Search the Community

Written by: Admin Saturday, 29th March 2014 It is with utter disbelief that once again our Club and it's support have been dragged into a series of incidents which has resulted in Vanguard Bears deciding to release a statement to outline where we stand with this RFFF mess. The recent legal action carried out by Sandy Easdale against Craig Houston is well documented, what has enraged the vast majority of donators to the RFFF is that certain factions, for reasons only they can explain, saw fit to first release their intentions on Mark Dingwall's FollowFollow forum, a forum which any supporter of any club can join and have a say, to put to a vote for acceptance of monies being taken from said fund to shore up Craig Houston's Legal Defence against Sandy Easdale, should this have made the courts. This action went against the vast majority of donators wishes, despite certain parties assuring everyone they spoke for the majority of the support. The RFFF was set up to fight our Club's corner against our detractors out there, of which there are many, sadly there are just as many from within the ranks of our support these days who are equally as damaging. Many put their hard earned cash into this fund in good faith, sadly thanks to certain individuals with nothing more than self-promotion and mischief on their minds have sought to put this at risk. The anger among the many donators has resonated around the globe, and no one can blame them for their anger thanks to this latest stunt. The seven committee members who voted to accept this should now find their positions in the RFFF untenable. If they had any dignity and feelings for the way in which their latest stunt has left the support enraged and suitably angered, they would resign with immediate effect. Knowing the background of some of them and their past antics, this would seem highly unlikely. It will now be down to the majority of enraged supporters who donated to the RFFF to demand their resignation, and with this in mind a decision must also be taken regards the next move to protect this money falling into the direction of self-promoters, with their own not-so-hidden agendas, to use as they see fit. It should be noted that the VB representative on this committee voted totally against any funds being utilised for anyone's legal defence funds against Sandy Easdale. We also vow to ensure that this cash will never fall into the hands of any self-appointed fans group leaders or hastily nailed together 'new age' fans groups either. We note also that Mark Dingwall in a recently released post on his own forum is once again imploring the support not to renew their season tickets for next season. We find this utterly astonishing that somone who relies on handouts from other supporters to attend matches - whenever he feels like turning up - should ask of many who hold season tickets, and have done so throughout their lives, to give up theirs so he can further destabilise our club and cause further harm to pursue his own and others agendas. VB once again will urge all of its members and beyond to ignore the rants of this troublemaker and self-promoter and to get fully behind the club in its time of need. Dingwall along with Chris Graham and other self-appointed and opinionated 'fans' speak only for a handful of rabble rousers and charlatans, we are sure the decent and vast majority of the Rangers support will see through their desperation to disrupt and destabilise our club and renew their season tickets when the time comes. This group of Charlatans will NEVER speak for the vast majority of our support, make no mistake about this. The Rangers Board now must act firmly and address those that would seek to harm both our Club's finances and reputation immediately, until that large boil is lanced and removed, the uncertainty and divisions will remain. http://www.vanguardbears.co.uk/statement-on-the-rfff-committee.html

Chris Jack ‏@Chris_Jack89 8h 'Easdales want to be the two main #Rangers powerbrokers - but may not be at Ibrox for the long term' Exclusive in Wed @TheEveningTimes

Robert Marshall and his son, Greg, have been heavily involved in the formation of Rangers First. Rangers First is a fan-led membership vehicle that aims to buy shares and achieve greater supporter involvement in the running of the Ibrox club. Matthew Lindsay of SportTimes met the lifelong Rangers fans and season ticket holders to speak about the ambitious project and their hopes for the future. How did you get involved in Rangers First? RM: I was invited up to the Supporters' Direct Scotland offices in Stirling. So I went and listened to two lads speak and I liked what they had to say. I thought: "If it can help Rangers I will give it a go." It was just about helping the club. As a fan, I was in. Then we had a meeting here (The Louden Tavern, Ibrox Stadium) to see if the body of the kirk, if you like, wanted to take the idea further. Richard Atkinson, a volunteer with Supporters' Direct who has been involved at quite a few clubs over the years, spoke to us. We had around 50 people here. And not one voice was dissenting. I think it is important to state that this is not anti-board or pro-board. It is pro-Rangers and pro- Rangers fans. At the first meeting we said: "Leave your egos at the door. Leave the politics at the door. Let's just see if we can do this." GM: We have people who attend our meetings who are at opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to their attitude to the club board. If it is about individuals then it will fail. It is a vehicle that should be analysed on its own merits. What are the objectives of Rangers First? RM: The first target that Rangers First has is to obtain 5% of shares in the club. GM: That gives you powers in terms of calling a general meeting and getting answers to questions. It is all about getting what is called ACT - authoritative consultative transparency. That basically means the fans having a voice and the club having to listen to and engage with us. This is about the board engaging with the fans so that we know what the situation at the club is and we can all move forward together. It is not about getting a fan on the board. Our members would have to vote on having a representative on the board down the line. It has still to be decided. But, personally speaking, I think we would want a professional representing us. GM: The money the Community Interest Company spends must be to the benefit of the Rangers community. We can't just spend money willy-nilly. Initially, we just want to get shares until we can get the ACT. Once we get that then it will be up to the members to decide what we do with the money after that. We can fund specific projects that are and are to the benefit of the club. BuyRangers already exists. Why is Rangers First necessary? RM: By law we (BuyRangers and Rangers First) have to work together publicly because the schemes have the same principles and the same goals. We want to work together. But I think this vehicle could unite fans. GM: The key point about Rangers First is that it is not partisan. It is trying to unite the small groups into a bigger group. We are saying to them: "You are still allowed to have your differences. This is beyond that." There have been lads at the meetings we have had so far whose personal opinions I do not agree with. But their ethos is right. They genuinely want to put Rangers first. We need to engage with a wider fan base - and especially with fans abroad in countries like Australia and the United States. That is one of the advantages of Rangers First - we can accept payments from abroad. A CIC is to the benefit of the Rangers community and the Rangers community isn't defined by geography. It is what we decide the Rangers community is. And the Rangers community is global. It is basically anybody who considers themselves to be a supporter. They can contribute to it from abroad. The main strength of the CIC is its flexibility. For example, my father and I are going to donate our shares to it. We bought £1,000-worth of shares at the IPO. As well as money you can put shares in. A few of us are going to do that. RM: One of our representatives is going to Hong Kong this week to do a presentation to the Rangers Supporters' Club out there. Richard (Atkinson) also did a presentation with Orsa (Oceania Rangers Supporters Association) recently. We are really trying to engage with the ex-pat fans because it must be really hard for them looking in and not being able to do anything. What has the response to the scheme from Rangers fans been? GM: It is still in the process of being put together. But we have 1,000 members already. That is not bad after two weeks. We are due an update on that any day now. We were at a pub in Lanarkshire a couple of weeks ago at which 10 Rangers Supporters' Clubs were represented. Three of them joined up on the spot and seven took it back to their members. Nobody was against it. When people engage with it they say: "This is a good idea." It genuinely is a good idea. But we do need the support of the fans to make it work. At a small level, we could build up a small shareholding. But if we get larger numbers we will get the transparency the fans want. Has the ongoing financial uncertainty at Ibrox increased the interest in Rangers First? RM: I think it does increase enthusiasm for what we are doing. But I am keen for this not to be seen as a criticism of the board. I am not against them. I know they should not have spent the £22million that was raised at the IPO. But, as far as Rangers First is concerned, we are simply for the club. We are there to help the Rangers support. How many members do you hope to attract? RM: We would like to get to 20,000 to start with. Personally speaking, I think we can get 50,000. Now, I know people may laugh at that. But you had 200,000 at the Uefa Cup final in Manchester in 2008. You also have however many thousand abroad who are all desperate to help the club. I think we can have a worldwide membership of 50,000 within two years. How much does it cost fans to join Rangers First? RM: There are three boxes on the website - http://www.rangersfirst.org - you can join for £5 a month, £10 a month or £18.72 a month. There is also a life membership, Club 1872. That entails a £500 one-off payment. You get nothing out of it other than the satisfaction you have helped Rangers. Plus, as a member you get a vote. GM: If we can get 1,872 signing up for a life membership it will give us enough money to buy circa 5% of the club. Dave King has stated he is prepared to put money into Rangers "along with the fans". Could that funding come from Rangers First? GM: It could. Buying shares as individuals has not given us any dividend so far. Individual fans have roughly 12% of the shares. But we don't have anything to show for that. Buying as a collective, through Rangers First, would. RM: There is also a vehicle you can use. Say, for example, Laxey Partners were prepared to sell their 12% stake in the club, but Rangers First did not, at that time, have the money to buy it. We could say to them: "We will pay you for 4% a year." GM: We could provide them with a dividend and take the proxy for their shares and subsequently buy them a few years down the line. That is not something that necessarily is going to happen. But the CIC is flexible and you can do that. The other thing is we can approach the Rangers fans who currently own 12% of the club and ask them to proxy their votes to us. We would need to collect the signatures of the 4,500 fans who have shares before a general meeting. One of our committees is looking at shareholder engagement. Community ownership failed at St Mirren. How can it work at Rangers? GM: Amongst the clubs where this has been tried it has never been exactly the same. There are technical elements which are similar. St Mirren was a wholly-owned club. They had, for some reason, to buy 52% to make it work. They put in a legitimate bid and Stewart Gilmour, as was his perogative, decided not to accept it. There are successes. Dunfermline got over 1,000 members after they had already been saved. Hearts got over 8,000 fans paying in £15.50 a month. We want to achieve ACT at Rangers. The members will decide where we go from there. How optimistic are you about the future? GM: If this kind of vehicle had been about prior to administration I think it could have had a significant influence on the club. Maybe we wouldn't be in the position we are in now. Having said that, I think it will take off now. It may be a slow burner, but I think it will take off. Whoever puts money in can be assured that it will go towards the betterment of Rangers. I think we are getting there as a result of the meetings. We are starting to unite. Very few people want actual fan ownership. They want fan participation. What we are saying to the club is: "Be accountable to us." That is all we want, accountability. RM: We get nothing other than the satisfaction of helping Rangers and the Rangers community. I am not negative at all. I think Rangers are a sleeping giant. A good analogy would be they are a bear in hibernation. It is time the bear woke up. Get Rangers News Alerts by Email http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/rangers/it-is-time-to-unite-the-small-groups-and-waken-the-sleeping-giant-157872n.23841953

