Search the Community

http://www.gersnet.co.uk/index.php/latest-news/157-rangers-pr-problems-boycotts-and-bloggers Another weekend, another statement from the club complaining about newspaper A and blogger B. This time it’s the Daily Record in the firing line – as well as some mischief-making Celtic supporter websites and a PR guru the club have used for longer than some owners have been in charge. Fair enough, the club is entitled to have a moan and the statement seems strong and has validity. However, where does all this stuff really get us? Boycott the Daily Record? Sure, done it years ago – not necessarily because I think the Record is anti-Rangers per se but simply because newspapers are old-hat and their content usually at least 12 hours out of date. Of course the Record have had plenty examples of good, old ‘Rangers hating’ but any more than any other media source; I’m not so sure. After all, picking between the Daily Record and The Sun is like choosing between Jo Brand and Ann Widdecombe for a new life-partner. I’ll pass thanks… Use the club’s website for content? Definitely, visit it several times a day and it’s a much improved resource in recent times. However, it clearly won’t cover every subject and, even if it did, would it offer a balanced analysis of every issue? I doubt it so it’s inevitable such information vacuums are filled by alternatives – be them pro-Rangers or not. It’s up to the club to challenge these when and where appropriate. Ignore ‘malicious and wildly inaccurate’ coverage elsewhere? Absolutely, the day I accept a Celtic blogger’s attempts to derail our club, is a long way away. However, if their content is so dangerous and inaccurate, the club’s lawyers’ should be doing more than monitoring such stuff. How about taking them to court and/or being cleverer in how you deal with them? After all, I don’t see much evidence of these people back-tracking in their claims? In fact, they seem to be becoming bolder and multiplying. Not to mention their content often used by the mainstream media. Jack Irvine does not speak for Rangers? Great, this chancer’s impact on Rangers – both financially and logistically over the last five years has been the epitome of a conflict of interest. From working with Sir David Murray; to Craig Whyte; to Charles Green; to, erm, current director and investors James and Sandy Easdale, MediaHouse will know more than most about almost every single subject related to the club in the modern era. Does this mean making a public enemy of him is a good idea though? We better hope the non-disclosure agreements are well written and secure. Well, more guarded than the plethora of official club emails and documents that seem to be released on a daily basis on social media anyway. You know the Twitter account that the club’s lawyers continue to ‘monitor’… I think all the above shows us just how much of a mess the club’s PR operations are in. Doesn’t matter if its new directors using recently sacked contractors and banned media organisations or regular boardroom leaks (sometimes even to the Record), we seem completely incapable of getting our house in order in that regard. Is this the fault of ‘Director of Communications’ Jim Traynor? Not necessarily but it’s interesting that his strong website words have not always resulted in strong action. Again, that doesn’t mean he’s to blame but he’s the obvious target for many bears, even if the recently appointed Keith Bishop Associates are responsible for the club’s PR work nowadays. With that in mind, it’s fair to question Rangers in how they intend to deal with the various PR issues we clearly have. The club says it can’t lend Celtic fan blogs ‘credence’ or ‘react’ to every single story. Fair enough, that would require a lot of resources. Despite that, in recent months, Rangers has banned BBC Scotland, removed Radio Clyde as a media partner and taken legal action against the Daily Record and one anonymous blogger. Is (or should) there be discussions for addressing mainstream media coverage or should they be banned indefinitely? How does the club separate action against organisations such as the BBC from individuals like Graham Spiers (who has arguably been the worst offender historically) and anonymous blogs? We can’t ban or sue everyone so with the situation arguably getting worse, it’s up to the club to show the supporters what solutions they’re considering. Generally speaking this isn’t an easy conundrum to solve though. The media is and always will be a constant that the club (and fans) will have to interact with. They cause mischief, they print spin and all too often lack the balance Rangers fans would like to see on many important subjects. All that is a given from every source so the club often just has to suck it up. Unfortunately, while I’d consider statements on our website as occasionally helpful, the lack of action – or perhaps more accurately – the lack of genuine results in addressing the most malicious stuff just makes every new statement appear like impotent sabre-rattling. Like everything else at Rangers, our strategy seems inconsistent and poorly carried out yet we pay a small fortune for these services. At some point, those responsible have to start delivering real results or ‘the truth’ Saturday’s statement highlights will just become another casualty of a war that is tearing our club apart.

