Category: Uncategorised

Defend Rangers?

There’s been more than a wee bit going on in the stands and off the park recently that is worth expanding upon. A banner appeared in the stand in the Europa League game at Ibrox against Fenerbahce which stated “Keep woke foreign ideologies out – defend Europe“. I’ve not seen an official explanation but it does feel somewhat vague and cryptic. Whatever the intent behind it UEFA took the opportunity to charge Rangers under there “racist and/or discriminatory” rules. Amongst other things, it gave Nosferatu at the BBC the opportunity to crawl out of his coffin and talk about Rangers, and racism, and explain to everyone how terrible it all is.

Rangers issued an initial statement and then followed-up confirming a fine of £25,000 and a suspended sentence over the closure of the Copland. The club statements included these points.

“Rangers is a modern, progressive football club and we are fiercely proud of our diverse playing squads, workforce and support,” the club say in a website statement.

“For the club to be charged with such a matter in 2025 is shameful and the disdain for those responsible will be shared by the overwhelming majority of our supporters.

“For the avoidance of doubt, if you do not believe in 2025 that absolutely everyone is welcome to follow Rangers, whether at Ibrox or away, then Rangers is not the club for you and you should disassociate yourself with the club immediately.”

With the latter statement adding –  “In response to the displaying of the racist and/or discriminatory banner at the Fenerbahce game, the club can confirm that it is in the process of issuing lifetime bans to the individuals responsible”

David at Heart and Hand made a valid and unarguable point on this. The reasoning, justifications, accuracy of the banner doesn’t matter. We are getting hammered and club can’t do anything about it. Therefore, all the club can do is to ask the support to not risk anything similar in the future. It is what it is. Saying that, it is worth looking at the context and how we got here.

Firstly, against the charge and the negative connotations of racist and/or discriminatory behaviour the club are absolutely right to highlight the diversity of the playing staff and our support from across the world. We have had players from countless countries over the years and they’ve been supported and appreciated as much as any home-grown player. We’ve been an international club for a long time. I think the idea of Rangers being supported across the world, growing that support, strengthening the club and moving onwards and upwards is something that everyone is on board with. This is positive. We all agree here, so everything is good then? Not quite.

There’s the gnawing feeling that the banner didn’t really undermine any of those points or beliefs, it was neither racist nor discriminatory and in that regard the clubs response is contradictory and heavy handed (although there is the possibility that UEFA insisted the club reacted like that to avoid heavier punishment?). They are right to question unsolicited banners, especially that bring negative attention from UEFA. They can be angry and demand it doesn’t repeat, for no other reason than UEFA are trigger happy on (some) political issues and won’t hesitate to hand out heavier punishments next time. However, you can’t claim everyone is welcome, and then expel (for life!!!) those displaying cryptic banners because they hold views you don’t happen to agree with. That isn’t a diversity of views, an inclusion of opinions – it’s more limited and intolerant. Whether or not Ibrox on a Thursday night is the place to trash out debates on different opinions and political views is a different question.  

On to our slogan, we know that not everyone, anyone is welcome. Those numbskulls that pop up with the SS banner every couple of years or so, for instance. The overwhelming majority largely rejects whatever they think their message is and whatever they hope to achieve with it. So where is the tipping point? Who gets to decide what’s acceptable from year to year? It is suggested that part of the catalyst for the banner may have been the recent flying of the pride flag, and then the removal of said flag, to then celebrate Ramadan at Ibrox. Both ideologies have elements that the general British public consider far from settled and/ or acceptable. So how does the club decide what’s acceptable, or what should fit with the clubs latest worldview?

Leadership. One complaint at the running of the club is that we have lacked real leadership for years. We have had no real discernible direction or strategy and certainly no communication of thoughts and ideas. Bad decisions (primarily the Sydney Cup) and a lack of ongoing communication and dialogue allowed the Billy Boys to come back. Those running the club showed no accountability for themselves, so had they opened dialogues with fans or fans groups, then it would be a big ask to get compliance. And so TBB reappeared domestically and predictably it spilled back into Europe, where it will be very costly if not stopped. A functioning board would’ve seen this problem developing 3 years ago and nipped it in the bud back then. We (club, support, groups) all should’ve been smarter here because it has developed into something that’s cost us and brought negative PR and coverage back to the club. I would say the new board need to show that they are leaders and not just people in positions. However, real leadership is bringing people along with you, telling them what’s happening and why it’s happening. That means regular, clear updates that follow a natural logic and are not completely at odds with the clubs history or prevailing view. I’m a bit uncomfortable that the club demand that people with a unfashionable, old-fashioned or fringe views find another club if they don’t agree with whatever the latest board decides our identity is to be that month.

Bigger picture. Let’s step back and look at the bigger pictures. Politicians are largely an unnecessary curse and burden on society. They survive by creating problems and chaos and then proclaiming insight or solutions to those problems. We can all acknowledge that this is to serve masters other than the public. Currently (or maybe always) Western politics is a self-generating, self-perpetuating parasite which eats away at its host. The fact that the main issues pushed by the media and politics today are divisive or irresolvable is no accident – identity politics/conflicts in the middle-east/immigration/climate-change etc. These are huge sprawling grey issues with no binary or all-encompassing answer – you aren’t meant to be right, you are meant to think you are right and become entrenched and divided. And it provenly works.

USaid. Let’s take another tangent. Everyone really should getting up to speed on the long term going-ons with USaid. This has been a US soft power operation and networks spread across most nations. Whatever it initially started as, it has morphed into something truly grotesque. With the backing of billions of dollars, control has been obtained and built across media, legal systems and governments. To the extent that elections and political leadership can be dictated by USaid, and often with political opponents being smeared or arrested, using the aforementioned networks and reach. NGOs and charities are used to increase reach and strength. Money is syphoned into these and armies of loyal helpers are accrued as transparency and accountability is shed. This all provides an apparatus which can be used to serve the masters wishes, part of which is to inject ideologies and narratives into societies. It can, and is, being used to destabilise, divide or upset cultures if that suits the objective. Flash mobs, marches, riots, hit pieces, political arrests, kangaroo courts. It is a culture war.

Rangers Tax Case. To bring this back round to some relevance to Rangers Football Club, I’ve always struggled to define the substrate behind our tax case troubles. I’d always assumed that celtic people arranged it all, which is still largely true. However, the network that USaid controls would more than fill in some blanks. If the aim was to facilitate and aid the erosion and demolition of British institutions and identities then allowing a humiliating downfall of Rangers would tick that box. Of course, they’d have willing people above this layer to pick it up and run with it. Part of the same web is the SNP under Sturgeon. For a while Sturgeon had incredible control over the media and judiciary. Very much an identikit globalist puppet. Raining division and chaos down upon the nation. Ironically, some of the “woke” ideologies she pushed onto the nation ended her career. Convincing the general public that hairy-arsed men should have access to women’s spaces felt more like an initiation ceremony or dare than a serious political belief. A woke foreign ideology. You can debate to what degree this stuff is orchestrated but it is not up for debate that it happens.

