BrahimHemdani

No problem at all, I started it!

Apparently he can't show his face in his home town of Stranraer due to shagging the wrong person's wife; otherwise they might take him off our hands. This is a bit off the subject of the chain but hey ho.....

Kyle looks to me like a punch drunk heavyweight; seriously he wouldn't get a game for your pub team and even if he did get a game you MUST play someone beside him to get the knock downs.

The reason I didn't mention Gattuso was because it was always known that we only had him on loan and that he would go back to Milan.

What utter nonsense, I pay my money to follow my team, staying away won't help them get better. BTW my spies tell me that McCoist was overheard in a certain coffee shop today saying that "the team isn't good enough", I wonder if he's had a look at himself lately, taking off Shiels for Kyle, deary me.

I didn't :disgusted:

A certain former owner of our club, once said that very few players have ever left Rangers and gone on to better themselves. Van Bronkhurst certainly was one, Jelavic and Naismith look like being others; Charlie Adam is arguable I guess. Kris Boyd and Hutton are classic examples of a miss as will be so many of the others mentioned in this chain. Of course the current circumstances are unique but the grass is always greener, I think not......

I watched him very closely at Forres from the rail right beside the pitch and I was very disappointed to see that he did not appear to offer any encouragement to any players particularly when he moved back into midfield and we were under severe pressure late on in the game.

I have made some enquiries about tickets for the East Stirling, Elgin and subsequent games and at the same time asked, given the experience gained so far, if the Ticket Office is planning to issue a list for the rest of the season. I have made the point that unless a list is issued in advance then there is no point in the change back to the old system as fans won’t know whether or not they have a ticket for any particular game. I have been told that East Stirlingshire only confirmed our allocation on Wednesday (31st) and this will be communicated to successful supporters either later on Wednesday or on Thursday (1 November) . So I guess that if you haven’t had an email by tonight then you haven’t got a ticket. They are still waiting on confirmation from Elgin and a few other clubs. “We will of course confirm to our supporters as soon as we know and hopefully that should be within the next couple of weeks.”

Cribari actually had his best game IMHO against Motherwell. Personally I think he looks very comfortable against the third divison strikers even when playing on injured as he did on Sunday; but I am concerned about lack of communication. I watched him closely from the railing at Forres and didn't once see any communication between him and Perry never mind anyone else. I don't know whether there is a language barrier or he's just naturally someone who gets on with his own game but I find that quite worrying and it could cost us in more difficult matches.

Did he not expect it to be on Saturday and Sunday this week? Or maybe he got confused with the clocks going forward?

This is very helpful but I am confused. Let me see if I've got it right. Apparently a new group called Rangers Unite met on 22 September 2012 and â??deemed themselves as fit and proper to represent the majority Supportâ?; claiming that they are â??perceived (by whom, themselves?) as committed to Rangers Football Clubâ??s wellbeing; and have consistently demonstrated this in both the short and long termâ?, which I donâ??t doubt. The new group stated that there were significant representations at the meeting from the following existing Groups: The Rangers Supporters Assembly; The Rangers Supporters Association; The Rangers Fans Fighting Fund; Rangers Till I Die N.I.; Vanguard Bears; Rangers Media Forum; Copland Road.org. In a statement to Rangers Supporters Trust they said inter alia: Rangers Supporterâ??s Trust (RST) was not invited to todayâ??s meeting. The reasons for this are as follows: It has been deemed that RST are pursuing a â??convenientâ?? plan for buying â??stockâ?? in Rangers FC. They are pursuing this avenue with the assistance of Supporters Direct. In our opinion, the RST, at the present time, lack the credibility to be leading a fanâ??s takeover of the Club. The main problem with their â??proposalâ?? is the caveat that, to buy Shares in the Club, â??allâ?? Fans would â??needâ?? to become members of the RST. We consider this to be both unwanted and unnecessary. We also feel that this â??planâ?? has elements of self interest attached to it. We, therefore, cannot endorse it. Certain RST Board members are also perceived as divisive within the Rangers Support â?? most notably, Mr.Dingwall. A number of groups also made it clear that they would not engage in the USP process if Mr. Dingwall was a part of the USP process. There was also a unanimous view that this antipathy was reserved to only some members of the RST Board (not to its Members). This â??minorityâ?? are perceived to have a self-serving agenda that is not in line with the vast majority of Rangers Fans. This assertion was unanimously agreed by all Groups who attended Saturdayâ??s meeting. Since this was the new groupâ??s first meeting one might well ponder how they could have pre-formed an opinion about anything let alone an invitation to the RST and who it was that was â??deemedâ? to have an opinion about the Community Share Scheme. This also begs the question about how the "statement" was conveyed to the RST. In any event the same or similar group called the Unified Supporters Platform, this time not claiming specific support from the RFFF or RM but including Rangers Unite (so it is not clear if RFFF and RM subscribed to the statement by virtue of being members/supporters of Rangers Unite or not or indeed if Rangers Unite have any members), Blue Heaven, Union Bears and Number One Fanzine issued a statement on 1 October 2012 calling for: â??the Rangers support to withdraw its financial input to any SPL club by boycotting the next round of the League Cup, drawn on 4th October, should our opposition be ANY Scottish Premier League club away from home.â? in other words a boycott of any such SPL team. Now hereâ??s where Iâ??m confused. The RST are members of the Assembly and the RSA have two members on the RST Board; and yet if the first statement is correct then both the Assembly and the RSA take the view that a leading member of the RST Board (some would say THE leading member), Mr Dingwall is divisive within the Rangers Support and furthermore they express "antipathy" (which could mean anything from ill-feeling to downright hatred) towards a minority of that Board who they "perceive as having a self-serving agenda that is not in line with the vast majority of Rangers Fans". The RST are not members/supporters of Rangers Unite or this so-called Unified Supporters Platform but they are members of the Assembly who signed/endorsed both statements. However, the RST did not appear to support the boycott (although perhaps conveniently that is now moot) but the aforementioned Mr Mark Dingwall is on the Committee of the RFFF as is the Chair of the Assembly, Mr Andrew Kerr. The Assembly and presumably Mr Kerr supported the call for a boycott and if RFFF are still members or supporters of Rangers Unite then it would appear that they did as well. Isnâ??t there a degree of contradiction here?

