as Celtic breeze through Estonian test'. Number two of things learned is, 'Celtic shouldn't have to play Euro-qualifiers'. He utilises four paragraphs to explain ra Sellik are just too good for the standard of opposition. I don't think ra Sellik being special will cut it with UEFA? Of course, Neil should provide some pertinent evidence to support his emotive plea. It's akin to his take on Rangers and diversity, "okay, we know a few left footers slipped through the net". This is stated to assuage his obvious reluctance in describing Rangers signing of MoJo as, "the first high profile RC". As stated before, Rangers signed as many RCs in their first fifty years as other Scots clubs(outside those clubs deliberately founded to play RCs ie ra Sellik, Hibs, Dundee Hibs, ..... etc). I believe during Bill Struth's tenure, four RCs did slip through the nets? Clearly, it was Struth from 1919 that imposes a non RC signing policy. Why? I penned an article nearly two decades past that attempted to explain the then reasoning, NOT to excuse the policy. Struth and Wilton were both Commissioned Officers in the Royal Army Medical Corps. They worked throughout WW1 and in Struth's case, for nearly a decade after the Armistice. Dealing with multiple soldiers' and their horrific mutilating wounds(physical and cerebral). After WW1, those soldiers in particular felt keen betrayal reference the events in Dublin during 1916. It was in their terms, a stab in the back. I believe Struth solicited soldiers he was helping to restore. Further, I believe it was an unacceptable and inexcusable action? Now, Neil Cameron could do some research but he is lazy. He prefers to sit extremely comfortably with his preferred prejudice. However, the facts are out there, Neil has had to move his position from Rangers NEVER signed a catholic until MoJo, to he is the first high profile RC. The current position will not hold for much longer either.

For what it's worth, I actually enjoyed his article. I don't agree with all of it, but it was entertaining and in my opinion largely correct.

Thank you, and I decided just to bite the bullet and read it. It does look like the judge saw right through Blair's attempt to pull a fast one over a previous judgement, but I'm so glad I've read this. There's actually nothing in this that is out of the norm of one of these types of disputes. I can also see why SD are likely to win these, and probably keep winning them. The issue then is why would Rangers continue to go into these sessions knowing that we are likely to lose? To me the answer is simple, and it's the same reason almost all of these instances occur. Even while we go through these with compensation payouts, it's probably financially better (and I suspect gives greater satisfaction) rather than to give SD what they want. Also, each time you go through such a case, there's a good chance we will win relatively small victories which then eat away at the interpretation of the current contract. I hope we keep going with this. One thing to note however is that there are a couple of areas where SD's lawyers have played a blinder and it just shows the advantage they have in the money they are paying for their side. We can't ever compete with that so it will be death by a thousand cuts until eventually the value of this contract to SD is diluted to the point where we will propose another but final payout to SD. SD's lawyers have all the experience so they will just be trying to secure the best possible outcome when that inevitable time comes. It could be as soon as 18 months at this rate. I'm going to look at the previous contract too now because I was astonished at us paying £3m to renegotiate. I am intrigued to see why it was so bad that we were willing to pay such a fee. In comparison with our income that seems hugely disproportionate and that makes me curious. I should add that as far as I can tell, the judge stepped out of line when he suggested that this had cost 'SD millions'. There was nothing presented that would give him enough evidence to suggest that so I'm really surprised he said that. Also, there is one particular clause that Rangers are relying upon to limit the compensation to £1m, and despite the official statement from the club this judge has ruled that this limit may not necessarily be applied. I do agree that SD may be hard pushed to prove losses more than this, but in my opinion that statement form Rangers is misleading on that one point. They could have acknowledged what the judgement said but then assert their view that losses are unlikely to breach that amount, but instead they chose to word it in a way that contradicts what the court papers say. That's the one point that will make me now check the source facts from now on, rather than rely on the club's interpretation of what happened, and I'm disappointed that this is the case. Thanks to @rbr for encouraging me to read what I could have a few days ago.

I feel sick at the sight of that photo! Were there no republican marches or gatherings for him to enjoy? The other part of me wonders why Yousaf was pictured at Ibrox, around about the same time as Cameron writes an article encouraging bears to vote a certain way? (Before I get hammered for the politics thing-it has relevance to the picture). However, the main point of the diversity thing is a media tuck box. We have known for years how diverse our support was.

I have not given a penny to any club that conspired against us and never will.

