Hildy 0 Posted November 7, 2014 Share Posted November 7, 2014 Let's cut to the chase. The club, under widely perceived toxic ownership, wanted to be seen to play the democratic game, and why not? If it can have its own in-house forum it can begin to marginalise the more organic groups that already exist. In addition, it can manipulate an in-house forum in a way that it can't with an independent group. Of course, few people will join an official group when the club's ownership is so distrusted, so what to do? Give membership away free to every season ticket holder. Default everyone into the gang. Try to make it look credible even when it isn't. Already, it has been naive enough to raise the topic of access to the club for independent fan groups - and yet this official group may be the smallest fan group of all. It is had just one meeting and delusions of grandeur have set in with a vengeance. The club has tried to 'default' fans into a group before and it didn't work. It hasn't learned its lesson. It is at it again. The only groups that are credible are those where people actively join, and if the club can only attract a couple of hundred fans to pay to be a part of this, it has wasted time, energy - and fan money. Praise where it's due though - this fan board seems to be acting pretty much as our board of directors would want. Is it representative of the support? I don't think so. Is it obedient to the wishes of the club? It just might be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stimpy 0 Posted November 7, 2014 Share Posted November 7, 2014 NO I have not stated any such thing. There is no such proposal so far as I am aware. The proposal was that the Board do not communicate directly in future with unelected leaders of groups. At the last meeting it was agreed to put this to the directors. As I was at great pains to point out there are a number of groups who have properly elected leaders who would not be excluded by the proposal. I agree with the proposal and I have also explained why I agree with it. You're not getting it. There's a proposal on the table that is looking to restrict communication access to and from Rangers FC. You, your peers and any other Rangers supporters has no right to discuss and propose such action. 49% of 200 people actually paying to join does not give you any more legitimacy than the fan who has had a ST all his/her supporting life. Your ignorance on this subject is truly astonishing. Disgraceful and you are obviously not fit to represent Rangers supporters. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted November 7, 2014 Share Posted November 7, 2014 I really can't see this fan board recovering from such a catastrophic start to it's existence. It's credibility is shot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted November 7, 2014 Share Posted November 7, 2014 I really can't see this fan board recovering from such a catastrophic start to it's existence. It's credibility is shot. BH needs to resign if it is to stand a chance. I don't think any of us had any hope for it anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,808 Posted November 7, 2014 Share Posted November 7, 2014 You're not getting it. There's a proposal on the table that is looking to restrict communication access to and from Rangers FC. You, your peers and any other Rangers supporters has no right to discuss and propose such action. 49% of 200 people actually paying to join does not give you any more legitimacy than the fan who has had a ST all his/her supporting life. Your ignorance on this subject is truly astonishing. Disgraceful and you are obviously not fit to represent Rangers supporters. Comes down to what and whose interests are being represented regards this specific matter and.............. was BH part of any discussions on a proposed RFB, with anyone in and around the executive board of RIFC/TRFC pre AGM 2013 and/or in the following weeks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stimpy 0 Posted November 7, 2014 Share Posted November 7, 2014 This reminds of the time when Murray and Bain were rubbishing forums and encouraged fans to ignore them. Keep in house with the ears covered. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted November 7, 2014 Share Posted November 7, 2014 This reminds of the time when Murray and Bain were rubbishing forums and encouraged fans to ignore them. Keep in house with the ears covered. Funny that. The way this initiative seems to be targeting fans rather than the actual issues reminds me of the way the Easdales are quick to threaten legal action when their hair is criticised but don't give a rat's ass about anything else. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,808 Posted November 7, 2014 Share Posted November 7, 2014 This reminds of the time when Murray and Bain were rubbishing forums and encouraged fans to ignore them. Keep in house with the ears covered. Good time to bump this as this thread is such a long and winding road. Macro concept of RFB was always to marginalise 'awkward' fansgroups and make it easier for the RIFC/TRFC boards control and manage the fanbase. They'd probably like to have friendly office bearers on the RFB who would more or less share this particular objective , perhaps for their own reasons and look to help steer matters accordingly. Before the 2013 AGM, there were two main areas for the sp.ivs/sharks/whatever to get under control. 1. Executive control and 75% of the vote. 2. Supporters (ie. revenue stream). They were successful regards executive control although failed with the 75% and resolution 10. The supporters would be difficult but to partly address the matter, they (including Toxic) came up with the RFB. This was planned to serve them in several different ways. - Marginalise other fansgroups and centralise a body that the club would try to have 'under control'. - Use this as a perceived mandate when dealing with fans, media, shareholders. - Use successes within the micro issues to promote, justify and garner support for it going forward. - If not unqualified success it will grow another focus for division In short a fansboard, occasionally for the fans but mainly for the club. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I wrote the jist of the above months ago. All signs so far indicate that it is full steam ahead. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted November 7, 2014 Share Posted November 7, 2014 BH needs to resign if it is to stand a chance. I don't think any of us had any hope for it anyway. It's not only down to him. The rep for the females has a similar mindset, and as this proposal made it through the discussion stage, there must be others. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stimpy 0 Posted November 7, 2014 Share Posted November 7, 2014 It's not only down to him. The rep for the females has a similar mindset, and as this proposal made it through the discussion stage, there must be others. The female rep looks awfully young. Perhaps easier to influence and steer in a favoured direction. The NARSA rep (overseas guy) is apparently anti-SoS/UoF/RST/FF etc. though can't confirm for definite. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts