Jump to content

Collymore the pisshead on the attack


Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Inigo said:

We had a general policy of avoiding Catholic players, with a relatively small number of exceptions that were advised to keep it under wraps. There's no point in pretending we freely and openly signed them. We didn't.

Do you have written proof of such a policy? Like transcripts from board meetings or such likes?

Why would a club freely and openly discuss a players religion upon signing them? That would be a bit bizarre to discuss a private matter like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, plumbGER said:

Do you have written proof of such a policy? Like transcripts from board meetings or such likes?

Why would a club freely and openly discuss a players religion upon signing them? That would be a bit bizarre to discuss a private matter like that.

I know, because I know shareholders (in my family) from the 60s and o wards when there weren't very many shareholders and were familiar with those in the corridors of power.

Everyone knows it was the case anyway. I mean, statistically, it's like looking at GCC's choices for Lord provost and claiming it shows nothing. The number of Catholics that we signed was so far below representative that it has to have been, even taking into account the fact that they would likely have been sellic fans.

But that's btw. I know it's true from family and and everyone else, if theyre honest with themselves, knows it was the case 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Inigo said:

I know, because I know shareholders (in my family) from the 60s and o wards when there weren't very many shareholders and were familiar with those in the corridors of power.

Everyone knows it was the case anyway. I mean, statistically, it's like looking at GCC's choices for Lord provost and claiming it shows nothing. The number of Catholics that we signed was so far below representative that it has to have been, even taking into account the fact that they would likely have been sellic fans.

But that's btw. I know it's true from family and and everyone else, if theyre honest with themselves, knows it was the case 

Plausible but that doesn't prove anything i'm afraid., not really.

The fact we actually signed catholics aswell makes it increasingly unlikely that such a rule existed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Inigo said:

I know, because I know shareholders (in my family) from the 60s and o wards when there weren't very many shareholders and were familiar with those in the corridors of power.

Everyone knows it was the case anyway. I mean, statistically, it's like looking at GCC's choices for Lord provost and claiming it shows nothing. The number of Catholics that we signed was so far below representative that it has to have been, even taking into account the fact that they would likely have been sellic fans.

But that's btw. I know it's true from family and and everyone else, if theyre honest with themselves, knows it was the case 

No debate on this as far as I am concerned. We did not sign Catholics for many a year on a point of principal, we were the Protestant club as opposed to THEM across the city. However this was a time when the only Catholic we could have signed would have been a Scottish one, otherwise known as a celtic fan. 

With the opening up of borders, the option to sign a Catholic who was not a Fenian became available, and we did so. Personally I do not give a fcuk about a players religion as long as he does the business on the field of play, and I doubt that there are too many Bears out there who would say a bad word about Amo, The Hammer or Caniggia to name but a few in recent years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Inigo said:

I know, because I know shareholders (in my family) from the 60s and o wards when there weren't very many shareholders and were familiar with those in the corridors of power.

Everyone knows it was the case anyway. I mean, statistically, it's like looking at GCC's choices for Lord provost and claiming it shows nothing. The number of Catholics that we signed was so far below representative that it has to have been, even taking into account the fact that they would likely have been sellic fans.

But that's btw. I know it's true from family and and everyone else, if theyre honest with themselves, knows it was the case 

We may not have sought out Catholics but they were as unlikely to have played for us as we were to sign them. They would have been ostracised by their own.

Those Catholic players we did sign were treated no differently to any other player. The same cannot be said when it comes to how they treated the manager who is synonymous with their European success.

Collymores other point about coloured players needs addressing too. Maybe the name Walter Tull means nothing to him but he would have graced the Rangers shirt but for his sacrifice in the First World War.

Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, plumbGER said:

Plausible but that doesn't prove anything i'm afraid., not really.

The fact we actually signed catholics aswell makes it increasingly unlikely that such a rule existed.

Souness talked about it at the time. So did David Holmes. The fact we signed, or tried to sign, so few suggests such a thing did.

As I say, the same family member I have previously talked about on here that was involved in the discussions over the new stadium in the 70s told me it was very much something that existed.

It was an idea that was accepted by fans up until the 80s. It's only recently it's been made out to be something of a myth.

Nothing to be ashamed of. Things were different back then. But it's how it was. Collymore's hypocrisy and selective offendedness is the issue 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Inigo you are talking pish we’ve always signed catholic players a manager on one of my sites surname O’Brian raised Catholic but Rangers fan they took him on their books this was the height of the alleged signing policy 

here I’d bring the signing policy back as Scottish Catholics that support celtic are scum - if it was upto me but people don’t actual know the history 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, K.A.I said:

Inigo you are talking pish we’ve always signed catholic players a manager on one of my sites surname O’Brian raised Catholic but Rangers fan they took him on their books this was the height of the alleged signing policy 

here I’d bring the signing policy back as Scottish Catholics that support celtic are scum - if it was upto me but people don’t actual know the history 

Never said we didn't sign them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Inigo said:

Souness talked about it at the time. So did David Holmes. The fact we signed, or tried to sign, so few suggests such a thing did.

As I say, the same family member I have previously talked about on here that was involved in the discussions over the new stadium in the 70s told me it was very much something that existed.

It was an idea that was accepted by fans up until the 80s. It's only recently it's been made out to be something of a myth.

Nothing to be ashamed of. Things were different back then. But it's how it was. Collymore's hypocrisy and selective offendedness is the issue 

Yes i would rather focus on the matter at hand and that is the arsehole Collymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, K.A.I said:

What are you saying then? Apologies if I’ve came in late and only caught something out of context 

I've said we did sign some, but they there was a general stated policy of avoiding them. That there was a sectarian element to our recruitment, but that it wasn't quite as all consuming as many that hate us make out, and evening it was, it was 30 years ago that it ended and others are allowed to move on from questionable history, yet we are not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Inigo said:

I've said we did sign some, but they there was a general stated policy of avoiding them. That there was a sectarian element to our recruitment, but that it wasn't quite as all consuming as many that hate us make out, and evening it was, it was 30 years ago that it ended and others are allowed to move on from questionable history, yet we are not.

No I was right first time you are taking pish as who I’m on about fell in that period 

Don’t get me wrong there was a scout that passed up on McGrain because it was a fenian name when he was a bluenose but it’s never been policy - the odd scout maybe 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, gsa said:

No, like Neil Lennon his "illness" will never result in suicide. Thankfully. 

I've known people unfortunate enough to really suffer and the attention seeking, baiting, aggression and "poor little me" behaviour of Lennon and Collymore is not depression.

It's two bitter, sad little bullies, looking for excuses for their behaviour.

did not say he was depressed but showing the manifestation of his BPD and lots of PD's go on to destroy themselves.

Lennon is a nobhead and uses mental illness as an excuse when he has made a cunt of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, K.A.I said:

No I was right first time you are taking pish as who I’m on about fell in that period 

Don’t get me wrong there was a scout that passed up on McGrain because it was a fenian name when he was a bluenose but it’s never been policy - the odd scout maybe 

Nup, it has been. Don't know about that specific case, but it was policy to avoid them. As both Souness and Holmes suggested in the 80s. As my family member was aware of earlier. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...