- Popular Post
JohnMc
-
Posts
1,943 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
21
Posts posted by JohnMc
-
-
I don't think he should be in the squad, I don't think Gilmour should be either. Both clearly have huge potential but neither have played anything like enough first team football to warrant a full international call up. Anyway, they're in it now so I hope both of them do very well.
0 -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
It's come to something when Brian Wilson sounds reasonable and moderate to Rangers fans. It's a fair article and raises some good points.
5 -
13 hours ago, der Berliner said:
Isn`t there something like Ofcom checking out the journalists too?
BTW, they were pushing for "strict liability" with regards to songs et al before Covid-19 struck, even toned it down a bit when the Scum`s hordes were overdoing it themselves. I have no doubt whatsoever that had there been fans in the ground, they would have pushed that agenda again throughout the season, not least in the current climate.
Yes, there is - https://www.ipso.co.uk/
3 -
Congratulations Gunslinger, hope this Saturday goes as well as last Saturday.
1 -
43 minutes ago, Uilleam said:
An "illegal gathering" is an illegal gathering, whether it is 'spontaneous', or 'organised'.
Both represent breaches of the law, and must be treated thus.
One may be seen as a more serious infraction than the other, but that does not free the lesser action from illegality.
The reasons for assembly are irrelevant, although they may figure in any assessment of the public interest in undertaking prosecution, the nature and extent of charges, and the sanctions imposed following establishment of guilt.
It's ironic, but Glasgow police were criticised in some quarters for not following the letter of the law when we won the league. Some wanted kettling, mass arrests, roads closed and forced dispersal. Glasgow police, sensibly I thought, pointed out that would have been disproportionate and that officers on the ground made decisions based on crowd and public safety and their feel for the mood and moment.
I'm surprised to see you're a critic of that approach. ?
1 -
1 hour ago, Bluedell said:
But not yesterday's demo, or last weekend's Palestine one, or the nationalist one that took place the previous (?) week?
Maybe we do have something to demonstrate about if the SNP continue to use us as a political football? It's been proven that the chances of transmission in the open air are very small, and the worst reason for tomorrow not happening is because of the risk of the SNP using us as an excuse for their own inadequacies or their puritanical outlook on life.
Ah now, Del, read it again please. You've taken half a sentence, read the whole paragraph please. I said there is a chance Glasgow won't come out of level 3 because of rising infection rates and so people should stay away from Ibrox and George Sq. I didn't say it was because of that gathering, or any other.
Since I wrote that it has in fact been announced that Glasgow and Moray will now not leave Level 3 lockdown like the rest of the country. As someone affected directly by that I find it both very frustrating and more than a little concerning.
0 -
4 hours ago, onevision said:
Agree with most of what you say John but come on....spontaneous?no way was that illegal gathering spontaneous, organised yes but spontaneous, no.
I'd say for a lot of people it was. Some may have been tipped off and were waiting for it, but a lot knew nothing about it until it happened. I'm not condoning it, I'm just pointing out it shouldn't be compared to what's being discussed for tomorrow.
0 -
4 hours ago, Uilleam said:
A gathering is a gathering, irrespective of its reason, or purpose.
The motives for a gathering would come into play only in matters of punishment.
That's naive Billy, and you know it.
Many were fairly happy to excuse the celebrations when we won the league, I certainly was. There was a spontaneity to it and a release of pent up tension and anticipation. This time it's different.
1 -
4 hours ago, Frankie said:
In general I don't disagree with the thrust.
But yesterday's illegal gathering was promoted and called for by politicians and none, including Humza, have condemned it today. In fact, most have lauded it.
As such, as correct as you are to ask fans to consider their responsibilities, one rule for one group and one rule for another just muddies the water and gives people an excuse not to follow the rules.
I'll be clear though (and I tweeted this yesterday before the Pollokshields stuff), I would ask fans to consider our own responsibilities on Saturday. The manager and players have made us all immensely proud this season at home and abroad. Celebrate as you wish and where you wish but do it with respect for yourself, the club and CV19. Be safe!
