Rangersitis

I think you are forgetting that objections to BBC Scotland's coverage of our club started before Whyte's tenure.

Nope, indeed I remember that your wee group had a rally down there - not the one with the UB! I was addressing the comment about The Men Who Sold The Jerseys which was broadcast in the May.

Yes i told it weeks ago as well but since then warburton has came in and said he has final say on all transfers. Taking it the manager will not be over ruled

 

 

His agent said the deal was all agreed he would be coming to rangers as long as hibs do not go up. He also said he would have signed before but mccoist screwed them over. Wouldn't elaborate.

Thanks.

Agree with that D, who can forget the hatchet and fantasy job " The Men Who Sold the Jersey" The BBC haven't had the decency to hand back the prize they falsely won, on the back of the lies and smears. It should be renamed "The Lies That Sold An Agenda"

Well you patently forget that it was broadcast after Craig Whyte had been toppled.

Perhaps had our club not been subjected to such a vitrolic campaign by BBC Scotland it would have been far easier for us not to shoot the messengers.

I could perhaps buy that if it had been targeted shooting by a sniper and not a Gatling gun being sprayed indiscriminately across a wide arc.

I agree with that. It was more for me than a Manager. I haven't seen him play other than the times he played against us. I wanted to see his stats so I could get an idea of how well he's done. Looking at a performance is subjective, and you'll get a different opinion from each person you ask -- 'He's shite', 'He's class'. 15 Assists in 30 games seems a pretty good stat that suggests he has an influence on the team.

As I say, I'm a dinosaur so not the best person to ask.

I agree, but surely a midfielder needs to be judged on something?

He's judged by whether his manager thinks he had a good game or not. The stats may be a help to him if they are used in conjunction with watching the game live and then on tape afterwards but that would be down to the individual. The game seems to have been over-complicated.

Good point. I suppose it would need to be split into short-pass-success-rate and long-pass-success-rate. Obviously the difficulty is different, but I would argue the short pass is still a very important pass. Xavi is renowned for the short pass; Pirlo the long pass. Which is more difficult? probably the latter. Which is most important? Both, I'd say. Although pass-success-rate doesn't take into account difficulty, I still think it's an important stat with which to judge a midfielder -- It suggests the importance of the player to the team.

 

What do you think?

I think football hipsters should be shot.

A successful 2 yard pass when surrounded by three opponents is different to a 2 yard pass with nobody nearby. The bare stats don't appear to have any context to them.

Thanks for that.

 

Of course it's not American Football, but we judge strikers by goals scored etc., so it makes sense to judge a midfielder on assists and passes, pass success rate etc. no?

 

Incidentally, Allan contributed 15 assists in 30 games last year. I think that's decent; it certainly makes me more interested in signing him.

I never have taken the time to find out the parameters of these in-depth stats.

Is a successful pass judged the same whether it is 2 yards sideways or a 20 yard slide rule pass that guts the defence and leads to a goal?

forfar played only 4 of 7 available

How many full games at Portsmouth? 4 or 5?

 

league 1- plays 13 games, 5 as a sub, 3 he gets taken off, 1 goal ,1 assist (5 full games in total)

championship- 20 games ,3 as sub, 9 of them he gets subbed, 1 goal 5 assists (8 full games in total)

 

Scottish championship- plays 30 games, 2 as a sub, 12 games he is subbed off ,2 goals ,15 assists

 

the majority for hibs at right mid for comparison vuckic played 15 scored 8 and 2 assists, danny wilson played 31 scored 5 with 5 assists at centre half

 

Are we not trying to improve the side?

 

 

sorry have watched the guy a few times for scotland u21 and hibs he is poor.

 

The more i think about it the less likely i see Warburton signing off on him.

Sorry, but didn't you claim last night that the deal had already been done prior to Warburton's appointment?

Eustace looks a risk after those knee ops. But the lack of leadership on the pitch has been absolutely dreadful. Jig had his limitations as a player but I did think he'd have the character to provide a bit of leadership. it makes some sense to have an old head in what's likely to be a fairly young squad, and there's off-the-pitch influence as well: sounds like he might instill a bit of professionalism (evidently pretty thin on the ground). Overall, with a bit of luck with injuries, he might be a canny acquisition.

Wilson, assuming it gets done, seems a no-brainier. The other lad, I have no knowledge of but sounds solid and ok on the ball.

The discussion of Allan is just getting daft: either he's Platini in his heyday and pub football clogger. On what I've seen, he looks ok. I like the drive he gives. When he gets the ball, he always seems to try to pass forward or to run at the opponent's midfield and defence. He takes responsibility--no hiding--and tries to make stuff happen. Again, this has been absent far too often. On the flip side, it means he can give the ball away cheaply and he also looks a bit petulant and reckless. He's looked decent against us though I've not seen enough of him to make a definitive judgement. On balance, I reckon he'd do ok(clearly wants to play for us too, which shouldn't be ignored--can't be tolerating players who think they're doing us a favour by pulling on the jersey).