Supporting Rangers has never been quite so difficult. Doesn’t matter if it’s new beneficial club owners from one year to the next, executive directors that are replaced quarter by quarter or turgid on-the-field performances which would struggle to excite the most positive of football fans, it’s not easy to find a bear without a sore head nowadays. This headache soon becomes even worse when you try to examine the minefield that forms our supporter group landscape. Let’s go through them for clarity – take a deep breath: a) The Rangers Supporters Association – the oldest group which represent a range of RSCs all over the world. Nowadays, pretty small, perhaps old fashioned and primarily scoped to deal with ticketing issues you’ll nevertheless find their latest secretary Drew Roberton commenting in the media on a regular basis. b) The Rangers Supporters Trust – an independent group formed in 2003 mainly working towards fan ownership via share purchasing; the RST account for up to 2000 members. Their chair Gordon Dinnie is also often credited in the media on their behalf. c) NARSA and ORSA – two foreign associations which look after the interests of the North American and Oceanic RSCs respectively. It’s not often they’ll be quoted in the media but they do have lots of members with a fair amount of clout behind the scenes. NARSA especially have a solid historic relationship with the club. d) The Rangers Supporters Assembly – the original umbrella group which encompasses all of the above (and more) and was setup around ten years ago. Since then they’ve really struggled to capture the imagination of those they insist they represent (including season book holders). President Andy Kerr remains vocal in the media and usually aligned with a) and b) above. The future of the organisation within the club since the 2012 administration is unclear. e) Sons of Struth (SoS) – a more recent phenomenon is two fans that have been at the forefront of various protests against figures at the club. Most controversially, their spokesperson Craig Houston was threatened with legal action by club director Sandy Easdale for defamatory comments on a social network page. This has prompted much comment which we’ll explore further below. f) Union of Fans – even more recent is this new umbrella group which is made up of a), b), d), e) and the two Ibrox singing sections. Again, this group appear most concerned with the short-term future of club and their statements are geared towards this political aim. Spokesman Chris Graham is a keen blogger on the club and is featured regularly on two popular websites. g) Buy Rangers and Rangers First – not to be outdone, we now have two share vehicles specifically interested in achieving fan ownership via the purchase of shares as part of government backed schemes. The former is organised by the RST while the latter is a new development also promoted by Supporters Direct. At first glance both appear attractive to the interested supporter. h) Rangers Fans Fighting Fund (RFFF) – set up in 2012 this fund was put together to raise money for the club post-administration. Despite having Assembly and official club connotations, the Fund has been blighted by a lack of communication and transparency. Indeed, its website is no longer available and uncertainty remains with respect to the £500,000 surplus in its account. i) The Rest – as well as the TEN groups above, there are a variety of other clusters of fans which one may or may not perceive as ‘formal’ groups. These are often backed up with websites/blogs and can be made up of thousands of shared members; though usually these can be concentrated down into smaller lobbies of key opinion formers from group to group. It’s difficult to recognise all such bodies in a formal sense but there’s no doubting their contribution can be worthy. The above really is quite incredible when put down on paper – even with what I’d concede is a very superficial outline of each group. Quite simply, there’s no wonder confusion and division exists when we have so many groups all competing against each other. Despite regular assurances to the contrary (and so-called umbrella groups speaking for all), the chances of genuine fan unity and convincing representation remain as far away as ever. This is confirmed by the most recent issue which has caused further splits in the support. As touched on above, the Sons of Struth has been one of the most prominent groups of late. Despite only being made up of two individual supporters with no formal constitution, their stadium protests and media profile have resulted in much debate over recent months. Undoubtedly in my view their lobbying of Rangers and its support has contributed to the decision-making of the club hierarchy – even if I may also disagree with their methods and words from time to time. This is especially disappointing when using (or allowing) derogatory language to make their point. As someone who has experienced legal contact in such matters previously, there’s a fine line between fair criticism, unfair falsehoods and petty name-calling. Therefore, it was no surprise to see the main SoS figure Craig Houston served with a legal notice by Sandy Easdale to desist from such alleged behaviour or face a £200,000 court action. At this point the debate became polarised with those generally supportive of the SoS eager to source funds from the hitherto inactive RFFF to help Mr Houston in his defence against Mr Easdale. However, this suggestion seemed at best unlikely and at worst flawed given the RFFF monies were primarily setup to be used for the club only (despite some cash being used to pay small oldco debts such as Dunfermline Football Club in 2012). With that in mind, even those who had sympathy with the SoS predicament felt it was best a separate fund was setup should legal action go ahead. Hence, it was a great surprise to many bears when the RFFF subsequently voted to put the decision to a general vote of fans rather than immediately reject the suggestion. Despite this curiosity it could be argued this was perhaps the most reasonable course of action. After all, while many fans didn’t agree with this non-club appropriation of funds, what should happen if another more popular non-club opportunity arose: should it be declined automatically or debated by the fund contributors? Furthermore, the volunteer RFFF committee were put in place to act on our behalf so it’s difficult to argue with the democratic process being followed – even if the lack of clarity surrounding the decision (and RFFF work generally) is of valid concern. In any case, no matter our thoughts, the reaction has been furious from some quarters with one website and NARSA both calling for the resignation of those who voted for the issue to be decided via a ‘general meeting of fans’. Suffice to say the response to that has been equally negative with all sorts of insults permitted in some online communities. Once again the fan-base is split – often based on their website or group of choice rather than actually examining the issue without prejudice. Indeed it’s this kind of division that is now becoming very difficult to ignore when looking at most issues related to the club. Rather than such subjects being analysed with balance and in unison, we have some coming to most debates with a pre-determined opinion already in place. Quite simply if person/site/group A says one thing, you can be sure person/site/group B will say another and vice-versa. Such disagreement may actually be healthy in some respects but when it is increasingly accompanied by the kind of nonsense we usually see for those hostile to our club then such puerile debate just becomes counter-productive. Is it any wonder our club and fan-base have been taken advantage of in recent years when we can’t agree on the most basic of issues? Unfortunately, there’s no easy solution to this ongoing tribal warfare. Existing ‘umbrella’ groups have tried and failed for many years to capture the imagination of the widespread support while those not already interested in such ‘political’ matters won’t be swayed by a long list of fan organisations they may struggle to identify with. In addition, resignations, fall-outs and abuse appear to tarnish any good work such groups do. Meanwhile, a club fighting with itself on a month-to-month basis appears to have neither the will nor the way (not to mention the funds) to put in place a new scheme which can accommodate fans of every possible background. Yet, in my opinion, if such a group is to be successful, from the club it must come. It needs that formal official status, along with the backing of high-profile relevant figures, to take fan representation from social clubs and websites to the boardroom. However the only certainty is that when such a proposal does see the light of day, it may be strangled at birth by a minority of people who will always insist upon throwing out the baby with the bathwater for the most ridiculous of arguments. In the meantime, the moderate (and usually silent) majority can only hope for better. And until we concentrate ten bizarrely disparate groups into one then that day may be a long time coming. What part will you play in achieving that positive change: are you part of the problem or the solution? Will the real Rangers support please stand up?