Frankie, it's not news that football supporters are treated differently by police and usually politicians. I mean I've been going to football regularly since the early 80s and it's been happening as long as I've been attending. My issue isn't whether politicians are opportunists, they are and always have been, and it isn't whether the police view 2 large groups of people differently if one of them is wearing football scarves, they clearly do and always have. My only issue is people equating two quite different gatherings of people. The gatherings when we won the league were a spontaneous outpouring of joy. They shouldn't have happened but it's entirely understandable why they did. I didn't criticise them at the time and I won't criticise them now. But what's being spoken about for tomorrow is quite different.
Even from a pragmatic point of view we should be discouraging it. The Glasgow police were heavily criticised for not taking strong enough action last time, they might feel they need to correct that this time. A dozen young lads getting criminal records for this would be a real shame.
3 -
3 hours ago, Bluedell said:
Firstly, that wasn't a spontaneous protest by the neighbours. Politicians were calling for people from all over to attend.
Secondly, I don't know the rights and wrongs of the specific case, but those protesting were interrupting people going about enforcing the law. Yes, that's totally different and should, on the face of it, be condemned a lot more than people just celebrating a league win.
It was spontaneous for a lot of people, the vast majority of who had no idea they were going to take part in it when they woke up yesterday.
I'll leave what condemnation they should get to people who want to get involved in the politics of it. I don't. But as a gathering it's entirely different to what's being spoken about happening tomorrow.
0 -
3 hours ago, Gonzo79 said:
Thirteen+ months of lockdowns and ten years since a title win are why there will be a considerable gathering in Glasgow tomorrow.
Gie's peace, we won the title months ago. I can't remember any other time our support have gathered in George Sq to celebrate a trophy handover. It didn't happen after Wallace stopped Stein's 10 in a row and it didn't happen after Souness won his first title. There is literally no excuse for it happening tomorrow.
3 -
Are we drawing an equivalence between a spontaneous protest by the neighbours of two men being removed and deported and football supporter's celebrating receiving a trophy for a league they won 2 months ago? I'm sorry but the two are simply not the same. Whatever your personal politics, like or dislike for the current government or specific politicians or your views on immigration and refugees in this country, if you're trying to draw parallels between these events it's no wonder we get trounced in the media so regularly.
By all means ask why Thistle supporter's weren't derided for their spontaneous gathering outside Firhill when they won the league, or the various Green Brigade gatherings to worship and the tomb of Scott Brown that have taken place in recent weeks.
As a Glaswegian who actually lives in Glasgow I'd really prefer if all Rangers supporters stayed well away from Ibrox and George Square tomorrow. Infection rates are on the rise here, there's a chance the lockdown restrictions might be stopped because of this. So please, stay at home, watch the match on TV and celebrate it with your friends and family. This is not the time for pointless political point scoring or whatever the fuck it is motivating people to consider this.
4 -
Note to self, 18.00 is not the same as 8pm.
Note to self, 18.00 is not the same as 8pm.
Note to self, 18.00 is not the same as 8pm.
Note to self, 18.00 is not the same as 8pm.
Note to self, 18.00 is not the same as 8pm.
3 -
28 minutes ago, Rousseau said:
I agreed that they would toughen up, but I still believe they don't really learn anything useful for their move up to Rangers. How many Rangers youngsters have actually made it into our first-team after playing on loan at Championship sides? The intensity and level of football may be higher (not by much, IMO), but it doesn't help them get a game for Rangers, and it doesn't develop them into well-rounded players - too many Scottish clubs have no idea what a well-rounded player is! McCrorie has played every game for Livingston, but apparently -- going by comments on here, (by yourself?) -- he's not ready for Rangers.
Regular matches, yes, but how many of the current Scotland squad would make it at Rangers, when they were on our radar, so to speak? Roberston did well at Utd, but were we clamouring for his signature? No, he had to go up a level, to Hull. McGinn? I actually thought we should sign him when he was at Hibs, but the majority thought he was p*sh. Again, he's had to go up a level. They are good players, but I wouldn't say they are well-rounded. Robertson is just hard-working, with a wonderful left-foot. McGinn is similarly hard-working.
It's not just playing at Auchenhowie, it's playing against elite players in their age-range. Our 'B' team was playing against the best sides, and because the players are not outmatched physically, they can develop their technical skills while playing in a system similar to our first-team. You could argue that players developed from our 'B' team actually look much more rounded, and better technically, than anything produced before (McPake, Kennedy, Kelly, Mabude, Dickson, King etc -- I think Gilmour, too, but maybe not?).
