Jump to content


Gold Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by AJF

  1. It's rather obvious what my point was... you said you hadn't heard the song at McDiarmid in the last 10+ years which is quite evidently incorrect unless you are claiming that you yourself never heard it because you were either not there or were not listening for it. It's rather obvious from the other videos it is a common song sang by the support as well and it will undoubtedly have been sang at McDiarmid over the years. I'd be willing to bet a large sum of money on the fact that it was likely sang at McDiarmid last month as well, but I don't really have the time or energy to go and watch the match back to prove a point. Not only is it sang by our support, it is literally played at every home game at Ibrox as well, so why has nobody taken issue with being a song that panders to bigots until now? Is it because it is an instrumental version that's been used and people can therefore interpret as whatever song they wish it to be that uses the same tune? Would the same outrage be getting displayed if it was a song with the lyrics included (lets not mention that the notes are in sync with the Four Lads lyrics though, eh)? I don't believe I am blinded by loyalty in this scenario. People may have a point that Rangers pander to a certain element in other instances, but this is literally a song being used that celebrates our founders when we are releasing an anniversary kit. The person who produced said song will probably put it better than I possibly can:
  2. Unfortunately he only makes public appearances from hospital beds. As he isn't currently ill he was unavailable for comment.
  3. That was kind of what I was getting at. Given that Four Lads has been sang up and down the country, it would be odd for us never to have sang it at McDiarmid, which we now know is incorrect. Whether people mistook it for TFS, I couldn't say, but they are very different in how they are sang.
  4. 1) I honestly believe that it is the most appropriate song to use that celebrates our history which is why I believe it was used. That it shares the same tune as TFS in my view is irrelevant because it all comes down to intent, which brings me to answer your second question... 2) The bigoted element in our support does not need nor should it be catered to. I do not believe the media team at Rangers decided to use that song as a way to tap into bigoted minds. If anything, I'd say it is being used to reinforce the message of 150 years of history that people are often cynical about, given the lyrics.
  5. I’m not saying you’re all diddies, I’m simply saying sometimes the most logical explanation is the correct one. Playing the tune to a song that commemorates our founders in a promo video launching a 150th anniversary kit is a lot more logical than playing the tune to a song that sings about the Irish famine in a promo video launching a 150th anniversary kit. The whole kit launch branding revolves around legacy and our founders.
  6. Below you’ll find a few easily found YouTube videos of Rangers fans singing the song at home, away and abroad. If you skip to 2:30 of the first video, you’ll find the song being sung at McDiarmid. You’re talking shite. https://youtu.be/k6sjE3BMhqE https://youtu.be/ARlMjlO8KcI https://youtu.be/UM-8PwW9II4 https://youtu.be/powsy3UEg_U https://youtu.be/RSLo1UCfg2o https://youtu.be/OEmQ-cIgJrQ
  7. I think this is where I can see both sides of the argument. There are people (like Michael Stewart) who will see this in a completely partisan view and genuinely believe that Rangers are using this tune as a reference to TFS due to the actions of moronic fans that have made it infamous. But in reality, Four Lads is 100x more prominently sang in the Rangers support with the club also playing it over the tannoy pre-match. That is why I believe intent has to be taken into account here and I believe anyone who thinks this song has been used in reference to TFS rather than Four Lads is going out their way to be offended.
  8. Four Lads has been a regular song played and sang at Ibrox for probably the last decade.
  9. The point was made by @Theyellowboxin the post I previously quoted who mentioned that while 90% of people at Ibrox would be singing Four Lads, the other 10% would be using TFS lyrics. That's what I meant about add ons in the sense that when Four Lads is being sung, there are no Famine Song "add ons" or "substitutions", because they are entirely separate songs. And I respectfully disagree with the rest of your point. Intent is crucial here and if anyone believes that the song used during a 150th anniversary kit promo is intended to reference TFS rather than reference Four Lads (which is literally a song about our founding) then I think they are finding offence where there is none.
  10. That was not the intention of what I was saying, it was specifically in relation to the point made that 10% of the Ibrox crowd would use Famine Song add ons to the song. And given that the Four Lads song is always sang at Ibrox, I was making the point that, in my opinion, it's entirely acceptable to use that song in a promo video for a commemorative kit.