Genuine question because I think Dave King could get blamed for something he is not totally responsible for. I honestly believe, after speaking to hundreds of other fans, that they have had enough of the complete and utter dross being served up on the park. Nothing to do with boardroom stuff.

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=2986&newsID=13171&newsCategoryID=1 In response to recent speculation and comments made by Dundee United officials, the Scottish FA is compelled to clarify the club’s ticketing allocation for the forthcoming William Hill Scottish Cup semi-final between Rangers and Dundee United at Ibrox. At the pre-operations meeting held on Tuesday, 11th March, Dundee United were made an initial offering of 11,063 tickets, allocated in the entirety of the Broomloan Road Stand, the Govan West corner and a section of the Govan Stand Front and Rear. The number was offered on the basis of Dundee United’s ticket sales for recent semi-finals. For last year’s semi-final against Celtic at Hampden Park, with a 12.45pm kick-off, Dundee United received an allocation of 10,686 tickets and sold 6783. For the 2010 semi-final against Raith Rovers at Hampden Park, with a 3pm kick-off, Dundee United were allocated 11,806 tickets and sold 9969. The Dundee United official present stated that in order to ensure a maximum attendance, in the first instance the club would not require the additional allocation in the Govan West corner, Front and Rear and, instead, would prefer the Broomloan Road stand, capacity 8012. He was invited to revert to the club for confirmation but declined. Notwithstanding the present allocation of 8012 – as requested by the club – Dundee United retain first option on the Govan West corner, and a section of the Front and Rear, an additional 3051 seats. Should the club a) request that additional allocation and b) sell it, then there remains the opportunity to extend the allocation subject to agreement between the clubs and the relevant police and stewarding advice.

..........gets Rangers fans all fired up to renew Old Firm rivalries. IT was a terrific quote. Nauseating so far as its sentiment was concerned, but a marvellous sound-bite never the less. It was the one Dave King delivered about some Rangers fans who couldn’t, or wouldn’t, put shoes on their children’s feet because they wanted to use the money to buy their season ticket for Ibrox. This was portrayed as evidence of the extraordinary degree of passion some fans have exhibited for the club. It’s nothing of the kind. Putting football before your family’s needs is not and never will be a badge of honour. Indeed it is a source of everlasting shame and there shouldn’t be the slightest hint of dubiety about that. But Dave wasn’t indulging in some emotional flight of fantasy, dreamed up one night while he was lying on a sun lounger as dusk fell on his exotic garden and swimming pool in Johannesburg and thinking about his place of birth. These people really do exist. I was once abroad in the company of an old friend who had a long and illustrious career with Celtic. We had been covering one of the club’s European ties and having a post-match refreshment before turning in when he was accosted by a fan. One who proudly told him his children hadn’t had a holiday in any of the previous three years so that he could travel the continent to support his team. The supporter had managed to turn denial where his family was concerned into some kind of imagined virtue He may have expected the Hoops hero to offer heartfelt words of praise but it was all the ex-player could do to maintain self-restraint after the interloper had invaded his company to spout his ?nonsense. Here’s the thing, though. ?Rangers’ survival as a viable concern is essential to the future well-being of the game in this country. The written media have done their usual first-class job of turning Celtic’s latest title-winning exercise into more column inches than would have been devoted to the Second Coming. But the reality is we need, heaven help us, the return of the rivalry that brings out those whose distorted sense of family values is an affront to decency. That also means unleashing the younger element upon us as they represent another part of the baggage that comes with re-establishing the Old Firm. Rangers and Celtic will play an Under-20 league match at Murray Park on Tuesday afternoon. That’s because the number of police who would’ve been required to enforce security if the game had been played ?in public view would’ve been financially inadvisable in times of austerity. It would have been interesting for normal folk to monitor and contrast the clubs’ youth development set-ups. Particularly at a time when 17-year-old Liam Henderson is scoring in a match against Partick Thistle that confirmed Celtic as league champions. But the youngsters’ match would have been hijacked, as those in authority well know, by the flare throwers, the singers of questionable songs and the rest of the misfits who would leave a family audience in fear of their safety. The match would’ve become an irrelevance to both sets of fans while they hurled sectarian insults at each other. It was the business of using rivalry as a basis for thuggery that put King’s policeman father off football when Dave was growing up. But one day, and it’s not too far off now, we’re going to have to deal with a first-team Old Firm derby that troubles society at large while helping enhance the product known as the SPFL Premiership. King knew exactly the right button to press when he started his propaganda campaign to win control of Rangers by instilling the fear of Celtic winning Ten in a Row in the minds of his club’s fans. And that’ll prey on their minds longer than Rangers’ captain Lee McCulloch’s talk about next Sunday’s Ramsdens Cup Final being a “massive” game. The match with Raith Rovers is a by-product of a club fallen on hard times. Nothing more and nothing less. Only those who would contemplate denying the weans shoes to buy a season ticket will think otherwise. Now the Ibrox board have countered King by saying that fans will threaten Rangers’ viability as a going concern if they decide to withhold season-ticket money The fans are now trapped between two sides, each trading on their innermost fears. And gullibility. I was speaking to a fan on the radio the other night who told me Celtic qualifying for the Champions League group stages next season would be a greater achievement than winning the European Cup in 1967. It was breathtaking nonsense, and a moment to ponder whether some fans actually understand history. Celtic were the first British, not Scottish, winners of the competition. Idolising Neil Lennon's perfectly all right, but distorting the truth while tarnishing Jock Stein's memory isn't. Neil would surely be the first to agree. No-one's dismissing his achievements. But there must be a sense of perspective.

