Vanguard Bears - just who are they?

[minstral 5,375]

In my opinion certain members are trying to create a wedge between the two sites. They would like nothing better than the two sites to be at each others throats.

[Gaz92 966]

Politics and religion go hand in hand with football all over the world though so wouldn't you be better off taking up another hobby? I don't believe VB have ever stated that only certain types of fans are allowed. Why do you want to get rid of it, why does it bother you?

Rangers will never not be known as a club with a strong Protestant background, with a link to Northern Ireland. I know that, and I don't try to argue against it.

I'll stick to football thanks, I enjoy it quite a lot. I don't particularly enjoy the politics and religion that some bring into it though, but I don't let it spoil my enjoyment of supporting Rangers.

And if you'd have read this thread you'd see that the VB's is only for Rangers fans of a certain mould, admitted by members themselves.

And as for the last point, I asked you in my previous point not to put words in my mouth. I never once said I wanted "to get rid" of the VB.

[Gaz92 966]

Gaz92

Theoretically you are correct, but of course you are ignoring reality.

Most sane rational people would prefer to live in a country without nuclear weapons and 400,000 trained killers. Unfortunately, we wouldn't last long if that were the case.

In Scotland football it is much the same. While there is one side looking to use politics and religion in football, you'll always have the other side.

Well, I don't personally agree that it is necessary - many more would disagree, but I'll never hide from voicing my arguments against it.

[Fastrax 274]

Rangers will never not be known as a club with a strong Protestant background, with a link to Northern Ireland. I know that, and I don't try to argue against it.

I'll stick to football thanks, I enjoy it quite a lot. I don't particularly enjoy the politics and religion that some bring into it though, but I don't let it spoil my enjoyment of supporting Rangers.

And if you'd have read this thread you'd see that the VB's is only for Rangers fans of a certain mould, admitted by members themselves.

And as for the last point, I asked you in my previous point not to put words in my mouth. I never once said I wanted "to get rid" of the VB.

You can support Rangers any way you want Gaz, but when you ARE arguing against the clubs strong religious and political background which I'd say majority of our fans subscribe to, on one of the biggest Rangers sites online, do you not expect a bit of flack? I'm not putting words in your mouth I wasn't talking about the VB, I was talking about our tradition and culture that you seem so reluctant (for one reason or another) to endorse.

[gogzy 31,195]

In my opinion certain members are trying to create a wedge between the two sites. They would like nothing better than the two sites to be at each others throats.

and there are members of both sites activley creating that wedge mate.

It's not all one way traffic mate, as much as some woulld like to say it is.

TWB and a few others might make some sly digs and SOME of the workVB do and SOME of the things VB say, but the outright abuse/threats and nastyness pretty much ALL comes from the VB side. I understand they feel they they are just defending themselves, but it honestly does not show the VB guys in a good light.

[Iron Curtain 60]

Allowing your self to be defined by how others see you (as per your starting statmement) is simply to allow allow others to think for you.

Do we need to be defined by how others perceive us ? Why not enjoy the sport and make your own mind up on religion and politics based on some thought on what is best and not becuase you think you should have certain views because someone else who supports a different team has a different view and you MUST take the opposite view.

It is not simply enough that we are a great football team - with a great sporting history?

That is a fantastic post, strikes a lot of chords with me.

[thebooler 4,509]

I didn't notice it on this thread, there's been plenty of posts in this thread I probably haven't noticed, and you clearly didn't notice my response to your question as you just breezed past it onto a different question.

It may have appeared as immature for me to like it, but I just found it amusing at the time. I just find the sniping that goes on between TWB and the many who will bite amusing.

Fair enough. You could have said that rather than rep a post which was an obvious dig at the good work VB's do.

[bluepeter 5,627]

There certainly is.

Out of interest, would you describe the following post by TWB as "decent discussion".....................................

"VB's motives are essentially the same as their motives. Yes, the shareholders probably are part of a lunatic fringe, what does that say about VB"?

Come on, booler, you're better than that mate. Anyone could pick posts from either side of this debate that don't show posters in a good light or show baiting, snidey digs, lack of decent discussion. Apart from that, that was posted in a different thread, since when TWB has said he'll contribute constructively or not at all. This thread is in the main a big improvement, with some decent discussion in it. Let's try to keep it that way.

