Red & Black shirts for sale

[Hildy 0]

I don't recall it as being an either/or. I'd have thought he could have still invested in BuyRangers (was it not called that?).

 

 

 

There is still a requirement for leadership even if the fans were to become owners. There would need to be fans driving it forward. Perhaps there hasn't been suitable leadership within the fans bodies? I like guys like Dinnie and Kerr but they aren't going to get 1000's of fans to follow them, and Dingwall is seen as being too divisive. Perhaps it's the fact that RST was seen as divisive right from the start and it's never recovered and as such there's been a lost opportunity?

 

Some are happy to be drawn in by an ideal but others need to see something more tangible and perhaps those who have been involved in the fans organisations are at fault for not developing this latter point sufficiently? It doesn't mean that the fans as a whole don't have belief in themselves. The problems lie elsewhere.

 

 

I'd agree that the support does need to give itself a shake, but your accusations aren't going to stir anyone into anything. Reasoned arguments, something sadly lacking in the whole season ticket debate, should be what changes people's minds.

 

I'm in favour of reasoned debate, but there's nothing wrong with a bit of heat being generated from time to time and it can be done without being abusive.

 

A little bit of a radical edge is no bad thing, but it has to be used to construct as well as to disagree. The RST had to happen, and it gave the club a shake as well as provoking all sorts of fan reaction, which was good.

 

To this day, the RST generates debate and keeps fan ownership on the table. It may have upset a few over the years, but omelettes and broken eggs come to mind.

 

Overwhelmingly, it has been a force for good.

[aweebluesoandso 290]

SaveRangers, if I remember correctly, had around £13,000,000 in pledges although it's difficult to know how much of this figure would actually have come in. I think we were as ready for fan ownership at that point as we have ever been, but the advent of the ill thought-out and pointless RFFF effectively took it off the table.

 

"Deferential' should not be insulting to those who are naturally inclined this way. Those who believed every word said by SDM and want another just like him, most probably King, are more than happy to defer to a rich and powerful man. They often accuse ordinary fans of 'getting ideas above their station' when it comes to fan ownership, and this could certainly be construed as being insulting.

 

Those who want fan ownership are arguing that every Rangers fan who wants to have a contributing opinion should get it. That is about as respectful as it gets.

 

Those who don't want fan ownership are asking their fellow fans to pipe down and defer to an all-powerful individual. That's not very respectful at all.

 

I agree Hildy, i have queried this on FF with Mark himself. The standing joke there, which annoys the hell out of Mark is the "keep our powder dry" quote from him. his reply was that the 'Save Rangers' was purely an idea just to gauge the supporters interest, not to be set up?

 

But think the Save Rangers was a great idea and could been a contenderf, as you suggest. Unfortunately it took a dive and was sacrificed for the price on the RFFF, which btw did a good job for the club and supporters saving our titles. However if those pledges had been given anywhere near the promises, then there could have been enough to give Green a run for his money, assuming D&P would have allowed any opposition to Greens offer.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

d@p would just have thrown it out for having suspect funding.

[Bluedell 5,330]

To this day, the RST generates debate and keeps fan ownership on the table. It may have upset a few over the years, but omelettes and broken eggs come to mind.

 

Overwhelmingly, it has been a force for good.

 

I'd agree but it's not effectively targeting those whose minds they want to change. I'm not sure that I have an answer to it, but I do know that it's not working anywhere near as well as it should (and that's a criticism of myself as much as anyone).

[plgsarmy 111]

I'd agree but it's not effectively targeting those whose minds they want to change. I'm not sure that I have an answer to it, but I do know that it's not working anywhere near as well as it should (and that's a criticism of myself as much as anyone).

 

I agree with a lot of your comments and those of Hildy to an extent. To clarify the Save Rangers thing, we were specifically asked to put it on the back burner when the RFFF was being launched so it's difficult to know how it would have developed. With the benefit of hindsight perhaps it should have been continued. Anyone who puts their had above the parapet to speak on behalf of fans gets shot down in flames by the 'he doesn't speak for me' brigade but I think, in general, we (not just the RST) have failed to persuade supporters on the merits of fan ownership simply because nobody has set out a vision of how it would work.

[Hildy 0]

I agree with a lot of your comments and those of Hildy to an extent. To clarify the Save Rangers thing, we were specifically asked to put it on the back burner when the RFFF was being launched so it's difficult to know how it would have developed. With the benefit of hindsight perhaps it should have been continued. Anyone who puts their had above the parapet to speak on behalf of fans gets shot down in flames by the 'he doesn't speak for me' brigade but I think, in general, we (not just the RST) have failed to persuade supporters on the merits of fan ownership simply because nobody has set out a vision of how it would work.

 

The RST should consider doing this.

 

Rangers could use the Barcelona model, the German model or any number of examples out there, but perhaps the best one for Rangers would be to cherry-pick the best bits from a variety of examples.

 

The initial blueprint might not be perfect, but it would provide a sample to be tweaked and adjusted until it became something people could relate to and endorse.

[Zappa 0]

I think, in general, we (not just the RST) have failed to persuade supporters on the merits of fan ownership simply because nobody has set out a vision of how it would work.

 

It's not a particularly easy vision to set out without the support of the Club itself and an owner who believes it can work and is willing to help.

[pete 2,499]

The RST should consider doing this.

 

Rangers could use the Barcelona model, the German model or any number of examples out there, but perhaps the best one for Rangers would be to cherry-pick the best bits from a variety of examples.

 

The initial blueprint might not be perfect, but it would provide a sample to be tweaked and adjusted until it became something people could relate to and endorse.

 

Barcelona had to borrow millions last year to pay their players so I hope we don't copy them.

[Hildy 0]

It's not a particularly easy vision to set out without the support of the Club itself and an owner who believes it can work and is willing to help.

The question is simply this: do fans want a democratised club which is professionally run and supporter-owned? This is basically a question on whether fans agree with the principle of fan ownership.

 

Imagine a country's population being asked: do you want your country to be a dictatorship or a democracy? The people are being asked to agree the principle before actual details are ironed out - whether it should have a PR system of voting or first past the post, whether the president or prime minister should be elected for four years or five etc.

 

We may not be able to make fan ownership happen for another few years, or maybe a few decades, but the opportunity to make it happen could also come quickly and unexpectedly so it is best to be prepared.

 

A blueprint to show the benefits is worth having. It will not be the finished article but it might be close to it.

[Hildy 0]

Barcelona had to borrow millions last year to pay their players so I hope we don't copy them.

 

We went bust without fan ownership.

 

Liquidation was managed with rogue ownership - not fan ownership - and our door is constantly open to more of the same.

 

Nothing can guarantee survival and a flourishing club, but an open invitation to rogue ownership practically guarantees failure somewhere down the line.