Search the Community

Last night, Vanguard Bears were granted a meeting with Rangers Chairman Craig Whyte.3 Delegates from the site attended the meeting, which was brokered by one of our influential contributors. The meeting was unprecedented, and a first for any Rangers supportersâ?? website. Happening the same week as our planned Demo at the BBC, and at a very busy time for the club, and Mr Whyte in particular, we are very grateful to Mr Whyte for actually taking time out of his busy Schedule to discuss topics of interest to Rangers fans across the globe, with Rangers Supporters Liaison Mgr Jim Hannah present. The meeting lasted 90 minutes and covered a variety of topical points, which we found productive. Jim Hannah advised us that this meeting would be a one-off meeting out with normal Assembly procedures, due to the imminent BBC protest. With Vanguard not being represented through this forum, Craig Whyte felt it appropriate in this instance in order to listen to us. Minutes as follows: Agenda for Meeting with Craig Whyte on Tuesday 1st November 2011 at 5pm. Vanguard Bears â?? who we are, what we do, and why we exist. Mr. Whyte and Rangers F.C. â?? The Future The Media The Support 1. Vanguard Bears â?? Who, What and Why: We started the meeting with a spirit of open dialogue, explaining our reasons for existence. During the last decade in particular, the club we love has been the focus of several attacks by the media No dedicated group to co-ordinate a fight back against detractors of the club Frustration at other groupsâ?? historical hesitance to fight back in a controlled and driven manner through to completion Years of experience and knowledge of the methodology behind the attacks on the Club Dedication to defending the traditions of the club Dedication to enhancing the legacy of the club No conflict of interests whatsoever; no profits, no bonuses, or contracts to be won, and no desire for power Explained that some of our senior members were founder members of the Rangers Supporters Trust Highlighted our work, successes and achievements William McBeath grave Continued highlighting of agenda of certain bloggers and journalists, who are now being ridiculed by mainstream media, and their peers Explained our members activity in marginalising certain bloggers from radio stations Previous two demos and petition granted face to face meeting with senior BBC Management in Glasgow by BBC Director General in 2009 BBC Staff responsible for two disgusting incidents regarding the titling and properties of photographs on the BBC Website disciplined Explained our reasons for leaving fans joint working group Felt that only one response to our request to demonstrate a symptom of malaise and inaction The one response, for a â??strongly worded letterâ?, woefully inadequate, naïve and two years behind us Aware of communications between certain group members excluding Vanguard Indicated our delight at common support and public backing from our friends at Gersnet, Rangers Media, Blue Order, Union Bears and several Rangers Supporters Clubs Informed that previous BBC Demos have gone without incident and that attendeesâ?? behaviour was commended by Strathclyde Police Explained that we have issued strict guidelines for attendees this Saturdayâ??s Demo Advised that photographs of demonstrators were taken of protesters at previous demo from inside BBC Building and posted on Celtic fan websites Stated our desire for Mr Whyte to address imbalances in the media, and that VB in particular supported that stance whole heartedly. Stated that we believed the previous management team had sufficient information to make informed choices, but had little appetite to do so. Durring this session, Mr Whyte was supportive, open and candid about the scale of the agenda against the club, and appreciated it is widespread and not an isolated issue at one broadcaster. He explained that the club has to evaluate the importance and reach of media outlets, the severity of the slur, the legal implications, and accept â??digsâ? from journalists or bloggers if these â??digsâ? are not libellous. We both agreed that constructive criticism was completely acceptable. My Whyte explained that he is still being advised by Carter Ruck with regards to allegations made on the BBC Programme â??Rangers â?? The Inside Storyâ?, its researchers and contributors. Those who have repeated said allegations may also be pursued. We explained that while VB was set up to act primarily as a conduit for supporters to right wrongs, and address agendas against the club, above all else we are Rangers supporters who care deeply for the club. Therefore, it would have been foolish not to ask questions on the future of the club: 2. Mr. Whyte and Rangers F.C. â?? The Future Some direct questions were put to Mr Whyte VB â?? Reports of Rangers going in to Administration continue to dominate the media in Scotland, including a rumour from a credible source to VB that the club will voluntarily enter Administration on Monday 7th November. Is there any truth in this rumour? CW â?? Not at all. Our phones were red hot last Friday (28th October) with the same rumour, which led to us having to contact media organisations to inform them it was business as usual for us VB â?? Do you have a value in mind that you could settle at with HMRC that could allow the club to pay off any amount due, should Rangers lose the â??mainâ? case against the organisation, and avoid the scenario of Administration or Insolvency? CW â?? Yes, although that value is sensitive VB â?? Would that value be paid directly without offsetting against future season ticket revenue? CW â?? Yes VB â?? Are you confident of winning the case? CW â?? Yes VB â?? Do you genuinely see Administration as an option, or is it part of a game with HMRC? CW â?? Sadly, it is an option, and not a game in the slightest, although we see it (Administration) as worst case scenario. A Plan â??Dâ? if you will. Administration is not, and never has been a Pre determined Strategy to deal with any possible loss of the â??mainâ? tax case. Rangers are talking to HMRC on a daily basis VB â?? What is the legal/contractual position of â??Murray Parkâ?? Can is be put to the fans to rename, perhaps as a symbol of a new era? CW â?? There is no obligation to keep the name of â??Murray Parkâ?. VB- We've have no representation on either the SFA professional board or the SPL board since Martin Bain has left? With Peter Lawwell, Eric Riley & Stephen Thompson among those now in senior positions there seems little influence for Rangers within the management circles of Scottish Football CW â?? The SPL is democratic, and Ali Russell will take over from Eric Riley at the SPL next year. The SFA has obviously been through some restructuring which we will monitor throughout the coming months. VB â?? The previous management at Rangers attempted a Share issue, which was undersubscribed, largely due to a lack of trust between the support and the custodian. Is this an avenue that you have considered? CW â?? Itâ??s not something we have considered to any great degree. Do you think the support would invest? VB â?? If given confidence that the money would be used wisely, yes We then moved on to more general Media issues 3. The Media VB - We have already covered the BBC Demo, and the Documentary, and note your action against The Record and Herald during this season has resulted in quick apologies, what is your position on Graham Spiers CW â?? I decided when I took over the club, that while I would address media imbalance, I would start with a clean slate, and expect the same in return. After seeing Mr Spiersâ?? involvement in the BBC Documentary, we were considering whether to withdraw all press privileges, but decided against it, as we were of the view that his influence and readership is not significant enough to trouble us. That said, when we took that decision we only considered â??The Timesâ??â? reach in Scotland, not their reach in England and beyond. [Following discussion with JH] It is too late to reverse that decision. If Mr Spiers appears on our radar again for the wrong reasons, we will take a more holistic view. In football terms heâ??s on a retrospective yellow card VB â?? Are you aware of any journalists that he considers as having a sympathetic ear to the club? CW â?? To a certain degree yes, but some are constrained, and outnumbered within their outlets to put the required balance back in to reporting. Some also have their work edited. (CW named two journalists, who VB were non committal on our view of them) 4. The Support VB - One of the reasons our plans for a BBC Demo were delayed, were the reports coming in from fellow fans about their treatment at the hands of Stewards at Ibrox, where we felt that our fellow supporters were being unfairly targeted by G4S at Ibrox, and treated like cattle on their travels. We temporarily put our energy in to offering advice and support to those affected. The SNP and â??Anti Sectarian Billâ? â?? How can the club help the support, when our behaviour in recent years with regards to â??Sectarianismâ? has been exemplary? CW â?? Will will continue to lobby strongly, and ask that our supporters not be singled out without good reason. G4S have been spoken to since the incidents you refer to, but are still constrained by a lack of clarity from the authorities VB â?? It is our understanding that there is a specific letter from UEFA with respect to â??The Billy Boysâ?, but that it has never been distributed. [CW looks to JH] JH â?? Yes, there is a letter specifically outlining â??The Billy Boysâ?, and it was shown to members of the RST, Assembly and Supporters Association. It does exist and is not a myth. VB â?? We are concerned at the double standards on the term â??Fenianâ?, and how the goalposts have moved on a word historically an exclusive term referring to â??Irish Republicansâ? of all religions, to have a dual meaning interpreted by certain factions as they see fir. CW/JH â?? Case law and legal advice tells us that those of influence in Justice deem that the term can be deemed Sectarian in certain circumstances, but that there is a lack of clarity over what these circumstances are. The time to argue this was before case law. That time has passed. VB â?? We are also concerned over the double standard in usage of the sectarian word â??Hunâ?, which also has case law to support it being sectarian, but there is a distinct lack of action on those using the term CW â?? We were unaware of this case law and will look in to it VB â?? In recent years it has been noticeable that there is a significant political presence at Celtic Park both within the boardroom, and in stands, why does it not appear to be the same at Ibrox? Are we looking at engaging with Political figures CW â?? Believe it or not, there are a handful of MPs and political figures not shy to show their allegiance. They may not be household names, and the cameras as Ibrox generally being on the same side of the pitch as the main stand perhaps doesnâ??t show them regularly. In any event, I donâ??t think they are here to be on telly. VB â?? Regards our BBC Demo, do you back it? CW â?? I can fully understand the frustrations that have driven you to organise it As we were about to wrap up proceedings we asked one final question. VB â?? We understand that there was an incident in the Tunnel at Ibrox before you bought the club, where an opposition manager is rumoured to have racially abused Vladimir Weiss and El Hadj Diouf. Did this happen, and if so, why werenâ??t the press told? Do the club have evidence? CW â?? I wasnâ??t here, so canâ??t comment. We donâ??t want anyone to lose their job do we? JH â?? No Comment VB â?? Thanks for your time Mr Whyte CW/JH â?? Our pleasure JH signed off with a reminder that VB should consider becoming part of the Assembly. VB Representatives stated that we would consult our members. Admin Vanguardbears.co.uk

