Walterbear

With the YB game coming up then Motherwell and the nature of yesterday’s defeat I think their priorities need to be on resetting the players. I agree they need to do that at some point but it can wait. Just prior to the piggery game is the time to do it.

Can I throw food and drink at opposing players at Ibrox? Can we all? Point is gonzo we need zero tolerance. Rangers players have been attacked several times now and it barely gets a mention in the media. If someone threw food at you in a pub what would you do? If I was Tav I’d be questioning why my club wasn’t taking this further.

If only he was in charge of UEFA!

I don’t think it would work and I’d rather not take the chance. If it’s true and FARE are reporting us we need to get on the phone to UEFA and tell them we’re not taking away tickets. The away support are brilliant in terms of noise and passion but now can’t be trusted and anyone singing add ons at these matches is not a true Rangers supporter. We’ve seen Dave King this very week talking about how much personal money he and others £30m have put into the club and £1.5m could be wiped out by a stadium closure.

Well overdue a goal against them. Might be a hat trick on its way.

True Bill for ongoing Bill. But the platform of bias will help.

I agree Bill. I think it’s well worth taking all of the work from that thread, consolidating it to a readable compelling format and consider the best way to publish it within and beyond the converted. The observations in that thread are too important to lose and point to shocking impartiality. The issues to be overcome are that the info doesn’t fall neatly within FOI although it’s possible to be creative and claims of impartiality is easily batted off with the stock response of editorial privileges. If someone could consolidate into one long text document with the actual dates of incidents I’d be happy to do further work in terms of creating a more readable document which could then be used more powerfully.

My final response to them below. Thank you. I will not appeal to the Information Commissioner. I note with respect that you are unable to confirm or deny whether or not the Compliance Officer has been contacted by the BBC Scotland sports team based on data analysis as you do not collect data, but rather you assert faith in the impartiality of BBC Scotland. Not quite the same thing and please note BBC Scotland have had to make several formal apologies to Rangers FC in respect of inaccurate editing and unequal or unfair reporting. Yours sincerely.

My latest FOI. Basically BBC says they do not collect information on whether or not they report incidents to CO therefore not obliged to create data therefore their assumption is there were no referrals. Their response to my original request was quite bizarre. I have edited for brevity. No Relevant detail excluded. These do get reviewed in London and eventually they will realise all is not well at the subsidiary branch. It’s not a complex process and always appeal to get coverage in London even if it is usual dismissal. 30 September 2019 On 13 August 2019, you requested that the BBC provide the following information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (‘the Act’): “Scottish football operates a disciplinary system whereby controversial incidents not seen by an referee or assistants and relating to player discipline, can be retrospectively referred to the Scottish Football Association’s Compliance Officer. Referrals to this disciplinary process can be initiated by a variety of people and organisations. During season 2018-2019 how many times did BBC Scotland refer incidents occurring in the SPFL or SFA competitions to the SFA Compliance Officer? Which incidents involving which players from which clubs were referred by BBC employees or BBC staff whether in interim, permanent or consultative roles such as ‘football pundits.” On 11 September 2019, the BBC responded that: “We can confirm that neither BBC Scotland nor BBC staff submit disciplinary reports to the Scottish Football Association’s Compliance Officer.” On 11 September 2019, you sought internal review of the BBC’s decision. In particular, you said that: “I note that you have not responded to the actual question I asked, which was simply which “incidents” have been referred to the SFA Compliance Officer by the BBC staff or those employed in an official BBC capacity (interim or permanent). The answer you gave me was that no “Disciplinary Reports” were submitted. That response does not make contextual sense in terms of the question I asked. I did not imagine the BBC submitted “Disciplinary Reports” (whatever they may be). I am asking whether or not “incidents occurring” in football matches are referred by the BBC or its employees (permanent or interim) to the Compliance Officer and if so in what context have those referrals been made and which players and teams were the subject of those referrals in season 2018/19. I am appealing against your initial rebuttal of my request as it appears your response is out of context with the actual question I asked and does not allay my concerns that BBC staff in Scotland are interfering or involving themselves with the disciplinary process in Scottish football. In fact the response looks misleading and designed to confuse due to the alteration of context..” The issue for review The issue for review is whether the BBC handled your request in accordance with its obligations and duties under the FOI Act. In particular, as required by sections 1(1)(a) and (b), did the BBC confirm or deny that it holds the requested information and, if held, have that information communicated to you. Decision I am satisfied that the BBC complied with its obligations under the FOI Act in handling your request. The reasons for my decision are set out below. Reasons for decision The FOI Act provides a general right of access to recorded information that is held by a public authority at the time that a request is received. A public authority is not required to create new information to respond to a request. I have reviewed the file for the BBC’s initial response. I can confirm that neither the BBC nor BBC personnel have referred any incidents to the Scottish Football Association’s Compliance Officer. I am satisfied that the information you have requested is not held by the BBC. I am therefore satisfied that the BBC complied with its obligations under section 1(1)(a) of the FOI Act.