Immigration. The current immigration crisis across the UK (and most Western countries to be honest) is another example of a destabilising, confusion-inducing policy. This is being directed and organised from somewhere, and is being allowed to continue from within the country. It may be USaid or another foreign network which is inducing or funding this, but our politicians are doing what they are told and not what the public are asking. Expecting our borders to be secure does not mean you are racist or a white supremacist (sic). Controlled immigration can be a benefit to everyone. Uncontrolled, unvetted, exploited, illegal immigration is deleterious for everyone. Simple as that. Questioning the continuation of this direction of travel and what it means for the host country and population is a valid and perfectly natural question. This could equally be applied to any country and culture in the world, not just the UK. This is being arranged with something in mind and it probably doesn’t involve protecting our rights or culture. You can understand why people are frightened or looking for answers. So when fans within the traditional support see the club platform and virtue signal using new or alien ideologies, then you can understand fans looking for a voice or platform within the club. The question is, I guess, what is the right way and best time to do that?

That’s my two cents anyway. The club needs to communicate its moves better. It needs to explain the game better. Patrick Stewart (and whoever owns the club) need to take the support along with it, we are the lifeblood of the club. Being so antagonistic or reactionary over a relatively nothing banner feels too much, especial since the board themselves has been asleep at the wheel for years. We understand we need to jump through certain gates to grow into the soulless, money-orientated world of UEFA and modern ownership, but it will be a tough journey if it means shedding everything that makes us Rangers. Should the banner have read “Defend Rangers“?

Why wouldn’t the officials be biased?

Whilst fans podcasts perform an autopsy on another lost cup final much of the focus has again been on some questionable decisions by the officials. Many of them are keen to stress that this isn’t calling the officials themselves, or more broadly, the refereeing culture within the SFA biased. But my question is why wouldn’t it be? Why would the refereeing system in Scotland be infallible?

I have a vivid recollection of making this very point many years ago. 2019 to be exact. My ire at that time was directed at the Compliance Officer position. A contrived role which had seen a succession of handpicked Celtic-supporters for many years. That’s one part, the key part being that each of those had displayed very clear and open bias in executing their role.

https://everything-rangers.co.uk/2019/02/19/re-refereeing-scottish-football/

This happened because Celtic had effectively over-ran the Hampden offices in preceding years and had managed to shoe-horn their people into key roles across the governing bodies. Whilst ushering dissenters (and honest men) out. Having their lawyers in there allowed them to look after their own sordid interests, to increase their power-base, hide behind a shield of legalese and to use the rule-book pointedly against rivals (I believe the kids call it lawfare these days). Back then Rangers suffered on the pitch as retrospective bans were disproportionately applied to us. Key players were ruled out at crucial times. Dignified silence reigned at Ibrox back then to, even in the face of some of the most egregious cheating you will see anywhere in world football.

A similar blight of tribal rot had spread across the BBC and Sportscene, notably STV, Daily Record, C4, as it was endemic within the SNP, wider Holyrood, the GCC; you name it, where it could be enacted then an openly hostile and partisan agenda was pursued.

But why bother? Because it proves it can be done, it’s a conquest, a sectarian badge of honour. Because tribalism trumped professionalism. For completeness, it’s been successful elsewhere, why not build as many outposts as possible, just in case! But more fundamentally, because it can have a measurable effect on the clubs (backing, goodwill, sponsorship, energy-spend) and even on the results of a season. Controlling the narrative is a huge advantage. It can hide things you want hidden and make storms in teacups, which can cause all sorts of distress for the club on the receiving end. It can ignore the fact that the Celtic-supporting CO had cited a dozen Rangers players and zero from Celtic over a couple of seasons. It can make Morelos the story for the CO to then pick up on, whilst ignoring Griffiths or Brown stamping or headbutting opponents.

Every aspect of Scottish football can be use for an advantage to some degree. We know this. It is marginal gains and all things being equal it is these things that can make a difference.

So in a world where every useful, pliable component of Scottish football has been corrupted by Celtic, why would a ruthlessly thorough and calculating club like Celtic not attempt to corrupt the biggest asset of all? The men in the middle.

For me its not even a question. I’ve seen enough since the Compliance Officer to know it’s a real and present problem. We know Doncaster exists. I’ve seen decisions being made which caused title challenges under Gerrard to falter. We know Collum exists. As does Clancy. The system chose these people and these people are the system. But the worst of the lot has been in Old Firms games in recent years. Any tight game has seen a match changing decision go against Rangers. Never the other way. It’s a standing joke amongst supporters – how will we be robbed today? We are at the statistically impossible stage of conspiracy. The bias in clear and undeniable now, as it has been for years.

My only question is to Douglas Park and his dignified silence friends and to ask what the f*ck are you doing about it? If there’s a cheating Celtic fan in position at ANY place and ANY position in Scottish football then I would demand a ruthless, calculating Rangers fan sitting opposite him to keep him honest or call him out.

Lost at Sea, again. The Rangers Boardroom.

It’s almost 6 months now since James Bisgrove left the club and vacated the Chief Executive role at Rangers. Since then, John Bennett and then John Gilligan have stepped in on an interim basis. The Chairman and Director of Football roles do not have a permanent appointment either. Other key roles at the club require attention, and the important point is that the staggering and clunking along is long past becoming a distraction or inconvenience. Douglas Park was Chairman from 2020 for three years. Bennett and then Gilligan again thrust into that role too. Pressed or willfully, who knows?

In a way, to supporters at least, it doesn’t matter who is in there and who is in which chair, what matters is that each position is given full attention and that the club is held in a position of strength and moved forward with purpose. Only the output matters and we as supporters can see the output. Personality will go a long way, leadership skills and status are essential, but the right person could be almost anyone with the right skills. Any missing skills can be complemented by the blend of other people leading the club. As an example, Stewart Robertson was our Managing Director for 8 years. He was fairly bland and unimpressive but at least he was capable within his remit and provided a period of stability. He didn’t or couldn’t provide the political gravitas that Rangers require, but someone else should’ve been brought in to complement him. And then someone else to provide other skills, or contacts, or experience, or leadership. And so on.

Structure matters. Plans matter. Culture matters. The people working within that structure may change or move on, but the company must have mechanisms for processing lessons learnt, retaining experience and enabling it to be passed on seamlessly to incoming people. A culture of professionalism. Rangers are apparently a million miles from this.

Any competent, functioning mid-to-large-sized company would’ve had a plan to deal with departures (at any level of the club) and either scout a suitable replacement or put out an invitation for ambitious go-getting types to apply. Rangers are a well-known and high-profile brand and would surely have no problem bringing suitors to the door? The delay for all roles makes no sense. In saying that, the sizable list of missteps and calamities make no sense either. The lack of attention to detail makes no sense. A group of investors putting in their own money and proceeding to treat the club with so little care and finesse makes no sense.

Since it’s been headline news a lot, it’s hard not to think about the level of dysfunction and neglect from the custodians. What I expect from Rangers is to always have a plan and to always have competent people in place to execute any plans and move the club forward. On the field and off the field. Take the analogy of a boat. That boat might get from point A to point B without a crew. But equally, or in fact more likely, it might get smashed up on the rocks 20 minutes later. So why take the risk? Hire a crew. Make sure it’s a competent and trustworthy crew. Is it a valuable boat? Then add in the best crew. That’s the short-term stuff. Fundamentals.

