Walterbear

Whereas its Dornan himself who traduces swathes of innocent people by characterising us all as bigots. 

Hollyrood public standards is the correct place with solid evidence and political sponsor. 

33 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

Club 1872 statement

 

Dear Member,

On 23rd February, James Dornan MSP, during a Twitter exchange in which he misrepresented the Club 1872 position on unacceptable behaviour, made the false allegation that “Club 1872 abuse me regularly on their website." This statement by Mr Dornan was an outright lie.

Club 1872 has not mentioned him on our website, let alone subjected him to regular “abuse”. We wrote to Mr Dornan, giving him the opportunity to delete his tweet and to make a public apology but we have received no response and no apology has been forthcoming. It is completely unacceptable for an elected representative to make demonstrably false accusations about our organisation or its individual directors, all of whom are volunteers. Mr Dornan’s risible attempts to ‘combat sectarianism’ by smearing groups and individuals, undermines genuine and sincere work against prejudice and discrimination. In doing so he raises questions not only of his competence to be Convenor of the Cross Party Group on Combatting SectarIanism but also of his fitness for public office at any level. We do not believe that Mr Dornan is a fit and proper person to act as convener of that group and we will now write to his colleagues to request his removal. It is incomprehensible that Mr Dornan was able to take up this position in the first place given his selective approach to sectarian issues - including an incident where he posed in front of the flag of a proscribed terrorist organisation. We will also contact Rangers to make them aware of this incident and to urge them to be extremely cautious over Mr Dornan’s publicity seeking, public announcement expressing his wish to meet with them.

Rangers and Club 1872 should always engage with any individual or group seeking to genuinely address issues around unacceptable behaviour. We firmly believe that Mr Dornan does not fall into that bracket.

Now that would contain a good bit of wording for a petition.  

I would take that largely as a positive. 

7 hours ago, Bill said:

How the 'group' came to be constituted or populated is one thing - but in any case it is what it is - but for so-called Rangers fans now to be equivocal or obstructive to efforts aimed at challenging it is bewildering. It seems fair to ask, what are the motivations of fans who would rather criticise those efforts than contest such a contrived and hostile group?

 

It needs to be said - this is why I could never trust a Scottish nationalist to act fully in the best interests of Rangers. Some may but it's increasingly clear that most will look for any reason not to do so.

Sorry mate that’s ridiculous. “It is what it is”. Correct - it is what it is - it is asking someone to get removed from something they don’t belong to!

You are a bright guy and folk will sign the petition if it’s constituted properly. Nothing to do with the SNP. All to do with a stupidly worded petition. It honestly looks like someone just discovered change.org and did this petition sitting in the bath with a half bottle of Buckie. 

3 hours ago, Doc said:

I have argued on another thread that this full interview needs to be aired somehow. The transcripts of the interview must exist outwith the confines of PQ or Traynor is nowhere near as smart as he thinks he is. Get that transcript out to the Rangers public and let us broadcast and perform it in full if need be. If the BBC will only pick out the 9 seconds that plays to their narrative and leaves the rest in limbo, let's get it out there ourselves. Then everyone can see what was asked by the BBC and what was replied over the course of the full 25 minutes. I suspect it won't be comfortable listening for the crowd at PQ.

Play it on the big screens and foyers at Ibrox. 

Whataboutery is for clubs that cover up child sex abuse who want to extinguish their past and to be judged to different moral standards on a range of issues including sectarianism and crowd violence. 

5 hours ago, 917 said:

There have been protests like this before, by Rangers fans and other groups (the SNP, pro-Brexit supporters, anti-Brexit..) in even greater numbers. They get very little publicity, and possibly even harm their own cause as it makes them look like nutcases. A few years ago I’d have went on this, but now I feel it would be pointless at best, and possibly even counter productive. Good luck to those who do go though.

Agree. If successful will not get reported but one indiscretion will be over egged and Rangers FC portrayed as inciting fans. 1872 are given some coverage nowadays so any efforts would be better through them and with the club’s support. Everyone is frustrated so cool heads essential n

4 hours ago, ian1964 said:

So either he sent Bachman off for something he didn’t see (although we do know he saw it) so he should be disciplined or he did see it, told them what happened and they overruled him anyway which is not the purpose of the CO role and they are breaking their own protocols.  They are openly damaging Muir’s integrity as a person or his credibility as a referee. 