FOOTBALL fans who peddle internet hate will still get the red card under tough new anti-bigotry laws â?? but only if their messages are deemed to be THREATENING. The change to the SNP's anti-sectarian Bill came yesterday after Nat chiefs added a clause protecting freedom of expression. It now means that messages containing insults or abusing religious beliefs will NOT be against the law â?? but those considered likely to cause public disorder or threaten people WILL. The clause also doesn't apply to sectarian or threatening behaviour at and around football games â?? which will also be deemed illegal. Last night Community Safety Minister Roseanna Cunningham,tasked with steering the legislation through Parliament, said: "The intention of the amendment is not to prevent legitimate religion discussion and debate. "It aims to prevent the kind of communication we saw last football season when individuals were threatened with serious harm. "It is important that we remember that's what this is about." The clause to the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill was backed by MSPs on Holyrood's Justice Committee in a vote yesterday â?? despite Labour members James Kelly and Graeme Pearson REFUSING to take part. It also received a lukewarm response from human rights experts. But last night Shadow Justice Minister Mr Kelly again blasted the Bill â?? and called for it to be scrapped. Earlier he and Mr Pearson abstained from every single vote on almost 40 amendments during the vital second of three stages needed for it to become law. The move infuriated Glasgow MSP Humza Yousaf, who represents the SNP on the Justice Committee. He said: "You cannot simply opt out of debating or discussing the whole of a piece of legislation, especially one as important as this. "This Bill is significant and, whether people are in favour of it or opposed to it, they were let down by their Labour MSPs â?? they may as well have stayed at home." But Mr Kelly defended his actions â?? and repeated his claim that the Bill was not "fit for purpose". He said he abstained in protest after the Government "failed to engage" with critics about issues surrounding the legislation. And he vowed his Labour colleagues would turn out in force to vote against it when it comes back for consideration in front of the whole Scottish Parliament. He said: "The reason we abstained was to give ministers time to reflect on the legislation and call a halt to the Bill. "As it currently stands we do not believe it is fit for purpose and Parliament should not be asked to pass bad law. "We want the SNP to withdraw this Bill and take more time to discuss the problems of sectarian behaviour with all interested parties." Mr Kelly's criticisms were backed by Green MSP Patrick Harvie. He said: "I'm still not convinced that this Bill can be fixed â?? its flaws are too deep. "Ministers are stubbornly determined to force it through in the teeth of consistent and reasoned opposition from all quarters, inside and outside Parliament. Parliament as a whole will have one more chance to address some of the most obvious problems with it. "I hope that colleagues in other parties will be ready to discuss how to achieve that before the legislation's final stage." The plans were first introduced following a series of bust-ups and sectarian incidents last season which shamed Scottish football. A host of Old Firm stars â?? including Celtic boss Neil Lennon â?? were also targeted in online rants by web thugs. But the Bill has since faced huge opposition from football clubs, fans' group, church leaders and legal experts, who have all voiced their concerns. Under it, the SNP propose two new offences. The first targets sectarian and threatening behaviour at and around football matches â?? which is deemed likely to cause public disorder. The second relates to threats or serious harm which are intended to stir up religious hatred on the internet or other communications. Those convicted under the legislation could spend up to five years in prison â?? and be banned from football grounds. Another change made by the committee widens part of the Bill to include people not necessarily travelling to a football match. Last night Mairi Clare Rodgers, director of media relations for human rights campaign group Liberty, still voiced her concerns. She said: "We welcome this admission from the Scottish Government that its Bill is chilling to free speech. But the offences it contains remain dangerously broad and a nightmare for police to enforce. "We look forward to further sensible amendment. It's one thing to incite violence, quite another to cause offence." A Rangers spokesman said: "Rangers welcomes the fact the Scottish Government has recognised legitimate freedom of expression is to be protected in the proposed new bill. "We are also supportive of tackling threatening behaviour on the internet. Our overarching concern about any legislation or effort to tackle anti-social behaviour is that it is applied evenly and fairly and does not stigmatise football supporters unjustly." A spokesman for Celtic said: "We have made our position quite clear and believe that the current legislation is already in place to tackle the issues which the proposed Bill aims to address." myView By COLM DEMPSEY, Defence Lawyer THIS is a positive change to the Bill â?? but concerns remain as to whether it is sufficiently succinct. You could still have cases where one person's freedom of expression is another person's offensive behaviour. For example, songs that one person may think are political or simply an expression of freedom could be considered threatening by someone else. There needs to be more clarification to eliminate any potential ambiguity. These will eventually be matters for the court â?? but the more uncertainty and questions are squared away, the better. Read more: http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/3953640/New-twist-in-bid-to-tackle-sectarianism.html#ixzz1eW0htd9S

