How To Win Friends & Influence People

[Germinal 27]

Since the team on the park and the board up the stairs appear to the be doing their jobs quite competently, it was little surprise to see the papers shift tack onto a new story, keeping representatives of Rangers out the corridors of power at the SPFL.

 

The piece which was posted on here was titled 'Why We Must Keep Rangers Out', or words to that effect. No doubt it was a sub editor rather than the writer who came up with that, but while it is a bit puerile, it at least highlights the thinking of some other fans - very much still us and them.

 

Not much of a surprise there.

 

What interests me as a Rangers fan is how we are going about the aim of trying to get onto this board or that. You'll no doubt remember that we put forward a candidate last year as well about this time. But in all honesty, in any other walk of life an entity like Rangers would have to demonstrate 'good behaviour' for more than a year before it got into the boardroom.

 

Yes, the present lot are incompetent and yes, they're clearly having their strings pulled by Celtc but that's life! I don;t have a quibble with trying to address that, but I think we're going about it a bit clumsily. Instead of chapping loudly and insistently at the door, we could be working a little more quietly and subtly to achieve the same end, for the best reasons, and for the good the game - remember that idea?

 

Take the play offs. Falkirk take on Kilmarnock and, having seen both, even the weighting in favour of the Ayrshire side might not be enough to save them. Falkirk are clearly a far better team, and it will only be the illegitimate construct of Scotland's playoffs which can bail them out. That set up is an open goal for any side which wants to gather teams around a shared goal. Instead of demanding a place now, suggest a minor tweak of the play off so that, say, two teams go straight down and the Championship teams play each other for promotion. Or, if there must be a game between Championship and Premier league team, level the field so that one side doesn't get a rest ahead of the game.

 

The option of refusing to engage with the clubs which did us down won't get us anywhere, really. It is appealing but it's unproductive. Just be constructive. While it would be good for us it would be good all round, and that, rather than self interest, ought to be a guiding principle. If, by the bye, we talk to, work with, and get friendly with other teams in Scotland, all well and good. It might take longer but it seems a better way than 'because we're Rangers'.

[colinstein 294]

The majority of top tier clubs would be against this change. Why would they vote for a representative who wanted to implement this change?

[buster. 4,808]

The political atmosphere within the Scottish game is difficult with pressure groups (eg. SFM website, Res.12) pushing for real measures to be taken against Rangers and encouraging a general attitude of alienation towards our club from all other fans. What is being pushed for is similar to 2012 and a threat amongst supporters not to buy ST's so as to put pressure on the respective boardrooms at their clubs.

 

Within our own club you also have a difficult dynamic with many of the support not at all interested and often hostile to any concilatory noises coming from Rangers towards anything else to do with Scottish football, including other clubs, governing bodies, MSM etc.

 

The hope will be that once next season gets underway it'll be business 'as normal' when it settles down after some initial grudge games / ST's are renewed / other moments ..........that work some of the bad feeling out of the system.

 

So until some more time has passed I doubt much will change.

But I don't think it constructive to maintain a 'cold-war' footing with all and sundry for very long and efforts will need to be made on our behalf to break some ice and remove some of the fuel that keeps the Celtic-Minded from aggitating and recruiting other fans into their Rangers hating cabal. The time to make such moves are when the team are being successful.

 

If on the field we can change and become a team that other 3rd parties will note for an exciting brand of football and want to follow then it would make sense to become a club that easily attracts the neutral rather than making it easy for the extensive network of Celtic-Minded aggitators to push their calculated and often co-ordinated poison.

Edited May 17, 2016 by buster.

[Germinal 27]

The majority of top tier clubs would be against this change. Why would they vote for a representative who wanted to implement this change?

 

They wouldn't. But that's no reason to just let them off with it!