Looking ahead, is the boat at risk from stormy weather? Then ensure that the boat is in a fit condition to ride out any bad weather. Obtain a regular weather forecast and charts, so you can predict storms, plot a course through any choppy waters or take evasive actions and sit in the harbour for a while. Again, fundamentals for a club like Rangers. Anything else is neglect.

I expect this from Rangers and more. We know first-hand what happens if we are not prepared or underestimate the ocean in which we sail. David Murray was a wretched Captain. He had no idea of the approaching armada and had no protection or avoidance systems to defend his ship. Our ship. Worse than that Murray had brought the cannons on himself and allowed his rivals to control the waters. The contrast in foresight and cunning, the general level of functionality, between our board and our rivals board was stark in that instance – as it still is today. They ran their club, they played politics, had a handle on the media, had influence in different sectors and had the long-term intelligence to know that the biggest gain in a two-horse race, is made by crippling the other horse. I expect Rangers leadership to always understand and acknowledge what happened and ensure that it can never happen again. I don’t think we can currently say this whilst we are being ran worse than a regional bus company.  

None of this is great for the club and, best intentions or not, intent matters nothing when the result is damage to the club. General poor management and poor leadership is costing the club lots of money, arguably tens of millions in the last couple of seasons This has got to be affecting the manager and the players to some degree. The months playing out of Hampden had a negative effect. Earlier, the fallout from Sydney cup had an effect and cost us money. As do court-room skirmishes, inconsistent contracts, random new deals, poor man-management strategies, unsettled players, baffling scouting and targeting, assets running down deals, constant changing of personnel/management teams, in-fighting against supporters, lack of transparency, a general lack of people that command unwavering respect. This is just the basics and day to day stuff and we cannot continue like this.

I can see people wanting to play at football club owner, wanting to hold on to power, or being reluctant to hand over power. However, when the empire is crumbling, they need to recognise that they are doing more harm than good.

A Short Study on the Tribal Takeover of Scotlands Establishment

establishment – a group in a society exercising power and influence over matters of policy, opinion, or taste, and seen as resisting change.

There’s a naivety in most people to think that things will remain the same, or if not the same, then at least the same flavour. This is especially true within a comfortable or indigenous majority, where it’s natural to just assume that order will remain. It’s a common misconception that rules and laws are absolute and that these will apply to everyone equally all of the time.  

Scottish football and Scottish/UK politics have taught me a lesson in the how the world really works since the 2000s. A few observations:-

  • An organised minority can easily oust and control a disorganised majority.
  • It’s easier to take over existing organisations (and their assembled machinery) than it is to build new ones.
  • A few people in key positions can control entire organisations.
  • Identity and discrimination cards can be used in bad faith to ease people into roles and silence dissent.
  • Controlling the media and narrative can cover a large number of indiscretions and mischief.
  • If you control an external organisation then use this to fight your enemies to drain their energy. Similarly, control the narrative and have other parties fight your enemies for you.
  • Focus all of your energy on one battle, no matter how small, ensure the win. It will make the next battle easier.

Everything else flows from these. Once you have one person in an organisation then it is easier to bring others in and change the culture. This new culture holds the keys and can then become a closed shop and actively discriminate to preserve itself. If everyone is on the same page, from the same school so to speak, then this never needs written down. It is possible to change and bend the rules to suit needs or cause.

If you chose an organisation (be it a national broadcaster or a political party) that has a trusted reputation and known identity, then the general public will not question its actions, even if totally dishonest and at odds with previous standards. You can effectively hide in plain sight and have the reputation protect you. We saw this at BBC Scotland where targeted propaganda was put out against Rangers and was not questioned. The antagonists then hid behind the organisation and had it protect them. We saw this with the SNP, where it effectively changed skin under different leadership. And we see it with the Green party, where all-sorts view it as little more than a vehicle to hijack to suits thier cause.

I am of course referring largely to Rangers travails since 2000s, with the club being on the receiving end of any reforms. Prior to this period an accord, or at least an equilibrium, existed whereby neither side would attempt a coup; besides the wider footballing environment would not allow it or stop anything before it reached anything substantial. This is perhaps portrayed best in the common support for Labour in Glasgow. Both sides would back the working party and this would be a common bond across communities and also considered to be on a higher plain of importance than football allegiance. An instability developed in the 90s. Celtic had their troubles and Rangers had great success. There’s no doubt that jealously and spite hardened and drove Celtic people. The inattentive eye of Rangers owner David Murray left many doors wide open and disadvantageous changes were allowed to seep into many facets of central belt life.

For all intents and purposes BBC Scotland and various media outlets were hijacked. Some of the poison in the press was cultivated and dispersed from the Celtic View fanzine. Some from the wider support. The orders to the foot-soldiers was basically to protect Celtic and attack Rangers. These people were parachuted into roles across the media and sought out like-minded individuals. This suggests a force was present to make this happen at this time. One probability is that the Catholic church flexed some muscles, possibly with a view to help cover up the CSA scandal at Celtic and specifically their part in it. This then grew arms and legs and the football club soon saw and reaped the benefits of these extra powers.

With irony abound, sectarianism gave them a useful weapon to attack their rivals. As with anything which finds itself in a new or strange environment so Rangers had no defence mechanisms to assaults from national media and Holyrood. The game and rules had changed . As Rangers recoiled under the onslaught so the perpetrators gained confidence and this embolden others to step up, to forego professional codes and use their positions to attack Rangers.

I believe we’ve had 20 or so years of this. Rangers’ EBTs troubles in 2011 were another ruse used to purge Rangers’ people from institutions and deny representation for the club. The SFA and SPFL and BBC Scotland around this time are marked by a change in composition that has never been rectified. The assault garnered more strength as it overlapped with the Independence referendum. Rangers are largely seen as a symbol of Unionism and therefore something for nationalists to attack, the SNP for their part, saw this as an opportunity to grow their support. Celtic saw it as an opportunity to solidify support and was the bond between many different factions. The SNP had already declared itself the home for the catholic vote so courting the anti- Rangers vote was a logical next step. Of course, this ignored the fact that Unionists were Scottish and would still exist and be part of Scotland, whether independence was won or not. Regardless, people within the SNP and Celtic cause worked together and had their fun at Rangers expense – something that’s continued long after the referendum.

What does all of this mean? It’s a window into what the world is really like. It’s more jungle than the civilised structure people want to believe it is – certainly what I thought and wanted to believe it was. It follows that these options are also open to every politically motivated entity. The Rangers board, should it wish to and with a bit of hard work, could mobilise a significant army to put Rangers’ people back into positions of influence. There would have to be planning. A strategy and a clear message would be a start. Suitable individuals identified for roles and collectively trained to respond to opportunities without thought – much like a triggered press on the football pitch. Collectively though, it requires a change in perspective for the Rangers support. It requires a reordering of political priorities and realising that if you don’t change these, if you don’t join forces to protect shared interests and take control, then someone will take it from you.

