Over to the board now regarding the Cup Final.

[big blue Fin 3,724]

17 hours ago, GWR1979 said:

Too busy building Bridges.

I know where I'd like to shove those fucking bridges...

[coopsleftboot 5,512]

1 hour ago, BloodRunsBlue said:

Only strong words followed up by decisive actions by our club will have anyone sit up and take notice.

Unfortunatly thats never going to happen from the bridge builders, so how do we get our useless board to grow a spine?

How about a "Not a penny more" campaign!!! (cue all the uber staunch Rangers fans Dave King fans, aghast at such a statement)

 

Not a penny more to who?

[TMB 14,167]

1 hour ago, BloodRunsBlue said:

If after the last 4 or 5 years you DONT  have an appetite to go to war with the SFA/Police/Rest of scottish fitbaw, then you are an appeaser.

I'm a football fan and I'd just like to get back to the football. 

[islandblue 366]

The fact is the SFA have accepted that without strict liability a club is not responsible for the conduct of their fans. Accordingly we can sing what we want without fear of the Club bring sanctioned

[islandblue 366]

Further clubs will never vote for strict liability so SFA are powerless

[Bristoe1872 2,553]

4 hours ago, B1872 said:

They are having a major shake up in the coming years. The board would be crazy not to even contact the EFL and have some discussions. The hatred towards us in this country is getting fucking ridiculous and something needs to change.

Agree 100% The hatred towards Rangers,a lot of it drummed up by a baying media,is out of control in this country. It seems these days we can't visit a single away ground without some nonsense taking place,which of course will always get a reaction from us. That is inevitable. If there was even the slimmest of chances of us playing elsewhere it would be remiss of the club not to at least make enquiries.

[Smile 26,610]

2 hours ago, islandblue said:

The fact is the SFA have accepted that without strict liability a club is not responsible for the conduct of their fans. Accordingly we can sing what we want without fear of the Club bring sanctioned

That won't be tolerated though but attacking our players and destroying the Ground okay.

[GWR1979 1,964]

4 hours ago, THE_MIGHTY_BEARS said:

It's two very different situations. 

I would agree the situation with the SC Final was worse, yet the reaction to the Lennon incident was off the scale, The Week after the final we were blamed for the slow Police response as we were blocking the route. 

[TMB 14,167]

41 minutes ago, GWR1979 said:

I would agree the situation with the SC Final was worse, yet the reaction to the Lennon incident was off the scale, The Week after the final we were blamed for the slow Police response as we were blocking the route. 

A Hearts fan ran on to the pitch, attacked Lennon, and was arrested.  Hearts FC weren't held accountable for the actions of that fan. 

The blocking of Police was a newspaper story and they've since apologised for getting that story wrong.  It's a separate issue from the damage liability being discussed yesterday.

[Howsitgoing 4,281]

3 hours ago, islandblue said:

The fact is the SFA have accepted that without strict liability a club is not responsible for the conduct of their fans. Accordingly we can sing what we want without fear of the Club bring sanctioned

This is part of the SFA rules. 

 

33. disorderly Conduct
The clubs are responsible for the behaviour of their players, officials, members, supporters and any person carrying out a function at a match on their behalf.

In the event of damage being sustained to a stadium where a tie in the Competition is played as a consequence of misbehaviour by a player, official, member, supporters, or any other person acting on behalf of or associated with a club, then that club shall be responsible for any costs arising in the reparation of same.

The Association shall have the power to request such reports as may be necessary in determining responsibility for restitution and may additionally through the Board impose upon any club a censure, fine, ejection from the Competition or suspension if, in the opinion of the Board, a stadium is the subject of damage by that club’s representatives or those associated with it (Rule 6 refers).

The provisions of this Rule 33 are without prejudice to the terms of Article 92, which apply to clubs in the context of their participation in the Competition. Any infringement of that Article also can lead to serious sanctions as set out in the Articles including ejection from the Competition. 

 

Its completly false that there hands are tied due to this "strict liability " rubbish. 

[Sweetheart 8,458]

club statement http://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/club-statement-67/

 

[Teamgers 1,214]

Fuckin get in Rangers!!

