Search the Community

......He might be a lunatic but he's OUR lunatic. AHEAD of tomorrow's Championship clash between Rangers and Hibs, Ally McCoist hails his controversial Tunisian defender and Hibs strike star Dominique Malonga considers a Congo international call-up. HE flits between bombscares and brilliance. His manager describes him as Champions League-class in the art of inducing heart attacks. But deep down, Ally McCoist knows he has a player in Bilel Mohsni. And deep down he knows if he can coach the comedy capers out of him, he won’t have him for long. Because he reckons the 27-year-old Tunisian is good enough to play for anyone at any level without them. The Rangers boss said: “He genuinely could. He’s quick enough without being lightning, he’s certainly powerful enough, he’s good in the air, comfortable with both feet. “There’s definitely a player in there. His national team manager would agree with that as well. He has been playing and playing well. They went to Cairo to play Egypt and won 1-0 so it is definitely just a concentration thing. “He made a mistake against Inverness at Ibrox, there were a couple during the game the other night – he just switches off when he thinks it is slightly easier than it is. Easier said than done but if we can nail them, he has far greater qualities than deficiencies.” McCoist loves the fact he has someone of charisma in his team, an opinion divider, something he feels has been lacking. He said: “He might be a lunatic, but he’s OUR lunatic, and an extremely likeable lunatic! I jest, of course. He is a smashing guy. “The crowd love him but are equally frustrated by him. You have to appreciate as well that away from the football he is an absolute diamond. He is wonderful with kids, wonderful with supporters and the whole package makes him a big loveable character that everybody wants to do well. “They get frustrated with him at times and pull their hair out. He is the type of player who pops up with a great tackle after making a mistake in the first place. “But I love the fact he has become a bit of a cult hero/menace for our fans. “It has given him something, given the supporters something and given the club something. We have had good boys who have got the job done, but our fans maybe haven’t had someone they can identify with or discuss for an hour in the pub afterwards over a pint.” Meanwhile the outspoken star has been taunting Hibs ahead of their meeting at Ibrox tomorrow. Mohsni himself revealed the manager had tried to persuade him not to over-complicate defending and not to dribble his way into trouble. And he insists he’s trying to curb his natural instincts. He said: “I was taught to pass so when I kick the ball and clear then it’s because the manager has told me to be solid and not take risks. “It’s not pretty, I don’t like it either. But this is the job and I have to do it. “Against better players, you know that one mistake can cause a goal. I made a mistake against Inverness and was lucky they did not score. “The manager says I gave him a heart attack in that game. I’d like to be more concentrated and solid and maybe next season we can pass the ball more and enjoy it.” McCoist believes the further up the ladder they make it, the more the calibre of football would bring out the best in his stopper – but the scares are still there. He said: “I was hopeful the step up in the league this year would see him naturally defend at a greater level of consistency, but he still has a few wee points when he switches off. “He has to handle that. He is a great threat for us going forward from set plays but as a centre-half you are in the team to defend. He has to cut out the errors. “He made a couple of mistakes against Falkirk in midweek but also played the ball of the night with the outside of his right boot to play in Dean Shiels. That’s the kind of thing we don’t want to take away from him. “We don’t want him to lump the ball out the park but he needs to defend. At the same time he has to concentrate and work on his use of the ball.” http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-boss-ally-mccoist-ibrox-4337624?

Posted Today, 07:02 PM SEPTEMBER 26, 2014 / BILLMCMURDO The boardroom saga rumbles on at Ibrox with the news that Rangers CEO Graham Wallace has had talks with representatives of Dave King. My understanding is that these representatives were Paul Murray and George Letham. No big surprises there but this is where we enter into the Twilight Zone once more. When contacted by a prominent daily newspaper, I am told that Dave King denied that these men were his representatives. Which begs two questions: 1) Why are these men purporting to represent Dave King? 2) Or is Dave King being economical with the truth? We could also ask why he is, if he is., Given that Rangers fans want transparency and that this requirement for transparency is often spoken of by Messrs Murray and King, surely it would be very much in the interests of both these men to clear matters up for the fans. In a nutshell, is Paul Murray representing Dave King in talks with Graham Wallace? This opens up a whole raft of other questions. Why is Graham Wallace speaking to Paul Murray? Is he doing so with the backing of fellow board members or has he “gone rogue” and if this is the case, what can be done to stop him? It is no secret that there is a rift in the boardroom and this is not something Rangers fans want to be reading about, especially in anti-Rangers outlets. I personally am fed up of all the cloak and dagger, which is playground stuff. We need men leading us, not boys. Yes, confidentiality is often necessary in business dealings but you can’t call for transparency to score points while being furtive and even deceitful. If Paul Murray is representing Dave King, fans should be told and not lied to. The whole matter hinges around Dave King’s now legendary £30 million to invest. Is the £30 million for real or a mythical figure that keeps Dave King in the limelight while deceiving the Rangers support? Even if Kings’ 30 mil is real and in place for investment, other questions need answering. These include a very important one i.e. Is that it? Is the 30 million all there is or is there more to follow? Not as a possible but something far more concrete? I mean, are there other investors lined up or does King himself have more in reserve? Just as vital is the question: What role does King want for his investment and can he get it? There are huge question marks over King’s suitability as a director of RIFC PLC both from the stock market perspective and from that of the SFA and SPFL. King needs to answer those for his own sake and others. Should King fail to get a directorship, is he happy to take a back seat and does this also mean there is a very real prospect that he will fall foul of AIM regulations concerning “shadow directors” who hold no office but exercise inappropriate clout? Can King’s ego handle being just a good guy investor with no hands-on power? I see the papers are waging a campaign against Sandy Easdale attempting to pressure him not to block this mooted Dave King investment. Easdale may be crazy to try and block this investment if it saves the club but he would be crazier still to rely on it given how precarious it appears to be. The fact that he is active in seeking alternatives is indicative, not of a churlish anti-King prejudice but of commendable business prudence and responsibility. As I wrote previously, Rangers require a custodian. Both Dave King and Sandy Easdale may have a lot to do to convince fans they can fill that role. Being more honest with the Rangers fans would be a good start. http://billmcmurdo.w....the-kings-men/

I don't think this goes against any rules because I'm not talking about any forums. I'm talking about comments made by our fellow fans. Some of our supporters are calling him a 'grass', questioning his mentality etc. Disgraceful. Very disgusting behaviour. I've never understood the whole grass/snitch thing. If there is serious wrong doing, by all means report it. It would be utter madness not to. A real grass is someone who snitches on someone with no foundation just out of spite. The fact is Billy has seen our club torn apart and took action. I just wish more were like him. He really has been an excellent supporter over the years and has helped uncover much of the disgraceful antics we have been afflicted to.

