Club Legend
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by D'Artagnan

  1. Why would they extradite him to South Africa for an alleged offence which has UK jurisdiction ?
  2. It is disappointing that an indivdual's character, personality or previous service have become the subject of discussions on both forums, either positively or negatively - as personalising any debate or discussion makes us lose sight of the real issues - something which RBR correctly points out on Gersnet. I dont indulge in mud slinging & I have no intention of starting - I deal in facts and I have no intention of changing that. Good corporate governance is fair, balanced and consistent and is appllied without exception. Furthermore whilst operating within a board, as an individual, you have to take collective responsibility for the actions of that board. In terms of the word "governance" it is how you police, function and govern within that corporate identity. If your attempts to "police" fellow directors with regard to protecting that corporate governance is unsuccessful then it leaves a person in an invidious position with regard to that aforementioned collective responsibiity. As I said to Craig at the members meeting, other than the fact he has got slightly mixed up with the timeline of the phone calls he refers to - there is no dispute over the circumstances, only the interpretation of them. I, along with 2 other directors felt we were faced with a situational conflict of interest in that an advantage could be gained by his attendance at the meeting. It is my opinion that those concerns have been validated in view of the fact that questions and hypothetical situations discussed as the security briefing were the subject of questions asked of the potential candidates at the recruitment and interview process. Others may feel differently or hold a different opinion - but in the period which has elapsed I have neither seen, read nor heard anything which would alter my viewpoint on the matter.
  3. Copland Rear went up from £348 to £420 this season bud. I think Rfc52's advice is probably your best option
  4. As per my response on FF - this is a complete an utter falsehood.
  5. As you will be aware following the announcement from Club 1872, all 3 of us have resigned as directors. We considered it an honour and a privilege to be voted to serve on the board of Club 1872 by our fellow Rangers fans, and those of you who know each one of us personally will understand how painful it was for us to leave an organisation we firmly believed in and worked tirelessly to establish since our election. We feel it is incumbent upon us to outline to members the reasons why we felt our positions had become untenable. As anyone who has served on a board or committee will know there will always be differences of opinion and varied interpretations on matters and the Club 1872 board was no different in that respect. However, throughout our tenure we found the conduct of one director particularly challenging, causing all of us to make considerable personal compromises at times. However last week a situation arose, which we felt compromised the organisation rather than ourselves, and that was one compromise we were not prepared to make under any circumstances. As many of you will be aware Rangers have recently advertised two job vacancies in respect of a Social Media Officer and a Supporters Liaison Officer. At Club 1872 we were informed recently that the latter of these two roles would be our main point of contact at the club in the future. Word subsequently reached some of the Club 1872 board members that one of our directors had applied for the position of Supporters Liaison Officer. However, as no notification had been received from the director in question this matter remained as nothing more than a rumour. Matters came to a head when the director in question intimated he, in addition to two Club 1872 directors who had already confirmed their attendance, would attend a meeting at Ibrox facilitated by Rangers Security personnel. This meeting was in respect of the forthcoming Old Firm fixture at which both Police Scotland and Club 1872 were invited participants. As persons present at this meeting from Rangers were to be involved in the interview and recruitment process for the vacant Supporters Liaison role concerns were raised within the Club 1872 board. As nothing had yet been received in writing to the Club 1872 board this necessitated a phone call by one director to the director in question at which time it was established he had in fact applied for the role of Supporters Liaison Officer. On such confirmation, the director in question was advised that it would not be appropriate for him to attend this meeting. In essence, we had a Club 1872 director who had applied for a job at Rangers, attending a meeting where persons from the club who were not only involved in the interview and recruitment process, but would also have direct line management responsibility for the post in question, were present. Despite such advice and the concerns of fellow board members, the director in question attended the meeting. We tendered our resignations shortly thereafter. We would like to take this opportunity to express our sincere apologies to all members, and in particular, those who voted for us. However, all 3 of us believe that by resigning in such circumstances we were reflecting the standards, values and principles which saw us elected. Laura Fawkes Joanne Percival Iain Leiper
  6. No info at all ? https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/statement-dave-king/
  7. Ive said before JCD - with this heading towards litigation we wont get answers on this.
  8. We will try to do everything we can bud to get answers - and I note the point of @RFCRobertson regarding difficulties of location - however given the significant entailment of this question Im certain DK would be keen to respond however he can to the 5th largest shareholder.
  9. We did - it is framed into the question regarding the investment of DK - hence why clarification of the figure was so important. Furthermore it is why as I alluded to in the other thread - these questions will require answers from the person who originally provided the figures.
  10. I think it is well worth a read. I know I have been banging on about this for months but this is critical... Go to the top of the class guys....
  11. I understand where you are coming from IF, but if I might respectfully suggest we insert the word "performance" rather than "behaviour" in your 1st line. Performance both on and off the park has not been anywhere need good enough and I think the two factors being present at the same time serves to compound each other.
