Rangers FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2012/2013

Eirebear

Dempsey wrote: »

No, they represent Rangers fans and they have a shameful standard that the club should be seen to maintain. They are strangely silence on the behaviour of David Healy and its fairly obvious why that has happened.

Rangers could have easily influenced Azure either way on how to deal with their employee and I'd find it surprising if they didnt considering the business partnership and like Healy, what they do reflects back on the club. The silence from the club regarding Healy shows what way they wanted the axe to fall with the chef imo.

The RST represent a section of the support, they do not represent the majority. They certainly do not represent me.
Does Semi Colon Joe of the CSA represent you?

And again, the chef wasnt sacked - he was disciplined and moved elsewhere. Given the issues at Ibrox at the moment i'd expect the moving of a chef to another location is pretty small beans.

KeithAFC

Corholio wrote: »

Not a Celtic or Rangers supporter, just casually browse some of the threads. But thought it a little funny that Celtic supporters were telling Rangers supporters to go talk about Rangers in their own thread instead of coming into the Celtic one, when this thread seems to be weighed heavily with Celtic fans.

We are the club. We welcome the chase.

Eirebear

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

I'm not sure anyone accuse the club of double standards?

Really?

Bigdeadlydave wrote: »

Rangers are hypocrites if they don't at least suspend Healy. I don't care what players do in their own time, but to condemn the chef and not do likewise with Healy is simply massive hypocrisy. Take a look at that statement from Rangers Supporters trust in particular this bit:

the realpigiron wrote: »

Are Rangers going to ignore and be allowed to ignore this Healy issue? Surely there aren't Rangers fans around here trying to defend the hypocrisy of their club in this matter?

The hypocrisy after the sacking of the chef is shocking. If the media fail to cover this story properly and Rangers fail to deal with it, then the SFA and UEFA should be notified.

A Dub in Glasgo

Look what happens when I go away for work for a few days - this thread explodes (no pun intended!)

Corholio

Dempsey wrote: »

Please go find those posts because when you find them you'll realise that you read them wrong.

Was it a coincidence you were the one who replied? The actual post:

"Go talk about Rangers in the Rangers thread, dont be making excuses to post about it here because you are too fúcking lazy to find a link"

Im genuinely not **** stirring, just found it a little hypocritical.

KeithAFC

Corholio wrote: »

Was it a coincidence you were the one who replied? The actual post:

"Go talk about Rangers in the Rangers thread, dont be making excuses to post about it here because you are too fúcking lazy to find a link"

Im genuinely not **** stirring, just found it a little hypocritical.

It is hypocritical and a slight obsession going on. But just allow them at it.

A Dub in Glasgo

Corholio wrote: »

Was it a coincidence you were the one who replied? The actual post:

"Go talk about Rangers in the Rangers thread, dont be making excuses to post about it here because you are too fúcking lazy to find a link"

Im genuinely not **** stirring, just found it a little hypocritical.

Ah but Brewster is not a Rangers supporter (according to him) therefore the post you made is not an accurate one

"But thought it a little funny that Celtic supporters were telling Rangers supporters to go talk about Rangers in their own thread"

bobmalooka

Corholio wrote: »

Not a Celtic or Rangers supporter, just casually browse some of the threads. But thought it a little funny that Celtic supporters were telling Rangers supporters to go talk about Rangers in their own thread instead of coming into the Celtic one, when this thread seems to be weighed heavily with Celtic fans.

I think the difference is that the celtic fans here are posting about rangers matters, but brewster was posting about rangers matters in the celtic thread.

PauloMN

bobmalooka wrote: »

I think the difference is that the celtic fans here are posting about rangers matters, but brewster was posting about rangers matters in the celtic thread.

Correct. Too hard for some to figure out of course.

PARKHEAD67

KeithAFC wrote: »

We are the club. We welcome the chase.

Well HMRC will chase ye off to oblivion if justice is done.;)

lubo_moravcik

KeithAFC wrote: »

Corholio wrote: »

Was it a coincidence you were the one who replied? The actual post:

"Go talk about Rangers in the Rangers thread, dont be making excuses to post about it here because you are too fúcking lazy to find a link"

Im genuinely not **** stirring, just found it a little hypocritical.

