Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'politics'.
-
THE WAR is over. The retailer has won. This morning Graham Wallace will be fired from his position as Rangers chief executive and this crisis-ravaged club will belong lock, stock and smoking barrel to Mike Ashley. Quite what Ashley has planned for it is still a matter of conjecture but the ruthless manner in which he went about last week’s power grab certainly suggests he wants it badly and also sees a way to make a killing by rolling his tanks into Glasgow. He now has security over two of the club’s major assets, the Albion car park and Edmiston House, and when his placemen arrive in the boardroom this week he’ll have grabbed this club firmly by the throat. As with everything Rangers, Ashley’s arrival on the scene will be spun in a variety of ways. The dark arts were evidenced over the weekend when it was leaked that, without his intervention, this basketcase would have gone bust within 48 hours. There were even muffled whispers from the shadowy sidelines Ashley had in fact ‘saved the club’ but the very notion the Newcastle United chairman had ridden to Rangers rescue in some sort of philanthropic or heroic act is completely absurd. In many ways, what actually went on amid increasingly frantic discussions on Thursday and Friday was a throwback to May 2011 when Sir David Murray invited Craig Whyte to trigger this omnishambles and set in action the catastrophic chain of events that has now led to Ashley’s increased involvement. That deal was a great bit of business for Whyte and for Lloyds Bank in particular – the £18million they recouped from the sale remains the outstanding trade of the last three and a half chaotic years – but it was a spectacularly awful one for the Ibrox club. Similarly, by taking control of Rangers for the price of a £2m loan, every penny of which will be paid back, Ashley has pulled off a serious coup in more ways than one. This is why he is known as the biggest beast in the jungle but even the Newcastle owner must be laughing up the sleeve of his safari suit at the way in which he managed to pull this one off. It was typically bold and eye poppingly aggressive and it included issuing the remnants of the Rangers board with threats of legal action both collectively and individually, should they turn him down in favour of a £3m loan from Brian Kennedy. Each of these directors was warned of potentially devastating repercussions should Ashley not get his way and as a result Rangers is his now to do with as he wishes. And all for less than the cost of a Sports Direct poly bag. It was an extraordinary stunt and it’s no wonder Sale Sharks owner Kennedy left Glasgow on Saturday still unsure as to how on earth the dysfunctional Rangers board – a collection of directors who have run the business into the ground – could allow it to happen in spite of his impassioned pleas. The farce began with the rejection of Dave King’s £16m bailout offer by the mysterious bloc of shareholders whose 26 per cent voting rights are represented by Sandy Easdale. On Thursday CEO Wallace, who knew his £300,000-a-year neck was now well and truly on the line, reached out to Kennedy and pleaded with him to make a counter offer. Kennedy worked through the night with his legal team to come up with his £3m offer, dependent only on him being allowed to place one man on the current board. He flew to Glasgow at lunchtime on Friday in the hope of getting the deal done. Kennedy was wasting his jet fuel. Not one of these directors was even at Ibrox on the day it was determined Ashley should be handed the keys. The fact all these discussions were held via conference call, underlines how little feel for the club these men have. Wallace headed for a beach in Greece despite being urged by at least two key protagonists to postpone his holiday for 24 hours. Finance director Philip Nash went one better by resigning and washing his hands of the entire Ashley v Kennedy showdown. That Nash threw in the towel is an indication he suspected the game was up and that another director, Laxey’s lackey Norman Crighton, had jumped camps at the last minute. Crighton had voiced his concern at Ashley’s move and had even said the Cockney must be stopped ‘at all costs’ but he performed a 180-degree turn at the last minute to leave Kennedy’s proposal in tatters. Chairman David Somers is another who may have cause to be persecuted by his own conscience. At least Nash had the principle to resign from his £1,000-a-day post. While Wallace was clinging on for dear life for his pay-off, Nash wanted no part of it and this included telling Ashley’s people he was unwilling to work for their man in the event he was successful. Having previously called for the removal of Nash and Walllace, Ashley had a change of heart. It’s understood he wanted Nash on board after crediting him with making £5m worth of cuts since February. One of those cuts was to a contract worth in excess of £100,000-a-year to Ashley’s own PR firm Keith Bishop Associates. This agreement was done as part