Bill

Hiding Willie Collum away at safe venues says far more about the SFA than it does about Collum himself. This is the action of the diocese moving a priest to a new parish after he’s been caught doing you-know-what - “we know he’s guilty but there’s no way we’re ever going to admit it.”.

The compliance officer must be the best bit of legal cheating ever dreamed up.

It’s worth knowing that in the period since he last refereed a Rangers game Willie Collum has been in charge of at least four Celtic games.

Sunday against Hibs will mark yet another week and still no sign of Honest Willie Collum refereeing a Rangers game. What on Earth could the reason be? ? Since Collum last refereed a Rangers game on 3rd November we've had Craig Thomson 4 times, Bobby Madden 4 times, Nick Walsh 4 times, John Beaton 4 times, Alan Muir 3 times, Steven McLean 3 times, Don Robertson 3 times, Kevin Clancy 3 times, Andrew Dallas twice and Euan Robertson and Greg Aitken once each. I make that 32 league and cup games without the pleasure of Willie Collum's particular brand of impartiality. In that same period Willie Collum has officiated 4 time in Celtic games. Some might interpret that as the SFA confirming his unsuitability to referee fairly where Rangers is concerned.

Edit - reposted as a new topic

Makes you wonder what Kamara might be worth in a couple of years

It's amazing how many people didn't like me saying you can't vote SNP and be a Rangers supporter. Amazing because I've never actually said that. What I have said is that there is a natural incompatibility between the two. This is hardly a secret, with SNP using every opportunity to disadvantage Rangers. It's not difficult to overcome this incompatibility of course and many do just that, the fact there are clearly Rangers fans who vote SNP is obvious evidence of this. But it takes compromise to accommodate two diametrically opposed views. You can pretend there is no conflict, when there clearly is. Or you can take the view one is simply more important than the other. What you can't do is be honest AND lend wholehearted support to both. If you're in this unfortunate situation, it's entirely your own business how you reconcile it with your conscience but at least make some effort to admit the basic truth. There are a number of members and many in the wider Rangers support who DO refuse to criticise the SNP when it disadvantages Rangers, which is proof enough for me that what I've said is true The near-hysterical response to my earlier post from predictable directions only reinforces that view.

I like Davis. The more he plays, the more he'll deliver. Sound business. It's beginning to look like someone has thrown away the Martin Bain manual of player recruitment.

Morelos isn't the best player in the country by any size of mile. He may be the best striker but it's of little value if he can't be trusted to stay on the park long enough to prove it. The point about Gerrard is twofold. Firstly, I want to see he's in charge and not simply bending to popular opinion - right now he needs to demonstrate to Morelos that his inability to control his behaviour on the park has real consequences and that means sitting on the bench. Secondly, I want to see Gerrard put the team before the player, a team that has been performing consistently well in the league for perhaps the first time this season. I want to believe Gerrard can manage a player like Morelos.

Yet there are Rangers fans who go out of their way to deny any orchestrated attacks on our club and supporters. It’s long been my view that there is an inevitable incompatibility between supporting Rangers as well as the SNP. That this is denied at every turn is no more than you’d expect from people with split loyalties. Trying to face two directions at the same time requires a certain kind of face.

Agreed. If Morelos walks back into this team at the first opportunity it will say something about our manager I'd rather not hear.

What's really going on here? There are a small number of members who seem to use every opportunity to excuse the detractors of the club we all claim to support and it's as attributable as it's predictable. Why is that?

Ah, el fanfarrón.

Who cares?

If I understand your thought process ... the OO don't cause trouble but some other people who the OO don't/can't/have no obligation to control sometimes do cause trouble ... and it's reasonable to criticise because of them. That's a doozie.

The correlation between nationalist socialists and OO haters is indeed strong.

Aberdeen play classic Walter Smith tactics against us.

He didn’t. He made you look petty and misplaced.

Money is money and we need plenty of it but, like Pete, I don't think gambling is a message that the Rangers brand should be associated with.

If only we'd had these mighty intellects around at the time to guide us mere mortals, I'm sure no one would have been duped and everything would have turned out so much better. Where were they when we needed them.

This is going to be good ?

Spivs. Harks back to a really depressing period of our recent history. It was hard to know who made you most sick, those accused of spivvery or those hysterically labelling anything that moved as a spiv. There were certainly some fans who rose to prominence on the back of it. ?

Excellent question.

Not as interesting as I thought it would be but let's see how sales go ??

Yes, I'd much rather have read that on the Rangers website. I'd also like to understand more about why he stepped down from the board.