Follow Follow Rangers. Season 2024/25

[AJF]

2 minutes ago, Orbix said:

Jinky you’re trying to create an expectation of reciprocity in ticketing obligation where none exists. As far as the league are concerned, each game is a separate element. Ticketing agreements for Game 1 have no impact on Game 25.

Rangers have offered tickets to Celtic for the game at Ibrox, as they are obliged to. Celtic have refused them, as is their right.

Celtic should offer tickets to Rangers for the game at Parkhead, as they are obliged to. Rangers can accept them, as is their right. 

 

 

This is exactly it. Summarises it perfectly.

What Celtic deem acceptable standards for their fans to attend Ibrox has no bearing on whether Celtic offer tickets for Celtic Park.

I’d also be interested to know what these safety measures were that we apparently promised. I’ve seen it reported that we had agreed to increase the stewarding and police presence, other than that I’m not sure what they were expecting.

[Jinky67]

13 minutes ago, Orbix said:

Jinky you’re trying to create an expectation of reciprocity in ticketing obligation where none exists. As far as the league are concerned, each game is a separate element. Ticketing agreements for Game 1 have no impact on Game 25.

Rangers have offered tickets to Celtic for the game at Ibrox, as they are obliged to. Celtic have refused them, as is their right.

Celtic should offer tickets to Rangers for the game at Parkhead, as they are obliged to. Rangers can accept them, as is their right. 

 

 

I’m not actually trying to create any expectation of reciprocity at all, I know what the rules regarding ticketing are, it’s not a point I’m debating at all.

The question was asked as to what reason would Celtic use to try withhold ticketing allocation for the game at Celtic Park. I’m giving the reason that if Celtic do try withhold tickets it’s for the reason I suggested. They will see it as Rangers deliberately creating a scenario that gives them a sporting advantage. It’s up to the SPFL to decide if that flies, not me

Edited August 18, 2023 by Jinky67

[AJF]

8 minutes ago, Jinky67 said:

I’m not actually trying to create any expectation of reciprocity at all, I know what the rules regarding ticketing are, it’s not a point I’m debating at all.

The question was asked as to what reason would Celtic use to try withhold ticketing allocation for the game at Celtic Park. I’m giving the reason that if Celtic do try withhold tickets if what I suggested. They will see it as Rangers deliberately creating a scenario that gives them a sporting advantage. It’s up to the SPFL to decide if that flies, not me

The suggestion that Rangers have deliberately attempted to force Celtic to give up their tickets, considering our position is we’d like away fans to attend these matches (and indeed intend to take our allocation), is quite frankly hilarious.

Edited August 18, 2023 by AJF

[Jinky67]

Just now, AJF said:

The suggestion that Rangers have deliberately attempted to force Celtic to give up their tickets, considering our position is we’d like away fans to attend these matches (and indeed intend to take out allocation), is quite frankly hilarious.

If you really wanted our fans to attend these matches you wouldn’t have made the dumb as f**k move to slash the allocation by 7000 and putting this ludicrous merry go round into action.

And it’s beyond the pale to suggest Rangers would try to create some sort of sporting advantage? Do you know your own history mate?

But this is just me speculating, I have no idea if Celtic will do this or not but if they do I imagine this will be the point they will leverage.

And to answer your question around other measures, the suggestion is Rangers apparently agreed to put up a Euro style net to stop bottles and missiles being thrown and have told Celtic they won’t have it in place for this game despite it being agreed.

 

[AJF]

 

14 minutes ago, Jinky67 said:

If you really wanted our fans to attend these matches you wouldn’t have made the dumb as f**k move to slash the allocation by 7000 and putting this ludicrous merry go round into action.

And it’s beyond the pale to suggest Rangers would try to create some sort of sporting advantage? Do you know your own history mate?

But this is just me speculating, I have no idea if Celtic will do this or not but if they do I imagine this will be the point they will leverage.

And to answer your question around other measures, the suggestion is Rangers apparently agreed to put up a Euro style net to stop bottles and missiles being thrown and have told Celtic they won’t have it in place for this game despite it being agreed.

 

I’ve already said I disagree with the decision to reduce the allocation, but that has no bearing on weather Celtic can disallow the current allocation.

And have Celtic offered to do the same at Celtic Park (the nets) considering the same risks are present? I’ve never heard that suggested until now.

[Orbix]

Given that both grounds have got extensive CCTV, and that even with a good arm, you’re looking at 4000? people who could reasonably throw anything, I’d rather just see bans than nets tbh.