Friday, 26 September 2014 10:00 Keeping It Simple Written by Andrew Dickson BILEL MOHSNI admits he’s going against his natural instincts as he tries to eradicate mistakes from his game by keeping things simple for Rangers. The Tunisian defender has been in mixed form lately, turning in strong defensive performances most of the time but making occasional mistakes too. One such error almost gifted Inverness an opening goal in a League Cup tie last week but the 27-year-old got away with it as they missed their chance to score. While such lapses are more memorable, it’s fair to argue Mohsni has done well more often than not. What’s notable is he has stopped trying to come forward past opposition player so often and he has done that at the request of Ally McCoist. The international stopper admits his manager prefers him to stay back and do what his task is in the first instance, defending and protecting his side’s goal. Mohsni said: “In the Inverness game, I made a big mistake and I was very lucky they didn’t score. “I would not say it was a lack of concentration which caused that to happen because I was concentrating the whole game. “It was more down to talking and we need more of that than we had then. Everyone needs to talk to each other. “Maybe I need to concentrate more too. The mistakes I made earlier in the season were maybe down to that and a lack of match fitness too. “I feel more comfortable and fit now but I know I need to keep working on my concentration to stay focused on the game. “I’m trying to give 100 per cent there and not make any mistakes. The manager wants me to be solid. “I know I can pass and dribble and I like doing that but I also realise you can make a little mistake when you do that and lose the ball. “The manager has said he needs me to be solid and to defend. That is a little bit frustrating for me but I am doing that. “I know the fans maybe don’t like it if they see me kick the ball out of the pitch but I don’t want to upset the manager or my team-mates and I am working hard on doing simple things. “I know if I get caught out it will be more dangerous than it was before last season so I prefer staying at the back and trying to be solid with the centre-backs.” http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/7741-keeping-it-simple

....we won title by 21 points one season and lost it by 15 the next. BARRY says the next meeting between Rangers and Celtic can't come quickly enough and reckons, should they meet in a cup this season, his beloved Gers will prove they are closer to matching their rivals than people think. THEY might have been kept apart in the League Cup quarter-final draw but there is definitely a feeling an Old Firm collision is getting closer. A clash of the Glasgow giants could yet come in that tournament this season or even in the Scottish Cup with Rangers now getting deeper into knockout competitions. If it doesn’t then few would bet against Rangers winning promotion from the Championship which means we’ll have to wait only until next season for one. Personally, it can’t come quickly enough because it’s been badly missed and that has been the feeling of many Celtic fans in the past two years. But I’m not so sure they’re as eager for a crack at Rangers now. I’ve heard so much talk in the past couple of years about how Celtic are 10 years ahead of my old club. It’s a phrase that seems to have been trotted out whenever Celtic were at their highest or Rangers at their lowest. But there is no doubt the gap is closing. In fact I believe the squads are pretty evenly matched in terms of quality. But regardless of that I don’t think you can ever say one is 10 years ahead of the other. The thing about the Old Firm is that superiority goes in cycles. That’s always been the case and it probably always will be. They simply don’t get so far ahead that the other one can’t quickly catch up. And one of the best examples of that comes from a period when I was playing at Ibrox. Under Dick Advocaat we won the league title by a massive 21 points in his second season charge. It came on the back of a treble in Advocaat’s first season and, having won the final Old Firm game of that season 4-0, many believed the gulf had never been so great. Celtic were seen as being in disarray with Kenny Dalglish in temporary charge after John Barnes had left the club but Martin O’Neill was brought in that summer and things quickly changed. And what happened the following season? Celtic won the league by 15 points. So that was a 36-point swing in the space of just 12 months. If that doesn’t prove how much and how quickly things can change, nothing will. Nothing much at Rangers had changed and Celtic made only two signings, Chris Sutton and Joos Valgaeren, before the opening league game of that campaign (Alan Thompson and Didier Agathe followed in September, Rab Douglas in October and Neil Lennon in December). People have their opinions on the state of Rangers and Celtic just now but for me talk of being 10 years between them is exaggerated. It’s nothing like that. And it would be great to see them going at it for the first time since Celtic won 3-0 at Parkhead in April 2012. For a lot of people the Old Firm fixture is the only thing they associate with Scottish football and it’s been a difficult couple of years for our game without them. That’s a bit disrespectful to the other clubs but it’s the truth. I know Celtic fans would have loved a crack at Rangers at their lowest ebb in the last couple of seasons but it’s changed now. I don’t think Celtic have gone backwards because they still have a very strong squad. The personnel is pretty much the same but they have lost a manager in Neil Lennon who knew the Old Firm derby inside out while Ronny Deila is still learning aspects of our game. But I just feel Ally McCoist, right, has improved his Rangers squad greatly. He’s had a lot of younger boys in the past couple of seasons but now he has guys with Premiership and Old Firm experience. Plus it’s the old cliche of form going out of the window in an Old Firm game. Even those who do feel Celtic are 10 years ahead of Rangers would probably agree that in a one-off game anything can happen in that fixture. Again I can go back to that 2000-01 season for proof of that. Celtic beat us 6-2 at Parkhead in the first Old Firm derby of the season and we went out and beat them 5-1 in the next. Another big swing – this time all in the space of just three months. I feel Kenny Miller, although he’s been injured, and Kris Boyd are two huge signings and their experience is vital. I’m sure any Premiership manager would snap your hand off for those two. I know Boydie has yet to score in the league but it will come. It might just take one to go in off his backside and he’ll be on fire again. A lot of my friends are asking me if there’s anything different or wrong given the fact he hasn’t scored as many as some might have expected. But nothing has changed, apart from the fact he’s a much better all-round player than in his first spell at Ibrox. I don’t have any concerns about him. He’s a confident guy who believes in his own ability. That’s the kind of player you want in there and he’ll soon stick one in the top corner. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/barry-ferguson-you-cant-say-4326012?

