aweebluesoandso 290 Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 It might be poor grammar and/or wording on my part but the two directors give their own description/explanation in the statement in Frankie's post above. Thanks Buster, i'm just pissed off with it all and express my frustration by making light of it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEARGER 1,829 Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 I'm out. No more Fan Groups for me. Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh. Right. I've had enough of this. I will stay a member of RST and RF, I pray for a transparent, unified fans' group that will always put our beloved club's interest first. (I also hanker after proof of Santa Claus's existence.) However, I'm not going to read any more about the fans' groups, I'm going to stick to other threads and just see what we end up with further down the line. Since I'm not that far off 60, I doubt the fan-splitting threads will be over before I am, however. Don't credit the Judean Peoples Front or Peoples Front of Judea with more influence than they actually have. These guys are in a very small minority, just look on here - one member of JPF. There are many more working in the background to found a united fans group. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
limeburner 0 Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 Ahh--------a hankering for the good old days,macaroon bars n spearmint fukin chewin gum,we will never see the likes again. Things just seemed so much simpler------hey hoo. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,329 Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Looking at the statement from Graham and Ronnie The Rangers International Fans Consortium is a shell company set up by Ronnie Johnston and myself to do two things. Firstly when we set it up we felt it was inevitable that Rangers First was going to lose its independence and there was nothing we could do to stop it. We mentioned it to many people we respect and admire. However we received a lot of encouragement from a them and a variety of other people to stand for the board of Rangers First on an independence ticket. Knowing that Ronnie and I would come under attack from some who have had nothing to do with Rangers First and wanted nothing but failure for the CIC from the start it was an arduous decision, but one we were very glad to make. As stated in the pledge we have made with other candidates we still believe the success of Rangers First came from It's independence and will in the future. Independence from what? From the club? From other supporters groups? There's no real explanation for the reasons here other than the unexplained word "independence", Presuambly it's independence from other fans groups but what are the downsides of a merger? Which of the principles of RF would be compromised by a merger? Given the vagueness, it does seem to be a "toys out the pram" job and an unwillingness to explore what 97% of the members want. What happens if members of this new CIC don't vote in the way that they want? WIll yet another one be set up? Secondly and this was my personal point of view it showed the folly of a catch all merged fans group. What was to stop at any time now or in the future two or three like minded people getting together setting up a company, constitute it properly, call yourself a catchy name and try to persuade other fans to join. It's the very origin of Rangers First and indeed all other fans groups. There's obviouly nothing to stop fans setting up another fans group, but generally they are set up for a purpose. It's obviously self-explanatory but you don't need to go and set a company up to prove it can be done. This is a poor reason and smacks of someone struggling to come up with reasons for the new company. If this was the case would they not have pulicised the existance of it upfront rather than now coming along and explaining it after being caught? Rangers are a broad church with many many different point of views about fan ownership, media relations and even who to play up front on a Saturday. We believe, and so do many many members of Rangers First, that there is a need for more than one organised fans shareholders group. Rangers fans should have a choice. Again this isn't convincing. Things need to be different for there to be a choice. There's no explanation of why this new company would be different. Would it serve a different purpose or just be RF2 set up by a couple of guys who didn't get their way? Why not leave not and give fans the choice between RF and your new company if you really believe that? Ronnie and I will of course fully respect the decision of the members of Rangers First and if the merger goes ahead try to ensure any new body is completely independent. So if the members of RF decide that the new body isn't completely independent would you fully respect that and not go ahead with your new company or do you only respect decisions that you agree with? However like every Rangers fans should do, given our recent history, we will continue to question and if we believe a merged group is not run independently and without interference from any board of the Club reserve the right to see if other Rangers supporters agree with us. We sincerely hope we never have to activate the Rangers International fans consortium There's no way that a majority of the members of RF or RST would vote for a merged body that was not totally independent from the club so what really is the issue? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Looking at the statement from Graham and Ronnie Independence from what? From the club? From other supporters groups? There's no real explanation for the reasons here other than the unexplained word "independence", Presuambly it's independence from other fans groups but what are the downsides of a merger? Which of the principles of RF would be compromised by a merger? Given the vagueness, it does seem to be a "toys out the pram" job and an unwillingness to explore what 97% of the members want. What happens if members of this new CIC don't vote in the way that they want? WIll yet another one be set up? There's obviouly nothing to stop fans setting up another fans group, but generally they are set up for a purpose. It's obviously self-explanatory but you don't need to go and set a company up to prove it can be done. This is a poor reason and smacks of someone struggling to come up with reasons for the new company. If this was the case would they not have pulicised the existance of it upfront rather than now coming along and explaining it after being caught? Again this isn't convincing. Things need to be different for there to be a choice. There's no explanation of why this new company would be different. Would it serve a different purpose or just be RF2 set up by a couple of guys who didn't get their way? Why not leave not and give fans the choice between RF and your new company if you really believe that? So if the members of RF decide that the new body isn't completely independent would you fully respect that and not go ahead with your new company or do you only respect decisions that you agree with? There's no way that a majority of the members of RF or RST would vote for a merged body that was not totally independent from the club so what really is the issue? Totally agree with all of that. They have been caught with their trousers down and have now made a poor attempt to cover it up. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTP 0 Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Bit of a shambles now to be honest ........ 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Bit of a shambles now to be honest ........ It's almost like it was contrived? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Bit of a shambles now to be honest ........ Just remember there are 97% in agreement so it is not a shambles. That is like saying Rangers was in a crisis. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
compo 6,129 Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 We will soon have more groups than live aid 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,808 Posted February 12, 2016 Author Share Posted February 12, 2016 Bluedell Thanks for taking the time to write up an impartial and educated analysis on that statement ! 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.