A few points in response to The Chairman's response to 'We Deserve Better'

[BlueIsTheColour 35]

I have been reading the episodes of the last few days with great interest and personally, i am pleased that a couple of the Board members of the RST are taking the time to listen to the viewpoints expressed on RM.

I will start with the campaign itself. There is without a doubt a great many Rangers supporters who feel angered and dismayed with the way Rangers Football Club is being run nowadays, and this campaign at least gives some direction to that anger. A focal point. In my own oppinion i believe that allof the criticisms listed in the campaign are valid and all are contributing to the current climate of the club, from on-field inconsistency, to disenfranchised supporters and questionable financial decisions at the top. But i do feel that the RST have once again left themselves open to criticism through the lack of alternatives, suggestions and constructive arguments provided in the original statement.

As much as i feel that David Murray's reaction to the supporters who are supporting this campaign was nothing short of a disgrace, there is no doubt in my mind that the original statement allowed him to dodge the issues and dismiss them as reactionary. If the RST had provided alternatives to the current way the club is being run the he would have been under much more pressure to engage in some form of dialogue, even if it was just through the media and not personally.

Without doubt there are massive financial problems at the club, otherwise we would not have our Chairman and manager publicly stating that at least one top player will have to be transfered before February. The loyalty that the Rangers support has shown over the last 20 years of Murray's stewardship has been taken for granted. The money which we pour into the club year after year is not being spent wisely by either those in charge and therefore the support is well within our right to ask questions. We do not deserve to be patronised and belittled through comments such as; "they are hardly captains of industry themselves". It smacks of the arrogance and apathy towards the views of the Rangers support which Murray has time and again displayed. One really does wonder if the Rangers support will ever gain the respect it deserves from this man.

On another note I must take Mr Edgar to task on an issue that has cropped-up in this thread. When asked about why the RST membership was not consulted on the issue you stated that it was "impractical to canvass the opinion of every RST member on everything we do". As an RST member i can unequivocally say that i have not recieved one e-mail asking about my thoughts on ANY RST issue in the last year, nor have i recieved a copy of the Blue Spirit newsletter since the former Webmaster resigned. To me that is unacceptable. Any Board member you ask will tell you that the RST Board represent the views of their members, but how can they claim this if they have no idea what oppinions their membership holds? Do you agree that communication between Board members and the wider membership is not good enough and accounts for the high number of members not renewing every year? I'm not having a dig at you i would just really like an explanation for this.

[brissybear 50]

Money isn't everything. If Celtic start disappearing over the horizon then we need to start concentrating on other things like youth policy. We should be looking to be bringing through more young stars and doing our utmost to keep the likes of Fleck and Wilson. Murray Park could very well be the future of Rangers and I'd much rather foster local talent than bring in foreign has-beens for big bucks like we and Celtic continue to do.

So would I, in an ideal world.

Dont forget we have had some awesome foreign talent and they do have a good influence on the local boys.

Celtic dissapearing over the horizon must not be allowed to happen. That doesnt mean spend, spend, spend, but have a manager inplace who will spend wisely.

[KingKai 439]

Money isn't everything. If Celtic start disappearing over the horizon then we need to start concentrating on other things like youth policy. We should be looking to be bringing through more young stars and doing our utmost to keep the likes of Fleck and Wilson. Murray Park could very well be the future of Rangers and I'd much rather foster local talent than bring in foreign has-beens for big bucks like we and Celtic continue to do.

So would I, in an ideal world.

Dont forget we have had some awesome foreign talent and they do have a good influence on the local boys.

Celtic dissapearing over the horizon must not be allowed to happen. That doesnt mean spend, spend, spend, but have a manager inplace who will spend wisely.

And maybe give a youngster a chance now and then?

[Youllneverwinaway 0]

On another note I must take Mr Edgar to task on an issue that has cropped-up in this thread. When asked about why the RST membership was not consulted on the issue you stated that it was "impractical to canvass the opinion of every RST member on everything we do". As an RST member i can unequivocally say that i have not recieved one e-mail asking about my thoughts on ANY RST issue in the last year, nor have i recieved a copy of the Blue Spirit newsletter since the former Webmaster resigned. To me that is unacceptable. Any Board member you ask will tell you that the RST Board represent the views of their members, but how can they claim this if they have no idea what oppinions their membership holds? Do you agree that communication between Board members and the wider membership is not good enough and accounts for the high number of members not renewing every year? I'm not having a dig at you i would just really like an explanation for this.

hmmmmmm - not the first time Ive heard that.

I wonder if FF were canvassed on the idea though

[samNewton 0]

So I’m cynical about David Edgar and I’m a muppet with a hatred for Rangers‘ supporters? You obviously don’t know the difference between shit and the brown, smelly stuff that comes out your arse!

It’s called having an opinion, and being able to think for myself . I’ve been on this planet long enough to sniff out the likes of Edgar and his ilk without having to think too hard. If you need somebody to point you in the right direction and tell you what to think… fine. Only leave those of us old enough, and long enough in the tooth to spot a chancer when we see one to our own opinions.

For someone who attacks another forum on the basis of certain posters I would have expected a bit more than personal abuse.

[Frankie 505]

Can we keep the debate civil, please gentlemen...

Abuse does no-one any good here.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

I have one BIG critisism of the RST statement - it comes across as just a list of moans and gripes. What fan doesn't want better - christ I know fans of Man. U who think they are hard done by, Some Chelsea fans the same - perhaps 'We deserve better' should just be the motto of football fans everywhere.