Can't we just take a pre-emptive strike and confirm that we will take zero seats at away grounds this season? I know this will upset those that follow us away from home, but surely everyone would agree that this is in the best interests of our club, and as it is surely going to damage our competition, it's also gives us a competitive advantage. I wouldn't give any other club one single penny. I don't forgive any of them, and I certainly won't forget what they conspired to do to us.

I committed to look at the details around the previous deal, and if ever there was a need for a @Rousseau gif, it's now (feel free to insert as appropriate). Bloody hell, it's actually unbelievable and I'll be honest that I thought I had found a fake version at first. I recognise the current board's desire to make quick progress commercially, and therefore why they paid a fee to renegotiate, however I suspect that they were tempted to go down the criminal actions route. If that was me, I'd have been confident of a strong case against those that approved of that deal. I have never experienced any organisation with the audacity to even propose those terms, never mind someone then stupid/corrupt enough to accept them. I've not looked into the governance during this period, but how could this possibly have been reviewed and approved? Any director would be breaching their fiduciary duties by accepting this. There is absolutely zero chance of defending this as being in any way of interest to our football club. I don't know how much time it would have taken to reach a conclusion through criminal proceedings, but perhaps that was the main reason for choosing to cut losses and renegotiate instead. I'm furious that people have escaped appropriate punishment for this, but I do understand our board's rationale. I suppose that's just one we have to accept and move on from. If I then put myself in the position of SD, and if was holding on to a legally binding contract like that original one, I wouldn't have agreed to dilute it to the current contract for just £3m. I'd have felt confident in getting way more than that, so I suppose in one way it shows good negotiating tactics/skill from our club. However that just makes me further suspicious and probably reinforces my belief that SD knew that the board could have tackled the original contract in a more damaging route for those involved. I suspect there were lots of verbal threats/suggestions which we will obviously have to avoid speculating on. Ultimately, we were screwed in that original contract. We then paid a reasonable sum to renegotiate to a point where we feel we can dilute it down further. It's going to take time though, and we should all expect to be in this fight for at least 18 months more. I am so glad I took the time to read the source materials. I knew it was bad previously but didn't appreciate how bad. I am so grateful to those who have come in and rescued the club we all love, but this is a serious lesson to us all not to just blindly trust those in power at Rangers again. I can't forget what I've just read regarding those contractual terms and it concerns me that this was allowed to happen right under our noses. It must never happen again.

I like going to the football with like-minded individuals. I want to be able to sit with people that share my views on how the SNP are targeting our club, for example and that the rise of Nationalism is severely damaging our our country. That doesn't make me a bigot.

I sympathise with your point of view because the criticism of Candeias was way over the top through the season, especially when all his goal-creating stats were above Kent across the board who wasn't criticised. However in my opinion we lost the league in games where we were found out for lacking creativity/end product when it really mattered. Losses to Livingston, Aberdeen and Kilmarnock and draws to Aberdeen, Kilmarnock, Dundee, Hibs (twice) and St Johnstone. Those games were worth 21 points. We scored 7 goals in those 9 games. Those games don't include the final game of the season loss to Kilmarnock, the 3-3 draw to Motherwell and both losses to Celtic. You could add a few cup games to it though. Just my opinion but I felt we were pretty much fine in defence and midfield last season but the players tasked with creating goals just weren't good enough to turn more of those draws into wins and even losses into draws/wins. Celtic had the same very tough games against packed defences but found a winner time and time again. My takeaway was that we needed to find players better than both Kent and Candeias for our starting 11 this season and that we needed adequate cover for when Arfield is unavailable who is one of our most important players.

I prefer to see it both ways. Just because his stats are good, doesn't mean the opposite is wrong. Now and again his final ball and overall contribution were poor: in other words, he could have created and scored more. However, he was still a very useful player defensively and in attack. We all watch games and have our generic opinions on players: I very much doubt stats will change some folk's mind or let us know that Candeias' crossing was hit and miss. We can see that for ourselves. However, stats do let us know that despite his faults, his contribution was still more than useful.

Correct. Like I said yesterday, in many ways, I very much doubt Rangers felt they could win most of these court cases but, in the longer term, then they may be seen as acceptable (though costly) losses.