THE following quotes were published on the official Rangers website on January 31, 2011. “First, I would like to address specifically the latest attempt to undermine Rangers in today’s Daily Record which devotes five pages to trashing our efforts to get this club back on a sensible financial footing. “In the most lurid terms, the Record accuses the club’s management and, specifically me, of using supporters’ money to help fund the buy-out of Rangers. Not true. “The club is accused of not paying £5million in VAT. Not true. “The Daily Record’s approach to this story sought to distort and dramatise the matter. I for one will not be reading or buying the Daily Record again and I’m sure many other Rangers fans will share my disgust at yet another smear on this football club. “These are challenging financial times for Rangers – as they are for many other businesses. What I can say to you as a Rangers fan is that everything I will do as chairman will be in the interests of the club and I thank you for your continued support.” For the avoidance of doubt, these quotes were attributed to Craig Whyte. On the day the Daily Record revealed the truth about his ruinous financial chicanery. Two weeks before he plunged the club into administration. And a full six months after he had banned yours truly for revealing what he was up to with the club’s season tickets in the first place. A story which he aggressively dismissed as a pack of lies to the delight of many of the club’s supporters. Much could have been done to save Rangers from Whyte, in those intervening months, if only the Daily Record had been listened to. Which is why there was something chillingly familiar about the latest populist propaganda to have been churned out by the club’s politburo at the weekend. It read thus: “Nor can we react to every journalist and publication who appear to pursue an anti-Rangers agenda, publications such as the Daily Record which today boasts yet another headline which does not accurately reflect what manager Ally McCoist said in his press conference yesterday. “This paper’s intent is clear and we urge our fans to see it for what it is. If Rangers fans want the truth they will find it only on the club’s official platforms.” These will be the same platforms which trumpeted all of Whyte’s many denials – including the very website which, as recently as a couple of weeks ago, removed quotes from the club’s own manager after McCoist had harpooned Charles Green in a press conference at Forfar. And now they wish the world to know that the Daily Record has adopted some form of anti-Rangers agenda? How absurd. How infantile. How very sinister. Let’s deal in the facts here, just for the avoidance of doubt. This newspaper is a staunch supporter of Scottish football. Commercially, the more the game thrives in this country, the better it is for our business. And while doubtless there are skewed and malevolent people out there who long for the day Rangers self-destruct for good, these extremist views are not shared across this office floor. On the contrary, the Record knows that, in order for Scottish football to be returned to a fit state, Rangers will first have to be fixed or, to use another of McCoist’s own words, “cleansed” from the inside out. The sooner this happens the better for all of us who love our national sport. With that in mind, this newspaper has done more than any other in an attempt to shine a light on some of the murkier operations which have been carried out behind closed doors ever since Whyte’s pointy shoes first crossed the threshold. I take great pride in the work this paper undertook to prove Whyte was a liar and cheat. It was a six-month slog throughout which Whyte consistently cuddled up to our rivals and fed them scraps from his table. Such subservience is an affront to journalism. But it is the easy option and one favoured by the Scottish Sun in particular. That publication has repeatedly handed over its pages to people such as Whyte, Green, Imran Ahmad and most recently Brian Stockbridge, the financial director whose own questionable conduct regarding videoing Malcolm Murray and then releasing it has also been revealed in the Record. Not one of the above has a good word to say about this paper and for good reason. We nailed Whyte, chased Green and Ahmad relentlessly in pursuit of the truth and exposed Stockbridge. When this column suggested earlier this year that huge chunks of the club’s money was disappearing into other accounts, scattered to the four corners of the globe, it was accused of trouble making. Last week, of course, Stockbridge spoke exclusively to the Sun to admit the £22m of IPO cash raised at the turn of the year has now gone – but to insist with his very next breath there is absolutely no need to be panicked by this mind-boggling cash burn. Of course, there isn’t. And yet, only days earlier, Stockbridge claimed at a supporters’ meeting not to know how much of that money was left. If he really did not know such enormous amounts of cash had been spent then he ought to be fired for gross negligence. Instead, tomorrow, Stockbridge will pull up a seat at a board meeting to discuss whether or not Green should continue in his role as club “consultant”. Chief executive Craig Mather has called this gathering and he had better hope Stockbridge and directors James Easdale, Ian Hart and Bryan Smart choose to do the right thing – because if they do not agree to axe Green then Mather’s own credibility will be shot to pieces and his position untenable. There is, of course, another critical issue to be discussed and that is a shareholders’ requisition for the removal of Stockbridge, Mather and Smart and the appointment of Paul Murray and Frank Blin as directors. If these changes are not approved by Friday, an egm will be triggered and a bloodbath most probably will ensue. This can still be avoided by compromise and clear thinking. But only if Green is first removed from the internal affairs of a club which continues to self-harm so spectacularly. Saturday’s official statement was another indication of just how confused this outfit has become. And it came 24 hours or so after McCoist and his squad checked into five-star luxury at Turnberry to prepare for a League One trip to Stranraer – an extravagance which was not lost on the club’s anxious staff, many of whom have been living in fear of redundancies and restructuring. It went on to point out in its very last line: “Finally, Jack Irvine of Media House does not speak for this club.” This appears to be in response to weekend quotes from the PR mogul, who is representing James and Sandy Easdale. Up until very recently Irvine’s Media House enjoyed a highly-lucrative contract with Rangers. Over the past two years it acted also to protect the reputations and interests of Whyte, Duff and Phelps, Green, Ahmad and Stockbridge. Earlier this month Irvine selected a group of hand-picked “friendly” journalists to interview Green at the Easdales’ bus depot. Green used those platforms to demand £14m from Jim McColl, while admitting to being devious and an embarrassment. For the avoidance of doubt, the Daily Record was not invited. Nor did it have any wish to be.

SO MANY voices in this Rangers saga and so many mixed messages, so much contradiction to pile on top of the poison that has reigned in the place for far too long. Dire warnings from Dave King that the club is living beyond its means and is heading inexorably for the rocks again and, on the flip side, Ally McCoist looking to sign a reserve goalkeeper (is there nobody there already who can warm the bench for the season?) as well as two others. The club appears to be bleeding money. They have burned their way through their share-offering revenue – supposedly £20 million-plus – and have £10m left in the bank and overheads that are eye-watering. And yet the manager is carrying on – being allowed to carry on – spending where there is no need. No need whatsoever. Three more players might increase Rangers’ winning margin in League One. Big deal. They might give them an extended run in a cup, but is it worth it? More mouths to feed, more money going out, more pressure on a club’s finances that concerned Rangers fans are bending over backwards to have a look because they fear the worst. Is there nobody at Ibrox prepared to cry “Stop! We need to cut costs not add to them”? Apparently not. Contradiction upon contradiction. Yesterday, more of it. Sandy Easdale sent a message out there via his PR man, Jack Irvine, who came blinking into the light having spent so many years operating in the shadows. Laughably, Irvine attempted to portray his client as a man who would sooner jump in the path of one of his buses than do anything to damage his beloved Rangers. What is required desperately at Rangers – before it is too late – is transparency. The bonnet needs to be lifted on the club’s fiscal reality and the suspicion is that it had better happen quickly. For all their faults, the trio of Jim McColl, Paul Murray and Frank Blin want to do this in rapid order. That’s their modus operandi. Easdale doesn’t want it to happen. He has called the prospect of an EGM and a possible over-throwing of the board an “appalling waste of money”. He has, through his PR man, said McColl and company are wasting their time and that they will end up looking embarrassed. That is to say that seemingly an overwhelming body of the Rangers support are also wasting their time in their pleas for proper financial transparency. Easdale, it would appear, thinks everybody in the Rangers fanbase should pipe down with their complaints. He – or his man – calls the whole thing “boardroom nonsense” Boardroom nonsense? Quite a description, that. Just a little bit of an understatement, wouldn’t you agree? Tuesday is when the Rangers board meet to discuss Charles Green’s role as consultant. By rights, Green will be stripped of his position, if only for his capacity to cause humiliation to all those around him. That’s a long-honed skill of the Yorkshireman and his cohorts and it’s going to be difficult to stop. Green holds a lot of aces at Rangers. He’s going to take a bit of shifting. Overseeing all of this, of course, is Craig Mather, the chief executive who has to, on one hand, appease the Rangers support and, on the other, attempt to neutralise Green’s addiction to mortifying public utterances that send those at Ibrox into apoplectic fury. Mather, it has to be said, is not exactly a leader of substance. You might remember that, back in June, he borrowed a move from the Green playbook by trumpeting his desire to go after Rangers’ enemies, a carbon-copy of the tactic deployed by Green at the outset – and one that worked very well with the fans until they could see through him and his money-grab. “There will be times when you [the support] want us to tackle our enemies and it will seem like we’re somehow reluctant to do so or that we don’t care,” he said. “You might believe we don’t feel hurt to the same extent as you, but we do. Sometimes you have to wait. We’ve chosen, and we will continually choose, the right moment to strike. Please, never believe that I or any other directors don’t know the names of the people who have tried to damage this club. We know them all. We know what each one’s tried to do and I can assure you we will never, ever forget about that.” This was populist claptrap at the time and it’s populist claptrap that Mather has singularly failed to back up. Rangers’ enemies? Does he – or anybody else at the club – seriously believe that the media, the BBC in the main, are the club’s major enemy? If they do, God help them. Their analysis is desperately skewed. The main “enemies” are surely the ones who are wearing – or have recently worn – the Rangers blazer. The Greens, the Imran Ahmads, the Brian Stockbridges. Stockbridge is the financial controller at Ibrox. A few weeks ago at a fans meeting he was asked how much of the share-offering money remained in the club bank account. He didn’t know. Or didn’t want to say. A few days later he appeared in a tabloid saying that, er, nothing was left. Nothing. A financial controller? What, exactly, is he controlling when vast bonuses are given out to himself and Green for the pitiful honour of winning the Third Division. Big salaries and 
100 per cent bonuses. That’s not control, that’s the very opposite. Where is Mather’s ire at these people? It doesn’t exist because he is among them. Mather doesn’t know who the real enemies are. On Tuesday he, and the board, will have a chance to right a wrong and remove Green, a man who, it is said, is prepared to support Ahmad in his multi-million pound legal action against the club. With friends like that… Mather has said other things. He went after the SFA, for instance. Another Rangers enemy and more populism. The chief executive demanded answers from Hampden about the different punishments doled out to Hearts and Rangers in administration. He made great play of this in a statement. He wanted to know if it was one rule for Rangers and another for Hearts. He was going to press the SFA to explain themselves. All of this gave the impression of a man taking on the Rangers haters. It was bunkum. His anger and his call for transparency didn’t even amount to him taking the time to send an e-mail or write a letter to the SFA asking for clarification. A warrior in his statement and a pussycat thereafter. The SFA did, indeed, provide clarification, but not because of an official request – that’s normal procedure – but because they wanted to highlight what garbage Mather was talking in his phoney call to arms. The SFA statement was a deconstruction of Mather’s earlier position. Why had the SFA fined Rangers, Mather had demanded to know. Answer: Because Rangers asked them to. To Tuesday, then. And the hope that those seeking clarity are not once again painted as the enemy by the incumbents who want an end to mere “boardroom nonsense”. The reality, as most appreciate now, is far bigger than that. http://www.scotsman.com/news/tom-english-rangers-and-the-need-for-transparency-1-3051356?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/4824-for-the-avoidance-of-doubt

