BrahimHemdani
-
Posts
11,099 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by BrahimHemdani
-
The Rev MacQuarrie was adamant that the NC were not influenced by the Club in any way and the company that dealt with the email election was independent. As someone who was elected through this process I find your unsubstantiated comment very disappointing. If you have evidence of malfeasance I suggest you bring it forward post haste. -
That's a good question. As things stand at the moment, I attend all the away games that I get a ticket for (other than if I'm on holiday for example) and I do not get priority.
-
On your first point I think we'll have to agree to disagree. On your second point, please see my answer to #162. On the third point, it is unlike you to prejudge. Essentially the RFB has the power to call in expert help if it feels the need, much like many committees can co-opt for skills they do not have, except this would be on an ad hoc basis. On your last point, we seem to be more or less in agreement. I don't see anything that prevents a supporter or group going direct to the Club; but I've already had one such instance where the matter has been referred back to me! So some protocols do need to be established.
-
Yes, of course I see that and I didn't like the phrase "in a structured manner" myself; because it could be interpreted in a lot of different ways, most of which won't be helpful to the RFB. The Fans Board hasn't been "loaded" with anyone, unless you are suggesting that The Nominations Committee was influenced by the Club and the elections were rigged? The Constitution stipulates: 3.Objects The RFB’s objects are: (a) To provide the Members with a voice and communication channel directly to the Club in respect of the direction of the Club including, but not limited to: (i) the matchday experience; (ii) supporter engagement; (iii) Membership; (iv) local community support projects; and (v) any matters that affect the Club’s supporters’ experiences. (b) To improve communication between the Club and Members; to represent the views of the Club’s supporters; to encourage and assist the Club; and to take proper account of the interest and views of the supporters of the Club. © To provide the Members with an open forum in order that all Members can express their opinions in a clear and structured manner to the Club. (d) To represent and communicate on behalf of the greatest possible cross section of Members. The RFB can propose amendments but they have to be approved by the Club: 23.Alterations to the constitution 23.1 The Club shall have reserved to it the exclusive right to amend the constitution at any time. Any amended constitution must be publicised by the Club on fansboard.rangers.co.uk and http://www.rangers.co.uk. 23.2 RFB shall have the power to make a recommendation to the Club (on the basis of a majority vote of RFB) to amend the constitution. The Club shall be obliged to consider said suggested alteration to the Constitution. It is my understanding that the RFB intend to establish a sub committee to review the Constitution and I have no doubt that aspect will be prominent in the discussions since it is fundamental to how the representatives and the board as a whole will operate.
-
I was approached by a prominent individual on the way to the match last night and asked to comment on a rumour that I had proposed that RSC's should not receive any ticket allocation for away matches. I was happy to tell him and wish to state publicly that there is not truth whatsoever in this rumour. I have not been asked to make any such proposal, I have not made any such proposal myself, nor would it be my place to do so. I have been approached by the Secretary of a small RSC in connection with nil allocation for certain fixtures and I am pursuing that matter through the appropriate channels. I have also suggested to that Club and the RSA that I would need to be sure that if I was to approach the Club on the wider issue then the view that I was representing was agreed by the RSC's in general. I have previously offered to attend any RSA/RSC Meeting at which this type of thing is discussed. I trust this clarifies my stance on this matter.
-
That's much appreciated, Barca; I feel a bit punch drunk right now; but I'll recover.
-
I am not certain if it's appropriate for me to publish my own amendments but I have nothing to hide so in the interests of transparency I am happy to do so: 4a. In the last sentence add to - but could be easily found "via a hot button" (AF). 4b. After Web forums add "It was agreed that there was no impediment to Board Members participating in Web forums." 9. Add after - good example of RFB can be "seen to be providing two way communication between fans and the Club." 9. RFFF - change wording to "might have some say" (in how monies might be spent). - Insert after - Andrew McCormick is the Chair "and any fans who have concerns about the RFFF should be encouraged to write to him at Rangers address for onward transmission." I don't know the answer to your question about "the actual number of unique voters for the RFB elections"; you would need to ask the Club. The response to the RSA question was given by Irene Munro, Director of Communications and verified by me with her before I passed it on to the enquirers. Again, I'm not sure that it's appropriate to forensically disect the Minutes in this manner but so far as I was concerned the last two issues you mention were not related. I would reiterate that I have done my best to answer your questions as openly and honestly as I can and I have probably gone further than I should, so I hope you will accept this response.
-
I'm not sure where you got that from, BD, but the suggestion that was supported at the meeting would not restrict the directors from speaking to any elected group. However, I would respectfully point you to the first objective of "The Fans Board (which is to) provide a platform for supporters to communicate directly with key Club staff in a structured manner" The RFB didn't set that out the Club did and the RFB will have to work within that and other parameters. I would reiterate that ANY fan can contact ANY member of the RFB with ANY relevant issue, so whilst I agree that some fans were disenfranchised (although the constituency was approx 23,000), none are restricted from raising any issue. So there is no limitation on issues being raised. Also the RFB "may, at its discretion, allow any person (who is not an Elected Representative) who they reasonably consider appropriate, to attend and speak at any meeting of RFB; for the avoidance of doubt, any such person who is invited to attend an RFB meeting shall not be entitled to vote on any matter to be determined by RFB." So whilst the Elected Members may not always have the skills and experience necessary to deal with certain issues, they can call on any person who they feel would be so qualified.