On Thursday Rangers get the chance to right a huge wrong when Prógres Niederkorn come to Ibrox. I don't need to tell anyone that they surprisingly put us out of the Europa league at the first Qualifying round two years ago. Prógres had never won a game in Europe and scored just one goal. Even although Rangers only managed a 1-0 win at Ibrox it was unthinkable that a team who had never won in Europe and had only ever scored one goal could put the mighty Glasgow Rangers out of Europe. Niederkorn soaked up Rangers early pressure and gradually started to insert themselves more and going into the second half looked more and more dangerous. Disaster struck for the Gers as Olivier Thill crossed for Francoise to finish at the near post. Shortly after that a Sebastian Thill free kick, crossed in at pace, managed to avoid everybody and the ball ended in the back of the net. Rangers had incarcerated what is judged as their worst ever European result. Pedro Caixinha the Rangers manager stood by a hedge telling Rangers supporters that things would improve but after our worst ever 1-5 home defeat against Celtic and losing to Aberdeen for the first time in 26 years his days were numbered and after more poor results he lasted a total 229 days in the job before he was sacked. He goes down in history as the Rangers manager to last the shortest ever time. This was the Rangers team that day. 1 Foderingham 9 Miller 2 Tavernier 4 Cardoso 8 Jack 18 Rossiter (Substituted for Herrera at 77') 5 Wallace 24 Bates 19 Kranjcar 20 Morelos (Substituted for Dálcio at 45') 21 Candeias (Substituted for Windass at 58') Substitutes 7 Dálcio 11 Windass 15 Herrera 23 Holt 25 Alnwick 33 Waghorn 40 McCrorie Looking at that team only Foderingham, Tavernier, Jack and Morelos are still at the club. Replacing Morelos with Dálcio at half time in retrospect is an "Oh my god" moment. Rangers are a completely different beast under Stevie Gerrard so dare I say we really should be strong favourites to win this tie at ease. Therein may lie the danger that even under Stevie G our biggest problem has been with teams soaking up pressure and hitting us with a sucker punch. While under Caixinha with Kranjcar in the team Rangers never ever looked fit and that is completely different to the team at the moment. Rangers look like a super fit high pressing dream machine. Surely with this team lightening cannot strike twice in the same place? Looking at the Prógres team that played against Cork they still have five players who were involved the last time round. The standout name is Sebastian Thill who scored their second goal that knocked the Gers out. Their goalkeeper Sebastian Flauss was injured in the first half the last time we played them but unfortunately we hardly made their substitute keeper make a save. I hate using the word revenge as it sounds as if you have to win at all costs for past performances. I think we should have that mindset in every game whether we lost to a team in the past or not. I am pretty sure Stevie G will have that mindset as well. European money has become a major player on how much you can improve your team and Dave King has stated in the past that we need to get through to the European play-off rounds on a regular basis to keep improving the team to get to the level we need to be at. We really can't let teams who can't even play in their own stadium get in our way. While I have already booked a hotel in Luxembourg for the return game I will be happy to go there with the tie already decided by an emphatic win at Ibrox. Picking a Rangers team is a nightmare at the moment as we have two players for every position. I think McGregor is making a lot of mistakes at the moment so I will go with: Foderingham Tavernier Goldson Katic Barisic Davis Jack Stewart Jones Arfield Morelos To be honest I am not a Goldson fan and would prefer Edmundson and Katic but I think you can set Goldson's name in stone to play. Come on the Gers, get intae them!

I felt the latter three weren't as effective in the second period but finished the game fairly well. Jack was immense and was really unlucky not to have scored another goal. Aribo is going to be a big player for us.

Ultimately a solid result but have to say I'm annoyed by how slack we were in the last 20-30mins of that game - not only being wasteful in attack but a few players contriving to create chances for the opposition two and if it wasn't for McGregor, an away goal would have been conceded. Jack was my man of the match with Edmundson and Aribo also very good. A few others need to work on their sharpness.

I think Goldson has played more forward passes than anyone else though a couple have been too long. I think he's done well in breaking up counter attacks and recycling the ball well. It's all about opinions. PS: The disallowed goal wasn't offside.

Great goal from Aribo after some nice play around the box. If they don't stop trying to walk the ball into the net though this games got 1-0 written all over it.

Very good first half with our lack of goals the only disappointment. Lots of good individual performances with Goldson, Edmundson, Jack and Davis all showing up very well so far but Joe Aribo has stolen the show and looks a real find. Unfortunately, like last season at times, our decision-making in and around the box has let us down whilst Arfield looks a wee bit short of sharpness for me. Tav's not having as good a game either and we need a wee bit more from Ojo. We really should be 2 or 3 up but hopefully those goals will come after the break so we can kill the tie before we travel next week.

You’re losing it pete ?

