The fans are complicit in the Rangers problem too.

[Guest Pokeherface]

It was not in any way to undermine. I AGREE with you. I have said in every post that I agree with you. I AGREE, and said so, that the trust has let its membership (and former members) down. I dont think you can say that the trust has let the entire support down because they represent, in YOUR words, a tiny membership. That was all it was.

 

If you want to answer the first question, I would love an answer because it looks like you are harking back to some better time and if it existed, it existed before I was born. I am interested in when you think that sea-change in attitude came.

 

 

As for me? I think the trust are finished. I think they let their membership down and I think they could and should have done far better in their role. I dont think they are bad people or that they didnt achieve anything, because clearly they did. Your black and white world is just that, YOURS, and it bears no relationship to the real world where things are always in shades of gray. Instead of a blinkered 'all they did was/is bad', it often helps to look at things as they really are instead of in polarized ways.

[maineflyer 0]

It's a bugger, this black and white. It's not meant to be descriptive of course, in fact it's a hell of an uncomfortable way of looking at things. But it does allow at least some chance of looking past the clutter and bullshit, even if only for a moment. Amazing what you find sometimes.

[pete 2,494]

I remember in the seventies fans on the terracing wondering why Willie Waddle wouldn't give more money out for players to stop the Celtic 9 in a row. At the end of the season we were lucky to get 20.000 fans turning up if i remember right. Waddle always said the restoration of Ibrox was more important to him as it was not long after the Ibrox disaster. To be honest I don't remember any time in the seventies that fans were any more united or divided as now. if you look how the Manu fans were divided in their green and gold till Manu's sold then I doubt you will ever get a full support backing anyone.

[maineflyer 0]

As for me? I think the trust are finished. I think they let their membership down and I think they could and should have done far better in their role.

You cannot limit the failure of the RST by saying they have only let down their members and the rest of us have no right to complain. The fact of the matter is the RST was set up for the benefit of all Rangers supporters and sought to have all supporters as members. While that might be unrealistic in a literal sense it is nevertheless objectively true. That the RST achieved such a disappointing total membership and then lost the majority of them is testament only to the unattractiveness of their performance and paucity of their achievement. The Trust may have represented only a tiny fraction of the Rangers support but they acted on behalf of all and, in failing in their task, the RST let down all of us. Worst of all, they wasted the chance to do good for us all.

 

Every time the media wants the opinion of Rangers fans you read the same phrase "Rangers fans' chief said ..." and whether you like it or not, the wider community is only too willing to see the RST as representative of all Rangers fans - and the RST only too willing to talk on behalf of all Rangers fans (certainly, I've never heard the RST qualify the boundaries of their representation). The RST was such a huge missed opportunity that, to the shame of everyone involved, continues unaddressed even today. I hope they all enjoy their big dinner.

[Guest Pokeherface]

This is what I always thought. We have never really had a united support and we have never been anything other than customers. I would love to be shown I'm wrong on that though as it would give a little hope we can actually pull together in decent numbers.

[Guest Pokeherface]

You cannot limit the failure of the RST by saying they have only let down their members and the rest of us have no right to complain. The fact of the matter is the RST was set up for the benefit of all Rangers supporters and sought to have all supporters as members. While that might be unrealistic in a literal sense it is nevertheless objectively true. That the RST achieved such a disappointing total membership and then lost the majority of them is testament only to the unattractiveness of their performance and paucity of their achievement. The Trust may have represented only a tiny fraction of the Rangers support but they acted on behalf of all and, in failing in their task, the RST let down all of us. Worst of all, they wasted the chance to do good for us all.

 

Baws, I'm afraid. A group can hope to represent whoever it wants. Those it DOES represent are it's members. They failed to attract larger numbers, due in no small part, remember, to overtly hostile campaigners but every statement and every mission statement has said the same thing 'our members.....'.

 

you can make a long winded and far fetched claim that they failed the wider support only if you accept that you personally, as a UK citizen, were failed badly by Screaming lord Such, a Man who wanted to represent you, who had his chances and who failed to do anything of note. You may scoff at that, but it is EXACTLY what you are saying about the trust.

Every time the media wants the opinion of Rangers fans you read the same phrase "Rangers fans' chief said ..." and whether you like it or not, the wider community is only too willing to see the RST as representative of all Rangers fans - and the RST only too willing to talk on behalf of all Rangers fans (certainly, I've never heard the RST qualify the boundaries of their representation). The RST was such a huge missed opportunity that, to the shame of everyone involved, continues unaddressed even today. I hope they all enjoy their big dinner.

 

A missed opportunity? yeah, I can agree on that. I will add that there has been and continues to be absolutely fuck all in the way of you stepping up and doing it properly. Or me. or anyone else in fact. The people who tried and failed are better than you (not MF you) and me who didnt. The media go to them because they are the only independant fans group with any sort of track record, like it or not. If there were alternatives you could begin to complain about the media going to them but there is not.

[pete 2,494]

Baws, I'm afraid. A group can hope to represent whoever it wants. Those it DOES represent are it's members. They failed to attract larger numbers, due in no small part, remember, to overtly hostile campaigners but every statement and every mission statement has said the same thing 'our members.....'.

 

you can make a long winded and far fetched claim that they failed the wider support only if you accept that you personally, as a UK citizen, were failed badly by Screaming lord Such, a Man who wanted to represent you, who had his chances and who failed to do anything of note. You may scoff at that, but it is EXACTLY what you are saying about the trust.

 

 

A missed opportunity? yeah, I can agree on that. I will add that there has been and continues to be absolutely fuck all in the way of you stepping up and doing it properly. Or me. or anyone else in fact. The people who tried and failed are better than you (not MF you) and me who didnt. The media go to them because they are the only independant fans group with any sort of track record, like it or not. If there were alternatives you could begin to complain about the media going to them but there is not.

 

Totally agree with you if you want to change things then you have to do it from within. Shouting from the roof tops is a waste of time and energy unless of course you can get someone to carry the flag for you.

[chilledbear 16]

As most of the Support get their news and information from the media and Rangers themselves, why would Rangers Supporters feel they needed to get involved.

 

It is only very recently, in fact last week is the first time our Chairman had anything harsh to say about Murray, even then you would have to read between the lines.