Good Afternoon.
Announcing outstanding financial successes for Rangers PLC the then Chairman of the club opened his Chairman’s report in the annual financial statements with the following words:
“Last summer I explained that the Club, after many years of significant investment in our playing squad
and more recently in our state of the art facility at Murray Park, had embarked on a three year business
plan to stabilise and improve the Club’s finances. The plan also recognised the need to react to the
challenging economic conditions facing football clubs around the world.
Following a trend over a number of years of increasing year on year losses, I am pleased to report that
in the first year of this plan we have made important progress by reversing this trend. Our trading loss
for last year of £11.2m reflects a £7.9m improvement versus the £19.1m loss for the previous year and
although it will take more time to completely reach our goals, this is a key milestone. We also intend to
make significant further progress by the end of the current financial year. This improvement is the
consequence of having a solid strategy and the commitment and energy to implement the changes it requires”
Later on in the same statement the chairman would add:
“Another key part of our plan is associated with the Rangers brand and our Retail Division goes from strength to strength. Our financial results this year have been significantly enhanced by an outstanding performance in merchandising Rangers products, in particular replica kit, which makes our Retail Division one of the most successful in Europe.”
In the same set of financial reports, the CEO would report:
“To further strengthen Rangers hospitality portfolio, a new dedicated sponsor’s lounge was unveiled this season. The Carling Lounge is a first for the Club and was developed in conjunction with our new sponsor, Carling. ”
and
“Our innovative events programme continues to grow and this year saw a record number of official events including the highly successful annual Hall of Fame Awards Ceremony, Player of the Year and 50 Championships Gala Dinner, all of which catered for up to 1000 guests.
At Rangers, we continually develop our portfolio of products and as a key area of income for the Club, we evaluate the market for new revenue opportunities on an ongoing basis in order to exceed our existing and potential customer expectations and needs.
Demand for season tickets reached an all time high last season with a record 42,508 season ticket holders in comparison with the previous season`s figure of 40,320. Over 36,000 of these season ticket holders renewed for this season – a record number.
For the new season, we are delighted to welcome brewing giant, Carling on board as our Official Club sponsor. Carling is one of the UK’s leading consumer brands with a proven track record in football sponsorship.
The Club also continues to work with a number of multinational blue chip brands such as National Car Rental, Sony Playstation 2, Bank of Scotland and Coca-Cola. This year, we will also experience the evolution of the Honda deal via Hyndland Honda and welcome the mobile communications giant T-Mobile to our ranks.”.
The year was 2003 and in the previous 24 months Rangers Football Club, owned and operated as a private fiefdom by Sir David Murray, had made operational losses of some £30 million.
Yes – 30 MILLION POUNDS.
Of course the chairman’s report for 2003 was written by John F Mclelland CBE and the CEO was one Martin Bain Esq.
As Mr Mclelland clearly stated, by 2003 the club already had a trend of increasing year on year losses covering a number of years and was losing annual sums which stretched into millions, if not tens of millions, of pounds.
However, the acquisition of Rangers Football Club was absolutely vital to David Murray’s personal business growth, and his complete control of the club as his own private business key was more important than any other business decision he had made before buying Rangers or since.
When he persuaded Gavin Masterton to finance 100% of the purchase price of the club, Murray had his finest business moment.
By getting control of Rangers, Murray was able to offer entertainment, hospitality, seeming privilege and bestow favour on others in a way that was hitherto undreamed of, and he bestowed that largesse on any number of “existing and potential clients” and contacts – be they the clients and contacts related to Rangers Football Club or the existing and potential clients of David Murray, his businesses, his banks, or anyone in any field that he chose to court for the purposes of potential business.
His business.
It wasn’t only journalists who benefited from the succulent lamb treatment.
Accountants,lawyers, surveyors, broadcasters, football officials, people in industry and construction, utilities, financiers and other areas of business were all invited inside the sacred House of Murray and given access to the great man of business “and owner of Rangers” while attending the “record number of official (hospitality) events”.
Twelve months on from when John McLelland made those statements in the 2003 accounts, David Murray was back in the chair at Ibrox and he presented the 2004 financials.
In the intervening 12 months Rangers had gained an additional £10 million from Champions League income and had received £8.6 million in transfer fees from the sale of Messrs Ferguson, Amoruso and McCann. Not only that, the Rangers board had managed to reduce the club’s wage bill by £5 million. Taking all three figures together comes to some £23.6 million in extra income or savings.
Yet, the accounts for 2004 showed that the club made an operational loss of almost £6 million and overall debt had risen by an additional £7 million to £97.4 million.
However, the 2004 accounts were also interesting for another reason.
Rangers PLC had introduced payments “to employees trusts” into their accounts for the first time in 2001 and in that year they had paid £1million into those trusts. Just three years later, the trust payments recorded in the accounts had risen to £7.3 million per annum — or to put it another way to 25% of the annual wage bill though no one in Scottish Football asked any questions about that!
By the following year, the chairman announced that the 2004 operational loss had in fact been £10.4million but that the good news was that the 2005 operational loss was only £7.8 million. However Rangers were able to post a profit before taxation if they included the money obtained from transfers (£8.4 million) and the inclusion of an extraordinary profit of £14,999,999 made on buying back the shares of a subsidiary company for £1 which they had previously sold for £15 million.
All of which added up to a whopping great profit of ……… £12.4 million!
I will leave you to do the maths on 2005.
Oh and of course these accounts included the detail that 3000 Rangers fans had joined David Murray in participating in the November ’94 share issue where the club managed to raise £51,430,995 in fresh capital most of which was provided by Mr Murray… sorry I mean MIH ….. sorry that should read Bank of Scotland …… or their shareholders……. or should that be the public purse?
The notable items in the 2006 accounts included the announcement of a ten year deal with JJB Sports to take over the merchandising operation of the club and increased revenue from an extended run in the Champion’s League. However, the profit before tax was declared at only£0.1 million in comparison to the £12.4 million of the year before but then again that £12.4 million had included player sales of £8.4 million and the £15 million sweety bonus from the repurchase of ones own former subsidiary shares for £1.
Jumping to 2008 Rangers saw a record year in terms of turnover which had risen to £64.5 million which enabled the company to record a profit on ordinary activities before taxation of £6.57 million although it should be pointed out that wages and bonuses were up at 77% of turnover and that a big factor in the Rangers income stream was corporate hospitality and the top line of income was shown as “gate receipts and hospitality”.
However, 2009 saw a calamitous set of figures. Whilst Alastair Johnston tried to put a brave chairman’s face on it, the year saw an operating loss of £17.325 million which was softened only by player disposals leading to a loss before taxation of a mere £14.085 million.
Fortunately Sir David did not have to report these figures as he chose to stand down as chairman in August and so Johnston stepped in and announced that he was deeply honoured to do so.
In 2010, the income stream jumped from £39.7 million to over £56 million with the result that the club showed a profit before taxation of £4.209 million.
However, by that time the corporate hospitality ticket that was Rangers Football Club was done for as a result of matters that had nothing to do with events on the football field in the main.
First, the emergence of the Fergus McCann run Celtic had brought a real business and sporting challenge. This was something that Murray had not previously faced in the football business.
Second,the Bank of Scotland had gone bust and Lloyds could not and would not allow Murray to continually borrow vast sums of money on the basis of revalued assets and outrageous hospitality.
Third, the UEFA fair play rules came into being and demanded that clubs at least act on a semblance of proper corporate governance and fiscal propriety.
Lastly,Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs tightened up the law on the use of EBT’s which meant that Rangers could no longer afford to buy in the players that brought almost guaranteed success against domestic opposition.
On average, since 2002 Rangers PLC had lost between £7 million – £8 million per year – or roughly £650,000 per month if you like – yet for the better part of a decade David Murray had been able to persuade the Bank of Scotland that this was a business that was worthy of ever greater financial support or that he himself and his MIH business was of such value that the Banks should support him in supporting the Ibrox club whilst operating in this fashion.
Of course, had Murray’s Rangers paid tax on all player remunerations then the losses would have been far larger.
Meanwhile, all the other clubs in Scottish football who banked with the Bank of Scotland faced funding cuts and demands for repayment with the bank publicly proclaiming that it was overexposed to the football market in Scotland.
But no one asked any questions about why the bank should act one way with Murray’s club but another way with all others. No one in football, no one in the media and no one from the world of business.
Looking back,it is hard to imagine a business which has been run on such a consistent loss making basis being allowed to continue by either its owners or by its bankers. However, a successful and funded Rangers was so important to the Murray group that David Murray was clearly willing to lose millions year after year to keep the Gala dinners and corporate hospitality going.
Rangers were Murray’s big PR vehicle and the club was essentially used by him to open the doors which would allow him to make more money elsewhere on a personal basis and if it meant Rangers cutting every corner and accumulating massive losses, unsustainable losses, then so be it.
Today, the new regime at Ibrox run the current business in a way which clocks up the same colossal annual losses whilst the club competes outwith Scotland’s top division. Each day we hear that the wage bill is unsustainable, that the playing staff are overpaid, that the stadium needs massive investment and that the fans are opposed to the stadium itself being mortgaged and the club being in hawk to lenders.
Yet, in the Murray era the Stadium was revalued time and time again and its revaluation was used as the justification for ever greater borrowing on the Rangers accounts. The playing staff were massively overpaid and financially assisted by the EBT’s and most years the Chairman’s annual statement announced huge losses despite regular claims of record season ticket sales, record hospitality income, European income, shirt sponsorship and the outsourcing of all merchandising to JJB sports instead of Sports Direct.
The comparison between the old business and the current one is clear for all to see.
It should be noted, that since the days of Murray, no major banking institution has agreed to provide the Ibrox business with any banking facilities. Not under Whyte, not under Green, not under anyone.
Yet few ask why that should be.
The destruction of the old Rangers business led those in charge of Scottish football to announce that Armageddon was on the horizon if it had not actually arrived, yet today virtually all Scottish clubs are in a better financial and business state than back in the bad old days of the Bank of Scotland financed SPL. Some have succumbed to insolvency, and others have simply cut their cloth, changed their structure, sought, and in some cases attracted, new owners and moved on in terms of business.
In general, Scottish Football has cleaned house at club level.
Now, David Murray has “cleaned house” in that MIH has bitten the dust and walked down insolvency road.
What is interesting is that the Murray brand still has that capacity to get out a good PR message when it needs to. Despite the MIH pension fund being short of money for some inexplicable reason, last week it was announced that the family controlled Murray Estates had approached those in charge of MIH and had agreed to buy some key MIH assets for something in the region of £13.9 million.
The assets concerned are land banks which at some point will be zoned for planning and which will undoubtedly bring the Murray family considerable profit in the future, with some of those assets already looking as if they will produce a return sooner rather than later.
However, what is not commented upon in the mainstream press is the fact that Murray Estates had the ability to pay £13.9 Million for anything at all and that having that amount of money to spend the Murray camp has chosen not to buy any football club down Govan way.
Perhaps, it has been realised that a football club which loses millions of pounds each year is not such a shrewd investment and that the Murray family money would be better spent elsewhere?