  11. You should know by now I cannot detect sarcasm very well when in written form
  12. That's the thing though, the Famine Song doesn't get sang at Ibrox anymore, or at least I can't remember the last time it was. Away from the stadium and at away days yes, but not as far as I can remember recently at Ibrox. Additionally, the Four Lads song and the Famine Song, while sharing the same underlying tune, are sang completely differently so it's not really a case where Four Lads starts that it then descends into the Famine Song, they are entirely different songs, Four Lads does not have "add ons". Oh come off it. Are you seriously suggesting "Glasgow is our city" is the equivalence of the official club channels saying "the Famine is Over why don't you go home?" It's very likely a dig at Celtic and their "This is our City. These are our streets" motto they went with last year and the "Our City" slogan they have embroidered on their current home tops. Unless, you believe there is different undertones to these messages too? Celtic troll Rangers with ‘this is our city’ message as they tease adidas kit launch – The Scottish Sun Celtic home kit leaked with ‘our city’ boast on shirt collar - Glasgow Live And come on now. That is an extreme black and white example you've used to fit this scenario. The difference is that the Famine Song is nowhere near as prominent as the Four Lads song which is sang at Ibrox frequently. Rangers fans hear that tune, they automatically associate it with Four Lads. If there was such an issue with the Four Lads song sharing the same tune as the Famine Song, then why hasn't it been raised as an issue before now? My view is that Rangers used that song with it's intended purpose to refer to the Four Lads song which commemorates our founders to which this kit celebrates. If anyone genuinely believes the clubs intended use was for it to be associated with the Famine Song, then I think they are going out of their way to be offended by nothing. If they believe the songs intended use is to reference the Four Lads song, then surely they accept that it's use in this scenario is entirely reasonable and acceptable?
  13. The tune is used as the Four Lads Had a Dream song. This is sang at Ibrox every home match and is literally a song about our founders, which this strip commemorates. It is 100% the most appropriate song to use for this kit launch and viewed in the context it is intended, there is no problem with using it. I don't think the fact the same tune is used for a different type of song should change that considering anyone with an ounce of comprehension will know why the song is being used in this promo video. This is 100% a case of Stewart being faux offended by something that is not there, otherwise he would've condemned us singing Four Lads Had a Dream at Ibrox for any of our home games following those "recent events".
  14. Michael Stewart making a fool of himself. Again. He really can’t help but dive in two footed to condemn without actually getting his facts straight first.
  15. It was pertinent to the point he was making so I thought it had to be shared
  16. Just in the context of this point made, I came across an interesting graphic. Granted it’s a smaller sample size than a full season, but some interesting results nonetheless.
  17. I never called for him to be sacked because I felt we were capable of doing much better and I was willing to give him more time. Mind you, I think a new 5 year contract was maybe a bit too much time at that stage, but you get my point
  18. For me it was a period of 9 matches over around 10 months (assuming we are not including friendly matches anyway). And I suppose your post helps me realise how differently those results can be interpreted depending on what view point I'm looking at it from. Only 4 losses in 10 sounds a lot better than 1 win in 9 anyway I think my main point here is that I don't necessarily think it was unreasonable for people to believe his time was up, while at the same time I also don't think it was unreasonable for people to believe we should've stuck by him, which is how I felt.
  19. I never called for him to be sacked, but for those that did, 6 matches in International football is a long time and given that there are much fewer matches played compared to domestic football, disappointing results are a lot more damaging as you have less games to turn things around. Additionally, for me it wasn't just 6 matches, it was over the course of about 10 months. From when we lost away to Slovakia on 15/11/20 until we lost to Denmark on 01/09/21, we played 9 competitive matches, winning 1 of them which was against The Faroes. Of course there are results in there that weren't unexpected, but every game we never won (probably other than the England match) was disappointing.
  20. Personally, I also thought our chances of claiming second at that point were slim as well. Looking at our form up until that point in the Nations League, our opening WC Qualifiers and the Euros I was pessimistic. That we came out of that triple header with 6 points was at least 2, probably 3 more points than I was anticipating. I didn't go as far as saying I thought Clarke should go and I felt we should stick with him further, but I don't think it was at all unreasonable that others felt his time was up when you considered our form over a decent period of time.
  21. Football fans are allowed to change their opinion though. Their feelings and emotions are literally dictated by what happens on the field. Everyone is the same in that regard. When you say they should look beyond the results in the short term, I dare say many of them did. Prior to the Moldova match, we were not playing particularly well and we were on a pretty poor run of results extending back to (but not including) the Serbia play off victory. The argument could be made we are still not playing particularly well, but we are finally getting the results that we need. So, my argument is it was not simply a "handful" of results, it was the best part of a year. If King Rocketman's opinion is now changed to that they'd like to see Clarke stay, then I'd say that's natural given the upturn in results.
  22. I think there's always going to be some for of disdain towards Rangers players in the national set up from some, and I think that'll be mainly down to the "unique" relationship between some Rangers fans and the SFA/Tartan Army. Now due players competing for places it adds a little to it, certainly in the Patterson debate.
  • Create New...