Jump to content

What's the most "Tin Pot" thing you've seen in the SPFL


Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

Well you're speculating that it must be something other than the most obvious reason. 

Well, it's an opinion. And like I've said before, if people did think there was any genuine belief that Lennon and Sutton would be set upon by fans, then why is this in the tinpot thread rather than folk saying, "aye Rangers have taken the right action here"?

I'm forming my opinion on the basis that Rangers have moved, pretty rapidly, towards this model of being obstructive and petty with the media and this, to me, appears to be another similar instance.

So, do you believe that Rangers have taken the commendable action to remove Lennon and Sutton from harms way as they believed they would be attacked?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, AJF said:

Well, it's an opinion. And like I've said before, if people did think there was any genuine belief that Lennon and Sutton would be set upon by fans, then why is this in the tinpot thread rather than folk saying, "aye Rangers have taken the right action here"?

If Rangers did think there was a belief that Lennon and Sutton would be set upon by fans then the right action would be to provide extra protection for that area of the ground and ban any supporters who are behaving in a threatening way.

Given that noted bigot David Edgar and his cronies are still classed as official media partners, it's clear Rangers are actually tacitly encouraging the sort of atmosphere where people like Sutton and Lennon might feel unsafe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

If Rangers did think there was a belief that Lennon and Sutton would be set upon by fans then the right action would be to provide extra protection for that area of the ground and ban any supporters who are behaving in a threatening way.

Given that noted bigot David Edgar and his cronies are still classed as official media partners, it's clear Rangers are actually tacitly encouraging the sort of atmosphere where people like Sutton and Lennon might feel unsafe.

So that's where I ask the question, as Rangers never took that action, do you think there was a genuine belief that Lennon and Sutton would be set upon?

Edited by AJF
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, AJF said:

Well, it's an opinion. And like I've said before, if people did think there was any genuine belief that Lennon and Sutton would be set upon by fans, then why is this in the tinpot thread rather than folk saying, "aye Rangers have taken the right action here"?

I'm forming my opinion on the basis that Rangers have moved, pretty rapidly, towards this model of being obstructive and petty with the media and this, to me, appears to be another similar instance.

So, do you believe that Rangers have taken the commendable action to remove Lennon and Sutton from harms way as they believed they would be attacked?

🤣

12 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

If Rangers did think there was a belief that Lennon and Sutton would be set upon by fans then the right action would be to provide extra protection for that area of the ground and ban any supporters who are behaving in a threatening way.

Given that noted bigot David Edgar and his cronies are still classed as official media partners, it's clear Rangers are actually tacitly encouraging the sort of atmosphere where people like Sutton and Lennon might feel unsafe.

Put it better than I ever could. I'll be piggybacking on this as my response @AJF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, AJF said:

So you don't care to answer the question?

No. I don't think what they did was commendable at all.

As @craigkillie said they should have offered more security for that area of the ground and permanently banned any clowns who threaten either of them.

"Can't let you in pal. You might get a hiding because you used to play for Celtic" is not a great way to handle the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

No. I don't think what they did was commendable at all.

As @craigkillie said they should have offered more security for that area of the ground and permanently banned any clowns who threaten either of them.

"Can't let you in pal. You might get a hiding because you used to play for Celtic" is not a great way to handle the situation.

I never asked if you thought it was commendable, that was tongue in cheek comment. My question was do you believe that Rangers have taken the action to remove Lennon and Sutton from harms way as they genuinely believed they would be attacked?

I can't say for Lennon as I don't know if he has been a pundit at Ibrox before, but Sutton has likely covered matches at Ibrox on numerous occasions without incident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, AJF said:

So that's where I ask the question, as Rangers never took that action, do you think there was a genuine belief that Lennon and Sutton would be set upon?