of the £1 stadium naming rights deal Ashley agreed with Charles Green and which was signed off by Imran Ahmad – who then sued Rangers for £300,000 in bonuses for all of his good work. Deals like these are precisely why Rangers should brace itself for the full impact of Ashley’s arrival. He already pockets 49 per cent of all income from merchandise sales but may think this arrangement can be tweaked and improved in his favour. With two of his men on the board, a compliant chairman and confirmed allies in James Easdale and Crighton, he can do pretty much as he pleases. The only comfort in any of this for the Rangers supporters is to be found in the depth of Ashley’s pockets. He will not allow this club to go under, that much is certain. But from here on in Rangers will be run his way and for his benefit. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/opinion/sport/keith-jackson-mike-ashleys-rangers-4515761
-
With the next 24 hours likely to be important in terms of this issue, this article from Richard Wilson is a good appraisal ahead of a new thread on boardroom events. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29717979
-
http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/7812-notice-under-section-303-of-the-companies-act-2006
-
RANGERS today demanded an apology from Livingston over "outrageous and unacceptable" content in their match programme at the weekend. And the Ibrox club will also report their SPFL Championship rivals to the governing body over the "erroneous material". Gers supporters were incensed at two articles which appeared in the programme at the Energy Assets Arena. One story referred to "the club then known as Rangers" playing a game against Hibernian three years ago. It went on to state that "a brand new club" had been established after the old parent company was liquidated back in 2012. Another story in the Livingston programme mentioned the West Lothian club's record against the "now-defunct outfit" and "the newly-formed Rangers". However, High Court judge Lord Nimmo Smith ruled that Rangers was a "recognisable entity which continued in existence notwithstanding the change in ownership" two years ago. Livingston officials are believed to be horrified by the comments that appeared in the official publication which is edited by supporter Andy Crawford. However, Rangers still want their rivals, who they defeated 1-0 at the weekend, to apologise over the offence caused to the 54-times Scottish champions. A club statement read: "The content written about the football club and our players was outrageous and entirely unacceptable. "We will be raising the issue with the SPFL and seeking an apology from Livingston FC, who had a duty to prevent such erroneous material from appearing in their programme." Meanwhile, Rangers are set to escape any sanction from the SPFL over the crowd trouble that flared in the stands and outside the stadium in Livingston on Saturday. However, the League One champions are set to issue anyone who is convicted following the unrest at the weekend with banning orders from their matches. There were violent scuffles between Gers fans and police and stewards in one section of the stands during the first half of the second-tier game. Livingston safety officer Alan Scott confirmed: "There were five people arrested. The stewards and police assisted each other in dealing with the matter and no police or stewards were injured." And after the match mounted police reportedly had to break up an altercation between Rangers and Livingston supporters in the car park of nearby supermarket Lidl. The incidents are set to be mentioned in the official report to the SPFL by match delegate Alan Dick that should arrive at the Hampden offices of the governing body tomorrow. However, Rangers are confident their preparations for the match were professional and in accordance with strict guidelines laid down by the SPFL. They should, therefore, escape any official censure. After the match, Rangers manager Ally McCoist commented: "I did see it and it looked pretty unsavoury, but until I get a report on it I would be loath to comment other than to say we can do without incidents like that." http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/rangers/rangers-demand-apology-over-livi-programme-article-183240n.25506990
-
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...n-Rangers.html MIKE ASHLEY has doubled his stake in Rangers. The Newcastle owner now owns around nine per cent of the Scottish Championship club. Investment group Hargreave Hale confirmed it was behind the sale of £853,000 worth of shares in the fallen Glaswegian giants. Ashley’s purchase came hours after Gers fans threatened to boycott his Sports Direct stores over the cut-price deal he struck for the Ibrox naming rights. A spokesman for fans’ group Sons of Struth said: “We call on Mike Ashley to cancel his contract before the October 11. “If he still retains the naming rights after this point, we will instigate an immediate series of actions aimed at his Sports Direct stores.”
