Grantly Group ââ?¬â?? insolvencies, dissolutions and breaches of the Companies Acts

[bmck 117]

Some members of the RST board have reacted on FF due to Boss's criticism of them as an organisation.

 

The criticism isn't overstated in that article. I wonder what Union City Bear thinks of that article, because if people are being harassed for that kind of research you've really got to wonder...

Edited December 1, 2009 by bmck

[maineflyer 0]

It will be one of the many points I would digest before coming to a decision. What do I get for my money!!

 

I think what you mean is that others will take a decision and we'll be left to decide to take it or leave it. With the RST having squandered and squabbled their way through the last few years, amassing barely 1000 members, the chance for any meaningful consultation has long gone. Which is why I'm extremely nervous about the current RST proposing themselves as the voice of the Rangers support. and yet, without the RST, how does someone like Mr Duffy make the pretence of working with the fans?

[chilledbear 16]

I think what you mean is that others will take a decision and we'll be left to decide to take it or leave it. With the RST having squandered and squabbled their way through the last few years, amassing barely 1000 members, the chance for any meaningful consultation has long gone. Which is why I'm extremely nervous about the current RST proposing themselves as the voice of the Rangers support. and yet, without the RST, how does someone like Mr Duffy make the pretence of working with the fans?

 

I will make the decision whether to invest my money, and do the research, as I always do. I will not invest so that a Supporters Organisation can have seat on the board, as I think you are alluding to.

[maineflyer 0]

I will make the decision whether to invest my money, and do the research, as I always do. I will not invest so that a Supporters Organisation can have seat on the board, as I think you are alluding to.

 

CB, I was just making the point that no one will be asking us which way to go, which is how it should be in an ideal world. They will simply cut a deal for whatever purposes they bring to the table and present the outcome. We will then, as you rightly say, have a choice - put up or shut up. No change there then.

[Frankie 8,186]

The criticism isn't overstated in that article. I wonder what Union City Bear thinks of that article, because if people are being harassed for that kind of research you've really got to wonder...

 

Boss may have been a wee bit mischievous in his criticism of the Trust within that article, but even those such as myself who asked simple questions elsewhere have been labelled as 'stupid, jealous Trust-trashers'... Utterly bizarre when I've actually been defending them elsewhere recently.

[bmck 117]

Boss may have been a wee bit mischievous in his criticism of the Trust within that article

 

I can't see it. The only bit I can imagine is the 'only show in town' list of three which is just pretty funny. The point is surely that he's done a service that benefits all Rangers fans, even RST members, and allows them to make better informed decisions. The article didn't even say anything like absolutely-dont-support-this-guy, it just gave you the facts as they are known while admitting there were things unknown. Seems totally reasonable.

 

but even those such as myself who asked simple questions elsewhere have been labelled as 'stupid, jealous Trust-trashers'... Utterly bizarre when I've actually been defending them elsewhere recently.

 

I honestly just don't understand it at all. Usually when people get petulant when criticised, instead of just responding like someone-who-actually-knows-better, they're petulant, and don't actually know better. I got all caught up in the spirit of revolution and community from Tannochsidebear's thread the other week, but with every passing day I remember why it is the RST just cant be trusted to take the lead on anything.

[Frankie 8,186]

Surely everyone will make up their own mind whether to invest money, I don't see that it will matter what any Supporters Organisation says or recommends.

 

That is true to an extent but as a backer of supporter representation I'd like the fans to be involved and have their say. Despite the 'canards' of some elsewhere, I don't have a problem with the Trust being that vehicle as long as they go about their business properly. Same goes for any other fans involved.

 

Unfortunately that currently isn't the case and that is worrying if you, like me, reckon the fans should have their say on who is suitable while working with them to buy and run the club.

[chilledbear 16]

That is true to an extent but as a backer of supporter representation I'd like the fans to be involved and have their say. Despite the 'canards' of some elsewhere, I don't have a problem with the Trust being that vehicle as long as they go about their business properly. Same goes for any other fans involved.

 

Unfortunately that currently isn't the case and that is worrying if you, like me, reckon the fans should have their say on who is suitable while working with them to buy and run the club.

 

My worry is that ' Supporter representation ' is the be all and end all for some.

[Bluedell 5,356]

I still get confused about this. Is the RST the mouthpiece of FF or is it the other way round?

 

It seems that most of them will use any excuse not to anywhere other than FF, which is disappointing.

 

For example, they said on FF yesterday that David Edgar did not tell NOTW that they have been talking to Duffy for a period of time, but there's no mention of this on their own website or elsewhere. I'm not sure how they expect members to find this out.

 

However, hopefully UCB will continue to post here and put forward the Trust's views, and accept the constructive criticism that is bound to follow in the manner that it is meant.

[Frankie 8,186]

I can't see it. The only bit I can imagine is the 'only show in town' list of three which is just pretty funny. The point is surely that he's done a service that benefits all Rangers fans, even RST members, and allows them to make better informed decisions. The article didn't even say anything like absolutely-dont-support-this-guy, it just gave you the facts as they are known while admitting there were things unknown. Seems totally reasonable.

 

 

 

I honestly just don't understand it at all. Usually when people get petulant when criticised, instead of just responding like someone-who-actually-knows-better, they're petulant, and don't actually know better. I got all caught up in the spirit of revolution and community from Tannochsidebear's thread the other week, but with every passing day I remember why it is the RST just cant be trusted to take the lead on anything.

 

It does tease the Trust somewhat about jumping into bed with the new flavour of the month which I guess has got a few folk a bit tetchy. But, of course the overall point is a valid one and every bear should take it under consideration.

 

Representing a fans organisation online isn't easy. Having spent 3 years across almost every Rangers forum trying promote what the Trust did I appreciate first hand hand how difficult, mischievous and, yes, disrespectful some people can be. That can be incredibly frustrating but resorting to abusing people (no matter how petty said abuse is) isn't the best way to answer what were fair questions (they were posted in the Duffy thread on here as well).

 

As such, the only person 'trashing the trust' as he put it is himself. This same person hypocritically moans about this sniping on FF while dismissing non-FF opinion as invalid because sites such as Gersnet, RangersMedia, Vanguard and Gersforum etc may not match the traffic of Follow Follow. Fair enough, all these sites are smaller (not by all that much in RM's case nowadays) but I find it incredible, absolutely incredible, that elected, supporter reps so easily dismiss their thousands of fans' opinions because of the odd bit of criticism of which they are perfectly capable of answering.

 

Is it any wonder then that the RST are seen so negatively everywhere but FF nowadays - and even there they seem to have problems accepting criticism? That is the most disappointing thing out of all this for me. And they refuse to see that which is only causing them further image issues as they proclaim unity and leadership in the media. That couldn't be further from the truth.

 

Perhaps UCB could care to comment on this issue?

Edited December 1, 2009 by Frankie