It is hypocritical and a slight obsession going on. But just allow them at it.

Who takes you serious anyway?

bobmalooka

KeithAFC wrote: »

We are the club. We welcome the chase.

was that what Whyte said at the hearing last week

PauloMN

PARKHEAD67 wrote: »

Well HMRC will chase ye off to oblivion if justice is done.;)

...and sure there's always The Motherwell and The Hearts to chase you on the pitch.

KeithAFC

bobmalooka wrote: »

was that what Whyte said at the hearing last week

Yes. We will be back.

PARKHEAD67

KeithAFC wrote: »

Yes. We will be back.

Back where exactly?? In division 3 of Scotland to start again, or back where?Do YOU trust Craig Whyte? Seriously?

KeithAFC

PARKHEAD67 wrote: »

Back where exactly?? In division 3 of Scotland to start again, or back where?Do YOU trust Craig Whyte? Seriously?

All that matters is we survive as a club. If at worst we go into administration, that is fine. Compared to liquidation anyway.

PARKHEAD67

KeithAFC wrote: »

All that matters is we survive as a club. If at worst we go into administration, that is fine. Compared to liquidation anyway.

Heres a pic of the "the rainjurs" dressing room.Note the photo of the yoke at the top.Isnt it ironic that the same yoke has her minions hounding yee for unpaid taxes to keep her and her ilk in the life they've become accustomed to.I'd say god save the queen will be a lot less popular at ibrox these days.

Dempsey

Eirebear wrote: »

The RST represent a section of the support, they do not represent the majority. They certainly do not represent me.
Does Semi Colon Joe of the CSA represent you?

And again, the chef wasnt sacked - he was disciplined and moved elsewhere. Given the issues at Ibrox at the moment i'd expect the moving of a chef to another location is pretty small beans.

I said they represent Rangers fans, I didnt say the majority or minority, nor did I say "the Rangers fans". I didnt use any descriptive words.

Still though, Rangers could and should of deal with that situation better. He was disciplined (spin doctors say moved) because of the club, the club should have shown more tolerance.

Corholio wrote: »

Was it a coincidence you were the one who replied? The actual post:

"Go talk about Rangers in the Rangers thread, dont be making excuses to post about it here because you are too fúcking lazy to find a link"

Im genuinely not **** stirring, just found it a little hypocritical.

I know what I said I knew you read my post wrong. I said that he should talk about Rangers in the Rangers thread. What are we doing now? Exactly what I said. Nothing hypocritical about it, so jog on!

KeithAFC wrote: »

It is hypocritical and a slight obsession going on. But just allow them at it.

You seem to be your opinionated self again but you have jumped to the wrong conclusion despite knowing what I actually said. You know exactly what Healy did but dont have an opinion. :rolleyes:

bobbysands81

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Why not be honest TheKeith?

Why not just say that you don't care because he's pictured with someone from a community you support.

Your lack of support of Healy is otherwise hypocritical and, at the same time, singling out the chef for criticism is hypocritical.

Well TheKeith?

KeithAFC

PARKHEAD67 wrote: »

Heres a pic of the "the rainjurs" dressing room.Note the photo of the yoke at the top.Isnt it ironic that the same yoke has her minions hounding yee for unpaid taxes to keep her and her ilk in the life they've become accustomed to.I'd say god save the queen will be a lot less popular at ibrox these days.

HMRC are fully entitled to get any money they need. If unpaid tax has happened which we think it did, then it should be paid back.

Well TheKeith?

Already posted on it.

PARKHEAD67

KeithAFC wrote: »

HMRC are fully entitled to get any money they need. If unpaid tax has happened which we think it did, then it should be paid back.
So you admit that "the rangers" cheated the queen of her money? Is it time to stop singing "God save the queen" at ibrox? If it has to be "paid back" in full, your club could cease to exist.Theres always Linfield I suppose.A poor mans "the rainjurs":D

bobbysands81

KeithAFC wrote: »

Already posted on it.

Why are you so lil- livered on this issue? If you believe in something stand up for it for Christ sake. You have no courage in your convictions.

dartbhoy

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Why are you so lil- livered on this issue? If you believe in something stand up for it for Christ sake. You have no courage in your convictions.