-
Wednesday 1 October 2014 IS ALLY McCOIST'S POSITION UNTENABLE? No, not yet, but we appear to be trundling progressively closer to that state of affairs. Six points behind in the SPFL Championship is a surprising position for him to be in after seven fixtures and the situation is worsened by the fact his side have already lost at home to both Hearts and Hibernian, generally regarded as their two main rivals for promotion. The question is: how far behind must they fall before something dramatic has to happen? Eight points? Nine points? What will tip things over the edge? Will it be defeat at Tynecastle on November 22, or the latest in a long line of losses in knockout competition when St Johnstone pay a visit to Ibrox in the League Cup? So far, McCoist's players have done just enough to keep him away from the noose. They scraped an ill-deserved win at Falkirk thanks to a late, deflected mis-hit from Lewis Macleod in their second league match of the campaign and beating Inverness Caledonian Thistle to maintain interest in the League Cup was a big result. The team showed promise when winning 4-0 at Raith Rovers, but that has been shown to be a one-off and belief that McCoist can turn them into a side capable of providing entertaining football every week is dwindling. Supporters are not yet calling in significant numbers for McCoist's resignation or removal, but performances are nowhere near the standards expected. A number of bookmakers have already installed Hearts as favourites for the Championship and that is only sensible on current form. McCoist did agree a pay-cut, understood to amount to 50%, on the £825,000-a-year wage he enjoyed until January 2014, but his earnings are going to continue to prompt questions when his team plays as it did in the process of losing 3-1 at home to Hibernian. Open revolt in the stands, if it happens, would force the issue. SHOULD HE CONSIDER WALKING AWAY IF THINGS DO NOT IMPROVE? Tough one. Would you walk away for less than to what you are entitled when you had witnessed a number of others from the boardroom - all accountable, in part, for almost £70m being squandered in two years - receive pay-offs? HOW MUCH OF THIS CAN BE BLAMED ON THE ONGOING UNCERTAINTY CREATED BY THOSE ABOVE HIM AT BOARDROOM LEVEL? None of it. The players state ad infinitum, after all, that they do not focus on financial concerns. McCoist knows the pressures at Ibrox. Whatever is going on in the background, asking Rangers to set the pace in the Championship with a budget that dwarves anything available to other clubs in the division is not unreasonable. The money being spent on Rangers' football department means they should beat everyone in the game other than Celtic. IS SPECULATION OVER McCOIST'S FUTURE NOT A KNEE-JERK REACTION AT AN EARLY STAGE IN THE SEASON? Not really. Rangers fans have, generally, been scathing over the standard of football they have watched for the last 2½ seasons. The team did win the Third Division and then SPFL League 1 by a street, but they regularly struggled to dispatch teams of part-timers. McCoist's record in cup competitions cannot be allowed to pass either. Rangers did not, whatever he may say, spend the money they did purely to win Scotland's bottom two divisions. If they did, they spent way over the odds. Losses to top-flight sides such as Inverness Caledonian Thistle and Dundee United were dressed up as understandable and acceptable; questions over Rangers having a Premiership wage bill were glossed over. Defeats in the Ramsdens Cup to Queen of the South and Raith Rovers, who humiliated them in the final at Easter Road, were shameful in the extreme. WHAT WILL HAPPEN, THEN, SHOULD RANGERS FAIL TO WIN AT LIVINGSTON ON SATURDAY? McCoist will have to answer questions on whether or not he believes his time is up. ARE THE GROWING QUESTIONS OVER HIS TACTICAL APPROACH FAIR? Yes. Too many games have resulted in an over-reliance on long balls and there is a distinct lack of variation about the play. His team selections continue to raise eyebrows as well with players continually being played out of position. The side has been letting in goals too easily, but Darren McGregor, a centre-half, continues to be fielded at right-back while Bilel Mohsni remains a starter. McGregor admitted in the match programme for the Hibernian game that he had only played on the right "a couple of times with St Mirren". Wouldn't Richard Foster be a better bet there with McGregor in the middle? Lewis Macleod is a central midfielder who was being used on the left before injury. Rather than use attacking players with pace in the wide midfield positions against Hibernian, McCoist used Steven