Frankie

So says the papers this morning... :kb:

The Trust dinners are always good nights out and the Plaza is a fine, fine hotel.

Regarding politicians, the problem there is that they (and often the charities they fund) believe sectarianism is actually anti-Catholicism as opposed to the obvious two way street we specifically see at football games. I think there is a big difference between someone being anti-Catholic and a bigot.

26th, The police report in question was for gestures to the Main Stand so the 'extreme abuse' suffered by three of our players is separate to the gesture charge of which Mr Bates wanted the SFA to act upon. I'm extremely interested in why the mainstream media are not going after this with their usual gay abandon. Strings are being pulled and favours called in that's for sure.

I don't think it's changed for 3 months...

I doubt Walter has said anything untoward but I guess comment either way could affect share-price in the background.

Yet again we're to read between the lines. Thanks Walter...

Interesting stuff - especially so given the mainstream media are refusing to follow up on the initial RST led claim.

Yeah, the problem about coming back quickly is that the sharpness and pace may not be there for a few games at least. Obviously, an Old Firm game is a different beast with adrenalin often able to carry through less logical player choices but I'm hoping Edu and Davis' form will improve enough to make the return of McCulloch a less risky one.

Unfortunately, the attention on this subject only happens when it suits the those who have the power to bring it into the public eye. Rangers fans have been asking the questions in the first post for 3 years and got the same answers then as we've been given now. Nothing other than prevarication and patronisation. I attach my 2008 report into the subject here: http://www.gersnetonline.co.uk/archived/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=670&Itemid=54 The exact same conclusions I reached then apply now. It is quite incredible no-one points this out when this tedious debates rears its head in the media. The simple fact is there is no solution because those than can facilitate it are not genuinely interested.

Interesting to see Spiers comment after being forwarded the article by another bear: @GrahamSpiers There is a lot in that article that is quite meaningful. Who wrote it? It's actually quite good. Not sure he read it properly given many of the criticisms are applied directly at him...

I hasten to add, certain terms have been censored because of NewsNow's policy on such words.

