Club 1872 - Statement of Resignation

[Blue Avenger 22,567]

11 minutes ago, BloodRunsBlue said:

They're all part of a fucking cabal mate. They don't give a fuck about the fans. They just want to sponge a living from the club.

100%

[TheLawMan 6,240]

You know what.  Gonna give some credit to Chris Graham.  When it was clear there were issues about being appointed to the board, he removed himself. 

When it was clear he would have divided fans if he went on 1872 board, which he would have been voted on, he removed himself. 

Houstons self interest won't allow him to remove himself.  

Even CG is inadvertingly calling this out. 

[calio 688]

Oh well, best of many fans intentions ruined.

If this isn't dealt with asap then I'm out.

Shame.

[Courtyard Bear 41,357]

Not in the least surprised by this, if you invite poison in it will poison everything. 

I feel very sorry for D'art, Laura & Joanne. 

It seems it's game set and match to Sloth Murray & Gilligan, they have managed to grasp control of almost 1million pounds of fans money not to mention their shares. 

Those 3 cunts should be hounded from Rangers asap and never allowed to darken our door again. 

[Siam69 26,876]

Was dreading this moment, hoping it would never come, when D'art felt he had to resign. I've watched him pretty much singlehandedly defend C1872 on here recently, put straight many of the lies told about it by fellow Rangers fans (his words), tell people of the huge amount of great work being done by C1872 Board members, his obvious passion and hope for it to succeed.  Seen him say he was doing the same on twitter, though I don't do twitter, so miss a lot of that shite, which i'm not displeased about.

There's two sides to every story, yet to hear Craig's. Though as it stands, it seems Craig has put his own selfish self interest ahead of what was best for C1872, indeed could have dealt it a fatal blow. Either that or he's very, very naïve. Either way, he should not be on C1872 after what has transpired. Now I may be naïve as well, but I still believe SOS was started with genuine intentions for what those involved thought would be best for, and benefit the club. How they went about it sometimes, that was a personal choice for Bears, myself and wife never boycotted, still flew up to games from London. But I'm not going to slag off any Bears for doing what they though was best for the Club they love if that was the individual case, whether it was boycott or not, buy stripes or not, protest or not etc. And have defended Craig and SOS on here, while also calling them out when it was merited.

I've even had a look on FF for the first time in ages, read the thread there. Many are quite rightly saying what Craig did is wrong, some are saying if he doesn't get the job, where's the COI? I feel they are missing the point, he was asked not to while on C1872, that it would bring the integrity of the whole organisation into question, and as such the integrity of those on it, like D'art, Laura and Joanne. But he didn't take any heed, went ahead with what can only be described as a selfish, self serving action, what he wanted was more important than the integrity of C1872. When you have Esky, a respected guy from a very broad section of the Rangers support saying Craig thinks C1872 is his, he can do what he wants, then that speaks volumes for me.

As I say, there are two sides to every story, I look forward to reading a FB post from Craig explaining things from his side, but as it stands at present, until I find out different, to me it's either a self serving, selfish action, or naïve in the extreme.

Either way, it should make his position on C1872 or the proposed job at Rangers untenable.

Also, not sure I buy the other 'big scam/conspiracy' theory being mooted by some.

[willygers4life 1,031]

3 minutes ago, Siam69 said:

Was dreading this moment, hoping it would never come, when D'art felt he had to resign. I've watched him pretty much singlehandedly defend C1872 on here recently, put straight many of the lies told about it by fellow Rangers fans (his words), tell people of the huge amount of great work being done by C1872 Board members, his obvious passion and hope for it to succeed.  Seen him say he was doing the same on twitter, though I don't do twitter, so miss a lot of that shite, which i'm not displeased about.

There's two sides to every story, yet to hear Craig's. Though as it stands, it seems Craig has put his own selfish self interest ahead of what was best for C1872, indeed could have dealt it a fatal blow. Either that or he's very, very naïve. Either way, he should not be on C1872 after what has transpired. Now I may be naïve as well, but I still believe SOS was started with genuine intentions for what those involved what would be best for and benefit the club. How they went about it sometimes, that was a personal choice for Bears, myself and wife never boycotted, still flew up to games from London. But I'm not going to slag of any Bears for doing what they though was best for the Club they love, whether it was boycott or not, buy stripes or not, protest or not etc. And have defended Craig and SOS on here, while also calling them out when it was merited.

