Club 1872 has been in dialogue with Rangers for several weeks regarding Michael Stewart’s offensive and defamatory comments on Sportsound regarding Alfredo Morelos and Jim Traynor. Rangers were in agreement with us that Michael Stewart’s comments were completely unacceptable, and made strong representations to the BBC on that basis.
It was correct that the club engaged directly with BBC Scotland to make their position clear and attempt to resolve this issue. Rangers fans deserve to receive value for the licence fee which funds BBC Scotland’s activities. The decision to reinstate Mr Stewart, and the attempted justification for that reinstatement, makes it clear that under its current leadership BBC Scotland has no intention of ever properly discharging its duty to a significant section of licence fee payers in Scotland.
In an eight minute rant, Mr Stewart did his best to cast doubt on racist abuse of Alfredo Morelos. He then went on to describe the placement of PR stories, an issue he had completely fabricated, as being “more concerning" than racist abuse and “the main story". This clear and disgraceful attempt to minimise racism should have been condemned by BBC Scotland but instead they have completely ignored it. His defamatory comments about Jim Traynor were not only false and inflammatory but in our opinion were a factor in the physical assault on him just days later. Quite simply, Michael Stewart should have been sacked on the spot. The contrast between how BBC Scotland dealt with this and how the BBC in England have dealt with similar issues is stark.
The assertion by BBC Scotland that they have now adequately resolved this issue by simply explaining Mr Stewart’s responsibilities to him is an insult to the intelligence. Mr Stewart was already well aware of his responsibilities having had several complaints lodged against him for similar behaviour – most notably when he denied that Rangers supporters were placed in a dangerous crushing situation at Rugby Park earlier this season despite clear evidence to the contrary. There is a pattern of behaviour with Michael Stewart on any Rangers related topic and his motivation is abundantly clear to anyone who pays attention.
BBC Scotland’s reputation, already damaged by their refusal to deal properly with their ongoing biased coverage of Rangers, now lies in tatters over this matter. It is decisions like this that have led to more and more questions being asked about the future of the licence fee. Rangers supporters are correct to mistrust BBC Scotland and it is clear that the organisation is deeply flawed at an institutional level. There is no accountability, no integrity and no responsibility – from senior management all the way down to Mr Stewart’s level.
Rangers are correct to withdraw from all dialogue and we believe that those discussions should not resume until the BBC is able to demonstrate with action, not words, that they have regained some control over BBC Sport Scotland.
Club 1872 STATEMENT on Stewart
posted on 26/2/20
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Miller (U9310)
posted 17 seconds ago
Must be shiite going from sponsoring a training ground to making kits for a team with a pitch worse than a training ground.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You seen the rag tag bunch they make kit for?
https://hummel.net/about-hummel/sponsorships-football
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Massive in lots of sports though.
posted on 26/2/20
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Miller (U9310)
posted 17 seconds ago
Must be shiite going from sponsoring a training ground to making kits for a team with a pitch worse than a training ground.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You seen the rag tag bunch they make kit for?
https://hummel.net/about-hummel/sponsorships-football
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-U2a6glae3o
posted on 26/2/20
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 53 minutes ago
comment by New Magnum. The Mild Drover (U16400)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by orange sherbet (U21919)
posted 5 minutes ago
this site has gradually become more toxic IMO.
That maybe down to the user count dropping but from my experience POV you come across as a snipey and obsessed poster.
I know this will get shot down and attacked but its just my point of view and what I see. I aint saying I am correct just giving my experience of what I read on here
Guys like Timmy etc are just wean brains and its easy to see what they are up to.
Prob the biggest reason I very rarely post on here anymore, I do read often but dont feel the urge to post anymore.
To be fair the vast majority of posters are top notch and I have been wrong about other posters (Mags for eg in the past)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No no no
I think you got Mags spot on first time round .
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He did mate.
He used to like me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Definitive rating of the sites noteable Tims from a completely biased perspective.
Good - Lex, JFK
Decent (whanks on ocassion) - NNH (does a lot of cheerleading for the bigger names), Ginger (depending on how racist, Tory he's feeling) , Mags (depending on which side he gets out of bed on)
WUMS/Crackpots - Timmy / Joe / Juke (a very recent relegation)
Erseholes - POV
*If you're not mentioned, your an after thought, a hanger on, a schitehawk.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've always been a WUM.. it's only recently that folk have picked up on it. Possibly because it's actually grated seeing as you thought you had a chance at winning the League this year.. whereas previous seasons it went under the radar as it had no effect?
Granted I've been at it a bit more recently due to said title chase and it's eventual evaporation, and because I've found the site a bit stale and too pally so wanted to ruffle a few feathers
posted on 26/2/20
comment by Miller (U9310)
posted 53 minutes ago
My favourite is the untouchable seven with eight names.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Saw that doing the rounds last night and had to laugh at it.
Y'know fine the guy who made it up was waiting to see how long it'd take someone to cotton on to the number of names
posted on 26/2/20
Fvck sake, not even a sheitehawk
That POV's a real snidey bastirt but eh?
posted on 26/2/20
<Fvck sake, not even a sheitehawk>
Belter!
Started reading this from the Last Post as usual.
Spare a thought for me mate.
Despised by SNP'ers & Tories in = measure for my Left pols.
And by some Sellicks as they think I stuck up for Laudrup & Ishy.
And castigated by some Bears cos they think I'm too hard on Pedro.
Who gives a fvk eh? if you do you're on the wrang forum.
posted on 26/2/20
comment by The Mighty Quinn (U4099)
posted 32 minutes ago
<Fvck sake, not even a sheitehawk>
Belter!
Started reading this from the Last Post as usual.
Spare a thought for me mate.
Despised by SNP'ers & Tories in = measure for my Left pols.
And by some Sellicks as they think I stuck up for Laudrup & Ishy.
And castigated by some Bears cos they think I'm too hard on Pedro.
Who gives a fvk eh? if you do you're on the wrang forum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Stuck up for Ishy.
Too hard on Pedro.
You still clinging on to the separate entity argument on those two?
posted on 26/2/20
Aw thank fvk ma Brief's here.
Get ma sentence increased.
posted on 27/2/20
comment by New Magnum. The Mild Drover (U16400)
posted 13 hours, 39 minutes ago
comment by The Mighty Quinn (U4099)
posted 32 minutes ago
<Fvck sake, not even a sheitehawk>
Belter!
Started reading this from the Last Post as usual.
Spare a thought for me mate.
Despised by SNP'ers & Tories in = measure for my Left pols.
And by some Sellicks as they think I stuck up for Laudrup & Ishy.
And castigated by some Bears cos they think I'm too hard on Pedro.
Who gives a fvk eh? if you do you're on the wrang forum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Stuck up for Ishy.
Too hard on Pedro.
You still clinging on to the separate entity argument on those two?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So am I. I've heard the evidence but there's massive gaps in the level of wit
posted on 27/2/20
comment by Zico 😎 (U21900)
posted 20 hours, 39 minutes ago
That POV's a real snidey bastirt but eh?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's harsh.
He tries REALLY hard so he deserves credit for that at least