Rangers 2 years on

[54andcounting 0]

The Rangers fans

 

In fighting...just what we don't need at this time.

 

I'll correct that...

 

Just what we don't need ever.

 

Sort it out lads please

[Stimpy 0]

Whilst I very much appreciate the support I do not want this to be a "knock ff" thread. Those who know me know that Im about unity not division.

 

Shored Bear please note my comments in the last paragraph I included posters on forums as carrying the responsibility the same as everyone else.

 

I get that but if you're going to tackle the problem then mentioning the RST but failing to mention forums that obsess over the RST in a similar fashion to the tims on Rangers, shows lack of clarity or even honesty. You post on VB, what would I read about the RST on there that's constructive or suggests solutions? Will I read anything worthwhile or would it be hatred on an obscene level?

 

Until certain factions can admit to themselves and others their own part in the mess then we will never be close to working together. All I ever read is RST need to change, RST should do this, that and the other thing, but no mention of other that spend their days aiming abuse.

 

Do you see the RST posting articles attacking Gers fans or groups? No. Do you see others? Yes. So who needs to have word with themselves. And of course, I'm sure any bear that spends time on Gers forums will recall the campaign against BuyRangers. Utterly disgusting. Did you write about that and provide solutions?

[D'Artagnan 173]

I get that but if you're going to tackle the problem then mentioning the RST but failing to mention forums that obsess over the RST in a similar fashion to the tims on Rangers, shows lack of clarity or even honesty. You post on VB, what would I read about the RST on there that's constructive or suggests solutions? Will I read anything worthwhile or would it be hatred on an obscene level?

 

Until certain factions can admit to themselves and others their own part in the mess then we will never be close to working together. All I ever read is RST need to change, RST should do this, that and the other thing, but no mention of other that spend their days aiming abuse.

 

Do you see the RST posting articles attacking Gers fans or groups? No. Do you see others? Yes. So who needs to have word with themselves. And of course, I'm sure any bear that spends time on Gers forums will recall the campaign against BuyRangers. Utterly disgusting. Did you write about that and provide solutions?

 

Well firstly ShoredBear I didnt mention the RST in a negative light, or I certainly didnt intend to, I held up them and Rangers Unite to show how a failure to compromise can actually weaken rather than strengthen.

 

Secondly - I dont agree with the abuse of the RST - but I have no problems with criticism of the RST - in the same way as by blogging I leave myself open to criticism, much like you are doing now.

 

I think the RST comes in for particular criticism and abuse because a lot of people feel let down by it - I know I certainly do. I was there in Partick at the Burgh Halls, I grasped the dream, I was excited and ecstatic about it. I still remember that day so vividly and the feelings of optimism it generated. That dream has been extinguished for me and many others and I cant see it ever being re-ignited.

[chilledbear 16]

I have asked this many times, why do those that criticise the RST not join and change it from within? They always comment about the low numbers, then surely it wouldn't take that many to make a difference.

[Frankie 8,186]

I think SB makes some valid points actually.

 

Some critics of the Trust take their issues too far. There's valid criticism and there is unnecessary crap. On RM (I don't use VB so can't speak for there) a few posters certainly go too far. In saying that, on FF - administrated by a key Trust board member - unfortunately you will find similar from time to time about other groups/people as well. It's all a bit unsightly and does none of us any favours.

 

All this just goes to show the problems we all face even if the divisive behaviour is from a distinct minority and exaggerated too often. It really disappoints me that our fans can't disagree on some issues and still work together. Because when we do (see Hampden last year) we do so very well indeed.

[chilledbear 16]

Not sure it is actually the RST as such, more a certain member.

[Frankie 8,186]

Not sure it is actually the RST as such, more a certain member.

 

MD is a difficult conundrum for the Trust and other fan groups actually.

 

With all due respect to him, some of his actions and words haven't been the most constructive over the years but, on the other hand, he runs an excellent print fanzine and the most influential fansite. Moreover, he brings the kind of experience and knowledge such groups crave and need. I suspect if we were all really honest, neither would we disagree with him all that often.

 

With all that in mind, him not being involved would probably be more a 'problem' than he is now. Unfortunately, as long as he is an undeniable focal point, then some fans will use that as an excuse not to back to Trust or other projects he may be part of. It's a nonsense but it is an issue that people shouldn't be afraid of discussing.

[Stimpy 0]

Well firstly ShoredBear I didnt mention the RST in a negative light' date=' or I certainly didnt intend to, I held up them and Rangers Unite to show how a failure to compromise can actually weaken rather than strengthen.

 

Secondly - I dont agree with the abuse of the RST - but I have no problems with criticism of the RST - in the same way as by blogging I leave myself open to criticism, much like you are doing now.

 

I think the RST comes in for particular criticism and abuse because a lot of people feel let down by it - I know I certainly do. I was there in Partick at the Burgh Halls, I grasped the dream, I was excited and ecstatic about it. I still remember that day so vividly and the feelings of optimism it generated. That dream has been extinguished for me and many others and I cant see it ever being re-ignited.[/quote']

 

Give me specific examples and I will feed back to the board. Bear in mind that in the space of my time (2 years) most personnel has changed so anything from the past can't be rectified. Always happy to hear constructive criticism with realistic solutions.

[Blue Moon 1,124]

MD is a difficult conundrum for the Trust and other fan groups actually.

 

With all due respect to him, some of his actions and words haven't been the most constructive over the years but, on the other hand, he runs an excellent print fanzine and the most influential fansite. Moreover, he brings the kind of experience and knowledge such groups crave and need. I suspect if we were all really honest, neither would we disagree with him all that often.

 

With all that in mind, him not being involved would probably be more a 'problem' than he is now. Unfortunately, as long as he is an undeniable focal point, then some fans will use that as an excuse not to back to Trust or other projects he may be part of. It's a nonsense but it is an issue that people shouldn't be afraid of discussing.

 

Frankie, I have told this story many times and make no apologies for repeating it. I was barred after just a few days on FF for what I can only describe as being reasonable and was called the most abusive names in the process. I appealed 3 times with no reply. I cannot associate myself with an organization, which by association, operates in such a dictatorial fashion, doesn't tolerate alternative opinions and allows such abuse of members.

 

I agree that more often than not a certain spokesman gets it right, however, it is clear that many people on here and other forums have had the same experience as myself and the RST is tainted by this.

[D'Artagnan 173]

Give me specific examples and I will feed back to the board. Bear in mind that in the space of my time (2 years) most personnel has changed so anything from the past can't be rectified. Always happy to hear constructive criticism with realistic solutions.

 

ShoredBear

 

I really didnt want this to turn into a thread about the RST - positive or negative.

 

I appreciate you have only been there 2 years. The problems I allude to go back way before that time to Alan Harris' letter and statement of resignation. I think much of the criticism elsewhere stems from that time. While many people focus on the monetary aspects surrounding that resignation and the allegations made I have other concerns.

 

The fact that so many people within the trust allowed this situation to fester for so long is concerning. That Alan Harris was prevented from speaking out on this issue concerns me. It reeks of cronyism or a weakness to stand up to an individual who was fundamentally in the wrong. Alan Harris made some damning allegations in his statement of resignation and a decision was made within the Trust to make the response to them low key. Some wished for a far more robust response but they were were outvoted by the low key supporters.

 

The fact that the individual who was the catalyst to this problem has gone on to rise in prominence within the RST has done nothing to dispel those fears and concerns.

 

Allow me to make something clear - this is not about personal animosity. Its attempt to objectively look at the reasons why there is so much animosity towards the trust.