For anyone who isn't already aware, I have been elected to the Rangers Fans Board to represent fans who attend away matches. Rangers are creating email addresses for direct contact with the Fans Board Members but they will not be live until after the first meeting on 6 October. In the short term if anyone has any particular issues or concerns that affect “fans who attend away matches”, can they please post them here. I said that “I will arrange an early meeting with Susan Hannah”, the Ticket Office Manager. I have kept this promise. The meeting will take place on Monday when I will try to get answers to any immediate concerns. TB has already raised a number of points: Possible profiteering by charging Rangers fans higher than normal prices. I responded that “I think that there is a league rule about that but there will be ways round it I'm sure. I did notice at Alloa that £18/£9 was posted at the away gates and that is what we were charged, well I was anyway, not quite old enough for a concession.” Children’s ticket availability and pricing. I replied that “If that is a league issue I will pursue with Mr Doncaster.” Small allocations and how to divide between supporters’ buses and those who travel independently. If anyone has recent evidence of any of these situations can they please post here or PM me as appropriate. SB commented about “the variables Ulster Bears must contend with and the size of support travelling over for home games”. This is not my constituency per se but I responded that “If you have an issue that relates to travelling or attending or otherwise is relevant to away matches please let me know”. STB commented about “the short notice between being allocated a game and the payment getting taken.” I replied that “I think the issue is the short notice Rangers often get from the other Clubs and the fact that they need to collect and pay for the tickets within a certain period.” More information on any of the above issues would be helpful and feel free to add anything else. On a more general note, I have taken on board the comments about the categories and would welcome any other comments about organisational issues since these will be discussed at the first meeting.

Unloved owner in the North East should concentrate in taking over at Ibrox – it would be perfect for both Newcastle United and Rangers. Given the problems he has had at Newcastle United and the resentment he has caused during his seven years as owner, it may seem curious to suggest Mike Ashley is the ideal man to buy Rangers. Newcastle were a mediocre mid-table club when Ashley bought them and that is all they remain, yet Ashley could still be the ideal person to restore Rangers to its former glory. Most Newcastle supporters cannot wait to see the back of him. Although there is appreciation for the work he has done to improve the club as a business there has – with the exception of one fifth-place finish in 2012 – been little, if any, progress as a football club. There is animosity on both sides, Ashley is still bitter about the way supporters turned against him in the aftermath of Kevin Keegan’s resignation back in 2008, while they are convinced he is content for a proud club to be stuck in a monotonous mid-table wasteland while he uses it to promote his other business interests. The refusal to take cup competitions seriously is a wound that will not heal. Rangers fans also have their misgivings about Ashley’s intentions. So do the Scotland Football Association, who do not like the idea of one man owning two clubs, even if they play in different domestic competitions. Yet, if Ashley wants to buy Rangers, the SFA should let him. I don’t think there is a conflict of interests, just as there isn’t with Manchester City’s owners starting an American franchise, New York City. The opposition of the SFA to him increasing his stake to more than 10 per cent is a major barrier. He would, in theory, have to sell Newcastle first, but he has denied he wishes to do so. At least, he has denied he wants to at the moment. In a statement published on the Newcastle website, it was said Ashley will consider selling Newcastle at the end of next season, which interestingly is the earliest Rangers could be back playing in Europe. Uefa rules stipulate two teams owned by the same person cannot play in their competitions, which is reasonable enough as they could meet in a competitive fixture. That should not matter now if Ashley moves to save Rangers. Ashley would be an unusual fit for the knight in shining armour role. He is more market trader than chivalrous hero, but just because he has made his billions selling cheap sportswear should not disguise he has been phenomenally successful because of his business brain. Just because an idea is simple does not mean the man who came up with it isn’t a genius and few are better at making money than Ashley. Of course, being clever and innovative in business does not automatically mean you will be any good owning a football club and Ashley hasn’t been for Newcastle. The division between followers and leader saps its strength. The bitterness will not go away, there have been too many callous calls from Ashley, too many mistakes and too many perceived insults for Newcastle’s supporters to forgive and forget. Newcastle are paralysed by the lack of ambition in the boardroom. Many believe the only cure is a new owner and a new start. Ashley, though, is able to provide Rangers with exactly what they need, a secure financial footing and stability in the boardroom. He has the money to end the threat of economic meltdown and, as he has shown at Newcastle, he can turn a loss making business into a profitable one within a few years. The crucial difference between Rangers and Newcastle is that being a stable business in the Premier League is not enough to compete with the top clubs. Ashley stopped wanting to put his own money in to sign players and cover losses when he fell out with the fans and you cannot blame him. However, a stable business is all that is needed to return Rangers to the top of Scottish football because they are capable of generating far more income than their rivals. Only Celtic can rival Rangers in terms of gate receipts, sponsorship prestige and media interest, so all Ashley has to do to restore the old order is remove the spiral of debt repayments. Emotionally, no matter how much he tries to put a brave face on, the abuse Ashley receives as Newcastle’s owner must take its toll. There are only so many times you can be told you are overweight and not wanted. Ashley has broad shoulders and claims he is not particularly bothered what people think and say about him, yet he has also shown a thin enough skin to ban all three local papers for offering their supporting for a protest march calling for him to sell up last season. Ashley has still managed to make a project turned sour work for him. The exposure has been good for his retail chain, proving once again that there is no such thing as bad publicity. Even when he changed the name of the ground, provoking fury on Tyneside and beyond, Ashley ignored it and watched his other business interests prosper. Premier League exposure is one of the most powerful marketing tools around and Ashley’s sport shops are undoubtedly better known now than they were when he took over. Yet, although he has described the relationship between his sport shops and Newcastle as extremely beneficial for the former, it is still only responsible for a tiny fraction of its vast profits. He would barely notice if he lost them and there is every chance he can make even more if he buys Rangers. Not only do they have more fans worldwide than Newcastle, they are also far more likely to win trophies and success is a good thing to be associated with. Under his steadying hand, Rangers would almost certainly return to the Champions League, watched by huge television audience across the continent. Europe is the most obvious market place for Ashley’s other business to expand. They look made for each other, but Ashley has not made a move yet. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/newcastle-united/11121232/Newcastle-United-owner-Mike-Ashley-perfect-for-Rangers.html