Perhaps, it has been realised that the culture of wining, dining, partying and entertaining to the most lavish and extravagant extent will not result in the banks opening their vaults any more?
Perhaps, it has been realised that the Rangers brand has been so badly damaged over the years that it is no longer the key to the golden door in terms of business, finance and banking and that running a football club in 2015 involves a discipline and a set of skills that David Murray and his team do not have experience of?
What is clear, is that the Murray years at Ibrox were not good for the average Rangers fan in the long term and that when you have a football club – any football club – being run for the private benefit of one rich individual, or group of individuals, then the feelings and passions of the ordinary fan will as often as not be forgotten when that individual or his group choose to move on once they have decided that they no longer wish to play with their toy football club.
David Murray did not make money directly out of Rangers Football Club. He used it as a key to open other doors for him and to get him a seat at other tables and into a different type of “club” altogether. He did not run the club in a day to day fashion that was designed to bring stability and prolonged financial, or playing, success to the club. its investors and its fans. He did not preside over Ibrox during a period of sustained financial gain.
Mike Ashley will not subsidise 2015 version of Rangers to anything like the same extent that the Bank of Scotland did in the 90’s and naughties.
However, Ashley, like Murray, will use his control of the Rangers brand to open doors for him elsewhere in the sports retail market, and he will use the Rangers contract with Sports Direct to make a handsome profit. He will also control all the advertising revenue just as he does at Newcastle. In short, Mr Ashley is only interested in The Rangers with a view to using it as a stepping stone to achieve other things elsewhere.
However, don’t take my word for any of this, take the opinion of someone who knows.
Mr Dave King is quoted today as saying the following about the current board of Directors who are in charge of the current Ibrox holding company.
“History will judge this board as one of the worst the club has ever had. There is not one individual who puts the club above personal interest.”
That is an interesting observation from a man who became a non executive director of the old Rangers holding company in 2000 and who had a front row pew for every set of accounts and all the financial statements referred to above.
Whether or not Mr King is a glib and shameless liar is a matter of South African judicial opinion. Whether or not he can spot someone who puts their own self interest ahead of the interests of Rangers Football Club and the supporters of the club is a matter that should be discussed over some fine wine, some succulent lamb and whatever postprandial entertainment you care to imagine.
I wonder if he has ever read the accounts of Rangers PLC and compared them to the corresponding accounts of MIH for the same period?
Allyjambo says:
February 21, 2015 at 12:14 pm
upthehoops says:
February 21, 2015 at 12:05 pm
Have you never heard of the ‘Divine Right of Kings’? 🙄
—————————————-
Like Charles I , he’s off his head 🙄
neutralaxis says:
February 21, 2015 at 3:41 pm
_______________________________________
Part of the problem is that we are so used to it in this part of the world that our tolerance levels are high. Another part of it may be that depending on what the song is and one’s own cultural background, you may wonder what all the fuss is about.
So-called “rebel” songs were a bit like elevator music to me growing up – always there in the background but paid little attention. To be honest there was only one song that used to be sung at Parkhead (thankfully not heard it for about twenty years) that upset me because it was straightforwardly anti-Protestant.
Much of the rest of it never bothered me at all. My dad used to get pissed off with it, and I used to wonder why he got so incensed. Strangely, the older I got, the wiser the old man appeared to be 🙂
Growing up gives you a fresh perspective and perhaps a greater willingness to walk that mile in another’s shoes. In general though, we have been callused by a century of this stuff. I wonder if the absence of “the game” for a couple of years has seen that callus recede – and the fixture’s sudden reappearance appalled us all the more for it?
Wonder what exactly Mike Ashley himself thinks of the latest off field fiasco to envelope the Club/Company. Does Mike think that the songbook from the fans might in fact blight his SD business empire by mere association. Is there a huge business decision on the horizon for him or does he think that the whole issue will disappear down the West of Scotland drain in a few days as no one else will really mention it. as BT Sport have shown, it’s easier to attack the messenger.
Apropos Parma (who’ve been regularly mentioned during the Rangers-Sevco saga), just read that they’ve been ‘dissolved’ (a form of liquidation?). Automatic relegation (how does that work?) and remaining matches 0-3 forfeits.
Molto jingso.
Collymore has brought this to a national level, so hopefully it pushes the authorities here into,action
@DTguardian
In America, it is known as the YSA problem. It has been a bugbear of Major League Soccer’s commissioner, Don Garber, for longer than he will probably wish to remember and a couple of years ago, with a new television deal being negotiated, a memo went around that he could no longer tolerate that slightly strange tradition of supporters shouting: “You suck asshole!” every time the opposition goalkeeper took a goal-kick.
Real Salt Lake went for the naughty-step approach and warned their fans that if the song continued the club would not allow drums and banners inside the stadium, as well as halting privileges such as parking permits and discounted tickets. On the other hand, the New York Red Bulls opted for an incentive programme – bribery, to put it another way – and offered their supporters’ groups $2,000 each if they could go four games YSA-free.
Other clubs use different methods when it comes to the songs they dislike. Liverpool put a Bart Simpson cartoon on their website recently appealing for the naughty word in the Steven Gerrard song to be removed – roundly ignored, naturally – and the attempts at sanitising football crowds go all the way back to Brian Clough’s early years at Nottingham Forest.
Clough once ordered that a sign be carried around the City Ground before one game with the message: “Gentlemen, no swearing please! Brian.” When Clough was in the running for the England job the Trent End produced its own sign: “Brian, no leaving please! The gentlemen.”
It’s different, though, with Rangers, trying to navigate a way through the fog of bigotry that still pollutes the club and the realisation, even in February 2015, that anyone who has a go will quickly find the hate mob unleashed on them.
Sure enough, the poison started flowing when Stan Collymore set up an online petition – “Sectarian chanting is illegal” – aimed at turning down the volume on the Famine Song and Billy Boys and challenging some of the warped views that still exist behind Ibrox’s red-bricked walls.
Advertisement
In truth, the culture is so embedded and deep-rooted it might be 50 years, or longer, before Rangers (and Celtic) stop embarrassing modern Scotland.
But at least he was willing to have a go, when he will have known that every wannabe Begbie on the internet would be on his case. Collymore was told very clearly his campaign wasn’t welcome. There were threats of violence and other messages to his Twitter account that made it clear their first reaction was to attack, like zombies.
One guy who turned out to be a member of the club’s IT staff invited him to meet him in Glasgow, signed off with a clenched-fist emoticon that suggested he did not want to discuss Microsoft Windows or the latest edition of Smart Computing magazine. The Rangers Supporters’ Trust, an organisation that presumably wants to be taken seriously, reminded its followers what happened to Ulrika Jonsson 17 years ago (a bit rich at a club where they idolise Paul Gascoigne) and released a statement describing Collymore as a “self-publicist” and an “internet troll”, making petty jibes about his playing career and saying his complaints were “ill-advised, inaccurate and inane”. Plus, of course, the default-setting option every time Rangers are put on the spot: what about Celtic? It’s the tactic that is known in Glasgow as Whataboutery. Never mind what we did, what about them? OK, we’re singing about the IRA or 19th-century famines – but what about the other lot?
Maybe there are times when Collymore could be less strident and it would bring more people on board if he could soften his tone. His style will always put a few backs up and, in hindsight, maybe it would have been a more effective petition if it addressed both Old Firm clubs rather than just one.
Yet it is still fairly abysmal that one of the sport’s prominent broadcasters and racism campaigners tries to tackle a song that features the line “up to our knees in Fenian blood” and is dropped from his slot with BT Sport because the station “did not agree with the nature of the debate”.
In Spain, they have been deliberating over the past week about whether Barcelona should be punished because a group of supporters known as Almogàvers, latching on to some video footage of Cristiano Ronaldo on a birthday night out, started singing at one match: “Es un borracho, Cristiano es un borracho” — translated to accuse him of being a drunk. The threat of disciplinary action may sound faintly preposterous bearing in mind what can regularly be heard at football grounds elsewhere but the death of a Deportivo la Coruña supporter during violence with Atlético Madrid fans last November has led to a purge on any chants that Javier Tebas, president of Liga de Fútbol Profesional, says constitutes “symbolic violence”.
Barcelona, therefore, have been charged and several other clubs are also in trouble. Sevilla are one of them because when they played Málaga their fans were apparently singing: “We want a tsunami in the Costa del Sol.”
Lugo, in the Second Division, have been reported because fans sang “clown, clown” at Girona’s Francisco José Sandaza and it does make you wonder how long the backlog of disciplinary cases might be were the same rules to apply in the British leagues.
Yet the songs Collymore highlighted are of an entirely different level. In 2006, Rangers were ordered to make an announcement before each game clarifying that Billy’s Boys was banned because of its sectarian content.
The Famine Song contains the line “The famine is over, why don’t you go home?” and was deemed racist by three judges in 2008. Yet both were sung en masse, along with No Pope of Rome, at the Scottish League Cup semi-final against Celtic earlier this month. And, go on then, what about the other lot? Celtic’s dunderheads went through songs referring to a “Hun” and, of course, they have their own share of 90-minute and full-time bigots. But it was the Rangers end that seemed hell‑bent on going back through the decades and, if it does seem slightly unusual that Collymore is the one demanding change, maybe that is because we rarely hear a peep out of the people who really should be driving this.
The Scottish Professional Football League hides behind a rule that means clubs cannot be disciplined if they have taken steps “so far as is reasonably practicable” and the Scottish FA is just as feeble.
As for BT Sport, would it not have been better to highlight Collymore’s legitimate complaints and have a grown-up debate rather than decide it was too toxic and take him off air. “We abhor all forms of racism,” read a statement. “It should not be tolerated in sport. When issues of racism or sectarianism emerge, they should be tackled and discussed in the correct manner.”
Except it’s easy to put out a press release and promise the discussion will take place on another day. Why not involve the man who has brought it to light? And do they really not understand the irony that Gazza, the guy who once played a mock flute during an Old Firm game, is their guest on Sunday?
The same statement argues that it is “not censorship” that Collymore was removed from his role. Maybe not, but what has actually happened is that Collymore has complained a bit too vociferously for the station’s liking and the relevant people have taken what looks suspiciously like a commercially motivated decision rather than one that is actually fuelled by what is right and wrong.
Collymore had promised taking his petition to the various sponsors and broadcasters and suggesting they boycott Rangers until the sectarian songs stopped. Would the relevant people have had the nerve? Well, just look at what has happened instead. On Friday, when Rangers played at Raith Rovers, the soundtrack was defiantly predictable. The television executives have run a mile, Collymore has been bumped and the Rangers Supporters’ Trust has told its followers they “can chalk that up as a minor victory”. And everyone wonders why we are stuck in the same old loop.
Good caller on Off the Ball tonight trying to highlight the difference between sectarian songs and political songs and objecting to Celtic getting dragged into things. A point well made but he once again missed the main point. Both sets of songs have hee haw to do with Scottish Football in the 21st century and no one else in Scotland, the UK or the rest of the world gives a flying feck in the same way that I fail to see what point a person is trying to make hanging a Stoke City flag from a hotel room balcony on holiday. Like kicking Flower of Scotland into touch, if the country and supporters of the big Glasgow Clubs started looked forward instead of back we would all be better for it
Rant over.
