Rangers response to Mark Daly's Gordon Neely article

The BBC are complicit in covering up and harbouring one of the most famous and evil paedophiles the UK has ever known.

They have since denied they were liable or indeed had any knowledge in this cover up.

They are lying scum and the club should ban them for good
 
Humbug said:
Unless I have read this wrong, there are three main points here.

"The investigation uncovered an article in the club’s newspaper marking his departure, which made no mention of abuse concerns and wished him “every success in the future”.

1)The whole story is about an article in the Rangers news, not about any abuse claims.

2)This has been worked by the BBC into this whole furore, by describing it as a cover-up.

3)By doing so they have attempted to put us on a par with the convicted paedophiles of Celtic.


If ever an organisation needed a visit from our legal team it is this publicly funded one who continually breaches their own regulations. We should be actively asking for a root and branch inquiry into all aspects of child abuse in this country. Not the watered-down version ran by the SNP that omits sports clubs and faith-based groups.
Click to expand...

The report in the rangers news was probably due to the fact they couldn't publish anything about what could be an ongoing investigation.
Employment laws were probably different where we could easily sack him but to publish we got rid of him for being a paedo when at that time the investigation was ongoing could have landed the club in hot water with litigation claims.
 
Good response from the club.

The problem with these 'inaccurate' stories is that they are run as the lead story, but the apology is either a 3 sentence on page 24, or a small post on the offender's website. The reputational damage has already been done by the headline news.

To me, it's like in a movie trial where one of the lawyers goes too far during cross examination. It doesn't matter that the judge tells the jury to forget they heard it. They still heard it, and have already formed the opinions the lawyer has wanted them to.

Death by a thousand cuts.

The organisation responsible should be legally compelled to issue the apology with the same billing as the original piece. They may be more inclined to fact check if that were the case.
 
Commentator said:
We've heard all this for years, it's no more than fore-lock touching and wishful thinking. 'All the hands'? Can you be specific or is it just more deflection? And what would exactly be wrong in this case with all the hands being dealt early?
Our statement should have called for an immediate and open, independent, in-depth investigation into abuse in Scottish Football and stated that the club would do all it could to bring this about and then facilitate it.
The club needs a CEO who will robustly champion its interests on and off the pitch.
Stop listening to snakes like Traynor and McLelland, Mr. King. Give us a day-to-day leader.
Click to expand...

The club needed to respond last night.

We also needed to do so in a manner that wouldn’t unravel later.

Nothing we said last night could ever conceivably be deemed to be adding to Daly’s shameful and alleged “cover up” based wholly upon, it seems, one junior Rangers News staff member’s standard, so and so has left type paragraph.

I have absolutely no doubt that we will be making contact with Souness, Smith and other directors and staff of the day detailing EXACTLY what those individuals personally witnessed regarding this one off awful event. I very much hope that our legal representatives are also heavily involved, not to defend a claim by any potential victim, but to ensure that early steps are being taken to put the BBC in their place.

So, I very much doubt that last might’s statement is all we shall hear from Rangers on this matter.

Lastly, I completely agree that we should be calling for a fully independent public inquiry into this and suggesting that the inquiry should cover

1. all abuse that has taken place in any football related organisation or football club in Scottish football,
2. identifying how many victims there have been,
3. identify how many paedophile perpetrators have been operating,
4. looking into the possibility of paedophile rings,
5. establishing exactly who knew about these activities and holding any fully to account for why police were not involved in any of these cases if responsible adults knew it was happening to Scottish children,
6. establishing whether or not any cover ups have taken place and whether or not hush money was paid to any victims

The whole issue of paedos and cover ups now demands urgent government level intervention. This issue needs fully resolved. All clubs. And victims need apologies and compensated wherever possible
 
The insinuation of a cover up was used numerous times in their report.

If there is any way we can force a retraction of this damaging accusation I would hope our club will pursue it.

This has damaged us and they knowingly set us up for a slaughtering across the social media platforms.
 
Commentator said:
That's fair comment as an outsider. But the cop would have known exactly what would happen to his son if he had gone official. I have no knowledge of this but perhaps the Dad put his boy's future first.
Click to expand...