The West’s Failing Defence Mechanisms and Corrupted Institutions

To have a flourishing, functioning society you need solid foundations to provide and continue that strength and security. These could be physical, institutional, ethical, or behavioural fortresses that keep us all safe. Everyone, or at least a large majority, has to buy into this understanding, which then allows freedoms, knowledge, interests, pursuits to grow in different directions from that shared core.

These foundations cover many facets of the culture; be it, economy, laws, policing, health, education, defence, entertainment etc. What is important is that there’s a common thread running between them all. That the idea of a nation, a sustaining vessel, is acknowledged, if not universally respected. That institutions in each area respect the very people that they are built to serve. That merit and honesty is valued and that dishonesty or poor performance is punished.

What we are seeing in the UK, and wider West, just now is the erosion of these institutions. Where agendas (allied with greed) are being played out before the interests of the institutions and the general public. Previously this wouldn’t be allowed to happen. Rules were enforced and any rogue agendas were contained. The organism was able to protect itself. However, over generations the rules were allowed to yield. The clarity of message and respect of ethics present at the beginning has been lost. Detractors climbed the ladders and left the doors ajar. Those close to money helped themselves. Others would come after in a changed environment and so the creep continued. Over time the institution rots and the culture inside becomes unrecognisable from its original form.

As a prime example, parliament and politics in general across the UK appears to have suffered this decay. I can’t speak of times before the 80s or 90s, but since then any pretence of representation of the people or working for the betterment of the nation has gone. Problems are created artificially and regularly, and seldom fixed. It doesn’t appear that the political structure today allows an honest person to survive, let alone thrive or change things for the better. This could all be put down to incompetence, bad ideas, greed, corruption from corporations, or influence and corruption from foreign/hostile governments. At some stage the defence mechanisms relating to a key part national security have failed.

Another example. Scotland is comprised of a distinct and different sets of cultural groups. One of which is sympathetic or straight-out Irish Republican in intent. Intrinsically, this group is at odds with the general spirit of Britishness required to keep the wider British culture pulling in the same direction. The British public may not consider themselves at war with Irish Republicans, but many Irish Republicans consider themselves to be at war with Britain. Adversaries are not predisposed to exist side by side peacefully. Due to length of conflict and familiarity our defence mechanisms are no longer primed to identify or react to threats from this source. On some level this is clearly an issue.

For example, over the years Scotland has been denatured to overt support of terrorism. Institutions like Celtic FC and recently The SNP have fostered a corrosive sub-culture where attacking the UK, and any symbol of the UK, is positively encouraged and rewarded. This has to lead to problems and cracks in society. The constant undermining and assault on symbols and institutions will have an attritional effect, especially when the rate of work is shared with other hostile groups. Much of this effect has been gradual or even gone unnoticed because there is a large overlap between British and Irish cultures and media blind-spot to egregious acts. Despite differences, the cultures have a relatively high degree of compatibility. But what it has created is a weakness and conduit that others can exploit.

Immigration may at times be a necessity, where the requirement or promise of work or creation of industry is strong enough, and it can and should be a good thing for all parties. Progress should be a good thing. Sharing ideas should be a great thing. But like all things, there must be rules or plans go awry and the castle collapses. The onus should be on an amount of assimilation to protect the host culture. This doesn’t need to be aggressive or overbearing but the arrow has to be in that direction.

There’s a salient point from history here – during the world wars we didn’t flood the country with Germans, or Russians. Where people were admitted, then the expectation was very much that they would actively rejected the old culture and pick up the identity of the new home. It was understood that uncontrolled immigration would allow a destabilising number of hostile agents in and ultimately national security would be compromised. During war time, our cultures were considered incompatible.

At some point between then and now these basic defence mechanisms have been stripped away. We seem to have got ourselves to a place where hostile cultures are ushered in (even before immigrants from friendly cultures), where assimilation isn’t even mentioned, where they are allowed to immediately indulge in hostile pursuits (e.g., support of terror groups) on these shores and where their rights and benefits outstrip those of the indigenous population. Some thing has clearly gone wrong or is being designed to go wrong.

It may just be the increasing naivety of successive generations, where lessons of the past have been forgotten and not passed on. Where a softness has been allowed to spread throughout the civilization, all the way down to its very foundations. It may be that corruption is unavoidable and ultimately terminal in a capitalist society where anything and anyone can be bought. That politics, press and police can be paid to work against their own country and countrymen. That entire institutions can be ruined by a small number of the wrong people in the right positions. Or that the fatal flaw in every democracy is that an undemocratic majority appears?

That past wars were mostly played out with rows of soldiers and tanks; it seems foolhardy in the extreme to believe that war wouldn’t evolve and to assume that it could not be fought in plain sight, with different ideas or technologies, and that front lines could be erased. It would be a certainty that a hostile foreign power with an inferior army would then look for another way to win a war, to degrade or conquer a rival.

It is worrying that our defences have seen systematically stripped away and rendered useless, or worse still, that our immune response is being used against us. As examples, our own police targeting Brits, our companies discriminating against white males, our media and government gaslighting the British public whilst burning down the shared history and foundations that led to our advanced and celebrated (if far from perfect) society.

And our last line of defence, our military, has somehow abandoned the turrets and allowed things to develop this far. It palpable that people are sensing that something is not quite right. Alarm bells are ringing. It is very clear that many self-defeating, self-harming policies have been in place for decades and no one appears to be able or willing to address it.

Scotlands and Celtics problem with Terrorism

If you stop tending a garden then it ceases to be a garden. Over time it loses order and then succumbs to the chaos of nature. Our society, with the freedoms and relative safety we enjoy all exist within a framework, a structure that allows us to live our lives on this piece of land. Without this order, there are no human rights or freedom to protest, no democracy and no football. This varies from place to place, city to city, but these are the gardens that we tend and inhabit and the work that they require to look their best are respect, trust, tolerance and a general agreement how things should be ordered. The UK is far from perfect but its not bad.  

I don’t mind admitting that I’m a tribal being. We all are. Having that awareness should be a strength and not a failing. Takes ones to know one, hunter turned gamekeeper etc. You learn from history and you learn from human nature and you have to understand and account for the worst and build from there.

Scotland has its history of tribal issues, primarily of religious/cultural origins and much related to or at least exacerbated by the movement of people from one place to another. Tension was totally predictable – it’s a science where compatibility of people and cultures can be calculated based on history, populations, respect, offerings, grievance, rate of change and adaptability/willingness to yield. It’s not cynical to suggest some movement was encouraged to create problems and cause divisions and that a lack of mediation and attention and the stoking of divisions allowed tension to fester.

This is where the bigger questions appear. Does a collective of people have claim to any land? Does any person have a right to live in that land? Does the indigenous population have a say over who arrives and what boxes must be ticked to join them in that country? This certainly seems to be the default across most of the world’s countries and not many question the rights of those people or populations to exercise some degree of control over their land.

To continue the metaphor, gardens can look totally different and there’s no right or wrong but there are undoubtedly better ones and worse ones. They can be bland, uninspired and lacking variety. Straight lines or curves. Structured or hectic. They can be crowded and have all sorts of plants, flora and wildlife. All types can work and flourish. Humans can adapt, live and enjoy most environments they grow into to. Problems begin when things start to change, and change too fast, without planning, permission or blessing, or without any underlying explanation or necessity.