Smith, a full-back, and Arnold Peralta, a central midfielder. So much emphasis seems to be placed on sending Lee Wallace powering down the left flank, but Rangers are not getting behind opposition defences often enough and that is contributing to Kris Boyd's clear problems. He is a natural predator, but has failed to score in the league and has only hit the net in two of 12 appearances. There have to be greater signs of an established style of playing at Rangers. Regular supporters also note the absence of a Plan B. BOYD SCORED 22 TIMES FOR A POOR KILMARNOCK TEAM IN THE PREMIERSHIP LAST SEASON. WHY HAVE THE GOALS DRIED UP? He missed a number of chances at Raith Rovers and Alloa and looks a shadow of his former self, but he is not receiving adequate service. Rangers have lacked invention, variation and creativity. Boyd admits that he has been forced to feed off scraps at times. WHY HAVE SO MANY ESTABLISHED TOP-FLIGHT PLAYERS STRUGGLED AT RANGERS? Great question. Dean Shiels, Ian Black and Nicky Law all arrived in great form. David Templeton had just scored for Hearts against Liverpool at Anfield in the Europa League qualifiers. Marius Zaliukas, signed this summer, is not even deemed worthy of a start in a defence leaking goals left, right and centre. All these players are going backwards. Are they simply incapable of handling life in the goldfish bowl or are their collective troubles a reflection of wider failings within the team as a whole? Probably a bit of both. WILL THINGS CHANGE WHEN KENNY MILLER IS FIT AGAIN? Will Kenny Miller be fully fit again? He is three months from his 35th birthday. His career has been built on relentless workrate and selfless running. That catches up with you eventually. We are a month into the season and he has already been laid up with hamstring and calf problems. A NUMBER OF OLDER PLAYERS HAVE BEEN BROUGHT IN AND REMAIN. SHOULDN'T RANGERS HAVE USED THEIR TIME IN THE LOWER LEAGUES TO CONSTRUCT A STRATEGY BASED ON YOUTH? Of course they should. Jon Daly, for example, admitted earlier this week that he can no longer train two days in a row because of knee trouble. McCoist is not entirely to blame for the way Rangers have frittered away their millions, but they missed a trick. Two years in the bottom divisions could have been used to build a young, fit squad that could grow together. If those in the existing youth set-up were not good enough, a more structured, long-term and cost-effective transfer policy could have been employed. Instead, Charles Green was struggling to sell season tickets following his takeover and permitted McCoist to lure established top-flight players to the club. He needed quick results and could be understood in having gone for a quick fix. In the meantime, Rangers' footballing department was allowed to continue without a recognised scouting network. Rangers' development squad, for the record, currently sits close to the bottom of the SPFL Development League with three points from four games. EVEN IF HEARTS DO WIN THE LEAGUE, WON'T RANGERS STILL ACHIEVE THE ULTIMATE GOAL OF GETTING BACK TO THE SPFL PREMIERSHIP THROUGH THE PLAY-OFFS? Let's just say that anyone who has watched Rangers' two meetings with Hibernian so far would be reluctant to place money on that. http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/...=email%2Balert
-
“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.
-
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.
-
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?
-
CCFC 30 Years @CCFC30YEARS Thank you @RangersFC for the signed football and letter to congratulate us on our 30th year #ccfc30years https://twitter.com/CCFC30YEARS/status/501680371499798528/photo/1
-
I'm not clear on what is classed as repetition so perhaps we can have 1 topic where we can say what we like (within reason) and let off steam. Also, certain people can just stay away from this thread and then they won't be offended.
-
I like to try and be fair and after so much criticism I will give credit where it is due. Regardless of who we were playing against we retained possession with interchanging passing and moving and the long ball wasn't frequently deployed. We created plenty chances and always looked dangerous in the final third, crucially our midfield largely bossed the game. Hopefully we can push on from here but I can't recall us playing in this manner for more than a couple of games on the trot apart from the end of 10/11. As was my feeling then, it shows that we can play fairly decent football (it's illogical to suggest otherwise), so there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to see us playing aimless long balls again.
