The BIG thread of hun topics and other assorted mentalness from Albatross!

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
In its ruling, the ESC said that where the BBC had made the distinction between an "old" and "new" Rangers, as opposed to the "old" and "new" company, it "had not used clear, precise language and due accuracy had not been achieved such that the guidelines on accuracy had been breached".

The ECS said it was "satisfied that although there had been a breach of the editorial guidelines in relation to due accuracy and the use of clear and precise language, it had not seen anything to suggest that the BBC had knowingly and materially misled its audience".

The committee said the Rangers story was "a complex subject and it considered that the use of imprecise language was likely to have been as a result of that complexity".
Click to expand...

So, who got liquidated?

The beeb are supposed to always refer to the old Rangers company rather than Rangers or do they have to put everything in inverted commas? <laugh>

This has to be the silliest point of the whole debacle - it's up there with them donating money to that clown.

...and it specifically says you can't refer to them as "relaunching" does it? <laugh><laugh>

Absolute victory for cerebral programming.

Read the Spiers column today, it's him just quoting every high profile Rangers employee saying the club was dead, fast forward a year and they're all vehemently arguing the opposite.

Thing is, before Rangers died, no-one gave a **** that reports said "Rangers spend £12m on Flo" - when they should've been saying all along "Rangers company MIH spent £12m on Flo" and when referring to it retrospectively should now say "Ex-Rangers majority shareholders MIH spent £12m on Flo".

<laugh>

Rangers the "esoteric thesis of a thing of gathering wearing blue in a certain postcode every fortnight" club didn't buy, sell or do **** - no-one cared then and now it's a big deal how you refer to the differing offices (company) and dressing rooms (club) in the same building owned by the same folk a corridor apart.

When I read this story I hear it in Partridge's voice regarding some complaint from a resident's authority or something.

<laugh>
 
BBC Scotland is just the latest to feel the hot wrath of some angry Rangers fans railing at its editorial stance.

In fact, those Rangers fans have scored a notable victory in having a complaint to the Editorial Standards Committee about BBC Scotland upheld.

At least two supporters objected to the BBC in Glasgow occasionally referring to Rangers in terms of "old club" and "new club", and their complaint was upheld.

What was thrown out was the daft accusation, frequently cited among some Rangers cyber zealots, that the BBC was biased against the club.

My point here is not to defend BBC Scotland. In this complex Rangers saga, it has become obvious to me, speaking to various insolvency practitioners, that "new club" or "same club" Rangers is a highly subjective issue. I've heard the entire gamut of interpretations on it.

Where Rangers struggle to be angry or insulted by the suggestion that their organisation is a "new club" is in this context: at least four Rangers principals, men who have been lauded by supporters, have expressed just such a view of Rangers as a new club.

First, Charles Green. Prior to Rangers' descent into liquidation last year, Green was aghast at the attitude of Dave King, a long-standing Rangers director, who had urged that a CVA be voted down by the club's 276 creditors.

Incredulous at this, Green went on television and said: "What he [King] is suggesting is that, rather than get a CVA through that retains all the history and tradition, that instead we should vote against it and go down the newco route. I mean&#8230;why would a true Rangers fan suggest that?"

In this, the view of Green, the man to whom many Rangers fans swooned, appears none too different to that of BBC Scotland and others.

Arguably, no Rangers figure in this debate finds himself in a more excruciating position than James Traynor, the club's Director of Communication.

Time and space here doesn't allow for the sheer number of times that Traynor, in his previous role as a journalist, emphatically pronounced Rangers to be a new club once liquidation became a reality. Yet he has the temerity now to argue the complete opposite.

Of the numerous times Traynor weighed in on this subject, just two quotes here will have to suffice.

With liquidation looming, Traynor wrote in the Daily Record: "Some Rangers fans believe the club's history, which would end with liquidation, must be protected. But any newco should make it clear that a new beginning means exactly that: a new club open to all from the very beginning."

Later on, with the Rangers CVA being rejected, Traynor wrote: "Rangers FC as we know them are dead." Caustically, he added: "No matter how Charles Green attempts to dress it up, a newco equals a new club. When the CVA was thrown out, Rangers as we know them died."

Reading this type of stuff, I would urge Rangers to exercise supreme caution in railing against anyone who dares to call their club a new club; none other than their own Director of Communication has made his view perfectly clear on the subject.

Many a Rangers fan expressed the view that the club died with the descent into liquidation. Typical of this was Ibrox debenture holder Stewart Boal who, having stumbled out of the CVA meeting of June 2012, was quoted by Richard Wilson in The Herald as saying: "We're in shock. The club is gone. We've got to start again and move on."

Wilson, a fine reporter, himself wrote of that nine-minute creditors' meeting where the CVA was rejected: "In those few minutes 140 years of history had been rubbed out."

I could go on and on here. Richard Gough, one of Rangers' greatest ever captains, wrote in a newspaper column: "The club I gave blood, sweat and tears for is dead."

Walter Smith, one of the greatest figures in Rangers' history, and now the club's chairman, said of Green's consortium taking over: "I wish the new Rangers Football Club every good fortune."

This is a painful subject. Many Rangers fans are agonised at the thought of their club being new - they simply rule it out. "It's the company, not the club," became the mantra. Other Rangers observers - like me - find it hard to escape the view that the current club is a new club.

Rangers FC itself should think twice about laying into BBC Scotland or anyone else over this old club/new club debate. The more so when its own oral history on the subject is so weak
Click to expand...

Spiers delivers yet another skelping to the monkeys <ok>
 
SFA/SPL/UEFA/ASA/BBC Trust/Lord Nimmo:

Stylin' as per the script and as per, the unusual suspects are frothing at the mouth <laugh>

What a beautiful day <rofl>

Anyone wanna <party> with the Bazman?

Twechar Loyal
 
Right ...

Guys, gie it a break with the personal ****e ...

mums, kids, wifes etc is bang out of order.

If it's about the user - fair enough but having a go about someone who doesnt post on here is too much.

Gie it a **** rest.
 
pud said:
Right ...

Guyts, gie it a breal with teh personal ****e ...

mums, kids etc is bang out of order.

If it's about the user - fair enough but having a go about someone who doesnt post on here is too much.

Gie it a **** rest.
Click to expand...

Well said fatty <applause>
 
pud said:
Right ...

Guys, gie it a break with the personal ****e ...

mums, kids, wifes etc is bang out of order.

If it's about the user - fair enough but having a go about someone who doesnt post on here is too much.

Gie it a **** rest.
Click to expand...

Unless it's about how depressing ER's life is <ok>
 
pud said:
Right ...

Guys, gie it a break with the personal ****e ...

mums, kids, wifes etc is bang out of order.

If it's about the user - fair enough but having a go about someone who doesnt post on here is too much.

Gie it a **** rest.
Click to expand...

I agree totally as it happens Pud, but it's the same demented twat who starts it every time. Maybe you should weild the banhammer and give him the clear signal he's unwanted <ok>

Just sayin...
 
Imelda must have maxed out the credit card last month as ejjie seems to be fkn raging and spending an awful lot of time on here....

#justsayin'
 
If you dont stop ****in squablling and getting personal (out with the actual user) then am closing this thread!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back