Jump to content

 

 

Danny

  • Posts

    5,776
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Danny

  1. Richard Gordon confirming this almost word for word.
  2. Some reasonable comment in there but I can drill off a decent list of players from our youth who have shown something in the last 3 or 4 years - Ness, Wylde, Hemmings, Wilson, McMillan, Perry - even Little. Fleck never showed anything like the potential of these others. It's not like I want Fleck to fail - I just see no evidence to show he'll succeed.
  3. The only Rangers game I've missed in the last 3+ years was the Hearts loss at Ibrox last season. If he had a blinder in said game, I guess I missed it.
  4. I agree. But then making out I never said it in the first place is something different.
  5. Their deal is with the SPL afaik - the club just won't do any interviews etc. But by contract they have to let the BBC in to commentate. I may be wrong.
  6. I did, and got dismissed. I also noticed you (and most others) didn't make any comment on my Scotland Tonight comment where they portrayed Celtic as a joke club and metaphorically laughed at Lennon. Basically, my view on this doesn't appear to fit in with the flow, so gets ignored. And with that, I'll depart. Good luck with your protest.
  7. I don't think the club is paranoid, when did I say that?
  8. I read your post and disagreed with much of it, but I didn't see much point debating it with you given you're headstrong in your view and intend to protest. You have your view, I have mine, and it's best we leave it at that really.
  9. So pro Celtic that this week the stories they've run with have been negative - including Lennon claiming he hasn't fallen out with his players. I still say they're anti and pro everyone - whatever gets hits. Same with most media outlets. Sure, individuals within these organisations will have bias, that's natural. But I don't buy the institutional bias stuff people come out with. Back in the 90s we gave Celtic fans a nickname; 'paranoid tim'. Looks like it's come full circle now.
  10. Precisely. And more importantly Ally's adjustments.
  11. Just out of curiosity, are the BBC anti Rangers and anti Hearts too?
  12. Because I've never, in the 3 or 4 years he's been in the senior team, seen a single sign of quality from him - he's had over a third of a decade to show why he should be in the first team. And his permanent residence on the bench or worse pretty much tells the tale. And the other player who you're probably implying is Lafferty, and wasn't I right on the money with that one? So trust me on Fleck
  13. I'd have to disagree, the huge blow with Naismith being out is we don't have the players to compensate - he was our best and most effective player and our entire attack depended on his runs into space, his support from out wide, his drifting into the second striker role, and his goals. We have no one who can do all that and so rather than having the players to compensate, we have to hope Ally can alter the system to cope. As for Fleck, no chance - he'll remain on the bench at best. He just isn't as good as we hoped he would be. He's been the youth system's biggest hype and let down in the last 5 years.
  14. Obviously I hate them winning, ever, but in a way the consolation is this will give Lennon some breathing space to hold onto his job. I fully expect 'well to take the 3 points on Sunday though.
  15. I thought something astonishing had happened in this match to merit its own thread!
  16. So you're not boycotting them then
  17. Could you explain what you mean by 'clear MO'?
  18. Exactly how was this calculated? I'd like to know who counted up all the hundreds/thousands of fouls so far this season!
  19. What, no mention of the big bad STV attacking us? Come on you conspiracy chaps, some consistency please!
  20. What a ridiculous comparison. Because they're both tall?? Lafferty is one of the worst headers you'll ever see, while Crouch has made his career from it. Stupid comparison, totally invalid.
  21. I was watching a trailer for Scotland Tonight I think it was. It highlighted Rangers and Celtic in it. The Rangers segments were jovial, and positive. The Celtic ones made Celtic look like a joke organisation. If any Celtic fans were watching, they'd have had a case to say STV were attacking them. My point? I think the media in Scotland use Rangers and Celtic to gain attention, to gain hits, to attract viewers. I've seen the Daily Record called the 'Rhebel' by us and the 'Ranger' by tims. The Sun is called 'The Hun' by them - they believe the media attacks them as vociferously as many of our fans believe it attacks us. But very rarely do I ever see fans on either side acknowledge the attacks on the other side - only their own. You don't do much other than giggle when you see a negative story about Celtic. Whyte was always going to be targetted - a new regime for the first time in 20 years? If no media looked at him properly I'd be worried. BBC have also been massively lynching Hearts too - they could easily rattle off a bunch of examples over the years where they believe the BBC is biased against them. My point is I don't buy into conspiracy tales, just a sensational media who latch onto any target they can. Those who are protesting the BBC can do so, but thankfully protests are by and large a complete waste of time. JMO.
  22. Then why didn't we sue after all these (alleged) previous instances of insults, inconsistencies and accusations in the past? There's plenty fuel (not just in the BBC) for our club to sue - but it's never happened until Craig Whyte himself was attacked. Not the club, Craig Whyte. There was very little in that documentary which attacked the club, if anything.
  23. The answer is obvious. The BBC directly attacked Whyte. They have directly made allegations about him, claiming to have evidence which supports them. When they made Ally look like someone who condoned and laughed at sectarianism, did we ban them then? No, we got an apology and that was enough. But now it's Whyte himself that's the focus of all this, the BBC get banned immediately. Because smearing Ally apparently is less important to Rangers than smearing Whyte. My point? Spiers hasn't directly attacked Whyte. Not yet. He's gone on about the club for a long time, including SDM - but hasn't sharpened his razors in Whyte's direction. And until he does, he can say anything he likes about Rangers - and in fact has done since the BBC ban. To cut a rambling post short, Whyte doesn't like being the target. He seems to have less of an issue of the club itself being the target.
  24. Still feel quite baffled at the polar opposite season they're having this year compared with last. Nothing much has changed at Celtic bar some new personnel and the results/performances. It's not like us with a new manager, regime, owner. Very odd.
  25. Haha, I've not done an article for a very long time for any site. But thanks for the kind words
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.