We all agree there are behaviours that are unwanted and unhelpful and most of these become criminal acts as society seeks to establish order and protect itself and its citizens. Of course, not all seemingly unhelpful acts or ideologies are illegal and that’s the part of life and freedom. Sometimes these can move society forward and improve areas that need improving. As with immigration, people and ideas from other places can add the flavour and spice to a bland or stale society. Equally, deliberate disrespect and antagonization cannot be expected to be well received.

Promotion and celebration of terrorism straddles this boundary, for despite their being laws against it, it has largely been tolerated in Scotland where many openly and actively promote the likes of the IRA. Scottish society and police clearly do not know how to handle the problem. Perhaps thinking it is simply a childish or insincere act. There is a truth in this and that Scottish football plays out tensions more like a pantomime than a war-zone. But the tension exists and is proactively kept alive. The problem is that overtime these ideas can crystalise or transpose and the reality of terrorism isn’t something Western society should be playing with or encouraging.

I saw a recent tweet from a prominent union leader in the UK where he questioned Biden’s Irish credentials for backing Israel in light of the 07-Oct Hamas attacks. I would hope an 80-year-old POTUS who was born in Pennsylvania would have his primary loyalty to the US. But it does raise the question of mindsets, ideologies and loyalties. Why do some people refuse to integrate and yield? Does this loyalty always exist to the external entity, where’s the tipping point? To be passed through generations this must be deliberately cultivated and indoctrinated. And what if this grievance-driven identity then couples or resonates with a terrorist cause at a later date, or later generation? I think we can see how this would be undesirable for everyone.

And where some in Scotland may play with terrorism, and the disneyfication of terrorism, others aren’t so twee or harmless. The obsession some at Celtic fc have with Palestine has never sat right. Not because people and groups don’t deserve support or a better life but because of the reasons for support. There’s hundreds of valid causes and oppressed people and groups to show solidarity with, however, Palestine appears to have been chosen because of the anti-Brit angle, the mutual glorification of terrorism and the apparent problem that the Irish identity has with antisemitism. None of this is particularly healthy even if the cause is. Of course, the timing of the last showing of solidarity – after the Hamas attacks which killed 1400+ civilians of all ages and backgrounds – betrays they true reasons for backing from some in the Celtic support.

 Claims of moral high ground, human rights and solidarity vanish when so many innocent people are massacred. Red flags should also be ringing loud in that community and across Scotland about some of the people they have sided with – Islamic Jihadis. This isn’t a football game; this is the real world where outsiders are considered less than others and those beliefs are acted upon – not through song or through t-shirts or flags but through blood and slaughter.

It has been that way for thousands of years so would be foolish to think otherwise now. And who’s to say it stops at Israel? Because we know it won’t – humans and history tells us so. So take a look around the garden we live in, in relative safety with our stupid feuds and squabbles, and then think if you’re really heading down a road to towards enrichment or societal improvement.

Celtic CSA Scandal: Caring about Justice

‘You don’t care about the victims’, a comment often seen on social media regarding the Celtic fc scandal and very much the last refuge of the scoundrel. It is, of course, a desperate denial-soaked attempt to deflect from the issue at hand. When dealing with cold hard facts it is also a moot point. The crimes have been verified through the courts and committed to record. Other actions and occurrences are laid out in black and white in the printed press, including the celtic view. The judge doesn’t turn round to the prosecuting team and ask them if they are in fact Rangers fans just trying score points? It is the fact that the crimes have been committed in the first place that demands the truth and perpetrators are hunted down with cold unwavering prejudice. Caring about justice by default includes caring about the needs of the victims, whereas, ignoring or quietening calls for justice shows the opposite.

Surely a functioning society demands that everyone is treated equal and that the law does not discriminate? You should not expect favour or immunity based on saying nice things at the right time, cultural heritage, political persuasion, charity work or the fact the media does your PR for you. Crime is absolute. If you do not want your tribal adversaries to demand consequences for illegitimate actions then not commit illegitimate actions. 

As we know, there are many layers to the Celtic FC scandal. Primarily, there are the individual crimes and this is all about the victims. This is the coal face and where the real damage was done. The legal system and justice should be there for them, as should public support. This isn’t isolated to celtic and everyone affected, at any club, needs recognition and justice, in its many forms. The government and governing bodies really need to do more here.

Now, what sets Celtic FC apart and where their scandal diverges from other instances of abuse across football is the scale and organised nature of the abuse. Then on top of that further is the organised nature of the subsequent cover-up and damage limitation measures – some of which enabled abuse to continue and most of which tormented victims all over again, for years. This is where it becomes an institutional problem and not just an abuse problem – a celtic fc problem, if you will. In a way, this element is no longer solely about the victims, this is where the fabric of society and football is soiled and damaged by actions to protect celtic fc, both internally and externally. This is where government and governing bodies have a duty to show that this pestilent stream of wrong-doing cannot be tolerated. In many ways, it’s both an insult and bad joke that it has been left to the victims to fight for justice through a civil case, when it’s football and society that should be doing this on their behalf.

Here’s some things to consider about the outer layers of the scandal. Celtic admitted/claimed to have held at least three internal investigations into their boys’ club over the years. These have either found nothing, absolved Celtic FC or Celtic FC staff, or remained internal with findings never reported. A cynic would correctly say these were sops to deflect, buy time and allow things to blow over. These would have to had to be discussed and sanctioned by the club with the aim of damage limitation. It is known that senior figures at the club were actively trying to fight fires and the threats of legal action against the earlier newspaper stories look ridiculous with what is now common knowledge. This was undoubtedly part of their chosen strategy for dealing with it. One constant observed since the 90s is that celtic people within the media have been very happy to pick up these excuses for the club to draw a line under things and quash and bury the story. Some of those people began their careers at celtic news, some owe their careers to celtic and others just gladly do what the club wants. I can’t recall celtic fc ever being publicly called out or there ever being any high-profile discussion over their tactics and actions. Surely it merits it? A look at the social media of the usually very vocal of the Scottish press will show that they haven’t even acknowledged the latest developments. Quite incredible.

A key part of Celtics strategy has been attempting to publicly distancing the club from the boys’ club that they had set up and operated. The separate entity line first made its appeared in the late 90s. No doubt Fergus McCann’s new board had a look under the bonnet and thought ‘oh fuck’. Had the scandal unravelled and followed a natural course at that point then it could have (should have) finished the club. Quite the thought, remember the phrase sporting advantage? The press and support were happy to peddle the clubs’ line, despite knowing it would further marginalize the victims and (as we now know) kick the possibility of any sort of closure 30 years down the line. File that under not caring about their victims. This is incredibly slow progress and a lifetime (literally) to wait and fight. Across this expanse of time the phrase scurrilous appeared from an early internal investigation and saw incredible mileage. Even after the convictions started to pile high it was still habitually used by the Scottish press. Radio Clyde and BBC Scotland being as terrible as anyone over the period for their support of Celtic (opposed to the victims) on the issue. The club line and/or silence preferred to any open conversations that they or their football club would find uncomfortable, let alone show Celtic in a bad light. It is a hope that at some point these organisations publicly explain their editorial stances to the victims.

