Liverpool FC Forum

by **Gareth G** » Thu Dec 29, 2005 8:51 pm

Obviously it's to do with the word c.u.n.t but it's a bit stupid that it blank's out word's with the same letter's.

by **Mikz** » Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:01 pm

Adebisi wrote:A random post by a Rangers fan on a Rangers forum?

Was it worth discussion?

The answer is obvious.

Exactly . One side is as bad as the other end of story! I dont recall any of their fans gallavanting or rioting on there travels-except when they marauded down to wembley and took the pitch home :laugh:

classic

by **tttb** » Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:16 pm

Might have been Barcelona in 1972 when the game finished early because the fans invaded the pitch but I'm sure there was trouble in Birmingham in the 70s as well

by **The Red Baron** » Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:22 pm

tttb wrote:Might have been Barcelona in 1972 when the game finished early because the fans invaded the pitch but I'm sure there was trouble in Birmingham in the 70s as well

Aston Villa v Rangers

by **tttb** » Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:22 pm

got this from google

There were significant crowd problems at Ibrox in 1973 and 1975 but it was a Rangers' fans riot in Birmingham in 1976 in a 'friendly' with Aston Villa, which provoked the biggest media storm. In genera,l Rangers' expressions of disapproval and condemnation of 'certain sections' of their support, which had followed earlier outbreaks, were seen as irrelevant and now the Glasgow press severely criticised the club. The press detailed the Rangers' fans riots in Wolverhampton, Newcastle, Barcelona and now Birmingham, along with minor skirmishes elsewhere, and condemned the club. The general tone is revealed by Ian Archer in the Glasgow Herald:

"This has to be said about Rangers…as a Scottish Football club they are a permanent embarrassment and an occasional disgrace. This co :censored:

ry would be a better place if Rangers did not exist".

His reasons turned on bigotry and on the club's reputation for rough play. Rangers reacted to this growing criticism by stating that they were determined to end Rangers' image as a sectarian club and stated that no religious barriers would be placed on the signing of players.

by **yckatbjywtbiastkamb** » Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:34 pm

tttb wrote:got this from google

There were significant crowd problems at Ibrox in 1973 and 1975 but it was a Rangers' fans riot in Birmingham in 1976 in a 'friendly' with Aston Villa, which provoked the biggest media storm. In genera,l Rangers' expressions of disapproval and condemnation of 'certain sections' of their support, which had followed earlier outbreaks, were seen as irrelevant and now the Glasgow press severely criticised the club. The press detailed the Rangers' fans riots in Wolverhampton, Newcastle, Barcelona and now Birmingham, along with minor skirmishes elsewhere, and condemned the club. The general tone is revealed by Ian Archer in the Glasgow Herald:

"This has to be said about Rangers…as a Scottish Football club they are a permanent embarrassment and an occasional disgrace. This co ry would be a better place if Rangers did not exist".

His reasons turned on bigotry and on the club's reputation for rough play. Rangers reacted to this growing criticism by stating that they were determined to end Rangers' image as a sectarian club and stated that no religious barriers would be placed on the signing of players.

no religious barriers when signing players but ten years later when souness signed mo johnstone there was uproar!
when you think of that policy these days its almost unbelievable, i`m surprised the scottish F.A let them get away with it but i suppose you cant make them sign a catholic because he is catholic alone, thats almost just as bad.

by **Gareth G** » Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:36 pm

"This has to be said about Rangers…as a Scottish Football club they are a permanent embarrassment and an occasional disgrace. This cory would be a better place if Rangers did not exist".

AS is Celtic, like I said you f*cking dim wit, both club's are as bad as each other...FACT. Now take your biggot self and you useless arguement, and f*ck off to a place where you belong. You keep this going, it's obvious that you're bitter, otherwise you wouldn't bring history up. Now f*ck off ya c*nt.

by **Gareth G** » Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:40 pm

yckatbjywtbiastkamb wrote:
tttb wrote:got this from google

There were significant crowd problems at Ibrox in 1973 and 1975 but it was a Rangers' fans riot in Birmingham in 1976 in a 'friendly' with Aston Villa, which provoked the biggest media storm. In genera,l Rangers' expressions of disapproval and condemnation of 'certain sections' of their support, which had followed earlier outbreaks, were seen as irrelevant and now the Glasgow press severely criticised the club. The press detailed the Rangers' fans riots in Wolverhampton, Newcastle, Barcelona and now Birmingham, along with minor skirmishes elsewhere, and condemned the club. The general tone is revealed by Ian Archer in the Glasgow Herald:

"This has to be said about Rangers…as a Scottish Football club they are a permanent embarrassment and an occasional disgrace. This co ry would be a better place if Rangers did not exist".

His reasons turned on bigotry and on the club's reputation for rough play. Rangers reacted to this growing criticism by stating that they were determined to end Rangers' image as a sectarian club and stated that no religious barriers would be placed on the signing of players.

no religious barriers when signing players but ten years later when souness signed mo johnstone there was uproar!
when you think of that policy these days its almost unbelievable, i`m surprised the scottish F.A let them get away with it but i suppose you cant make them sign a catholic because he is catholic alone, thats almost just as bad.

How many Protestant's do Celtic have playing for them?

