BrahimHemdani

Why would there be any secrecy about those who are involved in the talks?

My feeling entirely.

It's a very wide remit according to the RF Proposal As the supporters group will own shares in RIFC, it must be entirely independent of RIFC and the Club. A new unified Board will be elected to co-ordinate and direct the operation of all of the functions identified above. The board will be appointed by contributors and members on a one member, one vote basis and will also be required to regularly consult with members through membership votes on key decisions. The Board will also be required to carry out its duties with regard to a common statement of purpose and values which will outline the values expected of Board members and the considerations to which they are to have reference in directing the group’s activities. The Board will have executive duties (e.g. PR, marketing, finance, share buying, finance, legal and administration) and officers will account to contributors and members for their performance. Prospective board members will be required to demonstrate that they can devote time to their position and duties and must make themselves available for Board and members’ meetings. Further discussions will be necessary to agree the number of members of any new Board with a maximum of between 6 to 8 directors under consideration.

I would suggest that's blatantly obvious; and I'm wondering if our very own master tactician Rousseau considers that gives the opposition an advantage (since if we fans can pretty much guess the subs so can opposition coaches) and also blinds MW to any tactical changes that might actually be required in our line up, or is he so wedded to Plan A that there cannot even be a Plan A (v2)?

As you say it is hard to imagine why Richard Gough would want to stand in this election unless it was suggested to him by King as an eventual means of influencing the unified Fans' Board. Equally one can hardly imagine the worthy Rev MacQuarrie jeopordising his seat in the Directors Box by ciriticising the establishment. The "rumour" has been comfimed by two sources who are usually in tune with this type of event one of whom has expressed concerns to King and the other has been in contact with James Blair (himself of course a likely candidate).

My understanding is that you, Gordon Dinnie and Chris Graham are representing RST. I understand that Alan Fraser and another (Rev MacQuarrie?) is representing the RFB, which is strange since that organisation is defunct and that Andy Kerr is representing the Assembly which is also strange since that organsisation is another that appears to be defunct. I also understand that Club Director(s) have been present and that the Club has appointed a consultant who used to work for or with John Gilligan ostensibly to assist the process. Can you confirm any of the above?

I understand that such high profile figures as Richard Gough, Rev Stuart McQuarrie and ex MP Brian Donohoe are vying for positions on the candidates list alongside some existing RF Board Members. I am sure the Club would welcome the election of the former two at least and their eventual election to the unified fans' Board.

Can plgsarmy or any one else shed any light on the identity of those taking part in the "merger" talks and confirm or deny the rumour that the Club's plan is that the new unified Board will hold all the monies contributed by fans and use these on a 50%/50% basis to buy shares and otherwise invest in the Club?

How do you view the fact that MW almost always sends on 2 subs in the 60th minute and most times the players who are coming off e.g. Miller appear to know that it is them who are going to be subbed. In the case of Miller (and Law when returning from injury) it is easy to understand the reasoning and many of us would prefer to see him return to the last 30 minute sub role he played successfully at the start of the season, it is less clear why Zelalem would be in that frame if he has the influence on the game that you claim for him. He's a young man of 19 but hasn't played 90 minutes since November.

I just felt that comparing his normal free flowing game when playing deep, I thought that Halliday found it harder to make space and hence made less impact in the more forward position; but there is no argument that he is one of our best players.

I agree he is a fine centre back, the best we have IMO. I just think Halliday is our best option in that position.

As regards Halliday, from what I saw today, he is much more effective coming from the deep position, than as an attacking midfielder, where he has far less time to play his controlled and accurate passing game. Holt and Law would be the attacking midfielders in my team. Ball is an excellent prospect at CB, play him there or not at all.

It is virtually impossible for any player to get up to speed in a game in less than 20 minutes and Law was only on the pitch for 17 mins; and yet he drove forward at every opportunity. This is in stark contrast to Zelalem who hangs about in no man's land waitng for easy balls. You are as blinkered about Law as you claim me to be about Zelalem. Describing any Rangers player in those terms is bang out of order in my view.

