Make our Mind Up Time

Avatar ByTrisidium

Make our Mind Up Time

I have been receiving quite a bit of  unflattering mail about the “agenda” being pursued on this blog. Depending on the correspondent, that is defined as  either denying people their civil right to gloat, hiding the “truth” that people of the RC faith are welcomed and encouraged to come to Ibrox, or indulging in Chamberlain-style appeasement with the banning of the “H” word and other incontrovertible rights-to-insult.

The objection to moderation of any sort appears to be at the root of these diatribes. Our position here in terms of moderation is clear. There is no “agenda” other than a desire not to be chasing up posts containing the rantings and ravings of partisan types who “demand” their right to be heard no matter how objectionable it might be to those hear it. We are not here to service a conduit for conspiracy theories based in Masonic Lodges or the Vatican. There are plenty of places where people can indulge in that kind of stuff, but the moderators here are just not interested. The administration of the site takes around four hours per day. That’s a long time trawling through posts which often set out deliberately to insult, abuse or otherwise cause offence – mildly or otherwise.

Our view is that the blog will only have cross-club support if we stick to what we can substantiate by fact or reasonably infer from the way things proceed. Further, we feel that if we are to gain credibility as an alternative source of news and comment to the MSM, that we need to cut down on the fansite type comments. There is no dignity (a word often used here) in calling the Rangers manager or their fans names. We need to maintain higher standards of impartiality than football fansites, because we know that a united fan base can actually make a difference as RTC did when the SPL chairmen were gearing up for a parachute for the new Rangers. OT discussions are fine, and often amusing, but they shouldn’t become the main reason to come here.

The requirement to have a WordPress account before posting here is not in any way draconian. It is designed to make people accountable for what they post whilst still maintaining anonymity, and therefore being exempt from moderation. Those who don’t like it are not being compelled to carry out any instruction – they only need go to a place where they don’t feel so constrained.

If the main issue of this blog becomes how the blog is being administered – or how the moderation policy is affecting the human rights of posters, we may as well just pack up now.

There have never been any objections to the suggested posting rules on here. We assume that people who post are reasonably intelligent. Therefore it seems fair to assume that those who have ignored the suggested posting rules did so deliberately. If that doesn’t happen, moderation is just not required.

If what we are trying to do fails because of our posting framework, then we will be blamed. We are certain though, that we can have no credibility if we indulge ourselves in conspiracy theories and constant references to anachronistic organisations, the Scottish school system, and the leanings of referees.

There is real corruption in Scottish football. It is based not on religious rivalries but on greed and acquisitiveness. The only thing that matters is that we identify that corruption and help put an end to it.

Our job is to ask questions and not jump to our own conclusions about the answers. That will divide us as surely as the realisation of the depth of the corruption united us. To be totally united as fans, we need to have more Rangers fans on here. Therefore we need to create an atmosphere that they can be comfortable with. Is that the case right now? The anger for RFC’s mismanagement and abuse of the game in Scotland is real, but we need to look forward if we are truly committed to ensuring that what happened to Rangers can’t happen again.

We’re not gonna throw the toys out of the pram here. If anyone else would like to run the blog under those circumstances of zero moderation, we will be happy to hand over the domain. There is no “agenda” – we will be happy to hand the work over to others.

The initial posting which proposed the change to WordPress logins received over 130 TUs and only three TDs. Subsequently the post advising of the changes got around 100 TUs and 100 TDs. It seems that minds are not entirely made up.

To get some closure on this once and for all, we have added a poll below to end on Saturday at 1700 where you can decide whether you want to go along with our original plan in terms of login and moderation. We obviously recommend that you vote “Yes”

About the author

Avatar

Trisidium administrator

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

2,133 Comments so far

Avatar

Ordinary FanPosted on10:55 pm - Sep 20, 2012


Green saying that he believes some SPL Clubs were pressurised (or “bounced” as he put it) into refusing to allow RFC’s Tribute Act a place in the SPL. Some of them were, by their FANS, you know, the people who pay the wages and invest their time and emotions into THEIR GAME. The people who were robbed of money and a decade of fair competition.

View Comment

Avatar

wolfmanPosted on10:57 pm - Sep 20, 2012


Believe want you like about what “each of you” “think” the “Shadowed Gunman” represents,but even a half-competent defence lawyer will have that kicked out of court.
The closest to a legally “offensive” image on the banner is a possible racist one due to the scarf on the primate, and even that is tenuous at best.

View Comment

Avatar

AgrajagPosted on11:01 pm - Sep 20, 2012


wolfman says:
September 20, 2012 at 22:57

Believe want you like about what “each of you” “think” the “Shadowed Gunman” represents,but even a half-competent defence lawyer will have that kicked out of court.
The closest to a legally “offensive” image on the banner is a possible racist one due to the scarf on the primate, and even that is tenuous at best.

======================

Forgive my ignorance but how is the representation of a scarf, on an image of a primate, racist.

Tenuous or otherwise.

View Comment

Avatar

John McLeanPosted on11:01 pm - Sep 20, 2012


Not managed to get back on since this morning but it seems that Scottish Football has indeed been distracted by Scottish Football needing/wanting to cause a distraction!

View Comment

Avatar

pau1mart1nPosted on11:02 pm - Sep 20, 2012


Ordinary Fan says:

September 20, 2012 at 22:55

sevco fans should note that he thinks the motherwell fan group choice was an external pressure on motherwell !!
at least they know where they stand with charles.
he always listens to the fans
or maybe he never listens to the fans
it’s something like that anyway.

View Comment

Avatar

smallteaserPosted on11:03 pm - Sep 20, 2012


TSFM says:
September 20, 2012 at 22:35

“Why can’t we just be adult about it and admit that the banner was inappropriate, provocative in its imagery and way beyond what reasonable people would call funny. Take away the violent iconography and it’s just a daft bit of fun, but a guy clearly firing a gun at a Rangers fan is way beyond that.”
———————————————————————————————————-
I think you better check the banner again, there is a caricature of a gunman firing a gun at a caricature of a “Zombie”, the “Zombie does not have any Rangers colours on, you are making things up.
As for “shadowy gunmen”, every character on the poster is “shadowy”.
Most banners are provocative & are meant to be thought provoking, this one obviously took some time to get a reaction, maybe its a timing thing, maybe a bit of deflection away from a Champions League game.
I’ll stop before I end up in a rant like CW.

View Comment

Avatar

CWPosted on11:05 pm - Sep 20, 2012


Palacio67 says:
September 20, 2012 at 22:47

CW says:
September 20, 2012 at 22:22

The banner was offensive, c’mon catch a grip. The figure with the rifle is shooting a ZOMBIE ffs, not a person, lighten up. If you feel that bad about it make sure you Stay a way from the 28 days later films and any George A Romero flicks, plenty of zombies being shot by soldiers and the army in them.
PL and Celtic should fight this and ask the question who is offended and why?

