Soulsonic5791

They are brazen Gonzo. They are unaccountable and they know it. No doubt I'll be accused of being paranoid with that observation. Whoever is directing this thinks that on occasion they are being subtle in their conditioning. But anyone with half a brain can see right through it. BBC PQ's output standards border on being tabloid in much of its televisual, radio and online content.

If the ordinary fan could click his or her fingers and improve one aspect of the club off the field (in a non-playing sense) instantly, what would/should it be?

Does the BBC in Scotland think that they are serving the wider public to optimal levels by providing the bare minimum of coverage on Rangers (unless it has a negative slant/spin) across their media channels? If they in fact do think that they are acting in the public interest, can they provide examples justifying their editorial standpoint.

Darthter, Surely you don't think that people's wariness of entries on your list as being unfounded do you?

Ok mate, I can see why you've said that. FWIW, here's my two bob's worth in the subject. I've been to many a big game with large crowds exceeding 70,000 at various stadia across Europe, with more than a smattering of them involving ourselves and the other ticket being in direct opposition. In years gone by policing of our support always struck me as a mixture of both control and management with the accent being on 'management' in many cases, especially so at Hampden where the policing mostly struck me as being efficient and as unobtrusive as it could be from Plod's perspective. There was no need for kettling etc., and unecessarily raising people's blood pressure in an already pressured situation due to the importance of the game. Now the reasons for this policing approach may be manifold, namely, different tactics being deployed due to lessons learned from the 1980 SCF, Heysel, Hillsborough, etc, etc. However, this has changed within the last ten years IMO. Having attended numerous away games during that time and witnessed different policing methods by forces in other areas of Scotland, at the 2016 SCF, it was apparent to me at least, that what could be interpreted, conveniently so, as Police incompetence, had a more worrying underlying aspect. It seemed to me and countless others that were there that day, that the Police were almost willing an escalated flashpoint to take place due to their botched handling of the situation. We bore the brunt of that. Not Hibs. This is despite the fixture between the two clubs having a necessary level of risk attached to it. Anyone who has been to Easter Road and witnessed Lothian & Borders officers in riot gear filming ordinary 'scarfers' will attest to how that level of risk is scored with a far smaller crowd and the higher than commensurate number of officers on the ground. This wasn't replicated at Hampden, allegedly. Was this used for ulterior motives in perhaps say, a resource bun fight at Scottish central government? Perhaps, and maybe a discussion for another time. Furthermore, policing at Firhill last season was the most unecessary display of mismanagement that I have witnessed barring the scenes after the final whistle against Hibs mentioned above. And, it trumped the Met's handling of England v Scotland matches when I left Wembley thinking 'they should send someone up to Glasgow to learn how to handle a big crowd without antagonising fans'. Whether or not policing has been politicised to such an extent as to deliberately treating our fans unfavourably is probably down to personal experience and varying levels of paranoia informing theories of conspiracy. However, I think it is fair to say that the attitude towards our support has changed in relatively recent times and not for the better. People might agree or disagree with me and that's cool.

At the risk of upsetting people, has there been any update on Aitken, McDonald, Dornan et al on the OP?

Are you deliberately being abrasive mate? Banal guff? Am I not tribal enough for you?

I would hope so BJ. If the fans feel maligned by the club then they should take action. I'm with you 100% on that.

You can't understand wanting to follow a team for the love of football Bill?

I'm sure the Utrecht RSC will snap a few of them up mate!

I agree with much of what you say MacK1950. First and foremost, I love Rangers for football's sake.

That's only coz they're winning Pete. Cast your mind back not so very long ago, and there was a severe lack of Grey 'n' Green walking the streets. Loads of our fans wear their tops. Once the fans can buy shirts, there will be an explosion of shirts all over the place. Maybe something that isn't too apparent over your way right enough.

I'll hazard a guess at the SNP is perceived as being more pro-republican in 2018 than it was in say, 2014. Defender of the Faith and all that stuff Darthter. People are genuinely alarmed at the prospect of the increased marginalisation of Protestantism. Whilst secularism is on the rise and could be argued to have some benefits, some people believe that Catholicism, in Scotland at least, will never stand by idly and allow any power and influence it has to dwindle away. Ask yourself why the SNP have never actively sought to start a national debate about ending publicly funded segregation of our children within the school system. The SNP are all about 'nation building' in their language, yet they never seem to want to mention that particular 'elephant in the room'. I wonder why that is? (That's rhetorical btw) and for the record, I don't have a problem with RC's having their own education system - let them pay for it themselves. I can just imagine the uproar now from some of the political appointees in public service if they had the gumption to do so but I won't hold my breath. British nationalism is a concept that is rather less well defined. It has its issues and pitfalls as well but this could turn into an essay if I was to go there too.