So, for me, we've got a structure that can develop good players. I would then agree that the next stage is regular games. Surely they'll get games for the Colts? They wouldn't use the team skills they'd learned if they were to go on loan. They'll have the team around them to play a certain way, utilising their technical skills, all the while playing regular games against 'tough' opposition.
The 'B' team in the leagues is a win-win, for me.
The gap between the Lowland League and the Championship is considerable. The vast majority of sides in the Championship are comparable to half the SPFL, you could swap St Mirren, Ross County and Motherwell with Dundee, Raith Rovers and Dunfermline and see no change in quality.
Under Gerrard really only Nathan Paterson has played for our first team and even that was only because Tav was injured. Kennedy, Barjonas and McPake have had cameos but our recent record of introducing young players isn't great. Obviously Allan McGregor went out on loan as a young player, as did Charlie Adam and both went on to have decent careers. Barrie McKay also went out on loan more recently before returning and making an impact in the first team. But overall I agree we've struggled to introduce young players whatever route we've taken. I don't think I've mentioned Robbie McCrorie, what I would say about him is he's not played every game for Livingston, indeed he's struggled to become first choice there this season. I doubt either of us see him as better than McGregor or McLaughlin currently.
In terms of the current Scotland squad I'd say Andy Robertson (Queens Park), John McGinn (St Mirren), Lyndon Dykes (QOTS), Ryan Fraser (Aberdeen), Ryan Christie (ICT), Stuart Armstrong (Dundee Utd), Kevin Nisbett (Dunfermline) and Robert Snodgrass (Livingston) would all improve our squad and challenge for a first team place. I've only picked the ones who started their careers in Scotland at a club outside of Rangers and Celtic. We can all debate the merits of each individual and I'm not proposing signing any of them, just pointing out their route to top level football.
Some players simply need games, they need to play at a decent level along with grown men to develop. This isn't solely about physicality, this is about mentality. It's about learning that failing to track a runner or switching off for a moment can lead to the loss of a win bonus, something that can make a huge difference to a full time professional at that level. Those players won't be shy in letting a young player know what's expected and when they've let their team-mates down. I think we make certain assumptions about players at Championship level. In fact many of the players at that level are model professionals, guys making a living with significantly less natural ability than the young Rangers lads, guys with good habits and great work ethics.
Look at our current side just now. Only Allan McGregor (who did go out on loan to smaller sides), Steve Davis, Jermain Defoe (spent a season on loan at Bournemouth) and arguably Helandar came through at 'big clubs' in the top leagues. Every other player in our side was either released by a big club and rebuilt their career at a lower level or came through at a smaller side. You could argue Ryan Kent but ultimately he wasn't troubling the Liverpool first team.
Indeed I'd probably struggle to pick a side from the last 50 years of players who have come through at Rangers, and made a proper impression on the first team without a loan spell or starting their careers at a smaller club. Derek Johnstone, Derek Parlane, Bobby Fleck, Ian Durrant, Barry Ferguson, Allan Hutton, Lewis MacLeod. There will be others I've forgotten but it's not a long list.
I'm far from an expert on this subject, it's just my observations and I accept the guys at the club now weren't there for much of the past 50 years, but I've come to the conclusion Rangers probably shouldn't be involved in youth development.
1 -
10 hours ago, Rousseau said:
We've also seen teams like Brentford abandon their Academy for a 'B' team, because they see it as better for the development of players. Rangers have adopted this too, but kept the Academy.
Would you say we have been developing a better brand of player recently, with this 'B' team model? I feel like there are a few players that look good. (Of course, that doesn't mean they're going to make it at Rangers.)
When you think about it, what does a player out on loan actually gain? Let's say they go to a League One side. Yes, they would toughen up against seasoned professionals, but the football would be atrocious - and, I would argue, detrimental to their progress. They wouldn't be learning any technical skills, or ways of playing that would benefit them when it came to playing for Rangers.
We loan scores of players out every year, and they don't make it. That way we're just relying on that magical player that comes along once in a blue moon. That's not sustainable.
Using a 'B' team that plays in such a way that develops their skills and abilities, and that has natural link into the first team, is surely the better course? These players can be developed to play roles in the first team. They'll also be playing against hardened players, which will toughen them up anyway.