Vanguard Bears

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UL3bVsZIvj0

For those of you that are unaware, the Vanguard Bears have arranged a protest for this Saturday against alleged biased broadcasting from the BBC and, in particular, the Scottish branch of the corporation (more details below). With this protest in mind, it has been interesting to note the response from the RFC supporting community to the proposed action. Obviously many back it but there are also plenty bears who remain cynical about such a move. After all, is this merely to show solidarity with an owner who has perhaps been less than forthcoming about his past (or indeed his intentions) and do we really have credible grievances with a national broadcaster bound by a variety of guidelines? Have we become as bad as the Celtic support - basing our outlook on paranoia rather than fact? I'd like to be clear from the outset. I don't believe there is a media-wide conspiracy to negatively portray Rangers (or our fans) more than anyone else. Fans of every club can point to poor reporting and this occurs to all clubs across every platform. However, with regard to BBC Scotland the situation is less clear so it's certainly worth examining why our fans are so frustrated. First of all, we have to remember this isn't a new problem just because Craig Whyte was accused of criminality by a recent BBC investigative programme. Therefore, inferences that Whyte is attempting to create a flawed siege mentality or deflect attention from him are off the mark. In actual fact, the organisers of this protest have held similar rallies over the last two years. Moreover, they also met with the BBC Scotland hierarchy to discuss these concerns. Yet the less than balanced coverage continues. Let's have a quick look at the last 6-12months and ask just a few interesting questions of the BBC Scotland coverage: 1. Why are 'neutral' sectarianism stories presented outside Ibrox (this happened again this very morning)? 2. Why were stories about letter bombs mailed to the Celtic manager presented outside Ibrox? 3. Why was our manager made to look like a fool with regard to editing news video about sectarianism? 4. Why, in the same report, did the organisation show our fans singing alleged sectarian songs while showing Celtic fans carrying anti-racism banners? 5. Why do the organisation choose to cover some sectarianism stories and not others? 6. Why do they have 'karaoke' lyrics for offensive RFC songs but not for other clubs? 7. Why are radio/TV debates often not presented in a balanced fashion (see Graham Spiers radio documentary)? 8. Why have Rangers had three examples of editorial problems this season alone? 9. Why have certain BBC employees mocked the Ibrox Disaster on social networking sites? Once again, as I present these rather damning examples of questionable editorial/production standards; some of us will suggest others can point to their own similar problems. Fair enough, as I've already conceded, other clubs (and supports) will be able to show negative/unfair coverage in the media. But, and it's a big but, such critics of Saturday's protest (and the RFC ban) struggle to do so when we specifically talk about the BBC. Indeed, I've asked doubting journalists and Celtic supporting friends to show me some similar examples of such strange productions/editorial standards. They can't. No matter though - even if they could point to similar problems that still raises the question of why BBC Scotland are failing to fulfil their own obligations to the millions of us who pay their television licence fee? If the Rangers support really are being unreasonable or paranoid, then the above questions should be easy to answer. Nevertheless, I obviously don't expect everyone to agree with the protest or buy into some BBC conspiracy but if Stuart Cosgrove can admit to problems within the media when it comes to Rangers, his opinion is worth discussing. Yes, he may only be the presenter of a sometimes funny BBC radio programme on Scottish football but, yes he's also Head of Programmes at Channel 4 and a former director of British Telecom. I've also had some personal dealings with Cosgrove and while he's no friend of Rangers, he's an expert on a variety of relevant issues. To conclude, I'm strongly of the opinion most footballing conspiracies are exactly that - unsubstantiated and anecdotal-only rumours about a perceived bias. For the most part, the people who spread these tall-tales usually can't authenticate them with genuine evidence of malpractice. And, often the evidence that does exist, points us in the opposite direction. However, when it comes to the coverage of Rangers related matters by BBC Scotland, I think there is a case to answer and I think the questions in this article are worth exploring. To that end, I'm happy that our club have taken a strong line with the organisation and also, in principle, back any fan protest of the BBC. I'd urge you all to carefully consider the situation and make up your own mind. If you disagree with the action then that is your right and I respect that. If you agree - I'll see you on Saturday at 12.30pm outside Pacific Quay. Protest details (via link to Vanguard Bears website) available below. Please read and respect the attached protest guidelines. http://www.vanguardbears.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=frontpage&Itemid=1

The article headline says it all. Scotzine

The guys at Vanguard Bears are organising a peaceful protest against BBC Scotland on the afternoon of Saturday 5th of November from 12.30-2.30pm (before our home game against Dundee Utd). I appreciate not everyone will agree with such strong action and understand some may not even feel the BBC have done anything wrong. That is fine - we welcome all opinions here. Personally, I'm strongly of the opinion that the media per se are not anti-Rangers but simply incompetent vultures looking for the next story which they can exaggerate to make money. However, I also feel that does not apply to BBC Scotland - as the following valid questions from the last 6-12months point out: Why are 'neutral' sectarianism stories presented outside Ibrox? Why are stories about 'letter bombs sent to the Celtic manager' presented outside Ibrox? Why was our manager made to look like a fool with regard to sectarianism? Why, in the same report, do the organisation show our fans singing sectarian songs while showing Celtic fans carrying anti-racism banners? Why do the organisation choose to cover some sectarianism stories and not others? Why do they have 'karaoke' lyrics for offensive RFC songs and not others? Why are radio/TV debates not presented properly and in a balanced fashion (see Graham Spiers radio documentary)? Why does Stuart Cosgrove suggest problems of bias? Why have Rangers had three examples of editorial problems this season alone? To that end, I'll be protesting in two weeks time. I hope hope you can join us.

On Saturday, October 1st 2011, The Union Bears and The Blue Order held a further protest at Ibrox Stadium in the 1-0 victory over Hibernian. The protest consisted of a 54 minute silence, surrounding the section in police tape and the unfurling of 3 banners; "Police Line - Do Not Cross" "Guilty Until Proven Innocent" "Al Megrahi Sits at Home, Football Fans Sit in Jail" Unfortunately, our protest was challenged by the stewards within the stadium who attempted to remove upon unfurling our "Police Line, Do Not Cross" banner. Despite attempts at censorship of our opinion, we will continue our opposition of the proposed 'Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill'. Further to this, following our protest action and the incidents that occurred on Tuesday night, the BF1 section was subject to intimidation by Stewards and Police, both inside and outside of the stadium. Each entrance to the Broomloan Road Stand had 5 stewards and 4 police officers. Certain group members were subject to a full body search 4 times, by 4 separate officers before being allowed entry to the stadium. No homemade banners or flags were permitted entry to the stadium, including the Union Bears group banner. On entry to the stadium, the BF1 section had 8 police officers along the top row, stewards positioned down both aisles, and 4 police officers and numerous stewards facing the section from trackside. In total, our section counted at one point a total of 26 police and stewards around the section. Supporters would also have been aware of the messages over tannoy and scoreboard informing all supporters that they must remain seated throughout the match. The tactic from Rangers security on Saturday appeared to be the elimination of all colour and atmosphere from Ibrox stadium, and the ejection of any fans who dared challenge this aggressive and unnecessary action. We had 6 supporters ejected from our section, with season tickets confiscated by stewards; 1 for standing 1 for filming police 2 for questioning why you can be ejected for filming police 1 for refusing to hand over season ticket details without reason or justification for why details where required 1 for handing out tape to supporters to cover their mouths as part of our silent protest We again, would like to thank the Rangers support for their fantastic backing of the section on Saturday. Your messages of support are greatly appreciated. We would also like to thank Alistair McCoist, for his support. It is clear that the management team believes that vocal support and atmosphere can inspire the players. We were utterly appalled at treatment we received on Saturday. We wish to support our team in a vocal, colourful and positive manner and feel we are being subject to intense intimidation and over aggressive policing and stewarding. We will be compiling a document with details of events over the past 2 matches, and submitting this to Rangers. Our hope is that we can resolve all issues and get on with encouraging the team to our 55th and 4th consecutive title without intimidation, fear of arrest or undue over-aggressive stewarding. Supporting Your Team Is not a Crime. Yours in Rangers, The Union Bears and The Blue Order

Some photos from Willie Vass - Rangers fans protest as they distribute a police do not cross tape amongst the crowd (Willie Vass) Copyright: 2011 Willie Vass

