Rangers and the code

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

It was David Murrays?s first ever AGM as chairman of Rangers Football Club.

The first question he had to field saw him at his very best?ridiculing the questionnaire and offering a firm response.

Another shareholder responded?..irrespective of the truth at hand?the chairman?s response was not what was expected of a Rangers chairman.

David Murray reflected and offered a sincere apology to the individual who had proposed the original question.

This factual incident, although seemingly meaningless, offers us great insight into everything about Rangers Football Club.

Neither money, prestige, reputation nor official standing?.can guarantee you exclusive rights to ownership of what it means to be a bear.

Rangers fans are born, Not manufactured

We do not choose, we are chosen,

Those who don?t understand?don?t matter

Those who understand need no explanation.

There was a code. And David Murray had broken it. By his own admission, he was not born a Bear?and therefore he did not understand. This is not meant to be a criticism of David Murray?.rather it is acceptance that there is something verging on the spiritual?the mystical of what it means to be a Bear. It?s more than just a birthright?and this author accepts he is not qualified to offer an answer to the mystical splendour of it all. But there is a code for sure?and too understand and appreciate it you have to live and breathe Rangers.

But one thing is certain?Rangers Football Club is an institution. In fact it is more than an institution.

In our lives we are subject to constant change?it may be employment?place of residence?.friends?.girlfriends?even wives?.but at the very core of our being remains a current constant?.a reliable milestone? you could even call it a sentimental benchmark?.Rangers Football Club. They remain a current constant to the madness of the world which surrounds us?small wonder then that Bears are resistant to change?particularly when such change equates to a selling of our soul.

For this football club offers more than just a sporting meeting place?.it has been a place for years where like minds could meet. We meet not just to support a football team?.but to express our political and spiritual aspirations and desires and this expression will only increase as the constant attempts are made to ridicule and undermine or culture and our history.

Rangers fans are born, Not manufactured

We do not choose, we are chosen,

Those who don?t understand?don?t matter

Those who understand need no explanation

But the institution which is Rangers has not been established by men of prestige?of money or influence.

No?the mystique of Rangers as a football team and an institution has been established by the ordinary men and women who have chosen to follow follow in sometimes extraordinary circumstances?..to follow something they were born to?something that was almost inherent?.and whether they could not understand the logic or rationale behind the desire?.at the heart of their very soul was something calling them?challenging them to respond?to follow?to support?and to believe in everything Rangers stood for.

Let me repeat it?. And I make no apologies for quoting our club captain?because I have believed this all my life?..Rangers are not a football club?they are a way of life.

There are those among us who care not for our expressions of identity.

I would ask them this question?..why did a BBC director on asking why he supported Rangers reply as follows ??Rangers are the quintessentially British club? ? Because?and I would wager he was not aware of the ceremonies associated with the Loving Cup?.those ceremonies which go on behind closed doors?he saw what those ordinary men and women achieved with their banners?their flags and their songs. Every day I reflect on his statement and feel immense pride on the message and identity which emanates from Ibrox?not from ?a club spokesperson?? but the men and women who are the very heart and soul of our club.

They sang those songs and waved those banners?not to be popular?not to win favour?but because it was what they believed in ?.what formed them as people?their identity?their beliefs?and they stood shoulder to shoulder with others who shared those beliefs. People may hate us for what we believe in?but they cannot and will not destroy our identity.

Rangers fans are born, Not manufactured

We do not choose, we are chosen,

Those who don?t understand?don?t matter

Those who understand need no explanation.

So let us get to the crux of the matter?because we as a support go beyond celebrating our British identity?we go further and celebrate our Protestant Heritage. And for that we have been condemned?..time and time again.

But why not celebrate it?in a responsible manner?.for our Protestant values are those which have made our club more than just a football club. Those who chose to argue that Rangers have no Protestant identity are denying the facts of history?church parades?..charity football matches to name but a few?the list could go on?but I am not here to educate the ignorant?I am here to rejoice with my like minded brethren in what not merely unites us?but sets us apart as both football club and a people.

I will not be ashamed of being a Protestant nor will I be ashamed of supporting a football which reflects my culture and beliefs....provided such expression is done in a responsible manner.

You are defined?. not by what you say ?but by what you do.

Money cannot and never will, be able to buy what it means to be a bear. Those mystical values of which I spoke of earlier are like spiritual laws?they are beyond price.