—————————————————————————————————-

Cheers palacio67,

Just about sums up the reaction I expected ! I’ll repeat :

“Anyone who challenges this SFA Charge should hold their heads in shame !!!!!
I hope it’s the first of Many, Many Similiar charges to be brought against both teams !”

TSFM, now do you see what your up against ? Bet you wish you hadn’t taken on this Gig ?

View Comment

Avatar

AgrajagPosted on11:05 pm - Sep 20, 2012


smallteaser says:
September 20, 2012 at 23:03

It’s almost like people see what they want, and react to it, months later.

View Comment

Avatar

Doon the slopePosted on11:06 pm - Sep 20, 2012


Why is The Establishment, – after warning everyone about stirring up sectarian hatred, – stirring up sectarian hatred?

View Comment

Avatar

wolfmanPosted on11:08 pm - Sep 20, 2012


Agrajag says:
September 20, 2012 at 23:01

Forgive my ignorance but how is the representation of a scarf, on an image of a primate, racist.

Tenuous or otherwise.
___________________________________________________________________________

“It’s not in the slightest,your Honour”
Judge: “Okay, case closed!….next case please”

View Comment

Avatar

smallteaserPosted on11:10 pm - Sep 20, 2012


smartie1947 says:
September 20, 2012 at 22:22

By all means confront the SFA at said meeting, but keep such a response in-house and make no public statements before or after any SFA decision. Let the public make up their own mind on the merits or otherwise of the SFA case. This tactic has worked perfectly to date and should continue.
——————————————————————————————————————-
The response will be kept in house. Nothing has been made public from any hearings, tribunals, 5 way agreements, tv deals or any other matter handled by the SFA/SPL this year, what makes you think this would be any different?

View Comment

Avatar

Ordinary FanPosted on11:13 pm - Sep 20, 2012


You would certainly need to have the brain of a Zombie to be offended by that banner.

View Comment

Avatar

wolfmanPosted on11:19 pm - Sep 20, 2012


The Banner is extremely offensive to believers of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution!

View Comment

Avatar

smallteaserPosted on11:22 pm - Sep 20, 2012


mirrenman says:
September 20, 2012 at 21:45

Vanguard Bears statement.. would be good to hear from the ‘ legals ‘ on this site

It is now up to HM to declare publicly, who formally instructed them to include the sanctions. It would surely be in the best interests of HM to provide clarity to the football world.

We await a response.
————————————————————–
MM not a legal, why would Harper McLeod betray the confidence on a client?
Why would anyone discuss a draft document, this would be for discusion of all parties and would change.
Basically they want a name as usual, so they can threaten people.

View Comment

Avatar

cuchulainnPosted on11:25 pm - Sep 20, 2012


the gunman in the banner is obviously an IRA man, the helmet he’s wearing is clearly IRA standard issue kit. 😉

View Comment

Avatar

John McLeanPosted on11:29 pm - Sep 20, 2012


TSFM:

“I bet you wished you never took on this gig?” What gig! These guys are decent, intelligent fans of football and Scotland and indeed football in Scotland. END OF! The gig only becomes a ‘gig’ if we make it difficult.

Tonight Scottish Football is dealing with a 5PM press release accusing CFC (by the way accusing because they have been reported) of breaking 4 SFA regulations. The SFA have to follow protocol on this.

There is every chance that CFC will be exonerated! OK my Green (sorry HOOPED) gegs are on tonight but please lets not get caught up with ‘a nonsense situation’ IMO!?

Please “let this intelligent online area flourish”!

Oh! and mind wee Jaggie the Thistle … Sorry! Clyde the Thistle is our friend

;D

View Comment

Avatar

ollielogiePosted on11:29 pm - Sep 20, 2012


The banner being unacceptable ahould not be the issue (you can find similar images on the fable end of houses in parts of UK) – the issue is why have SFA decided to make something of it now? And meantime, what have the SFA ignored along the way? We cannot ignore nor deny there are undesirable bogoted elements of support in Scottish football on either side of the reformation debate. I think we could also agree that much of the offending behaviour is ignored by the powers that be, for whatever reason. The tokenism of sacrificial lambs in both sides from time to time is peacemeal and ineffective.

I’m sure we all agree there is no place for images/songs that mimic the worst excesses of sectarian violence at a football match. Our job should be tonexpose this and to see that the government and those that govern our game stamp it out without fear or favour, wherever it appears.

View Comment

Avatar

Ordinary FanPosted on11:32 pm - Sep 20, 2012


Thinking about this banner charge, what are the chances that The Tribute Act will be facing a charge for the verbal diarrhoea they chant every week very soon!? Did we not just have Charles Green a couple of days ago talking about the unacceptable behaviour of some Tribute Act supporters? Iv’e a feeling The Tribute Act are looking at a disciplinary charge very shortly, this OLD banner story has been dredged up as part of the 2 sides of the same coin syndrome that is synonymous with the media and Scottish footballing authorities.
I will give it 10 days before TTA are charged with offensive chanting.

View Comment

Avatar

Palacio67Posted on11:34 pm - Sep 20, 2012


John McLean says:
September 20, 2012 at 23:01

Nail on the head John, just looked what its kicked off in the blog tonight.

View Comment

justshatered

justshateredPosted on11:34 pm - Sep 20, 2012


Perhaps the last picture should have had a man standing up to his knees in zombie blood because as we know that would have been entirely acceptable.
In all seriousness I do believe that there is a slight whiff of desperation in this charge due to the length of time it has taken to raise it.
I also notice that one of the charges mentions that the club failed to remove the banner once it had been displayed.
Is that not the job of the police?
Questions should be asked of their involvement and if they found the banner offensive. They have never had a problem confronting the Green Brigade in the past or in reporting the club for that matter.
People find different things offensive but perhaps the club should ask for clarification first of all of how this charge came about. If it has been through a group of people looking for something to be offended about, and that is the criteria now required, then that should be made public as well as who the ‘mock offended’ can contact because that person is going to be very busy indeed.
It seems strange that a banner at a pre-season friendly, which I don’t believe was actually shown on TV, can constitute a charge such as this when illegal songs are sung on a regular basis on national, and satellite TV.
Sure accept the charge by all accounts but yet again all that is being asked for is a level playing field and I’m afraid, yet again, this does not seem to be the case.

View Comment

Avatar

Doon the slopePosted on11:37 pm - Sep 20, 2012


Would their be any relation to this, the more I think about it, bizarre, charge against Celtic (the timing of it at least), and the VB’s call for the name of the person who “formally instructed them to include sanctions”?

I also assume that Campbell Ogilvie was at work this week.

View Comment

Avatar

Doon the slopePosted on11:38 pm - Sep 20, 2012


I am assuming that the VB’s know who it was.

