Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Fury

  • Rank
  1. Who did you send the emails to? RF? RST? RF and RST don't run Club 1872. You didn't send them to Club 1872 if you haven't had a response. It has it's own website, contact forms, email addresses and admin. All of which has been communicated to members via email and on social media and forums. I'll keep my own counsel on that thread on RF for the moment but you maybe shouldn't believe everything you read on the internet. Can you explain how the RSCs were lied to? That is pretty serious accusation given that a club director was present at the meeting so please be specific. Have you registered on the Club 1872 site? That is what everyone was asked to do and people continue to do on a daily basis. If you haven't received emails then it's because you haven't yet registered. There is no question that better IT systems were required to communicate with members and that is why we've moved everything to a new website that is fit for purpose. It's instructive that the vast majority of complaints people have are actually with one or other of the RST and RF. Thousands of fans are having a great experience dealing with Club 1872 and we've received a lot more compliments that negative comments. Interesting that all the negative comments have come via social media and all the positive ones from people prepared to send communication in their own names.
  2. That is simply not true. Nobody has been ignored via email. Over 1000 emails have been answered and all are answered promptly. Nobody has been blocked on Twitter. Some were already blocked and many of those have been unblocked despite their behaviour continuing to be abusive. Nobody has gone to ground - they are just busy doing important things rather than dealing with a small group of people on Twitter who are absolutely determined to spread complete nonsense. It's unfortunate that a vocal group of people - who number no more than about 20-30 but appear to spend an awful lot of time trying to damage Club 1872 - are upset that the merger went ahead but that doesn't mean they are right. If you want to ask some serious questions then send an email and ask. Posting this type of rubbish on a forum makes it look like you are more interested in slinging mud. Club 1872 has over 10,000 members, 6% of Rangers with the ability to purchase significantly more, significant funds coming in each month and a dedicated group of people working to improve every aspect of previous organisations. That won't happen over night but it is happening and all of that is being communicated to members on a regular basis via social media and email.
  3. Club 1872 Statement on the Daily Record article which tried to shift the blame for the cup final disorder onto Rangers fans. Includes video evidence that the claims made were false and detail of the process we went through with the Daily Record. http://club1872.co.uk/news/club-1872-statement-daily-record/
  4. And your vote would still only have counted once.
  5. Nobody was able to vote multiple times in any one poll.
  6. I got an email from Rangers on the Club 1872 proposal and the recent proposed switch to digital renewals. You have to opt in even if you do it online currently because it is giving them permission to just send the renewal form electronically. I'd say you should definitely check with them about emails because you should have got them.
  7. Frankie, What's been discussed so far is to put out a list of FAQs with answers, along with the proposal again. This will go out with the vote on Monday. It would be the product of the consultation period and hopefully give additional context. Not set it stone yet but it makes sense to me as then people can weigh it all up prior to casting their vote.
  8. I'm not convinced that's a genuine Chinese proverb. I'm going to check on companies house to see if you've set up The Independent Chinese Proverbs Consortium Ltd.
  9. Thank you Craig. I've steadfastly refused to comment on the RF elections except for some of the worst examples of people (including some candidates) spreading misinformation. Mr Harris was one obvious example. Buster has addressed some of the others very comprehensively. What people seem to be forgetting is that the conduct of this election potentially reflects not only on RF but on the whole push for fan ownership. It shouldn't, but given the nature of social media it probably will. My concern is not who ends up on the board of RF - as a non member that is none of my business - it is how that effects the future of fan ownership and representation as a whole. For some reason, at least on social media, this appears to have turned into a competition to see who can make up the most outlandish conspiracy theory about the work that has been ongoing with all the fan groups. If RF members are concerned about what direction that is taking then why not just ask the RF board members who have been involved in discussions along every single step of the way? That would seem preferable to relying on blogs and social media comment full of chinese whispers and, at best half truths. That said, the process will continue regardless, and hopefully when the proposal comes out it will be received positively by the tens of thousands of fans who are its audience. If a few people who like to shout very loudly on social media are a bit put out then that's a price I suppose we'll all just have to pay.
  10. Fascinating stuff. You made the insinuation. The posts you made have been copied and pasted to this site. You failed to quote your entire conversation but I believe quoting parts of rules/conversations etc. is your speciality. And here you are quoting rules again. All very interesting but still not applicable to this election. I'm amazed you are standing for election without knowing which rules apply to you and your fellow candidates. Especially since you are so experienced in these matters. Perhaps you should have prepared better? My comments were more with regard to you, your false insinuation about me and your attempt to mislead people by quoting rules that don't apply, rather than the RF elections themselves. I'm not commenting as an RST board member and had you not made your false insinuation about me on RM I probably wouldn't have commented at all. That said, as an organisation for which I have a lot of respect, I think it is important for RF members not to be misled by candidates so I'm glad I was able to point out your mischief making. Best of luck with your election and best of luck to the other elected board members of RF if you are somehow successful.
  11. Apologies for butting in as I'm not a member of RF but obviously those in charge following this election will be involved in ongoing fan talks so I do have some interest. Two quick points. Alan Harris has made an insinuation on RM that I attend board meetings of the club. That is untrue. I have never done so and I'm not sure what he hopes to gain by the insinuation. Second and more importantly for the purpose of your discussion, Mr Harris is quoting rules in this thread that RF have not, as far as I understand, adopted. Supporters Direct are just running their election. RF are not members of SD as far as I know and even if they were would be under no obligation to adopt their rules. It would appear therefore that Mr Harris is quoting from a rulebook that doesn't actually apply to those standing. I've no idea why he would do that but given the comments I've referenced above it does seem he has some difficulty with accuracy.
  12. I don't really take that well to being threatened.
  13. Checking backing I'm pretty sure it's Marlborough.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.