"Following the publication of updated holdings in Rangers International Football Club PLC, the Union of Fans feel it is important to continue to highlight the position of Sandy Easdale. Mr Easdale and his associates have invested just enough to keep them above the 25% mark required to hold a veto over any inward investment to the club via a further, more substantial, share offer. Despite owning only around 5% of the club himself, Sandy Easdale claims to hold proxy voting rights for around 26%. We have long been concerned that Mr Easdale refuses to disclose who he actually holds these proxies for and instead disguises them through Beaufort Nominees. Mr Easdale's recent meeting with convicted fraudster Rafat Rizvi would lead us to believe that some of those proxy voting rights may be held on behalf of Mr Rizvi. It is also clear from this recent announcement, despite PR stories placed in the media to the contrary, that Mr Easdale has not purchased Charles Green's shares. We are therefore in a position where Mr Easdale appears to hold, through Beaufort Nominees, proxies for people such as Charles Green, Rafat Rizvi and Imran Ahmad. Our concern is that Mr Easdale will continue to act, as he always has done, in the interests of those shareholders and not in the interests of the wider shareholder base and the club itself. We have been clear that we feel that Mr Easdale should be removed as a club director but the PLC board appear to be unwilling or unable to enact that much needed change. Regardless, Mr Easdale is in a position, with the backing of shareholders who appear desperate to mask their identities, to block much needed investment into Rangers. We would ask Mr Easdale to confirm publicly that he and his associates will not oppose any resolution at the upcoming AGM which would allow fresh investment from those who care about the future of our club. If Mr Easdale ignores this request or refuses to answer unequivocally then, in the near future, we will recommend what course of action we believe fans should take. We are also concerned at newspaper reports that the annual accounts and therefore the AGM may be delayed. We would ask the PLC board to clarify if this is the case and to explain why, after what they described as a successful fund raising, there would be any reason to delay publication of the accounts."

THE financials to the end of June were expected to be published by the end of this month with an agm to follow within 28 days but with no date yet fixed there are concerns a delay could have a knock-on effect on fundraising plans. The auditors signed off on the half-year results in March with the caveat the business remained a going concern as long as season- ticket sales remained at the levels of previous years. FEARS are rising of a delay in announcing the annual results of Rangers and of possible financial consequences for the club. It had been reported the club’s financials to the end of June 2014 would be published before the end of this month, with an agm to follow within 28 days. However, Record Sport can reveal a date has yet to be fixed for the release of the annual results, with sources suggesting it has been delayed by the board. It had been anticipated Rangers would use their agm to put forward a motion seeking support for a new, significant share issue to guarantee the long-term financial future of the club. Any delay would have a knock-on effect on the timetable for fundraising, with the £3.13m brought in from the recent share issue only expected to see the club through until Christmas. Insiders suggest the board are either confident of raising funds from other sources or struggling to have their financial results okayed by auditors Deloitte. But a boycott by fans over the summer has seen season- ticket sales slump and left a black hole in the finances. Rangers would not need to go to the market for fresh finance in the short term if they secured loans from investors such as Mike Ashley or the Malaysian group who recently visited Ibrox. Their involvement would almost guarantee, at a stroke, that potential saviour Dave King would be destined to remain on the outside looking in. Rangers yesterday confirmed director Sandy Easdale had increased his stake in the club Asked to confirm a date for the release of their financial results a Rangers spokesman said: “No date has been fixed. We have a regulatory requirement to hold the agm by December 31 and will do so.”

From today's Scottish Sun: There's not much meat on the bones but with various carefully worded AGM resolutions now starting to take shape, this year's meeting is set to resemble last December's as key people canvass for support. The calm before the storm?

“But our leaders didn’t just lie to us. They terrified us with spectres of mushroom clouds: they attacked our patriotism if we questioned them; they insulted our intelligence if we said we doubted them; they mocked our reservations; they withheld information; suppressed facts; invented threats and deceived us into backing an illegal war which has left tens of thousands of Iraqis, Britons and Americans – who should be alive today and with their families – very, very dead indeed.” (Neil Mackay – The War On Truth) Despite the recent experience many Scots will have had for having their patriotism attacked for merely daring to question, Mr Mackay’s book actually deals with the Iraq war, where amongst other things, he explores and displays considerable understanding of the various mechanisms and machinations used by the UK and US governments to sow the seeds of a lie. In explaining how the lies were told Neil Mackay tells it from the perspective of the US/UK governments and asks the question “So how are we going to twist the truth – some would call that a lie – and make it look as if Saddam was up to his sweaty little armpits in illegal weapons” I would ask you to bear that quotation in mind for the remainder of this article. Neil Mackay, author of The War of Truth, is the same Sunday Herald journalist who wrote the following article. http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/george-square-trouble-the-night-our-readers-became-reporters.1411314286 Some of you may recognise some of the phraseology used by Mr Mackay within the article. In fact the “statement on Vanguard Bears website” is not actually a statement at all; it is the re-production of an article I wrote on my blog some days before entitled “2 sides of a coin” – which appeared on some other Rangers forums and was subject of discussion. http://immortalrangers.wordpress.com/2014/09/19/2-sides-of-a-coin-2/ Despite the fact Vanguard Bears followed the caveat I asked of any forums publishing my work i.e. that it is reproduced verbatim, without any additions or deletions, you will notice that Mr Mackay has engaged in some fairly extensive and selective editing . Mr Mackay claims in his article “Yesterday it posted a statement online reading: “Our voice is on the rise, we must by actions, not words or political soundbites, ensure our Union is defended.” There is a particular twist to this however – some may even call it a lie – but allow me to share with you the unedited version which I originally wrote, was reproduced verbatim, and is still displayed on my blog. “Our voice is on the rise, we must by actions, not words or political sound bites, ensure our Union is defended, by attacking the root causes of social injustice and poverty within our society.” Remind me what you wrote in The War on Truth Mr Mackay ? “they withheld information; suppressed facts; invented threats and deceived us” Perhaps the original unedited version doesn’t produce the kind of terrifying spectres Mr Mackay was seeking to portray. I’m sure Scots of whatever political persuasion found the scenes at George Square unedifying, I know I certainly did. Of course the Sunday Herald, and it’s pro-independence stance has been of considerable financial benefit with the newspaper boasting a doubling in circulation figures. It seems the truth certainly can be bought at a price, and that has got to be the most unedifying aspect of all.