Even if they don't make it to Rangers, we would, in theory, be developing technically well-rounded players, who then could be a desirable asset for someone else. We've seen many a club scout youngsters from La Masia: even if they can't make it at Barcelona, they are good players; like Dani Olmo, Adama Traore, Hector Bellerin... Mikel Arteta?
I don't agree with you that playing in the lower leagues as a young player is detrimental. A look at the current Scotland squad suggests the opposite in fact. What holds back player development is not playing matches. Yes, players can pick up bad habits, but frankly they can do that at Rangers too. Surely playing in the Championship is better for a player's development than playing in the Lowland League. The intensity and level of football is higher in the Championship than in the Lowland League.
I'm interested in the idea that by remaining at Rangers and being trained at Auchenhowie the player will develop better than if they're at Arbroath on loan. If that's the case then why haven't Rangers produced countless first team players in the last decade? If keeping control of their training and development is what matters then surely we've had that all along? If Kai Kennedy fails to make it into the Rangers first team is that the fault of Raith Rovers?
Scottish football is at a low ebb, riven by self interest and short-termism and hampered by a lack of finance. I'm happy to see if playing our youngsters in the Lowland League will help but I'm sceptical.
2 -
22 minutes ago, Bluedell said:
What teams are in the Lowland League?
Currently - http://slfl.co.uk/lowland-league-table/ a mix of ex-Junior sides, old East Of Scotland League clubs that used to appear in Scottish Cup every year some relegated former senior sides and some new clubs like BSC and East Kilbride.
I'm puzzled about this. Apart from being deeply unpopular with supporters in that league it's really not a great level of football. I understand the desire to have young players playing senior football, but I'm not sure why the current system of having them out on loan doesn't work. I'd have thought a season fighting for a place in a Championship or League 1 side against seasoned professionals would be better for players than this, but what do I know.
1 -
While Walker simply isn't qualified to make informed comments on finance is he really that far off the mark using 'perilous' to describe us? The club is losing money and has been for a few years, it's being funded by the generosity of some wealthy individuals. That can't go on forever, we all know that. Players will need to be sold this summer and if we don't qualify for the Champion's League group stages it might be more than we're happy about. I don't think things are actually perilous because there's stability in the boardroom and what seems like a plan in place, a plan that's brought success. Plus, we clearly do have some very 'sellable' players on our books currently, it's a very different picture than any other point over the last decade. So perilous is too strong a word for me, but I'm not sure it's quite the slander the club are making out it is.
Walker probably gets his financial information from demented Celtic bloggers, and I suspect that was his audience for this, so it's ironic he's now banned from Parkhead too. That said I'm not sure anyone takes much notice of what Andy Walker says about finance, it's a bit like listening to Davie Provan's views on brain surgery or Charlie Nicholas on the plight of the Uyghurs. I still think we've over-reacted.
1 -
Goldson, Davis and McGregor have excelled all season in their respective position, rightly candidates for this award. Tavernier has not only excelled as a defensive right back, an area he's been criticised for in the past, but he's taken the attacking side of his game to a completely new level. He's currently second top with 'assists' and the 6th top goal scorer in the entire league, from right back. Even his leadership, again something that's been questioned in past seasons, has been unrivalled this season. It's Mr T. for me.
1 -
I've my doubts any of the current crop out on loan will make a dent on our first team. I can't see Middleton returning, he's been a bit part player at St Johnstone and he really needs games. Best case scenario for him is another loan at a similar sized club. Likewise I can't see a return for Jake Hastie. Brandon Barker and Edmundson might push for a squad space but I suspect Jordan Jones is finished with us.
Kelly has had an okay season at Ross County, but again he's not a guaranteed starter for them albeit he's played in most games this season. Again though is he likely to challenge for a place in our midfield currently, I don't think so.
McPake is playing at a pretty low level, there would need to be serious improvement for him to challenge Kent or Aribo. I suspect another season on loan at a higher level than English League 2 is next for him.
The players on loan in the Scottish lower leagues will either be released or sent back out on loan I suspect. Some of them have done quite well by all accounts. Mayo and Kennedy are both in the play offs. I don't think Mayo has a future at Rangers unfortunately or Barjonas.
