Search the Community

I've had two legal letters sent to me via email by Biggart Baillie on behalf of the Rangers board and Brian Stockbridge over comments I made about him lying. They are threatening a civil defamation action. One came on Friday and one today. Meanwhile, Macgiollabhain, Galloway, Haggerty, Greenslade and CQN can say whatever they like about the club and the fans without any risk of the board lifting a finger to defend either. They are an absolute disgrace. Their attempts to silence dissension both through the action against FF and me is a clear attempt to bully, using the fans ST money to pay for it. I'll be making more detailed comment on it over the next couple of days.

From BBC Chris McLaughlan #Rangers contact police over what they term 'offensive and threatening comments' made about a director on a fans website. BBC get the news first as usual.

............................as judge makes him read out letter slating his own character TYCOON made to read out damning letter slamming treatment of family and claiming he faced jail for illegal activity. FORMER Rangers owner Craig Whyte was yesterday forced to read out a letter in court slating his own character. The damning letter laid bare the tycoon’s troubled time at Ibrox, slammed his treatment of his family and claimed he faced jail for illegal activity. It was revealed as he gave evidence at the Inverness Sheriff Court trial of two former employees accused of stealing from him. The letter was allegedly written by his former housekeeper and cook Jane Hagan last year, weeks before Whyte sacked her and her caretaker partner Terence Horan. Monaco-based Whyte claimed he found it beside a computer in his Highland home, Castle Grant, after he returned there and found the couple gone and various items missing. It contained claims of terror threats, alongside allegations that Whyte had bankrupted his own father three times and treated his wife “in an appalling way”. It also disclosed that the bank were poised to repossess his Highland home at Castle Grant and said he could have been facing jail for his “illegal activities”. The letter, running to three A4 pages, was allegedly written by Hagan to a friend, Sue. Hagan, 50, and Horan, 54, deny stealing thousands of pounds worth of goods from the castle, near Grantown on Spey. In an uncomfortable few minutes, 42-year-old Whyte was forced to read out the letter in its entirety in court by prosecutor Heather Swan. It contained what appeared to be a confession by Hagan that the couple were taking items from the castle because they had not been paid and feared for their future. The trial was in its second day yesterday after being interrupted last month due to a lack of court time. Sheriff Jamie Gilchrist heard that a container had been rented by Horan and filled with a huge array of household items. Whyte, who had separated from his wife Kim three years earlier, said he noticed last year that some items were missing from the castle, including a huge kitchen table. When Whyte returned from a holiday with his two children, he said his housekeeper and caretaker were nowhere to be seen and he had to get a locksmith to get into the house. He discovered more things missing and, on checking with Kim, discovered she had not taken them. The court heard a search warrant was obtained by police and many of the items missing from the castle were found in a storage container in Grantown on Spey among others belonging to Hagan and Horan. Whyte told the court: “I was with the police and pointed out some things which belonged to either myself or my wife. I did not order their removal, nor did I instruct anyone to store them or hide them.” He also denied tampering with the letter. “I didn’t doctor it, edit or make changes to it. It is exactly the way it was handed to me,” he added. Whyte then moved from the witness box to the dock to answer a possible contempt of court for failing to appear for the trial when it was due to start on June 10. His lawyer Paul Kavanagh said it had been a genuine mistake. Sheriff Gilchrist decided to take no further action and made no finding of contempt. But he warned Whyte that he had to attend court to finish his evidence when the trial resumes on October 23. The letter in full: “Our boss has been behaving rather badly. We have always known he is not the nicest person in business and his living is mostly made by dubious means. Talking to his wife not only confirms our suspicions that he is not a good man but we find he has treated her and her family in the most appalling way. He has bankrupted his own father and due to this he has lost his home, not once but three times and still he uses him to do his dirty work. “When we returned from holiday she was in pieces claiming that he had told her he was doing a runner and never coming back to the castle. “It is rather distressing news to us, not only do we lose our jobs but also our home. “Well, it didn’t happen and he has had a couple of weekends here and showing no signs of stress. But he is an incredibly close person and never gives away anything. “However in the past few weeks he has been served with loads of court papers and the wolves are howling at the door. “He’s in all sorts of trouble with the law over his ownership of Rangers FC with some pretty serious threats of going to prison over his illegal activities. “His ex wife has been very good filling us in on the details as she’s been watching him closely. “There were terrorist threats to the castle and our boss and we have had to have anti-terrorist training. “The bank could take over the castle and he hasn’t paid our salary for June. We have organised with his ex wife to collect the last of her possessions. She has left behind expensive stuff and we are going to take some of the high value things as it looks as if the bailiffs will take the rest and we want to be sure we don’t lose out.” http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/court-humiliation-ex-rangers-owner-craig-2314008

c&P from FF Disappointing. Unbelievable.