Danish Pastry says:
February 21, 2015 at 8:11 pm
Apropos Parma (who’ve been regularly mentioned during the Rangers-Sevco saga), just read that they’ve been ‘dissolved’ (a form of liquidation?). Automatic relegation (how does that work?) and remaining matches 0-3 forfeits.
Molto jingso.
============================================================
I posted on this a few pages back.
http://www.tsfm.scot/spot-the-difference/comment-page-47/#comment-47071
The Italians operate a franchise system where the “sporting title” (or League Position) can be transferred (to another club from the same area) which buys the entire assets and pays the debts of the liquidating club.
The brand name is transferred and the purchasing club can play in the stadium and use the name of the liquidated club.
If the existing club operating as Parma have dissolved mid-season, that club cannot complete their fixtures and the franchise will automatically be relegated. The club that takes over Parma’s “sporting title” next year will inherit a league position one tier down.
This franchising system is what Neil Doncaster seems to believe we have (or should have) in Scotland. Fortunately, the remainder of Scottish football disagreed.
…or at least they did the last time. 😯
@HirsutePersuit, yes I was thinking of the recent comments. Derek Rae was mentioning Parma as well in some context. Quite incredible really, I think I read that Parma has changed hands a few times this season already. No doubt the SFA & SPFL will be watching with interest, especially if MA pulls the plug in some way.
Cracking ‘Parmageddon’ pun on twitter 🙂
Italian football needs a strong Parma.
“This is an automatic response…”
Ya don’t say :irony:
You and the rest of the Scottish media!!!
(I complained about the sectarian chanting to BT sport)
_________________________________________________________________
This is an automatic response, please don’t reply to this address
Thanks for sharing your thoughts with us. We appreciate your feedback and we’ll share it with the BT Sport broadcast team.
Your reference number is XXXXX XXXXX. If you need to contact us again before we reply, please tell us your reference number.
Kind regards,
BT Sport Customer Support
TSFM says:
February 21, 2015 at 1:42 pm
—————————-
I agree with almost all of that. The abusive nature of singing and chanting though isn’t just a wind up. Some of it is , however some of it merely a reflection of the attitudes of those singing and chanting.
When Rangers fans chanted that Collymore was a b***k f****n b*****d , I doubt that winding him or anyone else up was the intention. It is a straighforward case of racism and the authorities have a duty to deal with it.
On the balance of probabilities seems to be the SFA’s judgement of choice. In this case the evidence is overwhelming . Yet nobody expects the SFA to act, and not only because the SPFL rules bizarrely fail to provide a definition of what is acceptable preventative action by clubs.
The clubs themselves are the problem here. All of them , including my own, have skirted around this issue. It is a hot potato that nobody wants to handle. This in turn just gives the racists and bigots the certainty that nothing will come of their criminal behaviour, either in charges against their club or if there is a large enough group of them against them as individuals.
TSFM made the valid point about football being the wrong platform for political songs . I wholeheartely agree with that. Would anyone in their right mind pay £30 to go to an Eagles concert and spend the night singing songs about the IRA or Irish independence ? Makes as little sense doing it at a football match.
The prognosis isn’t encouraging. The SFA and SPFL are led by individuals who don’t take the problem seriously, judging by their statements. The clubs are scared to put in tough rules on the basis that ” there but for the grace of god , it could be my club in the dock” and a lot of the media are far to scared of the financial consequences of condemning the behaviour as it deserves to be condemned.
That leaves the politicians . Their pathetic attempts to legislate has worsened the problem, and their failure in this has contributed to a dreadful perception of Scotland from those outside the country.
It really is a very depressing scenario
Collymore’s right and what he has done in his younger years has hee haw to do with his argument! A lot of ‘The People’ and fellow press are shooting the messenger not because of the argument but because of his history.
This site, RTC and Pauls’ blog introduced me to ‘Ad Hominem’. One of my favourite latin quotes ( Thanks Paul ).
MercDoc says:
February 21, 2015 at 11:54 pm
This site, RTC and Pauls’ blog introduced me to ‘Ad Hominem’. One of my favourite latin quotes ( Thanks Paul ).
—————————————————————-
“Tu quoque” = Whataboutery.
I prefer Whataboutery. 😀
I hear many blaming the SFA, SPFL and even politicians for failing to deal with the issue of sectarianism in football but I prefer to blame the clubs.
It has been pointed out that at the SFA agm in 2013 the clubs refused to entertain the notion of “strict liability”.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22853305
Strange that.
If Rangers, Celtic or any other club wants to rid itself of discriminatory chanting then it can be easily achieved.
Simply inform fans that if a group of them shame their club by indulging in discriminatory chants then their team will leave the pitch and forfeit the match.
Surely such an honourable, and dare I say dignified, stance would find favour with all “decent” fans?
Why blame the SFA/SPFL for the clubs’ unwillingness to properly address the issue?
(Edit)
Just saw this and, what the hell, thought I might add it as we discuss sectarianism in football…
http://i59.tinypic.com/j5w56p.jpg
I would hope all “decent” football fans would like to see us deal more kindly with each other.
PS: I’ve been drinking 😳
Where do I start?
I seldom post but when I do it’s only a topic I feel strongly about.
I would never use the term respect or approval toward the pieces of shi*t sometime described as Chelsea fans, who abused the man who tried to board the train in France – but at least when they chanted they were racist and proud, blah de blah de blah etc at least I can accept that this is their life philosophy and as such they have a right to express themselves.
I do not want to go near the James Forrest thingy about freedom of blah de blah de blah, but here’s the thing that gets to me!
We know what these Chelsea fans are on a day-to-day, month-to-month, lifetime-to-lifetime basis – quite openly racist in their outlook.
But consider the 90 minute wonders who were singing about being up to their knees in blah de blah de blah at Raith Rovers on Friday night and many many other games involving The Rangers! These people go back to their routine Monday to Friday jobs/lives – acting like normal people, your next door neighbour, the guy next to you at the bus stop, the guy with his family having a meal at the next table to you in a local restaurant, the guy your standing behind at the Post office,
If only they had the courage to be like the ‘Chelsea fans’ and openly admit what they do in their weekend visits to Ibrox or other venues.
These people are IMO much worse that the Chelsea supporters who quite openly describe themselves as racists.
Rant over
Big Pink says:
February 21, 2015 at 4:45 pm
neutralaxis says:
February 21, 2015 at 3:41 pm
_______________________________________
Much of the rest of it never bothered me at all. My dad used to get pissed off with it, and I used to wonder why he got so incensed. Strangely, the older I got, the wiser the old man appeared to be 🙂
==================================================================================
BP…likewise with my old man (RIP), when I was growing up, these “songs” used to make him cringe…!
Also on another similarity, I never ceased to be amazed that as I was progressing through the various stages of the Scottish education system and gaining all sorts of academic “plaudits”, I noticed that he continued to grow in wisdom, the depths of which I still struggle to fathom…I think he must have been going to night school classes in many subjects….!….. 😳 😳 😳 😳 😳
RayCharlez says:
February 22, 2015 at 1:27 am
I hear many blaming the SFA, SPFL and even politicians for failing to deal with the issue of sectarianism in football but I prefer to blame the clubs…
———
Good point @Ray, also mentioned on both SSB & BBC. I don’t know the nuts and bolts of that vote (maybe someone does?) and if the possible sanctions were part if a bigger package. If it was a straight rejection of the single issue then it would good to have a breakdown of which clubs voted for/against. No reason for that to be yet another secret. Name and shame. If it’s good enough for UEFA it should be good enough for the SFA/SPFL.
RayCharlez Feb 22 2015 at 1:27 am
Ray, I hope you raised a glass to the late Mr Sagan.His words show that we are but an insignificant little rock in the cosmos.Makes all the earthly goings on seem superfluous.
I must admit to being tired of the singing debate. However, as TSFM is allowing it, here is my view. I don’t think it would be fair to dock clubs points, but I would not be against sections of grounds being closed for games, or even entire grounds, but it would have to be for genuine sectarian or racist offences.
It’s all getting very messy though. Whether or not people believe the Irish National Anthem has a place in a Scottish football ground is up to them, but for it to be compared to some of the bile we hear is ludicrous. I heard part of Radio Clyde last night and it was nothing other than an attempt to even up the massive problem that exists within the Rangers support. I do hope the Irish Government people in the UK demand an apology from that station, especially for the unchallenged statement from a caller that Hibs fans were ‘waving the IRA flag’ at Rangers fans two weeks ago. Since when did the Irish Tricolour become the IRA flag?
By all means we need to clean up some of the bile in football grounds, but the problem has to be properly faced up to before it can be addressed. As long as the media are determined to paint one side as equally bad as the other no progress will ever be made. Likewise we can do without the moral high ground from some other groups of fans. Songs towards Celtic about Jimmy Saville and the actions of a former Celtic Boys Club official are not okay in any civilised society.
My first scarey experience of sectarianism as a ten year old Celtic fan came from adult Kilmarnock supporters outside Rugby Park. It’s worth remembering the tentacles of sectarianism in Scotland can stretch throughout many different groups of people.
Bigsbee, the guy who shoved the man off the train is outed today as an ex RUC officer who after losing his job got involved with the world human rights Org. and is in this video https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NtxwBE5fmGg
His actions on Wednesday do not tie in with the idea that he is an in your face racist 24-7
RayCharlez says:
February 22, 2015 at 1:27 am
I hear many blaming the SFA, SPFL and even politicians for failing to deal with the issue of sectarianism in football but I prefer to blame the clubs.
=====================================
Ray, according to the ‘Hootsman’ 2 out of 5 Scottish people in a recent survey are blaming the schools! No prizes for guessing which ones.
Just when we hoped we were turning the corner…….
upthehoops says:
February 22, 2015 at 8:29 am
I must admit to being tired of the singing debate. However, as TSFM is allowing it, here is my view. I don’t think it would be fair to dock clubs points, but I would not be against sections of grounds being closed for games, or even entire grounds, but it would have to be for genuine sectarian or racist offences…
———-
Exactly.
Whether people need to sing GStQ or any other anthem is beside the point. Why they would even want to at Scottish football is another matter. This is a much more specific issue that doesn’t need other topics mixed in. Hasn’t Stan Collymore done a magnificent job in getting it discussed in the media.
The whole thing reminds me of why I switched off to Glasgow and Scottish football in my early teens. Mind you, back then it was fuelled by booze. Just as well no one wants to re-introduce that :irony:
Danish Pastry says:
February 22, 2015 at 9:22 am
Exactly.
Whether people need to sing GStQ or any other anthem is beside the point.
===================================
Indeed DP. I find it quite worrying that whenever this debate raises its head so many people want to include songs that are not illegal in any way, shape or form. People are entitled to question their relevance at a football match but the demands to make it an offence to sing them smack of prejudice in itself in my opinion.
upthehoops says:
February 22, 2015 at 8:29 am
My first scarey experience of sectarianism as a ten year old Celtic fan came from adult Kilmarnock supporters outside Rugby Park. It’s worth remembering the tentacles of sectarianism in Scotland can stretch throughout many different groups of people.
