The Shed

I agree, it was 'tit for tat', and almost inevitable unfortunately, you would hope that someone could rise above that for the benefit of the game ( no chance of course). In my opinion it would have been for the benefit of the game. I do take an interest in what that club and their fans say, I think it would be remiss not to. Someone in the 'Cllr Aitken' thread alluded to the fact that a certain section of society has placed themselves prominently in the political world, prominent out of proportion to their actual size in the country (the minority) whilst another section of society ( the majority) had taken their eye of the ball. I think that that would be true, from what I've witnessed, in the other 'estates' as well. It won't come as a surprise to anyone, that they are all represented in numbers in the stands of the piggery. So, I try to pay attention to what their board, manager, and fans say. From what I can make out, many of their fans have recognised that the absence of Rangers fans in any number at the game detracts from what the occasion, in large part, is about for them i.e. the chance to give it to us tight. I would be willing to bet that that in large part, for very many of us, is a big part of what going to these games is about. It's what makes the game what it is, and the atmosphere that it creates, and that's what sells this game. If things maintain as they are then I have no doubt that in time, for them and us, the special significance of this fixture will decline, along with interest.

I don't think it's selfish Gaffer. I think what has happened is another example of football in Scotland being diminished because of short sighted self interest, and we should know about that, Just think how others acted as we were forced to play our way through the divisions, does anyone think that Scottish football overall benefited or got stronger because of that? A few towns and grounds I hadn't been in for years got a temporary financial boost maybe, but the real winners were, of course, our city rivals. Thing is, while they were totting up titles and cups virtually unopposed, and perhaps to anyone who didn't know the background that suggested strength, the reality in actual fact is the opposite. That has been demonstrated over and over in Europe which is the real testing ground. What was already a poor product was made even poorer by others acting in a short sighted self interested way. Regardless of what anyone else thinks Rangers v them is the only thing of real interest to the outside World of football, and probably those who don't know anything about football will know us and them, and that will be it as far as Scottish football goes. So to diminish the only thing it has going for us, and that's what removing a pretty unique atmosphere does, is short sighted. Of course there's tit for tat, and on it goes. Rangers as the country's biggest and best supported club should be doing everything they can to strengthen not only themselves, but Scottish football. The bottom line is, if Scottish football is weak then by definition so is Rangers.

It's been open season on us for a while...............I'm really appalled reading about this particular incident, but I'm glad that you brought it here to highlight it.

I know why it was done, I just think it's a mistake to diminish the only thing that this league has to offer the wider football world, and reducing the opposing support to virtually nothing, diminishes it. I wouldn't be surprised if in the not too distant future Sky will be informing the clubs the same. That's my opinion, I'm entitled to it as are you to yours, so don't be giving it the 'Oh dear' shite.

Get that photo up on the dressing room wall for the rest of the season.....wipe that smile right off the cretin's face.

I pretty much agree with all you say above 'Doc', but on the point you make about us only having 800 there, what is your view on that, what's anybody's view? Personally I think we have got this wrong. Sorry if there's discussion about this elsewhere, I'm new, and haven't explored all the threads yet.

We have taken some humpings at the piggery, and with better teams than we had on the park today. Another one that springs to mind when Advocaat was in charge, was the 6-2 the day Fernando was hooked. Bobby Peta was destroying him (I know ,ffs), but that can happen on your first visit there, players can freeze. It happens the other way round, Reggie Blinker at Ibrox in Walters last season first time round, the day Gough scored, springs to mind. That was my only fear before kick off today, that some, in what is virtually a new team, might freeze. I didn't see any sign of that today, it was a difficult game for them, and for various reasons (talked about in length elsewhere here), we were not at it in some departments, but we didn't freeze, and nobody was hiding or giving less than 100%. Contrast that with some of the games against them last season and in particular the 1-5 at Ibrox. We were on the verge of total capitulation that day, at one point they were looking at not just their best win ever at Ibrox, but their best win ever against us anywhere! The players were at odds with the manager, not playing for each other or the jersey, and looking a beaten team from the minute they stepped on the pitch. None of that was evident today. We were not great today, but we're better, and will get better yet.

Thank you mr scott....I think they are more like crickets than midges, but I don't know for sure.....they make a fucking racket, I do know that.

Are they circadians the wee bastards that keep me awake down in Spain?

We do defend well, and we did in actual fact limit their clear cut chances, but if you can't stop the ball coming into the box the way it did today from umpteen corners or whatever, then you are always on the edge of losing a goal. The irony is of course, they scored in a breakaway which is what we had set up to do. However the problem was, we couldn't take the pressure off the defence for any length of time, didn't have the players or the legs to do it. Our wide men for most of the game were on defensive duties, and that meant that Tierney for example, was not being troubled defensively, and could bomb forward. I think in the circumstances Gerrard was right not to attempt a high press, but we just didn't have enough about us today middle and front, defence was asked to do too much. We will play better teams in the Europa albeit in less hostile environments, and I have no worries defensively. I don't worry either about the players' fight and togetherness, but in tough places we need to do more to keep the opposition occupied, and take the pressure of the defence. Coulibaly will help.

I think Collum was ok today.....sure he could have given a foul on Jack, maybe it was maybe it wasn't.....tell you what though, he was a lot close to the incident than Stevie G or the fourth official....looking at the game overall, it wasn't the ref that cost us today.

Sneaky feeling that the three at the back against Motherwell was partly preparation for today. Can't believe I'm awake this early on a Sunday, couldn't sleep, too excited................mon the 'gers, intae them!

I am in agreement with 'Doc' , they would say and do anything to further the cause of an 'Independent' (sic) Scotland, and totalitarian tendencies they may have, but the Scottish Parliament hasn't been burnt down just yet. I am all for the protection of children, this SNP approach hasn't been well thought out, it does interfere with basic rights to privacy, but the point is, it can be challenged. The real issue is that the SNP have obviously persuaded large numbers of working class people, and sections of the middle class, that the problems they face are problems of Nationality, when in actual fact they are class issues, and are the same as those of working people in England.

It's not a particularly clever piece of legislation, and I am not denying that in certain circumstances 'Nationalism' can lean in the direction of 'Fascism' , but that is not the case here. The danger in calling social democrats 'Fascist' is that you alienate whole sections who would be natural allies in any struggle with actual fascists. It happened in Germany in the thirties, and split the opposition to the Nazis.

You are correct Elisioth, SNP are pro capitalism, but it is not accurate to call them 'fascist'......unprincipled opportunists would be more a more apt description in my opinion.