Frankie

The recent fans forum has showed the Assembly are at least willing to stimulate public debate. They have then acted upon the mandate given to them at that forum by firstly taking the issues to their main committee and AGM; then agreeing to be more pro-active with regard to such issues. This has manifested itself in one of the first media statements I can recall from them - widely welcomed by the (online) support at large. I'd like to think others will follow - and not just with regard to the media either but in many areas that most bears will agree need improvement. That is the easy bit. The hard bit is, as you rightly say, attempting to invoke that change in a tangible sense. A statement on one's own website is simple. Taking the message offline for broad fan agreement then getting the club round the table and agreeing to change of strategy isn't - more so when their outlook is sometimes the opposite from that of the support. However, in the past the club have claimed certain opinions are not representative of the wider fanbase. Ergo, by using the Assembly to take forward our opinions (hopefully continued by further fans forums and united online co-operation) we use their own creation to assert our views. I'm as sceptical as you as to whether this will work or whether a new chairman may see a different view from Rangers FC. But I think it's worthy of exploration before we say it won't work or that the club won't be prepared to be more flexible than before. Therefore, I don't think it is wrong to say we can attempt to force change. We just need to be better organised and go about it in the correct way. I think there have been a few small steps in the right direction recently even if we need to keep pushing and carrying people towards the destination.

I don't think anyone is saying everyone and everything should be banned from Ibrox as soon as a bad word is written about our club. Mistakes can be made and sometimes it could be argued negative coverage is deserved. As such, only the very worst and the consistent offenders should be addressed - ban or otherwise. Graham Spiers is by far the worst person for writing negatively and inaccurately about our club while refusing to open up the debate about others in the same way. Guys like Traynor, Walker and Jackson don't even come close. See Jaaz's splendid article of years past for the evidence. It is this continued appallingly non-objective coverage that should see Graham Spiers banned from Ibrox Stadium. Or at the very least see the club work with fans to ensure every supporter knows their feelings on such journalists while refusing to work with media such as The Times or Radio Clyde who employ him. I don't think any of that is unreasonable.

Mate, I also read most of Spiers articles and I agree the majority are harmless enough and occasionally he makes some valid points in them. He wouldn't be in a job otherwise - poor Times readership or not. You also rightly say he concentrates on the Old Firm - a natural phenomenon in a country these teams dominate in. However, the problem occurs when he writes about sectarianism. Quite simply he does not do this from a balanced point of view. He concentrates completely on Rangers' problems (alleged or otherwise) and only mentions other teams on the very odd occasion so he can claim objectivity. In addition to that, many supporters who can see past this one-sidedness (it isn't easy) will see that, while raising the issue reasonably regularly over the last 5 years or so, he always fails to offer solutions for the problem. UEFA/SPL can ban songs all they like but the problem will just go elsewhere. That's because, as we all know, the issue of sectarianism is a social one - not a football one - so biased, inflammatory and inaccurate articles like that of Spiers (and Michael Walker et al) only serve to increase tensions instead of solve them. Thus, while defending Spiers overall journalistic contribution is probably valid enough, his MO is clear and Rangers supporters have every right to take umbrage with his disgraceful coverage - no matter how often he writes about it. The man is an anti-Rangers buffoon who has used a social problem to make himself money. His hypocrisy is disgusting and he is much a source of sectarianism as anything and anyone else. And he knows it.

The thread title was somewhat of a rhetorical question - however IMO, if people utilise the Assembly properly (since many no longer buy into the alternatives); then we can perhaps find some common ground. I've already said a ban for Spiers is unlikely. But I do think there are other ways of spreading the message about him which would be greatly improved if the club helped - tacitly or otherwise. You or I might rightly ask why it has to be done tacitly but in the absence of a greater appetite we have to work with what we have. We begin by forcing the Assembly to act and we seem to have an immediate (although slight) improvement from them in that regard. Now, we force them to take it up with the club in an official sense and use the club's own statements about the organisation to show there is a fan mandate for a change of strategy. As ever, I don't deny that will be easy or that I'm maybe being overly optimistic but, I find creating debate a healthy way of finding a manner in which we can address the issue - imperfect or not.

Going to close this next week... Still relatively few entries so chances of winning are excellent!

I'll take the sheep game....

Just so we can give them a wee chance...

Gav has written the SJ one already and pmed it to me...

Agreed. However, that's not to say the club can't take other action behind the scenes to help pressurise his employers. In some ways the club's own championing of the Assembly could see them hoist by their own petard here. If the Assembly is as truly representative of the support as the club have maintained, then the mandate has just been given for the club to address the media debate in more a more forceful fashion.

No probs NC... I'll do it unless someone else fancies it...?