Read that the equivalent of McDowall and Durrant at Man Utd are on less than here? Pray tell me this is not true?

.....for the Premiership title in 2015-16 Ally McCoist last night declared that anything less than Rangers challenging for the Premiership title in season 2015-16 will be unacceptable. The Ibrox club will compete in the Championship next season having won back-to-back titles and are hot favourites to pave their way back to the big time with a third successive crown. However, the source of the club’s long-term financing remains shrouded in uncertainty, with would-be investor Dave King so far being kept at arms’ length by the board. King’s willingness to underwrite the £50million he believes is needed to compete with Celtic has chimed with a fan base who are behind his plan to only release season-ticket money to the board if certain conditions are met. McCoist yesterday expressed his hope that dialogue could yet see all parties arrive at a satisfactory solution. But, come what may, the Rangers manager refutes the notion that the aim of a first season back in the top flight could be consolidation. ‘No, it’s not an option,’ he stated. ‘We know it goes with the territory here, you are expected to win the vast majority of games and you’re expected to get promoted and get back in the top league as quickly as possible. ‘So far, these boxes are getting ticked although there have been one or two hiccups along the way, which we always said there would be.’ Asked if he intended building a team capable of challenging at the first time of asking, McCoist continued: ‘Yes, it’s important. We’ve never made up the numbers at all. No matter what league we’ve played in or where we’ve played, we’ve always believed we’ve had a chance of winning the competition and I don’t see any reason why that should change. ‘In fact, it shouldn’t change and it can’t change.' On Thursday, Rangers chairman David Somers issued a stern warning that the proposed season ticket stand-off could cause untold damage to the club. Speaking after the publication of the interim financial results, Somers said the withholding of money could risk the club’s ability to ‘continue as a going concern.’ McCoist has repeatedly taken a neutral stance in the ongoing spat between the board, King and the fans, but yesterday he admitted to having serious concerns about what Somers had said. ‘Of course that would worry me, as a supporter and as a manager,’ he added. ‘That would be a concern for everybody who has anything to do with the club. If the chairman feels that has to be said, it is probably an unpleasant reminder to everybody involved at the club that we have a long, long way to go.’ Notwithstanding the possible return of King to Ibrox, McCoist believes he and the board are on the same page as far as a shared vision for the future of the club is concerned. ‘I’ve said all along that we need investment to get back, there’s no doubt about that,’ he continued. ‘Graham (Wallace, the chief executive) and the board have said that, too, so it’s good that everybody feels like that and shares that opinion. ‘Where the investment comes from we will have to wait and see. ‘In the meantime, it’s good everybody agrees investment is needed. ‘For us to get back to where we want to eventually be, we will need investment. ‘We lost millions when we lost all those players. To get back to the standard of where we were, investment is needed.’ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2591972/McCoist-sights-set-challenging-Celtic-Premiership-title-2015-16.html

Didn't look good and does not make good reading either ... Sky Sports News ‏@SkySportsNews 32 Min. Hull expect goalkeeper Allan McGregor to miss the rest of the season with a kidney injury #SSN