Today certain professionals such as cops, teachers etc are classed as mandated reporters. They are compelled to report accusations or suspicions to the head of their organisation. They must not investigate, just report. They do not contact the police or discuss with anyone else.

Not sure if this applied back then to this situation but it certainly did to me as far back as the mid nineties. I think it applied to all cops then as well.
 
HandsomeHead said:
That's what we're dealing with here and it's what this statement refers to - the utterly depraved desire to drag Rangers into this in order to somehow excuse the years of abuse at Celtic Park.

Rangers have a real PR battle on their hands to disassociate themselves from this now and PR is something we haven't been very good at under this regime.
Click to expand...
I respectively disagree. This provides Rangers with an ideal opportunity to call for a fully independent inquiry if and when the SFA cover up comes out.
 
For those wanting BBC totally banned, I agree, but not now. We get the standard 'cant report due to ongoing dispute' just now. Ban them for this and it will be every week mentioned as 'excluded from Rangers after reporting child abuse at the club'. Need to box clever with these fuckers.
 
Careca said:
There has to be a follow up. We need to lead the way here.
Call on the SFA To impose sanctions on ANY CLUB, who covered up even one instance of child abuse.

If there are cases where, directors, managers and players colluded and protected the good name of clubs in hundreds of cases over 30 YEARS, then there can be only one punishment.
Click to expand...
yeah bull dosed! and expulsion from human society
 
SmileyBear said:
You are needing to pin the posts you did yesterday on the subject that explained everything about the case as posters just seem to be ignoring the good information in them.
Then when the same questions are asked a thousand times we can just point to the pinned posts stops all the misinformation we are seeing now.
Click to expand...
Lenzie Loyal said:
Are you being deliberately obtuse, or just trolling?
Click to expand...
Sorry, not aware of the facts obviously.
 
I’m not downplaying the incident at all, all manners of abuse, whether it be physical or psychological are completely abhorrent, but I do find it interesting the massive blow up of this supposed event (not even verified in court) by an anonymous person who had claimed that he nearly had his bum spanked compared to 4 convicted paedophiles who actually raped and in some cases documented sexual abuse over decades at Celtic park.
 
cooprfc said:
I don't agree with this. They won't listen. The mud has been thrown, using very deliberate language, and they won't let Souness or Smith change the narrative. They will just ignore what they say same as they will with the club's statement.
Click to expand...
Spot on. They want Rangers being talked about. They want our staff being the focus.

They dont want their paedo ring or scumbag board, staff and fans talked about at all.

And let's be honest. They are succeeding very well considering the seriousness and scale of their abuse.
 
Arminius said:
The club needed to respond last night.

We also needed to do so in a manner that wouldn’t unravel later.

Nothing we said last night could ever conceivably be deemed to be adding to Daly’s shameful and alleged “cover up” based wholly upon, it seems, one junior Rangers News staff member’s standard, so and so has left type paragraph.

I have absolutely no doubt that we will be making contact with Souness, Smith and other directors and staff of the day detailing EXACTLY what those individuals personally witnessed regarding this one off awful event. I very much hope that our legal representatives are also heavily involved, not to defend a claim by any potential victim, but to ensure that early steps are being taken to put the BBC in their place.

So, I very much doubt that last might’s statement is all we shall hear from Rangers on this matter.

Lastly, I completely agree that we should be calling for a fully independent public inquiry into this and suggesting that the inquiry should cover

1. all abuse that has taken place in any football related organisation or football club in Scottish football,
2. identifying how many victims there have been,
3. identify how many paedophile perpetrators have been operating,
4. looking into the possibility of paedophile rings,
5. establishing exactly who knew about these activities and holding any fully to account for why police were not involved in any of these cases if responsible adults knew it was happening to Scottish children,
6. establishing whether or not any cover ups have taken place and whether or not hush money was paid to any victims

The whole issue of paedos and cover ups now demands urgent government level intervention. This issue needs fully resolved. All clubs. And victims need apologies and compensated wherever possible
Click to expand...