40 degrees here and I decided to lay 50x50cm garden slabs. What was that old song? Mad dogs and Englishmen go out in the midday sun

The problem isn't individual stories, Gaffer. It's the continual, one-sided assault on all things Rangers.

People giving Gerrard stick over Laffertys signing , at the time he was banging in goals and looking great , the majority of our fans wanted him , how was SG to know he was the same head banger who only this time was sending pics of his dick to women on the internet .

So this chunt attends the Everyone Anyone launch and goes to write a piece about this for his failing rhag of a paper, and manages to includes lies about Johnston being the first high-profile RC, including supposed quotes from a RSA official that I do recall from the time or have ever heard of since, confirms we are still a Protestant institution, slags our fans songbook, ridicules our collective politics as being worse than the Nazis, In over 30 years of going to just about every game Rangers play I have never seen a Nazi or any Nazi flags, banners etc, but somehow he says he sees them around all the time. I could go on but I have lost the will to do so with this utter tripe. Suffice to say that we spend a fortune to launch this campaign, invite the journos along, and then the write another negative piece about Rangers fans whcih barely mentions the campaign and tells you nothing about it. Why do we let people like this to have free access to our club?

Why is Humza wearing a black tie? Reference this new initiative, I note BBC Scotland failed to cover the launch. Couldn't they at least sent an effigy, by the time Humza left the Stadium, he would have ensured the evidence was lost?

That's so 20th century of you, coop. We need to welcome our Celtc supporting, Rangers hating fellow compatriots to Ibrox, with open arms and big, cheesy grins. Love conquers all, man.

I know that whataboutery doesn`t help often, but I would like to read a similar article by Mr. Cameron on the Yahoos. And not with regards with child abuse, even though he may add another article on that topic too. Just to see whether he has some balance.

Good. The fewer Rangers fans funding ABERDEEN the better.

It's as simple as that. No sensible person would ever use a selection of stats to define a player's overall quality, just as you wouldn't use one YouTube video to scout a player. However, as we've seen across sport, alongside more orthodox training, statistical analysis is increasingly important. Indeed more and more clubs at all levels use science (e.g. applied maths such as this example or indeed food/diet/sports science) to determine various factors from where best a player might feature in your team/tactics to fitness and well-being. Key mistakes is also a stat so if someone like Kamara is costing goals for whatever reason then stats can be used to find out if he struggles in certain situations or in certain areas of the pitch: this can then be used to alter the way he plays to minimise such problems. To say they mean nothing is just silly. I'd love to see Steven Gerrard's face if you said that to him....