[thebooler 4,509]

Well I personally believe there is very little place for politics or religion in football. I believe there can be more to us than a "Protestant, Unionist club", and I don't believe fan groups where only certain types of fans are allowed is a positive step forward though.

Where did I say I was ashamed of anything? Please don't bother trying to put words in my mouth.

confused.com

What do you mean by "certain types of fans"?

[YoungCitizen 79]

Its not easy to take such a self congratulory piece seriously at times "Its membership includes professional people (?) and also includes some of the most talented bloggers and writers in the United Kingdom", hmmm, not better to let others be the one's who sit in judgement?

I believe the above refers to the individuals who write blogs and not directly for the site. For example, Bill McMurdo, D'art and co...

As for the use of professional, I'd personally say it was a fantastic word choice to sum up who our membership includes.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

Some very good points but we are dealing with perception and reality. Unfortunately at this time our club is perceived in a certain light, that is reality. We as individuals can tell others that we don’t believe in that stereotypical thinking about our club but we can’t control what others think of us. All Rangers supporters are in a certain box as defined by others until they as individuals prove other wise. Religion and politics have almost always been in the mix with Rangers through out their history. If it was all down to sporting achievements and prowess, that would be fantastic but at this moment in time it is not and we have to deal with that reality. The club does symbolise certain things and when you wear that scarf, strangers will assume you share in that.

You wont change anything if you conform to what you think, other people think you are! Your position makes the determintation that we are defined by what others think and therefore all you do is conform to the stereotype! Kinda warped thinking to me.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

That is a fantastic post, strikes a lot of chords with me.

Thanks - now watchout for the taig accusaions coming your way

[Fastrax 274]

You wont change anything if you conform to what you think, other people think you are! Your position makes the determintation that we are defined by what others think and therefore all you do is conform to the stereotype! Kinda warped thinking to me.

Ah the great, free thinking BP9. In what way are we "conforming" to anything? Are you too blind / stupid to see that most people hold a genuine belief and morality which is embodied by our clubs very existance?

[Gaz92 966]

You can support Rangers any way you want Gaz, but when you ARE arguing against the clubs strong religious and political background which I'd say majority of our fans subscribe to, on one of the biggest Rangers sites online, do you not expect a bit of flack? I'm not putting words in your mouth I wasn't talking about the VB, I was talking about our tradition and culture that you seem so reluctant (for one reason or another) to endorse.

I've not expected some to challenge me, and they have, with some valid points and I'd say it was a fair enough discussion.

I know fans won't leave their culture and traditions behind, and in many ways I respect that, but I really don't agree with that many of them at all. I don't particularly want to get involved in a discussion about that though, as it would lead us down a whole different route.

I just believe if the VB believe defending those traditions means only appealing to certain fans, I believe that's a bit sad, and a bit backwards, and I've got very little time for an organisation that would turn away great Bears' because they don't fit said mould. Could the VB be a bit more inclusive whilst still defending these traditions, but taking into consideration the views of a different "brand" of Rangers fan? It could most certainly be done, but it's clear they have no plans of doing this, and that's what I've challenged.

[Gaz92 966]

confused.com

What do you mean by "certain types of fans"?

The ones that fit a Protestant, Unionist, Loyalist mould, or at least sympathise and lean towards said mould.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

Ah the great, free thinking BP9. In what way are we "conforming" to anything? Are you too blind / stupid to see that most people hold a genuine belief and morality which is embodied by our clubs very existance?

Please have the decency, prior to snipping, of reading what was said and what my post was in response to - you have obviously done neither!

Basically ZZed took the position that we are percieved BY OTHERS to be a Protestant Unionist Club therfore we must take that position - and that is simply daft! (All IMHO)

[minstral 5,375]

I've not expected some to challenge me, and they have, with some valid points and I'd say it was a fair enough discussion.

I know fans won't leave their culture and traditions behind, and in many ways I respect that, but I really don't agree with that many of them at all. I don't particularly want to get involved in a discussion about that though, as it would lead us down a whole different route.

I just believe if the VB believe defending those traditions means only appealing to certain fans, I believe that's a bit sad, and a bit backwards, and I've got very little time for an organisation that would turn away great Bears' because they don't fit said mould. Could the VB be a bit more inclusive whilst still defending these traditions, but taking into consideration the views of a different "brand" of Rangers fan? It could most certainly be done, but it's clear they have no plans of doing this, and that's what I've challenged.