-
I dont know the exact figures on this , but on the rangersfirst page there is a rolling screen of whos recently joined , and I have been watching it quite closely over the last few days , its been amazing to see the number of fellow fans that have been joining not just at the fan level, £5 a month, but at the supporter £10 and founder £18.72, levels , plus amazingly the life members and an amazing number of donations , where you dont need to sign up for any set monthly amounts but can donate one off amounts. Add in all the retail partners they have signed up , it is actually very impressive , anyone not checked out the rangersfirst retail section really should do so , any purchases made through the links , rangersfirst get a % back .
-
The video -
-
Chris Graham @ChrisGraham76 17m .@RFC_Union call on Rangers PLC board to remove Sandy Easdale as a club director immediately. #RFC pic.twitter.com/wIlX0SWgVu
-
THE displays of the Rangers team on the park last week were cause for optimism down Ibrox way. Ally McCoist's side netted 12 goals in their two competitive outings and put their shaky early-season form well and truly behind them. The size of the crowds in the home games against both Clyde and Dumbarton, however, were reasons to look towards the future with trepidation. And the attendance at the SPFL Championship fixture with Dumbarton on Saturday afternoon was particularly alarming. For the league meeting with the Sons was perhaps the best chance so far to gauge what the turnout will be like at Rangers home games in the 2014/15 campaign. The Petrofac Training Cup matches with Hibs and then Clyde were always going to attract smaller crowds due to the stature of the competition and the size of the opposition. Much was made of the fact that only 11,190 supporters filed through the turnstiles in the 8-1 victory in the latter game last Monday. It was the lowest Ibrox attendance at a competitive fixture for 29 years. Yet that encounter with part-time opponents from the bottom tier of Scottish football was - despite Gers great Barry Ferguson being in charge of the opposition - expected to draw that sort of response. There were 43,683 in the Championship opener against Hearts a fortnight ago. But there were special circumstances surrounding that fixture. The League One flag was unfurled and the Govan Stand was renamed in honour of Sandy Jardine before kick-off. Plus, the first game against age-old adversaries Hearts after two long seasons of often uninspiring outings against our national game's lesser lights was guaranteed to put a fair few bums on seats. No, the Dumbarton game at the weekend was a far better barometer of what size the attendances - and, in turn, the gate receipts -will be for Rangers in the weeks and months which lie ahead. And the fact that only 31,175 turned up on a perfect afternoon for football must be worrying for both those who follow the fortunes and those who control the purse-strings at the troubled Glasgow institution. It was the lowest turnout at a league game at Ibrox since 24,177 fans watched Rangers defeat Falkirk 4-0 thanks to a Robert Fleck double and goals from Davie Cooper and Terry Butcher on December 13, 1986. A home game against Methil minnows East Fife around this time last year drew 42,870. No company can have nearly a quarter of their customers disappear in the space of 12 months without drastic consequences. Even if all of the 34,000 fans who bought season tickets to see Rangers in League One last season had renewed this summer, the club would still not have had enough money to see them to the end of this term. So for just how long will the Light Blues be able to limp along with just over 20,000 season book holders and fewer than 10,000 turning up and paying at the gate on match days? There are ambitious plans for Rangers to hold another share offering in the very near future and the hope is to raise in the region of £4million of much-needed capital from that. But with shareholder Sandy Easdale and wealthy fan George Letham due to have loans totalling £1.5m repaid, financial experts have predicted that will only sustain the club until the end of the year. The ongoing lack of clarity over Rangers future off the field is overshadowing the fact that on it they appear to be getting their act together after some poor performances. They brushed aside Dumbarton with ease at the weekend thanks to strikes from Lee McCulloch, Darren McGregor and Nicky Clark. An own goal from Chris Turner aided their cause considerably. Bilel Mohsni, who was highly fortunate not to be red carded by referee Brian Colvin for his trip on Scott Agnew, also turned the ball into his net late on to give the sizeable travelling support a reason to cheer. That lapse of judgment by the Tunisian, though, could not wipe the smile from McCoist's face after a highly satisfactory performance by his charges from front to back. He said: "The skipper played in central midfield and chipped in with a goal, Nicky got a good goal and our right-back played well and scored a great goal. "To be scoring goals is always good. But to be scoring goals from different areas is an added bonus for us. "I was annoyed we didn't keep a clean sheet, but I thought the football was of a high standard. We created a lot of chances, scored four good goals, hit the post and had a goal disallowed. "It is consistency that is going to win us the league this year. That is what we have to work hard to get. "There are going to be a lot of difficult games for us in the months ahead and we have to be at our best every week." http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/rangers/deserted-seats-show-reality-of-angry-rangers-fans-voting-with-their-177533n.25139848 -
Here's an interesting call. Sorry that it sounds really bad news and sorry re the source of the recording but the caller seems to know his stuff. His view of the Wigs still being in control post admin is realistic if horrible to contemplate, there is an astonishing mention of The Mint and an unsurprising, but deflating inclusion of King in his list of the false hope merchants who have been piddling down our leg and telling us it is raining". http://podbay.fm/show/307483087/e/14...00?autostart=1 Starts about 15 minutes in There's a thread on FF about it...for those who forum hop....
