Collymore the pisshead on the attack

[K.A.I 36,183]

1 minute ago, Inigo said:

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. 

Give me your evidence of this official club policy where we were told no Catholics 

I’ll apologise if you provide it 

[Laudrupsleftfoot 10,872]

Just now, K.A.I said:

Give me your evidence of this official club policy where we were told no Catholics 

I’ll apologise if you provide it 

This is the same type of shitty argument Adams gives about the IRA. Everybody knows for fuck sake.

But it's derailing from the main point in that we have a cunt with hundreds of thousands of followers talking absolute shite about our club.

[Inigo 32,526]

Just now, K.A.I said:

Give me your evidence of this official club policy where we were told no Catholics 

I’ll apologise if you provide it 

I don't have any written sources I can link to. I've seen Holmes and Souness talking about in interviews and a direct source from within Ibrox.

Not to mention anecdotally, how unlikely it is that you'd be able to coun t the number of Catholics in the period of near on 50 years on a few hands, and that latterly there's been far, far more.

[K.A.I 36,183]

5 minutes ago, Laudrupsleftfoot said:

This is the same type of shitty argument Adams gives about the IRA. Everybody knows for fuck sake.

But it's derailing from the main point in that we have a cunt with hundreds of thousands of followers talking absolute shite about our club.

Point proven 

biggest undercover tarrier on the forum piping up about an alleged catholic signing policy 

rest my case 

[Laudrupsleftfoot 10,872]

Just now, K.A.I said:

Point proven 

biggest undercover tarrier on the forum piping up about an alleged catholic signing policy 

rest my case 

“When I came here in 1964, we had no Catholics. Not just the playing staff, anywhere. There was no bit of paper, it was an unwritten rule. David Murray changed that and it moved on significantly in 1989 when Maurice Johnston signed. You cannot clear up 80 years of sectarianism in eight months, but we are a huge way down the road.”
– Sandy Jardine

[sandyinroyalblue 16,478]

 1 nil to Fulham

Ha ha Stan.

[AustinGio 77]

He's a wee baldy cock 

[bilkobear 125]

1 hour 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 

I don't think it ever was as simple as that.

If you want to go down the road of proportional representation, then Celtc would today mostly be a Protestant club in much the same way that Hibernian are.

Simple demographics would have insisted upon such a development.

However, Celtc at every level of employment for all of their existence have totally turned proportional representation on its head.

As for Rangers, we signed RC's freely more or less until three things kicked in.

One was the success of Celtc and the aspirations of young Catholics who were good enough to play for Rangers wanting only instead to play for Celtc, the second was RC schools separating them in their football development and the third was the Great War where the 1916 Easter Rising was seen as a betrayal and caused a rift that wasn't easily mended between the Roman Catholic Irish in Scotland and the host Protestant population.

In the end Rangers had no need to waste time upon chasing after good footballers from what was a very small part of the population.

This evolved into no RC's in the Rangers side.

[gsa 3,906]

Steering clear of certain groups is different from an official policy. 

If I needed work carried out in my garden I'd steer clear of pikeys but I haven't officially written it down anywhere. 

Just as I'm sure that celtic didn't officially write it down anywhere that they didn't want Protestant board members.

We should all have the right to choose without a fucking many state telling us we've got to embrace everyone. 

[keithgersbear 3,225]

Stan Collymore is a wife beating scumbag which is one of the big reasons no serious radio station or channel will hire him. A chip on his shoulder, talks utter shite, doesn't have a clue about football, never mind politics. Utter cunt. Hope he gets hit by a bus. 

[ZZed 4,510]

2 minutes ago, bilkobear said:

I don't think it ever was as simple as that.

If you want to go down the road of proportional representation, then Celtc would today mostly be a Protestant club in much the same way that Hibernian are.

Simple demographics would have insisted upon such a development.

However, Celtc at every level of employment for all of their existence have totally turned proportional representation on its head.

As for Rangers, we signed RC's freely more or less until three things kicked in.

One was the success of Celtc and the aspirations of young Catholics who were good enough to play for Rangers wanting only instead to play for Celtc, the second was RC schools separating them in their football development and the third was the Great War where the 1916 Easter Rising was seen as a betrayal and caused a rift that wasn't easily mended between the Roman Catholic Irish in Scotland and the host Protestant population.

In the end Rangers had no need to waste time upon chasing after good footballers from what was a very small part of the population.

This evolved into no RC's in the Rangers side.

Think you need to add in, the stigmatising that Catholics got from their own if they were considering playing for Rangers.

[Inigo 32,526]

6 minutes ago, bilkobear said:

I don't think it ever was as simple as that.

If you want to go down the road of proportional representation, then Celtc would today mostly be a Protestant club in much the same way that Hibernian are.

Simple demographics would have insisted upon such a development.

However, Celtc at every level of employment for all of their existence have totally turned proportional representation on its head.

As for Rangers, we signed RC's freely more or less until three things kicked in.

One was the success of Celtc and the aspirations of young Catholics who were good enough to play for Rangers wanting only instead to play for Celtc, the second was RC schools separating them in their football development and the third was the Great War where the 1916 Easter Rising was seen as a betrayal and caused a rift that wasn't easily mended between the Roman Catholic Irish in Scotland and the host Protestant population.

In the end Rangers had no need to waste time upon chasing after good footballers from what was a very small part of the population.

This evolved into no RC's in the Rangers side.