————————————————————————
UTH, I shall not enter into the ‘debate’ regarding the various ‘songsheets’. As a Killie supporter, I am sorry that your first apparent experience of fitba’ sectarianism occurred at Rugby Park. However, at least you got to Rugby Park to support your team. My parents, and grandparents, would not let me attend any matches at Rugby Park which involved either of the big two teams from Glasgow. I leave it to your imagination as to why that would be. Needless to say, there was no chance at all regarding away games. I finally got to Ibrox when I was 14, to see Killie win 3-2 in about 1960.
I should also mention a particular issue regarding the Killie supporters’ songbook. It is in the way of a ‘possible’ misconception by Celtic supporters. When Killie supporters apparently sing, ‘The Billy Boys’, to a chorus of boos from the Celtic end, the words used are, “Hello, Hello, we are the Killie Boys….” The song (which to be fair, does mention a certain amount of blood!)goes on to refer disparagingly to another team in Ayrshire from a much lower league. However, it does not refer to a 17th century conflict or religion in any form whatsoever.
As a wee boy, I happily warbled this song in support of my team and had no idea of the implications of the original piece. I wasn’t even aware of the original song (because I never got to any games at which it might have been sung!)
I’ve always wondered if most Celtic supporters are aware of this. Maybe they are, but boo anyway due to the original song from which the Killie version came.
I’d be interested to hear any comments from Hoops supporters on this issue.
Although I live in England, and cannot get to most home games, I do get to quite a few away games. I can quite truthfully say that, at least in the last twenty years or so, I have never heard anything remotely sectarian from a Kilmarnock crowd. We have been too busy lambasting the Chairman, Board, Manager, referee, team, pitch, dastardly opponents, weather, etc., (not necessarily in that order)to bother about other issues.
essexbeancounter says:
February 22, 2015 at 7:44 am
Big Pink says:
February 21, 2015 at 4:45 pm
neutralaxis says:
February 21, 2015 at 3:41 pm
———————————————-
Or, as Mark Twain said:
“When I was a boy of 14, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be 21, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years.”
yakutsuki says:
February 22, 2015 at 9:02 am
Just when we hoped we were turning the corner…….
———————————————————–
I tend to view dealing with sectarianism in all its manifestations as a totally straight road without ‘corners’ but you have to avoid the many distracting cul-de-sacs which have been intentionally constructed along the way.
In my lifetime we’ve managed to travel a helluva long way down the road but that irritating trick of perspective remains – where the road seems to narrow and threatens to bar further progress.
But those travelling on the road understand that there’s no actual vanishing point and the road will always be open to those who wish to travel it.
In any society, down the ages, when those who held sway are ousted by a more populist movement there is often a last stand by those holding power. They might manage to extend their grip a bit longer but their time of power and influence is usually fast ebbing.
I look at the plight Rangers is in and it comes as no surprise that a significant percentage of what’s left of their support is desperately clinging to the old ways in a search for comfort and reassurance that the culture that is integral to their support of Rangers will prevail.
Most other people including sane Rangers supporters know that it won’t and that not just Scotland but the UK has moved on. For me it’s not that my time has come but more that their’s is ending through a mixture of demographics and simply a steadily more inclusive society.
And anyone that doesn’t realise the massive churn in the composition of the Rangers support makes a big mistake in including many Bears – currently passive and disengaged with sectarian singers – who find less and less relevance with the old ways.
Indeed the recent outbreaks of singing might finally force the Scottish Government to act and deal with the fading remnants of a culture which many Scots don’t accept and many others fail to see any relevance in.
However we must all remember that this road I discuss is a two-way street and it would be remiss not to state that there are elements in my club support whose actions and songs I also find abhorrent.
And if you still have a problem with perspective then it’s worth remembering that perspective is very much a cultural manifestation. If you look at Chinese paintings then the higher an object is the further away it is.
Also in cultures where fishing is carried out by spearing then the fisher doesn’t aim at where the fish appears to be using his eyes because his brain corrects the refraction angle created by the water and the spear is launched to a spot where the fish doesn’t appear to be but actually is.
OK off now to watch the game and it’ll feel really weird after Thursday night which I’m still buzzing over.
Meanwhile, back at fortress Ibrox, the sleepy Three Bears are shaking off the effects of their winter hibernation, and looking to sink their claws into Barry Leach for some comments he is alleged to have made in confidence, but were then immediately rebroadcast by his confidant.
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/three-bears-want-rangers-finance-chief-axed-1-3697809
That seems inaccurate to me, to put it kindly. Leach asked in advance that the remarks not be minuted. And there are no agreed minutes- just one side’s version of events at a meeting. But who cares about accuracy or even truth. As in all matters, the Rangers Way” appears to consist of finger pointing, together with making stuff up. If only I could aspire to such heights of dignity.
If I was Leach, by the way, the Three Bears would be hearing from Uncle Mike’s lawyers first thing in the morning.
Have I got this right?
The SG introduced a law banning offensive singing at football matches The bill was treated as a political football and got negligible if any support from opposition parties
Since the introduction of this Scottish legislation
An overwhelming number of Scots polled claim to be in favour of this law
The SFA and Police have demonstrated they will not enforce it
Its repeal is now a Westminster election issue for one of the opposition parties
What to do?
If there is another incident that can be visibly proven by TV evidence that produces no action by the Police the SG minister responsible for Law enforcement gets fired
Longer Term
One of the parties should propose legislation post the 2016 election to tax the SFA pro rata to the number of future incidents
essexbeancounter says:
February 22, 2015 at 7:44 am
Big Pink says:
February 21, 2015 at 4:45 pm
_______________________________________
Much of the rest of it never bothered me at all. My dad used to get pissed off with it, and I used to wonder why he got so incensed. Strangely, the older I got, the wiser the old man appeared to be 🙂
==================================================================================
BP…likewise with my old man (RIP), when I was growing up, these “songs” used to make him cringe…!
Also on another similarity, I never ceased to be amazed that as I was progressing through the various stages of the Scottish education system and gaining all sorts of academic “plaudits”, I noticed that he continued to grow in wisdom, the depths of which I still struggle to fathom…I think he must have been going to night school classes in many subjects….!….. 😳 😳 😳 😳 😳
—————————————————————-
yes ebc. I live in hope that the next generation will experience the same phenomenon – quickly! 🙂
Allyjambo says:
February 21, 2015 at 11:43 am
My complaint to BT.
“I subscribe to BT Sport.
Last night I watched the Raith Rovers v Rangers football match on BT Sport. On a number of occasions offensive songs, banned by the Scottish Government, and therefor illegal, were clearly audible on your broadcast. Although I am not one of the targets of those songs, ie I am neither Catholic nor Irish (nor do I support Celtic), I do find them offensive and know, as a fact, that they do incite violence.
==========================
Your latter point reminds me of an article I wrote in the days that The Famine Song was the subject of debate. It was aimed at the Celtic support but I think it crosses all club divides.
I’d prefer that football would leave all its non football baggage at the turnstile on its way in to a game but as that for some is to lose their identity (or perhaps more accurately what they identify with) I think that a forlorn hope. So on a pragmatic basis ( I know its not a word in the football lexicon or it would be close season today) I offer the following with a post script.
How To Tell if a Song is Sectarian.
Every now and then a songs debate flares up in Celtic Cyberspace and the one thing you can be sure of is no agreement will emerge. This will always be so unless there is a set of criteria to go by.
Examining The Billy Boys offers one set of criteria for a sectarian song in that the words “up to our knees in Fenian blood” offers violence to a person of an identifiable religious faith either directly or in this case by inference, fenian = Catholic. (see post script)
If you take the Soldiers Song or The Fields that are deemed acceptable by Celtic if I understand it correctly. The thing about these songs is that they are “inward aimed” or “centred on self” celebrating that sense of self.
Sectarianism is defined as ” bigotry, discrimination, prejudice or hatred arising from attaching importance to perceived differences between subdivisions within a group, such as between different denominations of a religion or the factions of a political movement.
The key words are sub divisions WITHIN a group. The group involved with The Fields or Soldiers is a single group where no intolerant sub division exists on this matter.
For a song to be sectarian it has to project OUTWARD from that group ideas or beliefs that the group wish to impose on others or to express distaste or hatred for those OUTSIDE the group.
The key words are inward celebration and outward projection. The first cannot by definition be sectarian but the latter depending on the words can.
So why not use those criteria to at least draw a line?
Now on what is objectionable to others: songs that are inward celebrating might cause offence to others but they are the ones taking offence, it is not being offered to or aimed at them. It is something intolerant in them that sparks the offence taken. If beauty is in the eye of the beholder, why not offence?
We as Celtic supporters are not responsible if others take offence at our songs of inward celebration. It is only when outward projection as in say add ons occurs that sectarianism might apply.
These criteria would apply to Rangers songs as well as our own where they too have songs of inward celebration.
This debate has been going on for ever. You would think someone would have penned official criteria from usage by now to give guidance to supporters.
Note criteria is NOT a song list. Folk can use the criteria to look at what they sing and maybe think about why they are singing what they are. Inward celebration of belief/faith/culture/tradition or outward projection of those things on to others?
Question the motivation, using the criteria, not the words.
Post Script
This report
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/spl/aberdeen/uefa-fine-and-warn-rangers-over-sectarian-singing-by-fans-governing-body-throws-out-original-not-guilty-verdict-1.19519
shows why UEFA came down hard on The Billy Boys in 2006 and should be part of the SPFL investigation on The Billy Boys. It is not because it is offensive (although it is) but it is threatening and that in my opinion is why it must be challenged and defeated or anarchy reigns in our game where threats seem to be the knee jerk response to a reasonable request to behave.
Although as an atheist I reckon we would be better off with no religion in schools . . the “blame the schools” arguement really is spurious .. .
Schools DO NOT have a “marching season” . . .it IS NOT schoolkids who will pollute our streets howling their hymns of hate and flying their banners of bigotry come summer . .
The arguement appears to be that if catholics would just cease being catholics then bigots would stop being bigoted against catholics !
Respect is due to Mr.Collymore for highlighting the close affinity between rangers and chelsea fans world view. .
One thing that particularily saddens me is that the small element in the celtic support who regularily provide ammunition to the “equivalence arguement” will pass up another great opportunity to unilaterally remove the the more suspect stuff from the parkhead songbook . . . and leave the spotlight fimly fixed on the main heart of the problem. .
With regards to this discussion concerning whether or not booze should be allowed back into football grounds, I do not remember booze ever being sold at any football ground I visited in my youth, pre 1980/1 when the alcohol ban came into effect. I know there was loads of booze carried in for consumption during the game, but I do not remember ever seeing any for sale within the stadia, well, certainly not the parts of the grounds that I frequented. Actually, I recall seeing very few outlets for refreshments at all, except the occasional pie stand or the bloke going around selling macaroon bars and spearmint chewing gum, as well as a few stale bread rolls and cheese. So, where was this booze on sale? Surely my powers of recall have not diminished that much?
