Bill

If reports from Dingwall today are accurate, the idea that taking a knee has anything to do with racism has been thoroughly discredited.

I assume the player who said it had also taken a knee. Which kinda blows your theory out of the water.

Much as I like him, Calvin Bassey could offer more than he did in the 1st half. Seems to have lost some spark. Ross County are pretty good for a village team.

It's all a conspiracy y'know.

Seen it all now. Minutes silence for Maradona at Fir Park.

Maybe Club1872 could help out. I’m sure fans would be glad to contribute. Fir big money we could afford to sell any one player, not more.

That would require either good judgement or courage, neither of which you’ll find at the SPFL

In that case I stand up as a confirmed racist because I see knee-taking as another example of using contrived victimhood to achieve personal justification, usually perpetrated by weak woke arseholes. I'm convinced most players only do it because they're terrified of being labelled racist. This kind of social bullying is out of hand and few seem to have the guts to stand up to it. The sooner we get fans back in stadiums to re-introduce reality, the sooner we'll see an end to this demeaning crap.

The one thing Ive learned over the years is that there's no such thing as an irreplaceable player.

I’m biting their hand off for £25m

It’s a farce really.

Try to avoid turning a decent debate into personal insults. It helps no one.

I think we’ve entered the realm of fantasy here.

Talk about circling the wagons ?

Y'know what? I can live without the endorsement of those petty bastards.

Very well deserved by both. This must be grinding a lot of gears in dark corners.

Ross County 0 Rangers 3 FGS - Kent

I took the decision long ago that if shares were evenly priced to all parties then the appropriate way to hold Rangers shares was on a personal basis. That way I don't need someone else to tell me what are "the best interests of Rangers" nor do I run any risk of that someone using "my" shares against my own judgement. I object to my pre-emption rights being denied when new shares are being issued, while understanding the strategic requirement to do so on ONE occasion. The voice of the ordinary Rangers shareholder is largely being suppressed.

No I don't make that assumption at all. That's something you've chosen to believe That's a bold assumption for which I see no clear justification. From what I can see, the reality is that most of the membership have awarded Club1872 a certificate of infallibility and most resolutions are passed with incredible 95+% majorities. I'm saying that for my part I can't see the basis for that faith. Perhaps someone can set out in some detail the basis by which Club1872 can guarantee to inform and represent it's members .... and in the process explain why a decision like this is announced by the person selling the shares before Club1872 has even consulted its members?

What has that got to do with with the effectiveness of Club1872 shareholding if it goes up or down?

Why so? What practical difference would it make to anything if Club1872's shareholding went up or down by a percentage point?

That's a bit like saying there's no reason why Scotland couldn't be successful as an independent country. Of course we could be successful but only if the right people are making the right decisions for the right reasons. As things stand, everything points to that not being the case but huge numbers of people ignore that reality and vote for it anyway. I'm afraid it looks like the same mythology is at play among Rangers fans. Much better not to follow devils at all. The way you do that is by opening eyes and minds and making judgements based on reality, not blind faith.

Let's get one thing crystal clear, nothing in the latest announcement is about fan ownership. The fans, albeit not the fans but Club1872, will never own Rangers. That much I would stake my house on. What is being proposed is that buying King's shares will mean the club is safeguarded from future malfeasance by rogue owners. That's the promise but until someone can show me how that promise will not only be kept but guaranteed, it can only ever be an empty promise. Safeguarding Rangers from a repeat of past mismanagement won't be achieved by owning shares and expressing good intention. It will only be achieved if that shareholding is used in the right way by astute people acting with honest intentions. And here's the thing - nothing I've read gives me any assurance that Club1872 and the people controlling it, as it currently stands, are either astute or entirely open and honest. The only thing I see clearly is that Club1872 does not run its affairs in anything like the right way. I'm not particularly close to the organisation, which makes this view all the more valid, since I have no personal axe to grind about personalities involved, for or against. While Club1872 remains the opaque, clandestine and quasi-democratic outfit it is today, there is no way I can believe it worthy of using a blocking shareholding wisely. Right now the changes required are at least as much about Club1872 as Rangers. In my opinion, Club1872 could be a trustworthy safeguarding presence on the Rangers board but not as things stand and that's why, with Rangers' interests at heart, I could never join the blind faith queue or put my trust in an outfit that simply hasn't shown it deserves it.

Not that fans criticising players has ever resulted in better performances anyway. I see tonight’s win as a massive achievement- previously we wouldn’t have won that, which for me confirms our progress.

I suspect there will be no shortage of fools to encourage this nonsense, each believing that helping Club1872 is the same as helping Rangers. That’s the power of storytelling