Is Choosing Celtic or Rangers the same thing?

The difference between the two is pretty simple:

Celtic = Catholic support
Rangers = Protestant support

While that may not mean too much to those outside of Scotland and Ireland, the supporters there take that division quite seriously.

If you want to see lots of ugly sectarianism, attend the derby...you'll get an earful from both sides.

Other than that, they are both huge clubs that actually cooperate on a number of issues (ie. shirt sponsorship) and to their credit, realize at times that if they don't work together, Scottish football could go down the tubes.

Right now, IMO, Celtic play the better football, so you might want to look there first.

 

Catfish,

Read the FAQ sticky post. It has a lot of info and points for further reading on the matter.

Does it matter whether you support the Sox or Cubs? Pretend the Cubs are a side that has historical roots in anti-slavery and the Union side and the Sox were traditionally Confederate-oriented team, and you can get a taste of what the HISTORICAL (not that it's right or not that it still pertains 100%) difference is between the two Glasgow teams mentioned.

I'm not going accuse you of being deliberately obtuse, but the Celtic-Rangers "thing" is almost the first thing anyone runs across when researching Scottish football, so it's funny to see such an open-ended question from someone with such a high post count.

It is a discussion that can get out of hand pretty quickly unless everyone keeps a cool head. That said, everyone feel free to edumacate Cat.

 

Celtic - First non latin team to win a european cup, only team as far as im aware to win a european cup with players born entirely within 20 miles of the stadium, friendly welcoming fans who win accolades and friends wherever they go, Henrik Larsson, Last seasons uefa cup finalists.

Rangers - operated a sectarian signing policy for 50 years, outwith a cup winners cup little pedigree or success in europe, tolerates racism from their stands against certain black celtic players, went out of last seasons uefa cup in the first round.

Pick for youreself

 

Cman-enjoyed your analogy, never thought about it that way. Catfish-For many people (such as myself) supporting Rangers was never an option. My friends that are Rangers supporters would say the same about Celtic, even those that have little concern for the sectarian element involved in supporting these clubs. As you mentioned in another post you were going to visit both a Rangers and Celtic supporters pub in Chicago, and you'll likely find that the people you meet at both places are quite similar, save the colors they wear. There are however, many out there that take their support for these two clubs VERY seriously, so tread lightly, but i'm sure you'll meet some understanding and friendly people. Also, my apologies for my comments towards you from an earlier thread, didn't mean to make my disagreement with your statement (ridiculous as i thought it was ) personal. And in the meantime, pull for Celtic to earn at least a draw in Lyon, as it's in the best interest of Scottish football

 

I certainly know a lot of Celtic supporters that can't stand ManUtd . I can't think of why one couldn't support Arsenal, Ireland and Celtic ; I think there are even some on BigSoccer. Many Irish and Irish-Americans that i know that support Celtic also follow Liverpool or ManUtd. But loads also support other English clubs (Spurs, Chelsea, and even f-ing ManCity amongst some of my friends ). A good friend of mine, a Glaswegian and lifelong Celtic supporter also follows Everton, although I also know some Scots that are Rangers or Celtic supporters that have little interest in any other clubs, or the Scottish national side for that matter. Just speaking from my personal experience, and i'm sure others may have had similar or differing experiences. Hope that helps.

 

Catfish -

Thanks for the wishes...I've been lurking forever, but wanted to get more involved.

To f/u on your point, I've met lots of supporters from both teams that downplay the divide. It has lessened quite a bit, so there is hope for the future. If you go to a match, however, especially at Ibrox, you will see it right in front of you. I was particluarly astonished to see such vitriolic anti-catholic slogans, hear quasi-racist chants, etc.

At Celtic, I saw less of that, but it certainly exists. I also did see a few PLO flags whipped out for the sake of solidarity by some of the Celtic supporters.

To the supporter coming from abroad, it struck me as astonishing that this exists. But it has so for well over 100 years now. There is no way to tell the story of Scottish football without dealing with it.

As for supporting one club v. another...I've not seen much of a correlation that supporters from one club will always support another. More a matter of personal preference from what I've seen.

 

Catfish-

I felt that the supporters who waived the Palestinian flag did so because they view the Catholics in NI as an oppressed minority, which many also view the Palestinians.

There were no pro-PLO chants, signs, etc...just the flag for very brief moments. It is a very small minority at both grounds that uses such inflammatory tactics.

And no, I do not think that Rangers/UK means support for Israel just to counterbalance such a tiny minority of Celtic supporters. The overarching theme of the rivalry always remains Protestant/Catholic and Unionist/Republican. Nothing else.

Like I said in previous posts, coming from abroad, I look for attractive football and a good atmosphere before anything else. Go, have a good time, realize fully that you have entered a different world, and you'll be just fine...

 

You people are so messed up. He asks what the differance is between the OF teams, and you give all this praise to celtic, and hate on Rangers. Rangers tolerates racism no more than Celtic. you need to shut your traps. You dont know what your talking about. Those that actually give an accurate description, good. But the rest of you are a bunch of fools

 

You people are so messed up. He asks what the differance is between the OF teams, and you give all this praise to celtic, and hate on Rangers. Rangers tolerates racism no more than Celtic. you need to shut your traps. You dont know what your talking about. Those that actually give an accurate description, good. But the rest of you are a bunch of fools

 

most of the posts are from celtic fans so of course they are goin to be biased. Just wait till the gers fans get here!

IMO one side are as bad (off the park) as the other and one team are as good as the other (on the park) so in the first instance your point is kinda right Catfish. Of course Celtic are better at the moment but remember Rangers won the treble last year! The dominant team changes all the time.

 

I was sitting in ibrox last season and saw an entire stand making monkey noises at didier agathe and bobo balde,it happened more than once, the radio picked up on it and the papers picked up on it, there was no admitance of it from rangers and the SFA pushed no harder.
At the first old firm game this season it happened again and this time there was widespread outrage that these morons could get away with this, but in the SFA official decry celtic were officially blamed too, despite it being our players who were being taunted, and then rangers finally admitted it and their chairman was forced to make a pitiful plea to the supporters to stop it,now unless you know what youre on about I suggest you "shut your trap" because I have seen it on more than one occasion and rangers have admitted to it.

 

https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=38780

 

Go Rangers !!!!


Why is it that both the Hoops and Rangers seem to have the same jersey sponsor recently?

 

Re: Brassmonkey...

A college historian. here we go. Thousands of Jews fought for the confederacy, and there is a museam dedicated to it in Richmond, Virginia. Ten of my ancestors fought for the south, three losing thier lives. They fought for freedom. If you were a historian you would know that the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery until 1863. Lincoln only signed the Emancipation Proclamation to cover up his wrongdoings and justify the war. The north was just as "racist". Northerners had slaves. Slave states that fought for the north were West Virginia, Maryland, Missouri, and Kentucky. I guess you would know that, bieng the high and mighty historian. The south was bieng screwed over by the north and was ignored politically and economically. They had just as much right to leave the union as the colonies did to revolt against England. You yankees just use slavery to justify a stupid war. Ask any real historian who isnt a left-wing nutjob and they will tell you the same thing nuff said.

Read this book if you want to stop listening to left wing propaganda

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/A...0507072/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_1/102-0246541-3062575

 

Keep on topic, if you want to argue about the american civil war take it to bighistory.com or at least to a poorly modded american board, anymore and the thread is shut,especially if it contains right-wing nutjob propoganda links!

 

I would hardly consider Amazon.com right wing

 

The book is, and as its not on topic I can call it whatever the hell I want.