GvB future

[compo 6,147]

He gas no future the board should stop fannying about and sack the dutch dud .

[Bill 13,717]

I'm not trying to be deliberately obtuse but I'm not sure I understand the concept of "fan engagement".

 

Clearly, it has something to do with communication - presumably by the board, to the fans. But how much is to be revealed during such engagement is less clear, or even if it would be productive to do so. Personally, I can't see the board being in any way effective if it made public its every strategy and shared all details with the wider support, so I think engagement could only ever involve generalities that would do more to make the support think they were being engaged than constitute and material exchange of information - you might even suspect it might involve more platitudes than genuine information. I mean, do we want to feel communicated with or do we expect to have hard information shared with us?

 

Or do we want to know our opinions, individual and collective, are being heard and considered, something we might achieve by sending appropriate emails to the club? Does engagement mean having our views and priorities surveyed?

 

[CammyF 6,798]

46 minutes ago, Bill said:

I'm not trying to be deliberately obtuse but I'm not sure I understand the concept of "fan engagement".

 

Clearly, it has something to do with communication - presumably by the board, to the fans. But how much is to be revealed during such engagement is less clear, or even if it would be productive to do so. Personally, I can't see the board being in any way effective if it made public its every strategy and shared all details with the wider support, so I think engagement could only ever involve generalities that would do more to make the support think they were being engaged than constitute and material exchange of information - you might even suspect it might involve more platitudes than genuine information. I mean, do we want to feel communicated with or do we expect to have hard information shared with us?

 

Or do we want to know our opinions, individual and collective, are being heard and considered, something we might achieve by sending appropriate emails to the club? Does engagement mean having our views and priorities surveyed?

 

I think we a know what the club can and can't "engage" with fans on. I don't think any fan wants the board to discuss and engage on every opinion or release sensitive data etc. 

 

However, complete silence from the board is unacceptable. There are many long-term issues and problems surrounding our club (well publicised) that are continually ignored (or so it seems) by the board. 

 

We have a ticketing system that is not fit for purpose, we have disabled access and match experience that is not fit for purpose, we have a PR Department that is not fit for purpose, we have match day catering that is not fit for purpose. 

 

We have a board who refuse to enter into discussion with fan groups on safe standing area(s).

 

These are an example of the areas who the club could (and should?) enter into dialogue / engage with fans. 

 

There is bo exact answer, but complete silence isn't the answer

 

[ranger_syntax 3,775]

12 hours ago, CammyF said:

If the board are behind Gio, coming out and explaining how and why they are backing him would not undermine him, it would support him.

 

7 hours ago, CammyF said:

If the board are genuinely backing Gio, asking them the reasons for this isn't a "dumb demand". 

If the board offer any explanation then it will invite further scrutiny of the manager.

 

Fans, and the press, would be able to criticise the manager with reference to that explanation.

 

The current manager would be under more pressure. The board would be limiting possible future decisions. Any potential future candidate for the manager's job would be discouraged.

 

I think that is a fair summary of the most important reasons not to engage with the fans on this matter.  I can't think of an important reason to engage on this matter.

 

Maybe there are some really important reasons that I'm unaware of. Unless those reasons become apparent it just looks like a dumb idea to me.

[ranger_syntax 3,775]

6 hours ago, Scott7 said:

I assume his position is that a demand being dumb doesn’t mean or indeed imply, that the person making the demand is dumb.

Quite.

[JohnMc 2,473]

It would hardly undermine the manager if Stewart Robertson or someone on the board did an interview in Rangers TV where they explained the board's delight at finally qualifying but their disappointment at the performances in the Champion's League. The reality check regarding the levels we are striving to reach, the challenges the coaching team have faced regarding injuries to the squad and the confidence the board have in GvB and the need for patience and backing from the support while injured players return to the team. I mean that's hardly controversial or indeed unexpected. A lot of the support might not agree with it but it would let everyone know where they stand. As ever directors can change their mind at any time in the future. 

 

For me the fact they haven't done this is more telling regarding how the board are feeling about things. I wonder if there's a split in the board currently regarding our manager. 

[ranger_syntax 3,775]

7 minutes ago, JohnMc said:

It would hardly undermine the manager if Stewart Robertson or someone on the board did an interview in Rangers TV where they explained the board's delight at finally qualifying but their disappointment at the performances in the Champion's League. The reality check regarding the levels we are striving to reach, the challenges the coaching team have faced regarding injuries to the squad and the confidence the board have in GvB and the need for patience and backing from the support while injured players return to the team. I mean that's hardly controversial or indeed unexpected. A lot of the support might not agree with it but it would let everyone know where they stand. As ever directors can change their mind at any time in the future. 

If the directors change their mind, after explaining, then their credibility suffers. Why risk that to placate fans?

 

If the board are being asked to tell us things that are neither controversial nor unexpected then it is completely pointless.

 

Demanding that the board do something completely pointless is dumb.

[Scott7 5,179]

Every Rangers manager’s position is precarious if the team is not top of the league and out performing the nearest competition. Supporters know that. The Board knows that. It’s useless to make statements about it..

[Gonzo79 13,660]

There's only one statement I want them to make but the longer we don't get it, the more I think GvB will still be manager when league fixtures recommence.  

[Sutton_blows_goats 4,221]

32 minutes ago, JohnMc said:

It would hardly undermine the manager if Stewart Robertson or someone on the board did an interview in Rangers TV where they explained the board's delight at finally qualifying but their disappointment at the performances in the Champion's League. The reality check regarding the levels we are striving to reach, the challenges the coaching team have faced regarding injuries to the squad and the confidence the board have in GvB and the need for patience and backing from the support while injured players return to the team. I mean that's hardly controversial or indeed unexpected. A lot of the support might not agree with it but it would let everyone know where they stand. As ever directors can change their mind at any time in the future. 

 

For me the fact they haven't done this is more telling regarding how the board are feeling about things. I wonder if there's a split in the board currently regarding our manager. 

This is where I'm coming from. Expectation setting costs nothing but means the world.

 

As for your last sentence, well again its the result of the vacuum. People will fill it somehow. Its fairly harmless posters on message boards speculating but these things can (and occasionally do) grow arms and legs. Who knows where it can end up.