Been on a much-needed holiday so was no surprise to come back to further debate about the recent 'articles' by Michael Walker and, of course, that fearless crusader of all things bigoted (as long as they are blue), Graham Spiers. Of course, ill-informed and imbalanced media comments are nothing new so while I was annoyed as the next bear about these articles, I was more interested to see the Rangers Supporters Assembly finally wade into the media debate. Looking around online their suitably succinct statement seems to have been received reasonably well which is certainly good news given many fans still harbour (valid) doubts about the quality of that organisation. Nonetheless, I'm sure these same cynics welcome the Assembly's efforts to be more pro-active in this regard. Utilising the Trust's experience in this field is also agreeable. I hope this is further evidence of an improving Assembly willing to act on mandates from interested fans. As ever though, it needs to be considered how to reach offline supporters so they are made aware of the Assembly's stance. To that end the club should be looking to help - even if asking them to ban Graham Spiers is unlikely to yield their agreement. Nevertheless, would it be possible for the Rangers News or a forthcoming match-programme to publish such Assembly statements? I'd also love to see them on the Jumbotron screens home matches but perhaps that is less feasible. Certainly, if the club are serious about combating unfair media coverage then, while making martyrs by banning journalists may not be realistic, helping the supporters publicise the worst of the offenders' work is something they can do to apply pressure. The club have stated a few times that if fans are not happy with media coverage, then don't subscribe to the platform involved. Of course that applies in many cases but our chances of success would improve if the club helped disseminate the information. Unfortunately the 'don't buy' mantra doesn't apply to the problems we've seen at the BBC in recent years but out of small seeds.... Unfortunately, with Sir David Murray still the majority shareholder, even the appointment of a new chairman isn't likely to warrant a large-scale change of tact in the way the club defends itself and its fans. However, the Walker and Spiers issues are open goals for the club to show they really care about their fans' image. With the club-funded Assembly speaking out - an organisation the club are quick to highlight as representative of all Rangers fans - the remit has been given more strongly than ever for the club to do more. The upcoming club AGM will be an opportunity to see exactly how Alistair Johnston feels about an issue which remains one of the most important to many supporters. The media challenge is one that unites most fans of otherwise different opinions and backgrounds. Do the club intend leading from the front and finally joining with us in addressing it? To conclude, the media debate may not be the biggest off-the-field challenge facing Rangers FC but it will give us an interesting insight into whether Alistair Johnston is his own man or a pawn for a regime which continues to allow hostile mischief-makers to say and do what they like. Moreover, this will be an interesting gauge to see if the Assembly are capable of creating the necessary pressure to force the club into change.

After today's excellent result and TBO displays, Jerome Rothen is urging all bears to buy their 'CompareTheTitles' stickers now - only �£1 for ten stickers! Remember all proceeds go back into displays and banners for the fans, by the fans! 52 League Titles We STILL Welcome The Chase. http://www.theblueorder.co.uk/ http://www.comparethetitles.com

As usual, they copy us...

Yep, I'd imagine Papac will deputise at centre-back with Weir.

Boogie, McCulloch, Thomson - all out apparently.

Welcome to the forum mate...

I agree. Having worked hard for the organisation for 3 years, I can sympathise with Trust board members attempting to make the best out of a difficult voluntary job in the face of occasional unfair criticisms but the comments from Bearwood Bear are equally uncalled for an inaccurate. However, I've said my piece so I'm away to bed!

Nice one Norris.... Was too busy at work today to send my thoughts to this person. Will try and make some time over the weekend before I go on holiday...

As I've said before, I applaud you for taking the time to make the effort. Unfortunately, while you may not feel undermined, to the neutral it certainly looks bizarre that several senior office-bearers are happy to criticise other forums and dismiss them rudely while one or two members do try to take up the torch. Doesn't look like the kind of defined, unifying leadership required to turn around the organisation. In fact, the parallels with the club administration are almost eerie if one looks past the disappointing irony.

They have. They won't make the effort to engage with other forums because they don't agree with some of the criticisms on them.

Yeah, I think we'll win 2-1... Fancy a few goals in this week's fixture - especially since I won't be there...

Hero - forgot again!

This isn't FF talking. This is the Rangers Supporters Trust via FF which they seem openly comfortable as having as their only place to debate the organisation. Before we go any further, I want to make clear (and it's not aimed at anyone in particular!), I won't accept any unsubstantiated allegations about persons or organisations in this thread. Bearwood Bear may be happy to generalise about other forums but I'd rather we didn't. There are a lot of good people on FF and while some of us may have a few issues with the place, we should remember that.

No need to apologise. Seriously though, don't you feel somewhat undermined given the comments of your senior colleagues elsewhere juxtaposed with your sentiments above? I'd understand if this was a one-off comment from an individual but it seems to be official Trust policy not to interact with other forums or their projects. Perhaps I'm wrong as I know you intend to keep posting here (hopefully!) and another board member posts on RM but there doesn't appear to be any great effort than the odd post now and again. I'm also pretty sure Gersnet and RM members would like to know why their opinions have been written off as bile and unworthy of debate.

Yeah, he's still here - been on the bench a couple of times recently. As was the case with Michael Ball and others, the rumour is we're due to pay more money to PSV if he makes a few more appearances. Pinch. Salt.