pmu 0 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 So we are back to the beginning without you answering any of my questions - not one. Why are you suggesting that he should have 'stormed the palace' and ignored the SFA? We know you don't like the SFA but........bearing in mind what you think of King.......it's a bit like someone living under the Pinochet regime hoping that Idi Amin storms the place. whether you agree or not rr is entitled to his opinion. Whilst i do not want king to fail by any stretch i remain a little underwhelmed so far With a few slightly alarming signs that i hope are not the way Ahead. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 FWIW I'm extremely disappointed Murray & King even agreed to this FAPP test by that great upstanding body of honesty & integrity called the SFA(stop laughing) run by the likes of RHegan, Liewell, Petrie etc.They should just have taken their places on the board & if the SFA wanted to do anything about it they should have taken them to court. Why was Murray subject to this anyway? He had absolutely nothing to do with the administration/liquidation which were the the actions of Whyte alone. Everyone knows that. Even Rhegan who was well aware what Whyte was up to but did nothing whatsoever They wouldn't have taken us to court they would just have punished the club and the individual 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anchorman 0 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 whether you agree or not rr is entitled to his opinion. Oh by God, I don't think anyone could say the bold Rab hasn't been entitled to his opinion on this one, over and over, over and over, over and over, over and over, over and over,over and over..................... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmu 0 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Calm doon. Just skim over what you dont want to read... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little General 80 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Calm doon. Just skim over what you dont want to read... or do what I have done and put him on ignore list. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anchorman 0 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Calm doon. Just skim over what you dont want to read... Thanks for the advice mate. Very helpful. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheWee BlueDevil 0 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Oh by God, I don't think anyone could say the bold Rab hasn't been entitled to his opinion on this one, over and over, over and over, over and over, over and over, over and over,over and over..................... It could well turn out to be a case of dreams coming true for a few Bears. Gets Rangers nowhere but hey they get their moment in the sun. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,415 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 (edited) The unyielding lack of faith and utter distaste a small section of our support have in Dave King amazes me. First it was 'where's your shares Dave?'. Now he's the largest shareholder, so that one's put to bed. Now it's turned onto this 'fit and proper person' nonsense and 'where's your money Dave?'. How about we just give Dave King and the new board time to sort the mess out? Graham Wallace was given over 4 months to produce a 'business review' and at the moment it's only just over 2 months since the EGM!! Nope!,some people are just doom mongers,once one path is cleared they just want to throw up another hurdle......................no idea why?,attention seeking? Edited May 14, 2015 by ian1964 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,415 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Does it really matter if he passes or not?,serious question!,what exactly would it mean to us moving forward if he didn't pass this "Rangers" fit and proper pish test?,none! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,246 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Graham Wallace was given over 4 months to produce a 'business review' and .. To be fair, Wallace just took that time and did not exactly ask anyone whether that was appropriate The main problem thus far is that the flow of info is not that great. Umpteen reasons can be put forward why this might be the case, just as many opinions will arise about whether it is good or useful etc. to have any / too much info. At the end of the day, the prolonged silence or spells of silence from the board is bound to cause all sort of sentiment. We all assume that the board is neck deep in all sorts of work. It would - no matter the information value - still be good to know that they are actually still there. One would hope that this King thing is being settled one way or another very soon ... and we will hear from the board about what is going on. 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.