It is perhaps a Godsend that the behaviour of our online Rangers communities do not appear to impact or reflect on the ability of the Rangers support to “Follow Follow”. Thankfully the support which embarrassed, and continues to embarrass Scottish football with it's attendance figures, which caught the imagination of the world with it's steadfast devotion to a football club, appears to remain unaffected by the schisms within her online communities. Whilst it undoubtedly raises a question of the significance of our online communities and how reflective they are of our support in general, I'm afraid the exploration of this subject must wait for another day as there are more pressing issues to concern ourselves with. The emergence of the Sons of Struth campaigners gave rise to the question asked in the title thread. Through no fault of their own (in fact they deserve immense credit for how they have, with diplomatic aplomb, handled the minefield which is the fractured, divided and partisan inspired Rangers online community) their emergence has proved to be a “proving ground” for everything which is wrong with our online communities. On the various websites which carried their threads, as well as on social media, sadly the usual battles, accusations and counter accusations came to the fore. It's perhaps pertinent at this point we highlight the 3 main objectives of the Sons of Struth campaigners :- 1. Keep the stadium in the club's name to avoid Coventry situation 2. Have clear accounts which prove the proper running of the club 3. Have a board that keep the club off the front pages and who themselves are beyond reproach If there is a bear anywhere in the world, never mind within the online Rangers community, who does not aspire to the 3 aforementioned objectives for our our club – them I am yet to meet them. Sadly, despite the universal agreement with the above objectives, our online communities find the energy and time to fall out with each other – is it any small wonder our club is in the mess it is today, being raped and savaged by so called “businessmen” and the media ? We appear to be too concerned fighting amongst ourselves than fighting the battles we really need to be engaging in. Can the real enemies of our club really wait until tomorrow whilst we fight amongst ourselves today ? It manifests itself in whole Rangers communities being stereotyped into one particular box, often “evidenced” by a single post by an individual which, as if by magic, suddenly represents the views of hundreds, often thousands of other posters who may not even agree with the original cited post. Personal animosity, historical feuds, bitternesses and hatred have all been done to death. Even the Rangers bloggers appear to have acquiesced to the hate fest, giving rise to what some have referred to as “The Blogger Wars”. At a time when hate filled individuals and even some of the mainstream media are determined to kill off our club – you would think our energies would be more productively spent tackling the enemies of our club. Perhaps what is particularly sad in all this is that the Rangers online communities also represent what is best in our support. 90 minutes on a Saturday is not enough for us – quite simply we eat, sleep and breathe Rangers FC. That kind of devotion represents considerable and mammoth energy with potential – the potential to effect change for the better. It is however completely neutralised when it is spent focussing inwardly on the things which divide us rather than the issues which unite us. If this online Rangers community is to fulfil its true destiny then it must change, because at the moment the schisms, historical feuds and bitternesses are holding us back from unleashing that potential on the real enemies of our club. If the Sons of Struth campaigners achieve nothing else (and I sincerely hope that's not the case) then educating the Rangers online community that there is real need for change, will be a considerable achievement in itself.

