colinstein 294 Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 I remember the RST being very critical of David Murray years before he sold us to Whyte. They certainly were not nodding donkeys to his regime. Their aim is fan ownership and I don't see any conflict at all with Rangers First. Indeed I don't see any great division in our support. Seems to me all are behind the present board except for a few arseholes on a fake Rangers forum. My guess is these are tims on the wind up, or getting backhanders from Easdales/Ashley although they were against anyone who wasn't Greenco. I'd say there was no more than half a dozen of them + comical Ali,.... McMurdo. Those who go on about "division" are simply bigging up these tossers. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,808 Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 If the support want full blown access to all details then become 51% owners of the club. It is asking too much for a business to have an open book policy with no commercially sensitive details allowed to be kept from the public domain. Given that some of the main individual shareholders are supporters and we can't be far from having 51%, then it comes down to trusting the people (individual supporters/ reps of shareholder groups) who are in and around the boardroom. If you can't or won't trust them then you're unlikely to ever have a satisfactory solution. I think it relevant to mention: - that the loud noise being made by some is disproportionate to the size and number of those involved. I refer to the general spin being put out there by the 'usual suspects' (eg. McMurdo, etc. from - Irvine - Bishop - Ashley camp). - that the vast majority trust / want to trust / want to have confidence in the current board. - that the current board have inherited a black hole of an Onerous Ibrox Treasury and their task is Herculean. - that they are desperately trying to hold it together, never mind move forwards. - that the current board may not be ideal is some respects but are in their own way, fighting for Rangers interests. It is far from a perfect situation but it's the dark reality of so many years of so many board members, that have done everything so as to best position themselves and related parties interests at the forefront of beneficiaries, with the club/support always paying the bill. Actual turmoil will continue because of it and efforts from the Irvines of this world will continue to maintain confusion and division. I hear people talking of paying Ashley the 5m to get rid of him and liken it somewhat, to back in the summer of 2012 when the WS led consortium were looking to make an offer to the Green led consortium, post sale of assets. I think the former were offering the latter a Million or two more than the 5.5M price that CG&Co had paid. CG&Co knew how much Rangers could make them and would have needed the offer multiplied by X (IMO more than x4). Well to get rid of Ashley and his influence.interests, we can use a similar multiplication. When Green&Co / MASH / SD got in the door they made sure that they made use of the boardroom control and put in place such onerous deals that would put Rangers in financial chains for years to come. Ironically, some still don't appreciate the difficulties and even support Ashley, by default. I can only hope that the possibility of a legal route out from the clutches of the onerous, may yet surface. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 173 Posted June 28, 2015 Author Share Posted June 28, 2015 I remember the RST being very critical of David Murray years before he sold us to Whyte. They certainly were not nodding donkeys to his regime. Their aim is fan ownership and I don't see any conflict at all with Rangers First.Indeed I don't see any great division in our support. Seems to me all are behind the present board except for a few arseholes on a fake Rangers forum. My guess is these are tims on the wind up, or getting backhanders from Easdales/Ashley although they were against anyone who wasn't Greenco. I'd say there was no more than half a dozen of them + comical Ali,.... McMurdo. Those who go on about "division" are simply bigging up these tossers. I think thats an important point CS - there was a body of us on FF who were critical of SDM much to the chagrin of others - I would say that a failure to defend the club by the Murray regime was as much a driving force behind the formation of the RST than anything else. And in that respect you are correct - division within the support about those in charge is not a new concept. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 173 Posted June 28, 2015 Author Share Posted June 28, 2015 There isn't a lot to be positive about where Rangers are concerned and that has been the case for a number of years now. Should I just shut up and let lies become truths and allow history to be revised in order to save the blushes of others? If you wish to turn a blind eye to the agenda-driven behaviour of the RST, VB or SoS, batter on, but it comes across as very strange that a mod on a discussion forum would decry anyone for daring to state their position. As for me being anonymous, I have met people who use this board and if you would like me to provide you with my name, address and Rangers history just say so. In fairness to you Rangersitis - you do seem to treat everyone connected with Rangers with equal disdain 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 There isn't a lot to be positive about where Rangers are concerned and that has been the case for a number of years now. Should I just shut up and let lies become truths and allow history to be revised in order to save the blushes of others? If you wish to turn a blind eye to the agenda-driven behaviour of the RST, VB or SoS, batter on, but it comes across as very strange that a mod on a discussion forum would decry anyone for daring to state their position. As for me being anonymous, I have met people who use this board and if you would like me to provide you with my name, address and Rangers history just say so. You call the supporters groups attacking the lies constantly peddle in the media, as nonsense. But you want to attack the agenda by the fans groups, how can you ignore one but not the other? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 I have totally no link to the RST but your statement is totally unfair. Hindsight is a fantastic thing and we were virtually all behind Ally at that time. You will probably say you weren't but in answer to that there is little you find positive about rangers. You are the perfect example of what is being discussed in DÁrts thread. A whisperer in the dark. Maybe if you try to do something within you will get more respect and possibly a new vision on things. I doubt if you want that though, it is easier to be an anonymous rebel behind a keyboard. That's definitely not true. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 The RST are aligned with the current board and were most vocal about the previous lot, that is except for McCoist. His exorbitant wage wasn't questioned in the same way as the likes of Green, Ahmad et al. His bung from Green of 1m shares was never used against him the way it was with others. Why? Because he was on the same side as them and it didn't suit the agenda that was being pushed. They are not the only group who have been happy to indulge in propaganda in the belief that their own missions would be achieved in the process. The support have never been as one, never, but the various self-interest groups that have been set up over the years have smashed any fissures into deep ravines. Sadly, the clock cannot be turned back. That is a good point. They were publicising pro-Ally demonstrations/songs not long before he left, which was shameful. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 In fairness to you Rangersitis - you do seem to treat everyone connected with Rangers with equal disdain That's certainly not true. I know plenty of folk with a Rangers connection who are good people, even ones who I disagree with on certain matters. My gripe is with the groups who use Rangers and it's support as a means to further their own ambitions, plus the influential individuals who will use their standing to attack others for not adhering to those agendas. You are one of those individuals, McMurdo is another. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 You call the supporters groups attacking the lies constantly peddle in the media, as nonsense. But you want to attack the agenda by the fans groups, how can you ignore one but not the other? Quite easily. Those fan groups have helped to cause more damage to the club than the media could ever dream of accomplishing. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 There isn't a lot to be positive about where Rangers are concerned and that has been the case for a number of years now. Thankfully that's beginning to change and within a reasonably short period of time as well. With the new ownership structure, new board, new management team, new players starting to come in and a lot of dead wood we've been crying out to have shipped out having now been shipped out, there's a lot more to be positive about. 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.