Rangers staff risk stoking sectarianism hints Glasgow council boss Susan Aitken

[Frankie 8,199]

1 minute ago, Soulsonic5791 said:

Apologies in advance for thread drift.

 

I have a hypothetical question to ask.

 

Imagine that the Rangers support was whiter than white when it came to the songbook and fan behaviour was beyond reproach and exemplary, what do you think the haters would focus on then in terms of a metaphorical stick to beat us with?

 

Because, let's not kid ourselves, were that situation to be the case, the haters would not go away and the sectarianism perpetrated by them would not disappear. 

It would and does drift into rule breaches and such-like.

 

The undue attention placed on Allan McGregor this week proves that.

[Soulsonic5791 408]

19 minutes ago, Frankie said:

Finally, when I say imperfect, I think our PR is often poor and that's why we're fire-fighting so often.

 

How long has that been the case Frankie? Our club's PR has been criticised as being poor for as long as I've been alive.

 

Could it be that we will always be treated as paying punters first and foremost? Granted, fan participation and consultation appears to be improving but how much of it is window dressing?

 

Aren't the fans just taken for granted? Recent EL ticket package prices do little to dispel that notion, regardless of payment deadline extensions.

Edited September 6, 2018 by Soulsonic5791

[buster. 4,846]

25 minutes ago, Frankie said:

I think the BBC are wholly to blame for their poor coverage of our club and the dispute between us.  Some of the coverage has been one-sided, deliberately confrontational and often biased.

 

However, three years down the line since the 'ban', I do believe the club could be doing more to address the situation, communicate with the fans and find solutions.

I often harp on about reactionary management opposed to strategic.

 

You can see many examples of this during the last few years and one of those was the withdrawal of press privileges from Chris McLaughlin.......or rather to do so without making it very clear why the action was taken and in so doing effectively giving BBC Scotland a case to answer.

 

I think the club were right to do it but didn't handle it well.

 

 

[Frankie 8,199]

1 minute ago, Soulsonic5791 said:

How long has that been the case Frankie? Our club's PR has been criticised as being poor for as long as I've been alive.

 

Could it be that we will always be treated as paying punters first and foremost? Granted fan participation and consultation appears to be improving but how much of it is window dressing?

 

Aren't the fans just taken for granted? Recent EL ticket package prices do little to dispel that notion, regardless of payment deadline extensions.

I'd contend that firstly via Jack Irvine and now via Jim Traynor, our main PR reps see their own reputation as more important as the clubs.

 

I'd also suggest that same charge could be levied at SDM and other 'custodians' since.

 

Fans are last on the list.

[Soulsonic5791 408]

7 minutes ago, Frankie said:

It would and does drift into rule breaches and such-like.

 

The undue attention placed on Allan McGregor this week proves that.

Sorry mate. I'm not following you.

 

Does the first sentence inform the second one?

[buster. 4,846]

7 minutes ago, Soulsonic5791 said:

How long has that been the case Frankie? Our club's PR has been criticised as being poor for as long as I've been alive.

 

Could it be that we will always be treated as paying punters first and foremost? Granted fan participation and consultation appears to be improving but how much of it is window dressing?

 

Aren't the fans just taken for granted? Recent EL ticket package prices do little to dispel that notion, regardless of payment deadline extensions.

In recent years PR wrt fans has been 'tell them what they want to hear' and later we'll see if we can do anthing. Sometimes it works, other times, not.

 

Again, the lack of a collective holistic strategy being evident.......and the impression of less than competent executives doing the day to day.

 

 

 

Edited September 6, 2018 by buster.

[Soulsonic5791 408]

3 minutes ago, Frankie said:

I'd contend that firstly via Jack Irvine and now via Jim Traynor, our main PR reps see their own reputation as more important as the clubs.

 

I'd also suggest that same charge could be levied at SDM and other 'custodians' since.

 

Fans are last on the list.

Doesn't that viewpoint go some way to explaining and informing the PR strategy?

 

No one likes us we don't care; the punters will always defiantly come back and pay towards the cause?

[buster. 4,846]

24 minutes ago, Frankie said:

I'd contend that firstly via Jack Irvine and now via Jim Traynor, our main PR reps see their own reputation as more important as the clubs.

 

I'd also suggest that same charge could be levied at SDM and other 'custodians' since.

 

Fans are last on the list.

Toxic Jack Irvine was presented with the gig by sir Duped and it was as much about PR for Murray than for Rangers. He then became a 'continuity bridge' for the endless stream of spivs, again paid by Rangers but actually acting in other individuals best interests. 

 

Traynor was an ex-journalist who in his first gig, has proved himself to not be very good at PR, as subtle as a hammer.

 

The story goes that it was Traynor who took McLaughlin to the front door and told him to leave. If true,  without any thought of how to play the immediate situation. I take you back to where I think we erred wrt the beginning of an 'ongoing situation'

 

 

Rangers haven't had well directed and competent PR in place for god knows how long. No surprise what follows...........

 

 

 

 

Edited September 6, 2018 by buster.

[buster. 4,846]

11 minutes ago, Soulsonic5791 said:

Doesn't that viewpoint go some way to explaining and informing the PR strategy?

 

No one likes us we don't care; the punters will always defiantly come back and pay towards the cause?

Siege Mentality only goes so far.

 

 

[Frankie 8,199]

23 minutes ago, Soulsonic5791 said:

Sorry mate. I'm not following you.

 

Does the first sentence inform the second one?

I'm agreeing with you.  If there was no bigotry to discuss, then they'd just talk about rule breaches or other Rangersbad stuff.

 

Look at Sunday's match - plenty IRA chanting from Celtic fans but no coverage.  No coverage of our fans because you couldn't hear them.

 

Ergo, what's the discussion - a naughty kick from McGregor that wasn't punished at the time or thereafter despite the new(ish) rules being clear it wasn't a red card offence.