Still waiting for an answer Bobby:eek:

KeithAFC

PARKHEAD67 wrote: »

KeithAFC wrote: »

HMRC are fully entitled to get any money they need. If unpaid tax has happened which we think it did, then it should be paid back.
So you admit that "the rangers" cheated the queen of her money? Is it time to stop singing "God save the queen" at ibrox? If it has to be "paid back" in full, your club could cease to exist.Theres always Linfield I suppose.A poor mans "the rainjurs":D

I don't think so. If it winds up the celts, it is worth it.

ColeTrain

KeithAFC wrote: »

I don't think so. If it winds up the celts, it is worth it.

Lizzy had great time for our heros of '16 last time she was over..

KeithAFC

ColeTrain wrote: »

Lizzy had great time for our heros of '16 last time she was over..

The things she does for her country.

Eirebear

Dempsey wrote: »

I said they represent Rangers fans, I didnt say the majority or minority, nor did I say "the Rangers fans". I didnt use any descriptive words.

Still though, Rangers could and should of deal with that situation better. He was disciplined (spin doctors say moved) because of the club, the club should have shown more tolerance.

Cake, or Eat it?

the realpigiron

PARKHEAD67 wrote: »

Its a fair kip alright.
Sectarian killer Jason Campbell back on the streets after 15 years for schoolboy's murder

May 27 2011 Mark Mcgivern
jason campbell Image 2

Thug Campbell (centre, in blue) is back on streets after serving 15 years for the murder of Mark Scott
Notorious sectarian killer Jason Campbell has been freed from prison after 15 years.
The brutal thug served a life sentence for the murder of young Celtic fan Mark Scott in 1995.
Campbell, whose family members were UVF leaders, slashed innocent 16-year-old Mark's throat for no reason other than him wearing a Celtic scarf while walking home from a match.
Campbell, 38, is now back on the streets of Bridgeton, Glasgow, where he committed his crime, while Mark's family still bear the pain of their devastating loss.
Campbell was released from Shotts prison on Monday and he headed straight for the flat he shared with his terrorist father Colin at the time of the murder. He became eligible for parole last January after serving the minimum 14 year tariff attached to his sentence.

Mark, a pupil at Glasgow Academy and the son of a leading corporate lawyer, had watched Celtic's 2-1 win over Partick Thistle at Celtic Park.
As he walked home with two friends along London Road, they were subjected to sectarian abuse from Rangers fans standing outside a pub.
Campbell ran up behind Mark, who was wearing a Celtic top, screamed: "Ya Fenian b******" and slashed his throat.
The murder was witnessed by fans, women out shopping with their children and people in cars and buses.
The timing of Campbell's release - while Scotland is gripped by sectarian rows - could scarcely be worse.
Shaven-headed Campbell previously tried to pass off his cowardly deed as a political act and tried to get transferred to Northern Ireland to serve his time but was refused.
Mark's death prompted his girlfriend Cara Henderson to set up the anti-sectarian group Nil By Mouth.
Shettleston MSP John Mason said last night: "This was a despicable crime that horrified Scotland."
A spokesman for the Scottish government said: "This case was one of the most extreme examples of the needless sectarian violence that often aligns itself with football in Scotland."



And many like him live there.

I saw this post on the Celtic thread, go to the original post for the images. In my view the post belongs on this thread because it is Rangers and Rangers fans that should answer for the recent David Healy controversy.

This Campbell scumbag is the sort of character that David Healy aligns himself with. I find it difficult to accept that the Healy issue is being allowed to be swept under the carpet.

_blank_

Rangers fans should answer for the behaviour of a player?

What the fúck kind of shít is that?

the realpigiron

Des wrote: »

Rangers fans should answer for the behaviour of a player?

What the fúck kind of shít is that?

Some Rangers fans on this board of opinion are refusing to condemn Healy's actions. Do you think that Healy should be disciplined by his club?

_blank_

the realpigiron wrote: »

Some Rangers fans on this board of opinion are refusing to condemn Healy's actions.

That doesn't make them answerable for Healy though. Explain to me why you think fans of a football club, ANY football club, are answerable for the actions of one of that club's players?

the realpigiron wrote: »

Do you think that Healy should be disciplined by his club?

