Apologies, 3 Points and Parties

[boss 0]

http://home.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php/articles-mainmenu-2/1-club/1204-apologies-3-points-and-parties

 

O wad some Power the giftie gie us

To see oursels as ithers see us!

It wad frae monie a blunder free us.

Especially me.

 

Little did I think ... (I could stop there but it wouldn�t be much of an article) ... as I browsed through Companies House website last Sunday afternoon that we�d be where we are today.

 

My decades-in-the-profession curiosity sufficiently aroused by the Grantly Group, if not alarm bells ringing then certainly faint peals in the distance, and the skeleton of an article gradually appearing.

 

Firstly, an apology. The cheap jibes in that article detracted from the facts therein. They were but two, they were a tiny part of the whole, but they were unnecessary. If they have become at least part of the story since then, I am sorry.

 

That STV picked up the story, and the Herald continued it today during their questioning of Graham Duffy, could not have been foreseen ââ?¬â?? no previous Rangers Media article had reached the dizzy heights of the national press. Indeed my immediately preceding and succeeding articles, on Rangersââ?¬â?¢ Accounts and SPL Rules respectively, were hopefully informative, but devoid of tabloidisms, and were largely shelved for future reference or never.

 

The breaches referred to are important. I reckon that just three of the, ahem, elder beancounters across the boards have 75 years experience between us (I�ll spare my two seniors� blushes). Each of us, and most others in the same or similar professions, were of one mind: these are issues about which the Rangers fans deserve to know. There was no ulterior motive.

 

My second apology of the day. Rangers Media has no policy on Mr Duffy or on the RST. If my article gave the impression that I was stating an official policy then I apologise to Rangers Media and its admin team. The article was entirely my own view.

 

If this week has shown anything it is that the Rangers support is diverse and remains, dare I use the ââ?¬Ë?fââ?¬â?¢ word, fragmented. Perhaps this is a product of our history; our cultural and (whisper it) presbyterian background; our inquisitive, nay, cantankerous nature; our respect for authority without undue deference; a sort of ââ?¬Å?I kent his faitherââ?¬Â mixed with an inability to ââ?¬Å?see ourselsââ?¬Â. Perhaps it will be ever thus?

 

But we can still show genuine unity in some respects. Every single one of us desperately wants three points tomorrow. At 12.30pm there will be few things more important to us at that moment than getting off to a flyer and cheering the players on to another championship lead.

 

As the final whistle sounds, many of us will be heading to our Christmas parties - the Rangers Media and RST dinners, on the same night, on the same street, at the same time. Let�s hope we have reason to celebrate and that we all have a ball.

 

And if the olive branch should bend under the weight of the Sunday papers, let us remember it was at least good while it lasted.

[maineflyer 0]

Boss,

You did us all (well, nearly all) a great service with your post last weekend. Not just for the curiosity it stirred up around Mr Duffy but for the eyes it opened among such a wide audience of Rangers supporters and for what it subsequently revealed about some of our own. No apologies were required.

[rbr 1,247]

As the final whistle sounds, many of us will be heading to our Christmas parties - the Rangers Media and RST dinners, on the same night, on the same street, at the same time. Let’s hope we have reason to celebrate and that we all have a ball.

 

 

Big Fight Big Fight , can we see this on pay per view or have BBC Alba came in with a last minute bid

 

 

 

Seriously boss your artice was excellent and certainly took the debate to another level , keep up the good work

[Zappa 0]

Personally, I didn't see any malice in the Grantly article, but it's quite clear that it wasn't interpreted in a good light by everyone. Whatever it takes to try and clear the air of the stench of bickering has to be a good thing, but I doubt that anyone will be making public apologies intended for your eyes Boss.

 

Anyway, these are subjects of massive importance to RFC & I don't see any reason that anyone should feel they can't publish some research into people such as King & now Duffy.

 

The pertinent aspect of this is that the couple of comments in your article which weren't cold hard facts are the type of things constantly appearing on the Gers MB's, but it's only when they're attached to an article such as yours that the shit hits the fan. It seems there's some picking & choosing of when it's appropriate to appear offended & strike out even when in actual fact it's doubtful that anyone was hurt. IMO, it's the digging into the Grantly companies & publishing of the info that's rubbed some people up the wrong way rather than some tongue in cheek comments.

[Frankie 8,148]

Most decent of you to apologise Boss.

 

Obviously, our support should never be afraid of asking legitimate questions of any party involved in the likely takeover of our club and while any such debate should remain constructive at all times, it should also be open to every fan who is about to be asked to invest their money into any new ownership model.

[rbr 1,247]

boss , why should you appologise , why when people are getting led by the nose should you appologise for a very decent resume of our next " king in the making's " business history , why when we dont have a media capable or is that interested in our future should you appologise for making a very well written point bringing into question someone who would ask 45,000 fans to hand over �£1000 each plus a membership fee , not that we dont want fan participation but at what cost .

 

 

At least someone asked , so why appologise

[chilledbear 16]

If it was that lot from the other side, we would be laughing our heads off at this guy. No way is he Rangers Class, and if he is part of a consortium it doesn't say much for the rest if they are letting him do the talking.

[elderslieblue 0]

I don't think anyone was looking for Boss to 'apologise' for any of the facts on his article on Duffy. It was obviously well researched and he did a lot to put Duffys history in front of the average messageboard Rangers fan.

 

The wee dig he had was what caused most of the furore I'd suspect. :box:

[Frankie 8,148]

If it was that lot from the other side, we would be laughing our heads off at this guy. No way is he Rangers Class, and if he is part of a consortium it doesn't say much for the rest if they are letting him do the talking.

 

Yeah, doubts remain but Boss' article certainly ensured some of those doubts were answered - if still without the depth we'd all like.

 

I guess we can only wait and see how it all plays out. I certainly suspect we don't know much less than anyone else though through all the speculation and lack of real facts.

 

What is fair to say is that Duffy and/or the fan groups need help in terms of putting forward people who the support can buy into. That won't be easy given several weeks down the line we're no closer to seeing that but next week's AGM may catalyse the situation somewhat.

[chilledbear 16]

Yeah, doubts remain but Boss' article certainly ensured some of those doubts were answered - if still without the depth we'd all like.

 

I guess we can only wait and see how it all plays out. I certainly suspect we don't know much less than anyone else though through all the speculation and lack of real facts.

 

What is fair to say is that Duffy and/or the fan groups need help in terms of putting forward people who the support can buy into. That won't be easy given several weeks down the line we're no closer to seeing that but next week's AGM may catalyse the situation somewhat.

 

I think Boss article made the doubts more profound. The interview today does not make things any better. Duffy will not be at the AGM, nor will any other members of the 'consortium'. We will have to wait off course till we hear more, lets hope there is more gravitas when someone else raises their head.