Key Points
- Celtic posted a social media video that referenced Rangers’ anthem and its “Simply the best” line, a move that was widely read as trolling after the Glasgow derby build-up and title-day atmosphere.
- Rangers had already been dealing with wider social media-related concerns, including a previous club announcement that players and management would boycott social media for a week over racist abuse and a lack of accountability online.
- The reporting linked the reaction to the intensity of the Old Firm rivalry and the way both clubs use online platforms to respond to each other’s fan bases.
- The available material does not provide the full text of the Rangers “U-turn” described in the headline, so this article is based on the source material that was accessible and verifiable.
Rangers (Glasgow Express) May 11, 2026, have been caught up in another social media flashpoint after Celtic posted a video that many supporters viewed as a deliberate wind-up, adding fresh tension to an already hostile Old Firm backdrop. The online exchange came after Celtic’s title-day celebrations and after a previous Rangers stance on social media abuse had already underlined how sensitive the club has become to what happens online.
What happened on social media?
As reported by the unnamed writer at 67 Hail Hail, Celtic published a video on X that showed a social media admin typing and deleting different captions before settling on “Just another day in Paradise”, alongside green clover and trophy emojis.
The piece said the clip revisited earlier banter around Rangers’ walk-out anthem, “The Best” by Tina Turner, which Celtic fans had sung at Ibrox during a previous derby. The article framed the post as a “tremendous piece of trolling”, reflecting how the message was interpreted in rival-supporter circles rather than as a neutral club update.
The same report noted that Ally McCoist had previously described the Ibrox wind-up as “brilliant” and “hilarious” when discussing it on talkSPORT, showing that even within the rivalry there are different reactions to the same incident.
That matters because it illustrates the tone of the exchange: not just a one-off joke, but part of an ongoing pattern of social-media sparring between the clubs and their supporters.
Why were Rangers already sensitive online?
Rangers had previously issued a formal statement announcing that players and management would boycott social media for a week from 7pm on 8 April. The club said the move was meant
“to underline the ongoing concerns over a lack of accountability and responsibility from social media outlets”
and highlighted
“the daily racist abuse our players have to endure”.
That statement also made clear Rangers believed hate on social platforms was “spiralling out of control”.
The club’s managing director, Stewart Robertson, said Rangers were “fully behind” the boycott and had arranged meetings with Facebook and Instagram to raise concerns.
He added that the club would keep pressing for better verification, stronger accountability and more direct action from platforms. In that context, any fresh online provocation involving Rangers was always likely to land in a charged atmosphere, even if the original club statement was about abuse rather than banter.
How did Celtic frame the post?
The 67 Hail Hail article presented Celtic’s X post as a playful but pointed piece of online theatre, rather than a formal club statement.
It described the video in detail, including the decision to type “World’s Most Successful…” and then delete it before moving to the “Simply the best” line and eventually the final caption.
That sequencing suggests the post was designed to be seen as self-aware mischief and to make reference to the familiar rivalry narrative between the two Glasgow clubs.
Celtic’s timing also mattered because the club was in “party mode” after being presented with the Scottish Premiership title.
The report tied the clip to the mood of trophy day and to the broader context of Celtic celebrating success while Rangers were left to reflect on the rivalry’s emotional edge. In practical terms, the post worked because it connected a football in-joke with a moment of real significance for Celtic fans.
What does the rivalry mean online?
The Old Firm rivalry has long extended beyond the pitch, and the source material shows how social media has become one of its main battlegrounds.
Celtic’s post turned a familiar stadium chant into an online message, while Rangers’ earlier boycott announcement showed the club’s view that social platforms can expose players to abuse and hostility. Together, those examples show that the online side of the rivalry is now part of the wider football story rather than a separate thread.
The key issue is not just what was said, but how quickly it spreads and how supporters interpret it. A light-hearted post to one set of fans can be seen as provocation by another, especially when the clubs are separated by only a few miles and every gesture is read through the history of the fixture. That is why social-media decisions by either club can trigger heavy reaction within minutes.
What else was reported?
The accessible source material did not include a separate, fully verifiable Rangers statement reversing an online position, so no additional claim should be made beyond the material available here. What can be said with confidence is that Rangers had already taken a strong public line on online abuse and accountability, and Celtic had responded in a way that was widely read as a taunt.
Those two facts are enough to explain why the story quickly became framed as a Rangers social-media climbdown or response in some headlines, even where the underlying detail was not fully visible in the accessible text.
For attribution, the accessible report on Celtic’s post was published by 67 Hail Hail, though the article excerpt available here does not show a named journalist in the snippet. The Rangers boycott statement was published on the club’s official website and attributed to Rangers and managing director Stewart Robertson. That distinction matters because one item is a media report describing an event, while the other is an official club statement setting out policy.
Background of the development
This development sits inside the long-running Old Firm rivalry between Celtic and Rangers, where league results, fan chants, social media posts and public statements often generate immediate fallout. The rivalry has become increasingly visible online because club accounts can now respond instantly to matches, titles and fan behaviour.
Rangers’ earlier decision to boycott social media over racist abuse also shows that clubs are no longer treating these platforms as harmless side channels.
The background to this particular episode is therefore twofold: Celtic’s celebratory messaging after title success, and Rangers’ broader concern about abuse and control online. Put together, they create the conditions for a social-media exchange that is about much more than a single post.
Prediction for supporters
For Rangers supporters, this kind of development is likely to increase frustration because online taunts can feel amplified when the team is under pressure on the pitch. For Celtic supporters, it may be seen as a normal extension of rivalry, especially when the club is celebrating success and using humour to underline that position. For both sets of fans, the most likely effect is that social media remains a flashpoint where even short posts can dominate debate far beyond the 90 minutes of football.
The wider prediction is that clubs will keep tightening how they use social platforms, particularly when fan abuse, trolling and moderation concerns overlap. Rangers’ earlier boycott statement suggests that they are likely to remain alert to online conduct, while Celtic’s post shows that clubs will still use humour and rivalry messaging when they think it suits the moment.
