RST attack on the SFA is factually incorrect & embarrassing

[contacts 0]

The recent RST statement which accuses the SFA of foul play is naïve, desperate, factually incorrect and embarrassing to it's members.

The RST are now being mocked by fans across the country as firstly they tell Walter Smith who they should not be signing and then accuse the SFA & Gordon Smith of refusing to help Rangers win the title.

Yes we are all aggrieved at what happened at the end of the season but rather than try and name & shame the people hiding behind the SPL the RST goes for the machine gun approach and fire at will at anyone and everyone.

Lets start with the facts. The SFA could only assist Rangers on 3 occasions; the replays with Hibs & Thistle and the Scottish Cup Final.

Hibs refused the request to change it as they had a player on international duty.

Thistle refused as they wanted more time to prepare as the fancied their chances to beat Rangers in the replay.

The SFA approached the SPL (not the other way about) and offered to move out the Cup Final to allow the SPL to extend the season. The SPL refused.

To change the dates of replays the rules only allow for this to happen when both clubs and the SFA agree.

The reaction of the RST to this is that Rangers should withdraw from the Scottish Cup and refuse to allow their players to represent Scotland. Unbelievable!!!

More concerning for me with the statement was that Gordon Smith has been a tremendous help to the RST before he took his position with the SFA. He spoke at their dinner twice (free of charge). On one occasion he spoke from the heart on how Rangers fans should cut out all the FTP stuff but be proud to be a protestant Scottish British club that is proud of their heritage. He stood up in front of 400 fans and business men alike and received a standing ovation for his speech which defended the history of the club.

Further to this Gordon got slaughtered in the media (shortly after taking up his SFA role) for doing a chapter in Ronnie Esplins book suggesting that there is support for Celtic in the media and Rangers were hard done to etc.

Now that Gordon is SFA Chief Executive he is even handed but to accuse him of doing Rangers a dis-service is wholly inappropriate and lacks respect for a true Rangers man.

Finally and for me most disappointingly was the RST excuse that they are not actually accusing anyone but sharing with people the thoughts of their members! They should either have the balls to say it or they should not say anything. Hiding behind the 'our members have contacted us' is complete and utter nonsense. That is why you are representing the RST - to decide such things.

I am a very disappointed member of the RST.

[docspiderman 1,270]

The recent RST statement which accuses the SFA of foul play is naïve, desperate, factually incorrect and embarrassing to it's members.

The RST are now being mocked by fans across the country as firstly they tell Walter Smith who they should not be signing and then accuse the SFA & Gordon Smith of refusing to help Rangers win the title.

Yes we are all aggrieved at what happened at the end of the season but rather than try and name & shame the people hiding behind the SPL the RST goes for the machine gun approach and fire at will at anyone and everyone.

Lets start with the facts. The SFA could only assist Rangers on 3 occasions; the replays with Hibs & Thistle and the Scottish Cup Final.

Hibs refused the request to change it as they had a player on international duty.

Thistle refused as they wanted more time to prepare as the fancied their chances to beat Rangers in the replay.

The SFA approached the SPL (not the other way about) and offered to move out the Cup Final to allow the SPL to extend the season. The SPL refused.

To change the dates of replays the rules only allow for this to happen when both clubs and the SFA agree.

The reaction of the RST to this is that Rangers should withdraw from the Scottish Cup and refuse to allow their players to represent Scotland. Unbelievable!!!

More concerning for me with the statement was that Gordon Smith has been a tremendous help to the RST before he took his position with the SFA. He spoke at their dinner twice (free of charge). On one occasion he spoke from the heart on how Rangers fans should cut out all the FTP stuff but be proud to be a protestant Scottish British club that is proud of their heritage. He stood up in front of 400 fans and business men alike and received a standing ovation for his speech which defended the history of the club.

Further to this Gordon got slaughtered in the media (shortly after taking up his SFA role) for doing a chapter in Ronnie Esplins book suggesting that there is support for Celtic in the media and Rangers were hard done to etc.

Now that Gordon is SFA Chief Executive he is even handed but to accuse him of doing Rangers a dis-service is wholly inappropriate and lacks respect for a true Rangers man.

Finally and for me most disappointingly was the RST excuse that they are not actually accusing anyone but sharing with people the thoughts of their members! They should either have the balls to say it or they should not say anything. Hiding behind the 'our members have contacted us' is complete and utter nonsense. That is why you are representing the RST - to decide such things.

I am a very disappointed member of the RST.

Good post and accurate summation.