I haven't had an opportunity to comment on the excellent OP because I must admit that the term metronome was new to me in a football sense and I wanted to take time to do some research before I made too much of a fool of myself. In addition I did not see the games at Morton or Raith where by all accounts he put in two of his best performances. That said (and at the risk of incurring more of BD's ire) I watched Zelalem as closely as I could today. The first thing to say is that he took a long time to get into the game, so far as I could see he only touched the ball twice in the first 12 minutes and 5 times in the first 20 minutes. He then seemed to hit a bit of a purple patch and on the count in my head completed approx 17 of 20 passes in total before half time, most were forward, some sideways and few backwards. In addition he twice got us out of trouble recovering the ball in the centre circle and recycling the play, if that is the correct terminology. He lost the ball in possession on one occasion. However (as against Raith if reports are to be believed) he started the second half very poorly and although he completed another 3 passes, he lost possession 3 times before being substituted in the 60th minute. So overall he has a very high pass completion rate, as high as 87%; but the vast majority of these passes are short (5-10 yards) and in the middle third, not the danger zone. When he attempts to drive into or pass into the danger zone invariably he loses possession or misplaces the pass. I also noticed that when Holt came on in his place there was a noticeable increase in tempo and dare I say Law also contributed to that with his arrival in the 73rd minute. Now I realise that Zelalem and Holt/Law/Shiels are quite different types of player but it seems to me that Zelalem's somewhat laconic style slows the game down and despite his high pass completion rate, he does little or no damage to the opposition. Talk of him in the same breath as Arteta is badly misplaced IMHO.

What's worse than that is in Europe, couldn't tell you how many guys pay hundreds of pounds to get to games and are completely wasted. I was going to wake one up at the game in Tel Aviv but his mate told me to leave him alaine he's no weel

Nope, lad from Stranraer mate, so I suppose he has an excuse to get out the car park early but it wouldn't be me driving all that way then missing goals at the end.

I believe I was at that match as well. I recall the snake line at the "Boy's Gate", then sitting on the track beside the corner flag and having to move back as a police horse strode through and when Alex Scott needed room to take a corner. My recollection is that the crowd was around 45,000? Health & Safety? The 5-1 game at Cathkin is listed as a league match on 12 April 1958. The League Cup game was 3-0 on 30 August 1958. Not sure if the game we remember was either of those but I do recall it being a sunny day.

Some of our fans are indeed very fickle when it comes to game selection but others do need to pick and chose. Perhaps there are other reasons why you can't remember who are we are playing but so long as you get into the ground and can find your way home, I guess it's fine. What surprises me more than anything is the stories I hear about fans who get off supporters buses, go straight to the pub and never set foot inside the stadium, what's that all about? And the ones nicknamed the "subway loyal" who arrive late and leave with 5 or 10 minutes to go. There's a guy who sits near me who must have missed a dozen goals this season, including the winner against Falkirk; it's getting so we're encouraging him to leave in the certain knowledge that as soon as he does Rangers will score.

If you spent less on wine and beer you'd have plenty of money for Cup games; sort out your priorities man

It never ceases to amaze me that some folk seem so concerned about the antics of the more moronic elements of Celtic and other team's supporters, if they are supporters at all. There is no doubt whatsoever that tweets of this nature are offences under the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012 because: Under Section (2) Condition A the material consists of, contains or implies a threat, or an incitement, to carry out a seriously violent act against a person or against persons of a particular description, and the person communicating the material— (i)intends by doing so to cause fear or alarm, or (ii)is reckless as to whether the communication of the material would cause fear or alarm. so hopefully those repsonsible will be apprehended and prosectuted to the full extent of the law. What is perhaps more instructive from a football perspective is the wrath of the Celtic fans after two not entirely unpredictable losses against teams in the top four of the league. In all honesty Celtic losing 2-1 at Pittodrie should not be seen as a disaster by Celtic fans but it is perhaps the manner of their defeat and their apparent inability to turn their overwhelming resources into overwhelming superiority at home following their worst ever European group stage campaign that is causing all the angst. Their scatter gun signing policy e.g. Ciftci and Allan and inconsistent team selection don't seem to be helping them. It would be wonderful for Scottish football if Aberdeen were to win the League and what is clear is that despite our years in the wilderness Celtic are by no means as far ahead of us as many predicted.

Legal fees perhaps or other obligations?

I wonder who that could have been

It's a reassuring statement in some ways but nothing that we didn't really already know and little of any great substance. A comment about future investment/ share issue might have been helpful, even if it was necessarily shrouded in caveats. I don't understand how he can say "A further unanticipated investment was made to pay off the Sports Direct loan", surely that was always a known factor, only the timing being in doubt?

Perhaps he can use his signing on fee to buy a couple of shirts that fit him.

You might think that; but I couldn't possibly say.........