Union City Blue 0 Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 What is it about Rangers supporters who, even after years of this shite from Spiers, still advocate doing nothing as a first option. Then, if really riled, might just suggest dropping hints. It's little wonder we are where we are today, with this fixation on style over substance. Nancy boys. What would you see happening with Spiers if, for example, he was banned from Ibrox (which I assume you are advocating)? What would he do and what other effects would it have? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted October 10, 2009 Author Share Posted October 10, 2009 What would you see happening with Spiers if, for example, he was banned from Ibrox (which I assume you are advocating)? What would he do and what other effects would it have? All he'd have to do is send an assistant in his place to report back to him. If that assistant was found out & banned, he could simply send a different one. Banning him will change nothing other than his personal contempt for our club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 What would you see happening with Spiers if, for example, he was banned from Ibrox (which I assume you are advocating)? What would he do and what other effects would it have? WTF is this, twenty questions? I'd ban the bastard - and the newspaper he worked for - end of. That's what I advocate. Souness did it and it worked a treat. What would he do - fukk all he could do. What other effects would it have - it would make every journo and every editor in Scotland think twice before bad-mouthing Rangers. How did I do, will you be awarding marks out of ten? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union City Blue 0 Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 WTF is this, twenty questions? I'd ban the bastard - and the newspaper he worked for - end of. That's what I advocate. Souness did it and it worked a treat. What would he do - fukk all he could do. What other effects would it have - it would make every journo and every editor in Scotland think twice before bad-mouthing Rangers. How did I do, will you be awarding marks out of ten? Yes, very funny. I was asking if you'd care to share your opinion on the consequences of what you advocate. I don't see how else to evaluate your reasoning without talking it through, seeing as I can't read your mind. I agree it would make journalists & editors take notice. At the same time, it opens up the possibility of Rangers being victimised on a whole new level. If you are confident that is not the case, or if you're confident Rangers has the means and the will to carry and win a sustained fight, then I agree we should just ban the bastard. Look, not a single question! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted October 10, 2009 Author Share Posted October 10, 2009 (edited) I'd ban the bastard - and the newspaper he worked for - end of. That's what I advocate. Souness did it and it worked a treat. Most Rangers fans agree that he should be banned, but at the risk of sounding repetitive, it's really not likely to happen. I'm not saying do nothing or just accept that the club won't ban him, but that personally I don't think they will. You can be sure that the club know fine well that the fans as a whole want this guy banned from Ibrox, but the wishes of the fans fall on deaf ears 99% of the time. Anyone think any of the supporters groups are capable of persuading the club to ban journalists? I don't. Edited October 10, 2009 by Zappa 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union City Blue 0 Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 Most Rangers fans agree that he should be banned, but at the risk of sounding repetitive, it's really not likely to happen. I'm not saying do nothing or just accept that the club won't ban him, that but personally I don't think they will. You can be sure that the club know fine well that the fans as a whole want this guy banned from Ibrox, but the wishes of the fans fall on deaf ears 99% of the time. Anyone think any of the supporters groups are capable of persuading the club to ban journalists? I don't. Bear in mind Schrooz that the RSA and RST have not directly asked the club to ban Spiers. They've asked that the club agree that "enough is enough" and (effectively) invite them to do something. Smart football clubs headed by powerful people can do various things on various levels - they have power, influence and sanction available. Even Rangers have this despite the generally-acknowledged lop-sidedness. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted October 10, 2009 Author Share Posted October 10, 2009 Bear in mind Schrooz that the RSA and RST have not directly asked the club to ban Spiers. They've asked that the club agree that "enough is enough" and (effectively) invite them to do something. Smart football clubs headed by powerful people can do various things on various levels - they have power, influence and sanction available. Even Rangers have this despite the generally-acknowledged lop-sidedness. I understand that UCB, although I don't know the actual specifics of the power, influence & sanction you mention. So what sort of results do you think the RSA & RST anticipate or wish for? Is there a clear picture of what they would like the club to do other than acknowledge that "enough is enough" as you put it? You said do 'something', but what would or could that something actually be? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union City Blue 0 Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 I understand that UCB, although I don't know the actual specifics of the power, influence & sanction you mention. So what sort of results do you think the RSA & RST anticipate or wish for? Is there a clear picture of what they would like the club to do other than acknowledge that "enough is enough" as you put it? You said do 'something', but what would or could that something actually be? Despite what some would have you believe, it's a delicate situation because the consequences could for or against you. The first and next step being urged by the RST and RSA is for the club to shift its mindset from 'passive and helpless victim', to something which is in keeping with its strength and the wishes of the supporters. That is the first thing that's required and that is the first aim. When this is achieved, then hopfully the club would consult with the supporters groups and discuss the various options, get input and so on, then decide what to do. That is how fans can have an influence over the decision-making process at the club. That is actually the RST's strategic goal; for the supporters to have a voice in the decisions the club makes. Manipulating situations for political advantage is an ancient and black art. A lot goes on behind the scenes and this relies on effective access, relationships, coalitions and alliences. Rangers FC has (but appears not to fully utilise) all of these things well enough, so the extent to which these exist behind the scenes will influence what 'can be done'. Only Rangers knows exactly how the land lies. Not avoiding your question - the top half of this post is the main thing at this stage in my opinion. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted October 10, 2009 Author Share Posted October 10, 2009 (edited) So what's the general level of enthusiasm amongst the wider support (people you speak to, other forums etc etc) that anything is likely to come of the wishes of the RSA & RST on this subject? Do you think people genuinely believe that the club is willing to discuss these things & potentially change as much as the fans would like bearing in mind that AJ is in the US & MB is running the club here in Glasgow? I can't help wondering if this is something actually likely to happen or if this whole subject is potentially something that the RSA & RST are latching onto to rally support from the fans by leading them to believe there's something being done on their behalf, when the reality is that nothing substantial is actually likely to change at all. All of the available facts & information we have points to this. Edited October 10, 2009 by Zappa 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 Thanks Andy & UCB. Seems to me Andy that you actually are NOT just doing nothing, but your original post came across that way. Part of the problem too though is that there just doesnt seem to be the collective will of Rangers and the fans. Andy's manner could work but only really if there was more of a togetherness in boycotting anything to do with Speirs. Currently there isnt. pete, I agree, banning him in the first instance could easily make things worse - he wont stop, it will be easy for him to say "told you they were bigots" and there are no further repercussions from the club as he has been banned anyway. But something MUST be done about Speirs because he is in a one-man crusade to sully our club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.