24th July Neil Cameron: Rangers couldn't ignore how their support has changed By Neil Cameron Gers fans these days have changed from their intolerant history IT is 30 years since a day-late Scottish newspaper told a 16-year-old holidaying in Malta that Mo Johnston had signed for Rangers. A phone call home, which was half my spending budget, confirmed news so sensational that only those around at the time could even attempt to describe what it meant to Scotland. Super Mo was the first high-profile Catholic to sign for Rangers, thus ending an unwritten but well-adhered-to signing policy of those in charge at Ibrox asking what school a would-be player went to; although it’s transpired since that a few left-footers slipped through. “It is a sad day for Rangers,” so said Rangers Supporters Association general secretary, David Miller, in 1989. “Why sign him above all others? There will be a lot of people handing in their season tickets. I don’t want to see a Roman Catholic at Ibrox. It really sticks in my throat.” Never mind the throat, Miller’s brain was stuck in the 1800s. He was also wrong. There was no boycott. The ticket office wasn’t open 24 hours to deal with folk handing back their season books. The average Rangers supporter worked out that their club had got one over Celticand signed one of the best strikers in British football. What section of Christianity the bold Mo, never a great church-goer it must be said, was brought up in mattered not a jot to most. Catholics have played, captained and managed at Ibrox and yet I still see Rangers as a Protestant institution. That’s not a criticism, by the way. But as a club, Rangers have found it harder to shrug off what a section of their support sing, blog and tweet with regards to some of the old ways which, to right-minded people, belong in the past. Those who see nothing good within the Rangers support, and remember it’s the biggest in Scotland, have an image of the shaven head, earring, tattoo, wearing an ill-fitting replica strip and whose politics are to the right of Klaus Barbie. And you do see them about. You hear them, mostly at away games, and social media can feel dominated by the pro-Katie Hopkins brigade who boast of their love of Rangers more than anything. However, that’s not the bluenoses I know and have hung around with for years. Left-leaning, Atheist, some from Catholic backgrounds, working class, middle class, funny, smart, some want independence while others don’t. They are into music, films, food and, of course, the famous Glasgow Rangers. They do not spend their day listening to Loyalist battle songs. Some, whisper it, aren’t all that keen on the royal family. Are they anti-Catholic or anti-Irish? No, and I wouldn’t spent time with bigots from all sides if I can possibly help it. That is why the bigots think we all think the same way. It’s because the only people happy to be in their company share the same poisonous views. I hate to break it to those who view Rangers as the baddies with no redeeming features but most punters go along to Ibrox, take in the game, then go home again. Just like everyone else. As one Bear put it to me: “We get blamed for everything. I know the Rangers support can let us all down but it’s not as if the rest of us go about punching kittens.” I was at Ibrox on Monday for the launch of Rangers’ new diversity and inclusion campaign, which hopes to show Rangers are the place for you regardless of background, sexuality, faith, disability etc. “Everyone, Anyone,” was the message. Good on them. This was no box-ticking exercise. A lot of work has gone into it by good people who love Rangers and would rather like a few more to fall in love, no matter who they are. The reaction was predictable from non-Rangers fans. The usual “Ah whatabout” began and will still be going. At least they are doing something. They had to. Not because it’s the right thing but because the Rangers support has changed. There are 10s of thousands going to games every week who would rather some of the old songs weren’t belted out. They cringe when a chant goes up about the Lisbon Lions dying. They are less than proud of what led to 2012, and quite a few things which happened afterwards. And yet they watch their team, go back home to a partner who may well be of the other persuasion, and many of their friends will be. The world keeps spinning. The playwright Alan Bisset, whose politics are of the left and he’s in favour of independence, is also big Rangers fan. This is what he said a few years ago when discussing Rangers from a cultural perspective. “Scotland has changed, Scottish nationalism is in the ascendancy and if you are a Unionist diehard you will feel under siege. There is that terror of no longer being relevant, of losing control. “The cliched response is when Yes folk say: ‘How can you be a Rangers fan and support independence?’ – I am and can. I am frustrated at all Rangers supporters being lumped together.” Rangers fans I know have no problem voting SNP, being one of those soppy liberals, having their kids at the other school and at the same time wanting their team to win trophies. And they would like as many people as possible to join their gang. Who cares who they sleep with, what they do on a Sunday or if their second cousin, twice removed, once went on a date with Charlie Nicholas. The Rangers support these days is a broad church. They like the idea of the person sitting beside them at the match not being from the usual “proddie” background. As long as they support the team. Most of us have worked out it’s all that matters.

Hate to be the one to tell you but this can be described as circulation. It is the act of circulating his words. It is very clear that this is inadvertent though since you certainly don't understand your actions.

Eh? I posted an article by a “journalist” all the words are his, not mine.

Not sure it was as often as that but, as I saw it, he did work hard to get himself out of trouble too.

We still lack the cutting edge required. Too often we required a second touch when one would have been advantageous. Too often we passed when we should have taken a shot. Improve both and we would bury Progres tonight.

Just out the game , at times sensational at others very sloppy , Edmundsson fantastic Ojo a waste of space, ok he scored but we carried him the entire game , needs to do much better all round.

It ends 2-0 and missed a penalty. Other than Edmundson our defence have looked pretty poor tonight switching off at set plays not picking up their man. The players they brought on were much better and tougher than the ones they started with. I think they have goals in their side and it will be a tough job over there in the return leg. In saying that they may open up a bit and have to score three to go through. We still struggle with the issue of breaking down teams who have everyone behind the ball and play on the break. We'll need to be a lot better than that if we're going to do anything.

Great to see Ojo finish so nicely on his weaker foot

That's pretty much full-strength, for me, excepting the odd change.

It's amazing how a screamer against the yahoos skews the memory. I didn't want Lafferty back and know plenty of other Bears who felt the same.

And we've seen it ramp up over the past few weeks to keep another distasteful story from the other side of the city out of the news.

I can only remember John Spencer who went on to play for Chelsea? I’m sure there were some before that though? It all depends on your definition of “high profile” I guess?

I agree but the counter argument would be that the players need to use these games to get used to playing in the formation they'll be playing every week in the league.

The irony of Cameron discussing relevance?

Sadly my personal experience over the decades just backs that up. I've been the Chairman of the Rangers Disabled Supporters Club for more years than I care to remember, sat as the disabled representative on the Rangers Fans Board, been on the Disability Matter Group since its inception. This scheme was apparently 18 months in the making and yet the first I heard about it was when I saw it on twitter.