By Alastair Dalton and Tom Peterkin CAMPAIGNERS against a proposed tough new law to stamp out football sectarianism vowed to step up their protest yesterday as they distributed thousands of leaflets at the Rangers versus Hibs game. Take a Liberty (Scotland) also plans to target Celtic Park and other football grounds, and demonstrate outside the Scottish Parliament when the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications bill is debated. Their campaign intensified amid growing signs that opposition politicians at Holyrood believe the SNP's proposals are becoming increasingly confused and could criminalise ordinary fans. Take a Liberty has the backing of former Celtic director and ex-Lord Provost of Glasgow, Michael Kelly, who said the bill is a "runaway train". The bill would see those convicted face up to five years in jail for bigoted behaviour, such as singing or chanting that could incite trouble, at matches or online. First Minister Alex Salmond told MSPs last week that football in Scotland would be finished if sectarianism was not tackled and appealed to opposition parties to unite behind the proposals. Kelly said: "It is ironic that our much maligned football fans are the first to stand up to defend freedom of speech and oppose this ridiculous, undemocratic and unenforceable piece of redundant legislation. "The ordinary fan has clearly a much firmer grasp of what human rights mean in Scotland than a First Minister jumping on a bandwagon which has quickly become a runaway train." Take a Liberty spokesman Stuart Waiton, a sociology lecturer at Abertay University in Dundee, said fans from a variety of clubs, including Airdrie and Celtic, helped hand out 5,000 leaflets at Ibrox yesterday, demanding "free speech in football" and "an end to the police harassment of fans who are deemed to be singing 'offensive' songs". He said the move was aimed at boosting a petition against the bill, which has attracted nearly 3,000 signatures. The group has also produced T-shirts with the slogan, after Voltaire: "I may hate what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it." Waiton said: "People may not like some of these songs, but seriously, a possible prison term for singing a 'naughty' song. If it wasn't so serious for the individuals involved you'd have to laugh." Waiton, who is a Sunderland fan, added that last week's arrests of 11 Hibs fans for disorder at a pre-season friendly against his team last month was "just the latest of this form of politicised policing". Last week, Conservative leader Annabel Goldie suggested offences at matches were already covered by existing legislation. Labour leader Iain Gray yesterday warned Salmond the SNP could lose cross-party support for the bill unless they listen to the concerns. Gray said Labour would seek urgent meetings with supporters' organisations to discuss their concerns. "We're not simply going to agree with this bill just because Alex Salmond says we should," he said. Scottish Labour leadership contender and Glasgow South MP Tom Harris, who helped distribute the leaflets yesterday, said: "Bad legislation is a lot worse than none. This will just antagonise and demonise football fans." A Scottish Government spokesman said: "Law abiding football fans - who are the overwhelming majority - have absolutely nothing to worry about from the proposed legislation." http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/scotland/Rival-fans-team-up-in.6846148.jp?articlepage=1

On September 27th 2011, The Union Bears and The Blue Order held a protest at Ibrox Stadium in the opening ten minutes of the match against against Kilmarnock. The protest consisted of anti-SNP chanting and the unfurling of 3 banners namely; "Undefinable Laws Against Supporters" "SNP Weak On Criminals - Tough on Fans" "Football Fans Not Criminals" The protest was not challenged by the police and passed peacefully, with other sections of the Rangers support showing unity with the message of the protest. For clarity, there are several reasons why we feel we must make a stand upon this issue. We are protesting against the implementation on the 'Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill' as proposed by the current SNP government. This bill discriminates against football fans, singling out a demographic of the population for specific laws. The implementation of the bill means that almost any football supporter, whether you be vocal in support of your team or not, could be subject to arrest, without significant police evidence of any actual offence caused. The criminalisation of football supporters threatens the game which we all love. Supporters attending a football match will now be met with fear of arrest, losing your job and being named in newspapers despite having not had your court case heard. The Union Bears and The Blue Order would like to make it clear we are against Sectarianism and Racism in all forms. We feel current legislation covers offences of these matters and further legislation is not necessary nor required. We feel this action is being used for political gain, and being supported by police officers in order to preserve their level of responsibility and therefore preserve their level of funding in what is economically challenging times. We have all seen that our supporters are subject to unnecessary harassment from police officers and we have and will continue to work with the Rangers Supporters working group on resolving these matters. In a completely separate incident tonight, around 100 supporters in the BF1 section walked out in protest at the heavy handed stewarding and policing which took place within the section at the match. The groups have issued a complaint to the police and the club and this will be dealt with in due course. We would like to thank the rest of the Rangers support for the support shown towards the group regarding this matter. Astonishingly the whole reason for the stewards getting involved was due to a young supporter in the section having a water bottle in the ground. One which he had cleared with another steward before entering and was told it wouldn't be a problem. Among the incidents was also the situation where mounted Police outside the stadium charged at young supporters including one who was visibly walking with aid of crutches. He was told by the mounted officers to run. We will be taking further protest action in forthcoming matches, and would urge you all to stand with us as we fight the injustice against the supporters of Rangers Football Club. We will issue another statement prior to the game on Saturday, which will detail how we wish to have your support. Supporting Your Team Is not a Crime. No Surrender The Union Bears and The Blue Order

September 26 2011 12:01AM It was quite an amazing scene at Celtic Park on Saturday. This loud, boisterous, sometimes militant group of the club's support known as the Green Brigade were in full flow. Neil Lennon, the Celtic manager, later referred to this chanting, drum-beating mob as "fantastic" and "brilliant". You almost forgot they were there because, for the opening 45 minutes, hardly a cheep came out of this singing section. Instead, a series of banners were unfurled, in a carefully-planned ploy that could hardly have been executed better. As each protesting banner was made visible the whole of Celtic Park rose and applauded, causing quite a commotion. Suddenly, at the beginning of the second half, their singing started again, and what an atmosphere it created. Great, booming, tribal chants were flung from one end of the stadium to the other, as otherwise dormant supporters were roused by the occasion. It gave the Celtic-Caley Thistle match a theatrical backdrop, prompting Lennon's later comments. The Green Brigade were protesting about the proposed new legislation being created for the Offensive Behaviour at Football Bill. Their perception, in many ways correct, is that it will curb their rightful freedom of speech. This is a complicated area, mired as it has become in a trashy Old Firm game of moral ping-pong, but it is still worth exploring. For instance, it is true that the Green Brigade's songs about Ireland and Irish identity, which are at the core of Celtic's foundation as a football club, are to be outlawed. One of their banners said: "Police State - Don't Criminalise Us". Another said: "Our Songs Are Not Sectarian". Further points were made about a collection of chants that the Green Brigade enjoy - one of them even being Ireland's national anthem - but which the Scottish Parliament might be blundering its way towards outlawing. The most contentious of the chants found among the Celtic support - as well as that of Rangers - is about the IRA. This is where it comes right down to the nub, and where, in truth, a zero tolerance policy probably needs to be deployed. It doesn't sound very convincing these days to argue that, when Celtic fans chant about the IRA, they are in fact referring to an Irish liberation movement of nearly 100 years ago, rather than the terror group of recent times. This is a semantic we can do without. The very same line of argument was tried a few years ago by some Rangers hardliners over their use of the word "Fenian". Anyone steeped in west of Scotland society knows that the word is a pejorative term for a Catholic, but some Rangers fans tried to get round this, saying: "No, no ... in fact we are merely referring to the 19th century political movement in Ireland." That argument disintegrated somewhat when thousands of fans at Ibrox would refer to Martin O'Neill, then the Celtic manager, as a "sad Fenian b*****d", when plainly O'Neill was alive in the here and now, and not in the 19th century. In fact, on Saturday at Celtic Park, there wasn't a single IRA chant to be heard from the Green Brigade, despite some of their critics fervently praying that there would be. It is the one refrain in their repertoire they need to junk, however fleeting it might be at Celtic Park. (Some Celtic fans on the road, just like those of Rangers, are a different breed to sort out.) The Green Brigade, like the Blue Order at Ibrox, is to be encouraged. They are loud and brash and they provide Celtic games with a vivid percussion. There is also an argument that, all across the world, many football clubs' supporters express a cultural or political stance that should not be deemed to be illegal. If these were outlawed then, never mind Celtic, the supporters of Real Madrid and Barcelona would be in deep trouble. Where most decent people want to draw a line, and be less libertarian, is where it comes to outright prejudice, principally involving race or religion. Where a football crowd starts to hurl bile in either of these spheres, I'm all for supporters being carted off and fined. But over a club's cultural roots - which many Celtic fans feel strongly - I don't see how it can be muzzled. The Scottish Government needs to be very careful as it meanders towards drawing up this Bill. The Green Brigade may have a point: Celtic and Rangers fans could face court charges over offences that are laughable. If I were Roseanna Cunningham, the Government's minister for community safety, I would tred very warily indeed.