Make it simple for you, VB defend the traditions of the majority of Rangers fans. It is clear that yourself and some others would rather leave behind our Traditions and Culture. So really you should not worry about what the VB are defending, and let the majority of fans be proud of people who are defending our Traditions.

[Gaz92 966]

Please have the decency, prior to snipping, of reading what was said and what my post was in response to - you have obviously done neither!

Basically ZZed took the position that we are percieved BY OTHERS to be a Protestant Unionist Club therfore we must take that position - and that is simply daft! (All IMHO)

Well said. I've told no fan at some point that they need to leave behind their political or religious views, but as a Rangers support we can strive to be viewed as broader than simply a Protestant Unionist club.

[Iron Curtain 60]

I believe the above refers to the individuals who write blogs and not directly for the site. For example, Bill McMurdo, D'art and co...

As for the use of professional, I'd personally say it was a fantastic word choice to sum up who our membership includes.

Professional is probably a good (if not indeed fantastic) word to sum up any group of any kind, anywhere, please feel free to elaborate if we have crossed wires - 'Professional People' as opposed to what...Bums off the street? And it was specifically the use of the word writers in context that caught my eye, that just cannot be taken seriously... some of the most talented writers in the UK?

Anyway thanks for your reply, I'm not wanting to get in to a big debate and just nit-picking perhaps, good luck with it all.

[Gaz92 966]

Make it simple for you, VB defend the traditions of the majority of Rangers fans. It is clear that yourself and some others would rather leave behind our Traditions and Culture. So really you should not worry about what the VB are defending, and let the majority of fans be proud of people who are defending our Traditions.

Did you poll the support before making that statement?

[outlaw69uk 123]

I think people are under a misconception that I actually want to join - I definitely don't and I haven't once said I do.

The VB are a group I see more and more of these days, and no doubt they'll go further. I believe if an organisation isolates some Rangers fans, it can't really claim to defend the support.

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe there's another organisation the size of VB or bigger that would openly reject the best Bear in the world if they didn't fit the mould.

The OP was clearly to provoke discussion, so I added my thoughts/criticisms of the VB moving forward.

You do like to make people repeat themselves dont you?

Do you have to "like" something or someone to defend it?

Does someone have to like you for you to defend them?

There are simple cases of right and wrong. Perhaps you dont understand some of the "attacks", therefore dont realise you are being stuck up for?

I thought last night, and, it may have been the late hour, that you were fairly reasonable, with a differing viewpoint, yet, posts like this one here make me consider you may well just be at it, in a more subtle way than some others. All your questions were answered, truthfully, you just dont like the answers

[outlaw69uk 123]

apart from knowing a VB member and hin vouching for you...what other criterea is there?

Last time i asked this, i was told by a member of VB that I wouldnt fit it anyway so dont bother trying to sign up.

If you know any, I am sure they would speak up for you mate

[gogzy 31,195]

Make it simple for you, VB defend the traditions of the majority of Rangers fans. It is clear that yourself and some others would rather leave behind our Traditions and Culture. So really you should not worry about what the VB are defending, and let the majority of fans be proud of people who are defending our Traditions.

This post annoys me, I am unfortunatley too stoned to articluate my reasons why very well but it smacks of elitism.

[YoungCitizen 79]

Well said. I've told no fan at some point that they need to leave behind their political or religious views, but as a Rangers support we can strive to be viewed as broader than simply a Protestant Unionist club.

That will never happen in my opinion, and I obviously hope it doesn't.

Take our support for example. The majority of our songbook is made up of traditional PUL ballads, ditties and add ons. Our flags and banners are mainly PUL minded. Our prematch entertainment even has a PUL theme.

That's not me touching on other links with Ibrox itself, which are PUL related.

There is no doubting that our traditions are alive and kicking with Ibrox.

[YoungCitizen 79]

Professional is probably a good (if not indeed fantastic) word to sum up any group of any kind, anywhere, please feel free to elaborate if we have crossed wires - 'Professional People' as opposed to what...Bums off the street? And it was specifically the use of the word writers in context that caught my eye, that just cannot be taken seriously... some of the most talented writers in the UK?

Anyway thanks for your reply, I'm not wanting to get in to a big debate and just nit-picking perhaps, good luck with it all.

I agree, it's a bold statement to back up regarding the writers.

As for professionals who are members, well let me just say, we have VERY influential people on board. I'm sure you'll understand I can't say much more on an open forum.

As I've said previous, questions and constructive criticism is welcomed.