Fan board elections now closed as of Saturday 20 September

[Frankie 8,200]

The point in question is not about the quote, but about the poster's veracity.

In the thread ' a huge day ahead for Scotland' at post #409 this poster agrees with a post accusing the VB article of using unsubstantiated claims. I am asking him to prove that he can substantiate his claim in post #230 of this thread that this 'infantile' comment was written on behalf of the VB.

 

My point in question is that this forum doesn't care for such pointless tittle-tattle.

 

If it means so much to you, then use the PM function.

[barca72 440]

My point in question is that this forum doesn't care for such pointless tittle-tattle.

 

If it means so much to you, then use the PM function.

 

We already have, and he invited me to ask the question on the thread. So I did. I think it is important that people can back up their accusations. I can see I won't get an answer, so I'll leave it there.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not trying to catch you out, but given that Mr Wallace knows who you are, and given that he may not personally know the rejected candidates, does that seem fair to you?

 

If you had missed out, and then discovered that those preferred were personally known to someone as powerful within the club as Mr Wallace, would you take it in your stride or perhaps feel that you had been disadvantaged in some way?

 

You may not be unique here either. Maybe there are others who were personally known to influential people at the club before being accepted by this committee - and I'm not thinking of anyone in particular.

 

For the avoidance of any doubt whatsoever in this matter I would like to stress that my meeting with Mr Wallace was after I was advised that the Nominations Committee had decided to put my name forward for the Election. I would also repeat that the subject of the meeting was an entirely unrelated personal matter which I do not propose to discuss on here.

 

I would also suggest that there might be as many reasons why Rangers would have rejected an application from me or certain others, who they might regard as trouble makers. Perhaps you can think of at least one such person who was put forward by the Nominations Committee and subsequently elected.

 

One of the candidates represents the Corporate Group; I think it would be fair to assume that he is known to "influential" people within the Club, perhaps including Mr Wallace?

 

Another states inter alia "Over the last 30 years I have been involved with many organisations/ charities both as a board member and in most cases as Chairman. These include; The Walter Smith Testimonial Committee (Chairman), The Mark Hateley Testimonial Committee (Chairman). In Variety Scotland terms I have chaired dinners for the late Davie Cooper, Ally McCoist, Lord Attenborough and Walter Smith."

 

Yet another is the President of NARSA.

 

I think it would be fair to make the same assumptions about these people, would you not agree?

Does any of the above prove that Rangers influenced the Nominations Committee, no it does not.

 

 

I would suggest that if you have any evidence of interference by Rangers you bring it forward now otherwise desist from these vague and generalised insinuations.

[Frankie 8,200]

Such initiatives often attract what is usually a small(ish) core of people interested in such 'political' matters. Thus, it's not a surprise when it's the same names seen across such platforms.

 

That's not always an agreeable concept in terms of ensuring quality debate but sometimes experience can outweigh that as long as the variety of people (and opinions) is sound. It's fair to say then that while BH or FS may have their critics they will also provide contrasting opinions meaning the debate should be a full one.

 

Generally speaking if anyone is unhappy with the process then they should look to get involved - either via standing themselves or by taking an active part in lobbying those that do represent them. From personal experience it is very difficult to find people interested/able enough to dedicate their free time to volunteering for such thankless tasks. In recent years we've seen such reps subjected to dreadful behaviour so it's not a surprise the pool we have to pick from is perhaps a shallow one.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

As an elected member of the board, it is most certainly a matter for you and your fellow appointees to ensure that changes are made if the needs of any significant group are not being fully met by the current 'categories'. If NARSA can't come under the 'Away Fans' grouping, then neither should the boys and girls who travel from Ulster on a regular basis. They shouldn't be ignored simply because they don't finance all expenses paid jollies for club officials on an annual basis.

 

The group that I have been elected to represent is "fans who attend away matches". This would include fans who attend such matches from NI, NA or wherever they are based. It would not include fans from NI or NA when they attend home matches. There is an "overseas" category to represent those folks and indeed that representative could also raise particular issues from that group for away matches or any other concerns. I gave the example yesterday of a disabled/ young/female/ethnic minority fan who lives in the Govan area attending an away match, which would come into a lot of categories. If any particular group feels they should have been represented but are not, then they are free to raise that issue.

 

I have no doubt that the question of the categories will be discussed by the RFB and indeed I have already discussed it with the Club. Ultimately, however, the categories have been and will be set by the Club so I would suggest that that is where representations should be made in the first instance.

 

That said we have 12 categories which is a very large Board, some might say too large; but they had to start somewhere. I am sure it will be refined and developed over time.

