Frankie

Here are a few ideas for discussion - I may turn this into a constructive article next week for discussion out with here but this may be the best place initially to avoid the usual crap from some. I think three main areas can be debated. Communication The omnipresent bug bear for many fans organisations, improvement has been oft promised but rarely delivered over the years for a variety of reasons - some valid, some no more than excuses (I hold myself partly responsible unfortunately). The Assembly has put together a new website which has been reasonable so far but certainly under used and under promoted. Aesthetically average and poor forum software/contributors means people have little encouragement for regular visits. I know they are working on improving this though - as well as their email communication - so hopefully that will happen asap. They also had a Fans Forum at Ibrox last November - promising more at that. Unfortunately these have not happened - probably because of the uncertainty surrounding the club. Are more a good idea generally? The Association have also worked on stuff behind the scenes but they seem to be an organisation struggling to expand beyond the decreasing influence they have had in recent times. How can they address this? Should they accept they are no longer important? The Trust retain the largest media voice and few people will contest David Edgar et al do a fine job in that regard. However, beyond that they still have problems reaching out to the community - especially the offline one - so I'd be interested to hear if they intend matching the Assembly with their own forum. I understand that will take investment (financial and time wise) to operate but it may prove the best way of removing some of the inter-site problems we've seen develop over the last couple of years. What other plans do they have for increasing awareness? Innovation Active media work, liaison with RSCs/NARSA/ORSA etc, GerSave, GersPride, Assembly Fan Forums at Ibrox, work with websites, dialogue with the club - all these projects have been conducted to varying degrees over the last 5+ years by the different fan organisations. Some have been superb, some less so and some failures but there is always room for improvement. What kind of ideas could take these organisations to the next level? Could they contribute research into development of Ibrox? Can they provide finance/investment via new independent vehicles? How can they involve the wider support? Improved Representation It is well known that SDM promised supporters closer involvement with the club in terms of having some sort of input at board level. Depending on your viewpoint that was either very close, never on the table or not desirable anyway. Irrespective of that, many fans do feel they could be represented more effectively - both by the organisations themselves and by the club accepting our input. As it stands we have three main organisations - each working together but each markedly different in tactics, reputation and funding. How can this be improved? Can they work together better under the Assembly banner to pressurise club into more official/in-depth/regular dialogue? Is the Assembly a dead duck? How do we engage the club in a way to keep them interested while ensuring organisation members are happy? Have fun!

No rush. Would be helpful if the RST/Assembly bods on here also contributed some ideas they may have. Not so we can pull them apart but so we can discuss and refine them if necessary. I'll also make a few points later this morning...

PS: Original post updated in page 1

Come on you bunch of lazy buggers - get your name in!

As the life resident of a less than salubrious East Lothian mining town, not many things affect my heart (other than Whittaker's defending) but I agree the area around Ibrox isn't a place that I'd move to any time soon. All the more reason for investment in it. As a socially concerned citizen, I wouldn't want to see mid-level casinos, extended turf accountants, cheap pub chains and dozens of take-aways but the scope is there for substantial improvement at a reasonable price. As far as I can see, this planning permission would be the only reason Andew Ellis would buy Rangers in the first instance.

Yep, I think we could increase our income to a fair degree - firstly through the efficiency savings we have made in recent years but, secondly, via investment into different areas of the club. Obviously the latter is much harder to find but is essential if we're to move forward. A new owner may provide some imagination and new ideas in that respect so I'd love to hear such a person's plans in that respect.

The same criticisms can be laid at the door of the Association and Assembly - neither of the fan groups are being particularly active or leading from the front in this topic. The problem may be more because they're just the same as us in that they know little, are not closely involved and yield minimal influence therein. However, that could change and the supporters organisations could perhaps be a bit more pro-active in that regard. Ergo, it would be be good to see a positive debate without the kind of abuse and insults we've seen elsewhere lately. Thankfully Gersnet appears the one place you'll find such debate. Several Trust members - former or current - and a few Trust board members - past or current - use the place so the facility is there for an informed, balanced debate. What suggestions would you make for improvement, MF? PS: I'm not saying it is solely up to you to provide the spark for the debate but given you've created the thread, let's take it forward in a constructive sense.

I don't think we need to be so negative about any changes to the landbank... Tidying up the area, improving traffic management, building some affordable new housing and providing resources for said new development is not only in the interests of the existing locals but would improve the match-day experience for all of us. As a property developer of some standing, I'd not only want Ellis to be interested in such a project but expect it of him. Planning permission for the area is available so a pleasant, socially acceptable development should attract everyone. Unfortunately, as is the case with PPG/MIH, I'm unsure how such a development would be funded, am unsure how Ibrox Stadium fits into the equation and unsure just how much money Rangers would make from any changes.

