trublusince1982

what is the maximum penalty?

As per rule.

 

The point is, can the compliance officer proof that he does? By the looks of it, an experienced business chap has joined up with the directors to steer the ship back on course. Yes, he has ties to Ashley, might even be "suggested" to the board by him. Yet, who is paying him? Is Ashley calling the shots though? How much time does he invest into anything Rangers per day? Just saying.

 

What Ashley has done is lending the club money, much like Laxey and Letham did. The maths look - on face value - dead certain, saying that Ashley got Wallace and Nash off and his man on the board. Yet, Wallace and Nash officially resigned, there was no EGM or something. Ashley has the club by the balls, but on face value not more than Laxey/Letham might have had. They, obviously, had no interest in other football clubs (that said, I have no idea where Laxey's money is involved).

 

Of course, if King and Ashley would exchange a few million and documents, King might get the same "control" over the board that Ashley has. nothing is simple with our club though, not least when King and Ashley are involved.

 

Just to be clear, no-one is disputing that Ashley IS calling the shots. Whether it goes as against the SFA rules as the SFA thinks is another point.

It was a stipulation of his loan. Therefore his people working in his interest at his stipulation. How many times have they travelled down to london to meet him now? how many other 10% shareholders have they travelled to visit? its the sfa not a court of law that is all they will need i imagine.

not nice for those involved but there is a history of excess at the club

thought he played decent football at west brom considering the opposition. couple of great results against man u in there as well

he was liked at chelsea

who does contract negotiations at the club?

guys a good manager, far better than butcher and mccall.

how did he get on selling the ones that did stay?

 

the ones who all received their pay?

 

Turning traitor for financial concerns is a completely justifiable reason to detest these players.It makes what they did worse not better. They have zero backbone and no principles. They never endured one financial loss, they decided it was justifiable to leave all the other staff, youth players, coaches and players in a slightly worse financial position than had they stayed. All because they might with big emphasis on might have lost some wages.

 

CG is and was a complete c**t but that does not in anyway justify their actions. 2 wrongs do not make a right.

 

Would put money on the fact he also received a pay rise and was told as much before he made his decision to go and that had more of a baring than he will ever have the guts to admit.

track record in the epl.

 

really.

 

and how are we to afford that?

 

it will be the cheapest option humanly possible and ashley probably wont know or care who it is.

only thing i would add to that is it is not always the cheapest option but that that makes the most guaranteed return for the cheapest outlay Ashley likes(or seems to)

ohh right so made up things that never happened were the reasons. How about you wait till you reach that bridge if it even existed instead of using ifs/buts and maybes as reasons to turn traitor? Is that all it takes to turn traitor? just an imagined hardship that may happen but didn't?

 

How did we pay the wages of the rest of the players? you know the ones that didn't turn their back and run? Did none of those players have bills or concerns?

 

He had nothing but concerns, not one shred of evidence or one penny missing from his pay.

McInnes is pals with Ally, so he will be well briefed on the board.

 

what makes you think it's going to be an ex player?

What makes everyone think it will not be Mcdowall he didn't hand in his resignation nor Durrant? no extra cost just like Ashley likes, cant see us paying them off as well as ally.

 

Thank god Hately has no management credentials or he would be in with a shout!

It is/was the same Rangers before green and it is the same rangers after ,never has it been a negative to pull on that strip. One man does not define the club or justify turning your back to line your own pocket through nothing more than dislike for a character.

 

As has been said Ad nauseam no excuse for not signing over then asking for a transfer. If Green had said no which there is no basis to believe then boo hoo you would have been left playing for Rangers poor baby.

seems now with your own words we as fans understood perfectly what happened.

 

You left without a thought for anything else other than taking care of yourself. We the people who had paid for your development deserved not one iota of risk on your part. What was the worst case scenario that could have befell you by staying?

 

traitor

ˈtreɪtə/Submit

noun

a person who betrays someone or something, such as a friend, cause, or principle.

"he was a traitor to his own class"

synonyms: betrayer, back-stabber, double-crosser, double-dealer, renegade, Judas, quisling, fifth columnist, viper; More

 

You will never play for Rangers again.

Billy Davies! give us peace:brick:

no surrender.

 

Its never over until it is over. Until those gates are padlocked I will fight with every last breath along with thousands of others, we have barley even started to fight back.

 

Think Mr Struth spells it out rather succinctly.....