I think the schools issue is one which is above the TSFM pay grade to be honest. It is also a much wider debate than in the context of sectarianism. There are issues concerning career opportunities, funding, logistics and demographics – all of which require a pragmatic as opposed to an idealistic solution, and are in my view more important than the obvious one.
I who was educated in a Catholic school, and subsequently taught in Catholic schools, although I now teach in a non-denominational school. If we accept the idea that Catholic schools (or faith schools in general for that matter) cause division, then perhaps we should look at churches, political parties, and football clubs as well. Maybe we should all go to the same church (atheists too – we don’t want arguments starting over that!), join the Conservative Party (anything else encourages factionalism), support Partick Thistle (first one I thought of), and buy Paloma Faith records.
Diversity should not be conflated with division, but doing so provides an easy scapegoat to target, and the temptation to go down the path of least intellectual resistance is often irresistible.
That said, given some of the issues I mentioned above, I would prefer to see them disappear. Like all religious based arguments though, the rush to blame and take offence makes it such a difficult one. Some outside the box thinking is required by those who are panned hard left and right on these arguments.
robbyp
You are correct. Alcohol was never on sale at football grounds. Pies, Bovril chewing gum and macaroon bars only 🙂
bigsbee says:
February 22, 2015 at 2:40 am
I would never use the term respect or approval toward the pieces of shi*t sometime described as Chelsea fans, who abused the man who tried to board the train in France – but at least when they chanted they were racist and proud, blah de blah de blah etc at least I can accept that this is their life philosophy and as such they have a right to express themselves.
I do not want to go near the James Forrest thingy about freedom of blah de blah de blah, but here’s the thing that gets to me!
We know what these Chelsea fans are on a day-to-day, month-to-month, lifetime-to-lifetime basis – quite openly racist in their outlook.
But consider the 90 minute wonders who were singing about being up to their knees in blah de blah de blah at Raith Rovers on Friday night and many many other games involving The Rangers! These people go back to their routine Monday to Friday jobs/lives – acting like normal people, your next door neighbour, the guy next to you at the bus stop, the guy with his family having a meal at the next table to you in a local restaurant, the guy your standing behind at the Post office,
If only they had the courage to be like the ‘Chelsea fans’ and openly admit what they do in their weekend visits to Ibrox or other venues.
These people are IMO much worse that the Chelsea supporters who quite openly describe themselves as racists.
Rant over
—————————————————————————–
I am sure you didn’t intend to convey the impression that all Chelsea fans are racist. In the 70s and 80s, people like Mickey Duggan, assisted by players including (bless him) Pat Nevin made a concerted and significantly successful effort to disassociate the club from the racist types who had attached themselves to it.
Of course there is still a problem, but Chelsea is by no means a rallying point for racists (in contrast to what happens in Scotland), nor are their fans a homogeneous body.
On the wider point I think I see what you are saying, but my take is that the reason the guy next to you at the Post Office doesn’t proclaim his sectarianism openly is that societal pressures force him not to. In other words he knows he is wrong. By contrast, those societal levers are absent at football matches (largely because in my view the clubs monetise the sectarianism and have little interest in dealing with it), which allows the belief system which accompanies sectarian behaviour to survive.
When people are openly racist or sectarian (like in Paris), when they don’t need a rallying point of a football club to spout their nonsense, I think the problem becomes much more difficult to deal with. Football can’t be blamed for the racism of a few travelling football fans, but the Scottish football business model is in my view the major reason why sectarianism in Scotland still flourishes.
I think the Scottish clubs have it in their power to make sectarianism as unacceptable at football grounds as it is in the Post Office queue. But they won’t.
GoosyGoosy says:
February 22, 2015 at 11:49 am
Have I got this right?
The SG introduced a law banning offensive singing at football matches The bill was treated as a political football and got negligible if any support from opposition parties
Since the introduction of this Scottish legislation
An overwhelming number of Scots polled claim to be in favour of this law
The SFA and Police have demonstrated they will not enforce it
Its repeal is now a Westminster election issue for one of the opposition parties
What to do?
If there is another incident that can be visibly proven by TV evidence that produces no action by the Police the SG minister responsible for Law enforcement gets fired
Longer Term
One of the parties should propose legislation post the 2016 election to tax the SFA pro rata to the number of future incidents
_______________________________________________
Its a little bit more complicated than that.
No party is arguing that sectarian chanting is a good thing. No one is arguing that it should be tolerated.
But one party is arguing that the act as written is so deeply flawed as to fail to achieve its stated aims (which enjoy near universal cross party support) while similarly having adverse unintended consequences (such as potential abuses – e.g. Kettling of (on the balance of probability) innocent Celtic fans).
It is possible to support the ethos of what the act is trying to achieve whilst opposing the specific manner of its implementation… which many see as cack handed.
It can be argued that the offensive acts observed last weekend violate existing equality laws in place before the OBAF act, making the act superfluous – except insofar as its downsides are concerned.
It can also be argued the act fails to achieve its stated aims – manifestly in my view (and predictably also!) – by merely addressing the tip of the iceberg and failing to define adequately what is and is not covered. (Is sectarian chanting OK when not wearing football colours then???)
It can be argued that those existing laws on equality could have been strengthened or improved in totality, or even simply enforced – without making the issue specific to football, to address wider issues in society. This is a reasonable and cogent argument.
In short – salient arguments can be made that there are better ways of addressing sectarianism both in football and in wider society than the specific draft of the OBAF as enacted – which probably serves as a distraction tbh.
My view is they did half a job, and the OBAF was more a piece of ‘party political’ window dressing and about being seen to do something decisively – than really trying to seriously and intelligently address the problems underpinning divisions in scottish society. I think a cross party approach would have created something both better and more effective, in terms of policy which may or may not have necessitated legislation. And I think such a thing is possible.
What we have instead – imo- is flawed legislation and an absence of policy.
The problem will remain so long as this stays the case.
Credit where it is due. It is good that the OBAF brought the issue to the fore.
But it was half cocked and cack handed, I think. We can do better than what we have.
Resin_lab_dog says:
February 22, 2015 at 2:21 pm
________________________________
A wee bit in awe of that RLD. A wonderful insight into OBAF and a compelling argument for another look at the situation by the Scottish government.
There is absolutely no shortage of goodwill across the country for its aims, so a consensus on how to get there should not be so difficult to achieve.
resin_lab_dog says @ 2.21pm:
“…..we can do better than what we have.”
………………….
And indeed we can.
Because we already simply do not tolerate anyone having a go at the adherents of any religious faith.No one dares to stand in a British street and make a mockery of Sikhism, or Islamism, or Judaism, or Presbyterianism, or Anglicanism, or Naturism, or Quakerism, or any religion whatsoever, even if they privately may think the tenets of these religions may, in their view, be philosophically or theologically unsound or unbelieveable.
It is inconceivable, utterly inconceivable, that any of us would sing ” ..up to our knees in Sikh..or Muslim… or Quaker… or Anglican… or Jewish
….blood” in the expectation that the civic authorities and the Media would not make an issueof it, and that our collars may be felt.
It ought not to be that singing about being “up to our knees in Fenian blood” should somehow appear to be permissible, or of lesser importance as a crime or as acceptable discrimination.
Dont post much but read a lot…apologies if this doesnt make sense!
Stan…the singing et al..where to start?
For me, and many others i suspect, its endemic to society. Here, it 1st happened to me at 11 on my way home from school (spat upon)…then work.. (‘howcome u managed to get a job…ur a Tim?’-said in jest but the undertone became apparent later)…and has ALWAYS been there…that undertone…
now in recent years we HAVE improved..no doubt we have…but the Stan situation and both the response. ..and lack of response…has blacked out ALL the improvement. ..FOREVER. ..its not whataboutery thats responsible. .its not ‘ah well…those louts in the West of Scotland’…its everywhere…its in the Eng-ur-lund crowd…its deep in society within politics and The City…its in Councils…its everywhere. So, what do you do about it?
Firstly, you back Stan. Like him or loathe him, HE IS 100% correct. Next, the football authorities take a zero tolerance approach. No excuses, no ah buts. You either kill it, now, stone dead (and hitting the clubs IS THE ONLY WAY) or we go back to employing peoole by asking them which school they went to.
Lastly, the media must support, no, in fact, endorse, the stance taken. Any attempt to do otherwise should be roundly condemned. Hurt them in their pockets too. Do that and the speed by which they will ‘come around’ will be atonishing.
And what about the Police in all of this? Start arresting people-by the handfull to get the message across. Now that they know the songs and words it isnt difficult.
Will any or all of this happen? Nope…not one…and that is to our undying shame.
And thats why all that has been done has been for nothing.
For all that Martin Luther King, and those who believed his values were theirs (and vice versa), managed to do, racism is still alive n well in the USA. Do we think we can do better? Up to us…..
Apologies for rant…
I was at Chelsea v Burnley yesterday for pretty random reasons (friend of a friend with a spare season ticket seat, £40). I’d never been to Stamford Bridge before and given the general cultural chat about Chelsea supporters I was steeled for some irritation, at best. I was in the Matthew Harding Stand, around eight rows from the front, and in the lead-up, during the game, and afterwards, everyone was pretty well behaved. Even when Burnley equalised and Chelsea (by then with ten men) struggled to score again, the most vehement comments from the crowd were against the referee, also from a couple of Scottish guys behind me who urged someone in a blue shirt to ‘stick the ****ing heid oan him’ with reference to a Burnley player. This was all late on when home frustrations were high (especially since Man City then went and stuck five past Newcastle).
Overt racism? I didn’t see any which doesn’t mean it didn’t exist, just that in the couple of hours I was in the locale and the ground, I didn’t witness it. The crowd was not uniformily white, although proportionately there were far more black Chelsea staff (all sporting ‘Support Chelsea, Support Equality’ stickers on their jackets) than black Chelsea fans.
Some time ago, this game had been designated as the club’s Game For Equality. Quoting from the club website: “This weekend, we celebrate the club’s diversity and inclusion work at our second annual Game for Equality.
“We will join forces with Kick It Out, Football v Homophobia, Show Racism the Red Card, the Premier League and The Football Association to underline our commitment to tackling discrimination in all forms, while promoting equality throughout the club, our communities and our supporters.
“It is an initiative which falls under our Building Bridges campaign and is fully supported by the first-team squad, who will wear the logo on their kit during Saturday’s Premier League match against Burnley.”
Obviously you don’t set up something like this in five minutes so its scheduling, days after the Paris racism incident, was actually coincidental. All electronic perimeter advertising – those flickering screens – carried ads relevant to the day’s theme.
Unlike my experience of football in Glasgow, I saw no one – or noticed no one – drinking carryouts in the street, or ****ing up a close. Frankly around that area of London I suspect the Met would be down on you like a metric tonne of bricks should you try and pee in the doorway of Roche Bobois of Paris in the Fulham Road.
Local pubs had loads of drinkers outside though and you could buy beer in the ground itself until ten minutes before kick-off.