http://leggoland2.blogspot.com/2011/11/daily-record-editor-and-brian-mcnally.html

http://leggoland2.blogspot.com/

Good or bad?

With tonight's closure of the transfer window now looming closer by the second it's becoming crystal clear that staying in Europe or more specifically, the Champions League this season was paramount to the ability of the new manager to start building a new, deeper and higher quality squad. That may well seem like stating the obvious, but I think we should ask ourselves if Ally was really afforded the opportunity to strengthen for our European campaign given that the club were very public about supposedly bidding for and trying to bring in the players who might have helped keep us in Europe, but either failed or backed off on the deals. Obviously it's all history now, but I wonder what players like Roland JuhÃ?¡sz, Wesley Verhoek and David Goodwillie might have offered the manager in terms of team selection options in our Champions League and Europa League games had we signed them up and registered them instead of messing about with low bids and flimsy attempts to acquire their services. Despite it being too late to help us in Europe, we finally brought in Alejandro Bedoya after a lengthy period of the club saying 'we want him NOW', but if we're to believe media reports, we supposedly went back to Ã?â??rebro with a lower offer than we had previously made just a couple of weeks earlier. No matter what anyone says about the player having been on the last X amount of games of his contract, if it's true that we did that, then it highlights one aspect of our new and somewhat bizarre concept of transfer market dealings. Is it a concept which involves telling the fans, the media and other clubs that there's money there for these new players the club are bidding for, then that money just seeming to disappear into thin air when the bids all fail? Imagine an episode of South Park where illusionist Paul Daniels is running a football club and dabbling in the transfer market with a top hat, a dove and a pile of magic money. No you see it, now you don't. It's Magic! Another strange series of events was the attempt to sign Carlos Cuellar from Aston Villa, now managed by former Gers manager Alex McLeish. In this case, the Scottish press reported that Villa had accepted a Ã?£2m bid from Rangers for the player. Fans were literally ecstatic about it because Cuellar aka 'King Carlos' was a cracking, no nonsense defender who was absolutely brilliant in our run to the UEFA Cup Final, a run which ended in his sale to Villa for almost eight million pounds. Good business to get him back for Ã?£2m then, but what happened to the deal? We had the bid accepted and it was supposedly still on the table until we went out of the Champions League. Then, all of a sudden the deal was off because he was still injured when in actual fact the club knew that he was injured all along. Am I missing something here? Did the guy's return from injury being slightly delayed put us off buying him back for nearly Ã?£6m less than we sold him for? You have to wonder.... Roland JuhÃ?¡sz? Were we really ever intending to buy this guy? After a drawn-out saga of us being told the club were making bids and having them rejected, we were reported to have made a final Ã?£3.5m bid for the player. In actual fact we must have bid significantly less than that for the deal to just fall apart because both JuhÃ?¡sz and his agent were keen for the deal to come to Ibrox to happen and Ã?£3.5m is what Anderlecht were reportedly seeking for the player. I'm intrigued as to what really happened to that deal, but if I was taking a guess it would be something along the lines of going out of the Champions League meant that there was no way the club could afford to spend Ã?£3.5m on a defender no matter how good he is. I think we'll skip all the details of the Goodwillie saga here because it was another drawn-out affair and in this case there were extremely unusual circumstances involved regarding his personal life, but it's worth noting that yet again we failed to sign a supposed top target. I can't help thinking that if we were ever serious bidders and the club really wanted to sign him, then David Goodwillie would be a Rangers player. We certainly need another striker because Kane Hemmings was going to be one of our back-up strikers in the squad this season and now he's out till Christmas or beyond due to an injury requiring surgery. Ally actually said he wanted another striker before Kane got injured, so maybe we need to bring in two strikers now? One thing is clear in my mind and that is that we haven't actually replaced Kris Boyd or Kenny Miller with another deadly goal-scorer. Nikica Jelavic is a fantastic player, but we need another 25 goal a season striker to partner him and fill the glaringly obvious void left in our attacking arsenal since the Boyd and Miller partnership moved on. It's time for our new owner to put the top-hat, dove and magic money back in the box of tricks and get his really money out because this isn't a scathingly satirical magic show on an episode of South Park; this is Rangers Football Club and it's real life. The transfer window closes in a few hours time and we need another striker Mr. Whyte.

Taken from FF. Well done the Aussie Bears LOL! get it right round you timmy! we the Perth RSC chipped in and had the banner below flown over Perth and the NIB stadium for the best part of an hour and a half. Leading up to the match we were throwing all sorts of red herrings out, kidding on we had our own section of the ground etc, which resulted in the police and daily record contacting us to confirm!!! the local police actually cancelled all leave and drafted in extra staff to cope with the 'problem' several guys had timmy quizzing them at work, saying 'thats pure pish you'se going to the game btw' etc etc during the match the stadium announcer said 'if your a celtic fan, please do not look up' while they were all at the game all prepared for riots etc, we were sitting sipping beers down at the Lucky Shag by thee riverside!! Aussiebear has a lot better footage and pictures, which he will upload shortly!! anyway, the other guys will be on shortly to talk about it and post some picture!!