I apologise for the length of this article but I think the subject has to be covered properly as opposed to restricted. Sectarianism in Scotland - The Simpleton's Solace When Rangers beat Celtic (or progress in Europe for that matter), the reaction from some quarters is always easy to predict. Either blame the referee or if that isn't possible when the light blue's were clearly hard done by, then place the focus on to what songs the Rangers fans sung. Let's be clear from the outset and do something that these dangerous people refuse to consider and be objective. Some songs Rangers fans sing are offensive. Moreover, I can also understand that other dirges such as 'No Pope of Rome' or imbibing hitherto harmless ones with stuff like 'FTP' could be seen as less than tolerant. Ergo, I personally feel that using chants like this has nothing to do with supporting Rangers and only gives credence to the flawed opposing argument that only one club have a serious problem with such issues. However, when discussing this subject I think it is also important to highlight that, while people may find offence at any specific term/song/chant, absolutely none are banned in this country per se. More than two weeks ago a summit was held within the Scottish Parliament to discuss the issue along with the broader subject of Old Firm associated troubles. In addition, once again the SNP Government promised funds of over half a million pounds to deal with said topic. When one considers that the previous Scottish Labour government also spent millions on combating sectarianism, one must ask where this money is actually going given a solution seems no less near than ever before? Furthermore, dialogue with football supporters in respect of the sport's contribution to this wider social disease remains minimal. You or I weren't invited to any summit; just talked down to instead of with once again. To that end, when the summit findings were announced, I took the liberty of contacting all the neutral authorities involved in the matter - the First Minister, the Justice Secretary, Strathclyde Police, ACPOS, the SFA, the SPL and the Leader of the Opposition in Scotland - Iain Gray. In my letter I specifically requested a list of proscribed songs/terms/chants which could be applied under the 'Unacceptable Conduct' rules oft quoted by the footballing organisations and with respect to racially/sectarian aggravated breach of the peace laws oft quoted during the extremely minimal prosecutions we hear about. It won't surprise many to hear that despite the promises made at the summit the replies received were inconsistent with each other, made excuses, were patronising, didn't answer my clear questions or in the case of serving MSPs (Iain Gray aside) or footballing authorities didn't even reply within the two week time-frame requested. Yes, these organisations really are serious about the issue! Nevertheless, one conclusion was clear from those that did reply: there was no available list of banned songs/terms/chants because no-one really had the courage to say what was acceptable and what wasn't. In many ways, when you then examine the number of arrests we see at football games (and in Scotland generally) for hate-related crimes, this wasn't a surprise. The problem is greatly exaggerated and quite simply generally only exists in the minds of people who harbour a grudge. This grudge has been clearly visible since Rangers' fine win over Celtic on Sunday afternoon. Instead of examining an excellent display from the Ibrox men or the poor performance of the match officials (this time arguably in favour of Celtic), the usual suspects have declared they once again find religious offence. Be it less than official online bloggers, official Celtic fan groups or discredited journalists for 'The Times'; the organised planning of their reaction has been immediate. Coordinated articles in broadsheets, complaints to the government and emails to UEFA is the usual MO and the recent resurgence of 'The Billy Boys' apparently the main source of their faux annoyance. In 2006, this song was allegedly banned by UEFA and Rangers fined twice since for 'discriminatory' chanting - be it using terms like fen*an and/or adding FTP to otherwise non-problematic songs. The fact Rangers were also given a 5 year probationary period is also meaningful as this runs out in May which may explain why a dead issue is suddenly valuable to a few people again. Nonetheless, at the time, our club and support acted quickly and the songs/terms involved almost disappeared overnight. Unfortunately, in the intervening time the same principles haven't been applied to other clubs and supports. Disgraceful songs (and behaviour which is formally illegal) in glorifying outlawed terrorist groups; chants urging 'h*ns' to go home (directed any anyone with a perceived Protestant background - be it Rangers, Hearts, Dundee or match officials); regular club-sanctioned displays in support of the IRA; approved banners of Ibrox on fire; songs about Walter Smith being a 'sad orange b**tard'; all amidst an overall anti-British sentiment which makes a mockery of Celtic FC's inclusive policy. Yet we hear next to no criticism of this. Interestingly, the recent promotions of Neil Lennon firstly to Celtic captain then manager as well as the signing of Paddy McCourt have led to increasingly large elements of the Celtic support celebrating their Irish Republican 'heritage' more vocally than ever before. 'Like me and you he's a Provo too', 'Soon there will be no Protestants at all' and 'Paddy McCourt's Fen*an Army' are sung (or displayed via banners) with gusto. Therefore, it's not a surprise that some Rangers fans have saw fit to retaliate to this provocative banter in kind given excuses are made for Celtic fans. This has seen 'The Billy Boys' return of late but of course the usual hypocrites immediately complain about the same 'f' word being used. First of all, I don't think there is any doubt some people use the word fen*an in an bigoted manner. However, no more than those who use literally similar h*n in the exactly the same way. The fact that Celtic fans now use fen*an more than ever to describe themselves is also extremely relevant to any debate. The authorities I contacted above spoke about difficulties in banning specific songs/terms/chants because of context. I'd suggest that both sets of supporters being happy to use one word to describe the ugly anti-British, Republican nature of sections of the Celtic fan-base is exactly what they mean and why we've seen minimal arrests or action despite 'TBB' returning at some games. Of course Celtic fans then attempt to apply a flawed 'n*gger' analogy but this is clearly erroneous given the disgusting 'n' word isn't an adjective than can ever be used simply to describe people of a certain colour. Fen*an though can be used to describe people who celebrate the IRA and are anti-British. Indeed, that is its literal meaning. As a result, by increasing the celebration of their Irishness in such an offensive manner, they only give validity to the Rangers fans' behaviour they hypocritically complain about. Evidently what we have is a complex issue and one which can't be discussed easily in an article such as this or in a one-off summit between parties who all have their own motive. This is also true for people who use such a controversial matter to score points or, even worse, to make money from. Be it unemployed people whose very existence is to blog daily anti-Rangers lunacy or members of the Fourth Estate who choose to deliberately skew their own simplistic coverage, these people only serve to make the problem worse than actually offer genuine solutions for what is an age old social challenge. To sum up these people don't discuss a complicated matter like sectarianism because they have more morals than you or I. Nor do they convene 'summits' because they genuinely think a few small charities and a chin-wag will solve an issue that has blighted parts of Scotland for over a 100 years. Quite simply, the over-exaggerated and laughably biased outlooks we've read over the last few days are for nothing more than for financial or political gain. Now that really is Scotland's Secret Shame.