View Comment

Avatar

smallteaserPosted on11:43 pm - Sep 20, 2012


Webster says:
September 20, 2012 at 23:36

Would it not be good if one of the Celtic Green Brigade guys who made the banner – it must have involved a fair few – came out, maybe here, and clarified what the squatting soldier is meant to represent (if anything)?
———————————————————————————————————–
People see what they want, I don’t see a soldier, I see something from Dawn till Dusk, maybe thats just me.
As you say you never seen it as a NI Gunman at the time, but do now, once someone put that notion in your head.
Please note NI Gunman is not mentioned in any charges only the good people on this site are viewing it as such.
If someone from the GB said it depicted a UDF gunman shooting the reincarnation of Rangers as they would not accept a NEW club would that make it acceptable? Or would that be a lie?

View Comment

Avatar

bubblegumPosted on11:43 pm - Sep 20, 2012


TSFM…what a lot of cobblers! Even at its worst, the banner would merely represent a rather sad reflection of a small minority of CFC fans mindsets in 21st century Scotland. Building this into anything greater than almost insignificant is a joke and serves only to perpetuate the nonsense.
Why has it taken 2 months to flag up…I suspect the DR was short of copy.
As I say…a complete non-story if ever there was one.
Forget about it.

bbg

View Comment

Avatar

CWPosted on11:44 pm - Sep 20, 2012


TSFM says:
September 20, 2012 at 22:50

CW & Roland B.

Please keep that stuff away from this blog.
——————————————————————————————

TSFM,

What “stuff” would that be ? The Truth ? I thought that was the whole point of this blog ?

Ah well ! Definately my last post post then.

So it’s Ok to have an opinion on Law, Accountancy, Journalism, etc. Just as long as it’s all nicely put in good English language for all to follow. You’ll get a post on TSFM then.

Unfortunately, it’s not OK to have an actual opinion on the state of Scottish Football, and the past history that has got us to this stage ! You will NOT get a post on TSFM then.

Does the title not say “The Scottish Football Monitor” ?

Why is my opinion considered “that stuff” ?

It was my own heartfelt “stuff” aimed at both Celtic & Rangers. It’s my opinion on “The Scottish Football Monitor”.

Maybe it’s time to change the Domain Name to something more milder.

It’s not exactly a “Scottish Football Monitor” if you can pick and choose what you want people to read !

p.s. Don’t expect this to get through Customs !

View Comment

Avatar

MrBPosted on11:44 pm - Sep 20, 2012


Charles green statement reference Motherwell……outside interference….surely he must know it was a vote by the Motherwell supporters to not allow a new club into the SPL AS PER THE RULES……unless he means mfc fans are easily influenced by the sporting integrity nonsense

the only established club not in agreement with their fans was kilmarnock and the applicant for entry to the SPL was also at odds with their new supporters….trfc supporters wanted to start from the bottom and march to the top……..were mfc fans unduly influenced by Trfc fans.

Begs the question,what clubs are acceptable to Trfc…..mfc,killie or poor little Ross county – Who are being told that all their effort in balancing books and building a strong squad was a waste of time, what’s the point when you can’t play Rangers……..hey Charles you should stop now..whats the point the Trfc and the other clubs will never play against Rangers again.

View Comment

Avatar

Palacio67Posted on11:47 pm - Sep 20, 2012


Going off topic a little, I had to nip out at 10 o clock to pick the wife up from work, and was expecting to hear RC talk about the banner charge but instead they reported on a comment made tonight by ole AJ defending the dual contract / EBT issue and citing that the authorities were to blame.
Did anyone else catch this?

View Comment

Avatar

smallteaserPosted on11:49 pm - Sep 20, 2012


CW says:
September 20, 2012 at 23:44

I think he was refering to issues not pertaining to football, but I guess you know that.

View Comment

Avatar

John McLeanPosted on11:52 pm - Sep 20, 2012


CW says: September 20, 2012 at 23:44

Spelling and grammar should be a pre (hyphen) requisite mate!?

I may be wrong on that!?

J

View Comment

Avatar

LurkPacPosted on11:54 pm - Sep 20, 2012


Evening to you all, this is my first post on the new blog (second in total since RTC’s inception) and kudos to those of you trying to keep us on track with the real issues going on. Bear with me please, so much has been said since I started this and not on the right things.

(I’ve also been on holiday and out of touch so haven’t read everything and caught up on all the news so apologies if points or questions have already been answered previously.)

Having very little experience or memories regarding the times alluded to in it, I must admit to laughing when I saw the now notoriously discussed banner. Only after really looking at it and considering the imagery did I see how it could be offensive. That is because of my own ignorance on the subject area and particular familiarity with the the popular zombie killing film and game culture which is currently ‘in vogue’. I’m not sure if anyone on here would be familiar with a ‘game’ played in the streets of many cities, including Glasgow of recent times, where people (usually students!) chase each other in the streets pretending to be ‘infected’ zombies or survivors. I’m not sure how they go about this or what their objectives are but I have heard about it and think it does indicate a clever cultural awareness in the banner’s theme.

The shooter is clearly unacceptable and I think Celtic should recognize that. I don’t think you can doubt the obvious intention of the artist to imply the connection and this of course has no place at our club. Put a nose or clearer features on it’s head and face and the it’s fine, but they obviously omitted any such distinction in that one area for a reason so let’s not try to deny it or defend that kind of connection with our team.

/dismount high horse and try lighten the mood a little

Now for the post I wanted to write at the start….

What I would like to know is how accurate the BBC report of CG’s comments regarding Ross County wanting to be in the PL only to play Rangers.

I mean this quote here:-

“Why, for example, would Ross County spend all their life-time trying to get into the Premier League to find Rangers were not there? It’s inconceivable.”

Is CG implying that Ross County’s sole reason for existence is to play Rangers?

So……the prospect of European football doesn’t appeal to them? Playing the other SPL teams of respectable repute and size? The increased chances of them staying in the SPL by virtue of NOT having to play a strong Rangers several times? The opportunity to play at the highest level of domestic football available to them? The chance to grow as a club and make their own history? No? None of this applies Charles?

It’s not only arrogant and disrespectful to all the other clubs, it’s offensive in it’s implication that the Scottish League is worthless to all without them. If, of course, CG is being accurately reported. If not this post has been pretty much a waste of all our time lol

I couldn’t find details concerning Ross County’s wage bill but I’m sure a years qualification for even the Europa League group stages (yeah I know, just hypothetically speaking) would pay their bills handsomely and work wonders for the clubs profile. The same would apply for many clubs in the league.

There are greater heights for them and all other clubs in Scotland to achieve than playing The Rangers, Zombie Rangers, Sevco, Z(ombie)ED-209, RoboGers, Cyberdyne systems model H^n-Zero-H^n or whatever it wants to call itself. These doing anything for you?

Rangers fans have to boot CG out, perhaps McCoist as well as I still can’t believe how terribly they have been performing. My first post on RTC made reference to my belief that they were having an easy ride being put in division 3 and being able to sign and play an SPL quality team. Oh how I underestimated the managerial ineptitude of the man. I go on holiday and they draw with Annan and lose to Qos? Well done old boy, didn’t see that one coming 😉

Someone win a vulgar amount of money on the lottery and stick a few million in the next top 6 teams in Scotland, not to buy overpriced foreigners, but to retain the talent they have, develop themselves and forge a better league for us all. 🙂

Sorry for the ultimate length of the post but sheesh you guys say so much sometimes!

