JohnMc

Jeez, time for the next preview and the last game has just finished. I should have Saturday's preview ready early evening, got some of it done at lunchtime. Do I post here or directly into the forum?

Yeah, I think I preferred the one with the aliens. Life ain't like the movies in my experience. You'd have been kicked to death at my secondary school if you'd come out as gay, so if it helps move kids on from that very low base I guess it can't hurt.

It was pre-season and it was done to get fitness and strength up, same as every club does. Wallace knew the players thought the sand dunes were harder, in fact he told them they were, but in actual fact running up sand-dunes makes you no fitter than running up the stairs of the terraces as many clubs did or today using a stairmaster or similar running machine. It was all in the head, the players believed they were fitter than they'd ever been, they believed they'd be fitter than the opposition were. That gave them a psychological advantage that Rangers needed. Celtic were dominating, Rangers had been second best for years despite having one of our best ever sides, and Wallace knew the side needed something to make them believe they could better Celtic over a season. Gullane helped him do that. Wallace is often depicted as a fearsome warrior, terrifying players, shouting and balling. Some of that is true but it's only a part of the picture. He was an astute tactician and understood the mental side of the game very clearly. You didn't best Jock Stein by being a Neanderthal and that's often how some people like to depict the ex-miner and jungle soldier. One of the best people on Wallace is Gary Linekar, he speaks glowingly about him and particularly about his ability to make his players mentally stronger and give everything for the team. There's a reason why there are so many photographs of 'murder hill', because Wallace wanted the players, the media, the supporters and those at other clubs to think Rangers were the fittest team in the league. It worked. He did exactly the same thing at Leicester when he went there.

Great photos, thanks for posting. We've had this discussion before (or was it somewhere else?) but you know the whole purpose of Murder Hill was psychological? You didn't actually get any fitter running up and down sand dunes you just thought you did. It was a piece of managerial genius by Wallace, who was a far more nuanced and intelligent manager than he's given credit for or often portrayed.

C'mon BD, nobody 'paid' for the biscuits, they were looted from a country on the other side of the world 100 years ago, as you know fine well...

Eh, I'm not sure what that film is trying to say, it's way too intellectual for me. But the next time an attractive blue alien gives me a glowing ball I'll relax knowing it simply contains a Lynx. Or something. Did I watch the same film you did?

Yes Gaffer, you having to listen to people swearing at the football is exactly the same as institutional discrimination against the LGBT community, good comparison. I don't decide what is acceptable and what isn't for anyone but myself, but if you can find an example of it then let me know. You know Gaffer I'm doing my best to keep playing the ball not the man here but you make it difficult. Why don't you put me on your ignore list, it must be getting very fucking tedious for everyone else. Oops.

It's a fair statement from Dunfermline. Is it not the case that Dunfermline themselves contacted the SFA to report issues with the running of Dunfermline prior to the current owners taking over, is that not the complaint that's being investigated? Then some Celtic fan has got wind of it and put 2 and 2 together got giraffe. You get the feeling that the rest of Scottish football is starting to weary of them.

What have I twisted? I'm trying to keep the 'debate' on topic, it's not me who introduced the Spanish problem or any of the other tangents. I tried to answer every point you raised. How do you get through 90 minutes at Ibrox with that aversion to swearing you apparently have, how does that work for you? Sometimes swearing is required, it adds emphasis and conveys feeling, in that context I felt it helped convey my feelings towards the opening line of your previous post. I apologised at the time.

That's two posts in a row you've introduced the word 'superior' FS, no one I've read has even hinted they feel superior to anyone else. Again with the strawmen. The thread was about a poster applauding the club's signing up to the Equality Charter and Bluedell's equally valid response that he didn't think it was an issue. For me some of the posts on this thread demonstrated it clearly is an issue and, in my opinion, there's a lot of education still required when it comes to LGBT issues. If the club can help with that then great. That's not about feeling in anyway superior to anyone else, that's not about denying someone a view, it's not about 'PC gone mad' or not knowing what the correct term is to call someone from Catalonia or whether the club has done enough to assist fans with disabilities. It's not an either or scenario. The club have done a good thing, in my opinion, you might feel it isn't a good thing, you might feel it is, I can't tell.

Well I'm struggling to know what you think, other than everyone is free to think what they want, hence my question. I've already said I think the 'age' excuse is a poor one. I don't have any problem with someone holding a contrary view, but they should be able to back it up when challenged on it. See my reply to Pete in post 104.

I accept that, I was trying to explain, rightly or wrongly, why I thought Anchorman reacted as he did.

