calscot

I agree with that, but think that tribalism should avoid the same subjects that you would in polite conversation - race, religion, politics, sexual prefenences and finantial status etc.

I think the whole sectarian thing is a load of wind ups and all to do with "us and them" mentality and tribalism. It is way blown out of proportion, but the reason behind that overreaction is that there is plenty of real sectarianism and discrimination around, and you get plenty of idiots or youngsters who don't quite get the wind up aspect and think it's serious - and they can take it far too far. Basically, religion is quite rightly a bit of a taboo subject for a wind up, as is race, disability etc. The government are now strong on legislation for these and that's why it's pounced on when it's being done systematically and at a grand scale at football stadiums. And to be honest, the same old wind ups are not funny anymore and getting a bit tedious. I'm not into draconian censorship, more into personal censorship, where you decide yourself whether what you are doing is appropriate. But you can't do that unless you recognise when things are not quite right. Sometimes it takes someone else to point it out - which is what I'm trying to do. However, as it's just my opinion, I could be completely wrong and what I say could be justifiably rejected. But if nobody gives the opposing point of view, then why will anyone even think about it? I just sometimes think that although people are doing innocent things, in the context of a continuous wind up that is now considered tasteless, their actions no longer look innocent. Perception is as important to many ideals as the spirit of them. The law is a great example. It is not enough for justice to be done, it also has to be SEEN to be done. I think we have to be seen to abandon all references to sectarianism (pseudo or not) if we are to emerge from its shadow. Once we have done that, THEN flags, such as the Royal Ensign, will possibly be taken in the spirit of their intent - and welcomed. To me, if I'm going to make such a good gesture, I'd like it to be seen and appreciated as such and not mistaken for something else. When you're on the wind up all the time, no one gets it when you're being straight and good - and who's fault is that?

No, it's his ability that is questionable, not his loyalty...

I have to agree with Frankie: my views differ from many on here and I've never had any trouble when expressing them and I don't see others being censored unless they are just badmouthing everyone. As long as you are civil then you are given respect here. This forum is run with a heck of a lot of decorum, dignity and fairness. That definitely contributes towards this being the best Rangers forum on the net, as well as helping to attract some of the best people around to debate with. To be honest I probably enjoy it more when things are a bit contentious as everyone agreeing is good but gets a bit dull. And I sometimes spice up some of my opinions, making them more antagonistic, to get a reaction and a good debate going. However, I'm always ready for a backlash and don't run away from it nor complain about it.

Plenty of Rangers fans get upset about that kind of thing. Now maybe they are upset because he is not doing it for religious reasons but on a wind up, but then how can they prove that? Same goes for flags etc... People are forever doing provocative things on the wind up which they can then use mock innocence as an excuse - and then make a grab for the moral high ground. BJK is a good example as are most of Celtic's excuses - starting from the old soup kitchen. Seems to me that when you do that all the time, nobody believes you when you're being genuine. And that's Rangers biggest problem, we've cried wolf too much in the past and if we want people to start believing us again, we have to shut up for a good while...

Novo should get more games - at least as a sub. He lifts the whole team when he comes on and puts in far more effort than most. I was glad for him when he came on in Camp Nou and he ended up one of our best performers.

IMHO, Elderslie wasn't guessing, he was stating a lack of evidence...

Considering our usual formation in Europe, I think he's the best we've got in the front position - with JCD suspended. I'd rather have DC there than McCulloch. So yes for me.

1: I wasn't looking to do Fulham any favours per se, it was to mollify them with regards to playing him against their wishes ie to negate any reason not to play him.

I think we should play Cousin - it would be doing Fulham a favour as long as he doesn't get injured, as he'd improve his match fitness against quality opposition. In our current tactics and formation, especially for Europe, Cousin definitely seems to be the best man for the job from those we have available. His mental state and lack of match practice my bear on the decision but they are difficult to evaluate. For me, I say, "Pick him".