I've even had a look on FF for the first time in ages, read the thread there. Many are quite rightly saying what Craig did is wrong, some are saying if he doesn't get the job, where's the COI? I feel they are missing the point, he was asked not to while on C1872, that it would bring the integrity of the whole organisation into question, and as such the integrity of those on it, like D'art, Laura and Joanne. But he didn't taker any heed, went ahead with what can only be described as a selfish, self serving action, what he wanted was more important than the integrity of C1872. When you Esky, a respected guy from a very broad section of the Rangers support saying Craig thinks C1872 is his, he can do what he wants, then that speaks volumes for me.

As I say, there are two sides to every story, I look forward to reading a FB post from Craig explaining things from his side, but as it stands at present, until I find out different, to me it's either a self serving, selfish action, or naïve in the extreme.

Either way, it should make his position on C1872 or the mooted job at Rangers untenable.

Good post. I don't think he will come out and give his side of the story as he was asked previously on the sos fb page and he did a sturgeon and answered the question without actually answering it. Now he hasaid also removed his personal page from fb aswell. He more than likely knows he done wrong but won't admit it and it won't stop him either, he more than likely thinks he is owed it after what he done. He is looking out for himself rather than  the beliefs he claims to have 

[Blue Avenger 22,567]

1 hour ago, TheLawMan said:

You know what.  Gonna give some credit to Chris Graham.  When it was clear there were issues about being appointed to the board, he removed himself. 

When it was clear he would have divided fans if he went on 1872 board, which he would have been voted on, he removed himself. 

Houstons self interest won't allow him to remove himself.  

Even CG is inadvertingly calling this out. 

I would say distancing himself to allow him breathing space for whatever he is up to. Maybe the biggest snake of them all. Time will tell. 

[Virtuoso 27,180]

1 hour ago, TheLawMan said:

You know what.  Gonna give some credit to Chris Graham.  When it was clear there were issues about being appointed to the board, he removed himself. 

When it was clear he would have divided fans if he went on 1872 board, which he would have been voted on, he removed himself. 

Houstons self interest won't allow him to remove himself.  

Even CG is inadvertingly calling this out. 

CG needs to put his head above the parapet and publicly denounce those slating Laura Fawkes as she was his nominee.

[Siam69 26,876]

5 minutes ago, willygers4life said:

Good post. I don't think he will come out and give his side of the story as he was asked previously on the sos fb page and he did a sturgeon and answered the question without actually answering it. Now he hasaid also removed his personal page from fb aswell. He more than likely knows he done wrong but won't admit it and it won't stop him either, he more than likely thinks he is owed it after what he done. He is looking out for himself rather than  the beliefs he claims to have 

Unfortunately yes, it certainly looks that way.

But you have to able to look at yourself in the mirror in the morning.

Needs to have a serious word with himself, or he could end up like that Rat McMurdo.

 

[Blue Avenger 22,567]

1 million sov's at stake!

Are our board so desperate for cash that they have to engage in Machiavellian skulduggery to gain access to supporter group funds or is all this just normal business practice?

[thehost 11,061]

11 minutes ago, Siam69 said:

Unfortunately yes, it certainly looks that way.

But you have to able to look at yourself in the mirror in the morning.

Needs to have a serious word with himself, or he could end up like that Rat McMurdo.

 

You leave Bill alone

[Siam69 26,876]

1 minute ago, thehost said:

You leave Bill alone

Says the man who started the thread highlighting that cunt McMurdo gushing over and taking the side of the Hag and Spiers over Rangers  

[thehost 11,061]

2 minutes ago, Siam69 said:

Says the man who started the thread highlighting that cunt McMurdo gushing over and taking the side of the Hag and Spiers over Rangers  

did I?

You "London Branch" lot have seem to know every posters history. I cant remember what I posted this morning far less what anyone else did.

I better call big graham and wee cutey-pie angie and tell them I stick up for them on here.

[JWAC 2,234]

I'm a lifetime member, I've contacted Club 1872 to request either Houston to be sacked (or to step down) or an EGM is called.

Whatever happens to C1872, he won't be involved in future. He's hopefully slowly realising this morning he's gone and fucked it right up now. He might have to find a real job

[Carsons Dog 9,878]

1 hour ago, TheLawMan said:

You know what.  Gonna give some credit to Chris Graham.  When it was clear there were issues about being appointed to the board, he removed himself. 

When it was clear he would have divided fans if he went on 1872 board, which he would have been voted on, he removed himself. 

Houstons self interest won't allow him to remove himself.  

Even CG is inadvertingly calling this out. 

