Jump to content

 

 

Fans Board Statement re Llambias intention to disband it.


Recommended Posts

Quite so.

I have a feeling this will also suit King who has made it clear he wants to work with the RST & RF.

 

How long till Chris Graham is on the Board?

 

How anyone can accuse me of having green eyes is beyond my comprehension.

 

And it is certainly not a hopeful comment, quite the contrary in fact.

 

I do not know Chris Graham or his background but believe he has spoken well when appearing on TV or quoted in the press. To my knowledge the RST have always said that any candidate they would put up for the board would be a experienced businessman, I don't know if Chris Graham comes into that category. I would certainly hope that any fans rep in any of the fans groups who stood for election to the board had not been a supporter of Llambias and his cronies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Email sent to Club:

 

We refer to your letter dated 26 February 2015 in which you ‘note that the Elected Representatives have created and are administering a Facebook page purportedly on behalf of the RFB. The RFB has no permission of the Club to publish a Facebook page on behalf of the RFB. Please ensure that the Facebook page is removed by 6pm [today], failing which the Club will have no option but to take the necessary Court action against you and your fellow Elected Representatives to have the Facebook page removed.’

 

1. For the avoidance of doubt, there is no ‘purportedly’ about the Facebook page being on behalf of the RFB. We assure you it absolutely is.

2. The RFB, in creating the Facebook page, relied on the ‘Communications – Points for Consideration by Fans Board’ document issued by the Club to the RFB. The document states that ‘t is recommended that a single rangersfansboard Facebook page is established…’ On the recommendation of the Club therefore, the RFB created a Facebook page. Please advise and provide the documentary evidence where the Club informed the RFB that permission was required.

3. ‘[N]ecessary court action’ requires some breach a court may address. Please advise upon what breach you shall be relying in submitting any application to a court to afford us an opportunity to respond or comply. As you are aware, a court would take a very dim view on attempted litigation if you fail to meet this reasonable request.

 

Kind regards,

RFB

Link to post
Share on other sites

Email sent to Club:

 

We refer to your letter dated 26 February 2015 in which you ‘note that the Elected Representatives have created and are administering a Facebook page purportedly on behalf of the RFB. The RFB has no permission of the Club to publish a Facebook page on behalf of the RFB. Please ensure that the Facebook page is removed by 6pm [today], failing which the Club will have no option but to take the necessary Court action against you and your fellow Elected Representatives to have the Facebook page removed.’

 

Just when you think that they can't stoop any lower. Scum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Email sent to Club:

 

We refer to your letter dated 26 February 2015 in which you ‘note that the Elected Representatives have created and are administering a Facebook page purportedly on behalf of the RFB. The RFB has no permission of the Club to publish a Facebook page on behalf of the RFB. Please ensure that the Facebook page is removed by 6pm [today], failing which the Club will have no option but to take the necessary Court action against you and your fellow Elected Representatives to have the Facebook page removed.’

 

1. For the avoidance of doubt, there is no ‘purportedly’ about the Facebook page being on behalf of the RFB. We assure you it absolutely is.

2. The RFB, in creating the Facebook page, relied on the ‘Communications – Points for Consideration by Fans Board’ document issued by the Club to the RFB. The document states that ‘t is recommended that a single rangersfansboard Facebook page is established…’ On the recommendation of the Club therefore, the RFB created a Facebook page. Please advise and provide the documentary evidence where the Club informed the RFB that permission was required.

3. ‘[N]ecessary court action’ requires some breach a court may address. Please advise upon what breach you shall be relying in submitting any application to a court to afford us an opportunity to respond or comply. As you are aware, a court would take a very dim view on attempted litigation if you fail to meet this reasonable request.

 

Kind regards,

RFB

 

That is a disgrace. The sooner these lowlifes are removed the better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

would be a poor move to put an rst board member on the club board.

 

they have failed to attract majority support from the fanbase for a very long time. They have consistantly refused to seperate themselves from individuals who most of the support rightly or wrongly mistrust. If they do not have the foresight to see that simple fact they will never be able to talk for the fans They amount to nothing more than a clique.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.