It’s still possible that they thought there was a genuine risk that Sutton/Lennon would be assaulted, and they weighed up the options of not letting them in or providing extra security and decided on the former. And the reason for that will be that, without even checking, there’s undoubtedly a load of Rangers fans absolutely loving getting it right up ‘wan ae them’

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, oneteaminglasgow said:

It’s still possible that they thought there was a genuine risk that Sutton/Lennon would be assaulted, and they weighed up the options of not letting them in or providing extra security and decided on the former. And the reason for that will be that, without even checking, there’s undoubtedly a load of Rangers fans absolutely loving getting it right up ‘wan ae them’

Scott Brown was confronted on the Ibrox pitch by a fan a few years ago 

So you’d say it’s entirely possible 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, oneteaminglasgow said:

It’s still possible that they thought there was a genuine risk that Sutton/Lennon would be assaulted, and they weighed up the options of not letting them in or providing extra security and decided on the former. And the reason for that will be that, without even checking, there’s undoubtedly a load of Rangers fans absolutely loving getting it right up ‘wan ae them’

That's what I'm trying to get at though. I've asked this question a few times now and the responses have ranged from "It's possible" to "Rangers can't guarantee their safety" rather than anyone actually confirming that they believe that was the genuine reason for them not being allowed in.

My opinion is it had nothing to do with genuine safety concerns, it was used as a blanket statement to stop them allowing entry to people they don't want inside Ibrox. I don't think anybody seems to have actually said they think Rangers were being genuine in expressing safety concerns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, AJF said:

That's what I'm trying to get at though. I've asked this question a few times now and the responses have ranged from "It's possible" to "Rangers can't guarantee their safety" rather than anyone actually confirming that they believe that was the genuine reason for them not being allowed in.

My opinion is it had nothing to do with genuine safety concerns, it was used as a blanket statement to stop them allowing entry to people they don't want inside Ibrox. I don't think anybody seems to have actually said they think Rangers were being genuine in expressing safety concerns.

So Rangers are not for everyone and anyone then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, AJF said:

That's what I'm trying to get at though. I've asked this question a few times now and the responses have ranged from "It's possible" to "Rangers can't guarantee their safety" rather than anyone actually confirming that they believe that was the genuine reason for them not being allowed in.

My opinion is it had nothing to do with genuine safety concerns, it was used as a blanket statement to stop them allowing entry to people they don't want inside Ibrox. I don't think anybody seems to have actually said they think Rangers were being genuine in expressing safety concerns.

To be fair, your official media partner seem to agree

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Clown Job said:

To be fair, your official media partner seem to agree

 

Indeed, and evidently they'll be more reliably informed than AJF on Pie and Bovril.

Either way, it's not a good look for the club. As much as I agree Sutton can't be objective at times when it comes to Rangers, it's a dangerous route to go down with a dodgy precedent to set.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ropy said:

Rangers should post their banning list outside Ibrox, on a weekly basis it could be reported on which fans or pundits have been added or removed.

“That’s they anti Rangers p***ks Lennon and Sutton banned fae the big hoose”

 

3D8503E8-7F54-43E8-8632-A2329FBE07E0.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, AJF said:

That's what I'm trying to get at though. I've asked this question a few times now and the responses have ranged from "It's possible" to "Rangers can't guarantee their safety" rather than anyone actually confirming that they believe that was the genuine reason for them not being allowed in.

My opinion is it had nothing to do with genuine safety concerns, it was used as a blanket statement to stop them allowing entry to people they don't want inside Ibrox. I don't think anybody seems to have actually said they think Rangers were being genuine in expressing safety concerns.

No, I don’t think they had legitimate security concerns. I think they used the fact that it’s plausible that some of your fans would attack Sutton and/or Lennon as an excuse to try to dictate (again) to media organisations who is and isn’t allowed to report on matters from Ibrox. And I think they should be absolutely fucking hammered for it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, oneteaminglasgow said:

No, I don’t think they had legitimate security concerns. I think they used the fact that it’s plausible that some of your fans would attack Sutton and/or Lennon as an excuse to try to dictate (again) to media organisations who is and isn’t allowed to report on matters from Ibrox. And I think they should be absolutely fucking hammered for it. 

And I absolutely agree with you (other than the plausibility part). It's what I've been saying from the start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...