http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index...gers-complaint The BBC Trust is not investigating football pundit Jim Spence over comments made about Rangers despite newspaper reports claiming a probe is underway, Newsnet Scotland can reveal. On 16 September, a report in the Herald by senior reporter Martin Williams stated that "BBC Trust's Editorial Standards Committee" was investigating hundreds of complaints made after BBC pundit Jim Spence made reference to "old club" Rangers during a broadcast. However, Newsnet Scotland has learned that no such investigation is underway by the Trust and that the Herald was made aware of the inaccuracy but has failed to correct the article. A spokeswoman for the BBC Trust said: "None of the complaints regarding Sportsound have reached Stage 3 of the complaints procedure and it is therefore not possible for the Editorial Standards Committee to investigate these complaints. "I don't know why the article has not been corrected but the Herald has certainly been made aware of it." The BBC Trust's rebuttal of the story came on 17 September, the day after the Herald article was published, but the article has still not been updated. Mr Williams, the story's author, admitted to Newsnet Scotland that he had received an email from the Trust informing him the story was incorrect but "did not realise they wanted a clarification". "The BBC is investigating, just not the body I intimated," he said. Complaints against the BBC can be escalated to the Trust only if the BBC's own internal complaints process has been exhausted. The final stage of that internal process is carried out by the BBC's Editorial Complaints Unit. Jim Spence became the centre of controversy after making the comments – a bone of contention for Rangers fans who insist the current Rangers is the same club and that only the club's 'holding company' was liquidated - earlier this month and the broadcast prompted more than 400 complaints. During a discussion on the BBC's Sportsound, Mr Spence said: "John McClelland who was the chairman of the old club, some people will tell you the club, well, the club that died, possibly coming back in terms of the new chairman." The popular pundit then became victim to "vile" abuse and harassment by email, text and social media and was rumoured to be close to taking voluntary redundancy over the incident. The story prompted other journalists to come forward with their stories about being intimidated by Rangers fans after covering the club's financial collapse. The NUJ strongly backed Mr Spence and revealed that following the escalation, BBC Scotland planned to challenge a ruling made by the BBC Trust in June that upheld two complaints claiming that the broadcaster had breached accuracy guidelines when using the terms "old club" and "new club" to describe Rangers. The BBC Trust's stance has caused much debate in Scottish football - and beyond, Guardian media blogger Roy Greenslade has called on the BBC Trust to accept it has made a mistake - and reports that the Trust itself had rapidly launched an investigation into Mr Spence's conduct raised eyebrows. A spokesman for BBC Scotland, which had initially apologised in response to complaints about Mr Spence's comments, explained that complainants had the option of referring the complaint to London if unhappy with BBC Scotland's handling of complaints. "Audience members who are not satisfied with the response they have received from BBC Scotland after making a complaint can go to the editorial complaints unit in London," he said. "If they do not accept the response from the editorial complaints unit they can then go to the Trust. BBC Scotland does not pass complaints to the Trust." When liquidated in June of last year, Rangers FC owed tens of millions to 276 creditors. Charles Green's Sevco Scotland Limited acquired the assets of the club and the company was renamed as The Rangers Football Club Ltd. The new entity entered Scottish football in the lowest tier Third Division.

I would like to ask fellow fans their feelings on the quality of football kits from Puma as opposed to the kits from Nike and Adidas , me i think the Puma kit is pretty dire and how long are we tied to this company .

Companies House is to contact Rangers' subsidiary Sevco Scotland Ltd after it filed an incomplete annual return. The document submitted on 12 September contained no details of shareholding during the return period from the company's date of incorporation. Annual returns usually provide details of the identities of shareholders. Sevco Scotland Ltd was the company that acquired the assets of Rangers Football Club PLC last summer after it formally entered liquidation proceedings. Sevco Scotland Ltd changed its name to the Rangers Football Club Limited in July 2012. Companies House told BBC Scotland that it would raise the issue with Sevco Scotland Ltd and confirm if a second annual return was to be filed by the company.

Rangers FC Official ‏@RFC_Official 25m PRESS: We'll have some live updates from this morning's pre-match press conference with the manager Ally McCoist coming soon. #FAFCvRFC Rangers FC Official ‏@RFC_Official 13m Ally McCoist on facing Forfar again - We're looking forward to going back up there, it was our biggest disappointment this season Rangers FC Official ‏@RFC_Official 13m AMcC - We want to go back up there on Sunday and continue what we feel has been a good start to the season. Rangers FC Official ‏@RFC_Official 12m AMcC - We feel we're stronger with the new faces that we've brought in. Forfar are a big side & they have the potential to make it difficult Rangers FC Official ‏@RFC_Official 11m AMcC on Dick Campbell's comments that #Rangers will win the league by Christmas - I think he's probably playing a bit of mind games there. Rangers FC Official ‏@RFC_Official 10m AMcC - We understand the situation with clubs having plastic pitches, they are a fact of life in lower divisions & we have to get on with it Rangers FC Official ‏@RFC_Official 10m AMcC on Zaliuskas - We have put an offer to him and he's at home considering it. We are very hopeful on that. Rangers FC Official ‏@RFC_Official 9m AMcC - We are also still speaking to Boris Pandza's agent too. Rangers FC Official ‏@RFC_Official 8m AMcC on where a Ramsdens Cup Final would be played - I'd be far happier having that conversation when we get to the Final. Rangers FC Official ‏@RFC_Official 7m Thanks for following this morning's press conference. Stay tuned for more on http://www.rangers.co.uk throughout the day today.