King: My father was so anti-football he didn't want me to be a Rangers fan Dave King can afford to laugh now. About the round of golf with Arnold Palmer which ended up costing him £20million. His investment in Rangers was never planned. Travelling with Gary Player from South Africa to a pro-am event in Hawaii early in 2000, the intention was to spend some time holing putts. ‘I played with Gary in the pro-am on the Tuesday,’ King recalls. ‘But on the Wednesday he was going to look at a golf course he was designing. So he arranged for me to play with Jack Nicklaus instead. ‘After that round we then had dinner with Alistair Johnston, the future Rangers chairman. He was a good mate of David Murray. ‘He was a big Rangers man like myself and was telling me how the club needed cash and so on. He was trying to sell it to me. Asking what it might take. ‘So I said to him: “You know what would be really nice? I’ve played with Gary on Tuesday, I’ve played with Jack on Wednesday, could you fix it for me to play with Arnold Palmer tomorrow in the pro am?” ‘Alistair could do that. He arranged the pro-am. So I played golf with Gary Player on the Tuesday, Jack Nicklaus on the Wednesday and Arnold Palmer on the Thursday. I might be the only amateur golfer in the world who has ever done that. But golfing with the big three was a costly business. It ended up costing me a £20m investment in Rangers.’ Some still suspect King got most of his money back. Amongst those opposed to his plans for a proposed new Ibrox investment of between £30m and £50m, a report from a South African business journal in November 2008 has now become gospel. Unverified, the report claimed King received £18m in income from Rangers over the 12 years of his previous involvement. It was seized on by the PR man once paid to do the bidding of the current board. Indignant, King tells Sportsmail: ‘Listen, I did not get one penny of that money back. SARS taxed me on my total income. And obviously your income includes what you spent it on. ‘When I invested that £20m I didn’t even have a tax problem. That came later. ‘There was some mischief put out there about me getting £18m back or something. Nonsense. ‘That PR guy Jack Irvine was putting out some stories to discredit me for whatever reason. It was absolute rubbish. The truth is that I put in £20m and lost it all. ‘I didn’t even get my 3p in the pound or whatever I was due back. So when people say I don’t put my money where my mouth is I point to that. ‘I genuinely put in £20m, I genuinely lost it. And I am still coming back for more.’ That first investment finally disappeared down a black hole when Rangers entered administration in February 2012. He threatened afterwards to sue Murray for the loss on the grounds of ‘non disclosure’ over the club’s true financial state. Asked if he is still pursuing the cash, he says: ‘I continue to work on that for myself and for all the fans who lost money.’ Despite it all, he now wants to invest more money in Rangers. This newspaper first broke the news of King’s plans for a fresh investment last April. A year later he is still trying, saying this week the club need up to £50m over the next four seasons and that he would underwrite a new share issue himself if he had to. The sums involved are eye-watering; a world removed from a modest childhood in Castlemilk. One of seven children – four boys and three girls – his policeman father Tom King witnessed the corrosive, disproportionate impact football had on Saturday nights in Glasgow. ‘My father wasn’t at all keen on me becoming a Rangers supporter. He was a Glasgow policeman and because of that he resented the whole football scene in Glasgow. ‘He was actually very anti-football. When we were kids growing up he was very vocal on his dislike of the bigotry in football. The police in Glasgow at that time saw it as a basis for thuggery. ‘He saw what it did from a crime and disorder point of view in Glasgow. And as a family we were taught to reject the whole bigotry aspect surrounding football. That has stayed with me through the years. ‘My father took me to that first game reluctantly, but I clearly remember seeing Ritchie, Shearer and Caldow in the classic Scot Symon team. It would have been 1965 or so and I was 10. ‘Thereafter there were so many players I admired. Greig, McKinnon, Ralph Brand, Jimmy Millar. But it was never about individuals. It was more about the club. ‘If you are a Rangers fan you go beyond players. It’s about the club, the institution – it’s what you are brought up with. It’s just in your blood. It’s in your DNA.” The Kings were amongst the first inhabitants of the new tenement flats in Castlemilk, the south side housing scheme developed by the old Glasgow Corporation to provide affordable overspill housing for the Gorbals. The homes were new, the amenities non existent. ‘I don’t think we ever regarded ourselves as well off in any way. You understand when you are a kid that a lot of kids are better off than you. That becomes a motivation in a way. ‘I wanted to do something different with my life. I didn’t want to feel like that. ‘It would be easy to say growing up in Castlemilk as one of seven in modest circumstances drove me on in life. But it was there within me anyway. ‘Of course, there was a certain sense of growing up and thinking: “I don’t want my kids to live like this.” There certainly was an ambition in me and in everything I did to progress from humble origins, if you want to put it like that.’ Uniquely for a boy growing up in Castlemilk, King attended a private, fee-paying school. ‘I was certainly helped by going to Allan Glen’s,’ he admits. ‘Everyone around me went to the local schools and I suppose I was unusual. ‘The view of my mum at the time was that she would do anything to get me in. ‘But I was lucky because I got a bursary. I sat an exam and after being awarded the bursary I was excused fees. But my parents thought it was so important that even if I hadn’t got a bursary, I would have been sent in any event.’ He left school and started his working life with Glasgow’s Weir Pumps. He was transferred to South Africa with very little cash in 1976. ‘I planned to spend a few years here, make some money and return to Scotland. But one thing led to another.’ He married wife Ladina and the couple had four children. After spells with the Post Office Reserve Bank, King set up a management consultancy and took a golf membership at the Dainfern Country Club. His tax problems began when he established Specialised Outsourcing in 1993/94 to efficiently handle funds on behalf of the government for a share of the profits. He acquired conspicuous wealth and in 2000 – the year he also invested in Rangers – he bought a painting by artist Irma Stern at auction for £100,000. Reading of the purchase, Mr Charles Chipps, a special investigator of the South African Revenue Service, decided to check on King’s tax payments and discovered a declared taxable income of just £4,000. His discovery triggered an infamous 13-year battle between King and SARS. One which placed him on the front pages of South African newspapers and saw his overseas assets frozen. When Rangers entered administration two years ago, he could barely buy a bus pass in the UK, let alone a football club. The damaging dispute finally ended last year with a £39.3m settlement. Shares in King’s company Micromega immediately rose in value by 500 per cent and – on paper at least – he has made all his money back. Regretful he allowed things to drag on so long, he admits the settlement is a weight off his mind. He can now focus his attentions – and cash - back on Rangers. ‘The SARS business was a huge burden - one that has finally been removed. It was onerous. Very onerous given the extended time and the tying up of most of my capital during this period.’ There remains one lingering stain. As part of the plea bargain, King accepted culpability for 41 breaches of section 75 of the South Africa Income Tax Act. Each charge offered the choice of paying a £5,000 fine or spending two years in custody. King opted to pay the total fine of £210,000 rather than spend 82 years in jail and maintains the offences are not serious enough to breach the SFA’s fit and proper person regulations. He remains ‘certain’ he will pass the test, but before he reaches that stage King must find a route back into the Rangers boardroom. He rejects criticism that he has yet to put his money where his mouth is. That he has talked a good game without buying any shares. ‘It’s not unfair to say I haven’t put my money where my mouth is,’ he insists, ‘it’s just plain wrong. ‘I repeat, I’m the man who put £20m in and didn’t get a penny back. ‘I don’t even want to put new money in. If the Rangers board can raise £20m without me than that’s the first prize. ‘I would prefer it and my family would certainly prefer it – because that’s the trust funds for my four kids taken care of. ‘But what I am saying is that if there is a fresh share issue I am willing to do it. ‘It’s quite simple really. Where Rangers are concerned, I am the last resort guy. No more than that.’ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2591251/Dave-King-My-father-anti-football-didnt-want-Rangers-fan.html#ixzz2xDdtF8hl

“We note today’s interim results which show a drop in revenue excluding the Sports Direct deal, a failure to address operating costs during the period to December 2013 and doubts over the cash position of the club going forward. The most important issue, and one which highlights the obvious need for substantial investment, surrounds the cash position of the club both at this present moment and at the AGM last December. The CEO, Graham Wallace, stated at the AGM that there was “sufficient cash in the business to fund the ongoing needs of the club in the near term”. It appears from both these interim results and the recent loan of £1.5m from shareholders that this statement at the AGM may have been somewhat misleading. It is unclear exactly how it could have been stated by the board at that time, with any confidence, that there was sufficient cash even for the short term and we would like Mr Wallace and Mr Somers to explain this as a matter of urgency. We would also like to address Mr Somers comments on the consequences of the possible withholding of season ticket money. We are certain that not a single one of the 6500 fans, and counting, who have so far shown interest in the idea of a season ticket trust, have any wish to withhold any money from the club. However, it would be foolhardy for fans to once again commit their money without any kind of transparency or security. The fans have shown outstanding loyalty and commitment in the past two years, both via the IPO and two sets of unprecedented season ticket sales, but we have seen that loyalty thrown back in our faces as money has been squandered. Mr Somers acknowledges how vital season ticket cash is and the need for the board to build trust with the fans. What better way to do that than to give security over vital club assets - Ibrox and Auchenhowie - to the fans in return for that much needed income? The board have publicly stated that they have no plans to use these assets for any other security, or a sale and leaseback, and so there is no impediment to them agreeing to the terms of release. For the avoidance of doubt, there is no plan to drip feed season ticket money on a game by game basis. The proposal is simply that season ticket money is paid in a lump sum, prior to the start of the season, in return for security over club assets. This will allow fans to be safe in the knowledge that no matter what happens the club’s assets will be in good hands. We also note Mr Somers statement about fan engagement but, since announcing the trust, we have had no contact from the board. Given the obvious and urgent need for investment, we would once again urge the board to accept Dave King’s offer of £30m so that both the fans and the club can move forward in harmony.” http://www.unionoffans.org/statements/ctbbhmeyvnm6jucnohohhbl3jce9ay

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/qa-rangers-chief-executive-graham-wallace-on-finances-the-review-and-the-clubs-future.1396009021 Can somebody copy and paste.