If Raith Rovers go up I could see us keeping Kennedy there, Raith play decent passing football and seem well managed and coached, if he can make an impact in the SPFL he's got as good a chance as anyone of getting into our side. Ben Williamson has apparently done well at Arbroath in the same league as has Maxwell at QOTS, again a loan at a higher level seems the obvious next move for them. I don't know much about Breen at QOTS or Lyall at ICT, but further loans seem likely.
The question of what happens to Paterson and King next season is more important. Paterson has looked very promising but barring injury he's not replacing Tav currently. King has been highly rated for a while and it was interesting we chose to keep him rather than send him out on loan too. He's not made it onto the pitch though. Do they stay as squad players hoping for a chance or go out and get first team experience elsewhere.
It'll be interesting to see if Charlie Lindsay, who we signed from Glentoran, and James Graham who we took from Ross County can make any kind of impression next season.
3 -
It also highlights the problem they have creating content while refusing to deal with us. Normally there would an in-depth interview with the league champion's manager, maybe some of the backroom too. There would certainly be interviews with key players and I suspect they'd like to speak with directors either on the business or footballing side. Likewise a review of the key moments in the season should be accompanied with quotes from those involved. But when the national broadcaster chooses not to engage with the champions of the nation then we're left with Jane Godley's memories of the Scottish Cup, and who wouldn't want to hear that...
This is the nightmare scenario for Pacific Quay, they could get away with ignoring us when we weren't winning anything, but for BBC Scotland not to have an interview with Steven Gerrard, something that would syndicate all over the BBC and probably beyond due to his profile, is seriously negligent. The other problem they have is nature abhors a vacuum, others are filling the space they're leaving. If radio coverage could be done by someone else on a free to air basis and across the main digital or FM networks then BBC Scotland would become completely redundant. For me that's the last piece of the jigsaw.
1 -
I've never heard of this player but then I'd never heard of Morelos, Itten, Kent, Aribo, Hagi (I'd heard of his Da), Goldson, Tavernier or Katic before we signed them either.
He's an international who has had a couple of decent seasons at a level certainly comparable with our league, and he's free. There's a lot to like about that.
1 -
1 hour ago, alexscottislegend said:
I know it's only paper talk but the guy from Ostende, Sakala, is perhaps being lined up to replace Morelos or Itten. Anyone know what the Bournemouth lad is like (Obfomor?)? And I've heard talk of an attacking mid Veerman from Herenveen. I hope we stick with the model of buying relatively young players and developing them on for a profit. Often wonder, too, why we don't do what the French and Belgian clubs do and recruit in Africa - some real gems to be found there.
There used to be issues around work permits, I assume there still is. Unless a player was a full international and had played a certain amount of games at that level he couldn't get a work permit for the UK. France and Belgium had different rules on this. I know very little about Sakala but Wiki reports he's played 13 games for Zambia since 2017 so he's close to a first choice international and should qualify for a work permit.
1 -
I tend to agree with Bluedell on Simpson's performance at the weekend.
What I'd say in Simpson's defence is he's barely played any football. I don't even mean just this season, I mean ever. He's 24 and had only played 20 first team matches (some of them as sub) during his entire time with Bournemouth, his only other professional club. By the same age Conner Goldson had played 106 first team games albeit at a lower level.
For me Simpson is a gamble by our scouting department. They're hoping that with development and games there's a player in there Bournemouth had yet to discover. They might well be right, only time will tell. For me Simpson is certainly behind Goldson, Helander, Balogun and Katic depending on how he recovers from his injury. Maybe even behind George Edmundson if he stays in the summer. The Rangers first team is a challenging environment to learn your trade though, we expect our 24 year old centre halves to be close to the finished article and Simpson certainly isn't that. Perhaps a run of games is all he needs to build his confidence, understanding and reading of the game, I have my doubts as to whether he'll get them with us though.
Anyway, I refuse to criticise any of our players from Sunday's match, a 4-1 win over Celtic earns you a week off from me.