Your assessment of Allen is pretty much the same as mine. I would rather have that type of character in the team than a Law, Wallace or Templeton.

Did 'George' countenance that the BBC may just be on to something when they were exposing Craig Whyte for the charlatan that he is?

Did 'George' call for togetherness when anyone criticising Whyte was being accused of "doing the beast's work for them"?

Did 'George' overcome his "angst" and recognise that we are "all one support" when he was told that he might have to sit beside other fans who like to provide colour, both vocally and visually, at the match?

No, did he hell.

You do write beautifully but sadly, it invariably has a hollow ring to it.

Sincerely hope so............because the pain from the impatient pontificating pomposity of the 'underwhelmed' Is already to much to bear. More likely to drive the rest of us to the Erskine Bridge before the first ball is kicked than anything W&W could possibly inflict upon us.

Just saying like .......... :D

When you pay your money you have no control over when another fan will voice an opinion or warble a few tunes in your immediate vicinity, however, I took your meaning to be that your view would be obscured by the raising of banners etc. which as we have seen, happens quite a lot with this group.

That's a hard choice.

I'm betting that it is the messages that those banners convey that is the real point of his objections.

Aye very good. Stay in your normal seat and be surrounded by the UB unable to watch the game. No thanks.

The choice is yours. Renting one seat for a year doesn't give you a veto over who sits near you.

If we are going with a relatively young centreback pairing and some young blood in midfield an experienced holding mid is exactly what we need. I presume they have done their homework and are buying in a ready made leader , something we have lacked for years, on the pitch.. typical of our supports mentality if its naw a big name we dinnae want him.

Not seen that mentioned.

He's nearly 36, he's just missed three quarters of a season with not one, but two injuries and is still rehabilitating from the one suffered in January. Wanting experience is one thing, bringing in a player who is in decline and appears to be injury-prone into the bargain is another.

Easy to say if you are not affected' date=' some have supported the club from a particular place "For Generations".[/quote']

 

 

And anyone wishing to continue to do so can remain. Nobody is being forced to move anywhere.

Half of last season's squad had an SPL level history and that did us no good at all. No good looking at what we'll do there if we don't have the tools to get there at all, like last season. If Derby fans will be raging if he joins us, and they're well aware of his age, that's as good an endorsement as I need.

If the whole wide world interweb says it's so, that's good enough for me too!

keep a note if they happen....

 

eustace-hardly plays (<15 games)

Wilson- slow, constantly out of position and out muscled.

Allan- poor, rated around the hutton mark, constantly gives ball away under no pressure.

Kiernan- no idea.

 

we(the fans) will want rid of them all when we go up.

Good horse.

Is 2.9 tackles per game considered good when 2.3 of them resulted in free kicks?

I can see the ticket office being forced to take on extra staff if this is accurate.

In the interests of balance....

Union Bears

 

I didn't get a chance to post a full explanation from our side last night and there has unfortunately been a lot of misinformation posted. That was always the danger of the club sending out survey without full explanation.

 

Firstly, some background as to where we came from as a group. It is correct that the Union Bears were located in CR1 from 2007-2011. During that time we probably had around 20 participants and were more a group of mates than anything serious. There was an awful lot of bad blood between members and other fans in CR1, with wrongs on both sides. Primarily some within a seated section wanting to stand and sing is simply not going to go down well, people had to be given the choice.

 

In 2011 we were approached by The Blue Order and asked if we'd move to a joint section in BF1. The cub had earmarked that section as it was easiest to Police and control, there was never at any time a choice of where this section would be, it was BF1 or nowhere. We decided that for our group to grow into the singing/tifo/ultras group we all wanted we'd have to move from CR1, and this is what we done.

 

Since then we have grown massively in BF1, and until last year's boycott we controlled the entire section and had it generating at times a very good atmosphere. We returned from our boycott in December last year and have been there in force every game since then. As we stated at the time we did not attend the League Cup semi final as a group because it would have been unfair on those fans who had been attending all season.

 

It has never been lost on us the constraints of our current section and I'd therefore like to list why we feel that we need a move from BF1 and the Broomloan in general:

 

 

1) Noise and participation. Due to our location in the furthest corner of the stadium a lot of the noise we generate is simply lost. There is no roof over us to project the noise and at times most of the stadium can't hear what's been sung. Indeed any decent travelling support would have no problem outdoing us vocally because of their prime location. This has shown over the years in the little participation from rest of the stadium compared to the BF5 days.