Establishing if any convicted paedophiles were allowed to return and operate within the same working environment and to continue the same level of abuse as before.
 
a_weir said:
Let me guess, you want a 'YEAH BUT CELTIC HAD LOADS OF PAEDOS' statement?
Click to expand...

We are being attacked over this.

I want our club to start leaving barbs in their statements (like others do). We know where this is coming from and ultimately who is paying for it.

I would like to see a course of action that owns our own shit, does the right thing and also puts them into a world of pain (which they deserve).
 
kerrbear said:
We need the best PR firm money can buy and we need it yesterday, if we can find cash for the Grezda deal and possibly Ojo on a permanent deal and if we had to then go for crowd funding, there is no point having players if the team and club are getting destroyed on an almost daily basis.
Every day I come on here and read the same "club can't stand for that" "somone needs to write to", We need the very best we can get starting yesterday. We need to go on the attack, I am not a wealthy dude but I will pledge £100 if anyone can help set up the crowd funding
Click to expand...

In every instance like this, we are reacting to an allegation or insinuation.

We should have had all the details available ready to counter Daly’s nonsense point by point.

My understanding is that the club do not view this side of things as important and will not invest the resources needed.

This is a huge miscalculation.
 
muttley said:
I think this guy smells money and that he knows nothing happened physically to him and that we did have the meeting with his then serving police officer father/so we did contact the police and covered nothing up.

He knows his dad is dead and that Alistair Hood is dead so can't contradict him and his version of events and then we are left with slurs an innuendo. he is for me attacking the memory of his own father as he is then saying his serving police officer father didn't his duty as both a father and policeman
Click to expand...
yip, he is saying his father knew and did nothing. i smell a rat.

maybe the club should go after him for damages as his argument would be destroyed in court with those witnesses the club have that were in the Office at the time of the meeting
 
Rick Roberts said:
We are being attacked over this.

I want our club to start leaving barbs in their statements (like others do). We know where this is coming from and ultimately who is paying for it.

I would like to see a course of action that owns our own shit, does the right thing and also puts them into a world of pain (which they deserve).
Click to expand...

Clearly, you have no idea how the world and in particular, PR, media relations and libel works.

This statement does all it needs to. We are dealing with our own issue on this matter.
 
Am I reading this right 30 years ago a guy threatened to smack a kids backside no actual contact and they're surprised there is no police record of it?

Think of all the different computer systems the cops have used in that time I'm not surprised there's no record of it. Doesn't mean it wasn't reported though
 
Just had a read of facebook and linkedin profile for the co-author of that BBC story. He has worked for BBC for long time. Originally from Edinburgh. To be clear, he appears fairly clean. Nothing to suggest any leanings or agenda.
 
we should have also stated something along the lines of, “Rangers have believed for some time that an independent public inquiry should be setup to look at the child abuse in Scottish football and the alleged paedophile rings that may have been operating within the very fabric of the game at some member clubs, the victims deserve this. It’s important that we get to the facts of the matter as opposed to the beliefs of journalists employed by media outlets who have repeatedly had to make public apologies over mis-reporting about Rangers in particular, a public inquiry is the only way forward for the victims to receive the recognition of what they had to endure at the hands of the abusers & that of their employer clubs. Rangers are shocked and saddened that both the Scottish Football Authorities and the Scottish Government have not sought to establish such a independent and public inquiry, leaving a void for which to think why haven’t the Scottish Government done so already!”
 
imager said:
Feel free to enlighten us then Mr Traynor!
Click to expand...

PR is not about writing 'GIRFUY' style statements slinging mud in all directions, which is what some people in this thread seem to want.

If a journalist wants to write one, a negative story is coming no matter what. No PR in the world can stop that. What an organisation can do is respond and control the response to any story and that's what we've done here.

PR is making your own stories either in response to others or, more commonly, of positive news that the press will report on and ultimately to not give them the need to want to print negative stories.

Great examples of the excellent PR work the club does is Everyone, Anyone, the recent videos of the gentleman with cancer visiting the stadium, or the young lad who followed RTV around, or countless more 'feelgood' Rangers stories we see here every week.