Do you reckon the Police have been politicised to such an extent that anything to do with Rangers, whether that be players on the pitch or fans inside and outside stadia, are not afforded the same levels of protection as fans and players of other clubs or are treated differently to their detriment Walterbear?

I was meaning that the club haven't exactly been proactive when it comes to defending the dignity of the support in light of sustained attack BJ. It always seems to be reactive as others have mentioned. But it is too easy to be misinterpreted in terms of context so I'll leave it at this: What I was getting at is that the support are highly unlikely to desert the club because it doesn't vehemently defend the reputation of the fan base as a cultural entity within Scottish life. I think that the club lazily rely on that. That said, there have been some instances lately whereby the club recognise that this stance won't wash for much longer. But it is still too reactive for me. Stevie and some of the new players are manfully trying to set agendas though and that is a welcome change at least. Casting my mind back to the early to mid 80's has some bitter sweet memories and the disarray of the chairmanship of John Paton is best left there mate, as young as I was.

Ahh, ok. I wasn't 100% sure with you using the word 'drift'. This is it isn't it. If it wasn't that, they'd dredge up something from the past or use conjecture about something else no doubt.

"More quick". Jeez, I'm starting to sound like Charlie Nick...

Doesn't that viewpoint go some way to explaining and informing the PR strategy? No one likes us we don't care; the punters will always defiantly come back and pay towards the cause?

Sorry mate. I'm not following you. Does the first sentence inform the second one?

How long has that been the case Frankie? Our club's PR has been criticised as being poor for as long as I've been alive. Could it be that we will always be treated as paying punters first and foremost? Granted, fan participation and consultation appears to be improving but how much of it is window dressing? Aren't the fans just taken for granted? Recent EL ticket package prices do little to dispel that notion, regardless of payment deadline extensions.

Apologies in advance for thread drift. I have a hypothetical question to ask. Imagine that the Rangers support was whiter than white when it came to the songbook and fan behaviour was beyond reproach and exemplary, what do you think the haters would focus on then in terms of a metaphorical stick to beat us with? Because, let's not kid ourselves, were that situation to be the case, the haters would not go away and the sectarianism perpetrated by them would not disappear.

I personally don't see any solution to the BBC stand-off any time soon. They are not exactly good when it comes to contrition and admission of being in the wrong. That applies at network level as much as it does at PQ.

Although to the casual onlooker it would appear that the SNP has more than its fair share of Siol nan Gaidheal sympathisers and its direction dominated by members of the 79 Group, it was not always thus. However, it is difficult to escape the notion that the influence of these two groups on the party in more recent times hasn't manifested itself by way of our supporters, and by extension our football club, being viewed as barriers to realising their objectives. Rangers and its relationship with politics is a multi-layered, complex issue. In my humble opinion, it's also one which shouldn't be overly simplified to suit any one political narrative.

Can I ask Darthter, how do you feel when elected representatives like Brendan O'Hara and Julie McKenzie openly and flagrantly refer to Rangers supporters using the'H' word? Does it make you question your political allegiance? Or do you see support for the party as merely a means to an end and reluctantly accept that there will be members with vastly differing cultural standpoints (some of which hate your kind) to yours as a necessary evil?

Too true Stevie. As I mentioned above, it wasn't overly easy to rationalise without sounding either overly critical of the players or much worse imo, too fawning and exempting Stevie of any blame. It was always going to be a tough ask in my view. And without sounding smart after the event, I fancied us to get beat. I didn't think that getting a draw was beyond us but the collective optimism seen in some quarters that we were going to go to their place and turn them over relatively easily was misplaced. The management will have learned a great deal from the whole affair on many levels. It will have shown Stevie just how despised he is by that shower. He will feel it for the first time as a Ranger rather than an interested bystander. That is a vitally important detail in my view. Not only that, it will not be lost on him the value in letting them and Rodgers off the hook (something I neglected to mention during the recording which was intended). He will be stung by it and will be more than ready the next time. Being lucid and fair minded is a big part of doing these pods for me, doubly so after a sore reverse. Ross and Stevie deserve credit for doing the business on that score.