IT'S what this game of ours should be all about. Two next-door neighbours, coming head to head with the whole season at stake. One's top of the league, the other a point behind in second. No wonder no one's thought about anything else for weeks. And now it's here at last, there's not a spare seat to be had. From the moment the gladiators swagger side-by-side into the arena, you can't hear yourself think. Best of all, when it's done and every single one of them has wrung every single ounce of energy out of himself and into the the churned-up turf, winners and losers alike go home babbling about the only thing that matters. The football. But enough of Dunfermline against Raith on Saturday. This was Ibrox, 24 hours later. The anti-derby. The opposite of sport. Everything that this game of ours has been allowed to become. A day when the sight of cops everywhere you turn should be a reassuring one - yet which in reality only rams home how depressing a fixture it is these days, how little it has to do with joy or entertainment and how it's all about praying the lid doesn't come flying off a big box of mayhem. A day when the only result that matters to anyone who's not involved through choice is if they get through it all in one piece. The ref and his linesmen, those legions of cops, hundreds of stewards, the girls on the pie stalls, the media. Taxi drivers, bus drivers, casualty nurses and doctors. So many people put through the ringer just so the lawless, brainless element among two sets of fans can have their fun. A minority? Yes, they may well be. But they are the fleas on the tail that wags the dog - and leave the rest of us yearning for a right good fumigating. I mean, what chance is there of peace breaking out between these two when the one guy you'd think would want to keep his head down struts around the pitch winding up the world? Neil Lennon's been sent nail bombs in the post. Internet halfwits are being rounded up as we speak for running online death threat campaigns against him. So if anyone should have been happy to get away with a result and head home to open Easter eggs with the family, it was surely him. But no. He parades around the pitch at full time with both hands cupped to his ears, telling the Rangers hordes he can't hear them. And in one ill-judged gesture, he makes sure the whole firestorm of abuse and recriminations keeps on blazing away. He said he was only having a laugh. And if these were jolly occasions, the world might have seen the joke. But let's be honest, they offer all the fun of a night in intensive care. Or maybe that's just me, seeing as the official line from inside Ibrox was that everyone had a smashing time and Radio Scotland commentator Rob McLean announced that the occasion deserved "ten out of ten for atmosphere, noise and colour and good humour." Good humour? Yeah, maybe in the way French peasants used to crowd round the guillotine for a fun night out or passers-by snigger when an old lady trips over a dodgy paving stone and breaks her hip. From where I'm sitting on days like these, everyone hates everyone else. No one's happy. At every throw-in and corner, twisted faces hang over the barriers, pointing and screaming abuse. They're like angry mongrels barking at postmen. All over the pitch, players who every other week can pass and run and shoot with the best of them pull shirts and click heels, riddled with fear over the dire consequences of losing. OK, so the second half was way better in the first and you could only admire the brilliance of Rangers keeper Allan McGregor as he kept his side in it. But in the end, it sums up the overall lack of quality that it will be most remembered for a striker failing to tuck away a soft penalty given by a ref who - for the second Old Firm outing on the trot - got away with making the wrong decision when it mattered most. Between that messy incident and Lennon's antics at time-up, it was just about the most fitting possible end to a horrible week when this rivalry has felt more tired and tarnished than ever before. I have friends on both sides who once would have sold their granny for an Old Firm ticket, but who'd now rather watch in the safety and sanity of their living rooms. I've spoken to fans of many other clubs who used to tune in to gawp with a hint of jealousy at the craziness of it all but who didn't even put the telly on yesterday. Yet still those who run Scotland's top division insist that these are the two clubs around which everyone must be built, whose every demand must be met. EssPeeEll chief executive Neil Doncaster calls this need to pander to the Bigot Brothers "an unfortunate reality". Well, he was at East End Park on Saturday. He saw first hand how a local rivalry CAN be passionate without being poisonous. And I hope he went home ashamed that he and his cohorts are flatly refusing to open the door to more clubs who have something fresh and energetic honest to offer. If that's how the powers-that-be want things, if that's the respect they have for all those in this country who love football for football's sake, then the end if well and truly nigh. Last week, former Celtic striker Mark McGhee admitted he wished he'd had the bottle to walk off the pitch in protest when the sectarianism got cranked up into overdrive. What a message it would send to the halfwits who spoil it for the rest if a modern-day player could read his words and act upon them. In fact, how good would it be if EVERYONE who hates the baggage that comes with this fixture just got up and walked out and left them to it. Except that you instantly see the flaw in that plan. Which is that the halfwits wouldn't even notice. Read more: http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/spl/3544479/The-shame-old-shame-old.html#ixzz1KUFasCRz

Published Date: 18 April 2011 By Paul Drury A GROUP of Celtic fans was involved in a tense stand-off with police at yesterday's Scottish Cup semi-final against Aberdeen at Hampden Park in Glasgow. Strathclyde Police officers went into the crowd to arrest supporters responsible for setting off a green flare. However, they were unable to remove the individuals because fellow fans - believed to be members of the Parkhead club's "Green Brigade" group of hardcore support - physically held on to them. Police said four men were later arrested in connection with setting off what they describe as "a smoke bomb". The arrests came as figures emerged showing police dealt with more than 2,400 crimes linked to the Old Firm in the past two years alone. Strathclyde Police and British Transport Police said they dealt with 264 serious assaults, 18 attempted murders and 44 attacks on emergency workers linked to Rangers and Celtic. Last night, a spokeswoman for Strathclyde Police confirmed the latest arrests. She said: "Officers went into the crowd to lawfully arrest a number of people." She acknowledged the police's initial attempt to apprehend the fans had been unsuccessful, but said the alleged perpetrators were later detained. She added: "Four people were arrested in connection with someone setting off a smoke bomb inside the ground. This is contrary to the stadium regulations." All the arrests involved Celtic fans, though a red flare was also set off in the Aberdeen end of the ground. More than 100 Green Brigade members walked out of Hampden in protest at the arrests, missing the final goal by Shaun Maloney in their side's 4-0 victory. Trying to enter a ground in Scotland armed with a flare is contrary to the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995. One fan who made an early departure said: "The cops tried to remove one of the young boys, but the Green Brigade were having none of it. "He was asking the cop why he was being led out, but the officer wouldn't tell him. So he just said, 'Well, I'm not going then'." Members of the Green Brigade made headlines last year when they unfurled an anti-poppy banner around the time of Remembrance Sunday. Some Celtic fans say the group has brought shame on the club, while others insist it has improved the atmosphere on match days. Next weekend's Easter Sunday match between Celtic and Rangers will see 35 Strathclyde Police officers mingle with the crowdto target sectarianism. The plan was drawn up after the 2 March game, which resulted in three red cards, touchline and tunnel confrontations and 34 arrests. Strathclyde Assistant Chief Constable Campbell Corrigan said: "We believe alcohol is the problem. Football is just the excuse. The vast majority of football fans out there enjoy these high-profile matches, without being affected by any violence. "Unfortunately, there is a minority of people who use the matches as a cover to cause disorder and disruption. "As a result, they get drunk, become full of aggression and, inevitably, they cause antisocial behaviour or seriously assault somebody." In February, after the widely condemned behaviour at an Old Firm clash, Scottish Police Federation chairman Les Gray called for an outright ban on any Celtic versus Rangers games. http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/news/Celtic39s-39Green-Brigade39-in-standoff.6753556.jp?articlepage=2