I am not a member of RST or any of the fans groups and I find it insulting that this group and other groups claim to speak for Rangers supporters in general when, in fact, they speak only for their own members and I do wonder if their own members have been consulted or even agree with what the spokesman says

I have never met or taken time to study the background and aims of the various groups who are interviewed as being "the voice of the fans", so my views are just what I take from contents of television interviews and newspaper articles.

I listen to interviews with Mr McMillan of the supporters clubs and Mr Edgar and very often think that nobody I know agrees with or thinks what they are portraying as the view of the fans.

I may be completely wrong but I often wonder if these fans spokesmen are more than self opinionated glory seekers who do not really have the backing or the interests of the Rangers supporters at heart or if their aim is self importance just like the majority of politicians.

[Frankie 505]

doc:

I can't recall the Trust ever claim to speak for Rangers fans in general - they've only ever done so for their members. In saying that, I appreciate that the media reports often suggest the comments are representative of Rangers fans in general when that isn't quite true.

With regard to contacts' post, unfortunately the Trust comments at the weekend - and the last couple of statements IMO - have not been the Trust's finest hour.

Gordon Smith is a strong supporter of the Trust movement and was a strong supporter of the RST in particular. As well as speaking at the dinners, Gordon was very helpful in other matters and I was very disappointed in David Edgar inferring he was to blame for part of our fixture congestion problems. We have enough enemies without isolating one of our own.

I'm unsure what strategy the RST is going to be undertaking over the coming months and years but it certainly seems as if they're preferring a much more aggressive route of late. Time will tell if that is effective (and that will please some members) but if strong allegations are to be made, supporting evidence should be used to ensure the facts are clear and our reputation is upheld.

It's also vital that if such important strategic changes are being made, the membership are consulted fully - more so, when there has been such upheaval at board level.

If these important actions are not taken, then I doubt much progress will be made in terms of the RST's primary aims.

The last 5 years had seen the Trust achieve a moderate amount of success in their field. I'd hate to see such progress wasted without good reason.

[mac444 6]

doc:

I can't recall the Trust ever claim to speak for Rangers fans in general - they've only ever done so for their members. In saying that, I appreciate that the media reports often suggest the comments are representative of Rangers fans in general when that isn't quite true.

With regard to contacts' post, unfortunately the Trust comments at the weekend - and the last couple of statements IMO - have not been the Trust's finest hour.

Gordon Smith is a strong supporter of the Trust movement and was a strong supporter of the RST in particular. As well as speaking at the dinners, Gordon was very helpful in other matters and I was very disappointed in David Edgar inferring he was to blame for part of our fixture congestion problems. We have enough enemies without isolating one of our own.

I'm unsure what strategy the RST is going to be undertaking over the coming months and years but it certainly seems as if they're preferring a much more aggressive route of late. Time will tell if that is effective (and that will please some members) but if strong allegations are to be made, supporting evidence should be used to ensure the facts are clear and our reputation is upheld.

It's also vital that if such important strategic changes are being made, the membership are consulted fully - more so, when there has been such upheaval at board level.

If these important actions are not taken, then I doubt much progress will be made in terms of the RST's primary aims.

The last 5 years had seen the Trust achieve a moderate amount of success in their field. I'd hate to see such progress wasted without good reason.

I recently joined the RST, I had been meaning to do so for ages but things always got in the way. I was always of the opinion that what the RST were doing was in the best interests of the club and its fans, and as such encouraged anybody that I spoke to about them to join.

I was delighted when my membership came through, even though due to a bit of stupidity on my part it was delayed somewhat, but after these recent comments about Gordon Smith and the SFA, and hearing on here about all the upheavel in the upper echelons of the RST I'm beginning to regret the decision of joining. The accusations leveled at Smith and the SFA were ridiculous to say the least, as it was common knowledge that they were willing to help out the SPL with their fixture congestion. I don't think I saw a paper or sports website that didnt carry the story. If the RST wanted to attack someone, whether rightly or wrongly in doing so, it should have been the SPL and Lex Gold.

[Frankie 505]

mac444:

I genuinely feel embarrassed.

Personally, I've spent a lot of time on various internet forums championing the RST for the last few years. I know many RM members didn't know a great deal about the organisation so I was delighted when so many people read what I posted and joined up.

Despite my resignation, I still deeply believe in the values of the RST. The option to buy shares in the club via GerSave and the positive dialogue with the club to obtain a directorship which would enable a greater say for all fans. Not to mention the vibrant media function which usually does an excellent job of applying public pressure when required. All this was showing that in many ways, the primary Trust aim of the fans owning the club was a realistic ambition in the longer term.