SKIPPER David Weir last night agreed a new one-year contract to stay on at Rangers. The 41-year-old, left, thrashed out his future during talks with boss Ally McCoist at Murray Park. That's according to the Daily Record. How do we feel about this. Although I suspect I know Ian's answer

Allan McGregor has emerged as Arsenals top transfer target despite Rangers insisting that the goalkeeper is not for sale. Watching Switzerland U21 v Czech Republic U21? Check in with fanatix Switzerland U21 v Czech Republic U21 live streaming Gunners boss Arsene Wenger is in the market for an experienced keeper, and sees the Scotland number one as the ideal solution to his problem position. The Frenchmans repeated failure to buy an assured stopper has partly contributed to the clubs six-year trophy drought, with Manuel Almunia and Wojciech Szczesny less than convincing between the sticks. Wenger is now prepared to test Rangers owner Craig Whytes resolve with a 12million bid for the 29-year-old. New Aston Villa manager Alex McLeish is also said to be interested in McGregor, and could offer his old club Carlos Cuellar as part of a deal. But Whyte told the Daily Record: "I've said that McGregor is not for sale. We haven't been approached by anyone about him so far. "As far as Cuellar is concerned we have made a formal offer. We are actively discussing it." Whyte confirmed his intention to bolster the squad, adding: "We would like to get some signings in as soon as possible but don't want to bring in the wrong players. http://www.fanatix.com/arsenal-ready-12m-bid-for-proven-stopper/

Branding the tax case website crap is nice to see. Also saying the right things for me currently.

Lifted from FF I understand that Keith Jackson has been banned from Ibrox. The Daily Record has been asked to publish a full apology for the 'Coisty Cash Crisis' story which appeared today. The new regime is sending out a message that untrue stories about the club will no longer be tolerated. Watch this space.

Meeting between Supporters Club and Rangers FC and Strathclyde Police Last night, Thursday, Billy Montgomery of the Nithsdale Loyal RSC facilitated a meeting between around a dozen reps mainly from clubs in the Glasgow area. Initially the meeting had been called as a result of media reportage which caused concern about the policing of the forthcoming Old Firm match. Also present were club liaison manger Jim Hannah; Rangers FC security and safety executives David Martin and Robin Howe; and Andrew Bates the match commander at Ibrox from Strathclyde Police. We were given the outline of the complaints to UEFA but no specifics as yet as it is still being worked on by Rangers legal people. Very strong representations were made to the club and police stressing that fans want a level playing field with regards to policing, stewarding and consideration of fan behaviour. It is totally unacceptable that Rangers fans are treated as second class citizens. Fan reps also stressed that we expected the club not only to defend itself to the fullest extent possible in this instance but to instigate changes in policy which will result in the ending of attacks on the club from the media or politically/religiously-motivated mischief makers. Andrew Bates was then asked about the policing of the game in general and about changes to police/legislative policy in particular. With regard to the 35-strong undercover snatch squad mentioned in the Daily Record he said that was incorrect - he will have officers at his disposal whom he can send into the crowd should he feel the need. These will not be targeted at any one support or any one section of the ground. Whilst he would not obviously be drawn into internal police matters we made it clear to him that it was intolerable that any group of fans should be allowed with impunity to sing the praises of terrorist groups for 90 minutes every second weekend, often within the Strathclyde force area. Likewise slogans and banners which are grossly offensive are simply not tolerated amongst the home support at Ibrox and we expect this to be the case in areas reserved for visiting fans. It was likewise intimated that the imbalance in court procedure, procurator fiscal decisions and police tactics needed to be addressed to remove undue influence and that the opinions of Rangers fans in particular need to be listened to and heard in discussions from which we are presently excluded. Preparations are being made for a meeting of supporters club reps on Sunday 1st May - once details are ready details will be sent out.

THE reason for the delay in Rangers publishing their half-yearly figures is ,there are those on the Ibrox board who quite simply do not trust Lloyds. However, I believe that recent top level talks with the new men at the top of Lloyds will see Rangers release the figures this week. It surprises me that not much has been made of what has been going on at Lloyds' top table in the last month. For the fact is that since the last update on the power struggle on the Ibrox board, and my revelations about why the half yearly accounts had not been published, there have been massive changes at Lloyds. It now remains to be seen whether those changes will undermine the position of Donald Muir and Mike McGill, the two Ibrox directors who are seen as Lloyds men. Somehow, and for no reason I can fathom, the huge upheaval at Lloyds has not made its way onto the sports pages of the nation's newspapers. Though what's being going on at Lloyds has appeared on the business and financicial pages of such reputable media outlets as the Daily Telegraph and the Scotsman. Let's kick off right at the top of the tree. The man who was in charge of Lloyds as chief executive, Eric Daniels, is no more. And a good thing too, many may believe. Closer to home for Rangers, the executive director of Lloyds, who had special responsibilities for the bank's business in Scotland, Archibald Gerard Kane, is also no more. An even better thing those on the Ibrox board with the good of Rangers in their hearts, Martin Bain, Alastair Johnston John McClelland, Paul Murray and Dave King, may well believe. The new Lloyds chief executive is the Portuguese born Antonio Horto-Osorio, who took over three weeks ago, and who is believed to be a hands-on supremo. Certainly it did not take him long to express what many interpreted as his dis-satisfaction with the performance of Lanarkshire born man-of-mystery Kane. One of the new chief executive's acts was to show Kane the door and replace him with Philip Grant. My research into Grant seems to show he was previously with the Royal Bank of Scotland, but the probe is ongoing. More of Lloyds new man Grant at a later date. For the moment, it is better to examine just what has been going on between Rangers and Lloyds during this period of turmoil at the bank. You may recall that last month I revealed the four page document which contains Rangers half yearly figures, plus a statement from chief executive, Bain, was pulped after Muir and McGill were reported to have objected to what Bain had written. There followed a round of briefings by Donald Muir to a small cherrypicked group of reporters, which surprisingly exiled the Daily Record. WHY? Rangers were believed to be furious that the outcome of these clandestine meetings was a series of stories which claimed Lloyds had saved Rangers. There was even some talk that what Muir had done may have breached the strict confidentiality laws governing the relationship between a bank and its customer. While this was all going on, Bain met with the bank again to try and thrash out a new business plan. When he reported back to the Rangers board, McClelland, Murray and Johnston were unhappy with what the bank proposed. That led to a further delay This happened against the backdrop of Horto-Osorio was getting his feet under the Lloyds boardroom table. Now, with the arrival of the new executive director at Loyds with special responsibilites for their business in Scotland, Philip Grant, Rangers have a new man to negotiate with. The latest delay to the publication of the half yearly accounts is a direct result of those talks, with Rangers hoping they get more sense out of the new man than they did from Archibald Gerard Kane. Or from the man who was responsibe for business banking at Lloyds when they took over Rangers banking arrangements, the now departed founder board member of the Celtic Trust, Manus Joseph, J Fullerton. Rangers can point to the fact Lloys inherited a debt of �£31M, largely due to the club's absence from Europe in the year before, which had fallen to �£23M by the time the annual audited accounts were published in the summer of 2010. It is believed that debt to Lloyds will now be around �£20M....or even less. Which will show the new men at Lloyds the ability Rangers have to reduce their debt, provided they are allowed to conduct their business in a way geared to bring that business success. As the business of Rangers Football Club is football, success financially is relative to the success on the park of the team. Therefore, playing in Europe - even in the Europe League - increases the club's income. In turn making Rangers more able to continue to reduce its debt to Lloyds. That is neither brain surgery nor rocket science. The amazing thing is that Eric Daniels, Archibald Gerard Kane or Manus Joseph J Fullerton seemed to realise that. Or if they did, the gave every appearance of wanting to ignore the fact. For whatever reason. Now, perhaps trust will finally be established between Lloyds Bank and Rangers Football Club. http://leggoland2.blogspot.com/