The society you live in decides Gaffer, this isn't a hard concept to grasp, and it's already decided on this matter. And I didn't suggest anything of the fucking kind (sorry for offending you there). If you can't understand why describing someone who is gay as "not a normal human" is more offensive than calling someone from Barcelona 'Spanish' then I can't help you. Yes, I've friends who work in the health service and they've spoken about the language used to describe various groups in society. It's most certainly not a term that is universally described as offensive though, but it's being dropped from official usage. It's nothing like as loaded a term as 'homo' is. Language is fluid, and none more so than English, the meaning of words changes, sometimes over relatively short periods of time, That comes as no surprise. Society decided Gaffer, the politicians we elect, the media we consume, the law-makers we entrust, that's who. No one decided you can't use the word 'elderly'. It's a collective noun and very, very different from describing a gay man as a 'homo' Gaffer, you can surely see that. Are you really unaware of the barbaric acts that the LGBT community suffered in the recent past? Of the active discrimination they suffered, open hatred based on nothing but ignorance and fear? You simply can't compare that to being over 65, from Bilbao or even being a Rangers supporter.

Yeah, I did, fair enough. But we're agreed that discriminating against people because of their sexual orientation is a bad thing, right? And the use of words and terms that are derogatory and offensive to them should be discouraged too, yeah? The rest is a strawman. See I'm cool with people having different views from me, I'm not backwards in expressing my disagreement with some views, as you might have noticed, so I've no problem with other people doing the same. Indeed I quite enjoy it sometimes. It was Anchorman who left the site, not me. I don't think he should have, it was an over-reaction in my opinion, but I can see why Pete's position on here as a 'mod' gave his words more authority and so carried more offence. Pete's explained and apologised, for me that's enough.

I could see how a Basque or a Catalan might not be happy at being described as Spanish, or a Portuguese even, but what others from the Iberian Peninsula feel this way? It's a poor comparison anyway, as is the 'elderly' one. Being Spanish, or old, wasn't illegal in Scotland until 1980. As far as I know no one was ever forcibly admitted to hospital and treated as being mentally ill for being over 65 or from Valencia. I've read the thread again and I can't see where anyone told Pete, or anyone else, they weren't "allowed" certain opinions. Indeed, we're currently 8 pages into this thread which suggests this is actually being discussed and debated. I don't speak for Anchorman, he was clearly angry at Pete's post and let him know that. He didn't ask him to be banned though. The fact Pete's a 'mod' and comes across as a pretty decent bloke certainly made his post all the more surprising to me. Pete apologised to Anchorman and further explained his choice of words. I don't think he should be banned for it and I believe him when he says he didn't realise the word was offensive. As for how you 'keep up to speed' with social norms I find myself wondering how anyone is able not to keep up to speed with this. I mean open a paper, watch the news, go online, read a book, have a wide circle of friends, it's not hard. Discriminating against people on the basis of their sexual orientation is illegal in this country Gaffer, if Pete, or anyone else, called their co-worker a 'homo' they'd almost certainly face a reprimand. You might not like that, you might think that's an infringement of your free speech, but currently the law, and pretty much every political party in the UK except the DUP and UKIP, doesn't agree.

Unfortunately mate it's English we tend to use around here. You're up to speed now though so looks like the Equality Network partnership has its first success!

The Crimson Forehead, love it. You won't read a better piece on Rangers or Scottish football this month. There are some superb lines in that. Well done.

Well they are clearly suggesting that Dunfermline have some sort of paper trail that implicates them and, I assume, Rangers in some sort of cheating. It's quite an accusation and I can see why they won't make it publicly because they'd need to prove it or be sued into oblivion. They seem quite sure of themselves on this but then that's nothing new. There was no doubt that Gavin Masterton, one time owner of Dunfermline, and David Murray were close. Jimmy Calderwood has spoken publicly about David Murray's influence in securing him the manager's job at East End Park for example. Some Tims have been convinced for years that Masterton was behind trying to put them out of business when he was at the Bank Of Scotland, well it's easier to blame him than the people running the club I suppose. Murray was one of the most influential figures in Scottish business circles for two decades. He knew everyone worth knowing, he probably did business with many of them too. But, how you'd go about convincing 11 footballers to throw a game, or several games, and then keep quiet about it for years later, well I struggle to believe even some as once powerful as Murray could manage that. Masterton did some murky business things, they've already been reported, even if it turns out he did some of them with Sir Dave, it's a big jump to anything else. I say let them work themselves into a tumescent state over this, any climax might be more difficult to achieve though.

Reading Mr O'Rourke's missives I can't be the only one hoping that one day he gets given a board position at Celtic.

It wasn't aimed at you, that's why I edited as it could easily be read that way. I'm not sure how quoting lift music at me relates to anything frankly, but I guess that's just the way it is... Are you suggesting that societal attitudes to gay rights have changed for the worse FS? When you were born it was still illegal in the UK to be gay. We've had posters on this thread say "normal human beings" and "homo", I can accept that not everyone moves at the same pace but there are glaciers moving at a faster pace than some of us it seems.

