Jump to content
 
 
 
 

Rick Roberts

Site Contributors
  • Content Count

    89
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

96 Excellent

About Rick Roberts

  • Rank
    'S' Form

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. You make good points and you're correct. I don't think there's any need to go through grisly details. I dont think anyone should stumble through details that upset or offend any victims. However, there is a secondary layer that is more suitable for discussion. Concerning the actions of the club, its legal stance and a cover-up. From the top of my head. - Links between board and predators. - Links between predators and outsiders (i.e. Bennell) - Hiring policies. - Comment on celtics own investigation into the boys club in the 80s. - How many people at senior club knew? - Fergus McCanns actions? - Payments from club to 3rd parties. - Public calls from club (and associates) reaching out to victims. - ...those made no mention of police. Was any info ever passed to police? - What did the police know and not act on? - Did celtic contacts victims directly? - How many non-disclosure agreements are out there? - When and how did celtic adopt their first defence strategy? Was this a shared tactic with the CC? - When did separate entity defence appear? - Compare clubs actions with those in England. - Compare Man Cities response with celtics. - Compare case and actions with Penn State. - Discuss whether Penn State precedents and punishments should apply to Celtic? - What options were available to SFA? - What options are available to SFA? - Discuss whether member clubs should meat to discuss celtics behaviour? - Discuss whether celtic scandal has been covered up? And by who. There's plenty scope for open and informed discussion on this. Some of this is documented fact, other points speculation and hearsay. They could get months worth of content out of this and people would want to know about it. They would if it were Rangers. Also, I'm sure Hugh Keevins could give some very accurate answers to many of those questions, if he wanted to. But there's the crux. He doesn't want to. Celtic don't want him to. To have the celtic support, and other supports, discussing that is damaging for them, which is why it is never mentioned. From what I've seen on twitter a lot of celtic fans are genuinely in denial or in the dark about it. The coverage and content for a scandal that size has been extremely limited. There's also some pretty murky stuff going on to cover it up. Accounts popping up and attacking anyone talking about it, including victims. I've seen tims setting up accounts pretending to be Penn State fans. We currently have a group driving the "victims cause" in Hampden and Holyrood that are knowingly excluding victims. That group appears firmly in the "dont blame the club" camp. Call me cynical. But when millions of pound are at stake then anything goes. Including radio stations opting to limit exposure. Clyde SSB, of course, have history with inconsistency. During one of the raging storms on Rangers singing nasty songs, when celtic fans were caught red handed singing sectarian songs, Keevins simply changed the subject. A change of editorial policy so to speak.
  2. Totally agree. I dont listen these days but its difficult to avoid seeing examples of the double-standards they spew out. Like the example above.
  3. I saw this posted on FF earlier. For anyone unlucky enough to have listened to Clyde SSB at all, or in the past decade in particular, this really is something else. If not unsurprising... It reads like its straight from the forked-tongue of the high priest of the East End himself, Hugh Keevins.
  4. I've went for Arfield. I think he's been at the centre of our best performances and has been the most missed when out. Tav has been excellent at times. Would be happy to see him get the vote too. A few months ago i wouldve said Morelos, by a long way, but he ruined it with the red at celtic.
  5. Us and the them is a bit different. I would have thought Killie would have to tread a bit lighter with us tho, given size of our away support.
  6. Yeah. Looks that way. If amicable then Rangers would've released statement wishing them luck etc etc
  7. Is this not something that wouldve been discussed beforehand, between the clubs?
  8. Correct, whole thing is a joke. Have said it elsewhere, but club needs to bring it to a head and sort it out this season. No way can we risk next season sabotaged by this shower of shite. I would have club formally submit incidents to CO system. Including Scott Browns stamp at Dundee. That way we are in no doubt what the panel are looking at and what decision they reach.
  9. Players (multiple) being fatigued at same time is a bit concerning. We have squad to rest and bring back some of these guys over season. Likewise, some players carrying injuries. I don't think anyone except Morelos is replaceable so no real excuses. One thing i never see mentioned is the Gerrard factor. He allows us to attract certain players, open doors that other managers perhaps wouldn't. We need to maximise this.
  10. Of course Pete. Both equally excellent. And Gersnet is infinitely better value. 😉
  11. https://www.patreon.com/posts/murray-and-me-25438092 On Patreon site. Subscription only, i believe.
  12. Martyn returns to quiz David on his time with the RST and his relationship with then-Rangers owner David Murray. In this episode, they look back to the battles over songs Rangers found themselves embroiled in during the 00s. How did Murray react to the changing climate - and how did David? __________ Fantastic listen, as always, for latest in their David Murray series. So tragic and sad that agendas against us were so blatant and so effective and yet as a support we're still in denial about these things.
  13. As a member of Club1872 I asked if they would back the demo. They said they hadn't been asked and weren't sure on arrangements/permissions etc, so couldn't commit at this time. They also said no other members had asked them. Likewise, i believe other Rangers forums hadn't publicised event. Because of history/personality stuff. There's some questions here. The bigger picture should have been all encompassing. A chance for an olive branch from either side and opportunity to be the bigger person. These groups dont have to like each other but at times they have a duty to suck it up, imho. Likewise, organiser could've reached out more (i'm assuming they didnt, they maybe did) and then at least they've done their bit. Ultimately, should've been postponed with the weather.
  14. It seems like an open goal to me. I don't know why club doesn't just jump on it. There's nothing to lose with them anyway.
  15. Here's my latest reply from the BBC complaints w.r.t. them being bangers. Editorially fair is the latest party line.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.