Statement released by former RST Secretary

[dirtybill 0]

He can't,he's too busy rounding up his wagon circlers and feeding them the party line for them to do his dirty work.

Same old coward pulling the strings.

Good input

[thebooler 4,509]

What did the PDQ machine company think of all this?

Surely the legal advice sought would have advised the RST to make them aware that their machines had been used by a 3rd party, whether it was in innocence or not?

If not, then why not?

Were the legal advisers made aware of the PDQ machine situation?

[Frankie 505]

I don't think the Trust statement says anything new to what we've all debated in recent days, other than finally give their official opinion.

Mr Harris' intentions may well be in question but the fact remains the accounting polices and lack of respect for their finances has resulted in this farce. Couple this with other objectionable behaviour then the organisation is nothing more than a laughing stock.

I've just had a quick look around the Trust website. The aim is something I still believe strongly in and it hurts me strongly that a few people are intent in ensuring this worthy ambition will remain a pipe-dream because of their continual unprofessional behaviour and stubbornness.

Of course, this minority of people are not solely to blame. We all have played our part there and I take no pleasure from my own failings. Can the Trust survive this latest shambles?

To that end, instead of going round in circles, I'd like to hear the Trust answer this valid question. How do they plan to recover from a reputation that has never been lower?

[Blackhawk 2]

Rest in peace RST, the organisation is finished. Glad i never renewed this year

Looks that way.

Personally, i don't think fan ownership was ever a goer.After that...........what do the RST have to do but create strife!

[nemisis 358]

I been thinking if some one is having buisness difficulties would they be able to hire a pub, The Drayton in London and then charge Rangers fans for entry?

[MisterC 12,455]

Interesting to see some of the usernames lurking in this thread, folk we dont know and others who just pop up whenever this topic is discussed. I wonder what their agenda is for being here. MD/RST/££ apologists, journo's, tims, the mind boggles

[Harry Callahan 9]

Interesting to see some of the usernames lurking in this thread, folk we dont know and others who just pop up whenever this topic is discussed. I wonder what their agenda is for being here. MD/RST/££ apologists, journo's, tims, the mind boggles

You will probably find there has been a very large number of 'usernames' and 'lurkers' who whilst having very little to add to the 'debate' are very interested in the subject with no set agenda for viewing, and by that I mean the threads on at least two forums.

[MisterC 12,455]

I dont doubt that Harry.

[SGC 0]

Interesting to see some of the usernames lurking in this thread, folk we dont know and others who just pop up whenever this topic is discussed. I wonder what their agenda is for being here. MD/RST/££ apologists, journo's, tims, the mind boggles

Just to clarify my own position on here.

I joined both RM and FF around the same time as I was looking for details on my local RSC and have posted more regularly on FF for the following reasons :-

1) I found the debate on here a bit more downbeat. I felt that a lot of threads were full of doom and gloom, and while FF is certainly more militant it has a more light hearted nature (in parts, I've never been banned)

2) I didn't really like the layout of posts on here with the big graphic footnotes and avatars (petty I know - but IMO spoils the read) However your new smartphone layout makes your forum much easier to read and contribute to.

So I hope that anything I've said over the past couple of days on this thread can't be misconstrued as apologising for the RST, however I genuinely feel that this is now the moment for the organisation to change for the better.

[SGC 0]

The perception of a conflict of interest is indeed an issue, but not nearly as much of an issue as this -

RST funds were used by board members to pay for bean-feasts. Someone agreed to underwrite those payments and subsequently was unable to meet those commitments in the manner (I assume) agreed when the decision was taken to release the funds. At least one board member sought to question the integrity of the sequence of events and then the RST - those responsible for this sorry mess - took legal advice, once again using RST funds to pay for it.

Is it unreasonable to expect the person(s) responsible for said expenses to make good the short-fall to the RST as a result of their incompetence? After all, it isn't their own money they are dealing with, is it? How can it be fair (in any sense) that you could use someone else's monies, screw that up and then use more of their money to protect yourself from potential consequences of your screw up?