 

Building relationships with other teams, teams not in the top flight and who weren't part of the gang who kicked us out, seems like the most productive way of repairing our brand in the eyes of others. If, as in this case, the moral case is inarguable, so much the better. Let's see Motherwell, or Aberdeen, defend the present set up on any ground other than self interest - they would look even more ridiculous than usual. And then, when they try to trot out integrity on some spurious ground, their hypocrisy could be highlighted.

 

And above all this revenge and point scoring, the set up of the gamei n Scotland could, painfully slowly but eventually, be improved. Everyone wins.

Edited May 17, 2016 by Germinal

[Thinker 851]

The play-offs aren't as rigged as they first appear. Remember, the Premiership has a 38 game season, but the Championship only has a 36 game season. So if 4th or 3rd get to the last round they've only played 2 league games more than the relegation candidate; and if 2nd make it both sides in the final will have played the same number of league games. It's really the tight scheduling that's the problem.

Edited May 17, 2016 by Thinker

[Germinal 27]

The play-offs aren't as rigged as they first appear. Remember, the Premiership has a 38 game season, but the Championship only has a 36 game season. So if 4th or 3rd get to the last round they've only played 2 league games more than the relegation candidate; and if 2nd make it both sides in the final will have played the same number of league games. It's really the tight scheduling that's the problem.

 

That's not as fair a comparison as it seems, though, because while Falkirk have seen off Hibs in two highly charged games, Killie have, since Dundee utd's relegation was confirmed, been resting players. Also, while they have to get up for two games, the Championship side have to lift themselves for four or possibly six.

[Thinker 851]

That's not as fair a comparison as it seems, though, because while Falkirk have seen off Hibs in two highly charged games, Killie have, since Dundee utd's relegation was confirmed, been resting players. Also, while they have to get up for two games, the Championship side have to lift themselves for four or possibly six.

 

Yeah, it's definitely true that this year the Premiership team has an advantage. Relegation will go right down to the wire in some seasons though.

 

Play-offs generally seem unfair to me no matter how you organise them. Look at the English Championship: Brighton took it right to the last game to finish a baw-hair off second spot and have since been knocked out of the play-offs by Sheffield Wednesday, a team they've proven themselves to be better than over the previous 46 games, and that had coasted into 6th. These games are more about excitement than fairness. I guess a straight second bottom vs. second top at Hampden would be the fairest way.

 

Incidentally, I noticed that the Welsh Premier have a similar kind play-off for their 3rd place UEFA cup spot (3rd to 6th place in a knockout). Something like could add some more excitement (or unfairness, depending on how you look at it) to our Premiership.

[pete 2,499]

Yeah, it's definitely true that this year the Premiership team has an advantage. Relegation will go right down to the wire in some seasons though.

 

Play-offs generally seem unfair to me no matter how you organise them. Look at the English Championship: Brighton took it right to the last game to finish a baw-hair off second spot and have since been knocked out of the play-offs by Sheffield Wednesday, a team they've proven themselves to be better than over the previous 46 games, and that had coasted into 6th. These games are more about excitement than fairness. I guess a straight second bottom vs. second top at Hampden would be the fairest way.

 

Incidentally, I noticed that the Welsh Premier have a similar kind play-off for their 3rd place UEFA cup spot (3rd to 6th place in a knockout). Something like could add some more excitement (or unfairness, depending on how you look at it) to our Premiership.

 

Holland also have play-offs for the European places. Sometimes as low as the ninth or tenth place can take part if the Champions win the cup.

[limeburner 0]

Re-being constructive,building bridges etc.

It has to be accepted that things will NEVER be the same as before,ever.

Yes,working relationships may be constructed,but that is all they will ever be.Goodwill ?No chance.

[Germinal 27]

Re-being constructive,building bridges etc.

It has to be accepted that things will NEVER be the same as before,ever.

Yes,working relationships may be constructed,but that is all they will ever be.Goodwill ?No chance.

 

Football is a business though, & if people ever did things through goodwill you can bet your life that it suited them so to do. I can live without the goodwill of others, it's too nebulous a concept anyway.