Soulsonic5791

I wonder if Archie would be forthcoming if he was pressed for an answer about the reasons behind the change in the once convivial canteen from an organisational perspective of the corporation?

It's ok gents, I can answer my own question...

*Self-admonishment alert*

Don't be so stupid, Archie wouldn't dare bite the hand that feeds would he.

Call me a heartless soanso but with Dave's eyesight, I'm not sure I'd trust his reading of a putt!

Did SSN quote him or was he interviewed Gonzo79?

I noticed the same thing but did see that depending on the publication, some reports omit the names of the clubs, others mention four of the five big clubs that Ray played for but leave us out.

Sad, sad news. RIP Ray.

55 minutes ago, buster. said:

I'd hardly call that a strong base for optimism.

 

Our transfer business in the past couple of years has been very poor and the January window just gone, whilst being better was mainly about players who will be going back to their parent clubs in the summer.

 

If you are implying that our directors have only just realised that 'you get what you pay for' opposed to actually allocating what scarce resources were available very badly, then what level of gumption is in the boardroom ? In other words, they know fine well that 'you get what you pay for' but finances and managerial/player choice have been problems.

 

The main base issue for me is who the manager will be.

If it were to be a 'Head Coach' working under Mark Allen, then we'd better get ready to use a larger wall for the manager portraits because Ibrox under current pressures is not a place that young coaches will be allowed to thrive.

 

 

Fair enough Buster. In my short time on here I'd like to think that people would recognise that I'm pretty wary of the board. I don't feel as though they've done a particularly good job for a number of reasons. They have however, made some decisions which I broadly support in principle.

What I was trying to imply, without blowing the gaff on the sensitive information that I have, is that the board have tried a couple of strategies which haven't borne any fruit other than getting promoted out of the First Division. Gift-wrapping a Scottish Cup for the Trainspotters and winning the Challenge Cup don't count in my book. Cheaper options if you will and evidence therein has proved to them that an alternative strategy is required to be successful on the pitch in the short term. Yes, undoubtedly, the transfer market dealings have been patchy at best and financials involved in first team environment recruitment have been problematic.

That said, I wholeheartedly agree that the board's activities should be scrutinised but my understanding is that this 'bordering on biscuit tin mindset' could be about to change fairly dramatically in reasonably short order and that would give me grounds, as a skeptic, of being cautiously optimistic.

Until something happens though, I'll reserve judgement; hence the reason why I've been a bit cryptic.

I'd already checked the restricted settings Frankie, cheers. Seems Google/You Tube have decided overnight that they don't like the browser on one of my devices. One by one the channels that I use have become scrambled to such an extent that they look unrecognisable - very frustrating. However, the dedicated app doesn't display any issues...yet.

Bassas. Yet another example of why I chucked in a career in IT.

Stick yer Sherlock deerstalker on Gonzo79 and you'll get the answer.

Oh, and remind me not to drink what Unicorn's having....coz judging by the poll it might be a goblet of chilled curare.

Without being a tease, please see previous replies Gonzo79. From that you can draw your own conclusions...

As I said Rousseau, I can't divulge too much. But let's just say that for all of us clamouring for the board to give us reason to believe that they are serious about the task at hand then what I've heard is encouraging.

Might be just me, but this is what happens when I click on the embedded content. And when I browse the channel, It says that there is no content.

Despite my voting for 2020 for the purposes of realism, I really reckon that everyone should pull out the stops to win the league next season.

Without starting an online rumour, I have heard some encouraging news in the last 48 hours which says to me that there has finally been a realisation that 'you get what you pay for'. And after two false starts, it could be a case of third time lucky.

You're probably aware Frankie, YouTube has removed/restricted access to the upload.

As predicted.

Docherty left to try to cover every blade of grass, the ever slow playmaker Goss dropped for someone every bit as slow in Dorrans (although he can spared real criticism due to his lay-off). Two carthorses at the back - nuff said. Outnumbered in the middle to accommodate a guy who now thinks he's arrived. A team which mainly depends on its full-backs (who are suspect defensively) to drive the team forward. We have two 'wingers' who are ordinary when it comes to creating chances. And a centre forward, limited in ability, who tries hard and can be streaky when amongst the goals.

The lack of fight and aggression is depressing to witness. Cedric Kipre crocks another one of our players. And, the opposition's main strikers are two guys who have bounced about teams in the lower reaches of the English leagues (Two and the Conference).

All told, we have no one to rise above the flotsam and jetsam and get the job done. We have a 'manager' who chews the zip of his jacket and is incapable of being proactive and reactive when circumstances demand these qualities.

The board need to step up and reward the faith and loyalty of the support by giving us something which resembles a real Rangers side picked by someone who is worthy of the position.

All this stuff smacks of a discredited government scrabbling to promote any populist agenda in a desperate bid to cling to power. Unless Dornan and his superiors are discouraged from engaging in this pseudo-incitement (whether that is privately by the Police and high ranking members of the judiciary, or publicly by politicians and media commentators or constituents in surgeries) his personal crusade will continue unabated because he serves a purpose and neatly fits an agenda.

Last week when Aamer Anwar, Anas Sarwar and others attended a march in Glasgow to highlight anti-muslim prejudice, members of the Green Brigade were clearly visible amongst the crowd. Echoes of the CSC and the Anti-Nazi League in the early to mid nineties immediately sprung to mind. Tactics like this are actively encouraged by guiding hands. 