Reading twitter and lots of bears are hoping or expecting the filth in the next round. So, what about Gersnetters? Timmy or a home draw to a so called lesser side to the tims? I'd love a spot of 'battle fever' but I'm not sure we'd get lucky and be drawn at home. Other big concern is some of our players being able to handle the atmosphere against them. Thoughts?

I didn’t think it was possible for the Rangers support to be more fractured and lacking consensus than we were in the first half of this year but rather depressingly we’ve managed it. In the maelstrom of a referendum on Scottish Independence the boardroom turmoil that has dominated the forums, social media and old fashioned conversations took a back seat to Loyalism, Unionism and the bogey man topic of Nationalism. Such is the ineptitude of our board, they missed the opportunity to bury some negative news in amongst the fog of the ideological war that raged throughout the month of September but I digress. Being a pro-Independence Rangers supporter these last few months has been a real challenge. I’ve been confronted by many fellow fans on social media and called everything from a “timpathiser”, (whatever that is) to a Nazi and Quisling. One particularly poorly adjusted and misinformed fellow told me I was a “traitor to Rangers Loyalist Unionist roots…” The idea that a Rangers supporter could support Independence just would not compute for many and my follower count on Twitter tumbled dramatically, I won’t lose any sleep over that however I must admit to now facing somewhat of a crossroads. Do I plod on attending matches listening to chants about where people like me can “stick your Independence” and the Loyalist songbook which was given an airing in George Square on Friday night amidst scenes of thuggery and hatred? Do I carry on turning a blind eye to the continual linking of Rangers Football Club to Loyalism and The Orange Order just as I have done for many years? The thought of turning my back on the club I’ve supported since I was five years old and which has provided myself and my (now deceased) Father so many happy memories makes me physically ill. The thought of a future devoid of one of the precious few constants in my life so far is unthinkable and so that is not a road I’m willing to go down just yet. So what are my options? I could become the archetypal armchair fan and refrain from discussing football matters on social media but we are in an age where it’s almost impossible to avoid. I could fool myself into thinking that it’s not so bad and the majority of my fellow fans are reasonable, open minded individuals but I’m not capable of cognitive dissonance on that scale. It seems that the core of our support are labouring under the misconceptions that being a “real” Rangers man means that you must also be many other things. I’ll use this juncture to clarify what I mean by “core of our support”. There are probably thousands of Rangers supporters (I don’t like term “fan”) who are feeling similarly disillusioned at the moment and those are probably a large percentage of the several thousand fans who’ve been missing for the last few home games joined by those who are boycotting, suffering from boardroom related malaise or simply disillusioned with how we are playing. What’s left are a core (match attending group) and of those I’d estimate that 75% fall into the category as described previously in this article. There’s also a large group of fans who, for one reason or another don’t regularly attend matches and again I’d estimate that a large percentage of those are politically and ideologically aligned with their brethren sitting in the stands. I’m conscious that I’m in danger of pigeon holing large swathes of people here and would only offer the fact that this is how I see things in basic terms. I’m sure there are reasonable folks in amongst the core who do not fall into any of my hastily preconceived notions and that I do not think the situation has reached the point of no return just yet and this leads me to the only other option I feel I have left. I’d urge everyone who considers themselves to be a Rangers supporter to distance the club from toxic and divisive affiliations. To seriously consider for a moment that we are in real danger of losing thousands of people like me who feel marginalised by their fellow bears and more importantly that we are in danger of losing the next generation of season ticket holder who have shown throughout the referendum run up and beyond, that they are increasingly well informed and turned off by Northern Irish politics, by far right-wing rhetoric and the kind of vulgar displays of aggression that we’ve seen both online and in the streets of Glasgow from both Unionists and Nationalist factions. Next time you’re attending an Orange parade maybe leave the Rangers merchandise at home, remove the Loyalist symbolism from Rangers flags and banners, try not to marginalise your fellow supporters who don’t care about that kind of stuff really, that’s all. Is that too much to ask? For some, what I’ve asked is probably tantamount to singing rebel songs in a tri-colour but to me it’s just common decency, something that has been eroding away for many years and something that the gallant pioneers probably had in abundance. Try to be a bit more like a Moses McNeil or a Tom Vallance and live the values which built the very thing that we all hold so dear. If we want a positive future for our club we all have to sow the seeds of that starting from now after all, we share much more in common than we do which divides us. I’ll remain a supporter and will try to live by my own code, respecting others right to support the club any way they choose but speaking out against intolerance, negative affiliations and polarizing attitudes. Let’s see if we can build a stronger and more together support from the rubble. The alternative I’m afraid would be a very dark period in Rangers history. It’s only a matter of time before we will be back attempting to compete with Celtic. It may be only a matter of time before we see major boardroom change. Do we really want to be facing these challenges with a support that can’t agree on what colour the sky is? The answer is obvious to me.