And by the way they are also indirectly now implying our player feigned injury by rescinding the card - despite the fact he took far more than a negligible elbow to the head. They’re just making it up as they go along. Utter fecking shambles manufacturing outcomes to suit the agenda of the day.  

I wouldn’t like Clare Whyte to be representing me in court that’s for sure. 

It really is time to boycott SFA fixtures and all away games. See lots of talk from fans about the club doing nothing and Rangers fans moaning about not good statements from the board etc. Hit them in the pocket. Only the fans with our money can change this. We have the power. 

1 hour ago, der Berliner said:

Honestly ... I only saw the BBC highlights today and all Bachmann does is wrestling his arm upwards and free of Kamara. Does he touch him? Yes. Does he do it in a violant manner? I have my doubts. Might have been seen differently from the touchline. If such contacts and "fouls" were standard, no game would end with 11 aside. I think we all would be rather agrieved if McGregor had been sent off for such a raising of the arm

 

https://twitter.com/BBCSportScot/status/1098391766372356096

 

There have been far more serious decisions been rescinded or downgraded, or quite simply went unpunished in as well as after a game.

Christ sake. Read the effin rules. It was more than negligible. 

1 hour ago, Briton said:

Got to admit that has changed my view.  Didn't seem that bad last night.

When our top coaches such as Clarke don’t know the laws and rules of the game and they are supposed to be developing our game it’s time we all went home. When so called sports journalists don’t have the basic knowledge to correct them or comment on what the rules actually are it’s time we all went home - and it’s time they stopped stealing a wage. 

LAW 12

VIOLENT CONDUCT

Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.

In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.

I’ll buck the trend on this one. We should get the best refs available. It’s a professional game and if a few SFA people have to lose their jobs or they have to cut down on their foreign junkets to pay for it I’m happy with that. At the moment we are being short sold. 

Re the CO that is a separate issue for me. Only Scotland could introduce a 18th Century version of VAR which is what it more or less is. In fact get rid of CO and all the associated cost to help fund better refereeing. 

The heart of the problem is;

1. BBC have banned themselves. 

2. They have a history of bias which contributed to and has succeeded the McLaughlin situation. 

 A)  CM report from Easter road 

 B)  X-Men and McCoist

 C)  Cook editing the McCoist interview

 D)  Jack beheading

Throw in the numerous disproportionate attacks on Morelos, false stills such as Morelos over the line goal at Killie, false still of Power head kick, obsession with every Rangers indiscretion such as Jack (compare his tackle on the Aberdeen player at pittodrie to the concussion he received at next game and coverage), compare Browns follow through on Sunday to Jack tackle at Pittodrie where he at least got the ball, McGregors coverage compared to the assault on him in the same game, Bowman, Cipre, the 30 min interview with Gordon gloating with Milne over the Ibrox managers job rebuttal (Milne actually came out of that interview as a decent chap unlike the interviewer whose agenda was transparent) etc etc etc. 

That statement is classic politburo bullsh*t and the only good thing about it is it is totally consistent with their disingenuous approach to this matter specifically and to Rangers in general.

They are the the ones who have had to offer 2 public apologies. They are the ones who had to move Cook ‘sideways’ to the US job to get him out of Scotland because of his lie (any other job in any other organisation if similar status and he would have been sacked on the spot). 

Rangers fans know that statement is a lie. 

I assume by ego SG means complacency? Certainly looked like it which is surprising from a group of players who have won the square root of feck all (excepting those here first time round). I’m trying to think which are the players in our squad who could challenge the mentality he’s talking about and whoever it is who can inspire the others need to show up on Wednesday. 

This season is still there to be regarded as a big success if we can bring that cup to Ibrox,  they have 24 hours to get on message. 

Why aren’t the SFA and SPFL telling the BBC that we have to be treated equally? If we are not being treated equally by the BBC and it is in writing and the bodies representing the clubs don’t insist on that parity then why are the deals being signed? You could eventually build a case for breaking away from this league. 

Dave King has more money in his back pocket than the Herald makes in profit every year. 

1 hour ago, ian1964 said:

 

...and Keith Jackson the racist with his unfortunate and O Grade English level drug related metaphors lost the little credibility he ever had. 

I think it’s going a bit far to conflate too many issues at different levels of society. 