What I mostly took away from the match was:
• London’s a strange old place and sometimes you have to dig down into something as established as football to remind yourself that the English working class still exists in some sense
• Players like Diego Costa and Eden Hazard are seriously world class and it was a joy – albeit forty quid’s worth of joy – to see them at close quarters attacking the Burnley goal in the second half
• When discussing issues like the equivalence of Rangers and Chelsea fans, there’s no substitute for going and checking things out yourself
• No I didn’t see the tackle that made Matic react and get a straight red but it was pretty heinous (saw it on the internet later)
• Being at Stamford Bridge allowed a real sense of top flight English football as an industry of some heft. There were over 41,000 at Stamford Bridge yesterday, over 45,000 at Man City, nearly 41,000 at Sunderland; nearly 36,000 at Spurs today. Crowds at Arsenal and Old Trafford are bigger. The scale of the enterprise as a whole is staggering if you haven’t thought about it for a while.
Anyway… Generally I’d feel safer at Chelsea than at Rangers going on yesterday’s experience.
This is makes its point very neatly
https://twitter.com/borderman67/status/569497096748974082
Edit:
Apologies if the video link won’t work – I’ll try to find another link to it!
This is very neatly done
http://www.channel4.com/news/this-how-west-ham-fans-are-standing-up-to-racism
Haywire says:
February 22, 2015 at 10:24 am
————————————–
Perhaps I should clarify that I was not insinuating Killie have a sectarian problem among their support, because they don’t. The incident I refer to happened in 1972 and I was pointing out an experience which showed me as a youngster that sectarianism issues spread wider than just two clubs.
Couple of observations on the current sectarianism/racism issues from Englandshire.
Firstly regarding the ‘it’s the schools fault’ brigade, England has faith schools of all religions and doesn’t have the sort of sectarian issues which are far too prevalent in Scotland.
Secondly regarding the Chelsea racist fans, they have been condemned by the club, by their own fans and by the media without exception……….no-one and I mean no-one, to my knowledge, has retorted with ‘yeah but not all Chelsea fans are racist’ or with ‘ok but what about west ham/spurs etc’. They seem to able to criticise and express disgust for the incident on it’s own merits (lack of!)
Compare that to how our utterly pathetic SMSM – yes we know you lurk here – are incapable of treating and condemning Rangers bigots in isolation.
While the Rangers fans were going through their usual repertoire of bile at Starks Park on Friday night, the home fans sang the following:-
I’m Geordie Munro, my home is in Fife,
I wanted to make a new start in my life,
I was ready to fly to the U-S of A,
But a certain wee lassie would say
Chorus
Oh no no no nooooooo,
Geordie Munro.
Oh no no no ma wee laddie,
I don’t want tae go,
Tae Idaho,
I’d rather stay home in Kirkcaldy.
No sectarianism, no up to their knees in Fenian blood, no Billy Boys, no goading opposition fans.
Just a simple little ditty extolling the virtues of their home town.
What would you and your kids prefer to listen to?
Now, come on Hoops guys, I’m still waiting for some response on the ‘Killie Boys’ issue. Very little so far.
What do you think the Killie fans are singing?
http://twohundredpercent.net/?p=26808
Imagine the scene. A leading club, one of England’s best-supported, reaches the FA Cup semi-final at Wembley against a long-standing, bitter rival in a match televised live by the BBC. From an early stage, they look a distant second best and long before half-time they are a demonstrably beaten side. Their fans know this. And there seems little point in trying to urge their team on. Instead, they begin to sing “Pakis go home” alongside chants glorifying the bloody murder of Muslims. The songs are audible to the nationwide audience.
Auldheid says:
February 22, 2015 at 12:26 pm
I very seldom disagree with anything you write but I don’t accept your arguments as being persuasive in this case.
You state:
I’m not sure where the sectarianism definition is taken from however I think ‘The Soldiers Song’ is a poor example to base your argument on. Firstly any National Anthem by definition must be or should be an outward celebration to the world representing a Nation IMO.
However wrt ‘The Soldiers’ it all depends whether we are dealing with all of the words of the song or simply the chorus which, if my understanding is correct, is what actually consists of the national anthem of the Irish Republic. In my experience most Celtic supporters sing more than the chorus as I did when I was younger.
The problem with ‘The Soldiers’ in your interpretation of the definition is that history doesn’t actually support your viewpoint.There were various differences of opinion in the Irish Republic over ‘The Soldiers’ which most certainiy wasn’t 100% accepted by the ‘group’ and indeed was rejected by a section of it. I have no wish to become embroiled in the nitty gritty but the history is clear and there to be viewed.
There is also the problem that exists if you move away from the chorus to the verses of ‘The Soldier’ and I find it difficult to accept that the line: ‘Out yonder waits the Saxon foe’ can be regarded as an ‘inward celebration’. Indeed IMO it is an ‘outward projection’ of Irish people intending to be up to their knees in Saxon Blood.
As to ‘The Fields’ it’s a nice wee romanticised and modern version of the actual horror of starvation that many Protestants and Catholics faced in their Homeland and caused them to emigrate during the Potato Famines. Similar horrors exist to this day but to regard them as ‘inward celebrations’ is a curious term IMO.
They should be projected worldwide where day and daily the same famines, war and natural disasters are still happening. The big difference is that the ‘outward projection’ created by the internet and social media means that donations can be raised to alleviate the effects. Perhaps one day similar songs such as ‘The Fields’ can be written and sung in devastated countries but I think that will take some time.
As to ‘The Fields’ is there anything objectionable? Well possibly to some in: ‘Against the Famine and the Crown: I rebelled they ran me down’. If ‘Landlord’ was swapped for ‘Crown’ then there’s nothing to moan about but would we – as Celtic supporters – be prepared to alter what we sing?. However I often sing ‘The Fields’ because it’s a nice song which creates a warm fuzzy feeling for most. However it’s has no real importance for me in the history of my race and the social, religious and economic pressures that created it.
For the easily offended there’s more offence IMO in GSTQ and Flower of Scotland although adherents might well argue it didn’t matter because these were anthems of ‘Inward celebration’.
Just for the record: I used to sing The Soldier Song – chorus and verses at Parkhead till about 20 years ago and I still do in my sadly infrequent visits to the Republic as all us old ones die. These days at Parkead I listen to the Green Brigade sing ‘The Soldiers’ and I feel the stirring but I have no wish to join in and I’m pleased to say it would appear neither does anyone else in the crowd.
It’s changed days and part of the process of us totally becoming a Scottish Club in reality although I hope that there will always be a place for our Irish Heritage which is free from bigotry and sectarianism.
We must look at our song book from time to time and check whether anything is inappropriate for the modern age which requires to be changed. It’s part of looking forward and outward and not looking inward and being a prisoner of the past and being complacently happy with that approach which ignores all other sections of Scottish Society.
Indeed it’s not a million miles away from: Nobody likes us or agrees with us but we don’t care!
With regard to the upcoming EGM; would it be possible for a few million new share options to suddenly appear on the scene which will sway the day?
We know this was one of the reasons that the city refused to buy new shares because they simply did not know what percentage of the business they were buying.
With King, The Three Bears, and the supporters it looks as if they have enough votes to secure boardroom change.
This narrows the options for Mike Ashley. He may wish to burn through the extra £5M and leave the pot empty, but with plenty of signed contracts for services extending into the future, when the new board arrive.
He may refuse to lend the further £5M which leaves a lack of funds for February’s wages. Will this allow the board to put the business into administration which in turn makes promotion an impossibility.
Ultimately this business is not sustainable in its current format. It losses money hand over fist. The only way it can be competitive is to massively front load debt and if the success does not immediately arrive what is the backup plan?
Most fans want a competitive league. We currently have a competitive league. What we do not need is for any club to arrive and skew an already fragile financial football model solely to allow them to feel good about themselves.
As for the goings on the other night. The media do not report it. The footballing authorities ignore it unless they can bring another team into the equation to give it some balance. The government pass legislation that is not enforced when more than 100 people are involved. Collectively they have done this, and little else, all of my adult life but when the issue is highlighted by someone south of the border then there is a brief reaction. Let’s be honest that is all it will be.
Is it really any wonder our sport cannot find a sponsor?
Who really would wish their product/company to be associated with such a grotesque spectacle.
From Stan Collymore on Twitter
“@StanCollymore: Scottish journalists are letting you down.
Happy to ignore,deflect and maintain a bilious status quo.
Imagine life without Sectarianism.”
Amen.
This weekend’s football reminds me of the importance of the “brand”.
On Thursday we saw a sold-out Celtic Park, bouncing with enthusiasm for the sport, which I think many would regard as a fantastic advert for the sport. Just to be clear, I was one such observer in the stadium and loved every minute of the spectacle – well, maybe not three of them, but I was enthralled and enthused and left the stadium gasping for more.
Move on to Friday where we actually went back in time with a disgraceful advert for Rangers and, to a lesser extent, Scotland. I sat watching with friends from England and felt embarrassed despite the fact they knew I was not a Rangers fan. I am, however, a Scot, and my embarrassment was 100% genuine.
If I was Ashley, or any other potential investor, I would see Friday as somewhat of a Ratner moment for those of us old enough to remember him calling his own stuff cr*p and recall where his business went thereafter……from tycoon to nothing in a few short months. Rangers are not far from being an equal to Ratners, IMHO.
Amazingly the SMSM choose to ignore this as far as they can or, according to some here, and involve themselves in whatabouterry rather facing up to the true scandal of this “Ratner ” moment.
I guess some things really never change and that, in itself, is the most desperately sad aspect of these two evenings and the reaction thereafter from the media.
Shame on them. I actually despair about this and struggle to see a road to recovery for Rangers when, it appears, nobody will call them to account or, when they do like Stan Collymore, their employers desert them in favour/fear of the Rangers fanatics, because for sure they are not true fans as we know the term. Most of the decent Rangers fans I know have long since stopped going to Ibrox and, for the management allowing to happen on their watch, is not far from a sporting scandal.
Shame on them; shame on the media, and especially BT, but well spoken, Stan Collymore.
justshatered says:
February 22, 2015 at 9:16 pm
Ultimately this business is not sustainable in its current format. It losses money hand over fist. The only way it can be competitive is to massively front load debt and if the success does not immediately arrive what is the backup plan?
=========================
The fact that the business at Ibrox is unsustainable has been obvious from day one. I am sure I could find posts on this forum going all the way back to August 2012 pointing that out. Which, of course, begs the question- why did the infamous 5WA not include a sustainable business model as a key condition for the transfer of membership? With expulsion the sanction for any undertakings broken?
The answer is, of course, that the “authorities” did not want any team from Ibrox to be run sustainably. They wanted any “Rangers” to spend their way through the diddy leagues in the shortest time possible, with the aim of ensuring a rapid return of the “natural order”. Shamefully,(and in my opinion stupidly) all 41 other clubs have gone along with this lunacy.
I get the feeling that the “authorities” are now gobsmacked that nobody except Uncle Mike has actually shoved any real money in yet. And of course naughty Uncle Mike actually wants security for his loans, which makes him a very very bad man. Compare and contrast with Dave King, who has yet to contribute one thin dime towards keeping the lights on, but who has acquired saintly status by not taking any security for his non-existent loans. Genius. You couldn’t make this stuff up.
