bennett Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 You paid money in support of sectarianism. Many would find that shameful. Your excuse doesn't wash either. You funded it ffs. Oh ffs, you have to be at the wind up here surely? You can almost taste the salty tears here 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever_blue Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 You paid money in support of sectarianism. Many would find that shameful. Your excuse doesn't wash either. You funded it ffs. so tell me how this policy operated and from when it started and ended please? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 so tell me how this policy operated and from when it started and ended please? Ask your old man how he reacted when Mo Johnston signed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever_blue Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 Ask your old man how he reacted when Mo Johnston signed. he was in work with his celtic workmates who had been singing for weeks prior "f**k yer ally weve got mo" only for him and his fellow ranger workmates to begin chanting " we have ally, we have mo" , he told me you could almost see the tears in the celtic fans faces although I dont know how my old mans reaction has to do with asking for evidence of this policy? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aofjays Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 so tell me how this policy operated and from when it started and ended please? so tell me how this policy operated and from when it started and ended please? From founding until Mo Jo signed according to rangers staff. Yes there were 14 others before him but I think you know fine well the policy existed. Don't believe me? Lets ask Matt Taylor: [the policy was] "part of our tradition….we were formed in 1873 as a Protestant boys club. To change now would lose us considerable support". Or how about Sandy Jardine: “When I came here in 1964, we had no Catholics. Not just the playing staff, anywhere. There was no bit of paper, it was an unwritten rule. David Murray changed that and it moved on significantly in 1989 when Maurice Johnston signed. You cannot clear up 80 years of sectarianism in eight months, but we are a huge way down the road.” Or David Murray: “We signed him [Johnston] as a football player firstly, and also to break the tradition of this club in not signing a Roman Catholic. That was wrong.” That do you? Or are you going to claim these men are liars? -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 You paid money in support of sectarianism. Many would find that shameful. Your excuse doesn't wash either. You funded it ffs. Willful ignorance/ cognitive dissonance. All OF fans, even the decent ones, have to perform some form of mental gymnastics because no matter what way you come at it they are supporters and enablers of sectarian bigotry. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever_blue Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 From founding until Mo Jo signed according to rangers staff. Yes there were 14 others before him but I think you know fine well the policy existed. Don't believe me? Lets ask Matt Taylor: [the policy was] "part of our tradition….we were formed in 1873 as a Protestant boys club. To change now would lose us considerable support". Or how about Sandy Jardine: “When I came here in 1964, we had no Catholics. Not just the playing staff, anywhere. There was no bit of paper, it was an unwritten rule. David Murray changed that and it moved on significantly in 1989 when Maurice Johnston signed. You cannot clear up 80 years of sectarianism in eight months, but we are a huge way down the road.” Or David Murray: “We signed him [Johnston] as a football player firstly, and also to break the tradition of this club in not signing a Roman Catholic. That was wrong.” That do you? Or are you going to claim these men are liars? well there you have it there was no actual signing policy , there was at most an unwritten rule ? as for the part about rangers being started as a protestant boys club from Matt Taylor then yes I would also disagree with that statement too and also Murray in Hindsight was an egotistical c**t. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aofjays Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 well there you have it there was no actual signing policy , there was at most an unwritten rule ? as for the part about rangers being started as a protestant boys club from Matt Taylor then yes I would also disagree with that statement too and also Murray in Hindsight was an egotistical c**t. So three men that were there are wrong and you with your complete lack of access to such individuals are right? Whatever. If you want to lie to yourself go right ahead just don't expect anyone else to believe it. Just out of interest, those idiots outside the gates the day Mo Jo signed burning their scarves and tops as the TV reported the end of rangers sectarian signing policy. Why do you think they were doing that? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aofjays Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 Mo Jo was a fucking great signing, scored loads of goals and annoyed the fcuk out of our east end neighbours, I was delighted when he joined Rangers. Do you think you deserve some kind of pat on the back for acting like an adult human being? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calum_gers Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 So three men that were there are wrong and you with your complete lack of access to such individuals are right? Whatever. If you want to lie to yourself go right ahead just don't expect anyone else to believe it. Just out of interest, those idiots outside the gates the day Mo Jo signed burning their scarves and tops as the TV reported the end of rangers sectarian signing policy. Why do you think they were doing that? Because they were idiots? If they hadn't been doing that they would been off being idiotic elsewhere. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 does anyone ever reply to a williemillersmoustache post I'm pretty sure you have. Ya b*****d 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 so tell me how this policy operated and from when it started and ended please? I'm not going to attempt to draw any conclusions about those who followed Rangers at the time the policy was in operation - different time, different ethics in some respects. Don't however insult our intelligence and your own, by implying that no such policy existed. It very clearly did and it surely leaves a bad taste? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever_blue Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 So three men that were there are wrong and you with your complete lack of access to such individuals are right? Whatever. If you want to lie to yourself go right ahead just don't expect anyone else to believe it. Just out of interest, those idiots outside the gates the day Mo Jo signed burning their scarves and tops as the TV reported the end of rangers sectarian signing policy. Why do you think they were doing that? Of course their was unhappy supports on both sides of the situation based on religion, loyalty and seeing him as a traitor etc and various other aspects. What does that have to do with the debate? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calum_gers Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 I'm not going to attempt to draw any conclusions about those who followed Rangers at the time the policy was in operation - different time, different ethics in some respects. Don't however insult our intelligence and your own, by implying that no such policy existed. It very clearly did and it surely leaves a bad taste? I can't say it leaves a particularly bad taste but I'm happy it no longer exists and by modern standards I find it strange that it ever did. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever_blue Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 I'm not going to attempt to draw any conclusions about those who followed Rangers at the time the policy was in operation - different time, different ethics in some respects. Don't however insult our intelligence and your own, by implying that no such policy existed. It very clearly did and it surely leaves a bad taste? a policy never existed , their was an unwritten rule adopted over a certain time period I accept but it certainly was not an official policy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 so tell me how this policy operated and from when it started and ended please? Are you serious? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 a policy never existed , their was an unwritten rule adopted over a certain time period I accept but it certainly was not an official policy. You're splitting hairs. The policy does not need to be framed in a document in order to exist. It was in effect, official policy, explicitly stated or otherwise. We both know this, so let's not be silly about it by pursuing this line further. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 a policy never existed , their was an unwritten rule adopted over a certain time period I accept but it certainly was not an official policy. I really despair at your inability to read. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 I can't say it leaves a particularly bad taste but I'm happy it no longer exists and by modern standards I find it strange that it ever did. That's fair enough, but I'd have thought that it's an aspect of the club's history that should inspire no pride for anyone but the genuinely bigoted. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 Official or unofficial. For some rangers fans, nothing to be ashamed of. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.