Sectarian 'keyboard warriors' facing five years in jail Mar 21 2011 by Paul O'Hare OLD FIRM bigots who spread sectarian poison on the internet could soon face five years in jail. Crown lawyers have briefed ministers on plans to go after the "keyboard warriors" who spout hatred in online fans' forums. And the law chiefs are considering a dramatic rise in the maximum jail term for such crimes, which currently stands at just six months. Under the proposals, offenders who make death threats online or incite religious hatred would face jury trials and maximum five-year sentences. Plans for a web crackdown were first revealed by Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini in the Daily Record last week. And the five-year jail sentences unveiled yesterday are just one of the anti-bigotry measures proposed in the wake of recent Old Firm violence. The Lord Advocate has also revealed plans for a specialist Crown Office unit to tackle sectarianism. Prosecutors are set to create a new charge of football-related breach of the peace, which will help courts get tough on hooligans. Crown lawyers will carry out a detailed review of sectarian offences committed in the past year. And in a move designed to stop thugs flouting football banning orders, season tickets issued in future will include holders' photos. The crackdown follows the recent Scottish Cup "shame game" where Celtic boss Neil Lennon and Rangers's Ally McCoist clashed angrily on the touchline. Lennon is under roundthe-clock guard after death threats from bigots. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/football/spl/2011/03/21/sectarian-keyboard-warriors-facing-five-years-in-jail-86908-23004927/

from The Daily Record.

Somewhere to stick the latest headlines for the latest installment of the silly season. I'll kick things off: Rangers line up Bosman for Killie Goalkeeper Cammy Bell http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/jan/04/rangers-bosman-kilmarnock-cammy-bell

Two tragedies linked by the cruellest twists of fate. "It had, according to the radio commentary on the BBC Scottish Home Service, been a tame Old Firm encounter but with a highly-dramatic finale. Two goals - one for each team - in the last minute of the game. The doyen of Scottish football commentators, David Francey, was at his loquacious best, injecting colour into an all-too-drab winter's afternoon in Glasgow. Before he signed off, he made mention of "something bad" appearing to have happened on the terracing at the Rangers end. In those days, "something bad" at an Old Firm match meant flying bottles and cans and police rushing in where ordinary mortals would fear to tread, to seize the perpetrators. But not this time. It wasn't that kind of "something bad", he thought. An hour later, news bulletins were talking of injuries, of scores of ambulancemen and women at the scene, of people being led away or carried out on stretchers - "something bad" had become "a major incident". With every television and radio bulletin that night on January 2, 1971, the toll mounted. Ten dead... 20... 30... I was home from university for New Year on the Isle of Lewis and in those days you couldn't get a Sunday paper there until Monday. And when we finally got them (around noon!), there was only one story. The Scottish Daily Express and Daily Record had pictures of the walking wounded, of club scarves peeking out from under the blankets that covered the dead. The back pages hardly bothered with the game. The peerless John Rafferty in The Scotsman wrote as only he could of fleeting triumph and sombre disaster following fast on one another. The papers asked how this could have happened and answered their own question with stories of one fan having tripped and fallen, bringing others down. Other papers told stories of fans who had decided to go at the last minute - and died. The drunken tangle on Stairway 13 became an enduring image of a day that made a mockery of the import too many of us place on football. Lewis had known tragedy at New Year. On January 1, 1919, more than 200 servicemen coming home from the Great War perished when the Admiralty yacht Iolaire struck rocks a mile out from Stornoway Harbour. Suddenly that New Year's weekend on Lewis, Ibrox and Iolaire seemed linked by the cruellest twists of fate."

The daily record and scottish sun are both carrying this story that miller will quit rangers during the january transfer window after transfer talks broke down??, I'm hoping this is just romours and this is not the case but rangers really should be pulling out all the stops to hold on to our top striker!!, you really have to ask what is going on at murray park! I'm very worried tbh

