FOOTBALL fans sometimes have to come across a bit coy these days when they're put on the spot about why they don't like "them".

Gone are the days when a Scottish supporter would look at his questioner in disbelief or pity, puzzled that anyone should have to ask why he "hated the English".

Everyone is more sensitive to this sort of stuff now, to the extent that supporters of any international side have to tiptoe their way towards an explanation for how it's actually legitimate to boo and wish ill on another country's team for sound and historic football reasons, none of which makes the perpetrators xenophobic, racist or ignorant.

The game's essential tribalism dictates that two sets of supporters in, say, Dundee, revel in the other lot's misfortunes, so no-one need be too perplexed by the fact that those interested in football's oldest international rivalry – Scotland versus England – tend to be quite keen on the Auld Enemy getting regular servings of custard pie in the face.

You still have to be able to explain it, though. There have to be defining characteristics which account for even the oldest of antipathies. For the last three or four decades, those have been pretty consistent when it comes to Scotland fans' explanations for their attitude towards the England team. Namely, the arrogance and distorted world view held by their footballers, fans, and – especially – media. "Football's coming home", "golden generations", insisting that England's is the best league in the world, glib and parochial commentators – all have been used to justify Scottish hostility to England. For a country which no longer qualifies for anything, there is only so much Skinner, Baddiel and Tyldesley – the aural equivalent of waterboarding – it is possible to endure.

All perfectly understandable, but this is where things start to get a little awkward. England have now retreated to such a level of mediocrity that they're no longer saying anything which could provoke even the most touchy Scottish fan. When Roy Hodgson was asked about low expectations on the BBC's Football Focus Euro 2012 preview show last week, he mumbled a low-key reply about how no-one had imagined that Denmark would do anything at Euro 92, nor Greece at Euro 2004.

No-one could have interpreted that as any sort of boast that his own team was about to emulate those unlikely previous winners. This was modest, humble, hangdog Hodgson saying: "Yep, Denmark and Greece, that's pretty much our level these days."

There has been no tub-thumping this time. No crowing. If anything, the real anxiety about tonight's opening Group D match against France (21 games unbeaten) in Donetsk has been palpable. The media consensus is that elimination in the quarter-finals (where they would probably face either Spain or Italy) would be a tolerable campaign for such an ordinary squad. Even the "playing without pressure could help us" line has been half-hearted.

Euro 2012 has seemed like a wet blanket for England from the start. A manager appointed with only six weeks to prepare, the nonsense of Rio Ferdinand's unpopular exclusion so things are less uncomfortable for John Terry, the injuries of Frank Lampard, Gareth Barry and Gary Cahill, only around 6000 fans bothering to follow them and the accompanying soundtrack of knives being sharpened for Hodgson makes things even worse than they need be. It has all meant the usual troupe of English cheerleaders haven't had cause to raise a single pom-pom.

And, football being football, there will be some Scottish fans missing the annoyance. It isn't the same when they're like this.

And another thing . . .

There has been a level of clumsiness and gaucheness about much of what Charles Green has had to say about how life is going to be at Rangers. Those are the characteristics of an outsider. Without the nose and instincts for what is likely to go down well with a weary and wary Ibrox support, Green has often misjudged his audience and offered promises and soundbites at a time when Rangers fans need transparency and consistency.

When Green has tried to whisper sweet nothings – he had £20m lined up, he would raise £1bn if he could, Murray Park should be named after a club legend, Rino Gattuso's willingness to return they are still a global force, there will be £30m in the bank via a share issue next month – it has often landed heavily, the executive equivalent of empty badge-kissing.

Even yesterday, as creditors are being told they'll get only pennies for their pounds, there was talk of the club being interested in five players who are at Euro 2012 and "another" £1.5m being made available to Ally McCoist.

There is a sense that fans are numb about all of this, unsure how to take it. They don't like that Green won't reveal who's in his consortium. It worries them that initially he claimed to have £20m yet now there is merely a "founders' contribution of £10m" to get this far. They're suspicious that he said Rangers would be debt-free only to subsequently reveal that the consortium will expect all its money back, plus interest. Why not say so from the start?

Still, his fingers are on the door handle. Rangers look like they'll be in his group's control on Thursday, either via a Company Voluntary Arrangement or by beginning the process of becoming a newco. But if Dave King and others are correct to believe this consortium has the takeover money but next-to-nothing to spend, Rangers will soon be utterly dependent on season-ticket income from supporters deeply fearful about providing it.

King's statements were too little, too late, but fans listened and one thought chills many of them to the marrow: what if he's right?