Hi everyone, not really one for forums but thought I would sign up and tell you about my picture collection, I have collected 1000's of Rangers pics and now sharing them for everyone to enjoy on the facebook group Rangers FC In Pictures https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rangers-FC-In-Pictures/467086550065174?ref=hl Also on twitter @RangersPics, although I am suspended at the moment due to tagging ex players in photos, didnt realise you couldnt do that on twitter or maybe because its a new account.

I'm interested to know whether or not I'm in a minority of one on this. Spence, despite being a wretch, claims to have been hassled in the street while out walking with his wife. I'd like the club to officially deplore such incidents because this way we not only (hopefully) deter the more aggressive fan from causing trouble but keep the focus on the journalist, not us. Aside from which, depending on how heavy the hassle was, its not really on either. I suppose this could be seen as a bit grovelly but we really need to up our political game because atm we are outsmarted every time. Yes, journalists, managers and players have been hassled by fans for decades without feeling the need to call (a) the police and (b) the papers but in the publicity war we are losing, heavily. 'Yes' to a statement or apoplectic 'get stuffed you handwringer'?

http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/4989-club-statement

http://news.stv.tv/west-central/239433-rangers-ebt-tax-case-hmrc-appeal-to-be-heard-in-public-judge-rules/ HM Revenue and Customs’ appeal against the Rangers tax case will be heard in public, it has been announced. The tax authority is appealing the First Tier Tax Tribunal that ruled in favour of the Murray Group Holdings and its subsidiary, Rangers oldco. In the tribunal decision released last November, a majority of two to one on the panel found that payments made through offshore employee benefit trusts (EBTs) to players and staff at Rangers should be classified as loans and did not attract PAYE and national insurance. There were five cases where the payments made to employees should be classified as wages and were taxable, the panel found. HMRC launched an appeal against the ‘big’ tax case in the Upper Tribunal last year and it is set to be heard on several days between January and March 2014. Colin Bishopp is the Upper Tribunal judge overseeing it and his directions issued at an earlier preliminary hearing in the case were released on Friday. In it, he confirmed that all further hearings in the case will be made in public, after the previous case was held in private. Judge Bishopp said: "It was common ground before me that the presumption is that tax appeals are heard in public, and with no concealment of identity or detail. I accept that, in the past, there was good reason to fear that the personal safety of certain individuals was threatened; but the information now before me indicates that the threats have abated and have probably disappeared. "Even if the identities of some individuals were concealed in the First-tier Tribunal’s decision, the nature of the issues was not." He stated that the original decision to withhold the identities of those giving evidence in the case came about because of the "strong feelings" football can generate. Judge Bishopp explained: "It is undisputed that various threats of a serious nature have been made, and that the Strathclyde Police have been compelled to offer advice and protection to several individuals involved in RFC’s affairs. Some of the threats have come from disappointed Rangers supporters; others from supporters of rival teams who have formed the opinion that RFC’s use of the EBT gave it an unfair financial advantage. "Largely because of those threats the hearing before the First-tier Tribunal was held in private. Some of the witnesses who gave oral evidence were resident outside the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom courts and tribunals, and therefore could not be compelled to give evidence; they did so only on condition that their names were not revealed. The two HMRC officers who had dealt with the matter, too, were believed to be under threat and their identities were concealed. In consequence the decision was released in a heavily redacted and anonymised form." 'No special status' The judge also noted that many of those who gave evidence could be identified by piecing together their First Tier Tribunal evidence with the findings of the independent Scottish Premier League commission chaired by Lord Nimmo Smith that found Rangers breached the rules by failing to disclose EBT payments. After the case last year, former Rangers owner Sir David Murray stated that the decision left the oldco, which is now in liquidation, and his company facing a "minimal tax liability". Originally, HMRC had sought £36.6m from Rangers oldco for PAYE and national insurance for its use of EBTs from 2001 and 2010. It also alleged that four companies related to Sir David - Murray Group Holdings Ltd, Murray Group Management Ltd, the Premier Property Group Ltd and GM Mining Ltd – owed a further £10m in unpaid taxes on the EBT payments. The panel that heard the first case ruled that most of the trusts were "valid" and payments made to players and staff were loans that are "recoverable" by the trusts. Rangers oldco, now known as RFC 2012 plc, went into administration last February with debts of between £50m and £124m, depending on the amount allotted to the big tax case. Duff and Phelps were unable to agree a company voluntary agreement (CVA) among creditors and liquidators BDO were appointed last October. Rangers’ assets, including Ibrox stadium and the Murray Park training ground, were sold to a newco, formerly Sevco Scotland Ltd, which was backed by Charles Green’s consortium last June in a £5.5m deal. Judge Bishopp said he took into account the financial collapse of Rangers and subsequent fallout into allowing the hearings to be held in public. He stated: "Perhaps because of such feelings, professional football clubs are often regarded as having a special status. In some respects that may be the correct view; but it should nevertheless not be overlooked that a modern professional football club is not a 'club', in the sense of an unincorporated association of members who join together in pursuit of a common purpose, but a commercial enterprise whose function is to generate profits for its shareholders. "From that perspective it has no special status, and there is no reason why its tax affairs should not be as open to scrutiny as those of any other profit-making organisation. The players, too, have no greater right to conceal their tax affairs from public scrutiny than any other taxpayer. The fact that they are in the public eye is irrelevant. "Any application for privacy, anonymity or redaction of detail must therefore be supported by the same type and quality of evidence as would be required of another taxpayer, and will be granted only for the same reasons." Under his direction, the HMRC employees who dealt with the case will remain anonymous in the Upper Tribunal hearing, while other witnesses who were not compelled to give evidence during the original case will not have to give evidence.