and we all know who that somebody was, don't we. That's quite all right, please don't get in trouble on my account. And I'll save you by saying it "no trouble at all".

Indeed, I'm sure she is both.

Appointment or not it is generally regarded in committee circles, especially those under the auspices of the deeply principled SD, that whilst "ongoing" appointments might not be against the rules they are unsafe and to be avoided. Now that I am thinking about it I do recall that the second position was to be rotated. Perhaps I was considered unsuitable as I might not toe the party line. PS: As a matter of curiosity, do you have some kind of system that alerts you to every post that mentions RST?

I take it you mean BH not BD, PLG. Thank you for correcting me on the history but I attended three successive AGM's of the RST and all the Board Meetings from Sep 09 to Apr 10 and it is a fact that Mr Dingwall's appointment to this position was never discussed. Of course it is possible that his appoinment was in perpetuity. I take it you are not challenging my statement that "At one point I secured agreement from Andy Kerr that we be allowed a second rep with visitor status and he invited me to attend as Secretary of RST but this was over-ruled." or the information about the RST reps.

I sent Andy Kerr and John McMillan the same text today asking if the Assembly and the Association were indeed signatories to this statement. I received a reply from AK. "Some of us thought there was a mandate through the RFF on this but one or two have now queried the scope of that mandate -there was such strong feeling against SPL clubs at that time!!". I didn't really undertsand that so I asked him to clarify whether or not the "Assembly have endorsed the call for a boycott". He replied "Yes". As has been pointed out RST are members of the Assembly. John McMillan has not replied.

During the year I was on the Board of RST; John Donald and John McMillan were the Association reps on the Board, though there were no such formal postions. John Donald never attended any meeting at which I was present; John McMillan attended meetings when his personal circumstances allowed but never made any contribution. Both are still listed as Board members. The RST is allowed one rep on the Assembly and so far as I am aware that rep has always been Mr Dingwall, though there was never any vote on that appointment . At one point I secured agreement from Andy Kerr that we be allowed a second rep with visitor status and he invited me to attend as Secretary of RST but this was over-ruled. I do not know the current position.

So long as they play "Rancho Grande" and I can sing along

Or tangerine? Well untill there is a new share issue none of us will be standing up at a Rangers AGM but I'll be happy to oblige in due course

I assume that all the references to orange should really be tangerine? Apologies if this has already been mentioned, as I haven't read all 25 pages! Some of you might remember one season we had a two tone purple strip which had me on my feet at the AGM saying that it was embarrassing to see never mind for the players to run out in. I went on to say that the Glasgow Rangers should always play in some combination of red, white and blue; which I have to say brought quite an ovation from the those assembled. It remains my opinion to this day. Tried to add colours to this post but it didn't work!

Agree that Regan was complicit and not for the first time got a showing up. Doncaster was the driving force at the behest of the SPL clubs and Longmuir was forced to go along with it and tried to make the most of it for his members. Having been in the same room as all three on more than one occasion, I can tell you that Doncaster treats the others with complete disdain.

Did you just agree with me, PLG?

I take your point about some supporters of other clubs but I still don't think that the language in the statement, never mind the sentiment behind it, is justified. Just my opinion though, I know there are strong feelings on this.

It was the SFL clubs who (rightly in my opinion) rejected the SFL1 plan and voted us into SFL3.