AMcK

We'd be daft not to sign him up for next season. Arguably our best player this season. We have enough areas to strengthen without trying to replace Kenny at the level he's playing it right now. He's also a good guy to have around the team even if next season he starts slightly less, been over the course and knows what it's all about.

Not that Hanley is great, far from it, but he's still better than Wilson imo. Been very disappointed in Wilson's performances this season. I thought he was a better player than what he has showed for us so far. Looks to have gone backwards since leaving us first time round.

Like most fans I was really excited when we signed Templeton. But now I simply can't see him making it. He looks a long way behind the players currently starting and, while it was early days, he was poor in the early games of this season.

One of the few players who could hold his head up high last season. All the best to him.

Think Hibs played the only way they could against us. Had they opened up I would have fancied us to take a few goals off them but instead they sat deep and counter-attacked which worked well for them. Only thing they were missing was a finish. Definitely one for the team to look at and learn form because I think more and more teams will be taking that approach this season.

Think he's doing fine. One bad pass yesterday, granted, but made a couple of good saves and collected plenty of crosses. Bell can't play the ball out as effectively imo

Encouraging to see. Think we all knew there was no excuse for not giving youth a chance and the likes of McKay have show that they are more than capable of contributing at this level. Long may it continue.

I'd probably keep McGregor. Wallace maybe but he's had a poor season. Outside of that it's hard to justify willingly keeping any of this squad imo

Well, with at least another season in the Championship, the money required has just increased. Lower income & probably lower attendances again will leave a rather large gap to be filled next season and running costs will just eat through the cash yet again. We can only hope we can build a squad that doesn't need ripped apart after promotion and minimise the costs at that stage of building a team to challenge in the top-tier. Hope King & Co have deep pockets. They'll certainly be required in the short-term.

As much as I love Walter he is very wrong with this one imo. The evidence over Ally's tenure as manager speaks for itself and the quick improvements under McCall, while still far from perfect, show exactly how badly our team was being managed. Ally of course was only doing his best but sadly that wasn't good enough.

It's all about being efficient with whatever budget we have. Teams like Motherwell & Inverness have been very successful with that in recent years. But we're chasing our tails. Scouting is so crucial and we have been operating without that for far too long and that has to change. We shouldn't need to spend crazy money in the second-tier if we can get our football operations sorted out. Thankfully having a number of players out of contract allows room to freshen things up and adjust our budget accordingly.

Ally clearly isn't the right man for the job but some of those players are an absolute disgrace. There's no character in that team at all. Even the slightest bit of professional or personal pride should ensure games like last night don't happen. Simply not good enough.

Should normally be the manager's decision however it's difficult to ignore the financial element as shifting the game to midweek negatively impacts the attendance. Slightly worrying also that Ally isn't confident of beating the likes of Alloa at home without one player.

So much potential there. Has made the step up again this season and if continues to progress he'll become a fine player. In amongst much of the poor football we've watched in last few seasons, Macleod has been a very welcome highlight. A joy to watch.

Have you contacted Rangers First directly to make the points you raise? For what it is worth I agree that, as well as having specific board positions, there should be a few non-specific roles for 'ordinary' members. This would allow fans to stand for election and allow democracy to take it course. I think members have to vote on the board composition / election process anyway before it proceeds so its perhaps worth voicing any concerns directly. More people may share the same view and the necessary amendments can be made.

Fans won't be running the club even if RF achieves a significant shareholding. It's about protecting the interests of the fans and therefore the club and helping to avoid the calamities we've witnessed in recent years. Ownership can achieve that. Qualified individuals will be appointed to the board of RF I'm sure and they'll have the knowledge and experience required when it comes to dealing with the business aspect of things.

Keeping in mind there will be another share issue in the not too distant future, that should mean another opportunity for RF to build up some cash and increase their shareholding. Hopefully message can be taken wider than the online community by then and we'll have more fans contributing.

The board are appointed by the shareholders to act on their behalf and in their interests. I believe that the fans have the best interests of the club at heart and therefore should have a say in how the club is being run (not actually running it ourselves). The only way to guarantee that is by owning shares. When a significant shareholder also represents a large % of your customer base, it becomes a very difficult voice to ignore. This should deliver the transparency and consultation desired by RF and its members. That's the plan. The official club members can only work as far as the board allows it to. The board can choose to listen to the fans board or completely ignore it. The fans board holds no legal right and could become irrelevant if the board want it to. That isn't the case with RF (or won't be the case if enough fans back it). I can understand fans wanting to own shares in their own name. That's fine, but without an organised block of shares in the hands of our supporters it is much harder to influence things and make our voice heard, as the last AGM clearly displayed. That's why I am in the process of transferring my IPO shares over to RF. I didn't buy them to make money or to earn a return, so using them as a collective block of shares is the best use for them in my eyes.

The club should be sustainable and self-funding if it is being run properly. I wouldn't look on RF simply as a way of throwing funds in. It's about trying to ensure the club is being run as we would want it and that our interests, and those of the club, are being represented and put first.

As I said in the article, we'll never move forward as long as people hold such views and attitudes. If thousands join, everyone will get to vote on their board. Everyone will get to vote and be part of purchasing shares and protecting our club. Give it a chance to succeed, instead of assuming it'll fail. If we had thousands signing up, even at the minimum levels required, I'm sure it would grow and prosper. If not people are free to leave at any time and allow the rest to get on with it. That's surely worth £5p/m to potentially make a huge difference? Especially given the recent history at Rangers.

Far better we allow the likes of Murray, Whyte & Green to get on with things eh? We may disagree, we may squabble but if you believe we cannot protect out club more than these kind of people then I'm afraid I have to strongly disagree. Utter nonsense.

Hopefully, if fans aren't sure of joining, they'll at least consider doing what you suggest and proxy their vote. It's important to have a unified block of shares that are organised and used together. Without that there is no influence as we saw at the last AGM. Board didn't even bother to speak to the fans. The key thing here is that, unlike existing groups, it is about simply buying shares. At least where RF is concerned, which unlike BR isn't linked to the RST or any other group, fan politics plays no part in its purpose. Members will democratically elect the board, and votes will go whichever way the membership decides. Another point worth asking is - what are the alternatives? Do we sit back, cross our fingers and hope things will work out? Do we wait King or Ashley or any other 'saviour'? We can be proactive and take matters into our own hands. For me it's the only logical way forward.

Fans wouldn't be running the club and wouldn't have to agree on every issue. It would be a democracy and, while we obviously disagree on certain things, we all want to see a stable Rangers back at the top, winning trophies and competing in Europe. There is more that unites us than divides us. It's not perfect but, in my eyes, it is the best possible solution going forward. It's unlikely to be close to total ownership but with a significant percentage we can help protect our interests and those of Rangers. That's worth fighting for.

Given our recent history and everything that's gone on recently, I can't help but think that fan ownership is the only real long-term solution to our current problems. But it is a solution that we must begin building together now if it is to stand any chance of success. There should be no reason we cannot greatly outnumber the likes of FoH and contribute towards building the successful, sustainable Rangers that we all want to see. Anyway, here's my thoughts over on the CRO - "Four Men Had a Dream. Why Can't We?" Thoughts and comments appreciated as always.

I'd keep Clark up front for the moment. Haven't been overly impressed by Miller and think Clark has offered more.