IT'S a couple of months now since Jim Traynor, in his Daily Record column, first wrote that Walter Smith is perfect for the role of performance director at the Scottish Football Association. As is so often the case, Traynor was not only bang on the money, but, again as he often is, ahead of the game. But in the immediate aftermath of that Traynor column there was no reaction from Smith. Then, when Sir Alex Ferguson told Scottish Sunday reporters, ahead of the Champions League game, that he thought his old pal should not quit Rangers, Smith made it clear he was not for turning. He used a special pre-arranged, and pre UEFA press conference, briefing with Scottish daily newspaper reporters in the Europa Suite at Old Trafford the day before the match. It provided back pages for all of Scotland's newspapers - except one. Just to remind you...that is the one Odious Creep swans around representing. He missed out on the significant and cracking tale, because he failed to get there on time, thus denying readers of the Scottish edition of the Times, Smith's reaction to the Fergie story which had appeared in a number of mass circulation Sundays. But enough of Creep. For now! Since then things had gone kind of quiet on the subject of what exactly Smith will do when he steps down as Rangers manager at the end of the season. That was until he appeared at Sunday's Scotland Hall of Fame function to pick up his award, and discuss that future. And it is a future which, according to the best and most successful manager Scottish football has seen for more than 30 years, will see him stay in football. Clearly he would not take on a role at any other club in Scotland, so unless his old chum at Old Trafford has something in mind for him, Smith is available to make a contribution to the greater good of Scottish football. Armed with that information, Scotland manager, Craig Levein now has the chance to stand up and make it clear to his SFA paymasters they would be mugs not to approach Smith. Levein, we have been told, will have a major input regarding who is appointed as Scotland's performance director. Campbell Ogilvie, who will assume the presidency in the summer, will no doubt also have a major say. When a Scotland manager is appointed the procedure is that the four office bearers, plus the chief executive, make a recommendation to the board of directors. This time around new chief executive Stewart Regan's lack of local knowledge will needless to say make him less influential than Gordon Smith and David Taylor were. If the board does not approve the name, then those office bearers - though on this occasion maybe not Regan - have no alternative but to resign. That power is currently held by president, George Peat, first vice president Ogilvie and second vice president, Alan McRae. Of course they will no doubt pay heed to the contents of the special report from former first minister, Henry "it's a muddle not a fiddle" McLeish. But really, ask yourself the question....is there anyone better qualified for the job than Walter Smith? It is question which has already been answered by one of the oldest and wisest heads in Scottish football, Craig Brown. Motherwel's former Scotland manager, is both eloquent and wise. In fact, if Smith does not fancy a return to the SFA, where he saved Scotland from the brink of oblivion it had been taken to by Berti Vogts, then Broon is the obvious choice. However, we have to remember, this is the Scottish Football Association we are dealing with. The organisation which seemed in a hury to get rid of Brown, which inflicted Vogts on the nation, and even more recently, landed the Scots with George Burley. Therefore the possibility of it making another mess of things is more distinct than distant. Before landing themselves in another fine mess, the Scottish Football Association should take note of three things. Number one....Jim Traynor pointed out two months ago, Smith is the ideal man to become Scottish football's director of performance. Number two....Craig Brown has made clear his backing for Smith to be appointed. Number three ... and most important of all, Walter Smith has given a clear indication he wants to keep working after he leaves Rangers. Now then, what's that modern phrase? Ah yes.... IT'S A NO BRAINER! 31 Comments below: http://davidleggat-leggoland.blogspot.com/2010/11/sfa-would-be-silly-to-snub-smith.html

STEVEN CRAVEN today reveals the truth behind the lies of a controversial Tannadice cover-up. In an explosive MailSport exclusive that will rock the SFA to its core, Craven lifts the lid on the spot-kick storm from Celtic's clash with Dundee United. The linesman opens up about the lies and bullying that led to his resignation and reveals how: Ref Dougie McDonald lied to Hoops boss Neil Lennon about his sensational penalty U-turn. Both he and McDonald came clean to refs chief Hugh Dallas. Dallas tried TWICE to get him to repeat what he knew to be a lie. Bullying, harassment and victimisation in the corridors of power will lead to refs quitting. Craven told MailSport: "Dougie ran towards me and said: 'I think I've f***** up.' After the game Dougie said we should tell the referee supervisor (Jim McBurnie) that I called him over to question the penalty award. "I went along with it because I wanted to be supportive of Dougie. "But then Neil Lennon came in after the game and asked Dougie why he hadn't given the penalty kick. "We told Neil the version that was a lie. "It was wrong to lie. And I'm not proud that I went along with Dougie's suggestion. "I decided to quit a few days later. I'd had enough of Hugh Dallas and John Fleming (the SFA referee development officer). "For a while I felt I had been a victim of harassment and bullying from them. "A lot of guys are not happy with it and are ready to walk away." SFA chief executive Stewart Regan said: "Dougie hasn't accepted responsibility for Steven's resignation. "His resignation covers other matters and we are looking at those." Dallas tried TWICE to make me repeat what he knew was just a LIE STEVEN CRAVEN knew he was wrong to go along with Dougie McDonald's lies after the Dundee United v Celtic game. But he was stunned and shocked when refs supremo Hugh Dallas wouldn't listen to the TRUTH after the officials decided to come clean. Craven says in his resignation letter that Dallas twice tried to make him repeat a version of events he knew to be untrue. That was when the linesman realised he was going to be hung out to dry for McDonald's decision to overturn the penalty he had awarded the Hoops. Inaccurate stories started to appear on a daily basis in an attempt to cover up the real version of events - and that's why Craven has decided to speak out. Now the match official - who quit the SFA last week as exclusively revealed in the Daily Record - can tell us the full story. He told MailSport: "I can remember it all clearly. Dougie blew for the penalty but I could see the United keeper Dusan Pernis did touch the ball. "However, Dougie was no more than seven yards away from the spot-kick incident while I was 25 yards away. "I was with Dougie in a game between Aberdeen and Kilmarnock two years ago. "Craig Bryson fell inside the Aberdeen box and I screamed to Dougie to give Killie a penalty. "But he ignored my call and cautioned Bryson for simulation. "We spoke about it at half-time and Dougie was adamant he called it right. Television evidence proved he was right. "So that incident was going through my mind immediately after he gave Celtic the penalty at Tannadice. "I thought he had the perfect position. There was no way I could question him. "He then ran towards me and said: 'I think I've f***** up. Did the keeper get a hand to the ball?' I told him I believed the goalie played the ball and that it wasn't a penalty. So he decided it should be a drop ball. "To make it clear, Dougie approached me. I did not call for him to come over. "After the game, in front of the other assistant referee and the fourth official, we spoke about it. Dougie said we should tell the referee supervisor (Jim McBurney) that I called him over to question the penalty award. He claimed it would give the decision to overturn the spot-kick more credibility. "I went along with it because I wanted to be supportive of Dougie and back him up. "That's the first time I've lied after a game. It was the wrong thing to do. With hindsight, I regret it. I'd never lie again. "The supervisors have earpieces and can hear all communication between officials during games. "Jim said he didn't hear me calling over Dougie but that the stadium was noisy." Supervisor McBurney wasn't the only person the officials tried to deceive. They even lied to Hoops boss Neil Lennon when he asked for an explanation. Craven revealed: "Lennon came into the room after the game and asked Dougie why he hadn't given the penalty. "We told him the version that was a lie. He seemed fine with the explanation. But, then, I suppose his side had still managed to win thanks to a late goal. "I told Neil it was better to win with a legitimate goal rather than a dodgy penalty. He agreed." McDonald's controversial U-turn led to a media storm and the worried ref decided to come clean to Dallas. But Craven claims the refs supremo wasn't interested in the truth and wanted the linesman to keep taking the flak. That then kicked off a series of events that led to Craven handing in his resignation and the SFA starting an investigation. The first part of that probe led to McDonald receiving an official warning but the investigation is still ongoing. Craven said: "On the Monday morning there was quite a reaction in the papers. "I sent Dougie a text to ask what he thought of the fall-out. "He called immediately and told me he had talked with Hugh the night before and decided to come clean. "Dougie told Hugh lies were told to the supervisor. He then told Hugh the truth - that I had not shouted for him to come over. "I was then urged to tell Hugh the truth when he called me. I was happy to do so and felt quite relieved. "When Hugh phoned he asked me to talk over the penalty. He said: 'So what happened after you called out for Dougie to come over? You called out Dougie, Dougie, Dougie?' "My wife was in the room and I told him that was not the case. I told Hugh he now knew the truth. "The truth was the version Dougie had told him over the phone. "But Hugh repeated: 'What are you talking about, you said Dougie, Dougie, Dougie and called him over' but I told Dallas I did no such thing. "Dougie came clean and so did I. But Hugh didn't seem to accept that. "I phoned Dougie back and told him Hugh tried to make out this wasn't true and denied having the conversation with Dougie on the Sunday night. "Dougie's response was he thought Hugh was just trying to test me, that he wanted to see if I would tell the truth or stick to the previous story. "My reading of the situation was Hugh wanted to protect Dougie and leave me to take the flak. "It was wrong to lie and I'm not proud that I went along with Dougie's suggestion. Rewind the clock and I wouldn't do it. "But it was worse to continue the lie. "I was really upset after that conversation with Hugh." Craven then got even angrier when he checked his email and received the official match report. He was criticised for his performance at Tannadice and that convinced him it was time to get out of the game. Craven said: "When I got my match report from the game emailed to me that proved to be the final straw. "I was down-marked for getting an offside decision wrong. "When I got the match report I phoned Drew Herbertson at the SFA and told him I'd had enough. "I was going to quit at Christmas - but not because of my ankles, as has been reported elsewhere. It was because of all the nonsense with Hugh. "I got my letter from the SFA on Friday morning to say my resignation had been formally accepted."

