BrahimHemdani

This is ambiguous. A "further meeting" would tend to suggest there has already been a meeting on this issue but it might refer to previous meetings. "We have now had the opportunity to discuss these concerns with Stewart Robertson" might simply have been a phone call; leading to a meeting. Some clarity about what was discussed in the meeting or phone call and what more will be discussed in the "further meeting" would be helpful. It is significant that no date has been set for the "further meeting" or if it has where are not being told. It's a nothing statement.

In terms of something formal the discussion is here: http://www.gersnetonline.co.uk/vb/showthread.php?81786-The-Fifth-(formerly-Semi-Annual)-Official-Gersnet-Dinner&highlight= I did say at the outset that: Saturday 1 April v Motherwell (possible, although personally I cannot commit to that date as I expect to be in the US for an old friend's 90th birthday). [This is now confirmed.] Saturday 15 April v Partick (not suitable for me as it's my birthday) Round 36 - Saturday 13 May, 2017 (might be moved to the Sunday for TV) OR Round 38 - Saturday 20 May & Sunday 21 May, 2017 (most likely the Sunday) Some other key points from that thread: Everyone who expressed an opinion on a date was in favour of holding it after the last home game. Whilst I think it's unlikely that Celtic will be the last game; possible opponents would appear to be Aberdeen, Celtic or Hearts. (As things stand Motherwell and St Johnstone should be the away fixtures.) Again with 3 homes and 2 aways theoretically at least we should finish at home. So I suspect we will be at home to Aberdeen or Hearts on the last day; either of which would be an attractive fixture and it may well be a 12.30pm KO which would allow us to make the "dinner" a late lunch at around 3.00pm. Whilst we are unlikely to know the fixtures/dates/times with certainty until 15-22 April, planning do far in advance will allow those who are interested to make alternative arrangements. I am pleased to be able to confirm that The Fifth (formerly Semi-Annual) Official Gersnet Dinner will be held at La Fiorentina Ristorante, 2 Paisley Rd W, Glasgow G51 1LE, following our last home league match which is anticipated to be on the weekend of 13/14 or 20/21 May 2016. I am still working on that assumption. If folk no longer want to go ahead as above then please post here because I'll need to cancel the restaurant. Of course none of the above stops anyone arranging to meet Pete and I'm sorry I'll miss that opportunity; but I won't be trading Waikiki Beach for Ibrox on the 1st of April

So how do you expect him to get match fit then?

This was in the wake of Berwick of course, following which CF Jim Forrest (who had almost a goal game record), never played for Rangers again. And somewhere I still have the Daily Express of the next day with the headline "Rangers Wives Weep". RIP BIg Roger

You can't expect someone who only played 6 first team games in 6 months to be match fit the minute he pulls on a blue jersey. Football isn't like that.

Shocked if Senderos is dropped for Kiernan

Based on last week I think Murty wants to play with 2 strikers but you might be right. Perhaps Miller will be deep in a mid 3.

Well there surely can't be any argument that this is 4-2-4. Looking forward to this and tempted to up my forecast

And you would achieve that exactly how?

Your suggestions are quite scurrilous and totally without any foundation. For you information I had the privilege to watch our teams for the late 50's/early 60's when the they were playing and winning three Cup Finals in a row etc, so have no need to read their history in books or on Wikipedia nor do I need any lessons in Rangers history from you.

I'll consider that once I've read the accounts and in the light of Craig's helpful advice.

I would completely agree with that; but it would take generations to make a real difference, the football problem exists here and now and requires an urgent solution.

I think that's a good point to agree to disagree.

OK let me be clear. I have absolutely no way of knowing if Mr King or any other director charges expenses of any description to Rangers. But I stand by my opinion that it's a legitimate question.

NO because I'm happy that the directors are not receiving any remuneration, which is certainly a marked difference from previous regimes.

I'm more than happy to accept your analysis of the expenses situation but in my experience first class is more expensive than business class which is why I looked at BC, so as not to be accused of upping the anti.

I knew that phrase was a hostage to fortune; but honestly Craig, you have no way of knowing that, it is pure conjecture on your part to support your agenda. And again I would ask if strict liability is not the solution, then how would you fix the ails that you see at present,

The SNP was the Government in 2012.

Well this is where I beg to differ with you. I understand the perception that Celtic have "got away with murder" and that "Every perceived offence committed by us receives wall to wall coverage." but if the rules are not changed then how do you propose to deal with the situation? Strict liability if applied properly should create a level playing field. I realise you will say that it is open to abuse and that may be so but until it is tried you really don't know. There is no doubt that the current system is broke and needs to be fixed. What is your solution?

I'd accept it was a provocative but I did say "if" and I do think it's a legitimate question.

I didn't say anything of the sort. I didn't suggest expenses were hidden in wages, though I do know that in terms of players remuneration there is often a fine line between the two. I don't know how Rangers treat directors expenses (if any); but I do think it's a legitimate question for shareholders to ask. Why do you say "I'd fancy he'll be picking up most (if not all of) the tab" when Craig says it is a legitimate expense.

I am fully aware of the difference between remuneration and expenses even if Mr English is not. I was responding to the comments on here not the accounts or what he may have said or written about them. Thanks for clarifying what constitute legitimate expenses for the Chairman; is your view the same regardless of the amount of time said Chairman might spend here on Club business? As you know some criticism has been levelled at Mr King for just flying in and out (to attend meetings) so to speak. If he is only flying in and out it might be argued that it would be more efficient and cost effective all round to use skype or some other video service. I too looked at BA and took a fare that came up in July. Either way we are not far apart, £6,725 - £7,000.

Business Class with BA is £7,000+ return. I haven't read our accounts but would very much doubt they are fraudulent in any way. However, as you well know a great deal of detail can be hidden quite legitimately.

It would certainly be interesting to know if Rangers pay first lass air fare, hotel costs etc for Mr King's flights from South Africa and if so whether folk on here feel that is an expense that should be borne by Rangers or is a personal expense?

The Clubs and the principal parties are all still the same. What has changed is that the rule changes made at the time have failed to deal with the issue; which is exactly what I predicted at the time. The recent changes do nothing to change that situation; and I would argue make it worse. Ministers said at the time that they would consider imposing strict liability if the rule changes proved ineffective; that is why i believe that the SG will either adopt Mr Dornan's proposed legislation as a Government Bill or otherwise support it;'s progress through Parliament.