 

[Buddie Holly]

43 minutes ago, AJF said:

 

I’d also be interested to know what these safety measures were that we apparently promised. I’ve seen it reported that we had agreed to increase the stewarding and police presence, other than that I’m not sure what they were expecting.

 

IMG_3131.avif

[Orbix]

 More first aiders?

[Jinky67]

40 minutes ago, AJF said:

 

I’ve already said I disagree with the decision to reduce the allocation, but that has no bearing on weather Celtic can disallow the current allocation.

And have Celtic offered to do the same at Celtic Park (the nets) considering the same risks are present? I’ve never heard that suggested until now.

I didn’t say it did have a bearing mate that was completely different point altogether

And I disagree regarding the risks, if you are at Ibrox and at either edge of the section you have fans above you, you don’t at Celtic Park. You also have protection from the big f**k off poles ( that is a joke btw)  and I don’t know if Celtic have agreed to do the same, I assume some promises are made by both parties however Rangers have currently not fulfilled theirs

Edited August 18, 2023 by Jinky67

[Jinky67]

28 minutes ago, Buddie Holly said:

 

IMG_3131.avif 4.58 kB · 7 downloads

Make them in Khaki mate and you have a nice little earner as I’m sure the GB will lap them up 

[Squonk]

If being unable to guarantee the safety of opposition fans is a factor, surely the football authorities should be introducing partial or full stadium closures, not pandering to the <checks notes> small minority of trouble-makers. As usual though with the gruesome twosome, they'll do the same as they do with large-scale sectarian chanting and claim there's nothing they can do.

[AJF]

19 minutes ago, Jinky67 said:

I didn’t say it did have a bearing mate that was completely different point altogether

And I disagree regarding the risks, if you are at Ibrox and at either edge of the section you have fans above you, you don’t at Celtic Park. You also have protection from the big f**k off poles ( that is a joke btw)  and I don’t know if Celtic have agreed to do the same, I assume some promises are made by both parties however Rangers have currently not fulfilled theirs

The risks are very much the same

https://x.com/ibroxloyal55/status/1692425870026178968?s=46&t=m9ZjO5H-7g8jnIzYxZXYPQ

[bennett]

Jinky must be rewriting war and peace.

[Jinky67]

1 minute ago, AJF said:

The risks are very much the same

https://x.com/ibroxloyal55/status/1692425870026178968?s=46&t=m9ZjO5H-7g8jnIzYxZXYPQ

All you do there mate is confirm 700 fans can’t be safe in either stadium so instead of posturing over whose fans are more cunty or the actual allocation you should be looking for a solution that allows us to attend and enjoy the games safely 

[kennie makevin]

34 minutes ago, bennett said:

Jinky must be rewriting war and peace.

To prove that Tolstoy was deliberately and systematically unfair to Celtic, I presume ?

[Dons_1988]

Fair play to rangers, the heads gone this has caused jinky alone probably makes the allocation stuff worth it. 

[Grangemouth Bairn]

8 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

Fair play to rangers, the heads gone this has caused jinky alone probably makes the allocation stuff worth it. 

Was just thinking that . The biggest safety issue here appears to be Jinky’s Blood Pressure.

[Orbix]

We are apparently interested in FC Steaua Bucharest* winger Octavian Popescu as an attacking option. £2.5m? Though he’s been touted wider and for more and not got any concrete bids.

Never heard of him, 20 years old, would require protracted transfer dealing with Gigi Becali, ‘hurr are they gonna block out his name on the shirt’ banter opportunities.
 

Can’t see what could go wrong. 
 

*technically just FCSB ‘cos they lost the rights but we all know. 

[KnightswoodBear]

10 minutes ago, Orbix said:

We are apparently interested in FC Steaua Bucharest* winger Octavian Popescu as an attacking option. £2.5m? Though he’s been touted wider and for more and not got any concrete bids.

Never heard of him, 20 years old, would require protracted transfer dealing with Gigi Becali, ‘hurr are they gonna block out his name on the shirt’ banter opportunities.
 

Can’t see what could go wrong. 
 

*technically just FCSB ‘cos they lost the rights but we all know. 

Someone needs to have a word with Ryan Jack and get him to give up his shirt number.

[alta-pete]

1 hour ago, Dons_1988 said:

Fair play to rangers, the heads gone this has caused jinky alone probably makes the allocation stuff worth it. 

Not while I’m having to wade through screeds of it, no. 
I’m beginning to think it’s an orchestrated grand plan to gum up the thread and just make it unreadable.