You suggested this was prudent? I'd suggest it is taking the piss.

I'm sorry but I don't get where the 'RST funds were used for bean feasts' comes from.

It would appear that MD agreed to pay for these tables at a dinner and then took over two years to settle the invoice and bounced some cheques along the way.

Now I agree that the whole sorry mess has been inappropriate, handled badly and ultimately deceitful over the past two years but to suggest that funds went from the RST to MD in the first instance appears to be wide of the mark.

It would appear that it was never a loan, but in fact a debt that took much longer to settle than it should have.

It is these deliberately misleading statements that will make bridges harder to build.

[gunslinger 270]

One out of two correct isn't bad.....

Again i ask if this place is so poor in comparison then why don't you post on follow follow ?

who said its poor in comparison. it just far far bigger.

besides noone on there stalks me. i would miss that.

[nemisis 358]

FF is certainly more militant

[dirtybill 0]

I'm sorry but I don't get where the 'RST funds were used for bean feasts' comes from.

It would appear that MD agreed to pay for these tables at a dinner and then took over two years to settle the invoice and bounced some cheques along the way.

Now I agree that the whole sorry mess has been inappropriate, handled badly and ultimately deceitful over the past two years but to suggest that funds went from the RST to MD in the first instance appears to be wide of the mark.

It would appear that it was never a loan, but in fact a debt that took much longer to settle than it should have.

It is these deliberately misleading statements that will make bridges harder to build.

Spot on, most of it is fantasy created amongst these forums but like i said before everyone loves a witch hunt.

[SGC 0]

Spot on, most of it is fantasy created amongst these forums but like i said before everyone loves a witch hunt.

Yep, and that's the reason why as a support we'll never move forward.

There have been a lot of suggestions on here about getting round the table and thrashing out these issues, however the latest statement from the trust, of which I'm a member, does not indicate that's likely to happen anytime soon :-(

My hope is that an open meeting is called of trust members is called where we can try and rebuild it's reputation by identifying more realistic short term goals to reengage the support and increase membership

[nemisis 358]

Yep, and that's the reason why as a support we'll never move forward.

There have been a lot of suggestions on here about getting round the table and thrashing out these issues, however the latest statement from the trust, of which I'm a member, does not indicate that's likely to happen anytime soon :-(

My hope is that an open meeting is called of trust members is called where we can try and rebuild it's reputation by identifying more realistic short term goals to reengage the support and increase membership

No the reason the trust will never move forward is Dingwall and his overbearing and underhanded tactics, until that is accepted by the trust and the man himself it cannot move forward. The offer of getting round the table was genuine and the one obstacle to this, Dingwall.

[SGC 0]

No the reason the trust will never move forward is Dingwall and his overbearing and underhanded tactics, until that is accepted by the trust and the man himself it cannot move forward. The offer of getting round the table was genuine and the one obstacle to this, Dingwall.

I've only met the man twice and can honestly say the picture painted on here is not the same guy (not saying that anyone else's perception is wrong - just not what I've found in my limited contact).

However if this is the only reason the fans cannot unite and move the trust forward then the board as a whole need to take a long hard look at it's make up

[CanadianBacon 2,088]

The perception of a conflict of interest is indeed an issue, but not nearly as much of an issue as this -

RST funds were used by board members to pay for bean-feasts. Someone agreed to underwrite those payments and subsequently was unable to meet those commitments in the manner (I assume) agreed when the decision was taken to release the funds. At least one board member sought to question the integrity of the sequence of events and then the RST - those responsible for this sorry mess - took legal advice, once again using RST funds to pay for it.

Is it unreasonable to expect the person(s) responsible for said expenses to make good the short-fall to the RST as a result of their incompetence? After all, it isn't their own money they are dealing with, is it? How can it be fair (in any sense) that you could use someone else's monies, screw that up and then use more of their money to protect yourself from potential consequences of your screw up?