Yes.

Dempsey

Eirebear wrote: »

Cake, or Eat it?

Rubbish

Des wrote: »

Rangers fans should answer for the behaviour of a player?

What the fúck kind of shít is that?

Try reading the thread properly

Pompey Magnus

Des wrote: »

Rangers fans should answer for the behaviour of a player?

What the fúck kind of shít is that?

Do you not believe that fans of certain clubs in England should condemn the racist behaviour of certain players on those teams or are you of the opinion that they should continue cheering them on regardless of whatever provoking actions they may engage in?

I see no problem with the idea of fans uniting to send a message that this kind of behaviour is unacceptable for a professional footballer.

the realpigiron

Des wrote: »

That doesn't make them answerable for Healy though. Explain to me why you think fans of a football club, ANY football club, are answerable for the actions of one of that club's players?



Yes.

You have answered the question that I asked, my point is that there are some posters on this thread who refused to answer the question. Technically you are of course correct they are under no obligation to give an opinion on the Healy issue, it's just that in my view it is a bit spineless to not do so. Fair play to yourself for doing so.

As regards the Healy issue, has it been covered by the mainstream media in Scotland does anyone know? Rangers FC should be made to deliberate on this matter.

Eirebear

the realpigiron wrote: »

Some Rangers fans on this board of opinion are refusing to condemn Healy's actions. Do you think that Healy should be disciplined by his club?

Just an FYI - but it seems that there are CELTIC fans on this thread who believe Healy should not be punished.

He should be allowed pose with whomever he wants.

Also, why should Rangers be forced to punish him?

the realpigiron

Eirebear wrote: »

Just an FYI - but it seems that there are CELTIC fans on this thread who believe Healy should not be punished.


Also, why should Rangers be forced to punish him?

Rangers shouldn't have to be forced to punish him they should do it on their own initiative. If it's a case that Rangers wont discipline Healy on their own initiative then the media should do their job, cover the story properly, and if needed the SFA should force Rangers FC hand on the matter.

That's what I think should happen, what do you think? Do you think Healy should be disciplined by his club?

Eirebear

the realpigiron wrote: »

Rangers shouldn't have to be forced to punish him they should do it on their own initiative. If it's a case that Rangers wont discipline Healy on their own initiative then the media should do their job, cover the story properly, and if needed the SFA should force Rangers FC hand on the matter.

That's what I think should happen, what do you think? Do you think Healy should be disciplined by his club?

I've already stated my opinions on it clearly.

You seem to be contradicting yourself on the matter though. Rangers should not be forced on the matter, yet if needed the SFA should force their hand?
Which one is it?

bobmalooka

Des wrote: »

That doesn't make them answerable for Healy though. Explain to me why you think fans of a football club, ANY football club, are answerable for the actions of one of that club's players?



Yes.

Of course Rangers fans are not answerable for David Healys actions.

Recently a chef was fired from Murray Parks(Rangers training ground) canteen for posing in front of a republican mural and posting it on facebook.
This is what the Rangers Supporters Trust had to say about it:

Quote:
“I have seen the pictures and find them abhorrent. It raises questions about how someone who follows that kind of terrorist agenda can work for Rangers.

“It is terrible that a man who supports any proscribed terrorist organisation can end up with a job at a football club.

“People fail to realise that their activities online can be clearly and easily tracked.

“This shows that people should use social networking sites responsibly and not as a vehicle to propagate their repulsive views.”

Of course they have made no comment on the David Healy issue.

Some of the Rangers supporters who frequent Boards also expressed strong views on the Chefs facebook pictures broadly in line with the RST statement above.

These same fans (with one or two notable exceptions) refuse to acknowledge that David Healy has done anything wong.

(One rule for the Timmys another for them)

Rangers fans are not answerable for David Healys actions.
They are responsible for their own actions.

The lack of condemnation from Rangers supporters is passive support for David Healy.

It is disgusting, the sooner HMRC put this mob out of business the better

the realpigiron

Eirebear wrote: »

I've already stated my opinions on it clearly.

And that is?