Or he's waiting to see which way the tide is flowing before backing the appropriate horse

[Virtuoso 27,180]

What's Houstons username on FF?

[Siam69 26,876]

Just now, thehost said:

did I?

You "London Branch" lot have seem to know every posters history. I cant remember what I posted this morning far less what anyone else did.

I better call big graham and wee cutey-pie angie and tell them I stick up for them on here.

You did indeed, a thread which led to said rat McMurdo getting banned by Gogzy, that's why I remember it.

You went way up in my estimation, well done you

[thehost 11,061]

Just now, Siam69 said:

You did indeed, a thread which led to said rat McMurdo getting banned by Gogzy, that's why I remember it.

You went way up in my estimation, well done you

The only thing I ever said about oor bill was when I asked him directly if he was being paid he said he wasn't. I don't know the guy from Adam, by all accounts he's a bit weird. I never even knew he was banned from here.

Even he must shake his head at the antics of that johnjames cunt.

Mind You maybe Bill can go for the liaison role

[JWAC 2,234]

8 minutes ago, Virtuoso said:

What's Houstons username on FF?

protester no2 or some pish.... 

[Siam69 26,876]

7 minutes ago, thehost said:

The only thing I ever said about oor bill was when I asked him directly if he was being paid he said he wasn't. I don't know the guy from Adam, by all accounts he's a bit weird. I never even knew he was banned from here.

Even he must shake his head at the antics of that johnjames cunt.

Mind You maybe Bill can go for the liaison role

You started a thread calling him out for an article he did where he took the part of the Hag and Spiers over Rangers, the time when Spiers lost his job over it. Gogzy banned Mcmurdo for the article, as any Bear who sticks up for and takes the part of the Hag and Spiers over Rangers should be shot, never mind ostracised.

Anyway, it's taking this thread off course.

Have a few drinks, away and reminisce on the Punk thread and content yourself

[Virtuoso 27,180]

To think that this self-serving prick polled most votes ffs:

[Wullies_bowly_legs 3,801]

So back on topic though someone has tried to deflect again.

Craig Houston will not give up anything, will not be shamed into standing down and although I would say does not have the intelligence to have planned this long term, he has the rat cunning to take advantage of an opportunity.

Sadly he will only be gone when this board is.

[Bobby Hume 13,046]

3 hours ago, gsa said:

I don't understand all this fan group stuff. I've never been part of one and never will. 

If we've learned anything surely it's that where money and rangers are concerned nobody is to be trusted. Pay for your ticket, your shirt if you're into that sort of thing, your rising stars, programme, pie, whatever. Enjoy the games, enjoy supporting the club but don't for gods sake get involved with these shysters who use OUR club to make themselves feel important and apparently to make a few quid here and there.

Back in the day the only "fans group" anyone needed to be part of was a RSC for buses to games. You turned up paid your bus, few quid for the driver and that was that. Different times...

Great Post mate ..... changed days right enough .... far too many would be "celebrities" out there now fighting for the limelight ..... just being a Bear is not enough for them .... some really sad fuckers out there these days.  

[Ace 3,556]

It should be noted from what I've read that D'Art, Laura & Joanne have resigned due to the actions of 1 fellow director and not due to the actual organisation or aims itself.

Many here know I am a fervent advocate of c1872 & it's goals but last night's peturbing news has given me cause for concern it the effectiveness of a group that stood on transparency & cannot itself be transparent on this issue.

I attended the hustings during the board election, I listened to all who stood, I listened to CH who actually agreed with many the Blair shouldn't be on the board because of a COI, I find it incredible that he now thinks the current situation, created entirely by himself, is not cause for him to remove himself from the board, even temporarily until the SLO position has been finalised.

I never voted for CH, I never fully trusted his motivations but put aside my feelings and gave all those elected my full backing, now I have already stated on other social media, if CH doesn't come forward & remove himself from the board of c1872 within the next 7days, I will, with much regret, cancel my direct debit to c1872 & withdraw from the group.

The loss of D'Art, Laura & Joanne lessens c1872, I know that both Laura & Joanne are the ones who carried out most of the day to day duties & will be sorely missed by the group and the bigger question now becomes who will step into the breech.

 

[Virtuoso 27,180]

Some poster on FF 'pollock prod' claiming that two directors went for the job, the other one being one of the resignees?

Edit.

From D'Art on FF:

Quote

Allow me to answer unequivocally.

None of the directors who resigned had applied for any such role - SLO or otherwise.