Edited September 26, 2014 by BrahimHemdani

[BrahimHemdani 1]

One thing I notice is that with almost 6,500 views this is one of the most read threads of recent times on here, more even than the " official manager" thread.

 

This at least suggests to me that interest in the RFB is high, which is surely a good thing.

Edited September 25, 2014 by BrahimHemdani

[MoodyBlue 0]

Far too many people on that board IMO. Can't see it working. It feels like a sham.

 

Hopefully we get proper change at actual board level and a new owner comes in and starts from scratch. Things like this are just a nonsense form the current board who have destroyed our club but are pretending 'to listen'.

 

in saying all that, I do support Forlan's appointment as I have genuine respect there and I'm 100% sure this is not ego driven from him.

[Hildy 0]

For the avoidance of any doubt whatsoever in this matter I would like to stress that my meeting with Mr Wallace was after I was advised that the Nominations Committee had decided to put my name forward for the Election. I would also repeat that the subject of the meeting was an entirely unrelated personal matter which I do not propose to discuss on here.

 

I would also suggest that there might be as many reasons why Rangers would have rejected an application from me or certain others, who they might regard as trouble makers. Perhaps you can think of at least one such person who was put forward by the Nominations Committee and subsequently elected.

 

One of the candidates represents the Corporate Group; I think it would be fair to assume that he is known to "influential" people within the Club, perhaps including Mr Wallace?

 

Another states inter alia "Over the last 30 years I have been involved with many organisations/ charities both as a board member and in most cases as Chairman. These include; The Walter Smith Testimonial Committee (Chairman), The Mark Hateley Testimonial Committee (Chairman). In Variety Scotland terms I have chaired dinners for the late Davie Cooper, Ally McCoist, Lord Attenborough and Walter Smith."

 

Yet another is the President of NARSA.

 

I think it would be fair to make the same assumptions about these people, would you not agree?

Does any of the above prove that Rangers influenced the Nominations Committee, no it does not.

 

 

I would suggest that if you have any evidence of interference by Rangers you bring it forward now otherwise desist from these vague and generalised insinuations.

 

I have met Mr Wallace once on an entirely unrelated personal matter.

 

I have not met any other current directors of Rangers IFC or FC.

 

To answer more fully I would need to know who you consider to be influential; but I have met David Martin, Head of Security and Susan Hannah, The Ticket Office Manager on several occasions. Personally I would not regard either of them as influential within the Club.

I'll repeat the question:

 

Given that Mr Wallace knows who you are, and given that you appear to have been part of a number of committees pertaining to club matters in recent times - and given that the club may not personally know the rejected candidates, does that seem fair to you?

 

If you had missed out, and then discovered that those preferred were well known within the club, would you take it in your stride or perhaps feel that you had been disadvantaged in some way?

 

This is not an accusation. It is a straightforward question which seeks your opinion.

 

If you don't want to answer it, don't answer it.

[Rangersitis 0]

I'll repeat the question:

 

Given that Mr Wallace knows who you are, and given that you appear to have been part of a number of committees pertaining to club matters in recent times - and given that the club may not personally know the rejected candidates, does that seem fair to you?

 

If you had missed out, and then discovered that those preferred were well known within the club, would you take it in your stride or perhaps feel that you had been disadvantaged in some way?

 

This is not an accusation. It is a straightforward question which seeks your opinion.

 

If you don't want to answer it, don't answer it.

 

Would the reverse not be equally true?

 

In any case, if Graham Wallace has had any influence whatsoever on the success or failure of the applicants for the board of fans both questions are moot.

[Rangersitis 0]

The group that I have been elected to represent is "fans who attend away matches". This would include fans who attend such matches from NI, NA or wherever they are based. It would not include fans from NI or NA when they attend home matches. There is an "overseas" category to represent those folks and indeed that representative could also raise particular issues from that group for away matches or any other concerns. I gave the example yesterday of a disabled/ young/female/ethnic minority fan who lives in the Govan area attending an away match, which would come into a lot of categories. If any particular group feels they should have been represented but are not, then they are free to raise that issue.

 

I have no doubt that the question of the categories will be discussed by the RFB and indeed I have already discussed it with the Club. Ultimately, however, the categories have been and will be set by the Club so I would suggest that that is where representations should be made in the first instance.

 

That said we have 12 categories which is a very large Board, some might say too large; but they had to start somewhere. I am sure it will be refined and developed over time.

 

If it is indeed a legitimate fan board, it is they who should be dictating the terms of it's constituents to the club, not the other way round. I think that should be a default position from the outset.