  12. Sorry IF but I dont necessarily agree with that. I think it is forgivable for a board to hire what was viewed as an exciting prospect for a manager - that it has not worked out as was expected or hoped is not their fault. But "we are where we are" for reasons not associated with the manager's position. Promises of a Nomad which have not come to fruition. Inconsistent publc statements regarding the level of investment proposed. Statements which were inconsistent with actions regarding defending the fans after the Scottish Cup Final Extrememly poor standards of professionaism inside our club which serve to damage our corporate identity - viz abomination of a resignation statment on club website, an official twitter account which doesnt even know where we are playing on a given day and one of our players appearing on the pitch wearing a shirt bereft of the Club crest. And now we have an Under 20 coach, who is neither qualified nor prepared to run the first team, doing so in a season where we have been told qualifying for Europe is critical. I was reading a thread on FF where one poster said he felt the current situation gave him a sense of Deja Vu regarding the situation under Ashley's Aide de Camps - with an unqualified coach being hung out to dry. I have guys on my bus who are not member's of either forum who are expressing the same concerns as some on here. It would be a mistake to suggest some of the criticism is purely down to the character & culture of various Rangers website forums. I think the circumstances & evidence speak for itself - and I have been warning for months that as a support we should remain both vigilant and consistent in our willingness to hold board's to account.
  13. if your info is correct bud that would be quite a coup in terms of recruitment. Wonder how that will affect who gets the manager's job.
  14. 2 things are critical imo Ace for it to be successful. 1) It needs to be all inclusive 2) It needs to have within the structue of the club a means of exercising effective vigilance. That would not be simple and would require considerable work - but that would be my vision.
  15. Well as I answered a few posts back bud - I like things to be evidenced based so that would be my starting point. When you ask if we are pushing the board hard enough - I would say yes but only within the confines of what we are capable of doing - and what I mean by that is that we have asked for a face to face with SR next Monday where we will present a series of questions and get answers from him. Its still a long way away from the type of vigilance I hope one day our fans will be able to exercise. Im firmly of the opinion there is sufficient independence to call this or any other board out - if there wasnt I simply wouldnt be there. No expenses are paid to the Club 1872 directors - its purely voluntary
  16. Ive listed much of what weve been involved in since inception in the Club 1872 statement thread Monty.
  17. Dont worry about it bud I took your post at face value - and replied in the same vein.
  18. I can assure you thats the plan - challenging questions and comprehensive feedback. I'll be honest with you though bud - its still a world away from where I would like a fans group to be - at the end of the day we are solely reliant on the answers given
  19. Actually I only recall you labelling me condescending, I think its the 2nd time in as many days - and I dont actually see anyone I have replied to complaining about the tone or content of my posts. Still...when someone replies to one of my posts with "never a Rangers fan"...then I'll get worried.
  20. Yes you are right it was clear some had better promotion than others. If you recall I took a break from blogging as I didnt think that would be appropriate in the run up to an election at which I was a candidate. Where I would disagree with you is that I dont think it should be a default position of mine to defend the group - I dont think carte blanche defensive mode helps anyone - especialy if there are lessons to be learned which improve the organisation. Im open to critcism and well aware Im not immune to error. But as you know I have an appetite for the truth and am willing to defend those in the Rangers family who are subjected to lies - Ive done it for others and will do it for Club 1872 - whether I am on the board of directors or not.
  21. Well with all due respect I cant be both "muted" and "towing the party line" bud. For over 23 years I have written blogs addressing the issues affecting our club - and I have always tried to keep them, evidenced, balanced, fair and above all else truthful. Its those very same values I carry into Club 1872 meetings or meetings with representatives from Rangers. I have never hidden my criticism of aspects of Club 1872 and would agree with some of the criticism which has been tendered. But that is a world away from downright lies which I find myself having to challenge time and time again. If you think it is of greater value to our club for people to spout lies & misinformation because of their personal dislike of individuals then I dont think as a club or a fanbase we will get very far.
  22. Well parts of it reiterate what I said yesterday in the Club 1872 statement thread regading the 3 shambolic instances I referred to in the last 10 days - though I dont quite get how Club 1872 are responsible for that. Other parts are inaccurate and demonstrate the author's lack of understanding as to how a Community Interest Company, and in particular the "asset lock" aspect of it works.
  23. The answer is simple Davie - he was voted on by the members as was I, & all the other directors. We went through a process of hustings where members asked questions of the prospective candidates and then submitted their respective votes.
  24. Who selected the "hand picked lackies" ? Do you mean the members who voted for them ?
  25. Let me take from the examples I gave earlier ǝpɐbıɹq uǝǝɹb ǝɥʇ display. The decision to allow them early access in order to set up their display was reversed by the board after Club 1872 had petitioned the club and raised the concerns expressed within our fanbase