-
-
I would encourage anyone not already a member to join now The below will be being emailed to all members shortly. We encourage all Rangers Fans world wide to now participate in at http://www.rangersfirst.org'>http://www.rangersfirst.org We are the People and this is our time. Dear members > > As you will have gathered the Club issued an Open Offer today regarding the issue of 19,864,918 new Ordinary Shares in Rangers International Football Club PLC. > > The full details of that issue can be found here: > > http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exch ... d=12066370 > > We would ask that you have a read of it all. > > Rangers First was set up to collectively buy as many shares in the PLC as it could, with the hope of at least reaching 5% ownership which in a PLC is significant as it would allow Rangers First to hold any PLC board to account via the calling of a General meeting. > > Rangers First can confirm that it has already written to both Graham Wallace and the NOMAD (Daniel Stewart & Company PLC, who has confirmed reciept) that it is in a position to “invest beyond our pro-rated pre-emption rights” and that Rangers First would “wish to be added to any Excess Application Facility for the purchase of additional shares” > > Upon reflection on todays statement the Rangers First steering group has concluded that it is most appropriate to continue on our policy of buying shares and will as we indicated in our letter seek to take up as many as possible. > > However as is made clear in the Clubs own statement there are severe risks if this share issue is not taken up and this will not be the last share issue and so we presume these same risks will also attach as concerns to the further share offers to follow. Rangers First is set up as a democratic organisation and so the Steering Group wish to put the democratic process into action and have our members confirm by vote that they are happy for Rangers First Steering Group to continue its share purchase policy and take up as many shares as it can in this share issue. > > All members will be sent a vote in the next few hours which will be open over the weekend. > > This is another chance for Rangers Fans to take a significant stake and have significantly more influence at our Club. From the statement this will be the first of a number of equity raises so now is the time to sign up, get you family, home and abroad signed up, get those you go to and watch the game with signed…..get every Bear you have ever known to sign up to Rangers First > > http://www.rangersfirst.org Please consider taking out a Life membership of Rangers First for £500 (this can be passed to your children one day) or joining for a monthly fee of as little as £5 per month (U16 free) Selling all the 1872 life membership would raise enough for Rangers First to buy over 5% of the Club and reach our Stage 1 > > > We are the People and this is our Time!
