Rick Roberts

42 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

I think the new deal is open-ended. ?

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? 

15 hours ago, JohnMc said:

Yes, ignoring the BBC is not a strategy that will be in anyway effective. Put simply they have the 3rd most popular website in the UK (after Google and Amazon), the most watched TV station and top 2 most listened to radio stations. On a Scotland only basis Radio Scotland has the most listeners of any station broadcasting from north of the border. I understand very well the changes in media in recent times however the BBC remains the single most influential broadcaster in the UK and in Scotland. That may change in the coming years but I wouldn't put my mortgage on it. 

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. 

36 minutes ago, Gaffer said:

That's a fair point but it only has an impact on those who consume the BBC propaganda.  I think I'm right in saying that the only time I am exposed to the BBC is on this forum.  I do spend a lot of time away from the UK, but I don't think I'm alone in having little to do with them.  My kids and their friends (who are all UK based) never see anything that comes out of the BBC (except perhaps The Line of Duty), so I wonder if there is a stage when it really is an irrelevance.  I can confirm that my life without the BBC is certainly a much more content one.  More of you should try it. ?

 

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. 

20 minutes ago, Gaffer said:

I get your point Bill, but perhaps the other approach is just to ignore them.  If we cut off the oxygen to these reporters, it would make our lives better and I'm yet to be convinced that they have any affect on us really anyway.  The one thing we'd do need to address is the trial by sportscene issue which is evident.

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. 

On 20/07/2019 at 11:28, pete said:

This contract was passed by this board and not the last one. They obviously thought they had a get out of jail free card but it looks like the fat man has the Mayfair and Park lane covered

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

5 minutes ago, JohnMc said:

You might well be right RR, and of course matching fan expectations does make life easier for a board. Certainly the transfer fee has a bearing on what you might expect of a player. Clubs not matching their rivals can get criticised, particularly if form is poor. I always laugh when a manager is sacked and pundits state that he was backed by the board in the transfer market, as if it was all down to the manager that the club wasted their budget that summer. 

I agree though that if there's any possibility it could add a couple of million to a fee it's a strategy worth pursuing. 

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 ). 

19 hours ago, JohnMc said:

I'm less concerned about pundits talking up his price, I struggle to believe that it makes much difference other than heighten or temper fan expectations. Tierney has Champion's League and international experience, is young and under contract so anyone wanting to buy him will have to pay a decent fee for him. I'd be astonished if it's £25 million though, indeed I'd have thought £10 to £12 mil even in the inflated English market is good business for Celtic. That said football transfers are mental these days. Chelsea sold a full back to Torino for £9 million earlier this month and I'd never heard of him (Ola Aina anyone?), indeed he only played 3 times for Chelsea. I guess if a 22 year old Chelsea reserve player with half dozen caps for Nigeria is worth £9 million then maybe someone like Tierney is worth double that. 

It does make you realise though that if Morelos can sort his discipline problem and score consistently in Europe he's potentially worth £20 plus million. 

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.  

36 minutes ago, StuGers said:

I do find it difficult to understand how Rangers, who are probably the most supported team in Scotland, fails to have any representatives when it comes to ex-players, fans, representatives on BBC Scotland. Just another statistical anomaly we live with in this country.

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. 

43 minutes ago, cooponthewing said:

The SNP are a more than willing partner. This is all repulsive beyond the extreme.  If I support a murderer I am as culpable as they are. The SNP must be held to account by the same moral and hopefully legal code!

 

I also agree re AG mum, she is showing remarkable restraint and is a shining light in a political and footballing cover up. We are all in her debt for continuing to highlight what is going on.

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. 

1 hour ago, Gonzo79 said:

I've always hated Celtc but now I find them utterly repulsive.  The SNP aren't far behind.

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.   

Quote

The reports that have emerged in recent years are extremely distressing, and while it is welcome that Jim Torbett and others have been convicted for their depraved acts, this issue clearly goes wider. Any further allegations of criminality must be swiftly investigated by the police so that further criminal proceedings can be brought where necessary.

The Scottish Football Association’s Chief Executive has apologised to those young people who suffered sexual abuse in football and I think he was right to do so. The Independent Review of Sexual Abuse in Scottish Football commissioned by the SFA found child protection policies at all levels were and still are not fit for purpose. The report has made a number of recommendations to address this and I believe they should be implemented as soon as possible. It is vital that we in Parliament play our part in holding the SFA and other bodies to account on this
Further to this, my colleague Adam Tomkins, MSP for Glasgow, has written to Ian Maxwell, chief executive of the SFA and to Peter Lawwell, chief executive of Celtic FC to seek urgent meetings on this subject. Through a series of criminal trials, we now know something of the scale of the abuse committed by a number of the men associated with Celtic boys’ club. What we do not know is what Celtic FC knew about these offences and when they knew it. These questions must now be independently and fully investigated and, if necessary, a compensation scheme should be established such as that set up earlier this year by Manchester City FC.

It is clear that victims of child abuse in football have been let down, and I very much hope Police Scotland, clubs and the SFA will give them the closure they need and the justice they deserve.

Please be assured the Scottish Conservatives will closely monitor developments on this matter over the coming weeks and months.

Thank you once again for taking the time to contact me.