Of course, Celtics network of compliant people is not just limited to the media. Celtic have had a seat at the top table of the SFA and SPFL for a long time. They were certainly prominent enough to influence events before anything became troublesome. Celtics’ influence at Hampden increased further in 2012 as they effectively assumed total control of the games governing bodies. This power was displayed at its most vulgar in the contentious historic abuse report by Martin Henry. Here we have a man of questionable credentials and links to both Celtic and the Catholic Church’ abuse scandals brought it to produce a report which manages to overlook many notorious celtic predators, most of the clubs’ failings, questionable/harmful actions and yet is able to name check Rangers more times than Celtic. It is also stated by victims that Henrys report omitted a lot of valid testimony to suit his narrative. All too predictably, Scottish football clubs and media folk were happy enough with the outcome and seen it as a convenient excuse to drop an uncomfortable subject and move on. I know Rangers had other things on their plate at the time but quite why they accepted their role of silently dignified punchbag in this affair is beyond me. Rangers have their own questions to answer and possible consequences but this shouldn’t shield others. Also in this period, many MSPs used the protracted issue of the report to delay action and avoid comment on the subject – further delaying justice. The whole episode was wrong on so many levels. You would hope that over 300 victims of abuse, 9+ convicted predators, coupled with media manipulation and the corruption within the governing body would be enough to stir fans of other clubs and more than a few isolated MSPs into at least a mild state of concern?

So here we are. Reports this week informed us that (after decades of adamant denial) “Celtic were ready to enter talks” with boys clubs’ victims to prevent the civil case going to court. Oh how noble a gesture for them! In the same week financial reports showed the club to be cash rich and now able to offer substantial pay outs without significantly affecting its general operations. Compare this to the preceding 30 years of using every trick in the book to avoid any hint of responsibility. The concept that justice can be bought without accepting accountability, without a shred of contrition and that it can be administered decades later and only when it suits the now wealthy institution is beyond perverse.

This is just a tiny sample of what’s went on in Scotland and any citizen that cared to look can see a long list of repulsive actions carried out on many fronts by the club and its allies, over and above the abuse. Sadly, the wider public have been conditioned by the relentless media downplay and swathes of the population remain in states of conditioned or wilful ignorance and inaction. That Celtic will probably escape condemnation on a commensurate level from the governing bodies and wider society is itself an injustice. Both Celtic and the SFA should both face disrepute charges over that report – if ever an act undermines trust and public confidence it is that. We can add conflict of interest to the list of reasons for the SFAs inaction.

And all of this in a world and time where sponsors and platforms are quick to drop fallen rock stars and sports stars, it makes you wonder how much longer Celtic FC can possibly dodge the morality bullet on that front too?

Banners, Chants and Custodians

To beat the traffic, I arrived early before the Ajax match on Tuesday. I took some quiet time to walk around the stadium take in some of the architecture. Around the periphery, the world outside Ibrox was organising chaos past closed roads and road works. Home time, still long before match time. The din of distant engines layered with nearby rattle and chatter as stalls were set up and staff arrived and greeted colleagues. Police and stewards stepped out to set about their duties and began their demarcation of the area. A brief look behind the curtains as the Champions League entry music was blasted inside. And at the centre of this the main stand sits silent. Unmoving and immovable. The gigantic main stand puffs out its red Welsh brick chest and gazes South through lit windows in regal contemplation. And as the sun lowers to the West, so the shadows further highlight the handsome façade. It demands to be admired.

3,000 tonnes of Ruabon majesty, tens of thousands of souls passing through the gates tonight, a drop to the countless millions over its years. The weight of history and tradition is palpable. Nothing looks so magnificent, can be so enormous and well attended without meaning so much to so many. And with that thoughts turn to what this stadium has seen? What it must mean to people. What must it be like to be in charge of this building? The building, but much more – everything it stands for and everything that goes with that. An emblem and cradle for the 150-year-old club. There is so much responsibility attached to that position. It’s a struggle to even imagine it, for me anyway.

We know David Murray ultimately failed the club. For as Ibrox is a Castle to us, so it is a palace to storm for others. Murray failed to recognise this. Custodian was his word – a person who has responsibility for taking care of or protecting something. It is as simple as that and by his own measure he failed miserably and we almost paid the ultimate price.

It gives me chills to recall some of the characters that held the keys in the intervening period. The red brick would never know the threat to its survival. We have thankfully left those days behind but the responsibility with the custodians still stands, if not increases through the years. It’s not a single act, you don’t buy into the position and your duties end there. They only begin. It’s an ongoing process; to care and protect the football club.

That means many things. The team on the pitch has to be winning and challenging, that is the essence of the football club. It is the property and assets. It is the commercial stuff. It is the brand, the image. It is the relationship with the fans and that includes the product and service the fans receive. It is the culture, recognising the past whilst charting a course forward. All to secure, better, build and advance the football club.

One area where our club has suffered greatly has been in the realm of offensive chanting. In my opinion, our custodians, but primarily David Murray, failed to recognise threats – to get ahead of the play, open communication, address issues and fight our corner when it was justified. They haven’t always been helped by our actions as supporters, where we have often shot ourselves in the foot. Again, it’s a process but you have to go through certain steps and we work through things and come out all the stronger for it. There’s an important point hidden here; the fans have a responsibility to represent the club in the best way possible and hold the board to account, and the board similarly can ask certain things from the fans whilst protecting the club. We’re all in this together.

In the sectarianism debate, the absolutes and context can be argued over but what should not be up for debate is fairness and parity. If the powers that be are to lessen tensions or curb offense then justice must be just.  

The recent ‘Kill all Huns’ banner from the Aberdeen fans last weekend made some papers. It is a sectarian term. Aberdeen fans claiming they’re using a different dictionary definition of the word is a moot point, it is used as a sectarian slur against protestants and groups perceived to be protestants.

Detractors will of course claim that Rangers fans can have no right to complain because we sing or have sung offensive and sectarian songs – they’d be correct up to a point, but that point ignores the 20 years of bad press we’ve accrued from that. That laws and legislation have been rushed through to punish it and too many have lost work and even gone to jail on the back of daft songs and banners. That’s not saying certain songs don’t still get aired occasionally, but this is usually as a response or defiance. This is the circular logic involved here – Aberdeen fans are somehow justified because of Rangers fans songs, so if others are allowed to be offensive as a response, then surely so are Rangers? This is where parity has to kick in. You have to condemn everything or nothing. It’s not a pick and mix.

This lack of parity from certain quarters was brutally exposed in October when the Republic of Ireland women’s team decided to celebrate qualifying for a World Cup at Hampden by singing up the ‘RA chants. Now this is offensive. It’s meant to be. It is aimed at Brits (collectively) and it’s celebrating terrorism against Brits. To be fair, it got nationwide attention and most in the UK were rightly highly critical of it, often calling for further action to nip this sort of behaviour in the bud. My opinion, it’s no different to the Billy Boys chant. The difference is most have agreed, with time, that TBB was over-the-top, unhelpful and should be left in the past, whereas the other side appear to quite enjoy singing their offensive chant and any esprit de concorde is thrown in the bin.