 

"I have been lucky - lucky in those who were around me from the boardroom to the dressing-room. In time of stress, their unstinted support, unbroken devotion to our club and calmness in adversity eased the task of making Rangers FC the premier club in this country.

"To be a Ranger is to sense the sacred trust of upholding all that such a name means in this shrine of football. They must be true in their conception of what the Ibrox tradition seeks from them. No true Ranger has ever failed in the tradition set him.

"Our very success, gained you will agree by skill, will draw more people than ever to see it. And that will benefit many more clubs than Rangers. Let the others come after us. We welcome the chase. It is healthy for us. We will never hide from it. Never fear, inevitably we shall have our years of failure, and when they arrive, we must reveal tolerance and sanity.

"No matter the days of anxiety that come our way, we shall emerge stronger because of the trials to be overcome. That has been the philosophy of the Rangers since the days of the gallant pioneers."

That seems the likeliest scenario to me, with one proviso - given that situation developing how can you say "until crowds come back"? Because I don't think they would. Especially as the timz would be past 10 in a row and heading for 20

like a tide support ebbs and flows. We as a support will not disappear for good over night. It only takes the smallest glint of hope to ignite a passionate support, as they say it is in the blood. Even now after everything that has happened it wouldn't take much to galvanise us. A simple common sense approach to running the club would do wonders. Please do not mistake that for me thinking we are being ran in a common sense way or that it is on the horizon, I don't!

We will not enter admin, to believe we will would mean you think either Ashley will stand by with his hands in his pockets doing nothing contrary to the evidence or he cares what the fans think.Wrong on both accounts.

 

Ashley will cut everything and i mean everything before he allows that. Training ground will shut, rangers TV will go, players will go, stadium will be cut down in size until crowds come back and everything else that isn't nailed down will go until we are left with the bare minimum.The business review going on is not about what can we do to invigorate sales or bring back fans, its about what to keep and what to cut to bring us in line with our new reduced income streams.

 

The man is ruthless he will not hesitate this is going to be very painful.

as long as they consider it a leaving doo for them all. have at it.

Sinclair going as well? hope he is going to be replaced or are we now making no attempt to kid on we care about a footballing future?

was meaning sommers recent crap but could cover both same crap different day!

were is the money from rangers tv? did it make a profit? what period did the ppv games come under?

 

what uses fall under rangers retail? does that mean it can only be used to cover stock purchases and we will never make the club a penny? thats in complete contradiction of our chairmans statement of it making the club good money?

I love these puzzles for older citizens.

pour on the doom and gloom for a while then when Ashley gives another loan the majority breath a sigh of release instead of pointing the finger of blame at him.

winning hearts and minds. with recent pr effecting merchandise he needs to divert before he makes a move

just another tactic. How else can you be acclaimed as a white knight if everyone knows your the fault? expect the dispair angle will be in full swing until our saviour appears from the mist.

He will have to beat Celtic to his signature and that isn't going to happen. They done it with Ledley and Matthews and will do it again with Ings. We don't have the money,will, brains or ambition to compete with them.

We may not have the money, will or ambition but even two competing fleas could unite and out smart them.

If you want to publicly state you spend x amount of money raised through selling Rangers related merchandise to rangers fans as an alternative to the terrible set up the club is operating, you should have no qualms about backing that statement up. I think we can all understand wanting the bare minimum of transparency in the current climate? No?

A month or so ago I would have thought it obvious buying merchandise from the official stores would benefit Rangers to a greater extend than anyone else. That obviously was a wrong conclusion. Fool me once and all that. If you want to show the way it should be done then do so. If I cannot take the word of the club then why should I take the word of strangers? That obviously has to be extrapolated across the support. Looking at public accounts when released is after the fact and no use to nobody.

 

Not into factions and all the little groups, but at the same time don't see what is wrong in asking to see some evidence before I consider making any purchase.All they have to do is show turnover against shares bought minus share bought through separate funding. In the most basic of ways.

If information is to be kept private and only for the consumption of RST members or only RST members can access the information to assuage their concerns and no public information will be forthcoming then surely sales should be limited to RST members?

If you want to involve the whole support as one fund raising community then do so, in a full and frank manner. Pretty sad if transparency is denied because of fear of other factions of the support or how they will twist. Might as well call it a day then.

 

Do we have anyone who leads the way and shows how it should be done based on the principles of our founding fathers? All these groups/factions and nowt but words and pettiness. Stop worrying about others and start worrying about self. These tops could be a great idea and a great alternative for fans don't ruin it with obtuseness.