Unfortunately, when it comes to shining a light on this type of behaviour and illustrating it for what it is publicly, it is usually left to the likes of Murdo Fraser, who isn't exactly a respected and credible voice. Unless something changes in that respect, there will little to no change in the promulgation of this nonsense.

And just to be clear, I don't condone anti-muslim prejudice in any shape or form.

32 minutes ago, Frankie said:

You're probably right but it doesn't provoke the same discussion...

True Frankie - I've already banged that drum! Maybe Graeme will surprise me on Saturday.

What you can put the kettle on for is that Robinson will have them fired up to get tore in.

Cedric Kipre needs a wee Ray Wilkins on Paul McStay.

All in the interests of good karma you understand... 

I'm gonna stick my neck out here.

Graeme will play the same way he always has with no change in formation. Docherty will be the midfield grunt whilst Goss will do his usual wanting all the time in the world to lift his head to pick a pass. Josh Windass might be more productive if space is created for him. Jason Cummings will drop back to the bench and Alfredo will replace him.

Expect another battle guys.

26th - Correct me if I'm wrong here, and apologies to everyone else for my pedantry, but the Record didn't publish a 'retraction' of Hamilton's story did they? I recall there just being a grudging 'apology' to placate IPSO.

I know it may seem trivial to some but there is an important distinction between the two in my view. With the apology they can fudge their language but essentially stand by their story. A retraction is an unequivocal admission of being in the wrong.

Usually I'm like an elephant with these things. But alas my memory isn't what it was these days 

11 minutes ago, boabie said:

How the other side work ---  https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/uk/snps-feargal-dalton-says-ancestors-fought-the-british-but-theres-only-one-military-organisation-i-was-ever-involved-in-her-majestys-armed-forces-31293980.html

Yes Boabie, a slippery customer is our chameleon chum Feargal, who has more faces than the town clock.  

Apologies for the thread drift.

4 hours ago, Gaffer said:

Excuse my ignorance, but who are these characters, and what is the significance of where they are, or what they're doing?  I feel like I'm the only one who doesn't know, so please someone explain.  Cheers.

Gaffer,

This photo was reportedly taken in 2014 at a 'talk' in Govanhill to 'celebrate' Scottish women allegedly taking part in the Easter Rising of 1916. Dornan is on the left and Feargal Dalton SNP councillor for Glasgow is on the right. I'm assuming the geezer in the centre has something to do with the organisation of the 'talk'.

Dalton is married to the SNP's Education, Armed Forces and Veterans spokesperson in Westminster, Carol Monaghan MP.

Martin Williams laps this stuff up. His card has been well and truly marked for quite some time now.

I wonder if he'd be keen to submit this to his editors? If I was close to a public terminal, I'd be tempted to contact the Herald's news desk with it.

Let me qualify me previous post. I can upload a 'cover' photo but when I click on profile photo and try to upload by clicking on the 'choose single file' button nothing happens. It might be my browser, but I was permitted to query my camera roll when uploading the cover photo.

Strange.

I'm probably just being obtuse here but I'm struggling to upload an Avatar. I can upload a profile photo without any issues though. I've also looked at the various threads in the sub-forum, i.e. where Pete mentions them, but I can't see any option in account settings.

Can someone help please?

12 minutes ago, aweebluesoandso said:

As far as i'm aware their 10.5% shareholding entitles them to call an EGM and put forward resolutions? Maybe Bluedell can confirm>

Yeah they have that capability but I would strongly suspect that they are unlikely to exercise it. At least whilst they are broadly aligned with the Club i.e. having offices in the stadium, having advertising hoardings etc, etc.

Maybe it's just me, but I struggle to see them as independent any longer.

9 minutes ago, aweebluesoandso said:

If you had enough shares in M&S to make your voice be heard, and you felt the board were being incompetent with the business structure, stock and staffing levels impacting on sales. Therefore also heavily destabilising your shares value, you wouldn't complain or do anything to get a better chairman in, or get someone who can turn the business round?  Bare in mind M&S has gone through several chairman in the last decade.

 

If you have enough shares in any company you can flex your muscles for change, it happens often in the business world, especially with large fund management companies letting their presence being felt. Well C1872 can do  that on a smaller scale and i would say maybe they should let their presence be felt, in a constructive way of course.

Correct me if I'm wrong here but can Club 1872 do this flexing effectively since it was more or less brought under the auspices of the Club?

I'm probably wrong here, but I see Club 1872 and the Club as more or less the same thing.

Gents,

Reading the recent comments, everyone makes valid points. Bill has a point in that, hypothetically speaking, were a Club1872 representative co-opted on to the club's board the organisation's ability to address media imbalance could be seriously blunted going forward due to obligations to the club by way of divulging operating strategies and processes. Similarly, Gaffer has a point in that we don't necessarily require board representation to at least embark upon a campaign of redressing the balance of media bias.

Up until fairly recently 'the fans' have had public representatives in the media. Craig Houston did his bit to highlight the issues with the previous regime. Chris Graham had a good go at challenging the likes of Odious Creep on tv and radio. And before him, David Edgar and to a lesser extent Mark Dingwall offered a voice on a range of topics.

This presence has been largely missing since the current board assumed the reins.

Club1872 to be fair, have issued a number of releases re press inaccuracies on their website but unfortunately these haven't really received public exposure for a multitude of reasons.

The various stresses of being a public spokesperson have taken their toll on the guys mentioned above. Perhaps it's time for a group of spokespersons to be more visual in the public eye. Done in concert with guidance from established PR providers and a secondary form of media legal advice, it would offer some respite from the incessant attacks on our support.

Let's be honest, the Club and its PR can only do so much.