Over 20 years of frothing, faux-outrage over the most powerful chant in football™ from Scottish footballs’ moral guardians seems to have evaporated and morphed into collective support for their murder gang of choice. “I think it’s harmless”, “It’s like a joke, a school chant insulting the other team”, “It’s not derogatory. It’s not anything anyone takes seriously”. A pretty stark difference to rhetoric wheeled out for footballing banter from the Rangers support. Indeed, some of the most vocal in the press and at parliament in Scotland made themselves very busy twiddling their thumbs when they weren’t busy contradictory their earlier stances on offensive chanting. Remember that Tom Devine recently stated that sectarianism in Scotland is largely isolated within the Rangers support. Well, here we have a distinctly Celtic FC brand of sectarianism; literally, conceived and fomented within the Celtic support and passed back as their gift to the world through some daft, unthinking, bigoted women at Hampden. Yes, it’s clearly only a Rangers problem Tom. Our day will come. Never forgive, never forget. Blah blah blah.

I digress slightly, but this is an example of the world we find ourselves in and the all-too-apparent slope on the political playing field. And politics is the word here. The Aberdeen banner got very little comment from anyone bar a couple of papers. This low-key response would be unthinkable if it had been a Kill All Fenians banner at parkhead. It may be fairly trivial to most people’s lives but why is no-one prepared to call-out the unacceptable when the target suits them? It’s a fairly low risk, non-controversial position to hold. Is there really no politician in Scotland prepared to put in minimum leg work regarding Rangers? We are clearly not using our sizable voting mass effectively, even after all of these years.

Beyond that, no one in Scottish football has broken cover and condemned it. Worse still, the Rangers board has not publicly condemned it. This is the one that rankles me most. We know Rangers don’t get favours so we shouldn’t expect too much. However, we must make them act when the opportunities arise. This is that opportunity. They may be working behind the scenes, but we need to see something.

Hun is sectarian and Kill all Huns is well over the top. Rangers’ custodians have a duty to protect the club and the support. We would face stand closures in European competition if such a banner saw the light of day at Ibrox. Our board have a duty to play the political game and ensure others are held to the same standards as we are.

This board is already under scrutiny, their communication and competence are being heavily questioned. Their commitment to the support has been questioned. For me, doing nothing shows that they aren’t up to protecting the club or not know how to. It shows that they are not working on issues important to the support.

One of my (many) gripes over recent years is the boards’ ability to miss open goals. This feels like an open goal moment. Call it out as unacceptable. Force Aberdeen and the SFA join in the condemnation. I’m not asking for TV cameras and lawyers, I just want it stated somewhere, officially, in black and white. And bigger picture, let’s see who in the wider political landscape is willing to back the club, and then ensure we reward that action by finding a way to show the gratitude of the support via the ballot box. It might be out-with the perceived remit of a football club, but this is what others have been doing.

Murray left us stranded and isolated on these issues but at some point, someone at Rangers is going to need to step up again. The country’s’ largest club with the largest support must have considerable political weight. Improving this helps the club in many, many ways and makes many issues so much easier. Bottom line, it helps to protect the club. The current custodians may well be working on these areas, doing things behind the scenes, but if there’s no discernible change or output over months or years then it’s not really working. It’s wasted time. If you cannot score open goals then what are you actually doing?

Out of Control Disrespect

Disrespect is nothing new in Scottish football. It’s been there before anyone reading this was born and I have no doubts it’ll be there long after we’re all gone. Last week and the passing of Queen Elizabeth II does seem to have ramped things to a new level. Thankfully, there has been condemnation in the UK press it but there also seems to be a lack of discussion beyond that.

Let’s be honest, both sides are fairly entrenched and neither side is passing on tolerance or respect. Some will claim they are, but recent behaviour and events clearly suggest otherwise.

To my eyes there has been a few incidents in recent years that have directly or indirectly led to a ramping up of hostility.

The (deliberate) mishandling of the sectarianism debate is certainly one, although I don’t expect any contributors to concede as much. Dampening down offensive chanting is not a bad thing and if trying to sell our game and widen our horizons then it’s a noble enough cause – for Rangers and other clubs.  However, it was never packaged as this. It was a point-scoring exercise that focused predominately on Rangers – since many of the main protagonists have long since shown their hand, I don’t consider this to be up for debate.

But beyond the general disingenuous rottenness of the agenda, it had several lasting by-products. It emboldened celtic fans, and others, that their chants (pro-IRA, sectarian or just plain nasty) were somehow acceptable because their lackeys silence and refusal to call-out or censor those chants let to them to be tacitly accepted (and therefore excused). Meanwhile, it embittered Rangers fans that they were being singled out. Those following things could see what was going on. Those on the outskirts and moderate fans of other clubs bought into it as established platforms like BBC Scotland were selling it (often and everywhere) and they especially bought into Rangers’ being the bad guy and being giving a kicking over it.

This dovetailed nicely with Rangers financial troubles in 2011 and the Indy referendum in 2014. My opinion is the sectarianism debate and events in 2011 (and its fallout) were largely orchestrated, in the press at least, to suit similar purposes to those of the nationalists in 2014. Regardless of cause, the effects were the same; more division, more outrage, more grievance and spite and more disrespect.

One of the many responses thrown at Rangers fans when on the receiving end of abuse is that you deserve it. That’s fine, it’s ok to dislike Rangers. It’s ok to be offended by songs. Ultimately, it’s ok to dislike rivals. But the logic is circular. If your hatred is justified, and you act on that, then perhaps Rangers fans then feel the same in return. An admission of an offensive chanting arms race that’s been going on for over a century would be a start. Trying to dismantle and diffuse that fairly would be a start. Rangers’ fans sing offensive songs, sure, but then so do others. To claim to be especially repelled by the word fenian but not those barking about orange, hun or English bastards or pro-IRA chants makes no sense to me. It’s simply one-eyed and perhaps (probably) the result of years of the media conditioning mentioned above, neatly fitting into existing prejudices (be it tribal, rivalry or politically motivated).

In recent years any bridge of respect between Rangers and celtic has been visibly torched. Previously I could recall regular articles or broadcasts playing on the same-just-different theme. Sometimes forced or contrite but usually well intended. These have largely disappeared, but then so is how we consume our media. I have no doubt celtic hammed it up during the sectarianism debate, knowing that the game was rigged and the media onside. I have no doubt many of the same people helped to direct Rangers troubles in 2011 to some degree. The reasons for this? Money, silverware, access to Champions League. But also, political – culture wars if you will.

The SNP made its rather unsubtle play to take voters from labour and that actively excluded Rangers. MSPs would frequently and frivolously attack Rangers or anything Rangers-related. This brave new strategy would later evolve further at Celtic with many of the club statements no longer acknowledging Rangers by name. No-one stopped to call this out or perhaps think it may not be best for social cohesion. This belligerence manifested itself in other ways too; the banners and tifo seemed to take on a more militant edge, always tribal but often a racial or sectarian undertone. As mentioned before, the IRA chants and paraphernalia was present before, if muted, was now pushed to the fore. Recent accounts of city centre pubs openly playing up-the-RA chants on match days can surely not be claimed as a positive for Scotland?