View Comment

Avatar

murdzinhoPosted on11:56 pm - Sep 20, 2012


From my view the banner is fine until the gunman, then it becomes questionable. Can’t see that image being permitted in any stadium from any fans. Yes the two month delay in charge is due to lobbying from fans, but is that not what we have been trying to encourage back on RTC and TSFM.

On this forum it is a distraction though. No need to get heated.

Real issues around radio silence from ND and SR. Why can’t they explain why their scaremongering in June and July has so far failed to occur?

Also I think some of criticism of Al Lamont was over the top. Thought he did a fairly good job over the summer and is a young guy trying to oust the dinosaurs of Jabba and Chico from BBC Sportsound.

Perhaps a more on topic blog might move us away from these distractions.

View Comment

Avatar

midcalderanPosted on11:59 pm - Sep 20, 2012


At 23:24, there had been 88 references to “banner”!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What next? Tin hat on.

View Comment

Avatar

bogsdolloxPosted on12:01 am - Sep 21, 2012


rab says:
September 20, 2012 at 18:50e This

Personally, i found the banner funny but maybe a bit silly to have a gunman shooting someone. However, it is clearly a zombie being shot and you can only kill zombies by chopping their heads off, and any way, they are the undead so they are kinda unharmable.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

My extensive research, via google, suggests a bullet can kill a zombie too. My research also suggests that the severed head can continue to bite for some time after decapitation although there are conflicting views regarding this.

View Comment

broadswordcallingdannybhoy

broadswordcallingdannybhoyPosted on12:01 am - Sep 21, 2012


The Green Brigade have a skull headed ‘mascot’ (it was one of the 4 horsemen I think) perhaps a better image would have been to have their mascot kicking the zombie in the tickity-boos.

I don’t find the banner offensive, I think however that the GB should take a leaf out of the Celtic Board’s book and don’t do anything at this time that gives the MSM/SFA an excuse to traduce the club.

I think it’s legitimate for TSFM to discuss why the offensive singing from Ranger’s fans has not produced a similar charge from the Scottish Farce Association. To discuss whether or not the banner is offensive is just Cul de sac-ism.

The original is called Zombie Evolution in case anyone was interested.

View Comment

Avatar

rabPosted on12:05 am - Sep 21, 2012


When will Celtic, the sfa, spl and sevco ( well, they turn up at every meeting) sit down and discuss which sanctions Celtic agree to.

View Comment

Avatar

Doon the slopePosted on12:05 am - Sep 21, 2012


Total disaster for Sevco against QOTS on Tuesday night. Especially those trying to make money out of them.

Green makes a speech on those who are not welcome at Ibrox (the balls of him lol!), and Campbell Og pulls a wee two month old bunny rabbit out a hat.

I’d expect a capacity, world record crowd at the Big Hoose for Motherwell’s visit.

Lol. If cloth was shame, and tuppence a yard, this lot wouldn’t have enough to make a pair of spats for a budgie.

View Comment

justshatered

justshateredPosted on12:06 am - Sep 21, 2012


murdzinho says:
September 20, 2012 at 23:56

I believe the fact that they are with holding merchandising and TV money is SR and ND trying to fulfill their own prophecy of financial melt down by pushing at least one club into administration.
They will then use this as an excuse to bring league re-construction back into the spotlight.
It really is high time that somebody called these two clowns to account.
There is no reason why this money should not be paid.

View Comment

Avatar

ikiPosted on12:17 am - Sep 21, 2012


If there is to be punishment for the banner then precedent should be heeded and the Green Brigade invited to the meeting with a view to concluding a 5 +- agreement.

View Comment

Avatar

bogsdolloxPosted on12:18 am - Sep 21, 2012


sn0tter says:
September 20, 2012 at 20:06

I am a Celtic fan and I agree that the banner ‘sails pretty close to the wind’ with the shooter looking very much like a troubles-era mural

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

But as a satirical cartoon that is why it works so well – even the gun looks like an Armalite

View Comment

Avatar

CWPosted on12:19 am - Sep 21, 2012


smallteaser says:
September 20, 2012 at 23:49

CW says:
September 20, 2012 at 23:44

I think he was refering to issues not pertaining to football, but I guess you know that.

——————————————————————————————

smallteaser,

TOTALLY pertaining to football, but I guess you all know that.

View Comment

Avatar

rabPosted on12:30 am - Sep 21, 2012


To me the banner is funny and distasteful ( any gunman ), like a frankie boyle joke.

The gunman is unidentifiable but is seen as subliminal terrorist.

We have posters calling for many punishments for Celtic and Trfc. Why?

Celtic have a large crowd and small percentage of any crowd will be sectarian/racist/offensive.

At many games involving the smaller clubs i have been told to go home, or called a paedo or a fen1an because a smaller crowd will still have a small percentage of sectarian/racist/offenders. I dont hold it personally against these clubs or think these clubs have a sectarian/racist/offensive problem.

Rfc and now Trfc, in my opinion have a much larger percentage of sectarian/racist / offenders in a very large crowd and this creates a problem which is reflected in scottish society by one or two other organisations who prefer exclusion of certain individuals.

As Agrajag clearly points out, republicanism is not a dirty word, putting irish in front of it does not suddenly make it offensive. Celtic must do all it can to weed out and ban the small element who chant pro terrorist chants, but celtic have no more a significant problem percentage than any other club. And every club should do all it can to weed out similar types from their own club. Until a civil war at sevco happens ( i was on RM tonight and its approaching ) and the many decent bears, like the many that i know, can split that club into good twin and evil twin, and we lock the evil one in the attic, then they will have a far bigger and more urgent problem amongst them than the rest of us.

Im sorry if thats too partisan, its my opinion and im not really up for debate on recalling times we have been offended by one anothers fans.

View Comment

Avatar

smallteaserPosted on12:36 am - Sep 21, 2012


Rangers v Brechin 29th July 2012

Rangers: Alexander, Goian, Bocanegra, Broadfoot, Wallace, McKay (Naismith 96), Black, Hutton, Macleod, Little (Crawford 111), McCulloch.

Rangers v QotS 18th September 2012

Alexander, Argyriou, Perry, Emilson Cribari, Wallace, McKay (Faure 79), McCulloch, Black, Macleod (Naismith 79), Shiels, Sandaza (Kyle 54).

Can anyone see the difference in player quality after the Season Tickets were sold?
Look at the back four Goian, Bocanegra, Broadfoot, three internationalists all gone, replaced by players nobody has heard of. The fans have been cheated yet again, but haven’t worked out what has happened.

