Bill

As Celtic may discover, integrating new players in January doesn’t always lead to the results you want on the park. I’d rather have stability for the time being.

We don't have a monopoly on pettiness in Scotland but we do seem determined to make it the foundation of everything we do.

Hearts 0 Rangers 4 Jack

Better just to close your eyes and think of Brexit. The transfer rumours are so dispiriting. Every media attack on Morelos these last two years has been intended for this moment to encourage him to say "I want out of this madness".

Just as well I don't associate with any ScotNats then.

What, you mean a real Rangers supporter? ???

If I wanted to sing I'd go to church or join a fucking choir ? By the same token I'll never understand the attraction of going to watch your team and spending the game slagging off selected players in your own team. It must be an illness.

What if I give my ST to a ScotNat instead?

It's not being re-sold or accommodating the waiting list either.

It's not about Flanagan, it's about the futility and destructive effect of criticising players. The only basis to criticise any player who's doing what he can is if he's not putting the effort in. Otherwise you'd have to slag every player for not being world class. Flanagan is what he is and presumably we knew that when we signed him. As far as I've ever seen, Jon Flanagan has never hidden during a game and has always tried his best. Whether that's enough is a matter for recruitment and the director of football to address. We do seem to like our scapegoats but I fail to see the point of having a go at Flanagan.

Fair point @cooponthewing, I'm more persuaded. If that's the rule when you buy your season ticket then I've no problem with it. So long as it's properly thought out, essentially fair and, most importantly, is part of the deal you sign up to in the first place. For example "continually" needs to be fully defined. Is it twice in a month or a number of times per season. If I give my ST to my neighbour to use and don't use it myself for a spell, am I breaching the rules because I'm denying the club the opportunity to make money, even though the seat isn't vacant. How would they know whether it was the ST owner or his mates who occupied the seat? If you lose your ST through non-attendance, do you get a refund? In any case, this is a bit like claiming congestion charges or electric cars will save the planet - it won't make a dent in a 15000 waiting list. Only mass deaths or redevelopment and additional seats will do that.

Is it official then? Is Flanagan the new whipping boy?

You pays your money, you makes your choice. If you’ve paid for your seat and abide by stadium rules, it’s no one’s business but your own whether you sit in it or not. Why are people so keen to tell you what to do?

It was Joe Aribo, pretty much the only source of invention and creativity while maintaining a high-level of effort throughout.

Boooooooo

A Wednesday night in January, against footballing riff riff like St Mirren, is unlikely to see a feast for the purist. So any win, howsoever achieved, will do me fine.

There’s a great deal they could say. For a start they could expand upon and clarify their own position and state clearly what they believe is at the root of it.

The point of another statement is that the board said there would be one. It's a matter of trust and integrity between the club and its supporters.

I hope I'm wrong but I've a feeling the board is more concerned with appeasing supporters than attacking the mendacity of the media or the football authorities. I'm not holding my breath.

Good post @Gaffer. There is of course a third reason why Club1872 will never see its shareholding translated into a role in the executive or the board ... the board doesn't want it and will never allow it, regardless of who is chairman. In my opinion, which admittedly isn't worth much, Club1872 will never be able to transform itself into a representative organisation whose core aim is the interests of supporters. Nor will it ever achieve the sort of member numbers that begin to reflect the size of the Rangers support. It was set up as a vehicle for share ownership and as such was entirely dependent on the goodwill of a board that has held it by the throat ever since. It has no meaningful independence, no unfettered opinion and is seen by too many fans as merely an arm of the club. We need something entirely separate and fundamentally different but I'm so jaundiced by the shenanigans of previous supporters' organisations that, on the whole, I think we're better off without another one.

You would certainly like to think so.

Not one chance in hell. Think of it like this. The SFA isn't there to represent football or those involved in the sport, it now exists only for the benefit of Celtic FC. Like the SNP, no one at the SFA will ever take action that could damage Celtic, no matter the cost.

A convenience

I’d be mortified if we lowered our ambitions to the level of Shankland.

Rangers 4 - 0 St Mirren Jack