http://www.therangersstandard.co.uk/index.php/articles/current-affairs/282-jim-spence-rangers-jibes I won't post the article as there are a few images used at the link for context... Suffice to say, poor Jum gets nailed by an on-form Chris...

Police Scotland to investigate itself as Prosecutors reveal allegations PR team’s ex-cops may have asked serving colleagues for leaks on HMRC investigations crown office AMID an on-going investigation by Police Scotland into leaks of private emails, documents & sound recordings relating to Rangers football club and the saga which ultimately led to the club’s demise into insolvency, it has now emerged from sources at Scotland’s Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) that retired & currently serving Police officers may be implicated in the burgeoning scandal. According to prosecutors, the revelations if true, may make it difficult for Police Scotland to impartially investigate the affair. Yesterday (Saturday), sources within the Crown Office identified allegations contained in material now in the possession of prosecutors which refer to possible discussions between former Police Officers employed employed by a media firm connected to Rangers FC and serving Police officers in what would have been Strathclyde Police under the command of Chief Constable Stephen House. Quotes from documents in the hands of prosecutors appear to indicate suggestions of discussions between “internal security people” and “still serving colleagues” with a view to obtaining details of operations & investigations being conducted by HMRC officials regarding the football club’s tax affairs. Prosecutors now appear to be convinced such conversations and possibly meetings between ex Police Officers & serving Police Officers took place. In an unannounced move, a senior Crown Office prosecutor has now been appointed to look at whether persons identified in the leaked documents may be charged with criminal offences over revelations that photographs & personal details of HMRC staff and civil servants may have been obtained and published online in an effort to derail investigations on the Rangers tax case in 2011. Prosecutors are also looking into whether the information identifying HMRC personnel may have been provided by serving Police Officers to former colleagues and those with an interest in defending the football club from the tax investigations. Meanwhile the Twitter account known as Charlotte Fakeovers (@charlotteFakes) at the heart of the investigation has been deleted and is no longer available. A number of documents published by the twitter account have also been withdrawn from circulation. No one from the Crown Office or Police Scotland was available to give official comment on the current state of the investigation. One can only suspect that the media firm involved is MediaHouse. Also, one may ask, how did this information get to the police? It appears to me that daggers are drawn http://scottishlaw.blogspot.ie/2013/09/police-scotland-to-investigate-itself.html