View Comment

Avatar

briggsbhoyPosted on12:38 am - Sep 21, 2012


What would be the response by the SFA if supporters of clubs throughout Scotland started to sing as song based on the theme of the poster that has been so offence to Rangers supporters who were at the Celtic v Norwich friendly game! Did I get that right, Rangers supporters at the Celtic v Norwich friendly? no I didn’t coz there were none. Anway I’m surprised nobody has mentioned the old Harry Belifonte number Zombie Jamboree. It wont be long though before it starts ringing out across the terraces. I have emailed a friend of mine who starred in a group that sang it and tried to explain to him about Oldco & Newco and the Zombies connection, it was difficult. I have told him he could look forward to seeing lots of hits on You Tube. I’ve been playing about with the lyrics but will resist printing them on this blog but will say that the words belly to belly have been changed to ice cream and jelly.

So here is Big Barry (with deep voice) & Rockapella singing Zombie jamboree in the Spike Lee movie Spike does it acapella.

Barry has been heard speaking on BBC Radio Scotland on Janice Forsyth’s Music Cafe where he talked about his voice over work.

Back to my opening point, what would the SFA do if everyone started singing it?

View Comment

Avatar

rabPosted on12:43 am - Sep 21, 2012


Bogsdollox.

To be honest, i dont care how you kill a zombie, but i appreciate the research. I did think a head could still bite for a while, i didnt say it was perfectly safe. Having thought about it, i accept that burning one to ashes would surely do the job too.

I still think if we start the juninho ebt debate again, that would be enough to bore one to death.

View Comment

Avatar

bogsdolloxPosted on12:46 am - Sep 21, 2012


smallteaser says:
September 21, 2012 at 00:36

Rangers v Brechin 29th July 2012

Rangers: Alexander, Goian, Bocanegra, Broadfoot, Wallace, McKay (Naismith 96), Black, Hutton, Macleod, Little (Crawford 111), McCulloch.

Rangers v QotS 18th September 2012

Alexander, Argyriou, Perry, Emilson Cribari, Wallace, McKay (Faure 79), McCulloch, Black, Macleod (Naismith 79), Shiels, Sandaza (Kyle 54).

Can anyone see the difference in player quality after the Season Tickets were sold?
Look at the back four Goian, Bocanegra, Broadfoot, three internationalists all gone, replaced by players nobody has heard of. The fans have been cheated yet again, but haven’t worked out what has happened.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I haven’t seen the new back four play but I’m willing to wager that at least three of them are better than Broadfoot.

View Comment

Avatar

briggsbhoyPosted on12:48 am - Sep 21, 2012


Can I just add I do find a part of that poster a bit OTT and unrequired, it lost it’s humour with the silhouette at the end as far as I’m concerned, you know what i mean.

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on12:57 am - Sep 21, 2012


I don’t think the gunman thing is offensive just because it may be evocative of the Troubles. For me, it doesn’t matter a jot whether it is related to that or not. It is a violent depiction of a man shooting a Rangers fan (zombie or whatever). Satire is fine, but I can’t understand any argument that ignores the context of the violent undercurrent of the last few months.

Personally I find it worse that people seek to defend it, and if I live another hundred years, I won’t ever be able to sync with a mindset that can. If those same arguments had been used on RM or FF to justify the Famine Song (ach it’s just a wee laugh ye know) this blog would be knee-deep in indignation. As a Celtic fan, the fact that we are not really makes me despair.

I can’t compel people to have the same sensibilities as me, but I find it troubling that the irony of this situation is wooshing over crossbars un-noticed. Notice the lack of remorse, even regret, or the absence of empathy over this?

Thankfully, I think the club itself is better than that. Celtic will perhaps attempt to mitigate the effects of the incident, but will not defend the shameful sentiment.

More importantly for this community, this is perhaps the first real test of whether the double standards we have accused Rangers fans of maintaining applies here. The early signs are not at all good, and that is ominous for the hoped-for self-critical ethos of this blog.

If fans of any club are just about splitting down partisan lines whenever criticism of that club surfaces, then our “agenda” is not being satisfied, and we should shelve any high notion of saving Scottish football.

View Comment

Avatar

carl31Posted on12:59 am - Sep 21, 2012


At the forthcoming hearing, Celtic will be asked to explain why the banner is not offensive – not the SFA having to explain why it causes offence. Some of the ideas and explanations on here may even be used, or variations of them. But if they try they are on to a loser.

It will be put to Celtic that the banner depicts Rangers as zombies? Yes or no?… Yes it does.
It will be put to Celtic that the zombie is shown as being shot at. Yes or no? … yes again. Ergo…???

Celtic attempting to defend the content as innofensive or simply jovial will put them in a ridiculous position – not because of the depiction of Rangers as zombie, but because of the depiction of violence (and its worth stating that the rifleman is in soldier/military pose silhouetted, not in movie actor shotgun holding pose.- which has obvious inflammatory connotations).

The banner IS CLEARLY OFFENSIVE (sorry about the caps, but it felt needed). I got that aspect of it almost as soon as I clapped eyes on it.

This should be admitted by Celtic, and they should play the other aspects of the charges diplomatically. Any excuse for the MSM to paint Celtic as somehow a bit soft on the fringe elements of their support who sympathise with terrorism, will be gleefully leapt upon. Pledges to do more to stop future banners should be made – public statements should be put out condemning the use of any violent imagery – a line akin to NL’s should be parrotted as much as possible … that the banter in good nature is fine, but not beyond it.

And never mind the whataboutery tactic re Rangers songbook, or divertery by querying the sattelite delay in the charge appearing – those are the tactics of the darkside.
The banner is offensive.
Its a fair charge.
We must do better next time.

With half an eye on what is coming over the next 6 months or so, this could be viewed as early warning and doing Celtic a favour.

View Comment

Avatar

CWPosted on1:06 am - Sep 21, 2012


Just realised tonight that this is really a Celtic Blog in disguise. How anyone can defend that banner ?

I used to think the Blog was neutral.

TSFM, I hope you appreciate what you have created ! It’s your bed, you can lie in it.

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on1:08 am - Sep 21, 2012


CW says:

September 21, 2012 at 01:06(Edit)

Just realised tonight that this is really a Celtic Blog in disguise. How anyone can defend that banner ?

I used to think the Blog was neutral.

TSFM, I hope you appreciate what you have created ! It’s your bed, you can lie in it.

______________________________________________________________________

CW
Your trolling is tiresome. I think we get your point. Now please go get some sleep.

View Comment

Avatar

bogsdolloxPosted on1:09 am - Sep 21, 2012


TSFM says:
September 21, 2012 at 00:57

If fans of any club are just about splitting down partisan lines whenever criticism of that club surfaces, then our “agenda” is not being satisfied, and we should shelve any high notion of saving Scottish football.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Well that’s that then – shop closed- nice while it lasted – rubbish when your ideals get smashed.

Don’t be so touchy – the blog is doing fine. It’s just lacking some news about Rangers wrongdoings – of which – more later I’m sure.

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on1:10 am - Sep 21, 2012


carl31 says:

September 21, 2012 at 00:59(Edit)
________________________________________

You pretty much said in a few paragraphs what I’ve been struggling to say all evening. Thanks.