-
Could you estimate a ball park (excuse the pun) figure?
-
05/11/2014 Counter Credit STEVEC GERSNET D BGC £10.00 Balance £266.66 That makes 16 with 31 days to the big night.
-
My pleasure, thanks for your support.
-
Yes he made two goals that night.
-
Is that not self evident?
-
As I have stated on here already, the election is being conducted by the Rev MacQuarrie on a strictly confidential basis and not even the Board members will know the candidates until the ballot papers are issued at the next meeting. And you are correct, I am not interested in your advice.
-
Absolutely not. I have said repeatedly in recent times that I have no agenda against the RST, what happened in the past is water under the bridge as far as I am concerned though that clearly is not the case in some quarters. I think the RST has done a fine job with their BR scheme.
-
I trust I've done that now.
-
Can I just remind everyone that it is open to any fan to engage with any member of the Fans Board by email; and I have also proposed that there be a "general" email address so that fans can a submit an issue for attention of the whole Board.
-
It did not apply to the RST or any other elected group, as I understood the point that was being made.
-
I agree that the Minutes are confusing on this issue, personally I would not have used that format; but re-writing that section would have meant re-writing the whole thing in a different format and since I was the only person who put up ANY amendments I didn't want to slow the process further by suggesting a complete re-write. The suggestion came from Rangers Media web site where it had widespread support; but again I would stress that as I understood it, it related to unelected bodies. I didn't put it forward as my proposal but, yes, I agree that now that there is an elected Fans Board in place Rangers should not meet unelected groups. My understanding of the final point you have highlighted is that future channels of communication would be discussed with the directors. As far as representation of other elected groups are concerned the question was raised by the RSA and individually by William (Monty) Mongomery. The answer that I received from Rangers is that "the focus groups were strongly of the opinion that the election should be for individuals not representatives. It was open to any member or official of any group or association to put themselves forward for nomination and the subsequent election. The Nomination Committee, Chaired by Rev MacQuarrie, was independent of the Club, five of its members were selected by the independent company that arranged the focus groups and the election process also was independent of the Club." I conveyed this answer to the persons concerned. I trust this answers your valid points.
-
This was also suggested by a comment on Rangers Chat, since most everyone has a mobile phone I thought it would be easy to implement, so I discussed it with the TO Manager (Incidentally, whilst you can check in online for United, you cannot print a boarding pass, the only option other then getting it printed at the airport is to have it downloaded to your phone, which is fine so long as you keep it charged and remember to open the app in advance when you are online. I also bought a ticket for Malaga and printed it off online, complete with a seating map and directions to the stadium.) Anyway, the issue is cost. Rangers turnstiles are way out of date and could not support a bar code reader without major expense and the money simply isn't available at the moment. I also thought that the smart cards could be activated instead of paper tickets, which would mean a major saving in printing, envelopes & postage as well staff time for enveloping & collections not to mention long wait times. Apparently the main issue here is that folk who buy on a per game basis want to have a paper ticket, especially if they are not using it themselves. Folk forget or lose their smart cards so they then have to be issued a paper ticket in any event. It would be a boon to the staff in the TO, so I'll continue to push for it.
-
SFA seek answers as Llambias joins Rangers board
BrahimHemdani replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
Whoops, I've crept back in and pulled the lid down. -
SFA seek answers as Llambias joins Rangers board
BrahimHemdani replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
NO. I am on record as having been against him from the start. I was one of the first to raise the Private Eye article and was toild by many that it was nonsense. I also strongly supported the assessment by the independent members of the Board. -
SFA seek answers as Llambias joins Rangers board
BrahimHemdani replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
Perhaps so but it is defined internationally "“club” means any club in membership of the Scottish FA and any club in membership of an association in membership of UEFA and/or FIFA;" -
SFA seek answers as Llambias joins Rangers board
BrahimHemdani replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
I have told you what I know but you would really need to ask Mr Regan that one. I did have the opportunity to ask him about it once and my recollection is that they let his lawyers take them for a ride over the "in the last 7 years" issue and by the time they got a staright answer if they ever did, the Club was in Admin. Although the situation is different, I think they'll push for much quicker answers this time; but as has been said I don't think there is any comparson between Whyte and Ashley in a business sense either. -
SFA seek answers as Llambias joins Rangers board
BrahimHemdani replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
I agree with most of this but the "rule" such as it exists is in relation to "securities or shares in excess of 3% of the issued share capital of another club or the holding company of such club" and Ashley seems to have negotiated 10%. There is no real comparsion with the Whyte situation, because he was a disqualified director, so far as has been brought out, Ashley is not.