The Failure of the Fans Groups

[Union City Blue 0]

Are you seriously saying that, as a member of the RST board (albeit an unelected one), that you choose to put your own sensitivities ahead of your willingness to offer a meaningful response when confronted with your own failure? Go dry your eyes, big shot.

 

The only thing wrong with supporter representation is the willingness of representatives to deal with there own lack of achievement. I realise it's not easy to take but, please, every day I listen to this put 'Rangers First' nonsense from people who plainly are prepared to do nothing of the sort. Trying is always commendable but refusing to acknowledge a lack of achievement is unforgivable and nothing characterises the RST as much as its failure to achieve, on any level.

 

People ask why the club and the support are so fucked up - well in each case, look no further than those involved. Improvement can only come with fresh blood, root and branch change. And whether you like it or not UCB, you're part of the problem.

 

But hey, maybe you're just too busy being offended.

 

maineflyer - you neither offend me, upset me, or make me cry. Seriously, you don't. You're rude but you don't care, so it's not my problem.

 

Anyway.....

 

I'm well aware of what fans' groups have and haven't achieved, particularly the RST. And I'm well aware that fresh impetus and change is required. You happen to believe that nobody who's currently involved has any single attribute other than having tried. I disagree.

 

So sorry to disappoint you, but I intend to carry on. Now if you'd stop asking me to resign we can maybe move onto more productive ground?

[Frankie 8,152]

As the RST has been an integral member of the Assembly since its conception and remained a member then by failing to do anything about it, the RST are supporting its set up.

 

My view is that the RST should resign from the Assembly but I know it's not a view that has much support from the RST board.

 

I can understand that point of view and suggested as much during my time on the board.

 

Since around then the Trust/Assembly relationship has improved but little seems to have come from this.

 

I noticed an interesting (and now deleted) thread on FF questioning the Trust/Rangers/SDM relationship had to improve if the Trust was to move forward. A reasonable point of view which the Trust may subscribe to but the club/owner himself may not given he (and Alistair Johnston) seems to have broken off any contact with the RST as an individual organisation.

 

To that end, the only way the Trust can be involved at that level is to remain part of the Assembly as I'm sure they wouldn't be happy with second hand information. By doing that, they're arguably only supporting the club's ignorance of independent representation and increasing the profile of the Assembly. A win-win for the club.

 

As its stands, the Trust seem to be doing a bit too much treading water and fence-sitting. Understandable in some respects given the uncertainty surrounding the club but hardly catalytic to self-improvement and necessary growth.

 

Of course there is no appetite for strong protest so if the Trust have to stay within the Assembly, then perhaps they should be agitating it more from within to try and achieve positive change.

 

Almost 3 years ago SDM promised a supporters rep on the board. Not an ideal scenario but a step in the right direction IMO (if proper procedures were followed). That hasn't been followed through but we've not heard a wimper from any of the organisations about it. Bizarre!

 

I think the Trust and Assembly would both benefit from examining their constitution, aims, and make-up. As it stands it is difficult to see a proper, workable and achievable direction for either. That is most disappointing during one of the most crucial periods in our club's history.

 

Never has there been a better opportunity to increase our say.

[maineflyer 0]

maineflyer - you neither offend me, upset me, or make me cry. Seriously, you don't. You're rude but you don't care, so it's not my problem.

 

Anyway.....

 

I'm well aware of what fans' groups have and haven't achieved, particularly the RST. And I'm well aware that fresh impetus and change is required. You happen to believe that nobody who's currently involved has any single attribute other than having tried. I disagree.

 

So sorry to disappoint you, but I intend to carry on. Now if you'd stop asking me to resign we can maybe move onto more productive ground?

 

By productive I take it you mean less awkward, more easily faffed over, less obliged to give meaningful answers, anything that avoids the real issues. No change there then.

[Frankie 8,152]

Gentlemen:

 

Please can we concentrate on the real issues here rather than starting to get personal with each other.

 

We've seen similar threads derailed (or deleted) elsewhere and I want to avoid that here.

[Union City Blue 0]

I was just thinking aloud regarding MF's suggestion that board members are not elected properly. He's not the only one to suggest that over the years.

 

In addition to that, across the community Trust members (past and present) still complain about a lack of communication and involvement - i.e. other than AGMs they are not consulted enough and, given the poor attendance at these meetings, the board's mandate to make and carry forward policy is worthy of examination.

 

In other words, how can the board be more accountable to its members when problems arise? The suggestion of standing yourself is fair enough - given the correct backing - but I know just how difficult it can be to influence or change direction.