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on1:13 am - Sep 21, 2012


bogsdollox says:

September 21, 2012 at 01:09(Edit)

Well that’s that then – shop closed- nice while it lasted – rubbish when your ideals get smashed.

Don’t be so touchy – the blog is doing fine. It’s just lacking some news about Rangers wrongdoings – of which – more later I’m sure.

________________________________________________________

BD
I never said anything about closing shop, but I hope you are right about the blog being okay.
I hope you are not correct that we need bad Rangers news to keep us happy.

“Without fear or favour” was once favourite for the name of this blog. We need to live up to that.

View Comment

Avatar

wolfmanPosted on1:20 am - Sep 21, 2012


Ever since the introduction of Zombies into the Sci-Fi/Horror genre,the fear of them is such because they are what anyone of us can become if infected with their poison.
That is why,in every single depiction of them,whether in book or film,they are seen to be an enemy that have the potential to turn you into exactly the same thing as them,with the same basic needs as them.
This is the reason they are always vigorously attack and wiped out.
Shot,Be-headed,Burned or whatever.They need to be eradicated or else they will turn the population like them.
We have been brain-washed as a nation and a people,for decades, to walk on egg-shells in case we offend the “important people”
We now are so paranoid that we cant even joke for fear of offence.
The world has gone PC mad.
Scotland in particular.
In fact Scotland “Singularly” in particular.

View Comment

Avatar

spanishceltPosted on1:27 am - Sep 21, 2012


Ive just wasted the last hour reading through dozens of posts about a stupid banner and now find myself skipping as soon as I see banner, gunman or Zombie.
My opinion?
Is it funny?, not really
Do I see why (in the world that “we” live in) that Rangers fans would be upset by it, Yes I do.
If a similar banner was displayed at Ibrox with gunman shooting at something representing a Celtic fan then EVERY person here defending it just now would be criticizing it instead.
Theres been loads of brilliant banners and displays at c.p. but this time they got it wrong and Celtic should put their hands up, accept the punishment and put this to bed before it detracts anything more from the real issues.

View Comment

Avatar

bogsdolloxPosted on1:31 am - Sep 21, 2012


wolfman says:
September 21, 2012 at 01:20

Ever since the introduction of Zombies into the Sci-Fi/Horror genre,the fear of them is such because they are what anyone of us can become if infected with their poison.
That is why,in every single depiction of them,whether in book or film,they are seen to be an enemy that have the potential to turn you into exactly the same thing as them,with the same basic needs as them.
This is the reason they are always vigorously attack and wiped out.
Shot,Be-headed,Burned or whatever.They need to be eradicated or else they will turn the population like them.
We have been brain-washed as a nation and a people,for decades, to walk on egg-shells in case we offend the “important people”
We now are so paranoid that we cant even joke for fear of offence.
The world has gone PC mad.
Scotland in particular.
In fact Scotland “Singularly” in particular.
)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Silver bullet Big chap – that’s all I’m sayin’ – stay safe.

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on1:32 am - Sep 21, 2012


wolfman says:

September 21, 2012 at 01:20(Edit)

We have been brain-washed as a nation and a people,for decades, to walk on egg-shells in case we offend the “important people”
We now are so paranoid that we cant even joke for fear of offence.
The world has gone PC mad.
Scotland in particular.
In fact Scotland “Singularly” in particular.

______________________________________________________________

Wolfman,

I know I’ve got as little chance of changing your mind over this as you have of changing mine, but this last section of your post is EXACTLY the same argument I have heard Rangers fans use (on vox pops to camera) in defence of their behaviour. So what is the difference?

I don’t see how it is, even if you think no offence is intended by the banner, that you can’t see how that imagery might be shocking to people. Or if you do, why you can’t see that it matters.

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on1:35 am - Sep 21, 2012


Wolfman,

Your earlier post was deleted because you misrepresented what I said in an even earlier post. Please don’t do that.

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on1:36 am - Sep 21, 2012


Webster says:

September 21, 2012 at 01:35(Edit)

Your problem, TSFM, is that many of us do not recognise this “shameful sentiment”.

___________________________________________________________________

Webster,
With respect, that’s not my problem.

View Comment

Avatar

wolfmanPosted on1:37 am - Sep 21, 2012


“beauty-is-in-the-eye-of-the-beholder”
“This saying first appeared in the 3rd century BC in Greek.”
From = http://www.phrases.org.uk
In this case, “offence is in the eye of the beholder”
Fixed that for you there http://www.phrases.org.uk

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on1:39 am - Sep 21, 2012


wolfman says:

September 21, 2012 at 01:37(Edit)
_______________________________

Thank you.

View Comment

Avatar

wolfmanPosted on1:47 am - Sep 21, 2012


I honestly never seen anything other than humour from the banner until I read on this blog that there was metaphoric symbolism in it.
I’m glad that my mind is so naive and innocent not to have seen the “obvious” intended offence.
If I have misrepresented the metaphoric symbolism alluded to on here by some,then I expect this post to be deleted also,in case my humour does not pass the “opinion-sniff-test”

View Comment

Avatar

bangordubPosted on2:14 am - Sep 21, 2012


The banner was actually very very good. It summed up the the birth, life, death and resurrection of the Govan empire as seen through the eyes of it’s perceived enemies.
Ok, the gunman at the end was in questionable taste but as a piece of art in it’s own right, it was brilliant. In my view the best banner ever, bar none, was the four horsemen banner produced by the same group of fans earlier this year.
I am not a Celtic fan but the attitude and behaviour of their fans would make me proud to be one.
As an example I would cite the solidarity shown to Liverpool fans in the singing of you’ll never walk alone last night. Tear in the eye

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkePosted on2:19 am - Sep 21, 2012


We have drifted somewhat , it seems to me,from the main issue.

It does not matter a tuppenny toss whether banners of any kind were or were not ‘offensive’ to whomever( Eric Morecambe’s lovely comedic use of ‘whomever’ still makes me smile).

The Footballing authorities are now such a busted flush that any club, following Sevco’s example , can give them the two fingers with impunity.

Until they deal with the real problem of their own pusillanimity in the face of the most iniquitous scandal that ever arose in Scottish football, anything they decide can be treated with the same contempt that CG expresses for them.

That should be our concern.

It is not for anyone, in civic life let alone in sporting life, to attempt to deny the expression of political or religious opinion.

As long as there is fair sporting competition, under the rules.

We do not yet live in a fundamentalist state where we are to be potentially killed for expressing our opinions, even if they are expressed in the sporting arena.

View Comment

Avatar

RayCharlezPosted on2:36 am - Sep 21, 2012


TSFM says:
September 21, 2012 at 00:57
“Personally I find it worse that people seek to defend it, and if I live another h*ndred years, I won’t ever be able to sync with a mindset that can.”

Many people will defend the right to display a banner that is a clearly a piece of satire.

Many will not.

I think it depends on where you draw the line with regards to freedom of speech.