"He's given the penalty and for me he can't change his mind, I find that unacceptable." "I suppose you have to put it down to another honest mistake by the referee." "It was a very strange decision and we could have got a couple of other penalties as well." I think we can all guess the answer so I wonder if Scottish football's moral and integrity guardians will be asking for clarification on our behalf this week? Moreover, will they be pushing for Craig Thomson's resignation as well as the new Head of refereeing John Fleming who seems not not be saying much in respect of Thomson lying about not pointing to the spot (which he clearly did)? I'm also eager to hear Thomson's apology for his error(s) of judgement in Sunday's game given he was keen to say sorry to Celtic for alleged mistakes last season. I'm sure as ever the media will be clamouring for all the above and flamboyant QC Paul McBride will be poring over the rule-book to ensure no team is considered 2nd class in Scottish football.

A very valid point mate... Even in the stand you seen the guy lose the plot more than once. Ever the victim!

Rangers take the first silverware of the season with dominant display at Scotland's national stadium. http://www.gersnetonline.co.uk/2010/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=386:celtic-1-2-rangers-player-ratings-and-mom-poll&catid=35:analysis&Itemid=67 :sd: I said the other day we needed our midfield to show up if we were to win. And boy did they all play well with Davis showing us exactly why we rate him so much. In truth though, we could probably pick anyone and not disagree. :spl:

I found it funny and I think a few people (myself included possibly) perhaps have to take things a bit less seriously at the moment. Until tomorrow at 3pm anyway...

Ach it's only a wee joke; arguably poking as much fun at those who are critical of the manager as the manager himself...

That's one way of looking how to maximise sales but clarity on club strategy may be just as important - no matter what ticket we buy.

Indeed it is...

I don't think I suggested anything of the sort. I'm merely offering the season ticket purchase as an example of our financial commitment and asking that all fans (with such a ticket or not) are better considered by the club as the recession (both generally and Rangers specific) continues to bite.

As said in article, logic often doesn't come into it for such emotional purchases. If I wanted to pay �£420 for great football and close involvement to my club, then Rangers may not be the best people to give it to. However, I love my club and I acknowledge there will be bad times as well as good. Moreover, financial challenges aside, we're still competitive on the field so it would arguably be cutting off my nose to spite my face by not renewing. Nevertheless, the reasons for paying that sum of money arguably reduce every year we're asked to suffer more cuts and more prevarication from the powers that be. Ergo, emotion may lose out to logic in more and more cases. The club would do well to heed that polite warning.

Perhaps the overall display wasn't overly-defensive but the initial formation was - as was our reaction to the opening goal where it took us until half-time to decide maybe it was time to try and get two goals. Essentially the original overly-defensive set-up made quite a large difference to the game. BTW, unfair forum criticism notwithstanding, sometimes if you're the only one on a side of the argument then that says more about your opinion that theirs. I'd consider myself one of the more positive posters on here but I'm also prepared to criticise where necessary. Last night's team selection and tactics were not required. The 2nd half performance is the evidence for that reasonable point of view.

Probably not this season but he is highly thought of - unfortunate injuries aside.

Yeah, I think the defensive mentality is affecting a few players. Last night Davis was 10x the player he was in the first half by being allowed to get further forward.