 

2) Overcrowding. Because the Broomloan Front is mostly single-match tickets we have a huge problem with new faces every week migrating over to the section and making it extremely difficult to move and potentially a hazard. Indeed, the club have previously stated it could lead to the Ibrox safety certificate being removed.

 

3) Glasgow Derby. Before our relegation to the 3rd division our section was moved to the Govan West Corner to accommodate the ****s in the Broomloan. It's always something we've been bitter about and feel that your most vocal section of the stadium should not be in a position where it needs to be moved for any set of away fans. It breaks up any consistency established in the section because we're not all grouped together in that corner.

 

 

Those are the main reasons that we feel that our current position isn't in the best interest of the club, the team or the support in general.

 

Let me make absolutely clear that this decision is NOT to deliverately antagonise other supporters by moving them from their seats, it is simply to improve the atmoshphere at Ibrox. We have a 51'000 capacity stadium, those who want to sit and simply watch the game have absolute reign, best seats in the house and always will have. However, if you want to support in a more vocal way (which spurs the team on as many players have admitted) you are put in a small corner of the ground with little influence on the atmosphere, no matter how hard you try.

 

That leads me to our meeting with the club. We met with John Gilligan and David Martin and outlined the reasons above as to why the atmosphere at Ibrox won't continue to improve if the singing section is located in BF1. They understood our position, agreed that change had to happen and promised to do some work to identify an alternative.

 

The alternative is the Copland Rear. From a logistical and emotional point of view it is the area with the least season ticket holders outwith the Club Deck and Broomloan (due to family section). This means that if it were decided the club would move the singing section to a section in the Copland Rear, anyone who wanted to be moved could be easily accommodated in a similar or better position.

 

We intimated to the club that if fans had to be moved to accommodate our section that everyone in our section would pay a bit extra on our season ticket for a couple of seasons in order to give those having to be moved a discount on theirs. The club felt this was a positive idea. We also stated that anyone being moved should be allowed to pick their seats before public sale and be moved along with family or close friends they sit beside.

 

For us as a group we believe the Copland should be where any singing section at Rangers is located. For many years it was the focal point of noise inside the old Ibrox and indeed today still holds the mantra of "when the Copland sings, Ibrox sings".

 

Why the Copland Rear for us as a group? The noise would be incredible! Right under the roof with a full section of fans giving their all could be special, and it could change the tide of atmosphere at Ibrox. It would be a consistent section of season ticket holders who are there every game, not being moved for away fans and not having to deal with overcrowding issues which plague BF1.

 

And of course, it can also logistically be the ideal place to trial safe standing in the hopefully not to distant future.

 

We believe that there should exist a fair choice in football. A choice where all those who want to stand and sing can do so and be in a location which serves the purpose, whilst all those who want to sit with friends and watch the game can do so as always.

 

We've all seen what our support is capable of, the Ibrox roar is second to none in world football and I defy anyone who doesn't want to hear that on a regular basis.

 

Hopefully this clears up many of the unanswered questions for those in the Copland Rear who could be affected and everyone else with an interest. I'd urge all those returning their survey not just to say "**** off" and dismiss it, but to have a think about what we're proposing and what we can potentially achieve.

 

I'm grateful that the new Board have embraced our ideas and bought into them, it's something we got none of from the criminals of the past.

Peaceful protest asking any supporters wishing to go in to the store to refrain as the money does not go to the club.

 

Unfortunately some supporters have no option but to go into the store to pick up merchandise for kids who don't understand the politics, only that they want a Rangers scarf/top for their birthday/Christmas. It is these supporters we have to convince that the short term pain of not being able to satisfy their kids demands will be worth the long-term gain of getting a fair retail contract.

 

Perhaps the club could allow the RST to have a stall set up beside the official store to sell the "unofficial" replica kits, given that the profits from that go to the club by way of share purchases. I don't know if that would break the retail contract as it is not the club selling it or endorsing it, just allowing a fans group the opportunity to raise funds to put into the club.

I don't believe that is the case anymore due to some legal technicalities. I think they are handing out tickets now.

1,500,000 signatures would not make one bit of difference to Ashley. As has been shown time and time again he doesn't care about criticism, only the contracts.

 

Better than doing nothing but wholly ineffective. Blockades of all Sports Direct stores, picketing of the Rangers shop on matchdays, these are the things that MIGHT make a difference, and even then i am not sure it would.

That would result in nothing but aggro between those who want to buy and those who don't and I agree with you that Ashley wouldn't give a toss.

I also see that the self-proclaimed, apolitical stance of Rangers First has now gone for a burton with a vote being mooted with regards to a merchandising boycott.

While the deal is patently one-sided, individuals are more than capable of deciding where to spend their own money and should not be subjected to the sort of 'shaming' intimidation which was employed by the Yes campaign.

Yes, anyone can move and sit together where possible.

NIMBY thread!