I think this book is interesting in this context – Extreme Speech and Democracy.

“Criminalizing Religiously Offensive Satire: Free Speech, Human Dignity, and Comparative Law”

“This chapter considers the question of whether satire that ridicules a religious figure or the core tenets of a religious belief should receive different constitutional protection than that afforded to political satire.

“It examines two possible models that seek to resolve the tension in principle: the U.S. model, under which freedom of speech enjoys pre-eminence; and the Israeli model, that protects human dignity as the principal value.”

While the banner in question is not offensive on a religious level it appears to offend others on political/cultural/social grounds.

But the banner sparks a similar debate to the one examined in the chapter of the book I reference as it is about how you “resolve the tension” between free speech and protecting human dignity.

The Famine Song, that you mentioned, is not satire although from a freedom of speech perspective I am far from convinced that it should be outlawed.

But the banner in question is a piece of satire and I believe it is important to defend the ability of individuals to use ridicule to make a political/social/cultural/religious/sporting point.

The same defence is used by those who believe it is important that you should be able to publish satirical cartoons featuring the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

I have no idea why anyone would want to publish a satirical piece on a religious figure but, by God, I will defend someone’s right to do so.

I am honestly surprised you don’t understand the mindset of people who would defend the banner and I am stunned that you think that this somehow diminishes this site.

It does no such thing.

To protect human dignity you must protect and defend the right to free speech.

View Comment

Avatar

Ordinary FanPosted on2:51 am - Sep 21, 2012


Miki: That really is disgusting. There is no way that an adult of sound mind could just casually stand around holding something like that. Shameless.

View Comment

Avatar

SeamusPosted on3:07 am - Sep 21, 2012


Seamus says:
September 20, 2012 at 16:29
8 19 Rate This
Some right nonsense being posted at the moment.
I miss RTC. I’ve had several posts removed that were
very relevant to the SFA and Sevco.
This site is basically a Newco that’s struggling IMO.

Moaning about a banner 🙁 See my post above ………………

View Comment

Avatar

Fritz AgrandoldteamPosted on3:27 am - Sep 21, 2012


Trust the Daily Ranger to keep this “offensive banner” nonsense going…..

“The banner featured a silhouetted gunman emblazoned with a green shamrock taking aim at a zombie-like figure in front of the tombstone.”

This copy is under a picture which cleary shows that there isn’t a shamrock “emblazoned” anywhere on the banner, nevermind the silhouette of the brave soldier, (or was it Van Helsing?) protecting society from the undead!

I guess the DR, Campbell Ogilvie, et al, see what they want to see – an IRA volunteer with a shamrock! It would be laughed out of court in a civil case.

View Comment

Avatar

RayCharlezPosted on4:12 am - Sep 21, 2012


Just as an aside. In a classic piece of whatabouery:

A banner saying “Paedo Free in Div 3” was unveiled at a ground recently.

I do not find it offensive although many will.

Is it satire?

It could be conceived as such.

Even if it is not satire I would still defend the right of an individual to raise such a banner in a public place.

Freedom of speech is vital to citizens in a democracy – although there is a cost.

You may not like what you hear and see.

We all have our idea of what is acceptable and what is beyond the pale.

We also have a legal system that lays down certain boundaries that help “frame” our own belief system.

But it is a dynamic, not a static, boundary.

The legal boundaries develop and change with time, as do personal, societal and cultural attitudes.

The philosophical/cultural trajectory we have been on in Western democracies for quite a while is one where social mores are becoming ever more fragmented while freedom of speech and individualism are flourishing.

Some of the legislation enacted by Westminister and Holyrood recently is regressive in this regard but such periods of retrenchment are common when you look at the historical development of individual rights. You will find that the underlying forces driving change soon reassert themselves.

In summation:
Limiting freedom of speech tends to be a regressive measure.
Expanding freedom of speech tends to be a progressive measure.

I have no doubt the “Crown,” through its legislative body at Westminster, will eventually be forced to “gift” UK subjects the same type of First Amendment rights that citizens in the USA are given at birth.

Or perhaps I am just an are internet bampot, after all.

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on4:24 am - Sep 21, 2012


TSFM – delete the other entries – I found the items causing it to go into moderation and have corrected them…

A few items have become clear
(1) Why the charge on the banner – let’s remember that the match occurred on 24th July and the banner was discussed at that time on RTC – if they had shown Hector waving to/welcoming the Zombie it may have been better for sure since guns are never humourous – but the charge came this week – why the delay. Remember Chris Graham’s calls to arms for the peepil after their “success” with Phil came 2 weeks ago – to inundate authorities with emails and complaints to “fight back” after all the sly kicking that had gone on. Let’s also not forget the SFA still have a full time president CO whose full time job is to ignore the biggest scandal due to his implication and focus on all other items. Plus the SFA seem to view being neutral as making sure the score is kept at 1 punishment for Rangers/Sevco/T’Rangers as they have been known recently and 1 punishment for Celtic – rather than be neutral and just apply the rules fairly. There is also the fact that many of us here have emailed and got not much reply – maybe Chris’ emails contain points of light references in the universe kind of stuff to make sure they are ignored with the chaff that come from us.
(2) The stripping of titles – they all know it’s a done deal and that they are guilty – all of the players/managers/directors/MSM can say it is not proved yet – but when the BBC have seen the evidence, it is obvious that the shredding machine campaign was a wee bit shabby by Martin Bain. So the stripping of titles is discussed as if it’s the maximum punishment at length – it is not. Expulsion from the game is the maximum punishment. They are setting the bar at stripping of titles to show when that punishment comes that it is a harsh penalty which they will then fight but begrudgingly accept. Then they will be allowed to say – see now we have been punished enough – when in reality they are lucky to still be in SFL after liquidation and after the dual contracts episode, they will be lucky to be members of the SFA. So the deflection of the punishment is a setting of the bar – they should be grateful it is being set that low!
(3) USA trips – Hugh Adam said it best – the myth of the mass of Rangers fans abroad is just that. Problem is most of the Peepil are reared in the world of WoS bogotry – when they go escape from that bleak scenario and go to live and settle abroad they see how different the world works when no one cares what the name of your primary school was nor any Norn Iron issues affecting them. Living abroad these 20 years, I have been fortunate to be involved in many Celtic supporters club around the world – and on days in major cities in USA and SE Asia when Celtic played RFC-NIL that I have attended, the local CFC folks ended up accommodating a few RFC-NIL fans to watch the games since they had no place to go on their own. As an example Chicago CSC has its own bar/pub and has huge amounts of fans show up for important games watching the game at 6am local time. The equivalent in Chicago when I was there had a handful of folks. There is no mass of Peepil that CG can talk to that will be investing in his new venture around the world unless they like him want to make money – but he won’t be for sharing the plunder, so he is looking for investors who don’t care about the return. They are harder to find – especially when they are probably not as blinded by the MSM propaganda machine either.
(4) Cambell Ogilvie – the world’s best administrator for a football administration apparently is going to be the holder of yet another world record soon during this record breaking season. Before Xmas, he will hold the world record for illegal player registrations filed under that person’s governance of the administrations without detecting them using the checks and balances. Yet he continues in office – working full time on anything not related to T’Rangers/RFC-NIL since he is according to SR excluding himself from those items. So what does he have to do now? Excluding him from the only show in town means he cannot be supporting SR as he should be in the most complex case to hit Scottish football ever. CO never found anything wrong – he was asleep – or perhaps looking the other way – when RFC-NIL embarked on a 10 year binge of dual contracts. He was supposed to be ensuring the rules were being applied and if not to detect it and close the loopholes in the rules – he did neither. And no plans to close the loophole either! He has to go surely.