I'll pose the question again; Do you think Healy should be disciplined by his club? Go on it's a straight forward Yes or No.

Eirebear wrote: »

You seem to be contradicting yourself on the matter though. Rangers should not be forced on the matter, yet if needed the SFA should force their hand?
Which one is it?

I'm saying that Rangers FC should discipline Healy on their own volition. It would be preferable that they would do that.

If they fail to discipline Healy, then the SFA should force them to do so. There is no contradiction there, it's fairly straightforward.

Eirebear

the realpigiron wrote: »

And that is?

I'll pose the question again; Do you think Healy should be disciplined by his club? Go on it's a straight forward Yes or No.

Yes.

the realpigiron wrote: »

I'm saying that Rangers FC should discipline Healy on their own volition. It would be preferable that they would do that.

If they fail to discipline Healy, then the SFA should force them to do so. There is no contradiction there, it's fairly straightforward.

So what your saying is that Rangers should be forced to punish Healy. So go on and answer my original question. Why? and indeed, how?

the realpigiron

Eirebear wrote: »

Yes.

Thanks. It does appear to be the case on this board that the majority of Rangers fans believe that Healy should be disciplined by his club. That's good to know, still I'd like to see Rangers FC themselves being more pro-active on the matter. Perhaps if Rangers fans made it clear that they want some disciplinary action taken against Healy, then Rangers FC would be more likely to address the matter.

Eirebear wrote: »

So what your saying is that Rangers should be forced to punish Healy. So go on and answer my original question. Why? and indeed, how?

Well I think the story should be carried in the mainstream media in Scotland - if it is the case that it is not being reported on - and by virtue of that Rangers FC would be forced into dealing with the matter if they fail to do so on their own volition.

One way or the other this Healy issue should not be allowed to be swept under the carpet.

_blank_

the realpigiron wrote: »

Well I think the story should be carried in the mainstream media in Scotland - if it is the case that it is not being reported on - and by virtue of that Rangers FC would be forced into dealing with the matter if they fail to do so on their own volition.

One way or the other this Healy issue should not be allowed to be swept under the carpet.

Hilarious the way you ask for a straight answer form Eirebear, then fail to give one yourself.

Amazing stuff altogether really. :rolleyes:

If Rangers don't take action, WHO should force them, and WHY?

1. Who

and

2. Why

Thanks

Eirebear

Thing is, what do you punish him for?

In terms of the newspapers, it's pretty much a non-story for them.
"Footballer poses for photo with man" Isnt exactly a story.

Given the current climate regarding fans and sectarianism, i would hope that Rangers have had a word with him and dealt with it in house. As i said in previous posts, i prefer it when that happens.

However he has commited absolutely no crime, so other than possibly bringing the club into disrepute - it's quite hard for any authority to do anything about it.

The RST issue, i tend to agree with what most Celtic fans are saying on here they should have kept their mouth shut regarding the Chef issue, as it had nothing to do with the club. However the the use of the RST to suggest that this is the opinion of "Rangers Fans" is wrong in my opinion.

the realpigiron

Des wrote: »

Hilarious the way you ask for a straight answer form Eirebear, then fail to give one yourself.

Amazing stuff altogether really. :rolleyes:

If Rangers don't take action, WHO should force them, and WHY?

1. Who

and

2. Why

Thanks

If Rangers fail to deal with the Healy issue in my view;
1. The media should cover the story and/or the SFA should put pressure on Rangers to deal with the matter.

2. Simply because this David Healy issue is a matter that should be dealt with, it should not be allowed to be swept under the carpet.

Ultimately it is a matter that Rangers FC should deal with and be seen to deal with themselves. It is not good enough that up 'til now Rangers FC appear to be ignoring the Healy issue. It doesn't reflect well on them as a football club at all.

bobmalooka

Eirebear wrote: »

Thing is, what do you punish him for?

In terms of the newspapers, it's pretty much a non-story for them.
"Footballer poses for photo with man" Isnt exactly a story.

Given the current climate regarding fans and sectarianism, i would hope that Rangers have had a word with him and dealt with it in house. As i said in previous posts, i prefer it when that happens.

However he has commited absolutely no crime, so other than possibly bringing the club into disrepute - it's quite hard for any authority to do anything about it.

