Lancer

Freedom of speech doesn't mean "freedom from consequences". I agree CG is well within his rights, and the police involvement is a horrendous indictment of where we're heading as a society. But there are standards other than "within the law" to which a Rangers director must adhere.

BigManRorschach Keep meaning to ask - why have you got that pic of my parents fighting in yer sig?

A lot of piss and wind. Graham is a million miles away from being of Rangers' board calibre. I've no love for shite like sharia law, and it feels a bit like getting Capone for income tax, but we really shouldn't be appointing twitter loudmouths to our board, even if they have the necessary business nous. Graham's a gobshite. Our gobshite, sure, if you like. But board material? Give it a fucking rest.

FFS. I know most fans are good people. How come all the high-profile bears seem to be fascist loons?

Wow, he looks much older. Walter's great, but not in the same league as Jardine (heart's choice) or Struth (head's choice).

Any other point in our history he'd be out, but we've a dozen players I'd chuck before him. Most of them out of contract in a few months.

I'm thinking of changing my username to Lancer JBL in his honour. See we all assume he's a bear, but he might think it's a Mitsubishi sound system forum.

That patter, if it ever worked, became unusable the moment Chris Graham became a director. All we need to know about Kingco's intentions became clear there and then. They too are spivs, and ones with a track record of fucking us up once already.

It appears the more loyal you are, the more of a true ranger, the more games you go to, the less the club values you. You're right that these are the real heroes. What does it say about the club that they appoint to the boardroom their very antithesis. The snivelling rhat who engineered boycotts now 'represents' all those who stayed loyal.

It looks like Graham and King did a deal - One would arrange boycotts to drive down the share price (who cares if it damages the team's prospects of promotion!), the other would take advantage of the low share price, and appoint the first as a director. The club might get shafted, but at least two ghoulish failures get to be in charge for a while. This is disgusting me more and more every minute.

The boycott achieved two things: Undermine the club in its finance and support as we try for promotion back to the top division. Put Dave King back in the driving seat for basically no contribution to the cause.I can only hope King is a success, but his history with us (and elsewhere) suggests we would be wise to watch him like a hawk.

What's great about the idea is that it helps to re-establish the links between club and support that the last few years have severed. I hope it goes ahead. On the downside, we could have been doing this sort of thing throughout the club, as part of fan ownership, had we reacted quickly enough. Instead we're protecting the inheritance of King's kids. I know he's riding a groundswell of support right now, but for me he owes us big time, not just for the consequences of the boycott, but for his role in Murray's empire of dirt.

That was a great reaction save. Combined with the Ally/EGM story, this is the second "Bell - end in sight" story I've read today.

RF should definitely have fan ownership as the end goal. But their decision to buy shares is looking worse and worse. It would have been much better to have a big pile of cash ready to take over, than to hand it to the very spivs who fucked us to begin with. We could have owned Ibrox. Instead we'll likely end up with paper.

Obviously he failed us as a manager. But I do think we are forgetting the environment in which he worked, and most importantly, the continuity he embodied. There have been times over the last few years where everyone ran away, and it was just Ally vs a rotating gang of asset strippers. If in those moments we'd have had nobody on the inside, I shudder to think what would have happened.