RANGERS have denied reports suggesting they have been contacted by the Indonesian Government over the club's involvement with convicted criminal Rafat Rizvi, who is wanted by Interpol. Newspaper reports in Indonesia suggested that the country's deputy attorney general had contacted bosses at Ibrox about the issue, but a spokeswoman for club vehemently rejected this. Government officials are understood to have been astonished to read media reports of Rizvi's meeting with Rangers' chairman of the football board, Sandy Easdale, two weeks ago. Following that meeting, the club claimed that Rizvi was acting as an adviser for a third party, Datuk Faizoull Bin Ahmad. However, Mr Bin Ahmad later denied this. It has prompted action from Indonesia's attorney general, his deputy and their minister of justice and human rights. Deputy attorney general, Andhi Nirwanto, is reported as saying: "We have already approached this club to tell them our views." The country's attorney general, Basrief Arief, also revealed: "We have filed a new request to Interpol in Lyon, France to hunt down the fugitive Rafat Rizvi after reports he was involved in buying a Scottish football club, Rangers FC. "We beg Interpol to look for him and to bring him back to our homeland in order to accept his sentence." However, a spokeswoman for Rangers said: "No approach has been made to the club by the Indonesian Government." UK-born Rizviwas sentenced in Indonesia to a 15-year jail term in absentia and a £775,000 fine for 'stealing assets' following the collapse of the country's Century Bank in 2009. http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/rangers-dispute-receiving-warning-over-rizvi.25386413?

I have actually just seen the result,so I decided to watch the highlights,I know I know!,but FFS Motherwell had a penalty denied at 1-0 up and BROON9 dived for a penalty for the BHEASTS.

....not to panic over wages fears in secret dressing room plea. WALLACE held a clear-the-air meeting with players yesterday to reassure them their wages and future were secure, claiming the £3million raised by the recent share issue had stabilised the Ibrox cash crisis. IBROX chief executive Graham Wallace has held a secret special briefing to reassure the Rangers squad that the future is secure. Wallace addressed the players in the home dressing-room at Ibrox on Friday and insisted there were no imminent financial worries. Ally McCoist’s side scraped a 1-1 draw with Alloa yesterday, with David Templeton hitting a late leveller. But at the clear-the-air meeting Wallace claimed the £3million raised by the recent share issue had stabilised the Ibrox cash crisis. One player said: “Wallace spoke to us on Friday and tried to assure us that the situation was under control. He spoke well and clearly, and told us not to worry about any speculation. “A lot of us don’t really know what is happening off the field. We just try to concentrate on winning games. He insisted the financial situation is under control.” Wallace claimed the picture is rosier than portrayedby worried fans in an attempt to ease fears the club may not be able to afford future wage payments. However, the chief executive’s comments clash with the feelings of supporters’ groups who worry that the club will run out of money by the turn of the year. Former chairman Alistair Johnston has also expressed grave reservations and has urged the Easdale brothers to sell their shares and get out of Ibrox. Revenue is drastically reduced at Rangers this season after only 23,000 season tickets were sold and corporate hospitality is also down. The club have had to borrow a total of £1.5m from wealthy fan George Letham and Sandy Easdale and sell almost 16 million new shares to provide working capital. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-chief-graham-wallace-urges-4297450

Rangers manager Ally McCoist has called for unity at the troubled club after former chairman Alastair Johnston claimed supporters had been let down by the Ibrox board. Speaking to Sky Sports News HQ, Johnston, who left oldco Rangers in May 2011 - nine months before it went into administration and a year prior to it being consigned to liquidation - said: “It’s just been a horrible experience for the fans, they’ve been let down. "I think they’ve been lied to, they’ve been cheated, and made statements to fans that have proved to be untrue or they’ve been deceitful. "You see situations that the only way to clear it up might be administration again. I can see why the fans are concerned about that. "Time is not on Rangers side at this point. Those that have some ability to get it done should at least understand they have to make some concession – take a loss and get out.” Thousands of Rangers supporters are boycotting home games as they continue their attempts to starve out the current board as it struggles to keep the club running as a going concern. Earlier this month Rangers raised just over £3m through a share issue - almost £1m shy of the target set - after the Ibrox board had warned it may not be able to pay creditors. This came shortly after Rangers agreed an out-of-court settlement with former commercial director Imran Ahmad, who had been suing the club for breach of contract. Ahmad had been keen to 'ring fence' £620,000 of Rangers' money ahead of his appeal but settled for 'substantially less' when coming to an agreement with his former employers. But speaking to the assembled media ahead of Saturday's trip to Alloa Athletic, McCoist said: "We want the team to be supported by as many people as possible. "As I have said on many, many occasions the supporters, particularly in the last three years, have been absolutely fantastic in terms of saving our football club. "But I do appreciate they have concerns. I think it would be wrong for me to get involved with any issues they have with other people but all I can ask them, from the team's point of view, is to give us their continued support. "That's all we can ask for and we'll certainly be doing, as I say, our level best to give them results on the park. "I keep saying from our point of view there is nothing we can do in terms of off the field stuff but on the field stuff we can have an affect on. "That's picking teams that can win games and go and win them hopefully with a bit of style and that's what our players and our staff are certainly attempting to do. http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11781/9478547?

