buster.
-
Posts
14,224 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
111
Everything posted by buster.
-
Tbh I can see the logic behind what Doncaster is saying. However where the governing authorities (SFA very much included) failed the game was prior to the re-negotiation of the contract as per the open letter of ND.
-
"Eternally" may be stretching it a little, as I'd wager you'll probably provide good reason for Mr B.Burd to reappear at some point in the near future.
-
Ok but use renewed rather than renew and it will be plainer. I've deleted the big burd
-
Nothing else ? It's difficult enough trying to find workable solutions but those who refuse to see or acknowledge that a fundamental and specific problem exists must live on a different metaphorical planet.
-
Comes back to the OP. Let the conflicts between X and Y rage, within large numbers of people there will always be disagreements and/or worse but why promote them to centre stage. At the sametime fans if they wish, can take on board anything they see as constructive that might come from X or Y. All this whilst bearing in mind the now traditional 'Divide & Conquer' tactics that have come from the boardroom over recent years. Let any division stay in the background and remember that there are bigger fish to fry.
-
I do believe that present arithmetic presents an accurate reflection of general discontent with how the club is being run and the depth of feeling is such that it can't be ignored, nor be unfounded. The much more difficult challange is finding a solution.
-
Everyone is entitled to their opinion but there has to be proportionality. Perhaps not the best analogy but..... Not many MP's listen to the 'Green Party' at Westminster. They tend to get on and attempt to tackle the issues of the day.
-
What exactly are the 'divisions' you refer to ?
-
I speak generally Frankie, not at you. You don't have to ignore anyone but there should be a sense of proportion and a will to look for solutions for what is largescale discontent at an important juncture.
-
People can choose to listen or ignore who they please but as I said in another thread, the concerns of the majority of those not renewing would logically align themselves close to or alongside that of the UoF (who together are reasonably significant in number) With that in mind individuals can choose for themselves who to listen to and what to do in the coming weeks. I think it unrealistic to expect to 'formalise' the voice of the 'middle rump' in a significant way. All this thread was for, is to highlight that given the current arithmetic 'division' isn't a major issue unless we make it such. Forget about 'division' and keep the eye on the ball at an important time. The standard 'Divide & Conquer' tactics from the boardroom will look to promote 'D', let's not make it so eay for them.
-
Let them get on with it. Should it dominate so much attention at a time when the club has been and is having such difficulties? Divide & Conquer...............................when are we going to learn ?
-
I didn't say 20,000 were strictly anti-board but I believe that the biggest single reason for the ST numbers is a lack of trust in the executive board. In the real world, you can't cater or realistically try to deal with each and every gripe or concern because whilst you do so, a metaphorical 'Rome' may burn. In the real world, all large groups of people will have differing viewpoints within. The electoral system gives priority to the majority. Let individuals within messageboards, individuals or seperate groups get on with whatever they prioritise regards in-fighting. The real issue at present is the longterm future of the club and the current direction of executive decision-making. SDM with Jack Irvine started the Confuse, Divide and Control tactics and they've been so successful overtime that they're now embedded. Now is the first time that I see large and significant numbers standing up and wanting something see 'change'. "Something is Rotten in the state of Denmark" Shakepeare
-
..............................................
-
I don't so much compare groups, Frankie. The differerence at present and the main reason I make this point is precisely because of what those without a group are not doing (renewing).
-
Given the current situation and arithmetic within,......the easiest way of tackling 'division' within the support is to stop talking about it. The vast majority (look at ST renewals/ or lack of) and we see that the large 'apolitical middle rump' of the support are unhappy. I don't think there is any doubt that the majority would cite general unhappiness of how the club is being run alongside a distrust of the current board. The numbers involved with groups that may be considered loosely as pro-board are such that they become unimportant. That isn't to disrespect anyone or to say they can't have their opinion(s) but it is to say that the arithmetic points to any 'division' currently being insignificant. The biggest noise is coming from those who don't belong to any group and the board would do well to listen.
-
Your wee joke was a valid argument when you consider the arithmetic.
-
We have large numbers who are expressing their distrust of the board by not renewing their ST's, effectively a vote of no confidence. The groups on one side of the so-called 'division' are relatively small. Given the current situation and arithmetic within,......the easiest way of tackling 'division' within the support is to stop talking about it. Energies would be better used in other directions that lead to the root of the ongoing problem.
-
Every individual or group is entitled to their opinion, including the VB's. However given the current situation and arithmetic within,......the easiest way of tackling 'division' within the support is to stop talking about it.
-
Changing tact slightly BH,,................ shouldn't Mr.Easdale think about addressing the concerns of thousands of Rangers supporters at a time when the PLC is thousands of ST's down on what they would have projected ?
-
The attention the VB's get is totally out of proportion to their size. People talk of 'division'. I don't see significant division at present, I see the vast majority deeply unhappy with the way the club is being run. What is new, is that the majority I talk of now includes much of the 'apolitical middle rump' who in good number seem to not have renewed. Perhaps we should give the VB's attention that is proportional to their size.
-
In what way is it a reflection of the 'engagement study' ? Perhaps the discontent and lack of trust is more to do with how the board actually engage and communicate in real life.
-
Scottish football has been a strange old place in recent years and the pertinent questions pile rivals that of the mound of now disappeared banknotes in the 'Ibrox Gravytrain Robbery'.
-
The question of whether the SPFL were due to pay Rangers X pounds or not would surely be determined by commercial contracts in conjunction with SPFL rules and should be fairly clear-cut and I doubt that a leak like this would influence the determination of Rangers to seek payment if due. The leak itself seems to focus negative attention on the SPL (SPFL). edit. Did the Harry Hood (pubs) claim on the SPL ever come to anything ?......anyone
-
One could argue that the presence of Mr.Easdale and other board members at football matches causes 'alarm' within the support in general. So much so that ST numbers have fallen dramatically.
-
Current 'expectations' may and probably do mean significant financial problems. Budget projections may have been more optimistic. Given individuals involved and the track record on corporate goverence/timescales you could assume whatever you liked.