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/spl/3517875/FAREs-file-ammo-for-Dutch-rap.html A LEADING European protest group are behind the report which could see Rangers fans banned by UEFA. SunSport can reveal Football Against Racism in Europe (FARE) compiled a damning dossier on the behaviour of Gers fans in Holland last month. The report was drafted by ONE individual and is thought to contain references to songs allegedly sung by Rangers fans in Eindhoven which are NOT criminalised. Rangers are now working hard behind the scenes in a bid to establish whether the report was commissioned by UEFA or whether FARE have acted pro-actively. A total of 63 PSV fans were arrested when Gers held the Dutch side to a 0-0 draw in the first leg of their last-16 Europa League clash in Eindhoven on March 10. Just ONE Rangers fan was held on a breach of the peace charge away from the ground. Now Rangers chief executive Martin Bain is set to go to war with UEFA as they fight the charges. We told yesterday how the Ibrox club believe a campaign to get them kicked out of Europe is being waged in Scotland. Ibrox bosses are stunned by UEFA's threat to ban their fans from away games and fine them. Gers chiefs claim the UEFA delegate present at that game PRAISED the fans in his report. Now SunSport has learned UEFA also had a security officer present in Eindhoven to specifically monitor sectarianism and racist behaviour. He too gave the Ibrox club a clean bill of health. Gers' case will be heard in Nyon on April 28. Rangers, who have already been fined and warned three times by UEFA since 2006 over either sectarian songs or offensive behaviour by fans, do not believe they should be in the dock again. London-based Kick It Out are the UK arm of FARE but spokesman Danny Lynch refused to comment on the story when contacted by SunSport last night. Read more: http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/spl/3517875/FAREs-file-ammo-for-Dutch-rap.html#ixzz1J0SLPxix

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/8422821/Rangers-chairman-admits-the-club-could-go-bust-if-no-white-knight-is-found.html The protest organisers took absolute pelters last year over him, plenty of people on RM particularly went all out to prove him a friend of the club, attending clandestine meetings and publishuing articles in an attempt to discredit the protests and now our chairman has broken his silence over him. He truly is the enemy within, to coin a phrase.

Now before I go any further this isn't a thread to back up Walter , the management team or anything else like that , I have just taken some time thinking about where we are at present after reading some of the usual knee jerk reaction not just on here but other sites as well . When Walter came back , let's not kid ourselves we were on our knees literaly , financially , players wise ,demoralised and defeated , he gave us our pride back and trophies not forgetting that magical road to Manchester , something I will forever be greateful for , yes ther have been blips along the way ,Kaunus was a major setback , however the financial strings that bind us were loosened as Murray feared greater fans revolt than the usual pathetic attempts by us as a support to protest against him . So after today's game what have we learned and where are we going , what we have learned is that we were poor , we seemed to lack desire and were more than happy seeing the game out , why is another story . Our squad is the weakest just about in living memory , it's filled with older journeymen , promising kids and loan signings , with a smattering of actual scouted players ie Jelavic . The facts are really simple to me , if and when we are actually bought over and the shortsightedness of today's squad building are hopefully behind us , then players will be brought in not just because we can afford them and they will fill a hole in the squad , but because they are right for the team and the way the manager wants to play. EHD had a good game today , but dont kid yourself on ,he was a desperation signing, we found out at 5 pm he was available and that Blackburn would cover the majority of his wages , the management team are getting slaughtered all over the place , but in their shoes how would you react , how would you go about building a side after losing your top goalscorer and not getting the transfer fee , reality time guys the fact we are still in all competitions is IMHO remarkable . Compare that to the taigs , they sold their alleged top player and brought in roughly 14 players , all were scouted , all were brought in intentionally to fit into a plan ,cast aside your opinions on them as a club or a team ,emotions and rivalry always cloud the issue . We brought in Beattie because we thought Jelavic was not going to sign , Weiss is only on loan and flits in and out , we dont really play him in a set position , only Jelavic can be really counted as class . Whether we win this league or not is up in the air , the way things are going and with yet another year of fixture congestion I would put it at 60-40 against , IMHO our only real hope for the future is that we get seperated from Murray asap , I think we all agree on that , whether this guy Whyte is the answer only time will tell , but the thought of reducing the squad further and being unable to offer contracts yet again to our top players frightened me to death . Finally , I hope walter is remembered for what he has done and the great times he has brought us , yes at times his formations are hair pulling , but at this time this bear is glad he is at the helm and I hope for all our sakes that the future is bright ....

I find it interesting and hugely disappointing to look at Rangers and Celtic today and consider the mirror image we saw twenty years ago. Who remembers Celtic's transfer dealings back then and didn't find them satisfyingly pathetic, desperate even. We looked at some of the players they were bringing in and we knew, we absolutely knew, they would fail. We understood it was all they could afford and we gloated because we also knew with total assurance that those signings were simply consolidating failure within the walls of parkhead. We saw their squad as mere confirmation of the superiority of Rangers and the widening gulf between our success and their failure. Now look at the two clubs today and the situation appears to be completely reversed. It strikes me that we have increasingly little prospect of winning the league title this season .... unless of course you win titles merely by wishing it. Our squad is already threadbare, our signings increasingly pointless, and every bit as desperate and deprived as those of celtic twenty years ago. I fear what then lay in front of them now lies in front of us and no amount of bluster and bravado will change the inevitable, final decline of Murray's rotten boasts all those years ago. Why state this now? Just indulging in self-pity? Well no, it would be nice to think that if we would actually admit what lies ahead of us, we might not feel inclined to wait two or three years before expressing what we think about it. We might want to think about persuading the likes of Bastard Murray that he should shoulder public accusation for the result of his management policies at Rangers. Most people call it protest.