Looks like he's going to be replaced by Neil Warnock at Forest. Wouldn't require any compensation now...

Taken from FF The RFFF voted today that in the event of litigation against Craig Houston, arising from content on the Sons Of Struth Facebook page, a proposal to provide financial support will be taken to a general meeting of fans.

There are real doubts about Rangers' ability to continue as a going concern THE chairman issued the dire warning, which he claims is a direct result of fan proposals to drip-feed season-ticket money to the club via a trust fund. RANGERS chairman David Somers has admitted that "material uncertainty" over season ticket income may cast doubt about the club's ability to continue as a going concern, as the Ibrox outfit announced its cash reserves fell by more than £17.5million last year. Rangers announced a loss of £3.7million in the seven months up to the end of 2013, an improvement of 50 per cent on the same period 12 months earlier. But they had just £3.5million cash on December 31, despite bringing in £22million in an initial public offering (IPO) share issue just over a year earlier. The main Rangers supporters' groups recently raised the possibility of drip-feeding season-ticket money to the club via a trust fund amid continuing distrust over the board's ability and intentions. And the club, who recently arranged loans totalling £1.5million from two shareholders, admits that casts a shadow over the club's immediate future. In the interim report, Somers said: "This possibility results in the existence of a material uncertainty which may cast doubt about Rangers' ability to continue as a going concern and therefore that the company may be unable to realise its assets and discharge its liabilities in the normal course of business. "Nevertheless, after making the appropriate enquiries and considering the uncertainties referred to above, the directors have concluded that there is a reasonable expectation that the company has adequate resources to continue in operational existence for the foreseeable future. Accordingly, the directors continue to adopt the going concern basis in preparing the interim results." Earlier this month, the Union of Fans, which incorporates all of the main Rangers supporters' groups, urged fans to put season ticket money into a trust, from which it would only be released to the club when assurances were met, including security over Ibrox and the Murray Park training ground. The club's independent auditor, Deloitte, stated the uncertainty might cast "significant" doubt over the club's ability to continue as a going concern. The club have made assumptions including that they "modestly" increase their season-ticket numbers, which stood at 36,000 in League One, next season and beyond. The improvement in financial performance is in large part down to increased retail sales with the club reporting its partnership with Sports Direct was worth £4.8million in the seven months, up from £900,000. Revenue was up 38 per cent to £13.2million, however operating expenses also increased slightly to £16.8million. Staff costs were down £800,000 to £7.5million but the club pointed out that £500,000 was spent on severance payments. Somers and chief executive Graham Wallace came in towards the end of the period and the latter is conducting a 120-day review of the business, and they explained some of the spending that meant cash reserves fell from £21.2million in a year. Somers said: "The majority of the money raised from the IPO in December 2012 had been spent by June 2013 on IPO related fees and commissions, severance payments, the purchases of the Albion car park and Edmiston House and to fund ongoing operating losses. "The club incurred a further £7.7m of cash expenditure in the six months to 31 December 2013, funding additional fixed asset purchases and operating losses. In total the club has spent over £4m on fixed assets since the IPO that are not yet generating incremental revenue." Somers admitted operating costs had been unsustainable. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/fears-future-ibrox-chairman-david-3290753

MARCH 25, 2014 UNION OF FANS STATEMENT 25TH MARCH 2014 by Union of Fans The Union of Fans (UoF) is delighted that Dave King has publicly stated his impressive plans for Rangers via a number of newspaper interviews. His vision for the club is extremely welcome as is the personal financial commitment he is willing to make. Like all Rangers fans, Dave King and UoF want to see the club back operating to high standards on and off the pitch and in the boardroom. We firmly believe that the involvement of Dave King is the best chance of those standards being attained in the short, medium and long term. It was clear from our discussions with him last week that the £30m+ Mr King is willing to invest is crucial to take the club back to a competitive level and improve the infrastructure and facilities. The club has been neglected, that cannot continue. Only once this investment has been made will Rangers be able to live within its means, something we all want for the longer term future. Until then Dave King has made it clear he will do what is necessary to get Rangers back to where we belong and where we can be self-sustainable. It is also important that Dave King chose to make his views public to the widest possible range of Rangers supporters by conducting interviews with four different newspapers with a combined readership of over 2M people. There can no longer be any criticism of him only speaking privately to supporters groups, though he has pledged to continue that important dialogue in order that the Union of Fans can keep people updated on events. We would now ask the board to indicate publicly, as a matter of urgency, whether they are prepared to accept Dave King’s offer of massive investment. The ball is firmly with the Rangers PLC board, in particular with Chief Executive Officer, Graham Wallace and Chairman, David Somers. Dave King has put a figure on what Rangers need and has shown his commitment to, and ambition for, the club he has supported all his life. Do Mr Wallace and Mr Somers agree with his figures and if they do, how do they propose to raise this large sum of money without Dave King? These are extremely serious corporate matters, therefore they are matters for the PLC board and not for any small, minority shareholder who is not a member of that board and who has no such high level corporate experience. The corporate reputations of Mr Wallace and Mr Somers now rest on their next move. We also note with dismay that Rangers director Sandy Easdale is continuing to pursue what we consider to be a confrontational and frivolous course of legal action against Sons of Struth. We would ask him to remember what it means to be a Rangers director and act accordingly if he wishes to enjoy the privileges of that position.

keith jackson ‏@tedermeatballs @kevineasson i hear they will be announced tomorrow keith jackson ‏@tedermeatballs 22m Celtic on the brink of celebrating another title. Rangers on the brink of announcing more enormous losses. Interesting 24 hours ahead.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/keith-jackson-its-check-mate-3286265#.UzKOhg6Tggg.twitter

Alasdair Lamont ‏@BBCAlLamont 1m Rangers transfer Laxey £1m loan to fan and shareholder George Letham at a reduced interest rate.

http://www.vanguardbears.co.uk/a-shameful-state-of-play.html

Exclusive Dave King interview in @TheEveningTimes and @TheHeraldPaper tomorrow. A must read for #Rangers fans Can't give too much away mate sorry. £m are mentioned for the first time and good stuff on his motivation for getting involved. From Chris Jack on twitter. For those interested.

