Bluedell

I believe I know what songs get us into trouble and what doesn't, but you are calling for a lot of songs that don't get us into trouble and probably never will to be stopped being sung. I disagree with that. Don't see how that is missing the point. I don't see the logic in stopping singing a song just because there's some remote chance that it may cause a storm in the future. I guess we should stop singing 3 little birds and Penny Arcade by that logic?

Just because I'm expressing a different view from yours?

Not sure I get what you are saying? Feel free to sing what songs? I'm not suggesting singing songs that will get the club hammered. I fully accept that there's some songs or some add-ons that can't be sung, but don't see why Derry's Walls needs to be banned just because TBB or FTP was sung at the w/e.

So let's get 100% buy-in to every song before we are allowed to sing it? What about Ally McCoist's blue and white army? That divides the support. Should that not be sung either?

LOL. So you're suggesting banning songs that aren't currently a problem (Derry's Walls) and keeping songs that are (Follow Follow). Wow.

Disagree with the OP. We don't need to stop singing about religion and politics. It's been done during every game at Ibrox this season without any major issue.

Why would the club do that?

Whether they should or should not be sung is a different argument. I don't have a problem with The Sash or Derry's Walls being sung by Rangers fans but there may be those who do. However turning round and trying to get people to stop singing them is pointless as it's not going to happen. We need to conmcentrate on the stuff that we can hopefully get them to stop singing. Certain songs are banned because they are demed offensive, not because people don't like them. A different matter entirely. Many don't like the Sash or TFOA but they aren't banned.

A bit of realism is also required. There's no need for our fans to stop singing about religion and politics and it's not going to happen short term anyway. The list of stuff they can't sing has to short and has to be banned. It can't be just because some people don't like it.

It's all about having discipline and not being stupid. We need to stop giving them ammo. It's not difficult. Just don't mention fen'ian or pope. The media is what the media is. That is a separate battle and it's going to be difficult to change that, but we can't do it if we start giving both the media and Celtic fans open goals. They are delighted that these songs are being sung, they want them sung and if the guys involved can't see that they are actually doing the haters jobs for them then it's going to be a struggle to do anything in this battle.

I don't think that answered my question.

Where do you draw the line? Let's say hypothetically that a vote of RST members was taken and a majority voted against the renaming of the stadium but a vote of buyrangers members voted for it. What is the RST policy on it? Could we have the situation whereby the RST are actively campaigning against the the renaming but the RST votes at the AGM are made in favour of it? There's also the issue that the rules of the RST don't allow for members to be prevented from voting on certain issues. I'd like to know how this is all going to work.

Thanks, mate. Looking forward to hearing details of the membership scheme. Would this be done outside of the club? Would it be a cash generating vehicle for the club? What about the potential disenfranchisement of the non buyrangers members? It's a concern of mine and would be interested in how you see it working going forward. I'm a full member of the RST and there shouldn't be any policy issues that I don't have a say on.

You are actually wearing blinkers on this and you're not coming across as objective. Green can and should give opinions on issues even if everything is not 100% within our club and I'd expect him to do so.

Given your first paragraph I guess you don't really mean your last paragraph.

As Traynor himself did when Gordon Smith went to the SFA.

Not seen anything to refute it, although not sure what constitutes a meeting as such. Do they have to have all the reps from USA and Oz? Certainly Andy Kerr is still involved in things such as the RFWG and it was the Assembly's bank account that was used for the RFFF, so although there's been no formal meetings there has been activity. However certainly surprising that they haven't seen fit to formally meet given the turbulent times over the past 12 months. I guess where Kerr stays, his ban and the fact that their budget got taken away has restricted them, but even so, you'd think they could have a formal meeting, even if was by Skype.

I've not seen anything serious to suggest that his resignation has been rejected, and it takes a lot more than Wabash's witterings on FF to convince me that it has been.

Hmmm. So will the Puma deal not be with us directly but be with SD (rhetorical question - not expecting you to know)? Sounds kinda like the suggestion that Umbro had the deal with JJB and not us. I could never see the cash from the supposed deal with Umbro and it was always a bit murky. I can't see the logic in tying a strip deal into a merchandising or stadium naming deal but I guess there must be something that I'm missing.

When will it be announced?

I have been extremely impressed with Andy Kerr in any dealings I have with him. He always talks a lot of sense. I do believe that there should be a total revamp of the Assembly and turn it into a proper vehicle for representing fans, but I'd certainly be happy with Kerr as its head.

Certainly can't argue with Kerr's comments.

So Leggat doesn't know where the leak came from but he can speak for every single person employed by the club to state that it didn't come from any one of them.

They voted for Rangers not to be in the SPL, so their title was won away from the park and therefore will be forever tainted. It's easy to win a league when you vote out your only challenger.

Hart showed his colours when he put money into Youth Development a few years ago, thus proving his credentials. I've no idea if he'll make good chairman but he was a successful businessman with Hacking and Patterson, and I would think he'd have been a good non-exec. I've nothing against Murray but if there's to be a change then let's do it quickly and painlessly.