craig 5,195 Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 Either way they (the likes of Speirs etc) will write their lies, bs and nonsense. Why reward them with the best seats in the house and free food and drink. It's insulting to the fans. Ban him and fuck what he writes. Were you not actually reading what BD wrote ? Punt him to shittier seats and deny him the freebies. Exactly what he said. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,195 Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 (edited) Aye, quite right lads. To hell with what he says. To hell with his agenda of getting us in bother with UEFA. I think we do ourselves more damage than we do Spiers by banning him. Edited June 2, 2011 by craig 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 I've never been for it, but I'm actually coming right round to the idea of banning Britney. It would not only humiliate him, but alienate him as well and when he writes his anti Rangers crap he'll simply look bitter and twisted. It'll never happen though. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 Aye, quite right lads. To hell with what he says. To hell with his agenda of getting us in bother with UEFA. I think we do ourselves more damage than we do Spiers by banning him. He's already doing us, and has done us, damage. Banning him doesn't change that. It just shows we wont completely take it up the arse off him. Sticking him in the "shitty" seats will still no doubt be a freebie and I still find that insulting. Any access to the club at all for this scrote is too much. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,195 Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 He's already doing us, and has done us, damage. Banning him doesn't change that. It just shows we wont completely take it up the arse off him. Sticking him in the "shitty" seats will still no doubt be a freebie and I still find that insulting. Any access to the club at all for this scrote is too much. I still think you are missing the point. By banning him you are right, it wont change his anti-Rangers agenda. By going the humiliation route you are simply telling him that the club wont stand for it anymore and if his anti-Rangers ahenda continues then a ban is the next step. You, at the very least, give him the opportunity to reign in his vitriol. Ban him and it doesnt happen. Surely the point is trying to get journo's to be even-handed and honest in their reporting. By banning Spiers it will never happen. By still allowing him access, but on lesser terms than his peers, you give him the chance to reverse his reporting style. Your prerogative to see it the way you do - you simply have a "fuck him" mentality. I prefer to treat him differently to try to mend his ways, akin to how the prison service would try to "rehabilitate" a criminal. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 I still think you are missing the point. By banning him you are right, it wont change his anti-Rangers agenda. By going the humiliation route you are simply telling him that the club wont stand for it anymore and if his anti-Rangers ahenda continues then a ban is the next step. You, at the very least, give him the opportunity to reign in his vitriol. Ban him and it doesnt happen. Surely the point is trying to get journo's to be even-handed and honest in their reporting. By banning Spiers it will never happen. By still allowing him access, but on lesser terms than his peers, you give him the chance to reverse his reporting style. Your prerogative to see it the way you do - you simply have a "fuck him" mentality. I prefer to treat him differently to try to mend his ways, akin to how the prison service would try to "rehabilitate" a criminal. It's not that I just have a "fuck him" attitude, it is that I think you are naive if you believe you can rehabilitate this particular criminal. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,409 Posted June 3, 2011 Author Share Posted June 3, 2011 I would ban him. I do see what what Craig is saying and can understand that it would harm the likes of him,but I agree with SA that this particular cretin has gone way too far in his slandering of everything Rangers,most of the mHedia have done their fair share of attempted damage to Rangers,but what would we lose in banning him?,this would also send out a message to the rest of the mHedia that we will not tolerate unsubstanciated accusations and that we should be treated fairly,which we have not been for the last few seasons. I would like to see CW/Rangers set out their stall,it's gone on for too long without challenge,it is time to start fresh and fight back. Having said all that I would be surprised if he was banned. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 It's not that I just have a "fuck him" attitude, it is that I think you are naive if you believe you can rehabilitate this particular criminal. Couldn't agree more. The idea that anyone in the press could be coersed into stopping writing anti-Rangers articles through singling them out and giving them a worse seat at Ibrox is nuts. Then again.. from a different viewpoint, if Britney was sitting with real fans he'd probably be so scared that he wouldn't come back to Ibrox anyway.... :devil: 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 My point being that Britney isn't a real football fan; he's a posh pansy who makes a living writing about football. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 I've been reading this assumed wisdom for a while but still can't quite rationalise the reluctance to ban members of the press pack from Ibrox. There seems to be a clear case being made that this would not be the smart thing to do but I'm buggered if I can understand what that case is based upon ... it's almost as if we've gone back to the old chestnut of threatening 'the Rangers way'. Maybe it's just my reactionary tendencies but I'm really struggling to see why this isn't exactly the course of action the club should be taking. The issue here isn't about rehabilitating the likes of Graham Spiers, why on earth would we see that as any business of ours? If he chooses to wage war on the reputation of Rangers, to the extent we are fined and sanctioned by UEFA, then if the club believes he is acting dishonestly or dancing to a deliberately aggressive tune, the club's priority should be to signal its position in the most unambiguous manner available. It shouldn't be a question of style but only as a statement of intent. Neither should it be done with a particular outcome in mind with respect to any particular journalist, such as persuading a change in his/her attitude. That would be too naive. It should be done simply to challenge and to punish. Rangers will exist quite happily without Graham Spiers but I doubt the situation is reciprocal. the common impression today is that Rangers are an easy touch and that will not change until and unless we change. To the greatest extent, it is more important for the club to demonstrate that change than to fret over the precise execution of that change. Everyone should stop fretting and Craig Whyte should start to show the leadership we've so badly been lacking. 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.