Yes, of course, the statement could have been more scathing, more direct and made reference to the far more vociferous paedo problem at another Glasgow club but that's actually BAD PR.

Can you imagine if, for arguments sake, Chelsea made a statement like that about Arsenal? They'd rightly be vilified.

Edit: final point, good PR is building bridges and not burning them. Not with everyone but is improving relations with the wider public.
 
It's an own goal by the club not to demand a full and independent public enquiry into historical child abuse within Scottish football. I also think that if our statement last night is our only public offering then its effectively job done by Daly. We are now publically tarnished as a club who covered up child abuse and two former managers have been implicated in the cover up.

More has to be done.
 
The ongoing situation with the BBC is one that ultimately damages the club through getting less exposure and targets our fans with no radio coverage ect. I have thought for a while that we should attempt to resolve our differences with this organisation and seek reporting parity with the rest of Scottish football.

However this latest outrage confirms that these arrogant bastards have absolutely no intention of resolving anything. In fact they are ramping up the attacks on the club. The board can obviously see what is happening here, hence the swift response, but I am now of the opinion that we should take a fuckin gun to the proverbial knife fight.

If it is at all possible, not being in the know with the commercial and legal situations, the club should ban these scum from Ibrox and HTC without delay. Explain why we are doing this and catalogue the attacks / apologies over the years. This is a stroke too far that the BBC may regret.
 
No Money No Problems said:
It's an own goal by the club not to demand a full and independent public enquiry into historical child abuse within Scottish football. I also think that if our statement last night is our only public offering then its effectively job done by Daly. We are now publically tarnished as a club who covered up child abuse and two former managers have been implicated in the cover up.

More has to be done.
Click to expand...
Let's just see if this is the last statement the club make on the subject.
 
a_weir said:
PR is not about writing 'GIRFUY' style statements slinging mud in all directions, which is what some people in this thread seem to want.

If a journalist wants to write one, a negative story is coming no matter what. No PR in the world can stop that. What an organisation can do is respond and control the response to any story and that's what we've done here.

PR is making your own stories either in response to others or, more commonly, of positive news that the press will report on and ultimately to not give them the need to want to print negative stories.

Great examples of the excellent PR work the club does is Everyone, Anyone, the recent videos of the gentleman with cancer visiting the stadium, or the young lad who followed RTV around, or countless more 'feelgood' Rangers stories we see here every week.

Yes, of course, the statement could have been more scathing, more direct and made reference to the far more vociferous paedo problem at another Glasgow club but that's actually BAD PR.

Can you imagine if, for arguments sake, Chelsea made a statement like that about Arsenal? They'd rightly be vilified.

Edit: final point, good PR is building bridges and not burning them. Not with everyone but is improving relations with the wider public.
Click to expand...
Agreed. The only thing I think could or should have been added is that we will be considering legal action. Because we bloody well should be.
 
This is a very sensitive situation and we need to be very sensitive about how we respond to it publically. Unfortunately, we work to a different set of rules to scum like the BBC who can just throw anything around without any real repercussions.

I hope the club continues to handle this appropriately and I hope all victims get some closure and recompense.

I also hope that some cünt somewhere has the will and desire to attack Celtc the way Daly has attacked us here when the accusations and evidence against us are so minuscule in comparison. Imagine we were harbouring what they are? We'd be buried.
 
a_weir said:
Clearly, you have no idea how the world and in particular, PR, media relations and libel works.

This statement does all it needs to. We are dealing with our own issue on this matter.
Click to expand...

I understand that that story yesterday came about from the PR, media relations of our detractors.

Yes, statement was good. Yes, it should be dealt with.

However, I will guarantee this wont be to last of this and other Rangers-centred stories from our dear press and I fully expect disproportionately high coverage of them. As they sneak about in the background. That is how the worlds works.
 
muttley said:
I think this guy smells money and that he knows nothing happened physically to him and that we did have the meeting with his then serving police officer father/so we did contact the police and covered nothing up.