While MF may not be as subtle as some would like, the Trust have been rather quiet of late. Sure, we've seen and heard them in the media with regard to the takeover which is positive enough but I see little influence in terms of being closely involved in the issue. That is worrying as we want as many bears as possible involved in such matters but I'm sure it could change if the Ellis (or AN Other) deal progresses. The problem the Trust faces (and it isn't limited to the present incumbents) is how to reach the fans they haven't already in terms of a credible voice. That's where they should be concentrating their minds - as opposed to commenting about crap such as the McJannet issue (although the VB response is commendable). Perhaps plgsarmy could enlighten us as to what they want to achieve and how they intend going about it in that regard? Would make for a more constructive thread than the usual crap seen elsewhere.

We can just move Senga and Archie to the East End out the way of this glamorous development... And those that do own their homes in the area, will be delighted if such a boost to the area happens as their homes double in worth.

Nice to see Jeffries has principles...

As said elsewhere, when you're the boss meetings can be adjourned easily enough. Moreover, anyone can answer a phone call from an unexpected person in such a way so it leaves an easy exit strategy if necessary.

BBC Scotland suggests they will announce more information in 2 weeks time Stefanovitch...

MF: Agreed. Ellis seems to be spending a lot of time and money in finding out if Rangers are worth buying. He must see an avenue for his investment where he can make money and bring/keep success to the club while hopefully improving it as well. We can only hope better fan communication/representation is part of his strategy. If he's not aware of how demanding our support are then he may find his previous football experiences a walk in the park when compared to being the focal point of Rangers Football Club. With all due respect to QPR and Northampton Town; this is another ball-game completely.

That is indeed the �£33million question MF so I know I'd like to hear a full answer before such a person buys the club. Unfortunately, it may not be forthcoming until after any deal is done so the proof may well be in the pudding. On the other hand, fans are more informed that ever before so expectations of any new owner(s) will be high while being analysed repeatedly by us all for the kind of mistakes that affected the SDM era.

I'd suggest it would be better if he didn't sit down with (solely) fans reps... He should have an open forum where all fans can all contribute to the discussion which may help remove a few barriers and misconceptions. I'm encouraged with the way Ellis has gone about his business so far but while he may not be under any obligation to communicate with fans, I hope he avoids the same trap of drip-feeding info to journalists and selected fans as others have employed in recent months.

For the avoidance of doubt, I know N_L would not have made this up... He's a good lad capable of getting off his own arse and finding stuff out while not being influenced by others.

Yeah, I'm happy with that but hopefully we'll see a more formal approach taken with the fans in due course... Well done to N_L for taking the bull by the horns though!

Very fair question actually... PM N_L and get Ellis' number?

From Northampton_Loyalist (who posts on FF): Just off the phone to Andrew Ellis The talk about Rangers developed out of the previous few minutes. Mr. Ellis told me that things are at a VERY early stage but should they progress he will 'certainly be in contact with you guys (the Rangers support as a whole) because we will need your help'. Mr. Ellis's previous talk on his other footballing ventures was explained by him as trying to offset some of the talk of (his words) 'asset stripper'. He was trying to show his track record, including trying to move QPR, was based on sound football reasons rather than sound property reasons. He is very clear on the matter that despite not being able yet to lay out plans for Rangers, his plans do not include in any way shape or form 'asset stripping', moving the club away from Ibrox or the club being milked as a cash cow. Not being a journalist and being a touch nervous, i had forgotten to ask an important question, is he alone or are there others? My personal thoughts are that he is 'masterminding' this move and there are other people with some decent clout behind him. Now, normally on threads like this you get 'source' posts galore. Well, the source is the man himself. That, however, makes none of the above true. I can only give you my personal feelings from chatting to him and they are, overall, good. He made it clear he is first and foremost a football man, and I think he is, he made clear his plans for previous clubs, although they can be looked at in certain ways, were always with the best interests of the club at heart and he made as clear as he could that his plans for Rangers are 'honourable'. I am swayed towards believing him but everyone needs to make up their own mind. On the truth of the above, I cannot 'prove' as such that this happened but neither do I feel the need to prove it. Messageboards are here to pass information on and this iis info I have recieved directly to myself from the main protagonist. In the fullness of time, and when he is able to say more, he has said he will be in contact, much in the way he would contact a journalist so i can only hope that happens. For now, I feel better about the whole thing than I did before. let the abuse commence Nothing all that new but interesting that Ellis took the time to speak with an 'ordinary' fan prepared to simply ring up and ask a few general questions.

