You make a fair and uncomfortable point. To be blunt, if fans have accepted past actions that limited Celtic supporters at derbies then we owe it to ourselves to be consistent when the tables turn. This isn't about cheering restrictions for the sake of it. It's about asking whether our reactions are principled or just partisan.

Consistency matters

Think back. You've mentioned David Murray's ban, Dave King's reductions and Celtic refusing an allocation over safety measures. People argued different positions each time, and you can see why emotions ran high. Supporters wanted safety, tradition, or what they saw as protecting the club. But if we cheered those calls before, we can't suddenly cry foul just because Rangers are on the receiving end of a request from Celtic. It's a mirror. It asks whether our stance is about the principle, or only which side benefits.

Safety versus hospitality

There is a simple household analogy in your post and it lands. Would you invite someone to your house if you genuinely feared damage or trouble? No. The same logic applies to matchday allocations. Clubs and authorities have to weigh risk and logistics. That can mean refusing an allocation or stipulating who can be sold tickets. To be fair, it stings when decent supporters are lumped in with troublemakers, but policing who gets tickets is one of the few levers clubs have to manage risk.

Where do we go from here?

Truth is, fans should demand consistency from their own side. Call out past decisions that were wrong, and admit when a restriction now feels reasonable. We can protect the club while still defending honest principles. And make no mistake, decent Rangers fans should always be able to attend. But that doesn't mean every single request around specific groups is automatically unreasonable. Ask the hard questions, keep perspective, and don't let tribal instinct be the only guide.

Written by Mr Mojo Risin: 18 June 2026

Tags: spfl