Rick Roberts

Thanks. Hopefully we get to an end long before the that 7 years would've been up anyway.

Stupid question, the new deal doesn't have the 7 year tie-in, just the matching clause?

For me the BBC is the only item that Rangers need to focus on. It is the most important by miles. The rest will take care of itself. I don't care how we get back in there, undignified kicking, screaming, lying, face-scratching, playing race and victim cards. But we need to get back in there.

I'd love to agree. But the unfortunate thing here is the reach. Some figures from last year suggest that Reporting Scotland can reach up to 500,000 listeners (10% of the country) thru its various broadcasts across the day. Its the biggest vehicle in the country by some distance. Most might be non-football fans or old Grannies, but the message is still getting out there. And if that results in even one occurrence of someone not buying a football top or not letting their kid go to Ibrox then its unacceptable.

Reputationally there must be an affect. As an example, discussing our chants across multiple medias as headline news, day after day. Using very pointed and particular language. Whilst ignoring the same from Celtic. And worse with their ongoing CSA scandal, which I dont know if they've even mentioned yet? One item that stands out to me was the no to newco stuff. Where mclaughlin and co would interview a different support every day over 2 weeks and announce that some no-mark fan group or other had voted against us remaining in the SPL. This stuff built the narrative and enabled the governing body to take certain actions (which no other FA would pursue or allow). Similar tactics to the trial by sportscene. Bigger picture, this stuff may being driving from elsewhere. It doesn't look like the key players are bothered about any damage to the BBC either, through their actions. Which may be part of the plan.

We've known this for a while but they've really been digging in recently. It has to stop. They've nailed it with the reporting system. It's designed to scunner.

Just read the judgement. It reads like a long list of complaints being mocked by the judge as he knocks them back.

It's hard to argue against Morelos being targeted last season. The BBC went for him full bore. That hysteria caught up with him, opposition players and officials. (I cant quite explain the ref in UFA though lol ).

For some (not all) clubs and Chairman the market is set through Sky Sports. They are applauded for bigger fees, goaded into breaking records. It must have an effect on some level, because it looks like they're told to do it. Even if it gets £1m more Teirney and £1m less for Morelos, or is simply screen time the club. For our club trying to catch up that £2,000,000 swing could be huge. And all for the price of a free bar and some media gigs for Hartson and Sutton.

Equally, I dont get how the club cant point it out. Simply provide some stats for the season. If say, 60% of pundits have been celtic fans or players, 70% spent talking about celtic games, 99% of Rangers mentions/topics involve negative incidents etc... They'll just keep doing it until its stopped.

She's resilient and then some. Facing shocking resistance and obstacles on her journey. Here's the problem. Her tweets etc are only getting limited exposure. Say 200 or so retweets etc. A large number of Bears and people in the survivors community. Everything is is shut down. Spiers tweets about folk asking for an enquiry, calling them ghoulish and point-scoring. He gets 1000s of retweets. Thomson C4 mentions it, agrees with enquiry, starts banging on about bloody Sunday. The main stream press is failing this. Thomson is usually like a dog with a bone with this social justice stuff. No follow up. Mark Daly has spent over 10 years investigating and doesn't comment on notable events or milestones (that's not normal). The BBC havent bothered covering Lawell dingying Adam Tomkins. The brother of the Grays lawyers (Thompsons and family) apparently is on twitter saying let the courts deal with it, no need for an enquiry.

Celtic deserve reputation damage, as an absolute minimum. It's an open goal (keeping it respectful and factual, of course). Non-celtic people need to get this point across - or else Celtic get what they want, no bad press, no enquiry, no blow-back on this, at all.

Some interesting stuff from Tomkins. Positive from SFA, i guess. Although cant help think that they'll want this over with as quickly as possible and will do whatever gets there. Good to see him not kowtowing to Lawwell and celtic. Very direct.

