Darthter 542 Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 There is, sadly enough, a tendency on this board now to lay into anything (!) that comes from the club, and at times it seems just for good measure. I haven't yet read what Murray says about "fearing Green is still involved", but the headline alone could have been done by Irvine (if he'd be in the opposite camp). The "Green could still be involved" card is a very powerful weapon for the requisitioner's.....all they need to do is introduce a shadow of doubt into the shareholders minds that he could still be involved somehow & it strengthens their case - there is no need to prove whether or not CG is still involved since they a merely hinting that he could. It is then up to the current board to try & prove that he's not. I agree that there does appear to be a tendency recently to simply dismiss everything that comes out of the club without a 2nd though. It is my impression that the club are currently on the defensive, with McCollco on the attack. As I've said else where...McCollco are very much "we are good, they are bad...so vote for us". Folk need to keep an open mind and not simply fall for an spin or smoke & mirror acts from either side. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 All fair points. Most or all were covered last night by the requisitioners. Are you in a position to summarize the answers??? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 Are you in a position to summarize the answers??? They need in to properly examine things. Mm said he was taken off the internal investigation as soon as it started finding things. Mm and walter were always outvoted on things. They didmt say why no bio. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 They assert green is visiting shareholders so if true and it looked true enough then shareholders will know. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Davison 0 Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 They assert green is visiting shareholders so if true and it looked true enough then shareholders will know. Hope that CG doesn't visit me. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 They assert green is visiting shareholders so if true and it looked true enough then shareholders will know. The say he contacted one shareholder.....whether he has contacted more or not is unknown, based on current info. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 The say he contacted one shareholder.....whether he has contacted more or not is unknown, based on current info. Doesnt matter really. One is enough to make him still involved. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 (edited) There is, sadly enough, a tendency on this board now to lay into anything (!) that comes from the club, and at times it seems just for good measure. I haven't yet read what Murray says about "fearing Green is still involved", but the headline alone could have been done by Irvine (if he'd be in the opposite camp). The money came in, the money went out again, and as of the present our infrastructure is non-existent, our 'plan for the future' non-existent, our financial future still wobbly (at best), we are owned by a Trust fund, the whole admin process was highly dubious as was the way we came out of it, yet several people now gone are now substantially richer. Hiring one or two people of a superior calibre is not enough to make up for their mistakes - you'd hardly hire the burglar who shat on your carpet to fit a new one, would you? Edited November 29, 2013 by andy steel 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 Doesnt matter really. One is enough to make him still involved. all depends on the nature of the conversation really.....something we obviously don't know. Regardless of the specifics of CG's contact, the mere thought of it is enough to send many fans into orbit. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trueblue 64 53 Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 have you ever posted on any subject other than the board and/or those looking to take over at Ibrox? I'm just asking because I don't ever recall you posting on something like, oh I don't know, football, maybe? A suspicious person might think you're not really a Rangers fan at all, having so little to say about the team or players or manager. You *do* know who the manager is, right? I am on this site and RM almost every day, I visit an equal number of football and boardroom threads. The football threads on this site are fairly balanced and see no need to comment other than to add my agreement to viewpoints. The boardroom threads on the other hand are usually heavily one sided and I feel the need to add my viewpoint. Take this thread for example, had I not read this thread until now I would not have commented as balance has been added today by darthter and der berliner. I am by nature a non commenter as is proved by my low post count, but I will not stand by and see my club criticised and smeared by non contributing shit stirring rebels who offer virtually no proof to their outragous allegations . If no one else defends my club I WILL speak up. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.