Perhaps time and distance from the bombings and troubles has allowed a new generation to forget what these actually mean and continue pushing the envelope of offense. Kevin McKenna wrote that Scotlands Irish voting SNP was an expression of their comfort in their Scottish skin. I wonder what the open celebration of the IRA tells us?

Back to that circular logic. How should normal people or fans of other clubs treat this open pro-terror militancy? Justified dislike? Mistrust? Disrespect? And if that had element had always been there, then why would attitudes have been different previously? Context. It would be nice if the media gave it a fraction of the exposure of some other chants. Is it a case of it’s not what you sing but who you sing about?  

The deaths of Tommy Burns and Walter Smith also mark milestones along this path. A genuine affection between McCoist, Burns and Smith felt like it symbolised something bigger. Burns passed in 2008 and, with hindsight, this tied in with an escalation in hostilities – that now doesn’t feel like a coincidence. No doubt a knot of mutual respect was lost that day. Replace Burns with the likes of Lennon and the message was always going to change.

Of course, some people didn’t respect Burns and disrespect was shown. Unacceptable chants were aired and some people took it too far or expressed that at the wrong time. Again, these things are cyclical and disrespect would be returned.

Smith, similarly, had a very high standing across the nation. As close to universal respect as Scotland is likely to get. And so another lasting knot of respect unravelled.

Time is a healer but also time allows people to forget. A chant appeared soon enough including Smith and Jimmy Bell. Disrespect and offense the aim and the target was hit. These aren’t really minorities as it was clear many in the joyfully progressive and inclusive theme pubs were indulging in it. Condemnation was offered in some press but none of the analysis really cuts to the thick of it – we are a deeply divided society and it appears to be getting worse. The reason is that division suits some powerful players and no-one appears to have the inclination or platform to resist it or call it out.

I actively dislike my rivals but without some grounding we all lose here. There has to be some symbols of respect and some grown-ups keeping everyone honest. We don’t have that anymore, or they no longer have platforms. We have puppets having their strings pulled. The SFA and SPFL are a joke. The media spins narratives. Even the police has been shown to treat people differently. We have constitutional and racial politics setting rivalries and dictating what people find should offensive.

And this takes us to a place where a moments silence for the Queen is spoiled. In some cases, spoiled is too mild, it was turned into a circus. We are in a place where people are able to forget about the occasion, the environment, their peers, their fellow citizens or the loss of something symbolic to the country where most have spent their life and are instead projecting their own politics, rivalry and spite onto it. You don’t have to agree or care about subject of remembrance but on some level, you have to respect the act of remembrance. Be it club legends, heads of state or those lost in the wars.

This was a very good article around the time of HRHs’ passing in the Scotsman. It may not mean something to you, yet, but it could and it probably meant something, or even a lot, to people you know and care about. I don’t believe every celtic fan wanted to disrespect the Queen or hates the UK. I don’t believe everyone in Hampden didn’t admire or wish to spend a moment to show respect to her. It’s not a surprise that some did not, but it is disappointing that there’s no social filters left and no-one to kept the peace.

One last thought. This is unapologetically through a Rangers’ fan perspective. I want us to admit and own our failings, there’s plenty can be improved and a better Rangers-centric way achieved going forward, but others need to play ball too. In all of the events’ mentioned Rangers have been the focus or placed at the centre of it, but the club has been relatively benign throughout. It didn’t rabble rouse. It didn’t drag things to the gutter. It has took punishment when it had to, publicly criticised and banned its own fans, has been relatively pro-active, kept quiet on many matters when it probably should have but it seldom rocked the boat or poured fuel on flames. Maybe Rangers has been the bad guy in the past, maybe even revelled in that role for a while, but let’s not pretend it’s been that way for many years.  

Pride and Self-respect Sold to the Highest Bidder

I’ve already written on Gersnet about my initial opposition to Rangers accepting a role as a support act in Australia in November.  Since then I’ve listened to more views on this and have had some time to think about it. And I’m still raging.

James Bisgrove mentioned it was an unparalleled offer, too good to refuse. My question would be why was that? Doesn’t that point alone get the spider-senses tingling? Mid-season, during a World Cup, when the best players and footballing world is focused on Qatar, we get a previously unheard-of offer from the other side of the world? We know celtics current manager has links there. We know celtic will be there and we’ll be playing them. Doesn’t this start to feel wrong already?

As I saw it, it took approximately 60 minutes for the real reasons of our involvement to be revealed. This fixture was leaked very quickly on the back of the monumentally significant civil action suit against celtic being revealed. For me, this suggests celtic having a bigger role in this than simply just another team in the competition. I don’t know what our board expected to happen but this is a big deal. In the context of Scottish football and our own recent troubles this is all tied together and connected, and it’s entirely predictable. I don’t know what the contract states but I would suggest this could be seen as a reason to exit that contract, or at least cancel or replace the game against them? It could easily be argued that this looks like the soul reason for our involvement and it would certainly go towards explaining the fee put forward to lure us in. Who knows where that money has come from?

As a minimum, I would expect our club and PR to come out swinging on the back of this breach of trust and goodwill. I’ve seen nothing. Mr Bisgrove was obviously told to front up and earn his corn but that’s pretty much been it.

In our 150th year, I want to see us play every big club possible and I want games across the globe to celebrate it. I want old friendships renewed and history made, relived and reignited with any number of famous clubs. And I want us making money at the same time. The fact we’ve chosen to play a couple of random Australian teams alongside our shameless, dishonest enemies’ reeks of laziness. Why not arrange our own tour and play 5 or 6 games across Australia? How about something in Dubai, Baku or the far East on way out or return journeys? That way we’d make money, increase our audience/exposure/accessibility, and keep our pride intact. But I guess that might also involve foresight and some hard work and planning.

Another reason for my objection to this game is the ethical point of view. I regularly give opinions and commentary on the plights of both the Grays and Gordon Woods in their fight for justice in the CSA scandal. This is not just window-dressing, this is a real human fight against terrible deeds and a prolonged cynical cover-up. Any backing from me is absolute and extends beyond tribalism and club loyalty.

Gordon is absolutely right. It’s insulting for everyone. Mistakes are allowed, but once you realise that mistake you have to act to correct it. This is the crux of everything in life. The misuse of the fixture to cover celtics bad news should have seen alarm bells sounding around Ibrox. There should have been an immediate response to at least address this aspect and put that right, even before looking to cancel the fixture. I cannot express how badly the club have failed everyone here. Personally, I cannot back the club commercial until this is put right. Rangers do not need this just now as we try to pull together for a title charge. I hope I’m wrong but this decision, and prolonged inaction, will stink out Ibrox for a long time. Possibly long after those making these decisions are gone. We do not need this but I can’t sit back and watch Rangers be used like this.

A one final thing. Rangers has still not satisfactorily dealt with their own share of the CSA scandal. Reparations, consequences, footballing sanctions, PR damage do not stop at celtic. The scale and the framework surrounding it may be entirely different but Rangers have left some unwanted threads hanging ragged. Mark my words, others will come after Rangers with everything they have to save their own skin and share or transfer any damage. Do we expect Rangers to be remotely ready for this and deal with it efficiently? Based on this Australian farce, I’d say that is a resounding no!