This was on FF and is the reply from the Scottish Conservatives to a constituent. As an aside, I recently emailed and asked my MP and MSPs (for Labour and Conservative) about an independent enquiry. Still waiting for some responses, but from one the feeling was that this was a new question or one he hadn't been asked before. So although it's big news to us, for many of them it barely registers. If the main parties start getting requests for to pick this up, or to at least ask about it (ask the question at Holyrood etc) from across the country, then it's harder to ignore. It would be good if posters could spend 5 mins asking the questions of their local representatives - it's only a few e-mails and a few sentences. Especially if you live in areas where its less likely to be in the public's attention and they may not have received requests.

Yeah, i agree. Ultimately it should be. There's a hierarchy where we can all do a bit - club > men of means > group leaders > your average fan. This is the frustration. There's a huge free resource, the PR team should be using it. Of course, there's wider issues that aren't or cannot be all on the club (culture, politics etc). Which is why we should all be getting a bit more aware. Again, there's a hierarchy that should be driving those too.

Yep, i think that's the frustration (leading to these articles). There's no obvious co-ordination or planning or scheming. Maybe its all football focused just now - which i can understand. Ideally, I'd be expecting a few more "bridgeheads" in the press - our own McLaughlin somewhere in the MSM. A bit more co-ordinated pressure on the BBC (through side comments or stuff leaked to tabloids, forums etc). Even have Gerrard or Mark Allen talk to someone like Lineker (or whoever) and have a few pot shots at PQ. I'd have liked to see some courting of Rangers friendly politicians. It's all very isolated just now. Maybe it's happening and we just dont see it. But the problem is if it isn't happening then its time wasted.

Exactly you sow many seeds and harvest what you need. One model that stands out is the amount of celtic-view reared journos across the MSM. They've been given that foot up, trained and seasoned, then allowed out into the wider world. Where they regularly pop up and throw grenades at Rangers. It serves its purpose short-term, then pays out even more beyond that.

If groups want to do there own thing then there should be strength in that. It allows different roads to be followed. Which at any point one will be the right road, and we all get on board. As an example - the vanguard bears do their own thing and do a lot of digging and messy, thankless work. But there must be times when that info and knowledge has to be of use to the club or club1872 or whoever. Agree on the marginalisation point. It's too easy to dig in. But this is where there has to be a message or understanding about what fights to pick. (i.e. you don't beat John Mason by calling him a DFB, you beat him by voting him out and helping Rangers beat his team).

You make a good point on the pods, and probably one i've overlooked and underplayed. There's plenty positives there. And good interaction between members 4lads, club1872 and then narsa etc on H&H. There's also a lot of common themes occurring and shared views. Would be great to see that continue and other big hitters brought in. And then see it somehow punch through to the mainstream. Where the biggest positive appears to be Ewen Cameron (who's great) but which is damning on our PR thus far.

I was discussing this with a mate last night. What worries me is I don't see any signs of strategy or change anywhere (on the ground, amongst the support - there's plenty good work ongoing at the club and football wise). An example i had used previously was of the rally at the BBC. I contacted club1872 and got a slightly non-committal response. It shouldn't be like that, personalities/history/agendas have to be put aside. Both Frankie and David Edgar had no problem promoting event. It eventually got rained away but that's a different story, if anything fails it shouldn't be from lack of effort or cooperation. Without wanting to pick on club1872 its purely because they are the most prominent and influential, and i contribute to them.

I was thinking more of the fans reps (and forum leaders) having articles (mission statements) on gersnet. Or better still an interview format on gersnet pod cast? Of course, easier said than done and some may not be interested. But i think if a few started then others would see it as the thing to do.

As mentioned on twitter, might be worth having a list of live topics on website for folk to address, as a kind of prompt? Would even be good if several people tackled same subjects and different points of view could be read. One thing i'd like to hear is more from the different fan groups. How'd they form, whats their goals etc. That way more fans may find something relevant to them to get involved with, and the groups might find some common ground or projects to work on.