Truth, integrity, loyalty, steadfastness, dignity?is it any small wonder that we so often hear the phrase ?not the Rangers Way ? ? The ?Way? to which they refer is the mystical code?the birthright? the exemplary code of conduct to which we are called.

How ironic that we seem to be under attack from politicians who replace the truth with spin?loyalty with defection?and dignity with shameful conduct.

I was born a Ranger?I have lived a Ranger? and I will die a Ranger.

And my son will replace me?. and his son him.

And no politician will manufacture what any of us were born to be.

Rangers fans are born, Not manufactured

We do not choose, we are chosen,

Those who don?t understand?don?t matter

Those who understand need no explanation.

RANGERS FOREVER

[Guest Manticore]

great stuff as always D'Artagnan.

I think we really need to hammer home the point that Minty is not a bear, as you say that is not to insult him, but it explains many of his actions and attitudes.

[Ayebrox 0]

Murray is not a Bear. Hold the phone.

There are many chairmen who have not been passionate supporters of their club before they became the Chairman, I don't see that as being a strong argument.

It's like people saying, " We need Rangers men in" when it comes to the players or coaching staff. No we need the right men in, first and foremost. If they are Rangers men, then that's a bonus.

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

Strong arguement for what ?

Who is making an arguement ?

[Ayebrox 0]

Strong arguement for what ?

Who is making an arguement ?

Sum up the point of your post then.

It looks to me like the old Murray is not a Bear so he isn't fit to do the job argument.

[Guest orangpendek]

giving so much emotional attachment to a sports club is not good for you. it's just going to cause you more pain than is necessary if/when things go badly. i can only say in response that i do not believe in pre-destination any more for football than i do for religion. i've been a rangers man since i was 7, and that's cause my uncle took me to ibrox, not because of any mystical/religious/theosophical reasons. so you'll understand,i hope, when i say that whether murray was 'born a bear' so to speak is from my point of view irrelevant to his chairmanship, and furthurmore that if you are chairman of a club for 20 years or so there's a fairly good chance you'll be a supporter by then also. it also seems a bit elitist to say now that things are bad, remember murray isn't really one of us. we were happy enough to take his money before, weren't we? i bet if he was still ploughing in the dosh this wouldn't be brought up.

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

Strong arguement for what ?

Who is making an arguement ?

Sum up the point of your post then.

It looks to me like the old Murray is not a Bear so he isn't fit to do the job argument.

Why... because you fail to understand it ? And you obviously have failed to understand it.

Whats this... explanations on demand to Ayebrox ?

[blueben_d 40]

sometimes if you are too steeped in your own ways life can overtake you, its always good to have a different view on things.

Remembering the past is good and we can never ever forget, but we also have to move forward as if you don't you stagnate and die.

Bring the old traditions into the new age and the foothold of tradition will always be there, but it will not become a millstone around our necks.

Being a bear no longer means being a protestant, but that does not mean we should forget our protestant roots

[Ayebrox 0]

Strong arguement for what ?

Who is making an arguement ?

Sum up the point of your post then.

It looks to me like the old Murray is not a Bear so he isn't fit to do the job argument.

Why... because you fail to understand it ? And you obviously have failed to understand it.

Whats this... explanations on demand to Ayebrox ?

I'm at work and had to skim read it, repeated paragraphs all over the shop. I don't see why, if you have a decent point to make, you can't concisely state what that point is.

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

giving so much emotional attachment to a sports club is not good for you. it's just going to cause you more pain than is necessary if/when things go badly. i can only say in response that i do not believe in pre-destination any more for football than i do for religion. i've been a rangers man since i was 7, and that's cause my uncle took me to ibrox, not because of any mystical/religious/theosophical reasons. so you'll understand,i hope, when i say that whether murray was 'born a bear' so to speak is from my point of view irrelevant to his chairmanship, and furthurmore that if you are chairman of a club for 20 years or so there's a fairly good chance you'll be a supporter by then also. it also seems a bit elitist to say now that things are bad, remember murray isn't really one of us. we were happy enough to take his money before, weren't we? i bet if he was still ploughing in the dosh this wouldn't be brought up.

Orangedek...

I dont want this to turn into an anti-Murray thread...thats not what its about.

But tell me one thing....when were we happy to take his money ? And what money was that ?

Has it not dawned on you yet that the money lavished out in the 90's was Rangers money not SDM's ? Thats why we were in so much debt.

Thats why we are restricted to 37 and 34 year old centre halves. We dont have any money as a club and our chairman is not willing to finance any deals personally.