...until assurances over club's direction are given. The Rangers Fans Fighting Fund set up in 2012 after administration Group has raised more than £600,000 in donations to date RFFF will only give £500,000 to Rangers if assurances are given Ibrox board must be able to prove they have long-term project set up The Rangers Fans Fighting Fund will not pass on their £500,000 kitty to the Ibrox board until they receive assurances about the club’s future direction. The organisation was set up in the wake of the descent into administration in 2012 and raked in more than £600,000 in donations. Money was used to settle football debts owed to Falkirk and Dunfermline, as well as helping pay for the relaying of the Ibrox pitch. The Fighting Fund is now ready to disband and it’s thought they would prefer the money still in their account to be used for a long-term project at Rangers, such as youth development or the establishment of a club museum. Chairman Andrew McCormick wrote a recent letter to chief executive Graham Wallace detailing 13 questions about current and future policy within the club. Wallace responded by asking to postpone any further discussions until after the completion of the share issue which last week raised £3.13million to stave off an immediate financial crisis. The Fighting Fund have grown increasingly frustrated about the lack of progress in terms of communication and released a statement on Wednesday evening to confirm their position. ‘Mindful of its obligations to the Rangers Family and the money we hold in trust, the RFFF has sought information from the board of Rangers International Football Club plc to enable us to make decisions regarding the future of the RFFF and the disbursement of funds,’ it said. ‘We had a meeting on May 5 this year with Graham Wallace, chief executive of the club. Unfortunately, as he was not accompanied by another member of the board, he felt unable to make any statement on areas of policy which we could communicate to supporters. ‘Since then, we have attempted to engage in dialogue but this has run its course and no further meetings have taken place or have been scheduled. ‘With the passage of time, our chairman, Andrew McCormick, wrote to Mr Wallace on August 28 and received a reply on September 2. ‘Having considered the content of Mr Wallace’s reply at our most recent meeting, the RFFF has decided to retain the funds donated to our safekeeping until we are satisfied that the club is financially stable.’ The stop-gap share issue has removed any doubt about Rangers meeting this month’s payroll and will also enable the repayment of £1.5m in loans to shareholders George Letham and Sandy Easdale. However, the club will need to raise further significant funds to make it through this season, most likely via a wider share issue. The distrust that exists between fans and the current regime has caused damaging falls in matchday income, with just 15,208 turning out for Tuesday night’s League Cup win over Inverness. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2760388/Rangers-Fans-Fighting-Fund-not-500-000-Ibrox-assurances-given.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

...that is the question facing Sons of Struth members as Rangers woes continue The Sons of Struth protest group this week polled its 1,500 members over whether to stage a boycott of Rangers. The controversial move has divided opinion among followers of the Ibrox club. Many believe it is the only way to achieve change at the troubled Glasgow instutition. Others are of the opinion that it will do further damage to a club facing serious financial problems. Matthew Lindsay of SportTimes spoke to Craig Houston of SoS and asked him about their plans... ST: Why are you polling your members about a potential boycott of Rangers? CH: It's quite simple. In the year the Sons of Struth have been in existence, a lot of people have asked us: "Do you want to boycott?" But we have always been of the opinion that it is a big ask to say to a fan they can or cannot go to watch their team. So we haven't spoken about it in any great detail. But over the last two weeks that has changed with the stories about Rafat Rizvi and the stadium naming rights being sold to Mike Ashley for just £1 coming out. The number of people who are asking us, both online and in person, if we would have a boycott, has multiplied. More and more folk have been raising the issue. There are a lot of angry Bears out there. In the last few weeks we have set up a Sons of Struth membership scheme and we now have over 1,500 members. With the feedback we have been receiving, we thought it was fair and democratic to ask our members their views. We have not told anybody to boycott. We are simply asking their views on it. But, unlike the club, we will listen to what they have to say. ST: What are you asking Sons of Struth members? CH: We are asking them three things. Do they think there should be no boycott? Do they think there should be a one-game boycott? Or do they think there should be a boycott for the rest of the season until change is made? We have also asked them about the prospect of boycotting Sports Direct and McGill's Buses. ST: What change would you like to see? CH: We believe if Sandy Easdale leaves Rangers Football Club we would be better placed to attract investment. In an ideal world we would like the entire board to change. But in reality that is not going to happen. It is a big ask to get rid of every director in one fell swoop. We are aware of people who are willing to invest money in the club. We believe the only people stopping them from doing so are Sandy Easdale and those investors whose proxy votes he holds. ST: But Sandy Easdale lent Rangers £500,000 last year to keep them afloat. And he hasn't called in the debt. Where would the Ibrox club be now without him? CH: Probably in exactly the same situation. I am quite sure if he wasn't involved that somebody else would have put up the money. Certainly, he isn't the first director to do so since we went into administration. One ex-director put his own money in to pay the electricity bills when we were waiting for funding to come through. It is not a new thing. But Sandy Easdale is the first person to have loaned Rangers money at a time of need who has required security on his loan. ST: Why are you targeting Sports Direct? CH: Mike Ashley took a deal that any businessman who does not care about Rangers Football Club would have taken. But we do not want Ibrox to be renamed - for a pound or any other sum of money. Ashley could exercise his right to name the stadium the Sports Direct Arena or he could sell the rights to another company in the years ahead. Rather than wait until that happens we will, if it is the wish of our members, be proactive. We will hit him in the pocket. We will give him £2 if he makes the agreement disappear. He will double his money. ST: You have just over 1,500 members. But the Rangers support is hundreds of thousands strong. Who cares what you think? CH: Nobody in the boardroom, anyway! Seriously, though, if you put all of the Rangers supporters' groups together they would still be in a minority. The vast majority of fans are not part of any official organisation. But the Sons of Struth have members who are different types of people and who are different types of personality. So they represent a broad cross section of the Rangers support. If the majority of them want to take action and boycott I think it is fair to presume the majority of supporters want to. When the Sons of Struth was just two people strong we still managed to get over 30,000 people to take part in red and blue card displays at Ibrox. If the consensus among our members is to boycott then we will put it out to the wider fan base. ST: So if you do decide to stage a boycott what exactly will you do? CH: You are putting the cart before the horse there. Our members might come back and say we shouldn't take any action. But it would be foolish to think we have not discussed what to do in the event that the majority of our members back a boycott. We have a few ideas kicking about. ST: Ally McCoist has stated his Rangers team will perform better with a full support behind them. Aren't you concerned a boycott will harm the side on the park? CH: Unlike a lot of Rangers supporters, I was at the League Cup game against Inverness Caledonian Thistle at Ibrox on Tuesday night. There were just over 15,000 in the stadium. So it was at a third of its total capacity. But that didn't seem to affect the players too much. I certainly respect Ally McCoist's view. It would be far better to have a full stadium behind his side. But I don't think fans boycotting games will impact upon the players too much, if at all. ST: Rangers are in a precarious position financially. Won't a boycott do further damage to a club you say you love? CH: If we do decide on a boycott it would not surprise me the club said investors had been put off getting involved due to the actions of the fans. But we have been told that investment is lined up by two separate directors in the last year and we only started talking a boycott in the last couple of weeks. Everything gets blamed on the fans. It is scandalous for anybody to suggest the actions of Rangers fans are detrimental to the club. In the last two years we have filled stadiums week in, week out. We have bought approximately 100,000 season tickets. To suggest we have put the club in peril is laughable. Certain people within the club should have a long, hard look at themselves for suggesting that and questioning the loyalty of fans. If our members feel a boycott is the best course of action to take then it will send a message to the board. It will underline they are not happy with the conduct of a certain individual at the club or with the naming rights to the stadium being sold for £1. We will talk to them in pounds, shillings and pence. Hopefully, they will then take action. ST: What has the reaction to a potential boycott been so far? CH: It has been a mixed bag. A lot of Rangers fans are already boycotting Ibrox of their own freewill. You only have to look at attendances to see that. They are the "not a penny more" camp. They made the decision we are asking our members to consider now before this season kicked off. Others have not gone to games for two or even three years. They want more people to take their stance. They are telling us: "Great. We hope you do this." But some Rangers fans want to go and see their team regardless of who is running the club and what is going on. No matter what the result of our survey is, I would not dictate to any Rangers fan not to go to a game. ST: Why don't you protest in a way that won't damage the club or the team? CH: If somebody can tell me of a protest that is guaranteed to work we will do it. No matter how crazy or bizarre. We have staged marches, have put postcards addressed to the chief executive through the door of Ibrox, have had John Brown hand in an online petition, have held red card protests and blue card protests. If somebody can suggest something else we can do that will have positive results then we will do that. When you go to a game as a football fan you are entitled to air your view. If the right-back has a shocker and scores an own goal then you can have a pop at him. I reserve the right to criticise the board if I think they are not having a good game. Many people feel that giving more money to Rangers just now is akin to giving an alcoholic you love a bottle of gin. http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/rangers/to-boycott-or-not-to-boycottthat-is-the-question-facing-sons-of-struth-180991n.25356637