-
Born Under a Union Flag: Rangers, Britain and Scottish Independence (Luath Press) will be an interesting read for those yet to open its cover, and I would strongly suggest you do. It allows the reader access at times, to the mindset of the authors of the various chapters, some of which will challenge you, some may even alarm you, but having drawn me in, it was one of those books I had to read from start to finish without interruption. It may seem strange for an avid Unionist to highlight a chapter written by a pro-independence author, Gail Richardson, but I do so for 2 reasons : (1) Gail asks questions relating to the motto of a group of which I am a member – Vanguard Bears (2) Of all the pro-independence chapters within the book, Gail’s was unique in that it offered a cohesive, rational and positive argument for independence which was free from negative subjective experience often cited by her peers, nor did it seek to demonise Britain as a justification for exercising a yes vote, in short it offered vision rather than vilification. I use the word “demonise” deliberately. When Alan Bissett argues that Britain is responsible for, amongst other things, “the mass slaughter of World War 1” you can perhaps begin to understand why I suggested in the opening paragraph that you may be challenged, even alarmed by its contents. Gail opens her chapter with a question : Do the Loving Cup ceremony or the portraits of Her Majesty the Queen hanging in the home dressing room at Ibrox not qualify as traditions ? Both are long standing practices at our club, with club historian David Mason, opening this year’s Loving Cup toast describing it as “A very important tradition in the history of Rangers Football Club since 1937”. Furthermore are they merely traditions or, additionally, a powerful statement of identity i.e. this is a club which values the traditions of monarchy ? The foregoing example serves as welcome introduction for another area of such debate which is often overlooked by many. Gail asserts : It is madness. But what about the flip side of that coin ? What about the instances where the beliefs and values come from within the club itself ? Are they in themselves not statements of identity ? If the historical commentators such as Graham Walker and Bill Murray are to be believed, and there is no good reason not to, then Protestant identity evolved due to a number of factors, primarily though that the Protestant indigenous Scot sought a football club which reflected their faith and culture in the same way that the newly formed club, Celtic, reflected the faith and culture of the Irish immigrant population. If Gail is guilty of overlooking symbolisms and traditions which emanate from within the club, perhaps because they don’t quite fit with her assertions and beliefs, I confess, I could be equally as guilty of reading something into symbolisms from within the club because they do happen to fit with my particular assertions and beliefs. I have difficulty accepting however that Church and Boys Brigade Parades, the holding of the Orange Order Annual Divine Service at Ibrox, our refusal to play football on the Sabbath, the welcoming of Kings at Ibrox, Armed Forces Days, amongst other things, are not statements of identity. Furthermore these take no account of the erroneous, which again have their formation from within the club itself. Gail makes reference to Rangers signing policy, I would add to that the comments of Rangers vice chairman Matt Taylor in 1967 when he stated in interview relating to it, “part of our tradition....we were formed in 1873 as a Protestant boys club. To change now would lose us considerable support.” However mis-guided, however ham-fisted, however opposed to true Protestant ideals and values the foregoing examples are, I would suggest they are a clear attempt to attach a Protestant identity to our club from within the club itself. I cite these examples not to usurp Gail’s questioning of their relevance today in an increasingly secular Scotland, but to demonstrate that the club itself over the years has actively encouraged an identity with which it is often associated, therefore to suggest that it’s our supporters who have projected their beliefs onto the club and asked them to uphold them is incorrect. When Gail states : “I’ve said that I don’t believe Rangers Football Club is a Protestant club or a Unionist club.” how does such a statement equate to a football club who have just released their 3rd strip which has as its centrepiece, the flag of the Union itself ? Particularly in view of the current political climate in Scotland. Strangely, the answer to Gail’s original question comes from an unlikely source, in chapter 3 of the book. Harry Reid, an Aberdeen supporter speaking of the demise of Rangers identity under Sir David Murray: And later in the chapter : Harry continues: Later in the chapter Harry emphasises the importance of any football club seeking to expand its aspirations, remaining true to its core fan base. There is really not a lot I can add to Harry’s quotes. The values, traditions and people Harry alludes to are very much at the core of what we at Vanguard Bears, seek to defend. I hope this article not only answers Gail’s questions, but also challenges her to examine her own vision of our club, as much as her chapter from the book caused me to examine my own.