http://www.gersnet.co.uk/index.php/latest-news/230-markers-and-moonbeams If there is one aspect of the Sir David Murray era that perhaps defines his time in control, it was that of the moonbeam. From the infamous 'for every fiver Celtic spend, we'll spend a tenner’ line to belated and failed promises in terms of investment as his custodianship stumbled towards being ‘duped’ by Craig Whyte; over time Rangers fans gradually realised that the success Murray brought to the club came at a great price. A cost we’re still paying for now. However, if there’s been one positive of the awful last few years, it’s that more and more Rangers fans have become cynical of the bolder claims made by the long line of chancers that attach themselves to the club. Sure, we all want to believe tall tales about tie ups with successful American sports franchises or argue we can secure impressive sponsorship deals with mobile-phone companies but I genuinely think, deep down, we now appreciate modern day Scottish football just doesn’t bring such opportunities. Of course European football may occasionally raise our profile via Champions League participation but the ‘big fish, small pond’ metaphor has never been more accurate – as much as our rivals across the Clyde may pretend otherwise. Nevertheless Rangers remain a big draw for its supporters. Incredible numbers of fans have stayed with the club through administration and our journey back from the (old) Third Division. Indeed to retain 36,000 season ticket holders during this period is something our usual critics must lose sleep over and it’s this annual loyalty which will always form the back-bone of the club’s financial future. This is why the art of the moonbeam became important as SDM started to realise his ambitions soon outweighed his ability; not just in terms of running the business successfully but being able to fund it. Quite simply our season money is the only substantial financial given each year for the club. Ticketus and Charles Green certainly knew this – even if both may have suffered somewhat since. Unfortunately, despite this seasonal show of fiscal fan passion, it remains clear the club will continue to struggle to be viable without the correct business plan and properly qualified directors. That’s why Whyte quickly failed, Green and Ahmad soon departed while other periphery figures also moved on; leaving us with the current stand- off we have now. In one corner we have the incumbent board defending itself from criticism via a rather over-long four month buffers while in the other we have Dave King applying pressure via a £50million media marker. Or is it a moonbeam? The last sentence is a bit harsh of course. After all, if anyone suffered more than most from SDM’s charismatic efforts to raise investment, it was Dave King who didn’t see much return for his £20million investment nearly 14 years ago. Ergo, when people like King talk about such matters, we need to listen and there’s no doubt his suggestions of investment levels are probably correct if Rangers are to ever genuinely challenge Celtic again at the top of Scottish football. With that in mind, I’m certainly glad he’s applying pressure to Graham Wallace ahead of his much-vaunted 120-day plan. Anything less than the £30-50million King speaks of would now look insufficient so the buck is definitely with the existing board over the coming weeks. Their overdue April reaction will be fascinating. However, all this should and must go beyond superficial sound-bites about ‘war-chests’ and/or budget cuts. We’ve heard all this before. What Rangers fans need, more than anything, are demonstrable plans of action. I, for one, don’t doubt the intentions of someone like Dave King but just because he’s a Rangers man or that he’s invested previously doesn’t mean we can have blind faith in his ideals. To obtain that faith, we need as much from him as we’re asking of Graham Wallace: namely a sound business plan which enables to club to be successful but self-sufficient in the longer term. Clearly, an element of risk and initial investment will be required to compete with Celtic in the coming years but how does this square with ensuring the club remains secure for the future? For example, wouldn’t it be dangerous to invest tens of millions into the playing squad if there are doubts over the management team and the lack of scouting? At what level is this risk acceptable without compromising the club’s ongoing progress? Now, all these questions are as valid for the current board as they are for Dave King. Yet, a couple of weeks since my two similar articles on TRS, we’re no closer to seeing genuine answers – widespread media Q&A’s or not. That remains a source of concern so we can only hope all these figureheads are aware of what we expect ahead of the next few weeks. Rangers fans undeniably want to invest in our future but not if it’s just repeating the same old mistakes of the past. It isn’t a surprise that some fans are considering their options so who will be the first to show that they have learned the lessons of the last 15 years? Markers may well be fine but moonbeams certainly are not.

IF, LIKE me, you’re proud of the Scottish Cup being the oldest national football trophy in the world you might have issues with it copying other inferior johnny-come-lately tournaments. I’m thinking of the screeching pop music, the balsa-wood stage for the winners, the celebratory bouncing, even the foliage in the managers’ lapels. You were first, Scottish, do your own thing. Don’t be bullied by the Champions League into moving from sacred Saturday to Sunday. And – favourites of this column – let’s bring back the massed pipes and drums and the Alsatian obstacle-course. Some of those changes are modernisms and maybe we have to move with the times. But every year our clubs are writing the cup’s history, a dutiful task like that of the trophy’s engraver. And when future generations of football students and anoraks open up Wikipedia at season 2013-14, what will they see? That Rangers played their semi-final at Ibrox, their home ground. Seriously, that has to be a joke. What an all-consuming tale this is. Truly, our cup runneth over. There’s stupidity, arrogance, incompetence, intransigence, fatuousness, our-club’s-bigger-than-your-club juvenalia, delusions of grandeur, you name it. Let’s deal first with the delusions of grandeur. The Scottish Football Association, who announced as far back as last October that Ibrox would host both last-four ties due to Hampden being out of action, have in the midst of the rammy tried to cite Euro precedent. The Champions League final venue is confirmed a whole season in advance, they point out, and you’ve got to forward-plan. Who are they kidding? Without wishing to contradict myself, the Scottish Cup is not the Champions League. It does not need six months of planning. George Peat, the former SFA president, recalled seasons in the League Cup where the Scottish league would have less than a week to arrange all-ticket ties. Peat said that while the SFA would have signed a contract for Ibrox he couldn’t understand why they didn’t have a plan B in the event of Rangers reaching the semis. Dundee United chairman Stephen Thompson reckoned he had a pretty good idea why: money. All current SFA chief executive Stewart Regan, pictured right, was interested in was the commercial benefits, he claimed. “Obviously looking after the sponsors is more important than it being a neutral venue.” Certainly Ibrox getting the semis and Celtic Park having the final sounds very SFA: a divvying up in the grand old tradition. But I do find it astonishing that no one in a blazer thought the cup could pan out like this. If no one did, requiring the plan B that Peat was talking about, then you have to wonder what kind of brains trust is running the game. The SFA have tried to pass the buck for being aware that Ibrox was the home of a club who potentially had semi-final aspirations back to the rest of Scottish football, saying that any concerns should have been raised at the time of the decision. It is here that the story becomes a bit murkier. You can find two different Dundee United responses. Yes, we had concerns and raised them then. No, we didn’t because it would have been presumptuous to suggest we’d be involved in the semis. But this isn’t the crucial aspect, and the second response would have been perfectly acceptable. The duty for organising one of the oldest club football competitions in the world, and avoiding the complete and utter embarrassment of one team having home advantage in their favour to reach the final, rests entirely with the SFA and it is both laughable and chilling that they appear not to have anticipated this could happen, or had a contingency plan, or were unprepared to change the venue when, as Peat says, they still had the best part of a month to do so. The bickering between Rangers and Dundee United was caused by the SFA, although the individual reactions of the clubs were fairly predictable. United laying into the game’s rulers, angry at the SFA’s tone, arguing that given the number of talented young footballers they were producing for the greater good they didn’t deserve such treatment. And Rangers, in the squabble over how many tickets United should receive, labelling their fans glory-hunters. Ally McCoist chose this moment to boast about Rangers’ bigger support. The last time United had been in a semi, against Celtic, Hampden was only half-full. His club’s fans didn’t just turn out for semis, McCoist said, but all games. Not true, of course – Ibrox wasn’t packed for the quarter-final against Albion Rovers – but the basic point hardly needed to be made: a lot of people like to watch Rangers do their special thing. The issue then became ludicrous with McCoist claiming no special benefits for his men from playing in the distinctive Govan air, with yon majestic Broomloan Stand rising up behind them and the classic criss-cross detailing by the great stadium architect Archibald Leitch so known to the team, like the tattoo on the back of a hand. “There’s very little to be taken from home advantage the higher you go in football,” he argued, before being quickly backed up by his striker Jon Daly. Sorry guys, but you’re talking tripe. Daly would not be saying “I don’t see Ibrox as being an advantage” if he was still a Dundee United player and McCoist would not be dismissing the venue as being of no significance if Rangers were facing a Scottish Cup final at Celtic Park against … Celtic. This too was among the scenarios of the SFA’s “planning” last October. They’ve avoided that, but a semi at the Big Hoose featuring its occupants is definitely happening. To be fair to McCoist and Thompson, they’ve toned down the language since the rumpus kicked off. But 12 April is currently shaping up as a dread day in the football calendar rather than one for families to enjoy. The SFA can still change the venue and they should. As things stand they’re doing no favours to Rangers save for stoking the defiance of their own fans and the conspiracy theories of the rest. They’re doing no favours to Dundee United who’ve been dealt a grossly unfair hand for sure but must be wondering if making such a stink could cause their young team to think their abilities to win are being doubted. Most of all, though, they’re discrediting the grand old Scottish Cup. http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/aidan-smith-sfa-should-change-semi-final-venue-1-3350659