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on5:01 am - Sep 21, 2012


Undercover Operation: Report [fail!].
=============================

My wife & I, bedecked in red, white and blue clothing went to the home of the only NYC Rangers Supporters Club / BigAppleBears at the Blue Room Bar.
As at 7.15pm nothing happening, so had a beer.

We then went to a ‘neutral’ Scottish bar, (Caledonia), and nothing happening there either, so had a beer.

We then went to the last ‘potential’ Manhattan bar – another Scottish ‘neutral’ bar, (St.Andrews), but again nothing happening, so had a couple of beers.

Finally, we went to a large ‘soccer’ bar, (Legends), but nothing happening, so had a beer !

I can reasonably deduce that – assuming Charlie was indeed in Manhattan today;

– he may have given a presentation to a private/invite only (?) group. But then why would he do this, and in the absence of any prior, local publicity, if you are hoping to appeal to the ‘average bear’ ?
– he could simply be on a jolly today, prior to his onward journey tomorow.
– he could be in NYC for other motives ?
I can only think of the reference to Chuck Blazer – and the fact that the Duff & Phelps global head office is in Manhattan, (purely wild speculation on my part).

Coincidentally, per the previous post by exiledcelt, I also get the distinct impression that there is minimal support for Sevco in NYC, and my expectation was that Charlie would be giving an informal pitch in a small bar rather than a large function room / conference facility.

I could of course be proved totally wrong, but I will be interested to see if a transcript is shared of a meeting tonight – like the previous Toronto meeting.

So, mission was a fail – but I will of course be submitting my expenses claim to TSFM for beers consumed tonight ‘in the line of duty’. 😉

View Comment

Avatar

carlisleceltPosted on6:40 am - Sep 21, 2012


I have to assume the vile banner relating to Peadophilia displayed by The Rangers fans will also be looked at and brought to book by the authorities.

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on6:47 am - Sep 21, 2012


RayCharles says:

September 21, 2012 at 04:12
Just as an aside. In a classic piece of whatabouery:

A banner saying “Paedo Free in Div 3″ was unveiled at a ground recently.

I do not find it offensive although many will.

**************
I do

What I find offensive is the fact that a sick individual is being used as a weapon to constantly beat up a football club and besmirch the greatest football manager Scotland has had (it could be argued that SAF would be many folks choice – but in my view however Stein never was able to buy players for millions of pounds – however both are able to identify players for teams for sure)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_Boys_Club

The constant reference to Jim Torbin is very old – however anyone on RM who argues gets called instantly a kiddie fiddler, so many years later it still continues since there is no comeback to an absolutely horrific and unwarrented sleight cast on each and every Celtic supporter due to this. There are I am sure some sick individuals who have indulged in this kind of activity – however to see grown men and women with that banner makes me wonder why they think this topic is so hilarious – as an older man, I cannot imagine my reaction should any sick twisted person be involved with any of my children, nephews, nieces – but I would not find it so funny to attempt to think that other parent’s and childrens suffering would be a source of fun and banter.

I remember attending a match at Celtic just after Desmond White had died and the RFC-NIL fans held aloft a “Desmond White Rot in Hell” banner – am sure his children and relatives who were attendign the game split their sides laughing at the banter…… Strangely enough Strathclydes finest let them display the banner for at least 20 mins before asking for it to come down. Did not hear of any SFA sanctions for that either…….

Freedom of speech is one thing – freedom to think properly is another.

View Comment

Avatar

Richard Wilson (@timomouse)Posted on7:18 am - Sep 21, 2012


The charge must surely be based on the concept that similar banners would be treated similarly.

History shows it hasn’t.

For example, this little nugget – http://www.ultras-celtic.com/gallery/d/6012-7/len1.jpg

How can anyone possibly say that the zombie banner is any more offensive than that banner which could be interpreted as encouraging Celts to commit arson? The Green Brigade use humour to get their points across and they don’t always hit the mark either with it being funny or with it being tasteful. That isn’t a criticism, simply the law of averages.

Rangers fans make banners also which also miss the mark or could be considered to be inciting civil disobediece (certainly there were a couple outside of Ibrox which appeared to have a real go at HMRC).

The point is that no-one is right. The point is that fans have the right to free speech up until they break the laws of the land (not of the game, of the land). This means they are fine to unfurl banners that go for subjects as long as they do not suggest personal threats, incitement of criminal activity or discrimination.

If those are the criteria you’re going on, then the Green Brigade could have been sanctioned long before now. But if you’re letting things such as the banner above slide, then your judgement has to be based on whether you consider the zombie banner to be of such distaste comparatively as to make it a special case. Is it really that?

Probably not.

Is it offensive in it’s own right?

If you don’t get the joke, then yes. Even if you do, it’s distasteful.

So where do the the SFA draw the line?

Unfortunately, it appears to be “Wherever they please”

View Comment

Avatar

timtimPosted on7:27 am - Sep 21, 2012


Mocking rivals at football seems to be part and parcel of the game and its certainly not restricted to Scotland . My avatar shows a large inflatable pig which was used by the FC Twente fans to wind up their rivals Groningen who they affectionately refer to as pig farmers.
In my opinion its humorous banter that can add to the occasion
There are boundaries of course, Feynoord fans depicting banners of the Luftwaffe bombing Amsterdam and making hissing noises to simulate the gas chambers to antagonise fans of Ajax goes further than bad taste . Fans making rocket noises in Enschede due to a local explosion that killed over 20 people in 2000 is far from humorous its wicked.
The apocalypse banner was imo artistic genius and Im sure if the positions were reversed the Rfc* fans would have acted in a similair way . From what I remember they took it reasonably well
The Zombie banner has allowed the serially insulted to add 2+2 to equal 5
I can see the intended humour and I can see why some may use it to further stir the sectarian pot. Only those who made the banner truly know what the intent was
As Celtic fans usually act in the humorous rather than provocative ie: beach balls at Ibrox before Seville ,I think they are entitled to the benefit of the doubt over zombiegate
I do hope that in the future they will think twice before acting as it seems that some are desperate to find offence where none was intended
There has been some memorable wind ups at grounds , one of my favourites being the
“Agent McLeish return to base ,mission accomplished” from the Dons
Football needs humour but we need to be careful we dont feed the permaragers

View Comment

Comments are closed.