He knows his dad is dead and that Alistair Hood is dead so can't contradict him and his version of events and then we are left with slurs an innuendo. he is for me attacking the memory of his own father as he is then saying his serving police officer father didn't his duty as both a father and policeman
Click to expand...
Then his mother would be able to corroborate the story surely?
 
What I hate about the press,media is the way they can start innuendo and spread it far and wide. Remember the guy falsely accused and hounded in Portugal,regarding maddie McCann and the fella in Bristol who was getting fingers pointed at him by tv and the papers when that girl was murdered. His only crime was being a bit eccentric.
Woe betide anyone who takes the media on,because they will all come together screaming about the right to have freedom of the press.
This is all very well,but when innocent people's lives are ruined by this,they really shouldn't get away with a hidden apology. It should be their front page or first news story with an explanation where they went wrong with full apology.
 
a_weir said:
PR is not about writing 'GIRFUY' style statements slinging mud in all directions, which is what some people in this thread seem to want.

If a journalist wants to write one, a negative story is coming no matter what. No PR in the world can stop that. What an organisation can do is respond and control the response to any story and that's what we've done here.

PR is making your own stories either in response to others or, more commonly, of positive news that the press will report on and ultimately to not give them the need to want to print negative stories.

Great examples of the excellent PR work the club does is Everyone, Anyone, the recent videos of the gentleman with cancer visiting the stadium, or the young lad who followed RTV around, or countless more 'feelgood' Rangers stories we see here every week.

Yes, of course, the statement could have been more scathing, more direct and made reference to the far more vociferous paedo problem at another Glasgow club but that's actually BAD PR.

Can you imagine if, for arguments sake, Chelsea made a statement like that about Arsenal? They'd rightly be vilified.

Edit: final point, good PR is building bridges and not burning them. Not with everyone but is improving relations with the wider public.
Click to expand...

We arent in the EPL. To pretend we are or the rules are the same in naive in the extreme.
 
A forceful and welcomed response by Rangers who have rightly condemned exploiting the sexual abuse of children in an attempt to undermine our club. We need to go further and ban the BBC, (not just Scotland), and make it quite clear that Rangers FC will no longer tolerate the sectarian hatred of many in the media.
 
a_weir said:
Nope but I have worked closely with PR agencies.

Do you work in high-level PR?
Click to expand...
I'm not the one telling folk they have no clue what they are talking about with regards high-level PR, that's you. Posters are allowed to have an opinion, even ones you don't agree with.
 
a_weir said:
PR is not about writing 'GIRFUY' style statements slinging mud in all directions, which is what some people in this thread seem to want.

If a journalist wants to write one, a negative story is coming no matter what. No PR in the world can stop that. What an organisation can do is respond and control the response to any story and that's what we've done here.

PR is making your own stories either in response to others or, more commonly, of positive news that the press will report on and ultimately to not give them the need to want to print negative stories.

Great examples of the excellent PR work the club does is Everyone, Anyone, the recent videos of the gentleman with cancer visiting the stadium, or the young lad who followed RTV around, or countless more 'feelgood' Rangers stories we see here every week.

Yes, of course, the statement could have been more scathing, more direct and made reference to the far more vociferous paedo problem at another Glasgow club but that's actually BAD PR.

Can you imagine if, for arguments sake, Chelsea made a statement like that about Arsenal? They'd rightly be vilified.

Edit: final point, good PR is building bridges and not burning them. Not with everyone but is improving relations with the wider public.
Click to expand...
There's been a few examples of how the statement could have been improved. You do yourself and your argument no favours by insulting posters and setting yourself up as a seemingly omniscient guru in all things PR. Good PR is also about righting wrongs and defending your reputation. We don't seem to be capable of doing that adroitly and that deficiency really needs to be addressed.
 
a_weir said:
Let me guess, you want a 'YEAH BUT CELTIC HAD LOADS OF PAEDOS' statement?
Click to expand...

Utterly mental that people think this would be be a good idea.

The fact it would leave us open to a ridiculous amount of legal action for a kick off means people aren't engaging their brains on this one.

I think the statement from Rangers on the issue is fine and does what it needs to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top