Rip it up and Start again? The Rangers Hall of Fame.

17 November 2011 18:46
It's that time of year again and the list has been drawn up.

But it’s not that list which draws groans and leads to exasperation (and in any case let us leave that to the expert in such matters, a Mr. S. Claus).

No, as you might have guessed, it’s the Rangers Hall of Fame nominations.

And just as last year’s inductees caused some mild consternation so this year we may be in for more of the same.

The names suggested for consideration are as follows:

30s/ 40s/ 50sTully Craig, Jimmy Duncanson, Jimmy Fleming, Tom Hamilton, Johnny Little, Scott Symon.60s/ 70s/ 80sKai Johansen, Dave McPherson, John McClelland, Alex Miller, Stuart Munro, Ian Redford.90s/ 00s/ 10sNacho Novo, Arthur Numan, Fernando Ricksen, David Robertson, Trevor Steven, Gary Stevens.

 

Some fine players, some deserving cases and some interesting nominations.

Over the years it’s often been the case that people have complained about some of the more stinging forum criticism of the ways in which Rangers honour their greats and it is probably true that in examining the careers of some men who are now in the club 'HOF' people have been offended, often rightly so. It should also be noted that a number of fiercely deserving cases have been taken up by the selection committee of Messrs Jardine, Mason and co. and have found their rightful place in the spotlight and in the Hall.

But let’s not mince words here: we’re now dangerously close to devaluing the whole enterprise and that tipping point, even for those of a more generous disposition, can’t be far away.

The methodology and the inbuilt bias toward those of a modern era – and, frankly, those able to attend the dinner to be honoured in person – is the chief problem with the nomination process. Certain plentiful eras will be underrepresented (forever) while periods where the Club suffered rare moments of extended misery will find an inordinate number of live and kicking Bears taking their place.

Selecting people as examples – otherwise known as ‘picking’ on people – doesn’t often end well, but the very concept and the criteria for entry to a Hall of Fame is clearly something which matters to a lot of people. Would Ian Redford – nominated this year and last - be welcome in this company? Is Fernando Ricksen really someone who deserves a place in a Rangers HOF? Last year we had the argument: does Ally Dawson sit comfortably with (irony alert) the likes of Sandy Jardine or Richard Gough? For some the very idea is nonsensical and yet others don’t seem concerned about peak ability and are happy to accommodate players who served – however well – for a sustained period. All of which is, in many ways, fair enough if sliding a little uncomfortably toward the ‘janitor at IBM receiving a gold watch for x years’ service’ style commemoration.

In any case, Rangers have now, beyond dispute, decided that their Hall of Fame isn’t an elite pantheon; not a metaphorical place in which the truly greatest of the great sit in isolation. It is, instead, an ever-extending list of people who played for Rangers: some good, some great; some part of wonderful teams; some average in mediocre times. The core idea is one to celebrate and cherish but the effect is too diluted for the honour to properly resonate.

The more cynical amongst us who decry the whole enterprise as little more than a chance to have an annual dinner where puddings can pay over the score to mingle with players over dessert is probably a step too far in the grumpy stakes but it’s increasingly difficult to enjoy the annual, selection-by-quota, approach.

Contrary to some insular concerns, it’s generally not much fun to kick the club and to question its noble enterprises. When all is said and done there will continue to be many a spirited argument about the merits of players past and present and indeed future and the accompanying book on the Club’s Hall of Fame is readable and may well encourage people to seek out more information on less-recent achievements and proud players. But it’s hard to escape the conviction that a fine idea, and a proud history, is being at best misrepresented and at worst simply wasted.

 

Source: FOOTYMAD