Rangers have had numerous Catholic's over the year's mate, you guy's are certainly putting yourselves across as biased and bitter.

THIS IS A F*CKING LIVERPOOL BOARD, WHO GIVES A :censored:

?

by **yckatbjywtbiastkamb** » Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:52 pm

KOP-1892 wrote:
yckatbjywtbiastkamb wrote:
tttb wrote:got this from google

There were significant crowd problems at Ibrox in 1973 and 1975 but it was a Rangers' fans riot in Birmingham in 1976 in a 'friendly' with Aston Villa, which provoked the biggest media storm. In genera,l Rangers' expressions of disapproval and condemnation of 'certain sections' of their support, which had followed earlier outbreaks, were seen as irrelevant and now the Glasgow press severely criticised the club. The press detailed the Rangers' fans riots in Wolverhampton, Newcastle, Barcelona and now Birmingham, along with minor skirmishes elsewhere, and condemned the club. The general tone is revealed by Ian Archer in the Glasgow Herald:

"This has to be said about Rangers…as a Scottish Football club they are a permanent embarrassment and an occasional disgrace. This co ry would be a better place if Rangers did not exist".

His reasons turned on bigotry and on the club's reputation for rough play. Rangers reacted to this growing criticism by stating that they were determined to end Rangers' image as a sectarian club and stated that no religious barriers would be placed on the signing of players.

no religious barriers when signing players but ten years later when souness signed mo johnstone there was uproar!
when you think of that policy these days its almost unbelievable, i`m surprised the scottish F.A let them get away with it but i suppose you cant make them sign a catholic because he is catholic alone, thats almost just as bad.

How many Protestant's do Celtic have playing for them?

Rangers have had numerous Catholic's over the year's mate, you guy's are certainly putting yourselves across as biased and bitter.

THIS IS A F*CKING LIVERPOOL BOARD, WHO GIVES A ?

i know daglish is a protestant and played for celtic.
as i said mate i couldnt give a sh.1te about scottish football or what religion anyone is but i remember when souness was rangers manager and signed a catholic. before those days i didnt even know such a policy existed and the only reason i remotely followed the story back then was because souness was a hero of mine and he was signing a lot of high profile players taking them north reversing the trend of the southern talent drain.
i commented on a frankly awful policy thats all.

by **tttb** » Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:58 pm

Like the Murphy's I'm not bitter :talktothehand

Same can't be said for you. You keep going on about Protestants

by **BOODIDDY** » Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:58 pm

why this thread on lfc page. I couldn't care less for the bigoted :censored:

north of the border. They live in their own world and truly belive when they come to the prem they'll be the biggest in europe. I know cos i work with scots only at work.

:censored:

celtic and rangers. Liverpool biggest team in the world most successful in UK.

by **greenred** » Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:58 pm

Kenny Dalglish and Jock Stein were both Protestants.Celtic have never had a ban on members of other religions,unlike Rangers(who banned Catholics for nearly a century).Liverpool and Celtic have a friendship that goes back to the Shankly era.We sing each others songs,we play each other in testimonials,we share a similar history of success.Rangers and Liverpool have no relationship whatsoever,never have,never will.

by **JBG** » Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:08 pm

I can see why Celtic were dragged into this but the original point was that the Rangers fan claimed Rangers were a bigger club than Liverpool, and my reaction to that is that I feel thats nonsense, as one of the raison detres of being a Rangers' fan - particularly in the part of the world where the Rangers fan in question hails from - is sectarianism and bigotry.

The original post was a boast that Rangers were bigger than Liverpool and just because Celtic may or may not be better/worse than Rangers has nothing to do with that.

Rangers are a big club but I stick to my guns in saying that they are far from being a great club when they and their fans have a history of sectarianism and biggotry. Just because Celtic are just as bad isn't an excuse.

The original post referred to Rangers in comparison to Liverpool: Celtic shouldn't enter into it.

by **Gareth G** » Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:10 pm

tttb wrote:Like the Murphy's I'm not bitter

Same can't be said for you. You keep going on about Protestants

Right enought mate...

I have went on about Catholic's just as much.

Do you not think I know what most of this topic is? You're trying to provoke.

Can I just add aswell, that I don't give a sh*t about Scottish football either, and religion of course.

This is turning into a hatred thread in my opinion, and there's some member's who are involved that has surprised me.

I'm done with this now.

by **Gareth G** » Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:12 pm

JBG wrote:I can see why Celtic were dragged into this but the original point was that the Rangers fan claimed Rangers were a bigger club than Liverpool, and my reaction to that is that I feel thats nonsense, as one of the raison detres of being a Rangers' fan - particularly in the part of the world where the Rangers fan in question hails from - is sectarianism and bigotry.

The original post was a boast that Rangers were bigger than Liverpool and just because Celtic may or may not be better/worse than Rangers has nothing to do with that.

Rangers are a big club but I stick to my guns in saying that they are far from being a great club when they and their fans have a history of sectarianism and biggotry. Just because Celtic are just as bad isn't an excuse.

The original post referred to Rangers in comparison to Liverpool: Celtic shouldn't enter into it.

Here we go...

Liverpool FC Forum

Rangers bigger than liverpool?

Who is online