Darthter

typo...;) Back on topic....I'm sure there will be plenty of stories dug up about all aspects of SGs past over the coming weeks. On the plus side, there should be plenty of positive reports from the media down south.

as does your blind devotion to nothing factual

Other than Tompkins mentioning his support of Rangers.....what part of the original tweet (from a Labour supporting Celtic page) points towards anything to do with Rangers???

Hopefully the players will realise that they are literally playing for their Rangers futures & put in a performance that we know they are capable of. Our players have the talent/skill to demolish Killie.....if they show a bit of pride & passion, that's what will happen. I can't see SG tolerating mediocrity.

Build a definitive list & present it to Party authorities - it's the only way for anything to happen, IF there is a problem. Any list has to be clearly Anti-Rangers or you won't have a leg to stand on. Eg. Dornan's "bash a Fe****" flyer, is NOT anti-Rangers - there was no mention of the club on it. However, if HE brings the club into it, that's a different matter.

They do seem to be doing ok with it though....

Lampard for No.2, Ferdinand for No.3????

would it be wise to hold the pre-game presser BEFORE unveiling the new manager??? There would be no interest in the game (well, less than usual) & more focus on what "might" happen later on. If they unveil SG 1st, they can then answer all the press' questions on that, then focus on the upcoming match.

I think the biggest difference is that with PLG & Warbs, there was an expectation based on their previous successes as managers. We don't have that option with Gerrard, so while there is trepidation & concern as to how he will perform as a manger, there is also a lot of optimism (rather than expectation) surrounding his appointment.

Part of the problem is that the bulk of the comparisons come via the Mhedia - they're the ones who are constantly banging on about the gulf between the 2 teams. I get the feeling that there is a very high level of excitement over SG's appointment, but balanced out with some health trepidation - which is a good balance to have. No-one is expecting him to walk in & annihilate all in front of him, winning the Champions league in his 1st season....there is still a realistic under current. I think overall, SG will be a good appointment for the club - just look at the amount of media coverage (across the UK) the story is getting, and for the most part it is VERY positive. I think there will be a lot more coverage/interest of our games down south as a result.

The difference being...there are specific examples of Labour (& Tory) members being anti-Semitic and as result they are being investigated as it is not allowed & a punishable offence. All I would ask going forward: Please refrain from generalising one parties views based on the actions of one or two individuals & also please refrain from the derogatory remarks about those of us who hold differing political views. We are all Rangers fans after all.

Other than some comments from one MSP....I don't see ANYTHING that is anti-Rangers. I ask again for examples of the SNP, as a party, being anti-Rangers. Also based on some of the logic presented here, there must be other parties are PRO-Rangers - I await the response.

So unionism isn't nationalism???

It's not about swaying anyone....it's about realising that this whole discussion is irrelevant.

Smiley faces....why is he not behind bars??? Of all the things to do. Wonder how many bears posted messages about SG with smiley faces. As for MP/MSP voting, every party is exactly the same. But again, how does ANY of that prove that the SNP, as a party, are anti-Rangers??? As I said before, none of the political parties care about football...they're more concerned about important matters like running the country.

As I said, if that is the case, there will be plenty examples to choose from....

But then again....I'm apparently nothing more than a SNP supporting Rangers fan with mental health issues....

The views of one msp do not represent the views of the party as a whole....but I'm sure you will be able to provide specific examples to the contrary??? The SNP as a party couldn't give 2 shits about Rangers, and neither could the Tories, labour, libdems, greens or any other party. Football is irrelevant when it comes to the business of politics....again, I'm sure your gonna pull out some 1/2 arsed examples.

Plenty Rangers haters out there.....this one happens to be a politician. It's certainly not representative of the party or its policies.

It's very easy actually.....to me, football & politics are 2 completely separate things. But compared to the alternatives, the SNP are by far the best option....but some folk would rather show support for a govt that put the lives of 450k women at risk in engerland and are actively reducing benefits to some of the country's most needy.

Originally read that as "arriving ON Waverley"...thought, that's an impressive entrance - sailing Doon the Watter on a paddle steamer

You know, that's not gonna happen

I can't see how they can improve much over the summer. The problem being, it's difficult to attract a high level of player to Scotland. They have been lucky with a few young(ish) signings who are most likely looking for a stepping stone down south. They have also spend big on several players who have flopped. They're biggest asset is their consistency, rather than their player skill level - look at all the plaudits Broonaldo is getting.... Whereas with us, an improved consistency level coupled with some good signings in key areas & we will be a serious thorn in their arse.

https://fypfanzine.uk/news/6935-james-mcarthur-contract-crystal-palace

If the talk of major investment is true....there is a case to argue that the 2 are going hand in hand.