[Ger_onimo 20,488]

7 minutes ago, Sweetheart said:

club statement http://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/club-statement-67/

 

If you say you're "not going to tolerate" something, you need to outline what the consequences will be if it happens. Otherwise tolerating it is exactly what you'll be doing.

[GWR1979 1,964]

21 minutes ago, THE_MIGHTY_BEARS said:

A Hearts fan ran on to the pitch, attacked Lennon, and was arrested.  Hearts FC weren't held accountable for the actions of that fan. 

The blocking of Police was a newspaper story and they've since apologised for getting that story wrong.  It's a separate issue from the damage liability being discussed yesterday.

I can understand from reading this thread you want to move on get on with the football but our players were attacked on the field at the SC Final,  Nothing has been done you have mentioned the arrests but until I see any figures I don't know what proportion are Hibs/Rangers as the most severe punishment s so far have been handed down to 2 bears.

The response from the club started promising but has now turned into dignified silence. 

I want the club to be defending the fans something as a club we have never done.

Can you imagine the Herald coming out with a story about how Scott Allan should claim religious prejudice because he's not getting a game for celtic, No neither can I but that's what they did to us last week with Barton, and I know they issued an apology but like the SC final aticle the damage has already been done.

[Ger_onimo 20,488]

Also, the stuff about Petrie is spot on and needs said, but as far as I can see they're not actually saying it to anyone but us. Why not raise it with UEFA and tell us that's what they're doing?

[Sweetheart 8,458]

3 minutes ago, Ger_onimo said:

If you say you're "not going to tolerate" something, you need to outline what the consequences will be if it happens. Otherwise tolerating it is exactly what you'll be doing.

Was that reference to something i've said or what was said in the club statement?

[Ger_onimo 20,488]

1 minute ago, Sweetheart said:

Was that reference to something i've said or what was said in the club statement?

Last para of the statement.

[Sweetheart 8,458]

Just now, Ger_onimo said:

Last para of the statement.

no probs

http://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/club-statement-67/

[Trialist 80]

The bottom line is that Hibs are off the hook. No amount of club statements will change that.Whilst I appreciate the sentiments of the statement and the tone of the statement , I'm not sure what difference this will make.

 

[BloodRunsBlue 1,303]

So when the SFA either ignore this new statement completely, or brush it aside with a load of bollocks, what do we do then?

The statement should have clearly stated that unless action was taken, we would continue to ask our questions and demand the answers from a higher level, perhaps to UEFA.

[Copland bear 7,966]

8 hours ago, islandblue said:

The fact is the SFA have accepted that without strict liability a club is not responsible for the conduct of their fans. Accordingly we can sing what we want without fear of the Club bring sanctioned

This is exactly how I read it also, time for the Billy boys to be brought back, The tarriers, Hibs, Motherwell and Aberdeen can do whatever the fuck they like.

Man City has an orange and blue kit on yesterday and no one said a word about it, yet if we had one the pope himself would be ringing the sfa.

If this board do not back the fans all the way on this then they are on borrowed time as I for one am sick of them and I was glad they got in, yes they were better than the last board which would not be hard but I don't judge them on that last lot or even under Murray.

They want our money then they better get their fingers out. 

[Sweetheart 8,458]

a good statement if the club follow it through. I'd like to see the PFA  conducting a investigation on player safety now.

[GWR1979 1,964]

36 minutes ago, Sweetheart said:

club statement http://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/club-statement-67/

 

Thats more like it,

Well done

As for Petrie he has previous with us and not issuing an apology after he tried to down play what was going on in front of him kind of makes him not fit for purpose. 

[Sweetheart 8,458]

3 minutes ago, GWR1979 said:

Thats more like it,

Well done

As for Petrie he has previous with us and not issuing an apology after he tried to down play what was going on in front of him kind of makes him not fit for purpose. 

I'd like to know why Hamden security did not follow Police Scotland's advice to mark a high risk categorisation for the Match. I hope the PFA look into this for Rangers and our players.

[GWR1979 1,964]

4 minutes ago, Sweetheart said:

I'd like to know why Hamden security did not follow Police Scotland's advice to mark a high risk categorisation for the Match. I hope the PFA look into this for Rangers and our players.

Just a guess but it will be down to costs.