What I didn't see coming was some of the issues that made me feel I had to resign. That was a personal choice though and my private thoughts on that needn't necessarily be shared by members like yourself - new or old.

Unfortunately, I'm worried that some of the recent statements - as well as the reluctance to address the extremely serious issue of 6 key members resigning from the board - are evidence of a dramatic strategic change in the direction of the RST. I'm also worried that some of the initiatives that have been put in place over the last few years are going to fall apart thereafter.

I may well be wrong of course but if this does happen I honestly can't see how the RST can be more successful than it has been. Last month I felt the best years of the Trust were ahead of it. Now, I feel they may be behind it.

I just hope your (and the rest of the membership's) tenner hasn't been wasted.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

I am NOT a member of the RST - but I liked there aims - getting shares, fans voice and all that - but over the last 6 months they have made a few extremely embarrasing statements and shown an utter nievity for handling the press, or tense situations. It is due to this I will not be joining them.

I also hate the way the press tie what they say to the support in general and I think that there recent 'views' have been a minority view - but are potraited in the press as Rangers FANS views - they are not!

I think they will find there support dismininshing (spelling) and thier credibility shot to fk by the way they have handled themselves recently. Its a shame!

[BlueIsTheColour 35]

Good post contacts, one which i don't think anyone on RM will disagree with. Usually when the subject of the RST comes up due to a press release or interview there is always a mixed response but this time everyone is in agreement. It just shows how ludicrous the comments of Mr Edgar and the proposals put forward by the Trust actually were.

As an RST Lifetime Member and as a contributor to the GerSave scheme i am not only embarrassed but angry at the way the RST have conducted themselves over the past month. The whole silence surrounding the original three resignations coupled with the continued silence after the further three is completely unnacceptable. The RST members DESERVE to know what is happening at Board level. We continually criticise Rangers Football Club for remaining silent on important issues yet the Trust board have acted in the exact same manner on this occasion.

When i read Mr Edgar's interview i just put my head firmly in my hands. How anyone, especially a man occupying the position of Media Spokesman, could make such incorrect and flawed asstertions in the public domain is disgracful in itself, but then to cover his tracks by attributing his comments to the RST membership is treason. Even if some members had agreed with the proposed actions (and it couldn't have been many judging by the reaction the the statement) it was not a view representative of the wider RST membership. Mr Edgar also knew for a fact that the media would report this as being the oppinions of the Rangers support in general, making him and the Trust look like self-oppinionated twats who don't have the courage to admit that the statement was their oppinion and not that of the Trust members or the wider Rangers support.

Frankie was the person who persuaded alot of posters on here to join the Trust and now he and the other top Board members have gone alot of us have been left wondering if this is a sinking ship considering how strongly Frankie felt about the Trust and it's aims.

I still believe in the values if the Trust, that is why i joined in the first place. But unless all of the daggers are locked away for good and the secrecy and beaurocracy is removed from Board level then i will seriously consider withdrawing from GerSave and cancelling my membership. Take not Board members, it is simply not good enough!!

[excoriate 0]

Its like a sniper using a cluster bomb.

The SFA had nothing to do with this?

[Guest Andypendek]

Does anyone know how many board members there are? If six have resigned, it must be getting to the point where those who have left are close to forming a majority - in which case, they ought to be able to address their concerns as a bloc (this assumes they are resigning over the same thing, of course).

In other words, rather than resigning, is there any possibility of the ex-board members (who seem to be the sensible ones, it has to be said) getting rid of the dumplings that are still there?

[bluedup 0]

Frankie for a man who doesn't want to discuss why he left you seem to be getting offended at the lack of RST information on your and other members withdrawal from the Trust.

Bit by bit you seem to be having a little dig at the present board. Would it not be best you actually come out with the facts rather than skirting around everything. You are aware the truth will come out in the end or should I say Mr Edgar's and Dingwalls slant on the truth and then you'll have missed the boat so to speak.

All this personal reasons when talking about 6 board members quiting is looking more pathetic as the days go by, either shout up or remain silent, you can't sit on the fence and expect us to take you seriously.

[Frankie 505]

bluedup:

I've explained why my resignation reasons will remain private several times in recent weeks. I believe there is a rather large thread somewhere with these explanations.

Moreover, while I may want to refrain from a public slanging match, as a member, I'm pretty sure can still take part in the debate without looking 'pathetic' or 'people not taking me seriously'.

I'm not being rude, I'm not disrespecting the RST/RM membership, I'm not telling lies - I'm merely attempting to retain my own integrity. Feel free to disagree with that stance but I'm very comfortable with my own personal position as it stands.

That may of course change....