Try these shoes for size Mr Waddell

[D'Artagnan 173]

“It means anyone who wasn’t there has no idea of the scale. Phone and periscope clips are there for all to see but they’re a microcosm, and judgment without the big picture is flawed.”

 

(Gordon Waddell, 29.05.2016)

 

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/h...prDGcjulHlj.97

 

Mr Waddell is of the opinion that the subsequent Rangers statements following the Cup Final have damaged our credibility even more than Hibs Chairman Rod Petrie’s car crash interview post-match. Perhaps Mr Waddell would do well to heed his own advice and look at not only the bigger picture but also the environment in which it was issued.

 

The Rangers statement was issued of course after the Petrie interview which itself drew so much condemnation from the press as it sought to down play, even question some of the events which had unfolded. It also followed the Off the Ball programme where Stuart Cosgrove had provided a masterclass in not downplaying but actually subduing all debate and discussion regarding the post-match shame.

 

It followed the First Minister’s tweet congratulating Hibs but offering neither mention nor condemnation of the ugly scenes of the aftermath. And of course it also followed the initial assessment by Tom English, who of course falls into Mr Waddell’s aforementioned category of “anyone who wasn’t there”.

 

The backdrop to the Rangers statement was a silence from our politicians, not only a downplaying but a forced closure on discussion on it from our national broadcaster and in addition a skewed focus of events from journalists who were not even present.

 

It is interesting that subsequent to the Rangers statement the First Minister has seen fit to comment and condemn the events post the Cup Final, Stuart Cosgrove has issued a public apology on air for his conduct and Tom English has altered his initial view of events having actually studied the evidence in more depth.

 

Let’s for a moment imagine a different scenario on Saturday 21st May, 2016. That a group of Rangers supporters had stormed the Hampden press box and goaded, incited, attacked, spat on and verbally abused journalists who were only doing their job. And a Rangers director subsequently dismissed such behaviour as merely “over exuberance”. That Rangers then sought to minimise all discussion or debate on the subject.

 

Can you imagine what the subsequent NUJ statement would have consisted of in both tone and content ?

 

Sometimes Mr Waddell you have to walk about in other people’s shoes to truly understand where they are coming from, in order to genuinely see that bigger picture.

Edited May 31, 2016 by D'Artagnan

[Frankie 8,148]

Good points D'art.

 

The Rangers statement may have been too strong for some but, for our club and fans, it hit the ideal tone in making clear our frustration.

 

The reaction since hasn't been a surprise but those that have exposed themselves over the last ten days will have opened the eyes of those bears previously reluctant to deny what has often stared them in the face.

[calscot 0]

I really don't know what was wrong with the statement - if there is criticism about what people are writing, pretty much detractor of the statement is starting in the wrong place. It should take a few decades to go through condemning a lot worse in the press, the plastic press, the football authorities, the police and many from other clubs, before getting to that one.

 

In fact the weird thing is that if the statement is bad for criticising what people said and didn't say, then surely the non-empathetic criticism of that statement is exactly the same and therefore just as bad - except maybe they didn't name names?

 

The way we are treated is completely bonkers.

[calscot 0]

Personally, I'd like a lot more of this - it may piss certain people off, but only for the right reasons and with truths. They don't give a shit about pissing us off will lies and black propaganda.

[ian1964 10,410]

I really don't know what was wrong with the statement - if there is criticism about what people are writing, pretty much detractor of the statement is starting in the wrong place. It should take a few decades to go through condemning a lot worse in the press, the plastic press, the football authorities, the police and many from other clubs, before getting to that one.

 

In fact the weird thing is that if the statement is bad for criticising what people said and didn't say, then surely the non-empathetic criticism of that statement is exactly the same and therefore just as bad - except maybe they didn't name names?

 

The way we are treated is completely bonkers.

 

Agreed,the fact that Stewart Robertsonsaid in an interview a week later that the statement was a well thought through statement was good,the only ones that are upset are the ones in direct line of fire from the statement. I hope this is continued from now on.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

The statements were bang on the money.

 

If we said nothing this would all be laughed off. Which given the horrific scenes which saw thousands in fear of their lives would be unacceptable.

 

I accept the actual chance of loss of life was small but the fear was there.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Ps what was English assessment?

[aweebluesoandso 290]

Waddell is a Clown who is suited to work in that Circus, or is it a Freak show they call the Daily Sectarian, so his shoes will be a size 30 that squeaks when he walks.

[ian1964 10,410]

The problem is that every ''football journalist'' thinks they are better qualified than any fan!,aye they maybe are university educated and are 100% entitled to their opinion/view and interpretation on anything,however their interpretation/view is only the same as any fan,especially fans who attend matches!,then they fabricate an article and when they get challenged and proved wrong they refuse to accept this,as we are only mere fans who are not university educated so therefore we are not qualified to know better!,and when they are challenged,even with undeniable facts they can't accept this fact and then we see the circling of wagons amongst all the ''journalists''! and the eventually cry sectarian abuse,and pull out the victim card!,it is so par for the course for these people to do this,even though they condemn sectarianism/bigotry yet rely on that for thier jobs!.

These people are actually responsible for feeding the sectarianism in Scotland and then when one of thier own are caught out using sectarian language they do nothing to condemn them!,honesty,transparancy!,give me a break!

Edited May 31, 2016 by ian1964

[D'Artagnan 173]

The problem is that every ''football journalist'' thinks they are better qualified than any fan!,aye they maybe are university educated and are 100% entitled to their opinion/view and interpretation on anything,however their interpretation/view is only the same as any fan,especially fans who attend matches!,then they fabricate an article and when they get challenged and proved wrong they refuse to accept this,as we are only mere fans who are not university educated so therefore we are not qualified to know better!,and when they are challenged,even with undeniable facts they can't accept this fact and then we see the circling of wagons amongst all the ''journalists''! and the eventually cry sectarian abuse,and pull out the victim card!,it is so par for the course for these people to do this,even though they condemn sectarianism/bigotry yet rely on that for thier jobs!.

These people are actually responsible for feeding the sectarianism in Scotland and then when one of thier own are caught out using sectarian language they do nothing to condemn them!,honesty,transparancy!,give me a break!

 

Ian,

 

They also appear to think they above normal codes of morality. If you follow Frankie & myself on twitter we challenged Keith Jackson as he obviously went on a fishing trip yesterday, but he refused to engage with either of us or discuss the double standards of morality on display from the journalistic community.

 

Make no mistake abusing journalists online is not only wrong, it is counter -productive and Ive no doubt they will circle wagons and run with a story about Rangers fans driving journalists off social media.

 

What they will not run with however, is that a journalistic community which condemns Rangers fans for sectarian singing is unilateraly silent about sectarian tweets on some journos timelines.