 

Like I say, these same issues existed when I served so they're not new and I'm not saying they're easy to fix (if required).

 

Of course people will say how can you change such matters with a membership who perhaps don't contribute enough anyway (even when asked) but apathy is arguably the biggest obstacle to a meaningful, large-scale participation and representative group.

 

I'm glad you're working on such a package but how do you intend to overcome the various issues that have blighted and continue to blight these organisations and their relationships with the wider support?

 

Perhaps 'accountability' is an issue where members could provide some input or ideas if Board members are felt to be unaccountable? Improved communication would be a priority and we've made some progress but we need to try to make much more.

 

As for overcoming issues........ well it's a process isn't it? It would be good if we could all first agree on what the issues actually are and see if there's a will to resolve them. It would be difficult for me to describe what I believe the issues are on here without first raising them formally with others, which I haven't done yet. This is exactly the type of thing that needs to be done now that a chapter has closed (i.e. the Ellis etc period) and I believe it will be.

 

For me, the bottom line is that I don't believe the support is divided, but it is definitely fragmented and un-coordinated. We should work out how to fix that IMHO.

[Union City Blue 0]

As the RST has been an integral member of the Assembly since its conception and remained a member then by failing to do anything about it, the RST are supporting its set up.

 

My view is that the RST should resign from the Assembly but I know it's not a view that has much support from the RST board.

 

I definitely don't believe the RST should resign from the Assembly.

 

I believe they should be more actively collaborative, not less.

[Frankie 8,152]

Perhaps 'accountability' is an issue where members could provide some input or ideas if Board members are felt to be unaccountable? Improved communication would be a priority and we've made some progress but we need to try to make much more.

 

As for overcoming issues........ well it's a process isn't it? It would be good if we could all first agree on what the issues actually are and see if there's a will to resolve them. It would be difficult for me to describe what I believe the issues are on here without first raising them formally with others, which I haven't done yet. This is exactly the type of thing that needs to be done now that a chapter has closed (i.e. the Ellis etc period) and I believe it will be.

 

For me, the bottom line is that I don't believe the support is divided, but it is definitely fragmented and un-coordinated. We should work out how to fix that IMHO.

 

I think most of what you write is fair enough but when a membership (past and present) feel disengaged from those that they elect, it's natural that they may find it difficult (or pointless) to attempt to provide input if they think communication is so poor. This logically extends to our relationship with the club which forms a vicious circle overall.

 

Your description of the situation facing our support is a good one. I do feel division amongst our fans (online especially) is over-egged by some. But we are fragmented and I've seen minimal effort by any of the fan groups to address that - hence the strong (unfair?) accusation of failure.

 

Unlike some, I think there is still potential in both the Trust and the Assembly. But even they must realise with every passing day, the lack of a credible solution and leadership reduces their chance of improvement.

 

So when you're raising issues formally with others, I sincerely hope you do so in a way that gets the message across that we've seen in almost all online communities of late. Change is required and those wanting to hide from blame or refusing to engage with all fans should be the first to remove themselves from the decision-making process.

[Bluedell 5,346]

I definitely don't believe the RST should resign from the Assembly.

 

I believe they should be more actively collaborative, not less.

 

But surely collaboration does not depend on membership?

[Union City Blue 0]

But surely collaboration does not depend on membership?

 

No, I don't suppose it does actually.

 

Resignation has never crossed my mind tbh and I don't think it would send out the right signals or achieve anything.

 

Do you?

[maineflyer 0]

Gentlemen:

 

Please can we concentrate on the real issues here rather than starting to get personal with each other.

 

We've seen similar threads derailed (or deleted) elsewhere and I want to avoid that here.

 

I'm sorry but this isn't personal. What it is, is important. I'm not being abusive but I am being deliberately direct and attempting to cut through the same old waffle and deflection.

 

What we have here is a prime example of the RST in (in)action. Won't resign, can't make a difference, put self first. Why shouldn't these people be targeted? Why shouldn't we expect more of them? Why should they be allowed to continue playing what is obviously just an ego massage? WQhat justifies this endless toleration of failure.

 

Frankie, you tell me where there have ever been any real answers. Show me an example of an RST board member taking personal responsibility for the collective failure. Point out what can possibly be gained by continually patting these people on the back for 'volunteering'. In the business world, when you have a square peg in a round hole, you don't start re-shaping the hole, you get some new pegs. We're dancing around the real problem and no one seems to want to rock the boat. Well folks, in case you hadn't noticed, the boat is sinking fast and before long, rocking may not be enough.