-
This mantra is in stark contrast to the axiom stated about boxers but it holds true at Ibrox, whether it is turmoil, on and off the field, Charles Green or Dave King. It was just another Sunday at Ibrox with normal levels of turbulence and uncertainty. There was a stark contrast to the dignified and fitting tribute to the late Sandy Jardine in the lurid headlines that screamed in the morning newspapers. Basically, they read: Chuck is back and this time it is business, not personal. Affairs at Ibrox must be investigated in two sections: the business and the playing. The former is the more urgent. As one Rangers supporter told me yesterday: "There are more pressing issues to address than whether Lewis Macleod should be playing wide right." The return of Mr Green is more than an amusement, though. The tales of George Soros may be as tall as Peter Crouch on stilts but the backstory to the former chief executive's latest foray into the media contains an element of truth that points to what is going on at Ibrox. It is this: there are significant developments unfolding at the club. The financial situation is acute with the board seeking investment and Green wants to be near at hand when that deal is brokered. More interesting is the relative silence of King. He, too, though has not gone away. Much of the action from Graham Wallace, the chief executive of Rangers, and King, the man who would be sovereign at Rangers, is taking place in London, with mixed results. A City source, who invested in Rangers in the initial public offering, told Herald Sport last night that Wallace has been active in trying to arrange support for another share issue. However, he added: "He has not met with conspicuous success." This was said wryly. The message, though, was deeply serious. "There is no way I would advise further investment at Rangers under the present circumstances and under the present board. It is that simple," he said. King has been working the City since at least March. His initial strategy was to canvass support for his plan to take the proxy vote for significant shareholdings and force change. This, increasingly, has been seen to be impractical, perhaps even unworkable, as long as the major players remain united within the Ibrox boardroom. The pressure must be applied to the Beaufort Group that holds the majority of shares. This has been applied effectively by the strategy of some fans to withhold season ticket money. There has been much argument over whether this constitutes a boycott but it would be much more instructive to investigate the action's consequences. It has brought King back into play, despite the reluctance of some on the Ibrox board to deal with the South African businessman. King's patience was criticised over the summer but he may just have played his cards astutely. Rangers are searching for money and King claims he has it. This seemingly straightforward case of demand and supply, however, founders on the rocks of implacable politics at Rangers. King, though, has improved his position quietly over the summer and may in the position to make his move. The re-emergence of Green at this crucial juncture is not coincidental. The Yorkshireman, who has the copyright of the terms bluff and plain-speaking, has again caused considerable annoyance to those inside Ibrox, not least Ally McCoist. The Rangers manager was understandably frustrated at Green's latest intervention at the weekend when he stated that he could raise money to extricate the club from the deep financial hole. McCoist described all of this as "a sideshow" and it is, but it is one with a purpose. The former chief executive was reminding everyone that he will have a say, even if his influence may be limited, in what happens at Ibrox. With this financial game playing out in the media, it is almost crass to discuss a football match but what happened at Ibrox in front of 43,683 deserves consideration. First, Hearts deserve enormous credit for a gameplan and for the willingness of their players to carry it out. Craig Levein and his football department have recruited wisely. Robbie Neilson set the team up cleverly and there were particularly outstanding contributions from Danny Wilson, in central defence, and Osman Sow, in attack. Success for Hearts was ensured by increasing fecklessness in Rangers ranks. After they had missed early chances, Rangers defended awfully. Wilson made the most of a free header and Sow capitalised on disarray in the Rangers backline to score emphatically, seconds after McCoist's side equalised. This frustration - and the very fact that he was asked a question he had to answer - probably accounted for McCoist's relative sharpness as regards Green. He will, though, be more concerned about solving the matters he has influence over, including finding the ideal wide man who can produce opportunities for Kris Boyd and Kenny Miller. The latter had to come back to midfield on Sunday to find a touch and he was insistent afterwards that the side had to create more chances. The team faces an interesting challenge at Falkirk on Friday. The board confronts more difficult problems with every day that passes. http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/king-still-in-play-as-financial-chess-game-rumbles-on.25024715?
-
Vincent has departed, he hopes to be invited to approach the Bar. Thus, a new Sellik supporting Compliance Officer is required. Peter identified one, told Regan to appoint Anthony McGlennan. I know there's a helluva lot going on within and outwith our club at the moment, but I suppose we should note the next Yahoo waiting in line to avail himself of the opportunity to sink the boot.
-
I've seen it at Ibrox for a couple of seasons now. I don't think it's appropriate. Please desist.
-
http://www.gersnet.co.uk/index.php/latest-news/258-book-review-born-under-a-union-flag-rangers-the-union-scottish-independence -
teams: Germany: Neuer, Howedes, Hummels, Khedira, Schweinsteiger, Ozil, Klose, Muller, Lahm ©, Kroos, Boateng Argentina: Romero, Garay, Zabaleta, Biglia, Perez, Higuain, Messi ©, Mascherano, Demichelis, Rojo, Lavezzi Referee: Nicola Rizzoli (Italy) 2-0 Germany for me. Klose and Muller. point on referees, I think they have generally been good and let play flow, except the European referees who I thought have been very picky. PS I'm watching BBC coverage as I cannot stand Adrain Chiles