Thinking about the news that offers are being received for Allan McGregor, I'm not really surprised that he will be sold. Wealthy clubs have always accumulated the best players and we should expect our best to be targeted by these clubs. After all, we've done it ourselves for over a hundred years. I do find it dispiriting that he might be sold for as little as �£5m which neither seems to reflect contemporary value nor the importance of the player to the club. Such underselling inevitably diminishes the club even further. But we have a ready replacement in Alexander, who will not let us down, and apart from the price this isn't the end of the world on its own. What I do find utterly depressing however is the lack of any apparent end to this decline. At the time when I first discovered Gersnet some years back I was convinced the club would diminish considerably from where it was then but I also expected a time would come when it would be sold and a new beginning would be reached, perhaps not quite on the scale of the 1986 rebirth but at least a fresh start. Now I fear we might yet look back and see these times as something to aspire to. If the tax investigation ends badly, we might easily sink without trace. I just hope we finally have it in us to wake up and never again put our unquestioning faith in an owner as we did with Murray. Not only did we close our collective eyes to what was going on at the club but we actively encouraged Murray to indulge himself with the thing we held so dear. "Rape us harder Dave, it must be good for us". How fucking stupid do we look now? And given the lack of any voice being raised against Murray even now, how stupid are we yet prepared to become. From the laughable posturing these last few months by the RST and other accumulations of plastic, it seems the pit of our stupidity might indeed be bottomless. Quite prepared to hoot about Lloyds and holler about Donald Muir, our 'reps' show their finely honed affectations at every turn but do you hear a single meaningful proposal directed at the root of the problem? Do you fuck. Do you see one attempt to harness the fans in protest? Do you see one glimmer of hope that the support has finally decided enough is enough? Do you fuck. It appears our capacity for self-deception and weakness is perhaps limitless after all. Instead of looking for the cause of our decline only in others, maybe we could usefully spend some time on more introspective reflection. just a thought.

CELTIC last night warned their fans Parkhead could be closed if they continue to breach safety rules by standing during matches. Police are unhappy with supporters who refuse to sit and several incidents have been reported to the club. Celtic issued a statement, urging fans to take heed or face drastic action - which could include Parkhead's safety certificate being removed. The club insist they are taking the matter seriously and demand fans remain seated at all times. A section of the support, the Green Brigade, who were criticised for displaying an anti-poppy banner during last month's game against Aberdeen, regularly stand but a club spokesman said: "Celtic Park is designed as an all-seater stadium and the safety certificate has been approved and issued on that basis. "Persistent standing is a real safety risk and could ultimately result in the certificate, which is required to open the stadium, being revoked. "It is vital this matter is taken seriously and that supporters sit during matches." The Green Brigade had a sit-down protest at the start of the recent game against Inverness. They pretended to read papers for the first 20 minutes before a whistle in the crowd was the signal to stand for the rest of the match. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/2010/12/16/celtic-warn-fans-that-parkhead-faces-closure-if-they-refuse-to-sit-down-during-matches-86908-22787258/

The Green Brigade have been one of the highlights of the past few seasons at the library that Celtic Park is. The introduction of their own section, sanctioned by the PLC, the introduction of a drum and the acceptance of Depeche Mode as anthem has made this season interesting off the park. Against Information Computer Technology their silent 20 minute protest then subsequent burst into life ââ?¬â?? that saw the stadium give them a standing ovation ââ?¬â?? has been the highlight of recent home games. This type of protest is unseen on these shores. The authorities seen unable to deal with this European styled group. They are trailblazing a path that others are struggling to comprehend nevermind follow. The fall out from Poppy Gate ( views on the protest are here and the aftermath here) has seen a change in tact from a board. It seems that instead of banning the GB from Celtic Park, as they threatened they will just ban them from Ibrox by stopping them or anyone else in section 111 getting offered tickets for this game no matter if they havenââ?¬â?¢t missed an away game this season. The season book holders in that section are getting the message that : THIS TIME YOU DONââ?¬â?¢T HAVE THE CORRECT PRIVILEGES ON YOUR ACCOUNT. Any queries are getting meet with the line: itââ?¬â?¢s a computer ballot. If you believe that then if you look out your window you will see a flying pig. Itââ?¬â?¢s not the first time that the PLC have used underhand tactics against the GB. The banner below saw a bluemail campaign from those who claim we are the offended ones and the PLC helped Strathclyde Polis (them again) identify those who held the banner and sectarian breach of the peace charges were brought against those fingered. The Procurator Fiscal has said the accused had no case to answer. A blow to those who wish to be offended. The PLC knew what they were getting with the Green Brigade, I donââ?¬â?¢t think they know what they will get if they continue to take their money and persecute them. They seemed to be liked, or dare I say LOVED, by the majority of the rank and file season book holders I come into contact with. They pay their money as well. http://thecelticblog.com/2010/12/blogs/green-brigade-banned-from-ibrox?

Roddy Forsyth: soap opera surrounding Hugh Dallas episode reeks of nasty opportunism So the conspiracy theorists were correct all along. The truth, at last, is out there and Scottish football is in turmoil, although it took disruption to the fixture card to bring the whole sorry mess into the open. This goes back to the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, of course. The oil has gummed up the ocean bed and switched off the North Atlantic Current, which keeps Europe from freezing. We are at the start of a new Ice Age. You donââ?¬â?¢t believe it? OK, what game are you going to watch this weekend? In lieu of a match programme, you might want to read the findings of Dr Gianluigi Zangari, theoretical physicist at the National Institute of Nuclear Physics in Italy who says that the Earthââ?¬â?¢s central heating system has broken down because of the oil spill. When the archaeologists of the future dig down through the tundra around Hampden Park they are bound to ask how the planet could have been plunged into deep cold just after a Krakatoa of hot air erupted over the subject of Scottish referees ââ?¬â?? and why there were so many unresolved issues even when the volcanic row became dormant. A couple of facts could be established, mind you. Hugh Dallas was not sacked as the Scottish Football Associationââ?¬â?¢s head of referee development for being satirical or sectarian in forwarding a widely circulated email about the Pope. His forced departure was because he had breached the SFAââ?¬â?¢s rules about IT, which prohibit the dissemination of potentially sensitive or offensive emails. Dallas was dismissed, plus four more employees, because of that infraction. Other SFA staff members were warned about their conduct in the same regard. It appears that the five who were sacked had forwarded the email beyond the confines of the SFA offices, while those who were warned did not. At which point the unanswered questions begin. Why did the SFA begin its disciplinary process all of six weeks after the circulation of the emails had been discovered? Were the sackings disproportionate? Was the nature and outcome of the disciplinary procedure in any way influenced by the much publicised intervention of Peter Kearney, director of the Scottish Catholic Media Office? It would be a surprise if mââ?¬â?¢learned friends were not examining this very point on behalf of the sacked quintet. Indeed, I believe that is exactly what they are doing. Kearneyââ?¬â?¢s role also warrants scrutiny. He was rejected as a SNP candidate for both Westminster and Holyrood by the voters of Coatbridge and Chryston but he retains sufficient political nous to be certain that his pronouncements about the email in question would generate enormous publicity. So, on whose authority did Kearney act? Did he have the prior approval of Cardinal Oââ?¬â?¢Brien or did the Scottish Catholic Church press officer go freelance on this issue? Of the email depicting the Pope, Kearney said: ââ?¬Å?We will not tolerate it. We will not laugh it off or see the funny side ââ?¬â?? because there is no funny side.ââ?¬Â Does that, then, apply to the edition of Have I Got News For You? which employed the same image as the Hampden email when the BBCââ?¬â?¢s irreverent news review programme was transmitted in the week of the Papal visit to the UK in September? And, if so, where was the implacable protest, the declaration that such a display indicated that ââ?¬â?? to use Kearneyââ?¬â?¢s words ââ?¬â?? hostility to Roman Catholics that is ââ?¬Å?deep, wide and viciousââ?¬Â. If Kearney did have the approval of Cardinal Oââ?¬â?¢Brien for his insistence that Dallas be sacked if found to have forwarded the email, is His Eminence satisfied that justice was done by extending the same sanction to a practicing adherent of his own faith and a man of 60 who, having recently lost his wife, has now been deprived of his livelihood at the SFA ââ?¬â?? and if so, what does that say for the application of Christian charity? In Kearneyââ?¬â?¢s denunciation of the Hampden email and others like it he declared that priests in West Lothian and Renfrewshire had been attacked by ââ?¬Ë?thugsââ?¬â?¢. Given that a childcare specialist in Wales was forced to leave her home by a self-styled vigilante mob who could not distinguish between a paediatrician and a paedophile, one could certainly believe that innocent Roman Catholic clergy might be at risk from similarly ignorant or bigoted buffoons. Yet where were the reports or police investigations into these incidents? I ask because, within five minutes of three complaints being received by Strathclyde Police about Dallas, a tabloid newspaper reported in its online edition that the Hate Crimes Unit was investigating him. Strathclyde Police do not have a Hate Crimes Unit and they are not ââ?¬â?? and never were ââ?¬â?? investigating Dallas. And we may ask why Kearney did not denounce the knuckle draggers who phoned death threats to a religious education teacher at a Roman Catholic High School in Lanarkshire ââ?¬â?? who just happened to have awarded Rangers a debatable penalty kick when Celtic lost 3-1 in the Old Firm derby on Oct 24. Whatever may be the rights and wrongs of the Dallas episode ââ?¬â?? and I think that he was stupid to have forwarded the email even if he thought it was a harmless joke ââ?¬â?? the outcome reeks of nasty opportunism. Speaking of which, the forced departure of Dougie McDonald was a declared aim of the Celtic directors ââ?¬â?? stated with considerable force by the Parkhead chairman at the clubââ?¬â?¢s chairman at the annual general meeting three weeks ago. Why, then, was it left to Paul McBride QC ââ?¬â?? in a rare distraction from his duties at the Tommy Sheridan perjury trial at the High Court in Glasgow ââ?¬â?? to speak as someone ââ?¬Å?close to the clubââ?¬â?¢s boardââ?¬Â and say that they had experienced ââ?¬Å?a sense of quiet vindicationââ?¬Â at the refereeââ?¬â?¢s decision to resign, McDonald having lied to their manager about a penalty kick decision at Tannadice in October. There was nothing quiet when John Reid was whipping up the gallery at the AGM, but the former so-called ââ?¬Ë?big beast of the Labour Partyââ?¬â?¢ has gone all coy now. Nor is there a squeak from anyone else at the club whose commitment to transparency is flexible enough to include threats of non-cooperation to broadcast outlets who transmitted Gary Hooperââ?¬â?¢s dopey remarks about Scottish referees. Anyway, as I say, itââ?¬â?¢ll all be academic once the permafrost kicks in. And itââ?¬â?¢s precisely because Russia knows how to cope with the coming freeze that Fifa awarded them the 2018 World Cup. Think Iââ?¬â?¢m kidding? Is the Pope a Catholic? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/scottish-premier/8177228/Roddy-Forsyth-soap-opera-surrounding-Hugh-Dallas-episode-reeks-of-nasty-opportunism.html