For all you guys who refuse to support your club,shame on you all. Watching the game over here with a few of my Canadian friends, So this is the mighty Rangers you're always braging about asks one buddy. I'm lost for words,and I am truely embarrassed.(okay we won tonight) but the stadium is practically empty,with no atmosphere. On our recent north American tour,we had sell out crowds,and way more atmosphere(noise buzzing for 90 mins.) I'm not sure what's holding you guys back from picking up your season tickets, but I am sure that you are killing our club.as I said before,SHAME ON YOU ALL.

Hey blue - the RST need to give an announcement about making themselves **** fools - wasting the fans' money @ 20p when their share scheme clearly states it's objective to be owning a significant voice. Rangers First used their members' money @ 20p to support the regime when it was clear to anyone it would fall below that and their members could have owned more today. That is even before we wish to talk not supporting the regime at all. I wonder if Rangers First will give an announcement of their decision.

1. if there is so much unhappiness with the regime? 2. If the vow is to get as big a %age as possible to have a meaningful voice for Buy Rangers, then buying at 20p was never gonna be a good idea.........the market price was always gonna fall as a bigger pool of shares owned exactly the same business - they could have hoovered-up more at any subsequent release with the members' hard-invested. (can the protestors/boycotters/nae-sayers say why they ever thought the RST decision to do this was a good one?). I've asked before, but never had an answer I could believe - why invest in Greenco now instead of waiting with the funds?????

In a relatively short time the changes that have taken place in our country, and at our club, have taken the breath away. Our club has survived after a prolonged and unforeseen crisis but it belongs to strangers now and is almost as remote from supporters as London is from Glasgow. Scotland is on the brink of fundamental and irreversible change and whether it remains within the UK or goes it alone, things will never be the same again. Those who grew up thinking that Rangers and the Union were forever must have been visibly shaken by this cataclysmic turn of events. Identity is important to us, and having already endured a period where our football club almost died, we are now seeing Britishness at the cliff-edge. Coming on top of the shocking collapse of our banking institutions, this is a bizarre period in our lives. It seems that nothing is forever any more, and much of what is dear to us is under threat. Even the Church of Scotland is languishing. It seems to have slipped back in the country's pecking order behind another strand of Christianity, the Catholic Church. Like Rangers, this cornerstone of society has seen better days. When the 21st century chimed in, who expected this? Inside a relatively short time, our world has been turned upside-down. The Church always had a fight on its hands to retain flock, but the Scottish parliament, which was specifically designed to stop nationalism in its tracks, has completely failed to do it. Within the Rangers family, the widespread belief that the club was immortal has been smashed, and the idea that two 300 year-old banks could fail was thought to be too outlandish to be seriously contemplated. Here we stand, days before a vital referendum, and much of what, historically, has been important to us, has either changed, is presently changing, or could change in the not too distant future. The iconic Union Flag, perhaps under a new name, could be redesigned if Scotland becomes independent, and no-one can be sure what currency we are going to use or even if the Queen will still be our monarch in another ten years. The times, they are a changing - and much faster then we ever thought possible. If Rangers gets through this period, I wonder, how much will it have to change to be at ease in this new era?

Sportsmail ‏@ScotMailSport 29m Malaysian businessman claims he does not know fraudster Rizvi. @Mark_Wilson8 on the latest twists and turns at Rangers. In tomorrow's SDM Chris Jack ‏@Chris_Jack89 1m When is an advisor not an advisor? When he's Rafat Rizvi, it seems. Interpol may know who he is but the Rangers Malaysian delegation don't