4 -
Good article, well written, good stuff @Rick Roberts
1
It’s Not What You Say, It's What They Hear
in Rangers Chat
Posted
It’s Not What You Say, But What They Hear
I made a mistake last Sunday. In a pique of frustration over the inevitability of much of Saturday night’s events and annoyance over some of the coverage it garnered, I sent a Tweet. As Tweets go it was quite long, and was an attempt to remind people that Rangers supporter’s who fight police officers, or themselves, on a Saturday night in town are no more representative of me, or the vast majority of our support, than the Rangers supporter’s who went bird watching, long distancing running or line dancing are. I wish I hadn’t.
I’m not a prolific Tweeter and I rarely Tweet about football. If you want occasional photos of my local park, perhaps some obscure research on birds or the occasional insight into international events, maybe I’m your guy, otherwise best ignore me, I’m there to learn, not teach. Prior to Sunday I doubt I’ve ever sent a Tweet that was ‘liked’ more the a dozen times; I’m not interesting or high profile, and I’m okay with that.
An hour or so after pressing ‘Tweet’ I was very surprised to learn over 100 people had liked, retweeted or positively commented on it. Almost all seemed to be fellow Rangers fans who had clearly been feeling something similar. This continued for a few hours, numbers increased and my phone battery complained. A couple of friends texted me to say they’d read it and enjoyed it, even my sister, who I didn’t know even had Twitter, called to mock me. All good so far.
Then, sometime around mid-afternoon on Sunday, supporter's of the second best side in Glasgow came across my Tweet. The comments changed. I’ve not read them all, there are simply too many and life is too short, but I got the general gist and some clear themes emerged.
My claim that it was a “minority” of Rangers supporters who were involved in any disorder on Saturday was widely ridiculed. Also, I’d failed to mention sectarianism, or “anti-Irish racism” as many seemed to call it. Lastly, that drunken, loutish behaviour is recurring and unique to Rangers supporters.
The ‘minority’ issue is easily dealt with. I think it’s fair to say Rangers have somewhere around 500,000 supporters. It might be more than that, it might be less, but I think it’s a conservative estimate to suggest that 10% of the population of Scotland would describe themselves as supporter’s of Rangers. Some of them might be nominal, a club they followed as a child but take less interest now, others will attend every match, home and away. The only definition of a Rangers supporter I accept is that they want Rangers to win. Estimates of the total crowd numbers at Ibrox and later in the city centre vary, somewhere between 10,000 and 20,000. 20,000 people is barely 4% of our support, and it’s worth remembering that Chief Supt Mark Sutherland of Police Scotland described that crowd as “largely peaceful in nature”. Even if someone wants to complain that everyone present was breaking Covid guidelines and so at least technically in breach of restrictions, it doesn’t change the fact that the other 96% of the Rangers support weren’t. As for those who actually engaged in vandalism and violence that was a very small percentage of those present and a tiny fraction of the Rangers support. For me those are simply irrefutable facts.
I don’t know what ‘anti-Irish racism’ is. As far as I know the Irish and the Scots are the same race. Having lived in both I can also say that in my experience we’re largely identical in almost every measurable way. I’m unaware of any systemic discrimination towards Irish people in Scotland, certainly not in this century at least. I didn’t mention sectarianism as I was unaware of any taking place. I wasn’t there, and I’ve not watched many of the videos that have been circulating. If there was sectarian singing or chanting then I condemn it. The anti-Catholic chants and songs still exist among a section of our support, and, away from the stadium and often after a few drinks they sometimes make an appearance. I wish they didn’t. I expect our board wish they didn’t and I can only imagine what some of our players must think. It’s embarrassing. It would be disingenuous to say nothing has changed in this regard over the years, but it would be equally wrong to say this has disappeared, it hasn’t. I can understand why someone who feels these chants are directed at them reacts with fury when they hear them.
