Allan McGregor

  • 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!
RebelBhoy

RebelBhoy

Moderator
Staff member
Jan 26, 2011
25,218
1,139
113
Doire
After the discussion about the war tunes where amongst the objections to the singing of these songs was on the grounds that they reflect badly on the club.

Allan McGregor was not charged with anything, yet in matches against the Huns, he gets continuously bombarded with taunts of being a "beast" (I understand this is a colloquial slur for a sexual predator) or "Rapist" which in the eyes of the law, he isn't.

I had this discussion on another forum and the person with whom I was conversing couldn't understand why I didn't like this. I am not adverse to noising up the Huns to put them off their game, but as far as I am concerned, this is one step off from the "BJK" stuff and it damages our reputation.

I imagine this falls foul of the new legislation as well as calling the Huns "Huns", so where do y'all stand?
 
I was branded a "lover of the beast" for even suggesting it. The next thing coming was to be called a hunposter.
I am not in favour of legislating against this sort of thing, although it doesn't look like I'll have a choice. As a support, I think we should address it first and foremost. Because it damages the confidence of a Rangers player, a number of us seem to think it is ok.
 
RebelBhoy said:
I was branded a "lover of the beast" for even suggesting it. The next thing coming was to be called a hunposter.
I am not in favour of legislating against this sort of thing, although it doesn't look like I'll have a choice. As a support, I think we should address it first and foremost. Because it damages the confidence of a Rangers player, a number of us seem to think it is ok.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's ok at all. It is designed to offend plain and simple, that's not the sort of atmosphere I want to breathe in, we have plenty of good songs as we have already said and although abuse is part of the game when it becomes orchestrated it takes on a new and more poisonous taint. I loudly condemned the abuse Neil Lennon and others have had so I won't be a hypocrite and suggest abuse like that sits well with me, there is no need for it and it seldom works anyway.

I don't think I have seen many players in my life who got sent off or played terribly because the opposition were giving him pelters. Besides that it is just wrong, as we said before if you shouted that at him in the street you would get lifted.
 
I agree, we should not lower ourselves to personal attacks on any player. This has no place in the game the same as the personal attacks on Neil Lennon last season. We are better than that.
 
Maybe if he kept his pistol in its holster there would be no need to call him a beast

The only players who should not get abuse are your own players
 
I agree with most of what Dev says and why shouldn't I. That man Dev is over 80 years old and His experience should be given worthwhile merit.
 
the gentleman I was discussing this with told me that "Beast" meant rape and only rape in the context of it being chanted to McGregor. Is that incorrect then?
 
I don't understand

Are you asking why the word is used?

Does it mean something worse to you?
 
RebelBhoy said:
After the discussion about the war tunes where amongst the objections to the singing of these songs was on the grounds that they reflect badly on the club.

Allan McGregor was not charged with anything, yet in matches against the Huns, he gets continuously bombarded with taunts of being a "beast" (I understand this is a colloquial slur for a sexual predator) or "Rapist" which in the eyes of the law, he isn't.

I had this discussion on another forum and the person with whom I was conversing couldn't understand why I didn't like this. I am not adverse to noising up the Huns to put them off their game, but as far as I am concerned, this is one step off from the "BJK" stuff and it damages our reputation.

I imagine this falls foul of the new legislation as well as calling the Huns "Huns", so where do y'all stand?
Click to expand...

A Hun is a Hun, that's where I stand :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back