From poster McCoist_355 on FF: http://forum.followfollow.com/showthread.php?t=932306 For posterity... Lord Nimmo Smith/Glennie/SPL: http://tiny.cc/ojiipw - NimmoSmith verdict's proving Rangers FC continues (JPG) http://tiny.cc/832kqw - Lord Nimmo Smith's report (PDF) http://tiny.cc/xn6kqw - SPL CEO Neil Doncaster: "It is an existing club, even though it's a new company" 1 minute in. http://tiny.cc/0ko6xw - Lord Glennie - distinguishing between company and club UEFA: http://tiny.cc/u8akpw - UEFA Rangers "Scottish Cup" squad (Elgin game) updated 8th Dec 2012 (LINK) http://tiny.cc/r12kqw - UEFA's updated Scottish Cup squad (JPG) SFL/SPFL: http://tiny.cc/8h832w - SPFL Rangers home page - "Founded 1872" - Full trophy list (LINK) http://tiny.cc/pyyzyw - Derek Longmuir, SFL CEO, congratulating Gers on 140 years. SFA: http://tiny.cc/xn832w - SFA statement - Newco are "the new owners of the Rangers Football Club" http://tiny.cc/b1kuyw - SFA Annual Review - RFC "entering liquidation and subsequently accommodated into SFL3" http://tiny.cc/qdfjqw - SFA's Scottish Cup archive: Rangers FC record continuous into 2013. (JPG) http://tiny.cc/gt3kqw - SFA Q&A: clarifying status of "Rangers FC" re. Div 3, 4 yrs of accounts, Scottish Cup entry (LINK) http://tiny.cc/lu3kqw - SFA statement "full membership has been transferred". (LINK) HMRC: http://tiny.cc/cryzyw - "the liquidation route does not prejudice the proposed sale of the club. This sale [of Rangers FC] can take place either through a CVA or a liquidation." (LINK) European Clubs Association: http://tiny.cc/yw5kqw - "The organisation considers the club’s history to be continuous regardless of the change of company" (LINK) Advertising Standards Authority: http://tiny.cc/gs832w - Rangers' most successful club claim is rubber-stamped by the ASA BBC - Independent report by Editorial Standards Committee: http://tiny.cc/lezzyw - "where.. the BBC had made the distinction between an “old” and “new” Rangers.. club as opposed to the “old” and “new” company, ..due accuracy had not been achieved." Proof of post-liquidation survival precedents: http://tiny.cc/5jnqqw - Leeds WERE liquidated/No CVA - KPMG source http://tiny.cc/7tpqqw - Arbitration case proving Leeds no CVA http://www.theifo.co.uk/adjudication...llettfinal.pdf - Luton No CVA (IFO)/Bournemouth/Rotherham/Leeds too http://judgmental.org.uk/judgments/E...A_Civ_180.html Crystal Palace were also liquidated. http://tiny.cc/9xp6xw (PDF) and http://tiny.cc/8cq6xw (JPG) - Portsmouth were also "liquidated" in 2010 And finally....Dermot Desmond: http://tiny.cc/vqo6xw - "A fantastic club with great history"

Petition by Sevco Scotland 5088 Glasgow, United Kingdom 134 Million pounds was lost to the Scottish taxpayer when Rangers died and were liquidated. Now a year after their liquidation they are claiming the 5 stars of the liquidated club. This club has only won the now equally defunct SFA Division 3 of Scottish football and claims to the contrary are a disgraceful attempt to claim the history of a liquidated club. Transparency is needed. If they claim the oldco's history then they should pay its debts! http://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/spfl-take-the-5-stars-of-the-oldco-rangers-off-the-newco-s-shirt

Haven't seen this on RM or here but according to the Daily Mail today McColl's gang tried to bring back McClelland as the chairman. Absolutely frightful stuff if true. A real return to the old days when he was Murray's puppet and presided over record levels of debt. I'm neither here nor there with the current board and prospective future board. To me they all remind of the South Park episode where a douche and a turd compete with each other. But it's absolutely disparaging that our prospective leaders want a return of one of our past failures.