IT is a measure of the way the Scottish Football Association operates, and the manner in which it is scrutinised by the nation's media, that the wider public is no longer made aware of decisions taken and verdicts reached by the game's governing body. Take for instance the case of the last Old Firm game played at Ibrox, which took place as long ago as last February. It is a turbo charged encounter with referee Dougie McDonald sending off Celtic captain Scott Brown and Maurice Edu bundling in a last minute winner for Rangers. The fact that there were fireworks came as no surprise as, in the build up to the vital clash, Celtic, via their official website, appreared to seek to crank up the pressure on referee McDonald with an anonymous rant. The press gave it massive coverage and SFA President George Peate was quick to respond by branding such an anonymous attack as "cowardly." What followed in the game's aftermath led to then Celtic manager Tony Mowbray being referred to the SFA General Purposes Committee for remarks, critical of the referee. Not long afterwards, while on international duty with the Republic of Ireland, Aiden McGeady was interviewed by a Scottish journalist and added his critical comments, and the General Purposes Committee was again called in. However, the most widely publicised event came when the official Celtic website again leapt in, and just over an hour after the end of the match it launched a full blooded attack on Dougie McDonald's integrity. The crux of this was that "no fair minded person" would agree with McDonald's decision to send off Brown, with the clear implication being that as McDonald had taken the red card decision, he was not fair minded. Daily newspaper journalists working in the Ibrox media media room, filing match reports, plus stories with the views given to them by the managers and players in post match interviews, quickly became aware of the content on the official Celtic website. Having picked up on it they then incorporated it into those reaction reports and the "no fair minded person" allegation formed the main thrust of the stories which led the back pages, from the red tops, through the middle market papers, to the broadsheets. The general line taken by the media was that Celtic could find themselves in deep trouble with the SFA over the website attack, an natural assumption to make, especiall given president Peat's obvious disgust and anger at what had appeared there prior to the game. But afterwards? How did the media follow up on things? Well, it would seem they all just forgot about it. Something which had been splashed all over the back pages for a couple of days and which jammed the lines to the radio phone in programmes, just slipped off the media's radar. Of course the increasingly secret service which is the SFA hardly helped. In the past any decisions by the General Purposes Committee - which deals with offences such as what managers and players say in media interviews - were made public. Now, according to my information, under chairman Rod Petrie, who is also chairman of Hibernian, that has changed. No news of decisions taken by the General Purposes Committee are made public. News however, has a way of leaking out, and I can now bring you the decisions taken by Petrie's Committtee regarding what appeared on the official Celtic website, and what was said by Mowbray and McGeady. McGeady, said Petrie's committee, had no case to answer. As far as Mowbray was concerned, by the time the committee sat in judgement, he had left Celtic and was no longer within the SFA's jurisdiction. And, in the case of the much more serious matter of the statement published on the official Celtic website Petrie's committee decided the appropriate punishment was a censure. Many may think this is a poor way for the Scottish Football Association to defend and protect the integrity of Scotland's officials. A set of circumstances has come to light again this weekend via a splendid exclusive by Mark Guidi in the Daily Record which reveals that Steven Craven, the linesman at the centre of the rumpus over last Sunday's penalty decision u-turn, has been threatenen, while his two teenage sons have been subjected to verbal abuse. Guidi's superb story also lifted the lid on just what happened between McDonald and Craven during that Dundee United-Celtic flashpoint. According to what he wrote, it was McDonald who, on second thoughts, overturned his own decision without any input from Craven, something which now explains the mystery of why Craven moved to take up the position of a linesman at a spot kick - behind the goal line. The Daily Record story also goes on to say that Craven feels he has been hung out to dry and used as a scapegoat by the SFA, and that he is ready to quit. How much of his decision to stand down relates to the latest occasion in which the SFA seems to have failed to protect and official, and how much to being the latest official who - along with his family - has suffered threats and abuse after being involved in a decision which went against Celtic, is unclear. Craven is probably weighing them both equally. Willie Collum, his two linesmen and the fourth official, therefore know what awaits them should they be involved in any controversial decisions while taking charge of the first Old Firm game of the season. On a wider perspective though, it will be interesting to wait and watch what the outcome is of the SFA's Rod Petrie led General Purposes Committtee's judgement on Dundee United manager Peter Houston's rant at Dougie McDonald . And whether Petrie's committee make public any of the decisions they may take regarding the fall out from events at Tannadice. Or indeed, whether the nation's media suffer another bout of collective amnesia. http://davidleggat-leggoland.blogspot.com/2010/10/sfa-try-to-keep-celtic-verdict-secret.html