.......but I'll be happier sitting among our fans, says Dundee United chairman Stephen Thompson. THOMPSON talks to HUGH KEEVINS as he stands firm in the face of the latest controversy over Scottish Cup semi-final tickets. DUNDEE UNITED chairman Stephen Thompson has paid a heavy personal price for holding strong opinions. Assailants have done community service for their threatening behaviour. His mobile phone number is changed as soon as it falls into the wrong hands. And even the salubrious surroundings of the Old Course Hotel at St Andrews were recently unable to provide him with a sanctuary from the problems connected with being the high-profile chairman of a successful football club. The glib summary of anti-social behaviour as it relates to people in the public eye is that abuse “goes with the territory”. Thompson sees it as the cost of defending his club’s position, which is why he was again thrust into the limelight with his protests over the choice of Ibrox as the venue for Dundee United’s Scottish Cup semi-final with Rangers on April 12. It’s not that the man who succeeded his late father Eddie as Tannadice chairman six years ago, having been a board member for five years before that, goes out of his way to look for trouble. When you’re in charge of a club that’s eaten up £6million of your family’s money, you don’t look for a show of gratitude that will never arrive. However, you do feel entitled to have your say if you feel aggrieved about something relating to the object of your highly expensive affection. As we sat in the boardroom at Tannadice, Thompson said: “I would have had a different, less stressful life if the club hadn’t been my dad’s passion, which I have inherited. “The money devoted to Dundee United could have set my family up for generations to come after the sale of the Morning, Noon and Night business we ran. “Now it’s millions of pounds that will never be seen again. But that was years ago and I don’t even think about it any more. “I know I’ll never get gratitude because that’s not how football works and I’m not in the game for gratitude in any case. “But I do love the club and I still go to the game with my scarf on, the way my father did.” But when United go to Ibrox for their cup tie, Thompson will sit in the Broomloan Stand housing the bulk of the club’s travelling support. It’s what you might term a strategic withdrawal in the interests of good order since Thompson is still, wrongly, held up to be a leading protagonist in the move to have the Ibrox club relocated in Scottish football’s bottom tier after they went into liquidation. He said: “I didn’t put Rangers in that position. I wasn’t even the first person from another club to speak out about what should happen when the newco asked to be allowed to stay in what was then the SPL. “I think Vladimir Romanov at Hearts was the first one to do that but he lived in Lithuania and I lived in Dundee. And people need to take their anger out on someone. “It hasn’t been funny over the past couple of years and when I got verbal abuse at the Old Course Hotel recently I did find myself wondering again why I’m in this business. “There’s been a price to be paid on a personal level but when Rangers’ situation was being discussed by the SPL clubs I had to listen to my team’s fans. “They were telling us they wouldn’t buy season tickets for Tannadice if United voted to let Rangers stay in the SPL. And pre-season sales that would normally have been around 4000-strong were reduced to 1500 tickets sold. The fans had made their intentions clear. “But that was two years ago and we have to move on. “I’m not snubbing the directors’ box at Ibrox on April 12. There will be a representative of the club in the boardroom before and after the match. “I’ll be in with the United fans because it’s something I do from time to time. I think I’m a down to earth man in that respect. I’ll be happier there on the day.” Winning the Scottish Cup is something Thompson experienced against Ross County at Hampden in 2010. And his memory of that time allows the listener to understand why the chairman this week campaigned to give his team the best venue and the most substantial backing he could in order to help them reach another final. He said: “My father saved this club. When he took over in 2002 we were shedding money at a frightening rate. “At our agm on Thursday night I was able to stand up and announce a profit for the third time in the past four years. We had a debt that peaked at £7m and now stands at £2.1m. Dundee United are in control of our own destiny and one of my ambitions is to be in charge here when we owe nothing to anyone. “For the first time in my 11 years as a board member I’m not worried about money but the game isn’t just about the club’s accounts. “When we brought the Cup back to Tannadice after beating Ross County my wife and I were the last two people to leave the ground following the open-topped bus drive through the city. “We put the Cup in the front seat of a taxi and the driver happened to be a devoted Dundee supporter. He asked me if he could touch the trophy and I said, ‘Yes, of course.’ “The Cup went to every primary and secondary school in the city. It was in every ward of Ninewells Hospital because just seeing it had this effect of making people happy. “You can forget the way football does that to people.” But even if United win access to another final at Rangers’ expense it won’t allow the chairman to exit the consequences which are attached to success. For the first time, Thompson has spoken about the possibility of losing his much talked-about youngsters and his manager, Jackie McNamara. He said: “My father would have loved watching this team with Andrew Robertson, Gary Mackay-Steven, John Souttar and Ryan Gauld. “We sold 650 half-season tickets because they were so good in the first part of the championship and people wanted to see them. That’s unheard of for us. “We’re not under any pressure to sell players because there’s no bank debt at the club any more and therefore no need to reduce borrowings on an annual basis. “But if the right offers come in then players will inevitably go because they’ll want to broaden their horizons and we’ll have a responsibility to the United fans who gave the club ‘friendly’ loans to see they get their money back in a percentage of the transfer fees. “Jackie’s a managerial talent and he’ll move on one day as well, although hopefully not for a few years yet. “We’ve never talked about it between us but if Jackie does move it will be because he has continued to be successful with Dundee United.” And what about the chairman who freely admits to having been turned into an insomniac by the demands of high office? The man who went to see Manchester United play Liverpool last Sunday with a ticket bought in a charity auction and suddenly realised he was enjoying himself because the final score didn’t matter to him. He said: “I don’t sleep properly because I’m always thinking about the future of the club. Uptight is the norm for me. “At the end of my father’s first season in charge we had to avoid defeat to Inverness to stay in the top flight while knowing relegation would have cost the club £2m. That’s the pressure you live under. “My belief is there will be some form of regionalised European league within the next five years and I want United to be ready if that opportunity arises. “There’s no given right to be anywhere and no rightful place for any club. You have to earn whatever you get. “I’ll keep going until we are debt free and have money in the bank. “I’m like my dad because I’m all or nothing and I stick to what I believe in. “I could keep schtum about certain things but I won’t because I need to be true to myself when I’m the majority shareholder at Tannadice.” That’s 53 per cent of the action and 100 per cent of the hassle when it comes to the events of this week.