Glen Gibbons: Ally McCoist’s claim to have as formidable a squad of players as any club in the country outside champions Celtic would do nothing to dispel the impression that his tongue these days is quicker than his wits. The words had hardly left the Rangers manager’s lips when his side were beaten 3-1 at home in a closed-doors friendly by Hibernian, who could not reasonably be described as the galacticos of the SPFL’s Premiership. The former striker’s readiness with the impulsive, unconsidered response may be rooted in his history as a media-friendly figure. He has, after all, been what is known these days as the go-to personality for the telling quote for as long as anyone (including himself) can remember. It is possible that McCoist has become so practised in the art of filling space that he cannot break the habit. Even so, he has been steadily compiling what might be called a portfolio of outbursts, some of them grossly ill-advised and even dangerous. McCoist’s errant views began at Dunfermline two years ago when, without having seen the incident, he insisted that Steven Naismith could not be guilty of elbowing Austin McCann because “he’s not that type of lad”. Naismith, of course, was caught on camera and suspended. There followed the infamous “we want to know who these people are” demand in the wake of the review panel who sat to consider Rangers’ rules breaches in the wake of their entering administration. A similar noise was made over the question of Rangers being fined for their indiscretions while Hearts and Dunfermline were not. On both occasions, the SFA revealed that McCoist (and, in the latter case, his chief executive, Craig Mather) already knew the answers. Perhaps most seriously of all, McCoist declared himself “appalled” by the arson attack on the bus depot which housed Rangers’ new luxury coach, clearly implying that it had been carried out by rival football fans. The subsequent police investigation disclosed that the crime was not related to football. If these previous retorts are a measure of his judgment, there is unlikely to be a stampede of punters desperate to plunge on Rangers for the only “major” left to them, the Scottish Cup. http://www.scotsman.com/news/glenn-gibbons-scots-send-in-the-clowns-1-3081141

Guys, I've been offline for a few days so apologies for my lack of contribution to recent issues. However, in my absence, I've noticed a few things being suggested/inferred/alleged about various people. Thus, a few points of order: 1. While we're happy to discuss any issue and/or protagonist in this farce, please avoid direct accusations of illegal behaviour which (at this stage at least) none of us can prove. Keep criticism constructive and fair! 2. While other forums and websites may wish to indulge their membership in terms of embarrassing us all by attacking, abusing and insulting each other, Gersnet will not stand for it. Stay civil and remember we're all Rangers fans here! 3. If you have any solid information which may clarify any specific issues with regard to various issues at Rangers FC (or elsewhere) please contact the club and/or Police Scotland rather than make unsubstantiated allegations (however understandable) on this website. I can't afford legal action! Thanks for your attention and understanding. Have fun!

http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/164607084

Team: Rangers FC Official ‏@RFC_Official 1h #Swifts vs Stenhousemuir: Kelly; Halkett, Gasparotto, Pascazio, Sinnamon; Dykes, Murdoch, Telfer, Stoney; Walsh; Gallagher HT; Rangers FC Official ‏@RFC_Official 33m HT: #Swifts 2:0 Stenhousemuir - #Rangers leading at the break thanks to goals from Danny Stoney and Dylan Dykes at Auchenhowie.

Unbelievable. http://billmcmurdo.wordpress.com/2013/08/24/for-the-avoidance-of-doubt/

AS has already been made clear the Board has been in discussions with representatives of the group which requisitioned a General Meeting. One of the aims was to avoid the disruption which would have been the inevitable consequence of such a meeting, as well as the totally unnecessary and massive cost to the Club. Having to convene two meetings, a General Meeting and then the Annual General Meeting, back to back would have caused a huge drain on Club resources. However, the Board is pleased to tell the Club's fans that it has managed to avoid such a damaging scenario. Through negotiations with Jim McColl, who has endorsed the General Meeting requisition, Rangers Chief Executive Craig Mather has managed to persuade this group that it would have been wrong to double the Club's expense, time and effort when the solution was always obvious. The Chief Executive has secured verbal and written commitment from the requisitioners that they accept the validity and logic of Mr Mather’s stance and are now willing to roll the two meetings into one session. It must be stressed this would not have been possible had it not been for the insistence of the Club’s Board and Chief Executive. The requisitioners had originally wanted to press ahead with a separate General Meeting until Mr Mather made it clear this would have been an unnecessary waste of the Club's money. It is disingenuous now of anyone outwith Rangers’ Board to attempt to claim any credit for this initiative. The truth is Rangers would have been spending well in excess of £150,000 to convene a General Meeting and then an Annual General Meeting almost back to back and it is categorically the case that it was only through the determination of the Board which made the requisitioners back down on this issue. The upshot of all of this is that this agreement means it is not necessary to meet the statutory deadline for producing the circular which must be sent out to shareholders to convene a General Meeting. The Club had prepared the document and was ready to send this but common sense prevailed. That was one of the main objectives of Mr Mather and the other Directors, although they are also striving to achieve a positive balance in the Board room. That’s why Mr Mather has made it clear to Mr McColl in their discussions he was open to change and additions which would include Frank Blin along with potential others. It remains the case that only individuals capable of strengthening the Board and the Club should be taken on. So that Rangers fans may be certain on this issue, it is absolutely the case that from the outset the Board has been willing to consider new Directors joining the Board who are capable of enhancing the Club’s strategy and vision. Our supporters should also be aware that after serious and profound discussion with as many fans as possible - both in the UK and abroad - it will be our intention to introduce a proper and modern Membership Scheme. The fans of a club this size should have a greater connection and influence. Fan representation on the Board is not something this Club should fear. Arrangements for the Annual General Meeting will be revealed in due course but the Board has managed to avoid what would have been unnecessary extra expenditure.