[Ayebrox 0]

y mystical/religious/theosophical reasons. so you'll understand,i hope, when i say that  whether murray was 'born a  bear' so to speak is from my point of view giving so much emotional attachment to a sports club is not good for you. it's just going to cause you more pain than is necessary if/when things go badly. i can only say in response that i do not believe in pre-destination any more for football than i do for religion. i've been a rangers man since i was 7, and that's cause my uncle took me to ibrox, not because of anirrelevant to his chairmanship, and furthurmore that if you are chairman of a club for 20 years or so there's a fairly good chance you'll be a supporter by then also. it also seems a bit elitist to say now that things are bad, remember murray isn't really one of us. we were happy enough to take his money before, weren't we? i bet if he was still ploughing in the dosh this wouldn't be brought up.

Orangedek...

I dont want this to turn into an anti-Murray thread...thats not what its about.

Yet the first large chunk of the article is a dig at Murray, and the rest seems to try and point out the aspects of the club someone like him would fail to understand, in your view.

[ibroxwonder 0]

I agree about the spiritual ideas... personally I am not a devout protestant... I'm more of an agnostic... but I've always seen Rangers as something of a religion... I go as often as I can to a "place of worship", and through personal hardship, as many people turn to their faith, I turn to my team... MY faith.

It always has felt, to me, that there is something special about following Rangers.

As for DM... I fully support him, because he has done great thing with the club... Call me blind, tell me I have my head in the sand... but there are times when I wish we spent more money... but I realise that we cannot... and with what money we DO have... DM has done a fantastic job. He's taken us from ?70m+ in debt, to a little over ?5m... and I think I'm right in saying he was not chairman during Advocatt's mental spending spree's.

Really there is one thing we all care about, and that's why we have the views we do ^_^

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

Strong arguement for what ?

Who is making an arguement ?

Sum up the point of your post then.

It looks to me like the old Murray is not a Bear so he isn't fit to do the job argument.

Why... because you fail to understand it ? And you obviously have failed to understand it.

Whats this... explanations on demand to Ayebrox ?

I'm at work and had to skim read it, repeated paragraphs all over the shop. I don't see why, if you have a decent point to make, you can't concisely state what that point is.

Its called emphasis and re-emphasis. Sorry that point was lost on you.

I'll try to bear it in mind next time I pen an article.

I'll put one in here and one in the "easy -read" section.

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

I agree about the spiritual ideas... personally I am not a devout protestant... I'm more of an agnostic... but I've always seen Rangers as something of a religion... I go as often as I can to a "place of worship", and through personal hardship, as many people turn to their faith, I turn to my team... MY faith.

It always has felt, to me, that there is something special about following Rangers.

As for DM... I fully support him, because he has done great thing with the club... Call me blind, tell me I have my head in the sand... but there are times when I wish we spent more money... but I realise that we cannot... and with what money we DO have... DM has done a fantastic job. He's taken us from ?70m+ in debt, to a little over ?5m... and I think I'm right in saying he was not chairman during Advocatt's mental spending spree's.

Really there is one thing we all care about, and that's why we have the views we do ^_^

Wrong he was chairman and he sanctioned the spending spree...

[Ayebrox 0]

Strong arguement for what ?

Who is making an arguement ?

Sum up the point of your post then.

It looks to me like the old Murray is not a Bear so he isn't fit to do the job argument.

Why... because you fail to understand it ? And you obviously have failed to understand it.

Whats this... explanations on demand to Ayebrox ?

I'm at work and had to skim read it, repeated paragraphs all over the shop. I don't see why, if you have a decent point to make, you can't concisely state what that point is.

Its called emphasis and re-emphasis. Sorry that point was lost on you.

I'll try to bear it in mind next time I pen an article.

I'll put one in here and one in the "easy -read" section.

Awww, come on now, no need to get the claws out

Forget the repeated paragraphs then, I'm sure my old English teacher would love it.

But again, can you concisely state the point of your article ?

[blueben_d 40]

Strong arguement for what ?

Who is making an arguement ?

Sum up the point of your post then.

It looks to me like the old Murray is not a Bear so he isn't fit to do the job argument.

Why... because you fail to understand it ? And you obviously have failed to understand it.

Whats this... explanations on demand to Ayebrox ?

I'm at work and had to skim read it, repeated paragraphs all over the shop. I don't see why, if you have a decent point to make, you can't concisely state what that point is.

Its called emphasis and re-emphasis. Sorry that point was lost on you.

