Supportersââ?¬â?¢ Representation ââ?¬â?? Templeton and MacMillan Give Their Thoughts

[Frankie 8,151]

http://www.gersnetonline.net/newsite/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=716&Itemid=2

 

Some interesting stuff there.

 

As I hinted at in the original article it is extremely obvious problems remain with all three main supporters' organisations.

 

We really need strong and trustworthy leadership to examine these flaws, offer alternatives and provide solutions to address the subject properly.

 

I'll post the results of the survey later in the week with further comment.

 

[Bluedell 5,330]

Very candid. Will expand later if I get a chance.

[Tannochsidebear 2,315]

It has always been my opinion that Scottish football would be much better served if the SFA, SPL and SFL were combined to create one governing body for football in this small country. When we have second top tier teams attracting only a couple of thousand fans to the games, how can we possibly justify 3 fully administered and expensive organisations to run our game?

 

For Rangers supporters, we have the same problem. Since 2003 we have had 3 active and polarised organisations. We cannot be best served by having 3 very separate, very different organisations all trying to get their message across to a 92% majority shareholder and his uninterested CEO.

 

As an inactive member of all 3 organisations, I read the statements from Jim Templeton and John McMillan with great interest.

 

It is clear that the differences between the 2 orgainsations these gentlemen represent (or represented in Jim's case) have if anything drifted even further apart, and the internal problems of the RST last summer show no greater unity or togetherness there.

 

I thought there was hope when Jim and John both joined the board of the RST in 2007 that we were finally putting our differences behind us and getting a unified body to voice our concerns to the chairman. Unfortunately, and for reasons well documented elsewhere, this was not to be, and it seems that the 3 bodies are further apart now than ever.

 

There are many things wrong with our Chairman's running of the club, our CEO's day to day running of the business side and contract negotiations, and us bears need a voice to challenge these wrongs and to seek clarity on matters we perhaps don't fully understand due to the lack of communications from the club. We need a platform for our good ideas to get aired at board level, we need to feel as if we belong again.

 

There is not a chance in hell of any of this happening whilst there are 3 organisations running supporters interests.

 

There is no chance of the RSA being able to do this as it's remit is to look after its' own member clubs, of which there are now unfortunately too few of. RSA meetings are also poorly attended for the number of members it represents, with the same selection of faces duly turning up, paying their dues and leaving again. It has made great strides and is to be congratulated for its efforts in obtaining tickets for member clubs this season directly from the opposition clubs after RFC's 5% debacle, and it's history and longevity is to be admired, but it does not tick all the boxes required in this era for supporter representation.

 

The Assembly will never have the credibility amongst rank and file supporters because it is funded by the club and is seen as a nodding dog for the club, a soundbite to be used and abused by the board when it suits it. Despite having the largest membership of the 3 organisations, it probably has the fewest consistently active members of the 3 and that in itself is the saddest thing of all. Sure it can talk about having meetings worldwide etc, but day to day it has not done much to improve our lot, no doubt due to the fact that it was very well policed from within the club itself. Jim has recently left this post and his damning resignation statement made it crystal clear as to how much the Assembly can do to change genuine supporter representation and influence at board level.

 

The RST looked to be the best bet for a while there. Since Malcolm McNiven took over the chair from Colin Glass, the objective of getting genuine supporter representation at board level looked to be getting much closer and culminated in the announcement at the 2007 AGM that it would be done within the year. Unfortunately, the RST imploded spectacularly in the spring/summer of 2008 with around half the active board leaving in a major split within the ranks. The new top table of the RST is not welcome at Murray's table and therefore it has to go back to being a vocal voice of the fans but without any chance of influence at board level.

 

So where does this leave us, the Rangers fans, as we still have both concerns at the things that are being ran by the club, and creative talents and ideas as to how to improve things at the club that go unheard. We have a huge split between the club and it's supporters that is probably as bad as at any club in the footballing world, and for a club as successful as ours, that is quite an achievement.

 

Sadly, for as many mistakes as the club have made, the supporters organisations have made just as many, and while all 3 have their place and certainly want to do the right thing, they are as guilty as the chairman of letting us, the rank and file supporters, down.

 

I take my own share of the responsibility for the failures of the 3 organisations. I have been a member of the Association for nearly 20 years and been to only two of their meetings, despite being secretary of a registered member club of the Association for the last 10 years or so. I have been a member of the Assembly (by default admittedly) and have never asked them to do anything on my behalf, or offered to give them any assistance in helping my fellow members. I have been a member of the RST since the very first meeting in April 2003 at Partick Burgh Hall, have attended meetings and asked questions but never asked to join the board or help out to do something positive to help their cause.

 

So can we have genuine supporter representation that is respected at board level? The answer for now is most certainly no, and will remain a firm no for the forseeable future, until we can unify our own organisations into a respected, independant from the club, popular with the rank and file, objectivised organisation with but one clear goal - to properly represent the general views of the Rangers supporter to the board of the club, and to get those views acted on for the common good where possible.

[Tannochsidebear 2,315]

FFS, I don't half go on a bit, I didn't realise I had written so much!! Sorry.

[Frankie 8,151]

Don't be sorry mate...

 

That is a fantastic post which I'm sure many people will agree completely with.