Analysis: is Blue Knight Paul Murray fighting a losing battle? Hugh Macdonald Wednesday 21 August 201 THE shifting quicksands of the Rangers saga have consumed a variety of personalities. Charles Green, the bluff Yorkshireman from central casting, joined the ranks yet again of those who have been banished from the drama on the south side but a more significant character now has a leading role in what will happen at Ibrox. The name of Paul Murray was absent from a Rangers statement in the wake of the dismissal of Green as a consultant but it does not require the combined skills of Interpol to deduce that he forms a block to any immediate resolution to the boardroom problems. To summarise the plot so far, if somewhat crudely: there is a move from outside the boardroom to remove Brian Stockbridge, Craig Mather and Bryan Smart and replace them with Frank Blin and Murray. A club statement last night read: "This board has been working tirelessly to find an intelligent solution to the request for a general meeting and all of the directors are open to sensible and reasonable additions. For instance, the board are not against Frank Blin becoming a director but do have reservations about other proposals.'' When it comes to Murray, some on the board have more reservations than the Apaches. There was a feeling of relief that Green had gone, a belief among his opponents that a metaphorical stake had finally been placed through the heart of the significant shareholder, but there was also an anxiety about his almost diabolical powers of recovery. The most pressing difficulty for Rangers, however, centres on Murray. The opposition group could make a compromise by suggesting Blin, former executive chairman of PricewaterhouseCoopers Scotland, is joined on the board by A.N Other. Jim McColl, part of the outside group, would not consider such a role but the more intriguing aspect is the willingness or otherwise of Murray to relinquish his attempt to join a board that needs stability. The indications last night were surprising concrete given the fluidity of events at Ibrox. First, it seems there exists a strong aversion to bringing in Murray from among existing board members. Second, there was no sign of Murray issuing any sort of statement saying he would fall on his sword to facilitate peace, at least for the present. The objections are believed to be both personal and on matters of business. The accountant was part of the board before Craig Whyte bought the club and is seen by some as part of the problem rather than part of the solution. One City source said: "Murray had his chance to influence matters when he was on the board and then had his chance with the Blue Knights. There is no mood among some on the board to bring him back into the fold.'' The private concerns are shrouded in claim and counter claim. The Rangers story has been extraordinarily messy with dirt thrown in all directions. Information has leaked steadily. Murray, rightly or wrongly, has been suspected as one of those who have used media outlets to his advantage. If true, he would stand in a crowded dock as the briefings have come from almost every source, every faction. However, the fog of war has cleared just a little over Ibrox. Green has been sacked, disposed of by an increasingly frustrated and determined Mather. There is now an opportunity for compromise and even, heaven forfend, resolution of the boardroom struggle. This could come in a variety of forms. Two options are most likely. The first is Murray stands down and the McColl group is allowed to bring in Blin and an unspecified ally. The second is that Murray, backed by McColl, stands his ground and maintains his attempt to come on to the board. This eventuality would be fast-tracked by the approval of a vote at the extraordinary general meeting. The crux of the matter is this: if the McColl group is sure of the support of a group of shareholders, it will feel it has no need to sacrifice the candidature of Murray. McColl and his cohorts will flex their muscle and the Blue Room will undergo yet another change of cast. Mather, it must be presumed, would not wait to be pushed and Stockbridge and Smart would face a limited future. There are a couple of possible twists, of course. This is a Rangers story, after all. The first is Murray could step aside temporarily, peace could break out and he could then be brought on board at a later stage. The second is that the present board finds enough support to win any vote. There is also the possibility of hearing the less than dulcet tones of Green joining the increasingly raucous debate. He may be gone but no one will be surprised at another scene-stealing interruption from the former chief executive. However, the narrative is now about Murray. Will he walk away or will he pursue his ambition to be on the board? History suggests it be latter option. The arithmetic will decide whether the erstwhile Blue Knight finally lands his prize. http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/analysis-is-blue-knight-paul-murray-fighting-a-losing-battle.1377061992