Since the whining but highly mobilized filth raised enough ruckus to have VB banned from Newsnow I thought it was worth sharing this topical article....... Responsible Journalism - What is that you may say? Written by Pro Patria, Vanguardbears Thursday, 07 October 2010 Well I would call it reporting facts and stating them in print so that there is no ambiguity or confusion. That the reader can immediately see for themselves what the story is about and the outcome or end result of said story based on the facts. Sadly the phrase ââ?¬Å?Responsible Journalismââ?¬Â cannot be applied to that many Media Outlets. The media outlet I am referring to is the Aberdeen Press and Journal who have again shown themselves to be of integrity, professionalism and worthy of the accolade ââ?¬Å?Responsible Journalistsââ?¬Â. You are now asking yourself where is this coming from and where is it leading and the answer is simple. Well as most of you will know by now certain Aberdeen Footballers namely Michael Paton and Zander Diamond thought it would be hilarious to engage in anti Protestant bigotry on their facebook websites. Indulging in such eloquent phrases as FTQ and wanting to run over Protestants with the Popemobile. Not the brightest are these two when their comments were in the public domain for all to see. However I digress from the main topic which is the reporting of their actions. This newspaper saw fit to run with the story and describe it as it asââ?¬Â¦ ââ?¬Å?Dons stars under fire over ââ?¬Ë?sectarianââ?¬â?¢ internet postsââ?¬Â. (Pair left facebook comments insulting Protestants on day of popeââ?¬â?¢s visit) This is the same Press and Journal who were not afraid of the West of Scotland influence when breaking the story about John Hartson and Stephen Pearson singing in the now infamous ââ?¬Å?Iraokeââ?¬Â video taken at an Official Celtic FC Function over in the Republic of Ireland. So why is it that this very simple story has been twisted slightly to give the West of Scotland readers a vaguer take on proceedings? The Scottish Sun headline reads: ââ?¬Å?Dons Pair Rapped on Pope Jibesââ?¬Â. And the article then starts off with this very odd choice of phrase:-* "TWO Aberdeen stars have been carpeted after posting vile comments about the Pope on the internet". Was the Pope the focus of their bigotry? Was the Pope the recipient of their Sectarianism? No he wasnââ?¬â?¢tââ?¬Â¦.the Queen and the Protestants in Scotland were the targets of their bile. So the question you have to ask the Sun is why do they go with such a misleading headline and why do they not have the headline ââ?¬Å?Dons Pair Rapped on Anti Protestant Jibesââ?¬Â (or something similar). Are they trying to get the subliminal message across to the casual reader who may glance at the headline and think ââ?¬Å?Oh here we go another anti catholic or anti Pope jibeââ?¬Â We then move on to the Daily Record headline which unsurprisingly states:- "Aberdeen stars Zander Diamond & Michael Paton in hot water over offensive Facebook remarks during Pope's visit to Scotland". Again this leads us to think that the Pope is the focal point and probable target of their abuse. One story but 3 very different slants put on it. Two from the West of Scotland and from organisations with previous and one from Aberdeen who have the moral fibre to call it as it is. So how can the Sun and the Record use the Pope in their headline when the comments were directed towards the Queen and Protestants? Why can the Press and Journal use the factually correct headline but these two cannot? Questions, questions but sadly few answers. Suffice to say that the organisations in question are not daft and they know that they have no choice but to print this story. Sadly they deliberately play with the the title to give it a softer and more misleading angle. It is shameful but utterly predictable behaviour from two organisations who are no friends of the Rangers or the Protestant religion. Well done the Press and Journal for yet again showing up the clear bias that exists in the West of Scotland media.

JELAVIC'S INJURY DO YOU remember when Kyle Lafferty cheated against Aberdeen to get Charlie Mulgrew sent off? And do you remember too, the number of times the incident was replayed on television? Can you also remember when Lafferty was sent off against Hibernian this season, and the amazing amount of airtime on television this incident was given ? Then, can you remember when Kevin Thomson was sent off against Hearts at Tynecastle last season, and the number of times his silly sideways lunge was repeated on the box? Now hit the fast forward button and let's return to Tynecastle and highlight the moment when a terrible tackle from behind - outlawed by FIFA - by Ian Black on Nikica Jelavic, injured the striker so badly he had to fly home for surgery and is not expected to play again for anything up to four months. But where have all the television replays been of the tackle from a match shown live on ESPN? That's a tricky one, for it has been hard to catch up with them, as on Monday and Tuesday night's Reporting Scotland - the licence fee funded national broadcaster - it appears we are in the midst of some old fashioned height of the Cold War Kremlin-style cover up. And as far as that modern phenomenon, which has fast become an old reliable, YouTube? Well, anyone trying to find the Black tackle which crippled Jelavic there will draw a blank, and be met with the message.... "The clip of the Black tackle on Jelavic has been removed from YouTube due to a copyright claim by the Scottish Premier League." That will be the same Scottish Premier League who have ensured Rangers must face five away matches on the weekends following their six Champions League ties. Does anyone detect a pattern here? Rangers player sins, his sin is missed by the referee, but caught on camera and his sin is shown over and over and over, again and again and again. Or, Rangers player sins, is caught by the referee and punished by him with a red card, and the sin, again caught on camera, is repeated on television over and over and over, again and again and again. As opposed to Rangers player is the victim of a bad tackle - one which many believe merited a red card ,but which was dealt with by a yellow - and is badly injured. And the result??? Blank screens! People are therefore robbed of their right as licence payers to see the clip again and again and again, over and over and over on BBC Scotland's Reporting Scotland at the peak tea time viewing hour, in order that they can form their own judgement. Rangers supporters though must be indebted to Keith Jackson of the Daily Record and Scott Burns of the Scottish Daily Express, for their interviews with Jelavic. It's taken Black long enough to issue a public apology claiming it was an accident, and that the Rangers man was too quick for him. But Jelavic, as quoted in the Record and Express, is having none of it. If the public were given the opportuinity by the BBC, the state funded broadcaster, to view the incident from all the angles - as was the case when Lafferty and Thomson sinned - then a judgement could be formed on whether Black was unlucky, and Jelavic even more unlucky. Or not! That would be justice. For Black, and for Jelavic. For, as I have often stated, for justice to be done, it must be seen to be done. One reporter, who has the inside track at Ibrox, says that senior Rangers sources are seething with anger. The speculation is one senior source is Walter Smith. He spent over �£4m of the meagre transfer budget afforded him by the club's Lloyds Bank paymasters on Jelavic, and the striker was showing every sign of forming an intelligent and lethal partnership with Kenny Miller. There was also - in a sort of perverse way - the bonus of the fact he is ineligble for Europe, meaning Rangers were hoping to look to Jelavic as an injection of fresh legs to the team for the next four away matches they have been ordered by the SPL to play immediately after Champions League ties. His loss in the Champions League - a tournament Rangers cannot possibly hope to win - was therefore balanced by the rest he would have ahead of SPL games, as the champions bid to retain their domestic crown. That benefit would have been seen next when the first Old Firm game of the season takes place at Parkhead a few days after Rangers must face the team settling Spain alight right now, Valencia. Now Jelavic - as a result of the injury he suffered following the tackle by Black, - will not only miss that match, but may still be sidelined when Celtic visit Ibrox on January 2. His injury may turn out to be a Marco Negri moment for Rangers. Whether that proves to be the case or not, in the interest of justice - for Black as well as Jelavice for it would give the Hearts man a chance to prove his claim of his lack of malice - the incident in which the Rangers man is the injured party should be given the same television prominence as those occasions when it has been the Rangers player who has been the sinner. Over and over and over, again and again and again. Pretty hard to disagree with any of that