Maybe that's why we want shot of him now - he won't want to go to Fulham in the summer if they relegated and no-one else is offering the same kind of money...

PPS I think we should have canceled the sale at the end of the window, we don't have enough cover in Europe due to our tactics and JCD's 3 match ban. Each round of UEFA is worth at least 2M, so one extra round would be as profitable as Cousin's sale. And if he plays well, his price is not likely to go down in the summer and may even go up.

PS It's getting so late in the season coupled with the fact that Cousin will have at least 5 weeks without a game, that maybe we should postpone the transfer till the summer and just play him. By the time he's fully fit for Fulham it will be near the end of the season anyway...

Anyone think FIFA are deliberately delaying things to put clubs off appealing all the time? It's the only alternative that I can think of to my impression that they are a shower of incompetent fools...

Perhaps, but you only have to remember all the f.t.p. brigade to see that it's not much of a leap for your average Rangers fan. Many posts on other forums show things haven't changed that much. The pseudo sectarian baggage we have in Scotland, may not be the biggest sociological problem, but it is quite undesirable and distasteful none-the-less. In England, there is still quite a bit of latent racism which I don't like at all either. You could say there is a big leap from red hand salute to nazi-ism but perception is a powerful thing, and naivety is not usually accepted as an excuse. For me it's a bit like having a wayward, loud and embarrassing brother who doesn't quite do anything illegal although he shows a lot of prejudice; you defend him to outsiders but in private you try to get him to behave himself in future.

Bugger, we should have appointed Gazza instead of Walter as manager: he clearly knows how to get us further in Europe... :devil:

PS Is it not a sad day when you can't express your religion in public eg by crossing yourself?

This would probably be fine at another club, but so many people have hijacked Rangers for their own political and often insidious ends, that the Royal ensign loses all meaning at Ibrox - not many will think it has anything to do with the navy. The true intentions of the flag are lost as they cannot be trusted. As such, it unfortunately becomes a less dignified show of support. It's like Boruc crossing himself, it's harmless, but in the context of the Rangers, Celtic rivalry, it ends up being undignified for his own religion. Red hand salutes are bad for our club and Ulster as they look like and are interpreted as Nazi salutes. There is a difference between freedom and appropriate behaviour in a society, otherwise we have absolutely nothing to complain about Celtic fans at all. In fact we should be extolling the same freedom's for them and also encourage flags for the IRA, Al Qieda, the Nazis etc. Big Jock used his freedom to not report something to the police. If we're going to be so sancetmonious we shouldn't be hypocritical. But hey, hypocrisy is another freedom to be encouraged eh?

Good balanced post - which I don't have time to reply to - sorry.

Me too, I'm far too partisan for that. I've got Setanta and it now has the EPL but I've never watched an English game for more than 5 minutes, and that's without a clash. Just can't get interested. If I put by time for any other team or league, I'd never do any work or even get off the sofa.

If training in a local park makes you a poor team then we should have been rubbish during 9iAR! At the end of the day it's still 11 against 11 and Barcelona could see us in the same light as we see Falkirk; however, we didn't lose 9-2 on aggregate. In the end I think sometimes we have to expect a MATCH on our hands. Our 2-0 win sounds to me as dominant a win as Barca over us.

Is Hutton's departure going to haunt us this quickly?

You mean, "thank goodness," don't you? I still have nightmares from WS's 3-5-2 in Europe... :uzi:

I agree with this. A lot of this traditional stuff leaves me cold and I'm no fan of tradition for tradition's sake. Our football has mostly moved with the times, why can't the club? 2-3-5 formation was a tradition abondoned very easily, as were wooden terraces. Nothing is sacrosanct.

I can see your point Frankie, but you have to admit our history is blighted by sectarianism. To prove that we are not just paying lip service to Government and UEFA legislation, I think we have to be careful and almost portray a whiter than white front. It may stick in the craw with some, but when you do the crime you eventually have to do the time: this is our penance. We can celebrate some of our history, but maybe we should do it a bit more quietly for a while.