Re the claim by Worthington, BDO dismissed it and they have significant legal powers to do so but this could be the sticking point in terms of court signing off as a judge can question their decision. I don’t think it’s over yet but can’t be definitive. I knew RIFC owned the stadium but want sure about the land. Have we seen land registration documents to confirm? I’m to mean to pay £15.

Good spot. He’s saying that penalties cannot be retrieved therefore no point pursuing them. He’s not commenting on the validity of the penalties in the first place. HMRC have been holding off on agreeing a position to date and BDO cannot convince a Court yet that all avenues have been exhausted with respect to sale of assets of Oldco. They have to do that before the oldco is struck off. HMRC movement to settle can be seen as a step towards closure in terms of claims against assets under control of BDO (ie oldco assets). The issue may then be whether or not a Whyte or similar crawls out the woodwork and lays claim to ownership of any of these assets post liquidation. I imagine a Whyte or Whyte company for example may have held back because those assets would fall to BDO pre liquidation. Once liquidation is approved in court BDO disappear. I’m still not clear who owns the actual stadium or the solum/ground it is built on. Can anyone clarify, reassure? I see no benefit in spending money buying back the original company btw. It’s been clearly established in statements in courts by judges even at UKSC level that a club is divisible from a company and can be transferred to a new company with goodwill and the football assets. The SFA have accepted this transfer as have UEFA. Taunts from other ignorant fans are of no consequence.

That’s standard press / media release from a govt dept under scrutiny. Not to be taken seriously. Been involved personally in similar many times.

Will the SFA and SPFL act in behalf of a member club, for example make representations to HMRC about their conduct and what should be expected going forward? if not then that’s all we need to know about Rangers’ status in these organisations.

Agree with most of that except we hardly tested their defence. I think we had one shot on target.

True. Also Celtic had 7 changes from the team that lost to us 2-0 in the last Ibrox game - including entire back 4 and goalie. We never pressed them sufficiently. We had nobody today to do the Kent role and nobody pressing like Candeias (I accept he had quality limitations). Last season we played 4-2-3-1 in the 2-0 game and 4-3-3 in the 1-0 game but we had width and high press from Candeias and Kent in that 1-0 game and Kent created lots of problems going forward in the 2-0. Today we had 4-3-3 but played more like a 4-5-1 and it was more akin to the lineup at Parkhead where we lost 2-1. I don’t really know if it was line up or instructions or players just playing badly but I think it was probably a combo of all 3 but today we sat deeper than last years Ibrox games and we didn’t press high against a questionable Celtic defence. The closest replacement to Kent would have been Jones to start or Ojo and given their new defence Morelos would have surely tested them more than Defoe with little midfield creativity. Apart from anything else Morelos is well overdue a goal in these games. Today was a gilt edge opportunity. It looks to me as if we were inhibited. Why is hard to tell exactly but the tactics and line up looked wrong and/or the players didn’t do what they were told. I’m afraid that comes back to the gaffer.