The ordinary bears are lining themselves up for another, even more painful fleecing by backing King, because the ordinary bears are the only source of the money required, first to pay off Ashley, and then to pay the bills. The City won’t touch this with a 50 foot bargepole this time round.
I reckon that at least £30m is required, just to pay off Ashley and stagger on through next season. To compete effectively in the top league, make that £50/60 million. History tells us that the fans simply can’t put up that sort of money.So what’s the plan?
In my opinion, King has no real plan beyond getting himself into the chairman’s seat in the Blue Room. After that, he will return to South Africa, and blame Paul Murray from afar for the ensuing disaster. But King is what the bears really really want. I just can’t work out why.
Haywire says:
February 22, 2015 at 8:21 pm
_________________________________________
Now, come on Hoops guys, I’m still waiting for some response on the ‘Killie Boys’ issue. Very little so far.
What do you think the Killie fans are singing?
______________________________________________________
I always thought they were singing “The Killie Bhoys” 🙂
Seriously though there are a few sets of fans who have versions of Marching Through Georgia . I thought that they would sing something along the lines “for it’s a Killie old team to play for” when Rangers came to town.
Just Hughie Sproat syndrome in fact.
Sproat was a Motherwell goalie in the late 70s and early 80s who used to wear a bright orange jersey when they played Celtic – and a bright green one when they played Rangers 🙂
Celtic fans get wound up because of the similarity to a Rangers song – not because they think it’s the same song. That said, Man U fans always have a right go at Celtic when YNWA is sung because it’s a Liverpool FC song to them. Similarly, Simply the Best is not on many Glasgow Nitespot playlists for the same reason.
In short, viewed through the prism of a Celtic fan, it’s a deliberate wind-up – and perfectly legitimate at that. Perhaps the fact that the first two words are not “Hurrah” Hurrah” (as in the original celebration of general Sherman’s seaward journey)drives that belief 🙂
neepheid says:
February 22, 2015 at 10:49 am
Meanwhile, back at fortress Ibrox, the sleepy Three Bears are shaking off the effects of their winter hibernation, and looking to sink their claws into Barry Leach for some comments he is alleged to have made in confidence, but were then immediately rebroadcast by his confidant.
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/three-bears-want-rangers-finance-chief-axed-1-3697809
That seems inaccurate to me, to put it kindly. Leach asked in advance that the remarks not be minuted. And there are no agreed minutes- just one side’s version of events at a meeting. But who cares about accuracy or even truth. As in all matters, the Rangers Way” appears to consist of finger pointing, together with making stuff up. If only I could aspire to such heights of dignity.
If I was Leach, by the way, the Three Bears would be hearing from Uncle Mike’s lawyers first thing in the morning.
—————————————————–
IMO you have totally missed the point. T3B didn’t break any confidence or agreement afaik. The minute that was published is indisputedly a smear on three Scottish businessmen which might well be actionable.
I find the concept that an executive director speaking to a fan board – elected by the vote of fans and representing those fans – can expect to have any confidentiality on any issue other than commercially sensitive information.
To have made such crass, personalised and possibly damaging remarks against three major shareholders who employ him is a fascinating extension of the powers of a director.
I have to assume that the statements reported must apparently be accurate or BL would have stated they weren’t and asked for a retraction. He, of course, has the option of taking legal action if his words have been wrongly reported.
If I was T3B I would be contacting AIM and RIFC’s NOMAD to lodge a complaint about the statements and also consulting my legal team with a view to obtaining a public retraction and apology.
When I write about the different factions involved in the battle over Rangers I try to make objective observations and avoid supporting one side against the other – if I don’t have factual evidence to support my position – as I think the correct place for personal unsubstantiated viewpoints are probably better on Rangers’ fan sites and the PR battle raging there.
Perhaps T3B have been in hibernation but somehow I doubt that and from what I know of a couple of them I have assumed they are working away on a professional basis and saying next to nothing publicly.
That’s how real professionals operate and that’s why you don’t see crass and immature comments being ascribed to them IMO.
ecobhoy
From your most recent bout of advocacy for the King/3Bear axis
Unless of course remarks are made off the record. In my experience off the record un-minuted remarks take place all the time. I put it down to conversation. Perhaps we should remember that this is not much more than a fan liaison committee. It has no formal or legal status. For its members to think otherwise would be delusional – and as far as confidentiality is concerned, if they felt so strongly about the moral requirement to break that confidence they should have resigned. That may have put a better veneer on it.
I would definitely avoid jumping to any conclusions. Unless I was there, I wouldn’t be doing that, because what the assumption would boil down to was whose version I preferred.
I think the rest of us should be forgiven for our inability to provide the “objective” assumptions that you have made here. I take it you consider Neepheid’s assumptions to be “subjective” and less worthy?
Quite :irony:
It’s been a relatively quiet day, and perhaps that is why not-so-thinly veiled attacks on other people’s points of view have appeared. They are now disappeared.
If people have nothing to add to the debate other than finger wagging monologue in the direction of other posters, or deliberately bait posters with whom you have had a previous disagreement, why not have some sport elsewhere?
Thanks for your forbearance.
Ecobhoy
I had no idea the Soldier Song offered the equivalence of violence as The Billy Boys, which is how I take your point.
That it reflects a bloody history just as much as God Save the Queen I have no doubt, but just as GSTQ is not sang to proffer violence to Catholics or Republicans but is a reflection of national history I would argue neither does TSS.
If there is an explicit equivalence to TBBs in the Celtic repertoire then under my definition, which is one I came up with myself to try and avoid the whataboutery debate, then it too would have to be challenged.
Even if TSS is a poor example and I think arguing a national anthem is such is tilting at windmills, my point re what makes TBBs different does not fall because of the example used.
Big Pink says:
February 22, 2015 at 10:23 pm
ecobhoy
From your most recent bout of advocacy for the King/3Bear axis
————————————————————-
I am obviously missing something here. I have posted on many occasions wrt to the various parties involved in the egm and tried to be objective wrt my remarks.
There are many pros and cons wrt the various parties and I have always been clear that DK and T3B might not be as unified as some would believe.
I try not to introduce a personal element when responding to posters which I usually find to be a negative step and I’m sure you would agree with me on that.
Some may have difficulty that I don’t feel a need to follow any ‘party line’ when I post but I debate my personal opinions openly and honestly irrespective of the fact that I am a Celtic supporter.
I actually have deeper obligations beyond my club to society as a whole but that is my choice and might not be for everyone.
As to my ‘advocacy’ if you point out why you think I exercise such towards DK and T3B and presumably against Ashley then I will respond.
I am always prepared to discuss any valid criticism of my position and will do so without personalising the issue. However I will not involve another poster on the basis that his name has been raised by another poster.
If I want to direct a comment or observation at any poster I do so directly either publicly or by PM.
If you have any other issues or questions feel free to raise them and I will do my best to answer them.
A question for some of the older contributors or those with knowledge of such history. How ‘traditional’ are the Glasgow Teams party song book.
Do people recall such songs (or those with offensive versions of lyrics) being sung post WW2 up to the start of the troubles?
Interested to know from those who were there if things like celebrating Unionism or Irish heritage was always so strong or if it is a more recent ‘tradition’?
With all the discussion of sectarian singing and racism this is an interesting item on twitter this evening.
Showing that it is possible for a club to address its own problems without whataboutery or deflection.
https://twitter.com/OllieHolt22/status/569635680604827648/photo/1
Auldheid says:
February 22, 2015 at 10:56 pm
I gave your original post a lot of thought before responding as I felt it an important post. I think the biggest problem is that the most important term needing definition is ‘group’ rather than ‘inward’ or ‘outward’.
‘Group’ is very relevant of course wrt GSTQ which many different groups find offensive for a number of different reasons.
However some Scots in particular may well have justifiable reasons for taking offence with GSTQ in the verse dealing with the ethnic cleansing of the Highland Clans, their way of life and cultural heritage which followed the crushing of the 1745 Jacobite Uprising.
When you say GSTQ shouldn’t cause offence because it: ‘Is a reflection of national history’ we land in a tricky place. Whose National History? Scotland’s or England’s?
And that’s why in my first post I tried to draw the distinction between ‘The Soldiers Song’ as a national anthem in its truncated form but something different with the verses added.
I really am trying to show that the song issue is largely a red herring IMO and deflects from actually dealing with sectarianism and bigotry because songs tend in my experience to create ‘defensive redoubts’ which must be defended at all costs.
Sometimes the best way to deal with redoubts is to bypass them and tackle the bigger picture or more pressing danger.
RE Friday night
What I find baffling is why BT Sport caved in over the issue?
If it had been BBC Scotland or STV it might have been easier to understand. These organisations have local employees who could be concerned about intimidation
But BT Sport?
What do they have to fear from the Loonies?
Are they afraid to cancel their TV contract with the SPFL?
And why have all the media pundits said nothing?
Has Collymore broken some sort of taboo?
Quick point eco, of which I’m in absolutely no doubt you’ll be aware given your, at times, convoluted encyclopaedic knowledge of everything; but God save the Queen was written by a Scotsman. From Crail in fact, if I remember my primary teacher Mrs Barton correctly.
GoosyGoosy says:
February 23, 2015 at 1:00 am
Has Collymore broken some sort of taboo?
=================================================
Indeed he has. It is the taboo often referred to by Graham Spiers that the Scottish media hierarchy insist Celtic must be criticised in equal measure whenever sectarian issues among the Rangers support are an issue. The Celtic support are in no way above criticism, but everything needs to be in context if progression is ever to be made.
A now retired colleague of mine has a son-in-law who is a journalist. He told me the Editor frequently refused to run factually correct negative stories about Rangers unless something equally damning could be found about Celtic. If not, then the Rangers story remained hidden from the public eye.
upthehoops says:
February 23, 2015 at 7:08 am
A now retired colleague of mine has a son-in-law who is a journalist. He told me the Editor frequently refused to run factually correct negative stories about Rangers unless something equally damning could be found about Celtic. If not, then the Rangers story remained hidden from the public eye.
———————————————————-
An interesting comment and has similarities to something I have posted previously.
I know for a fact that a now-retired – possibly dead – editor of a major Scottish newspaper operated his own pre-internet news management scheme when it came to Rangers and Celtic.
Say for example the paper had a cracking knocking story against one of the ‘Old Firm’ then it would be run purely on editorial merit.
As is the way of the world – and the internet hasn’t changed it – that story would generate a flurry of other stories mostly against the club originally featured. There would usually be a lesser amount generated against the other half of the ‘Old Firm’.
The Editor’s editorial policy was quite simple: It was he wouldn’t write a knocking story against the same club without first having written a damaging one against the other.
Often this meant that some stories wrt both club didn’t appear although they were known about in journalistic circles so sometimes they did come out. They also were often stories good for recounting but not cast-iron in a legal sense.
But the important thing about the editor’s edict was it was based simply on circulation in a time when circulation was paramount and the editor believed that it would be suicide to totally piss-off one half of his readership. He reckoned it was much cleverer financially to keep both sides on bopard by alternating the good and bad news about their club and its mortal enemy.
