SDM: End This Obsession

[maineflyer 0]

Agree with that Frankie,however I am convinced most neutrals are getting a bit fed up with the scum complaining about being offended at every little tune taking the piss out of them,give them enough rope !!!!,whilst continuing with their own verbals at every match

 

I wish I could believe that but it looks more likely that they'll just keep on extending their influence and keep on getting away with the same things we are pillaried for.

 

Change seldon happens spontaneously. It normally requires a catalyst. we appear to have none.

[Wija 0]

SDM would not need to stoop to the levels of the Dhims. A simple backing of the fans even when they are wrong is what he needs to do. Roy Keane did it recently. Sunderland fans were running amock but Keane did not say 1 thing against them. Nothing else needs to be said.

 

Obviously in the Scottish Press (Papal rag service) and the TV pundits (Papal Vision) they would go for it until something snapped.

 

He must defend his club and its fans in all situations. He has already shown he is willing to vilify the roots of this club. If he damages the roots, the tree will fall.

 

Be mindful SDM, you are the one destorying this club, not its history or its traditions.

[calscot 0]

I really don't agree. That's what Celtic do and it's sickening. You have to show integrity and criticise fans when they deserve it, and back them when they don't. Otherwise it's all just hypocrisy and lip service.

 

We need to be defended at the moment because we are innocent, not just because someone backs us regardless...

[pete 2,499]

A reporter on the beeb tonight said that Murray stated to him in an interview that there are about 40 people on unofficial-websites who are responsible for spouting sectarian bile . He knows who they are but he can't do anything to stop it as there are no laws covering it.

 

i just wish he would also acknowledge that there are also good websites instead of tarring all websites with the same brush.

[craig 5,198]

A reporter on the beeb tonight said that Murray stated to him in an interview that there are about 40 people on unofficial-websites who are responsible for spouting sectarian bile . He knows who they are but he can't do anything to stop it as there are no laws covering it.

 

i just wish he would also acknowledge that there are also good websites instead of tarring all websites with the same brush.

 

If it really is 40 people then SDM needs to spend MORE TIME pointing that fact out.

 

40 people from, say, 40,000 people every other week is 0.01%

 

Sorry, but SDM should therefore be spending more time defending that VAST MAJORITY.

[Zappa 0]

40 people that SDM knows about doesn't mean that it's actually 40 people. Seems like a pretty dim statement to have made by someone who clearly isn't stupid.

[maineflyer 0]

40 people that SDM knows about doesn't mean that it's actually 40 people. Seems like a pretty dim statement to have made by someone who clearly isn't stupid.

 

A dim, vague and pointless statement.

 

Just what is this sectarian bile that he speaks of, this description that is bandied about as if it actually meant something, as if it had entered the social lexicon because Mr Murray had willed it. What does it mean? Which words does it apply to - are they the ones directed at Murray or at the ever-more-incredible hypocrisy of the MOPES who have attached themselves to Celtic Football Club?

 

It is entirely typical of Murray that he should throw his non-insubstantial weight around without first having properly identified the target or the exact cause of his distress. The behaviour since the dawn of time of people who feel the need to be in charge but can't or don't want to take the time to get the details right.

 

I make no secret of the fact that I despise David Murray's performance as chairman of Rangers. Am I one of his 40? Do I spout this "sectarian bile"? I've had the odd thing dribble down my chin from time to time but I honestly couldn't say if it was bile, sectarian or otherwise. How do I or others know if we are being accused by the Great Leader of breaking the laws of this land - or just that we're in danger of permeating the faalse veneer of his questionable performance?

 

If just for once David Murray would risk being specific or risk (as almost all posters rightly say above) defending the abundant good in the Rangers community, how much more unified and progressive might this club have become? How did that man ever manager to raise children?

 

David Murray has finally become the clear focus for stupidity and ill-judged policy at this great club, more concerned with his own reputation and the ability to walk away with bulging pockets than on implementing sustainable improvement and implementing meaningful strategies that he clearly hasn't even bothered to formulate.

 

I felt when I landed in this forum that more than a few members thought I was intent only on becoming a disruptive influence and that I was irrationally anti-Murray. With such statements as we've heard recently, I just hope that Murray himself has gone some way to explain better than I can why he will never be the right man to be Chairman of Rangers.

 

The alternative? There's always an alternative.