It evolved into what was essentially an unwritten policy. Which is why I said it's not to be ashamed of the way many want us to feel. Not that I think it was good that it was that way, but it was a product of social factors, many of which Catholics themselves, and sellic fc were partly responsible for.

[keithgersbear 3,225]

10 hours ago, Bristol loyal said:

He really is a fucking moron. celtic were founded to stop catholic immigrants mixing with the Protestant population. The same celtic originally told big jock he couldn’t be their manager because he was non catholic, also wouldn’t allow him to sit on the board because of his religion. The same celtic that threw bananas and made monkey chants at mark walters on his Rangers debut. The same celtic that abuse Shay Logan every time he plays against them for the crime of being racially abused by one of their players. I’m sure there’s plenty more aswell. 

Funny how Stan ignores all this isn’t it? Although to be honest a wife beating pervert like him is far better suited to them anyway, in fact the two are made for each other!

The guy is a moron. He doesn't have a clue about the history of Scotland and Scottish football. Trying to come across as being in "the know" with that lot. They are so inclusive that they racially abused Mark Walters and El Hadji Diouf. Covered up pedophilia which to this day casts a huge shadow over them and on the front pages of papers. Absolutely no right to be on any high horse. And I haven't even included the IRA supporting banners celebrating the butchering and murdering of innocent in what they would themselves describe as Irish children.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-13361478

 

[keithgersbear 3,225]

These fucktards still going on about religion/Catholics etc. Rangers has had Catholics employed by the club for decades now. One would think they hate seeing Catholics at Rangers for no other reason than they themselves are the ones with the problem with Catholics representing us and not us. 

[Getstiffed 8,863]

What. The. Actual. Fuck. Has. Happened. Here. ?????!!!!

The policy is their's not ours. We signed over 100 of them well before MJ. The only reason we didn't sign more is simple: Their community pressured young lads just starting their careers into signing for the "Catholic team" and what was left was all the shittiest players. So we had 2 choices, sign shite players just because they are Catholic and we don't want to upset anyone or just sign players based on their ability.

TLDR: they took all the decent Catholic players and we declined to sign the dross that was left but we somehow had a sectarian signing policy.

Bit of shit policy considering over 100 of them managed to get on our books.

[Getstiffed 8,863]

15 minutes ago, gsa said:

Steering clear of certain groups is different from an official policy. 

If I needed work carried out in my garden I'd steer clear of pikeys but I haven't officially written it down anywhere. 

Just as I'm sure that celtic didn't officially write it down anywhere that they didn't want Protestant board members.

We should all have the right to choose without a fucking many state telling us we've got to embrace everyone. 

All we did was steer clear of shite players who happened to be Catholics.

If their community wasn't so sectarian to begin with we'd probably have signed a lot more than the 100 odd we did before MJ.

[Getstiffed 8,863]

5 minutes ago, keithgersbear said:

These fucktards still going on about religion/Catholics etc. Rangers has had Catholics employed by the club for decades now. One would think they hate seeing Catholics at Rangers for no other reason than they themselves are the ones with the problem with Catholics representing us and not us. 

They do and always have done. It is absolutely 100% the reason why we didn't sign more of them. Their little fucken cult brainwashed young lads into staying away from us.

[keithgersbear 3,225]

1 minute ago, Getstiffed said:

They do and always have done. It is absolutely 100% the reason why we didn't sign more of them. Their little fucken cult brainwashed young lads into staying away from us.

And even if the narrative they espouse was correct, it has been well over 30 years. Stan can not find work in any reputable station on radio or TV which doesn't involve sucking Putin's cock. 

[The Specky Forum Organiser 64,530]

 

 

[gmcf 34,152]

29 minutes ago, Inigo said:

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. 

I agree with you . Don't know where I read it from , but I believe there was an unwritten policy about not signing catholics from just after WWI . Only going from what I remember reading about it ( it was decades ago ) but it was to do with soldiers coming back from the war and not being able to get work due to cheap Irish immigrants and Rangers saying that they wouldn't be part of that . 

It would make sense , as Rangers openly signed catholics right up to 1919 . 

This lasted till Mo Johnston , though Don Kitchenbrand declared himself as one a decade or so after he left Rangers 

 

[To Be A Ranger 4,032]

There may have been some 'unwritten policy' but its been blown to fuck decades ago. I dont give a fuck about any Rangers players religion and would never google a new signing to find it out but I'm guessing any player from a Latin country probably counts the pope as their religious leader. Which means we have signed quite a few without us getting upset about it.

[RFC Eagle 4,888]

54 minutes ago, Laudrupsleftfoot said:

Fuck sake 

Inigo is spot on here by the way, and Collymore should be forced into retracting his comments on why we were formed.

So you missed the bit about them  being 'open to all'? He, specifically, mentioned black players in his tweet. Every aspect of his tweet was wrong (not really a surprise). Its typical of the waste of oxygen that he is (I have my own personal issue with him over and above football).

Inigo is, partially, correct. We didn't sign many Catholics but it wasn't, entirely, for the reasons claimed by many. We didn't avoid them for their religious beliefs as much as the potential issues it would cause for both the player (from within his own community) and the club.

There were, undoubtedly, those at the club who were anti-Catholic (Alex Ferguson had an issue with one) but the club, as a whole has always been more, genuinely, inclusive than the mob across the city.

[ZZed 4,510]

Mr Collymore watching septics treble

[DariuszAdamczuk 548]

I’m assuming Stan hates Athletic Bilbao then 

[sandyinroyalblue 16,478]

38 minutes ago, Goosetav said:

 

 

well played