I'll try to bear it in mind next time I pen an article.

I'll put one in here and one in the "easy -read" section.

D'Artagnan's Rangers Code for Dummies

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

"But again, can you concisely state the point of your article ?"

You work it out....others obviously have going by the responses to it.

[Guest orangpendek]

well i'm of the opinion that we spent a good bit more than we brought in from such sources, and season tickets and so on. after all, if murray had only been spending rangers money, we couldn't have got into debt could we? the money we borrowed above our income had to be secured against something, and since it was murray who bailed us out i assume he was the security.

but you say this isn't an anti-murray thread and i agree. the main thrust of my reply was that it's quite possible to become a rangers man and hold equally valid if different views on the club. i don't buy the argument that one must needs be born into a specific culture to be a bear.

as a by the bye, i feel that murray has run his course and should hand over to someone else. i'm not a murray right or wrong man.

[Frankie 505]

I don't think D'Artagnan will disagree that Murray has brought us lots of good times.

However, those good times were now approaching 10 years ago and now, no-one can deny that his ambition and leadership doesn't match that of our nearest rivals.

It really amazes me how far some people will go not to give David Murray criticism for the way he mismanaged the club during Advocaat's tenure.

[Ayebrox 0]

"But again, can you concisely state the point of your article ?"

You work it out....others obviously have going by the responses to it.

My point is, why the long intro about Murray ?

To me, it wasn't just an article about the great tradtion of the club and what it means to be a true Rangers fan.

To me, going by the opening section of the article, it was basically a swipe at Murray.

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

well i'm of the opinion that we spent a good bit more than we brought in from such sources, and season tickets and so on. after all, if murray had only been spending rangers money, we couldn't have got into debt could we? the money we borrowed above our income had to be secured against something, and since it was murray who bailed us out i assume he was the security.

but you say this isn't an anti-murray thread and i agree. the main thrust of my reply was that it's quite possible to become a rangers man and hold equally valid if different views on the club. i don't buy the argument that one must needs be born into a specific culture to be a bear.

as a by the bye, i feel that murray has run his course and should hand over to someone else. i'm not a murray right or wrong man.

I disagree with the first bit dek totally....and I could substantiate it....but this is not an anti-SDM thread...that is important.

Your second part sums it up perfectly...

"it's quite possible to become a rangers man and hold equally valid if different views on the club. i don't buy the argument that one must needs be born into a specific culture to be a bear."

Perfect summation....could you now explain that to Ayebrox

[Ayebrox 0]

I don't think D'Artagnan will disagree that Murray has brought us lots of good times.

However, those good times were now approaching 10 years ago and now, no-one can deny that his ambition and leadership doesn't match that of our nearest rivals.

It really amazes me how far some people will go not to give David Murray criticism for the way he mismanaged the club during Advocaat's tenure.

I'll criticise him for that Among other things.

But you can be critical of aspects of his reign and still be content to have him as chairman of the club.

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

"But again, can you concisely state the point of your article ?"

You work it out....others obviously have going by the responses to it.

My point is, why the long intro about Murray ?

To me, it wasn't just an article about the great tradtion of the club and what it means to be a true Rangers fan.

To me, going by the opening section of the article, it was basically a swipe at Murray.

Ayebrox,

If I was taking a swipe at SDM...believe you me you would know about.

It would certainly be more than a paragraph of factual content.

[Frankie 505]

Of course you can...

But, at this moment, in time Murray is presiding over one of the worst periods in our history. Just like he can be given praise for 9iar, he can be given criticism for our awful performance (on and off the field) for the last 5 years at least.

Until he shows us all that he still has the same hunger, drive, leadership and ambition that he did nearly 20 years ago, I wouldn't blame any fan for thinking his time as chairman is up.

Unfortunately, there aren't any alternatives to SDM right now. As such, like we do the players and the manager, I'd prefer we supported each other to try and find the answers to our problems.

But that support has to go both ways.

[Ayebrox 0]

"But again, can you concisely state the point of your article ?"

You work it out....others obviously have going by the responses to it.

My point is, why the long intro about Murray ?

To me, it wasn't just an article about the great tradtion of the club and what it means to be a true Rangers fan.

To me, going by the opening section of the article, it was basically a swipe at Murray.

Ayebrox,

If I was taking a swipe at SDM...believe you me you would know about.

It would certainly be more than a paragraph of factual content.

So what was the purpose of discussing Murray for the first section of the article ?