I had professional dealings with the editor in question and knew him and his family. He was a church goer and had a strong Christian faith but was hard as nails as an editor.
He employed Catholics purely on their professional merit when other Scottish contemporaries followed the diktats of print union members as to who could and should be employed even though their unions didn’t encompass journalists.
The editor’s decision wasn’t based on a whim but from his meticulous scrutiny of the readership analysis of his publication as to who bought the paper and why and, particularly, why they stopped and moved elsewhere.
The two main blocs of football readers were fairly static but the Editor had spotted before most that women were becoming an important purchaser of the paper and their sphere of interest was far wider than football and, indeed, they were turned-off with boredom when it constantly dominated the major news pages.
After he departed the scene and was replaced by a new breed of editor circulation began it irreversible decline although, admittedly, other factors were involved.
I would love to see up-to-date readership analysis because I reckon aging male football purchasers make-up a huge rump of what’s left. They declare online they boycott this that and the next thing and they sent the missus out to buy the paper so they don’t get caught-out.
However, as I say, it may well be that the two stories are the same with possibly a slightly different perspective.
causaludendi says:
February 23, 2015 at 6:25 am
Quick point eco, of which I’m in absolutely no doubt you’ll be aware given your, at times, convoluted encyclopaedic knowledge of everything; but God save the Queen was written by a Scotsman. From Crail in fact, if I remember my primary teacher Mrs Barton correctly.
———————————————————–
When it comes to a ‘convoluted encyclopaedic knowledge of everything’ I let my fingers do the googling 😆
I have this infuriating quirk though of not simply accepting citations that suit my assumptions and go loking for the contrary argument before eventually reaching a conclusion which is always open to change if further info is unearthed.
As to a Scotsman writing GSTQ I have never previously heard that one. It’s a matter of fact that many varied explanations for the origin of the music and words exist.
If it’s a subject that interests you then possibly a good starting point to begin research is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_Save_the_Queen
If you have any contact with the schoolteacher it would be handy to know if she remembers a name or anything else he wrote.
If a Scotsman did write it I wouldn’t be in the least surprised because, Scotland and Scots, were divided as to their support for the Jacobites and Hanoverians.
As well as the usual suspects listed in the wiki piece it’s worth considering the patriotic fervour that engulfed England and especially London as Charlie marched south.
Many theatres played versions of GSTQ which they or composers had written and the reference by your teacher could well be connected to this phenomenon.
It is a great pity if her commnets are indeed true but that the proof has disappeared as it’s an important piece of history.
PS: thank you for your compliment about my ‘convoluted’ encyclopaedic knowledge of everything. As I have pointed-out above I don’t and have never laid claim to: An encyclopaedic knowledge of everything.
But I do plead guilty without hesitation to possibly taking that knowledge and giving it the ‘deconvoluting’ treatment in a bid to reach the kernel of truth often hidden and protected by intricately folded, twisted, coiled and complex layers. And that was before we had PR people 😉
According to Keith on the DR web site:
“They are on the verge of a historic victory and the brink of securing fan ownership for a club that has been horribly abused and mistreated by all manner of charlatans and interlopers. Good for them.”
Fan ownership??? What deluded nonsense. While I can appreciate the various supporter groups wanting to do something to secure their club’s future, buying shares on the open market with none of the proceeds going into the club’s coffers seems a strange way to address the club’s financial problems.
They would have been better pooling their cash and offering a loan secured on some of the clubs assets!
Their “investment” will be worthless regardless of who wins the upcoming EGM battle and whatever arrangements are put in place to fund the growing black hole of Ibrox.
ecobhoy says:
February 22, 2015 at 10:05 pm
IMO you have totally missed the point. T3B didn’t break any confidence or agreement afaik. The minute that was published is indisputedly a smear on three Scottish businessmen which might well be actionable.
==============================0
I’m not clear what point I’m supposed to have missed. And where did I say or even suggest that T3B broke confidentiality? I didn’t say anything like that.
Confidentiality was broken by the fan representatives. And there is no “minute”, by the way. There is a note of the proceedings prepared by the fans but not agreed by the Board. None of us can say whether that note is accurate. And that includes T3B, who have used that note as the basis for a public statement which is clearly defamatory if it isn’t true. That is a very brave (or foolish) step by T3B, especially against someone with a reputation to protect, and the means to protect it.
Aside from the issue of whether the report of Leach’s comments is factually accurate, there is also the issue of this part of the statement
It seems to me that that is not correct. Firstly there is no minute, there is simply a fan representative’s note. Secondly, even the fan representatives acknowledge that Leach asked for his comments not to be minuted. That is a very long way indeed from asking for comments to be removed from the minutes. Leach may or may not take action. He knows what he said, I don’t. He may consider the “minute tampering” allegation alone worth acting on. But whether he does or doesn’t, for T3B to issue a statement based on what is no more than hearsay is in my view extremely unprofessional.
As for the behaviour of the fan representatives who leaked all this, adjectives such as disgraceful, untrustworthy, dishonest and dishonourable spring to mind. And they didn’t even have the good grace to resign. What did they expect- more meetings, so that they could leak a one-sided account as soon as each meeting is finished? Utter scoundrels, in my opinion.
@Goosy, I can only go back to my first visits to football grounds in mid-late ’60s.
You know your eyes are as big as plates when you first experience things and my recollection is of no union flags at Ibrox. But in the middle of the main enclosure there was a small group with the King Billy banner which I thought I recognized from seeing the OO on Duke Street. An early equivalent of a Samba Band, though with different tunes fuelled by carry oots! Very boozy. A few of them doing the ‘wee gallus walk’ as later ridiculed by Billy Connolly in one of his OO sketches. There were a lot of people at matches in those days and I had no sense the singing was widespread, at least not where we were standing (actually, I was sitting with a bird’s eye view up in the back girders).
It was obvious that my older brother didn’t like that section of fans (he actually attended Celtic Euro matches in those years). First being aware of it, you tend to hear it more and more. Tbh, I had no idea about the deeper side to it, and was bemused that many songs ended with ‘F*** the Pope’ as a kind of audio exclamation mark. The whole thing was off-putting.
But I think it was the drunkeness associated with the singing that put me off more than anything. I disliked it at the best of times. Friday and Saturday nights were the worst, booze-wise, and combined with bitter/euphoric rival fans was awful. As someone pointed out, the booze at matches was not a wee plastic cup, it was hardcore carry outs.
After the early to mid-70s I barely paid attention to Scottish football apart from the national team. But when I did tune in I could see a gradual creep of flags and symbols. Seemed to me that positions were being taken on the ‘troubles’ by both sides of Glasgow. Having spent almost a year in Ireland at one point I saw the darker side of those positions. That convinced me that there is NO place for Irish politics in any shape or form at Scottish football grounds.
Living abroad you only get a partial picture, of course, but what I see today, at least via Ibrox coverage and during visits home, is unrecognizable from my childhood. Even a neutral observer can see that the inclusiveness promoted by Celtic is far more attractive and sympathetic than the slightly bizarre uber British pomp and circumstance at Ibrox.
Sad thing about post 2012 is that the tainted history is being perpetuated out of some desperate commercial or ‘cultural’ necessity.
causaludendi says:
February 23, 2015 at 6:25 am
Quick point eco, of which I’m in absolutely no doubt you’ll be aware given your, at times, convoluted encyclopaedic knowledge of everything; but God save the Queen was written by a Scotsman. From Crail in fact, if I remember my primary teacher Mrs Barton correctly
—————————————————————-
http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/Symbols/NationalAnthem.aspx
About this site.
“This is the official web site of the British Monarchy. Written and managed by the Royal Household at Buckingham Palace, the site aims to provide an authoritative resource of information about the Monarchy and Royal Family, past and present.”
That’s us telt. 😯
Had almost forgotten the other story. Phil questioning King’s potential as a saviour. And this week, Parma Rangers are perhaps skint. Surely MA must already know the outcome of the EGM?
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/the-king-and-the-nomad/#more-5899
Danish Pastry,
My early recollections, early 60s, of those games, is that flags were commonplace.
It was even alluded to by the authorities that those flags, Union and Tricolour, were, in themselves, the cause of the trouble at those games.
So much so that before the games, newspapers carried notices from the Glasgow Police, that “stringent measures” will be taken against those who display them.
Initially, this measure had an effect, but I remember being at one game, where the ban was being observed, only for a Union flag was held up at the opposite end of the stadium.
That was the end of the prohibition.
Even at the time, I thought that the edict was stupid and typical of the authorities ham fisted refusal to tackle the problem head on.
Flags or banners never hurt anyone.
The elephant on the terracing at that time was RFC’s shameful recruitment policy.
Does anyone have a sense as to the size of the membership of some of the wilder fan forums eg the one which is a split up version of the name of a town in Glasgow’s parasite belt? (I first heard that term regarding activities around the Berlin borders just after the wall came down and it is very true of many cities.) These demented fora certainly carry the message of the film Idiocracy into action.
Danish Pastry says:
February 23, 2015 at 10:25 am
Phil is highlighting here something that always makes me question the outpourings of publicity seekers like King. They never give details. They are like opposition MPs, always promising to improve services, without detailing where the finance will come from. So far, the only thing King has claimed that holds water is that he is a Real Rangers Man, while the power behind the board isn’t.
I can’t think of a good reason, or even imagine there is a tactical reason, for not announcing exactly where the finance, clearly needed immediately, is going to come from. He is probably favourite to win the vote but could just about make it a certainty if he did reveal money is available in some form, other than by a repeated share issue with all it’s uncertainties and recent failures.
If King does have the money, himself, but is unable to reveal it due to his problems with SARS (or goodness knows what else), then they aren’t going to disappear just because he wins the vote, and TRFC doesn’t exactly have time on it’s side. We can be pretty sure Ashley isn’t going to go quietly into the night, and will want his money back damned quick, so instant mega bucks are required and working capital till the play-offs are over before STs can be sold.
Ashley represents boring continuation, for years to come. King represents…well what does he represent, other than more WATP and ongoing (but maybe not all that ‘ongoing’) uncertainty?
Personally, I’d trust Mike Ashley – to keep the club alive as a cash cow. I would never trust a man like King, even if he hadn’t been convicted of any crimes, as despite his PR and numerous public appearances and statements, he’s never said anything of substance regarding his plans and how he is going to fulfill them, which is probably as close to honesty as he has ever come to in his business dealings.
Quite a good article here by Keith Jackson, maybe his sabatical from Ibrox has forced him to take a journalism refresher course?
Still can’t help thinking he wrote some of it with his teeth gritted, but he is quite apologetic towards Ronnie Deila and complimentary towards Celtic’s football.
Worth a read, but leaves me wishing that it was a sign of improvements to come in Scotland’s media. Wishing, but not hopeful.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/opinion/sport/keith-jackson-egm-could-bright-5213640
@ThomtheThim, you must have more experience of these matches. I was hardly a regular. But even in the football annuals you got at Christmas the images I remember were only of people with scarves and bunnets. I suppose archive film might reveal what it was really like?
PS @allyjambo, less than two weeks to find out