Sticking to football there is no doubt that we were never liked by ‘fellow’ fans and then 2011/12 compounded the dislike into hatred. We’ve all personally seen and felt the increase in hatred in pubs and other places.  No-one is interested in helping Rangers and we need to get used to that fact and there is absolutely a ‘pay back’ taking place because lots of folk wanted us dead and it didn’t happen. The BBC are deep in that mindset and it dictates their football output. 

Noone seems to care if Killie, Aberdeen or Hibs get bad decisions and frankly it doesn’t make much difference as they will never seriously challenge Celtic so they hardly care themselves (and of course Celtic lend them players to shut them up) and whilst Celtic are not universally popular they have grasped the bull by the horns over the last few years and taken control. The CO is the most obvious example of that. 

It is not right that the SFA and the SPFL who exist to administer our game fairly are not capable of doing so. It would be better to focus on their capability (whether caused by corruption or bias or just professional incompetence) than to guess at the motivation for their inadequacy and link it to Scottish society and politics more generally. I mean Gordon Smith was CEO of the SFA - the guy is thick. The evidence of incompetence from these organisations is everywhere and there is perhaps more to the 6k fine than we realise. The message there is ‘shut up’. The media are tied up in Dermots web, the BBC are plane biased and corrupting our game so none of them will help us, and the officials are incompetent (evidentially true) or biased as is evidentially true in the case of the CO and surrounding ‘process’. Let’s not forget we did not cover ourselves in glory in the Murray and Whyte years but we were penalised and have served our sentence and should now be treated fairly. 

So why why would we just ‘shut up’? If we think we are going to be offered baubles on committees etc then we are playing a losing game. We should call it out a lot more and if it’s 60k in fines then it has to be done.

Our club will not get truly back on our feet until we start winning trophies and there is an off field battle taking place to stop that happening. The evidence of incompetence and unequal treatment is there (and it’s perhaps best to call it incompetence because absolutely no one can argue with that). But the club must be prepared to take a far bigger hit than 6k in calling it out and we should do it on a media scale guaranteed to raise eyebrows outside this country. 

1 hour ago, T-1000 said:

I think one of the issues for Kent is that teams have sussed out he is one of our most creative outlets and are looking to stifle him by doubling up and reducing the space in which he operates.  I would, however, agree that he needs to play with his head up a bit more and when to charge forward and when to pass.

They trebled on him at one point but that’s fine if the others have the wherewithal to use the space and these teams have figured out we don’t. The Candeias Tav partnership for example has ground to a halt. I can’t help thinking Barisic hamstring is causing him issues either physical or mental. He’s just not extending himself down the flanks. It’s as if he’s protecting himself. It’s not got the look of a regenerated post winter break team that’s for sure. Tragedy is Celtic are pysh. 

4 minutes ago, Bill said:

The issue most certainly isn't the ability of our squad. While it could and I hope will be improved, these are the same players who played their hearts out in Europe and against Celtic a few weeks ago. They can do it but the attitude is far from right and the next week they will deliver the feckless display we saw today. It was obvious within five minutes which heads they had on today.

 

Somehow, I can't imaging these same players turning in these half-hearted performances two weeks in a row under Walter Smith. It may be time to take the arm from around some shoulders and insert a size ten up some arses. 

Quite a few changes from these teams. Also the Scottish teams sit in except scum. 

There was little or no combination play on right and left. Morelos creates so much space for others to run in to and the others don’t serm capable. 

We lacked courage today in so many areas with the exception of Kent. A Warburton or Pedro team would have thrashed that lot today. The same line up should never be repeated. Hopefully we have learned that much. 

12 minutes ago, ranger_syntax said:

What money?

 

He left on freedom of contract.

 

Worrall is a loan anyway.  Not sure if we paid a fee for him but that would surprise me.

Aye quite correct free. 

...thought we got cash for Bates. I must be wrong. Thought Worral was costing us 500k overall. 

And boy do we need him. Today’s team would struggle against Killie and would certainly lose at Pittodrie. 

2 minutes ago, les186 said:

Davis and Worrall are only loanees, albeit on big wages. We can get rid in the summer. Grezda looks like a gamble that will not pay off.

We spent the money we got for Bates on Worrall. Worrall is no footballer and today slowed everything down but the real problem was the midfield. It was also obvious Defoe and Candeias are not going to win high balls constantly pumped at them. Today would have been better with a 4-4-2 but we have to assume Lafferty was doubtful and perhaps played with an injury.  Only Lafferty and Kent get pass marks because they at least tried to take responsibility. In truth that was fairly easy for St J.