Yours sincerely,

Ruth Davidson

Rt Hon Ruth Davidson MSP
Leader of the Scottish Conservatives
MSP for Edinburgh Central
Scottish Parliament
 

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.

8 minutes ago, Gaffer said:

I agree with your sentiment, but isn't this the role of the PR team at Ibrox rather than the support? In the large organisations I've been around there is a coordinated approach to building or protecting the brand.  I realise football clubs are just small businesses but we have a PR team and I wonder what they spend their time doing.  I don't see anything constructive from them.

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. 

8 hours ago, buster. said:

However, when it comes to your point about Marginal Gains, it would surely often need a degree of understanding, agreement and co-ordination for it to stand a chance of being effective.

 

A good example of individual initiative is here on this forum,..26th and his excellent thread on Pacific Quay.

Now, think about the ongoing situation between the club and bbc Scotland, your idea of marginal gains and looking for a solution.

 

 

 

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. 

9 minutes ago, 26th of foot said:

I agree.

 

Attempting to provide leadership to the Rangers support is akin to herding cats. Of course, their is tremendous strength in such diversity. However, the aspect of ignoring information on a matter of principle because the source of information is deemed unsavoury for whatever reason, is madness.

 

My professional life found me presenting/being a recipient of a formal set of Orders. It could take 45 minutes and involved copious notes. It's a process of distillation, if you are presenting, you have already attended another orders group and filtered out the relevant detail for your tasking. If you are receiving, you are interested in everything relevant to your designated task.

 

The one aspect which is never filtered, the very same exacting information passes from Field Marshall down to the newest recruit; is information on the Enemy/Threat.

 

Thus, if VB/Rangers Media/Gersnet/Follow Follow, ...... etc unearth a piece of information that makes a difference to how all Rangers supporters are treated/effected by the BBC Scotland/SFA/prominent Journo, ...... etc; then it should be utilised by all. John Mason MSP attends a church that has a literal interpretation of the Bible. He believes the world is several thousand years old. Dippy the Diplodocus was on display at Kelvingrove Museum for several weeks, the skeleton is 160 million years old. John Mason was educated at Hutcheson' Grammar School for Boys'. He is easy to isolate and dissect.

 

Simple adherence to an objective appreciation on each issue as it arises should allow us to prevail. The very second a piece of information is discarded because of source, the appreciation is subjective.   

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.  

3 hours ago, buster. said:

We always tend to return to the same old background. problems and questions underpinning much of any such debate,....you could call it quicksand.

 

• Somebody mentioned our collective strength but we are a long way away from being anything close to a collective
• We discourage quality leadership because of the way we have tended to treat those who do stand-up
• We are good at loyalty and following the team, not at politics
• We tend to follow pied pipers and not want to learn lessons
• We are increasingly marginalised and we inadvertently seek to go ever deeper (where others want us to go)
• We tend to respond positively to ideas that take us further down the road of marginalisation and vice versa (club often react to this so as to curry favour / ie. PR between club and support/customers). That doesn't mean such a road is always mistaken, it's not

 

You could fairly argue that the general political situation and societal tendencies have exacerbated such marginalisation and helped take it to a level that it's difficult to see changing positively anytime soon... #confrontation

 

 

 

 

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). 

1 hour ago, Big Jaws said:

Fan groups should be taking more affirmative actions leading discussions etc but if they are reluctant to put their head above the parapet then the fans themselves need to voice those concerns where they can be heard. Youtube, Twitch-TV, Podcasts and other media are the modern equivalent of radio/TV/Dead Tree Press. I'm a strong supporter of a holistic approach, the more Rangers focused pods and shows the better as far as I'm concerned. Unfortunately David Edgar has set himself up a bit of a walled garden and so it would be difficult to establish a voice in his echo chamber but I'd encourage any Rangers fan with an opinion to put themselves forward to join the discussion on any one of the other emerging new Rangers medias. Perhaps then when fan groups and their reps have a clear message from their members and supporters we will hear them.

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. 

11 minutes ago, Bill said:

To be honest, this article says very little new but it does say it in a way that focusses on the breadth of our challenges, which is a very valuable contribution. Perhaps the part that most caught my attention is quoted above. We've wasted years now, fretting away our energies over share ownership and seats on boards, while paying little more than lip service to the powerful contribution our supporters groups could be making. 

 

Perhaps it's just a coincidence but while the Club1872 website proudly announces the number of shares it owns, nowhere could I see a mention of how many members it has.

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. 

30 minutes ago, Frankie said:

In terms of the fan groups, Club 1872 do occasionally step into media issues but perhaps need to be more vocal when doing so - i.e. get themselves onto phone-ins and/or news shows such as Scotland Tonight for the bigger items of note.

 

 

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.

51 minutes ago, Frankie said:

Thanks to @Rick Roberts for this excellent contribution.

 

Hopefully we can see more articles again this season.  With social media taking more and more prominence, long reads such as this one become harder to find so please support them when they are published.

 

Remember, we'll be needing match previews and more as the new campaign gets underway.  I'd also welcome other regular contributions for the forum and main site such as match reviews and/or player ratings.  Such stuff is the bed rock of wee forums like this so please, please consider helping us out a few times through the year.

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.