What Cal said really... To be fair though his defending has improved slightly over the course of the season but he was a bit poor on Tuesday night. In saying that, quite often Davis leaves him isolated as the Ulsterman tends to be playing in a free role throughout games as opposed to a strict right midfielder capable of covering Whittaker at all times.

I'm only using the careful nomenclature Mr MacPherson did for consistency reasons...

Good point Zappa - Beasley looked to be 'impeded' there 'in the process of shooting'...

Gersnet was interested to note the comments of St Mirren manager Gus MacPherson after their weekend defeat to Rangers at Ibrox Stadium. As another manager attempting to bring the game into disrepute we'd like to ask him a few questions... The match highlights can be viewed courtesy of BBC Scotland here while the same organisation have an after-match interview with a clearly upset MacPherson complaining about one decision he felt influenced the game negatively for his team - that can be read and/or listened to here. To sum up Mr MacPherson's complaint, he felt David Weir should have been sent off for an early foul on St Mirren striker Michael Higdon. Bringing up mandatory meetings with the SFA, the St Mirren manager was frustrated with the inconsistent message given out by the football authority and the referees with regard to goal-scoring opportunities and other decisions. A few quotes and questions now follow: MacPherson: "I'm not wanting players booked or red-carded but there are laws to the game" Question: Given your obvious sporting principles, what do you want then if it wasn't a red card for Weir? MacPherson: "David Weir impeded Michael Higdon in the process of shooting, he affected how he was shooting. There's a decision to get made there. No decision was made." Question: As the video pictures clearly show, do you accept Higdon 'impeded' Weir 'in the process of defending', 'affecting' his ability to deal with the through ball. Why was that decision not made? Similarly, late in the game (no video highlight provided), a St Mirren defender stopped a cross illegally with his arm. Why was that decision not made? MacPherson: "We watch games, we go to games and we see clips on the BBC and we see a different set of rules getting applied. None more so than when we're coming here (to Ibrox)." Question: What different set of rules are these? Do you mean the free-kick given for a foul on your player but not the foul on a Rangers player immediately prior to it? What are you implying by the final sentence? Be a man and say exactly what you mean. We'd all love to see the evidence you have for such a controversial claim. MacPherson: "We're actually shown clips at the start of the season by (Scottish FA head of referees) Hugh Dallas and shown incidents of what's important and what the new guidelines are yet, when the games come along, when there's decisions to get made, they don't get made. A lot of football people at the meeting were actually questioning and arguing, which is healthy because that's what the game's all about. But then, when the games come along, you're looking for them to be applied in the correct manner and it's not getting done." Question: What is not being done in the correct manner? Do you mean hand-balls against your team not being penalised? Do you mean the officials being inconsistent in their application of the rules for aerial challenges - one of which you won a free kick from to score the opener last Saturday while Rangers were denied three identical fouls - one in your penalty area? Or do you mean the physical players in your team not being punished (see St Mirren Park - 8th April, 2009) where Rangers winger DaMarcus Beasley was taken off injured after 15 mins of the game after a variety of disgraceful 'challenges' on his person. Finally, given you've been involved in professional Scottish football for over 20 years - as a player and manager - why did you choose last weekend to infer dishonesty from the officials and what do you do to intend to prove this scurrilous accusation which calls into question the integrity of Scottish football? It has been most disappointing to note of late how many important figures who make life-changing amounts of money from the sport (either in the past and/or currently) are so eager to question the integrity of officials and authorities just because their team of choice can't win a football match. The fact of the matter is, every football club in Scotland (and indeed in the world) has its fair share of decisions go for and against them. Yes, it is frustrating and disappointing when it is the latter but for anyone to suggest an inherent bias in favour of one specific team at one specific stadium isn't just sour grapes but providing a dangerously paranoid platform for people to grasp to instead of addressing the real problems in our game. Therefore Mr MacPherson if you are concerned about the quality of the refereeing in Scotland (most football fans are) why not air your concerns in a more constructive manner at the mandatory Hugh Dallas meetings you seem so strangely annoyed about having to attend. Anything else is quite frankly insulting to any decent person involved in football. Shame on you for jumping on an already full (and broken) bandwagon.

It has been alleged that the Park consortium have undertaken due diligence but I've not seen it confirmed anywhere...