So the tims got their way after all. Only 5 million masons to go.:smile:

THE problem the Scottish Football Association is having with referees at the moment can be traced back a mere nine months to their feeble reaction to an incredible claim on the official Celtic website. You may recall that less than two hours after Rangers had won the Old Firm game at Ibrox in February, in a match which saw the Parkhead captain Scott Brown sent off, the official Celtic website made an astonishing attack on the referee. It claimed no fair minded person could agree the sending off of Brown was the correct decision. The clear implication was the referee was not a fair minded person. The further implication being that he was biased. Yet, when the matter was referred to the SFA's General Purposes Committee,it led to the SFA giving Celtic no more than a slap on the wrist, in the form of a censure. It was hardly the sort of defence a referee deserved from the SFA, and perhaps there was resentment among officials at the lenient way Celtic were dealt with. At the time I felt the SFA decision was tantamount to sparing the rod and spoiling the child. Or, to put it another way, giving an inch which would soon become a mile. However, that was not the first time Celtic appeared to have been indulged by the SFA in recent years. When Hugh Dallas was felled and bloodied by a missile, to the extent that his wound needed stitching, the men in charge of the SFA at the time felt the offence was serious enough to warrant a substantial fine. However, by the time Fernando Ricksen was also battered by a missile and also needed a wound stitched, the SFA appeared to have lost its grip. A slap on the wrist was all that followed, despite the previous. At the time surely stronger action was needed to lay down a marker. Perhaps an order to close the ground for a couple of matches - suspended for five years - was the way to head off any more trouble. People who heaped ridicule on such a suggestion were noticeably quieter just two years later when the Rangers doctor became the latest victim of the missile throwers inside Parkhead. Much of what has followed - and which has climaxed in the refereeing strike - has appeared to take root in a support which gives every sign of being out of control. Two years ago on Remembrance weekend the Green Brigade staged a protest against Celtic wearing a Poppy on their strips. The protest was inside Parkhead in the exact same area of the same stand where the Bloodstained Poppy banner was raised this month. Surely therefore, nobody inside Celtic should have been surprised the Green Brigade - a group many may believe the club has over-indulged - should have staged some sort of protest. Last Saturday there was more bother in the same section of the stand, and Celtic chairman the Baron Reid of Cardowan, was the subject of more hate filled banners. And that despite some harsh words spoken by the Baron Reid of Cardowan regarding the SFA at the Celtic AGM. It seems it is impossible for anyone inside Celtic to go far enough to satisfy the zealots and extremists who have attached themselves to the club. Yet there are still some media outlets who would have people believe the strike action being taken by referees has been prompted by a number of actions by a number of clubs, their managers, players and supporters. In fact, any of these run-of-the-mill confrontations which have taken place in recent weeks and months have been no more than we have witnessed over the years, and are what referees regard as usual. What has been unusual has been the perception of a campaign to get rid of Hugh Dallas, undermine the SFA and create anarchy, which has many Celtic supporters whipping themselves into a lathered frenzy. There was even a letter to UEFA from one Celtic supporter begging for intervention. A supplication which was quickly kicked into touch by that higher authority. Does that make UEFA party to a great conspiracy? Goodness knows what they think about what's going on in Scottish football. Maybe the Eurocrats are having a sly wee snigger behind their hands at the way Celtic supporters are ranting. But surely there is somebody within UEFA who can see the danger, and who can have a quiet word with the Baron Reid of Cardowan and ask him to try and calm Celtic supporters before some extremist and zealot commits one of act of madness which even the recently supine Scottish Football Assocation cannot dismiss with a mere censure. http://leggoland2.blogspot.com/

Neil Lennon who was brought up and bred in Ireland as a catholic found life very difficult (blah,blah)...now he wants to bring his hardship to Scotland, like many other's and all his grief with it and cause sensationalism in our small country, well quite simply we dont need this shite...get him and his like to fuck. I love my Scottish football especially The Rangers, why should I put up with his political crap any much longer.......get that guy to fuck out, Scottish football is struggling to find any ground and this cunt is knocking it when it's down, using religious reasons for 'Celtic FC's continual struggle to be tops. It's football, Killie, Hibeez, Saints, Well, Jam Tarts, Utd, Accies....it's what we have in Scotland, It's our game, why do we need to put up with this sectarian rubbish that flows from Celtic Park. Recently we had to endure some protest about bloodstained poppies? What the fuck has that to do with football? I think these cunt's want a voice, and Celtic put Lennon up there to voice it, and he's making one big arse of it, like many before him. Seems they will try anything to be noticed. The world is tough, we know, but I love my football, I love the challenge....but do we have to look at our TV screens and watch the twisted, tormented Neil Lennon the hard done by spewing his bile in the peoples faces? This guy afterall has mental problems, and due to pc and all that...we have to accept it, I know like any person out there we need to be careful in what we say, but do we have to put up with this shite anymore? Neil Lennon has a mental problem so therefore we have to allow him to bring our game into disrepute' NO FUCKIN' WAY.