That said it surprises me to see how many people liberally sprinkle the word ‘hun’ around their timelines when questioning my views. The refrain, when challenged, seems to be that the word isn’t sectarian and isn’t an idiom for ‘Protestant’. A ‘hun’ apparently is a Rangers supporter. Unless it’s a Hearts supporter. Or maybe an Airdrie supporter, and sometimes even a Morton or Kilmarnock supporter. This is the thing about the English language, the meaning of words changes over time and between people. My children regularly describe something positive as ‘sick’, this puzzles me and makes me feel old at the same time. The meaning of the word ‘sick’ has changed. I took a trip to Belfast before Covid hit. It’s a city I know quite well having lived there for a while a few decades ago, but it’s also a city that’s going through such huge change that parts of it were unrecognisable to me. I decided to do the first time visitor thing and take a bus tour to reacquaint myself. The Belfast bus tour takes you to places that are famous and infamous. It doesn’t hide its past, you see the city warts and all. We visited various ‘interfaces’. An interface is a euphemism for a border, in Belfast that’s where a republican area meets a loyalist area. These are bleak, people-less areas, dominated by high fences and walls, where territory is clearly marked by graffiti. Much of this graffiti is sadly familiar to a Glaswegian and I’d little trouble understanding just whose territory we were leaving or entering. Something unfamiliar did catch my eye though, 3 letters that made a regular appearance as you entered loyalist areas; KAT, and 3 similar ones when you entered republican areas; KAH. The tour guide explained that KAT stands for ‘Kill All Taigs’ and KAH stands for ‘Kill All Huns’. On the streets of working class Belfast it seems that Taigs are Catholics and Huns are Protestants. Not unsurprisingly I’ve recently started to notice these initials in Glasgow too.
Now I’m willing to accept that not everyone who uses the word ‘hun’ does mean all Protestants, but that doesn’t mean it’s not what I hear when it’s said. And while some might not use it that way, others clearly do. Meanings change, it’s all of our jobs to keep up with that change, not just Rangers supporters.
Lastly, why is it always Rangers? This takes us directly into ‘whataboutery’ country again and I’ve little desire to spend more time there. Suffice to say that over the years I’ve seen violence, first hand, sometimes at very close quarters, perpetrated by supporters of Aberdeen, Dundee, Motherwell, Airdrie, Kilmarnock, Morton, Clydebank, Partick Thistle, Hibs, Hearts, Falkirk, Clyde, St Mirren, Sunderland, Glentoran, Linfield, Cliftonville and, believe it or not, Celtic. Rangers don’t have a monopoly on bams, but I’m not going to pretend we don’t have any either. That there was disorder on Saturday night didn’t come as a surprise to me. I’ve lived in Glasgow long enough to know that there are people in our society for who a Saturday spent drinking will greatly increase the likelihood of them being involved in violence. That hard drinking ‘get mad wae it’ culture is alive and flourishing among a section of our society. I don’t think the blame for that can be laid at the door of Rangers directors, players or indeed me.
The Scottish Crime Survey of 2018 recorded that 46% of all violent crime in Scotland is alcohol related. 41% of all prisoners in Scotland report being drunk at the time of their offence, that figure rises to 60% for young offenders. The STAG Trauma Report in 2015 records that alcohol was associated with 33% of all major trauma patients, that number doubles when just recording male patients. Alcohol related death is 7 times higher in Scotland’s most deprived areas and alcohol related hospital stays are 8 times higher in Scotland’s poorest communities. Again, the figures are higher for men than woman.
Despite this I’ve yet to read anyone ask what Smirnoff, Buckfast or the makers of MD 20-20 had to say about last Saturday night, far less suggest that everyone who drinks alcohol should be ashamed of themselves and demand action be taken.
Rangers draw their support from across Scotland and beyond, but the post industrial heartlands of the central belt are where we draw the bulk of our support. These areas have more than their fare share of economic black spots and deprived communities. None of that is an excuse for violence or religious intolerance. Indeed the majority of people brought up in these areas aren’t violent or bigoted. But the power to change the people who are, to improve their schools, to broaden their horizons, to perhaps give them ambitions beyond the weekend, to deal with whatever demons they currently try and drown and to instil a pride or self worth clearly lacking in some of them doesn’t lie with Steven Gerrard or the Rangers board. It lies, quite squarely, at the feet of those elected to represent these communities; politicians. That’s ironic, because some of them have been very quick to point fingers of responsibility elsewhere this week.
It does feel that some people see Rangers as responsible for the actions of everyone who supports them at all times. There were 54 arrests and 429 crimes at T In The Park a few years ago yet no one suggests The Stone Roses are held responsible for that. There is a limit on what the club can do and should be held responsible for. I’m surprised that even needs stated.
But then maybe I shouldn’t be surprised, it’s strange that now we have so many ways of communicating with each other more than ever people still only hear what they want to hear.