Manager lacked faith in players and bravery with that selection/formation. From the moment they hit the ball long at the K.O. we never asserted ourselves. They knew we had gifted them from the moment they saw our team sheet. Far too negative. They have the quality middle to front and are likely to score and our selection/formation never had 2 goals in it. Brown strolled through that game which says it all - last season we ran him ragged. Aribo backing out of tackle isn’t good enough. You just can’t do that. Benefit of doubt that Thursday took its toll but to not test that Celtic defence is pretty damning and Stevie Gerrard has to take primary responsibility on this one.

All this ‘they are young lads and we all or most did the same’ is true but these young lads have older lads and grown men with them. Blaming the rest of the stadium, UEFA, FARE, Rangers Board, Oxford English Dictionary is head in sand stuff. UB can be a force for good and it would make a lot of difference if they just put their hands up and said we won’t do it again and we will self police. If the single largest fan group (at the stadium) said they will self police then many others might (assuming they are not going to get filled in). The UB dont even have to say they were wrong. Sometimes you take one for the team and you move forward. UB could show leadership here. And if you're out of the conversation Gaspard because of auto correct then you weren’t being serious in the first place. Pity coz you raised some fair points.

...................the statement they should have made was an apology for embarrassing the club and jeopardising our EL chances. They were caught red handed and they offer their child like attempts to blame everyone else.

Agree with most mate but the dog in the street knows that FARE are looking for ****** and Pope used in derogatory terms. Everyone knows BF1 kick off these songs. It is disingenuous of UB and anyone else to act confused and dismayed. It’s pathetic that they plead ignorance. A lot of time, effort and money from fans and directors has gone into saving our club over last 10 years and primarily it is directors money and guarantees has kept our club afloat. The UB like all fans have contributed but they now have a choice, bin the sectarian cr*p or go elsewhere.

Good result. Bit too much fannying about in opposition box tho. Need to hit a few more early.

FARE exist for European games dB. The inequality is frustrating but they are there to give an ethical rubber stamp to UEFA. They target games with a high risk of racism, xenophobia and anti semitism. UEFA need them to offset their own corrupt image. One way way to get the frustration and point raised and across to FARE would be to apply for a grant to raise awareness and education. That may be something Club 1872 could avail themselves of to fund leaflets distribution to our own fans (or whatever) and at the same time would show FARE that we are proactive as a fan base and trying to address our issues. That I think is where we are. Fighting FARE and UEFA won’t work. https://farenet.org/campaigns/footballpeople-action-weeks/apply-for-a-2019-footballpeople-grant/ https://farenet.org/get-involved/report-discrimination/observer-scheme-faq/

Exactly. If folk want to defend freedom of speech (I’m giving them too much credit for philosophical principles here) go and sing about ******s and popes in george Square. Don’t damage Rangers. I don’t like the Catholic Church or popes or any religious cult but I’m not going to destroy my football club to get the point across. No one is listening except FARE and the fact these numskulls still want clarification is breathtaking.

Simply put dB BBC Scotland sports department is out of control. They are biased and unreasonable and do not allocate the money Rangers fans give them in a way that fairly reflects our interests. As you can see from exchanges the BBC is largely unaccountable to the public. However London does ultimately control BBC Scotland and complaints are made to London. People there (I hope) will start to question people here, but only if we keep complaining. Don't let them think we don’t know what is going on. Their reputation is sinking and their listeners are falling. This will continue with their low budget Scottish channel. Don’t let them off the hook.

Last night in highlighting the impressive goal tallies of them and Rangers so far this season we had the commentary from 6 or 7 Celtic goals and one Rangers goal.

I have a new request underway relating to referrals to the Compliance Officer by the BBC. In no way can it be interpreted as relating to BBC output. Of course they may not have referred anyone from last season but if the art, literature, journalism argument is used then I will appeal that.