You suggested this was prudent? I'd suggest it is taking the piss.

Through all the pages of words I've read on this matter - this lot pretty much sum it up perfectly for me.

A nail-on-the-head moment of utter clarity.

[Boab 73]

Was the RST e-mail posted?

[Carsons Dog 9,878]

The poodles are persistent - I will give them that.

The whole scenario does resemble the MP's scandal with one major difference.

Most MP's fell on their swords.

[thebooler 4,509]

What did the PDQ machine company think of all this?

Surely the legal advice sought would have advised the RST to make them aware that their machines had been used by a 3rd party, whether it was in innocence or not?

If not, then why not?

Were the legal advisers made aware of the PDQ machine situation?

Can any of you guys who profess to know more about this than me please answer the above?

[Adoniram 1,919]

The poodles are persistent - I will give them that.

The whole scenario does resemble the MP's scandal with one major difference.

Most MP's fell on their swords.

Sadly 4 of them didn't, like Devine ...a fat sweaty repugnant overbearing bully.

The reason they won't resign is that in their eyes they are utterly convinced they have never done anything wrong.That the 9 resignations have all bee as a result of the actions of the 9 involved.

Dingwall hasn't even apologised for his actions and neither have the Trust.

Looking at the facts and taking on board some clarity here it is clear that Dingwall made a pledge but didn't keep to it.

This debt NOT a loan was deliberately hidden from the Board and only made known to a select few...so in effect a board within a board.

The fact it wasn't disclosed to either the board members or the accounts is the issue for me.

The TRUST did not TRUST their own board members and deliberately suppressed an issue of relative importance which in my eyes means all those involved in the cover up should resign office with immediate effect.

The payment machine and the Harris statement are other factors that are difficult to comment on as the facts don't seem to be as clear cut to me or if i am being honest not clear enough for me to make a judgement without knowing the rules and regulations of the Trust.

The key question that should be asked to ALL supporters regardless of allegiances is this.

Having watched this debacle unfold would you join the RST as it stands today?

I think the overwhleming and resounding answer would be NO.

Were that to be the case what do the Board do then?

[north_east_bear 0]

The poodles are persistent - I will give them that.

The whole scenario does resemble the MP's scandal with one major difference.

Most MP's fell on their swords.

The resemblance is there for all to see.

[thebooler 4,509]

Sadly 4 of them didn't, like Devine ...a fat sweaty repugnant overbearing bully.

The reason they won't resign is that in their eyes they are utterly convinced they have never done anything wrong.That the 9 resignations have all bee as a result of the actions of the 9 involved.

Dingwall hasn't even apologised for his actions and neither have the Trust.

Looking at the facts and taking on board some clarity here it is clear that Dingwall made a pledge but didn't keep to it.

This debt NOT a loan was deliberately hidden from the Board and only made known to a select few...so in effect a board within a board.

The fact it wasn't disclosed to either the board members or the accounts is the issue for me.

The TRUST did not TRUST their own board members and deliberately suppressed an issue of relative importance which in my eyes means all those involved in the cover up should resign office with immediate effect.

The payment machine and the Harris statement are other factors that are difficult to comment on as the facts don't seem to be as clear cut to me or if i am being honest not clear enough for me to make a judgement without knowing the rules and regulations of the Trust.

The key question that should be asked to ALL supporters regardless of allegiances is this.

Having watched this debacle unfold would you join the RST as it stands today?

I think the overwhleming and resounding answer would be NO.

Were that to be the case what do the Board do then?

If the Board have Rangers FC and it's supporters at heart, there's surely only one thing they can do in order to allow the RST to continue, pick up the pieces, and move forward, going from strength to strength.

[*Manticore* 1,893]

Nice to see you again , I hope all is well

Fkn hell you can see him?

You must have some computer.

[thebooler 4,509]

Fkn hell you can see him?

You must have some computer.

Webcam........................................