The RST issue, i tend to agree with what most Celtic fans are saying on here they should have kept their mouth shut regarding the Chef issue, as it had nothing to do with the club. However the the use of the RST to suggest that this is the opinion of "Rangers Fans" is wrong in my opinion.

*convicted terrorist

Hardly a non story considering Boruc blesses himself= he supports terrorism.

One rule for timmy another for The The People.

Eirebear

bobmalooka wrote: »

*convicted terrorist

Hardly a non story considering Boruc blesses himself= he supports terrorism.

One rule for timmy another for The The People.

TBH mate - if you want a grown up conversation about this, please remove the chip from your shoulder first.

Is it illegal to get your photo taken with a criminal?
Where in the name of god are you getting the Boruc statement from?

PauloMN

Des wrote: »

Rangers fans should answer for the behaviour of a player?

What the fúck kind of shít is that?

:rolleyes: Probably a good idea to read the thread before you spout your usual.

In summary, The Keith on this thread was very vocal about a chef, yes a chef, who works for a catering company obviously contracted by The Rangers, who was pictured standing beside a mural.

The questions pointed at The Keith over the last few days have been probing him as to why he's been very quiet about their now "star" striker (snigger) being pictured with his thumb up, beside a known terrorist.

As expected, The Keith claims to have "no opinion" on this, even though he was very vocal about the chef. So essentially he's got no opinion on The Dignity FC being associated with loyalist terrorism, but that chef standing beside a mural was a real big problem.

Eirebear

PauloMN wrote: »

:rolleyes: Probably a good idea to read the thread before you spout your usual.

In summary, The Keith on this thread was very vocal about a chef, yes a chef, who works for a catering company obviously contracted by The Rangers, who was pictured standing beside a mural.

The questions pointed at The Keith over the last few days have been probing him as to why he's been very quiet about their now "star" striker (snigger) being pictured with his thumb up, beside a known terrorist.

As expected, The Keith claims to have "no opinion" on this, even though he was very vocal about the chef. So essentially he's got no opinion on The Dignity FC being associated with loyalist terrorism, but that chef standing beside a mural was a real big problem.

TBF, it's been shown since then that it isnt exactly just Keith who is avoiding questions.
It seems ok for people just to come on here and blatantly make **** up when they feel like it.

Hardly a non story considering Boruc blesses himself= he supports terrorism.

Eirebear

Also, it seems to be acceptable for certain people to come onto this thread to abuse Rangers.

the sooner HMRC put this mob out of business the better

Bye bye Morally bankrupt Rangers

Add that to the constant syndey remarks about "Dignity FC" "The Rainjurs" or "The Rangers" and it all adds up to something i generally can't be arsed posting in.

How often do you see Celtic referred to anything orhter than Celtic in their thread? How often do you see snydey gifs and photoshops posted by Rangers fans in the Celtic thread?

PauloMN

Eirebear wrote: »

Also, it seems to be acceptable for certain people to come onto this thread to abuse Rangers.



Add that to the constant syndey remarks about "Dignity FC" "The Rainjurs" or "The Rangers" and it all adds up to something i generally can't be arsed posting in.

How often do you see Celtic referred to anything orhter than Celtic in their thread? How often do you see snydey gifs and photoshops posted by Rangers fans in the Celtic thread?

EB, come on, what do you expect with the way things are at the moment? Are you saying you've never ever made snide comments in the Celtic thread?

As for "The Rangers", one of your own calls it that! If people are so up themselves to refer to themselves as "The Rangers", expect it to be used by opposing fans in a snide manner.

As for Dignity FC, it's as old as the hills, but again in the news this week, McClelland or Greig (one or the other, can't remember which) was banging on about "dignity". See above, if people honestly believe that there's an ounce of dignity left in that club at the moment, expect it to be used by opposing fans in a snide manner.

To be honest, I can appreciate that it must be difficult watching the club you follow going through this, and that's fair enough. I think you know this already, but my comments are generally not aimed at you. There's a couple of people on this thread who are clearly not able to see the wood for the trees, and when they post stuff like they do, this is what happens. Anyway, I'll desist from the snideness on my part seeing as it's bothering you.