Christ, just when I thought this thread couldn't get any worse you go and quote Bruce Hornsby lyrics to me. That's a new low for Gersnet... Getting older is no excuse for deciding you no longer want to learn, you no longer want to understand what's happening around you and you no longer want to accept change, even change that has almost no bearing at all upon your life except you need to modify the language you use to describe some people. There's a hundred things people in their fifties today thought was acceptable when they were children that they know isn't today. I call bullshit on lazy, selfish ignorance being used to hide deep-seated prejudice. Quote Pete Townshend next time. EDIT - I don't mean 'you' specifically FS, it's a collective 'you'.

If anything proved the need for Rangers to sign up to the Equality Network it's some of the posts in this thread. Bloody hell. I've never bought the generational excuse for someone using racist, bigoted or homophobic language. Being old isn't a good excuse.

I'm sorry to see Waghorn leave and wish him all the best in the future. I can only assume this has been sanctioned as we've someone else lined up because we're weak up front.

It's difficult to judge today's performance. Motherwell had a load of new players, it'll be weeks before we can see if they're a top six side or relegation fodder. I thought we started well and for the first 20 minutes or so looked pretty decent, attacking at pace and closing down Motherwell. From then on the game was more even and Moult should have equalised, it was an open goal albeit coming at pace and an awkward height. We're weak on the flanks and Motherwell figured that out eventually and started to exploit it. Candeias and Windass need to work harder defensively for me, their five in midfield started to overrun our four. Cardosa made a very good tackle towards the end when Motherwell broke with men over. Their attacker got a bit of stick for it but I thought Cardosa held him up before sticking a leg in and knocking it out. Windass had a good first half but might as well have stayed inside at half time. I actually quite liked Herrera on today's showing. He works really hard and had decent movement, we need someone to play alongside him though, Miller hasn't got a full season starting every match in him I don't think. Whereas I thought Morelos looked like he'd won a competition and the prize was to get a game when he came on. He was only on for ten minutes so I'll reserve judgement, but I watched the ball run past him at one point and wondered just what Ryan Hardie has to do to get into the match day squad. Dorrans and Wallace played well, the defence will need a few more games together before any judgement. I was puzzled by the substitutions, Wilson for Miller at 2-1 was taking a bit of a chance for me and inviting pressure. I'd have stuck on Holt for Miller, it was in midfield we were struggling. Despite all that we won, away, and on balance we were the better side. I think last season we'd have dropped at least two points in that match. I think Hibs will be a harder test for us, looking forward to it all the same.

Edinburgh will be nice when it's finished... Glasgow and Edinburgh are two very different cities and it's difficult to make a comparison other than through personal preference. As a born and bred Glaswegian I have to disagree with the assertion that Glasgow has more cultural and musical events than any city outside London. Although I did think that myself once. All of the main provincial UK cities have fairly vibrant cultural scenes, Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield and Liverpool are very well served by the arts and music and university towns like Oxford, Cambridge and Durham can compete with most places in the world culturally despite their size. You need to be blind not to see how incredible the Edinburgh new town is, the Princes Street Gardens are not only an amazing monument to the foresight and genius of the city planners of the day but even now make the centre of Edinburgh unique. The castle dominating the skyline and the constantly evolving lanes, closes and streets of the old town make a visit to Edinburgh a constantly surprising experience. During the festival there are few cities in the world can compete with Edinburgh for atmosphere and choice of things to do. That said I've never found Edinburgh to be a friendly place. It's a cliche but no less true for that. It's not a working class city and so while it looks nice and pretty it lacks warmth and heart. Glasgow has many, many faults, but it's a friendly town to strangers and visitors. By and large Glaswegians are more open and welcoming, people will simply start a conversation with you in a shop or a cafe and that doesn't happen in lots of other places. I've only really experienced that level of friendliness in Liverpool and Belfast, both cities with similar industrial backgrounds to Glasgow. Glasgow also benefits from its position, a half hour drive to Loch Lomond or train journey, an hour to Inverary, slightly more to Glen Coe. The West Highlands are among the most beautiful places on earth and Glasgow is their city too. Glaswegians are proud of Glasgow in a way that's entirely unwarranted. We don't like people putting the city down despite the very many social and cultural problems we have. Parts of the east end have the male life expectancy of a third world country and anyone who has had to visit the Royal's casualty department at midnight any day of the week will see first hand the very worst of the city. We have some horrendous architectural eye-sores and many of the new buildings in the city centre won't last 30 years before being pulled down and replaced by some other utilitarian cheapest possible solution. That being said I've chosen to live here and raise my family here. I've an extended family around me, the city does have many positive things in its favour if you are raising a family. It has some good schools, many brilliant parks, cinemas, sports clubs and facilities, hospitals, libraries, theatres and easy access to some wonderful places. Also, according to my wife, it has brilliant shopping, not something I'd put in the credit column myself but each to their own. Lastly, and most importantly, it has Rangers, so, you know, the argument kinda ends here.