Me, I look at Murray, his character, what he has put into the club both emotionally and financially; I look at the potential alternates and I say 'I would rather trust this man with Rangers, than some unknown' - Now what can I do to help? Me I will help by supporting him, Walter and the team to the best of my ability by defending them against some of the more outlandish 'statements' on here. Are they above critisism, No. Are they the best for the job? IMHO - yes! Experienced, Proven and Loyal. They will do for me.

The RST have given the Chairman advice privately many a time. If you don't believe me, ask the ex-RST Board members on here.

He's ignored the lot, constantly stating he knows best. He did so again in his response today.

So we are simply saying 'okay - if you are the best man for the job and you know best, here's what we are unhappy about; sort it.'

It's a bit of a weird relationship. If we are simply 'customers', then name me another business who hear complaints from customers and say 'what would you do to make it better?'

If you are upset with Tesco, do they ask you how to resolve your own complaint?

I am sure the RST have offered SDM advice many a time - but he is the senior 'descision maker' in the organisation and as such will have listened to your advice but, as any 'descision maker' has a right to do he has chossen to go another path, probably after taking counsel from other interested parties. (Although even I am not above offering advice to him and WS - I am a fan after all!! but I respect his right to disagree with me)

Yes we all want to win the league - and win it every year, with world class players who have been reared at Murrray Park, who only want to play for Rangers. But thats all any fan wants, and the reality of it is it aint that easy. Football is (stating the blindly obvious) competitive and today more than ever money talks at the highest level. There is little that he has not done that SDM can do about the disaprity that TV money has brought to the football. Yes he has made mistakes, but then who hasn't but over the piece he has done more correct things that wrong. I have faith in the man and in Walter to get us the league back and remain 'competitive' for years to come, but realistic enough to know that we can NOT win every competition every year.

With respect to your tesco analogy customers always have a choice, it aint as easy as a footballl fan to switch allegience but you can with draw your custom. But because, in a large part, of SDM, Ibrox is nearly full every game and there is still tremendous demand to watch Rangers - before his tenure that was not always the case. He must have done, and be doing something right because when we were really bad before, in the 80's, the crowds were awful!

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

I have one BIG critisism of the RST statement - it comes across as just a list of moans and gripes. What fan doesn't want better - christ I know fans of Man. U who think they are hard done by, Some Chelsea fans the same - perhaps 'We deserve better' should just be the motto of football fans everywhere.

Me, I look at Murray, his character, what he has put into the club both emotionally and financially; I look at the potential alternates and I say 'I would rather trust this man with Rangers, than some unknown' - Now what can I do to help? Me I will help by supporting him, Walter and the team to the best of my ability by defending them against some of the more outlandish 'statements' on here. Are they above critisism, No. Are they the best for the job? IMHO - yes! Experienced, Proven and Loyal. They will do for me.

1st off, that is a surprise

I keep hearing this argument at what fan doesn't want better, it's the same philosophy as asking what millionaire doesn't wan't to be a billionaire! What the RST said was correct, in every sense of the word. It wasn't a moan, it wasn't simply an opportunity to state that we the Rangers support have been getting a raw deal fron Sir Maorray for far too long.

I look at Murray and I see what he has taken from Rangers both emotionally and financially and I despair that there are still some amongst us being taken for a ride. I wouldn't trust any man who tried to get Rangers fans arrested for singing a satirical song, not for a minute. I almost forgot that by critisizing him didn't mean you weren't supporting the team, please forgive me.

They wont do for me. 2nd place wont do for me!

This is the problem with the shit spouted about SDM - he has taken fuck all from this club financially - its a net cost to him, he is not the asset stripper you would try to make out! And its easy if you feel you get a raw deal from SDM - go elsewhere, dont come back, there are plenty who appreciate what he has done and is doing. Also SDM has NEVER tried to get fans arrested for singing satirical songs - all he did was pass on the advce, from the police, that singing it MAY be an offence. But why let any truth get in your way when you are trying to besmirtch Murray. Just make it up as you go along. Are you a Journalist by trade ?

[cooperonthewing 0]

I have one BIG critisism of the RST statement - it comes across as just a list of moans and gripes. What fan doesn't want better - christ I know fans of Man. U who think they are hard done by, Some Chelsea fans the same - perhaps 'We deserve better' should just be the motto of football fans everywhere.

Me, I look at Murray, his character, what he has put into the club both emotionally and financially; I look at the potential alternates and I say 'I would rather trust this man with Rangers, than some unknown' - Now what can I do to help? Me I will help by supporting him, Walter and the team to the best of my ability by defending them against some of the more outlandish 'statements' on here. Are they above critisism, No. Are they the best for the job? IMHO - yes! Experienced, Proven and Loyal. They will do for me.

The RST have given the Chairman advice privately many a time. If you don't believe me, ask the ex-RST Board members on here.

He's ignored the lot, constantly stating he knows best. He did so again in his response today.

So we are simply saying 'okay - if you are the best man for the job and you know best, here's what we are unhappy about; sort it.'

It's a bit of a weird relationship. If we are simply 'customers', then name me another business who hear complaints from customers and say 'what would you do to make it better?'

If you are upset with Tesco, do they ask you how to resolve your own complaint?

I am sure the RST have offered SDM advice many a time - but he is the senior 'descision maker' in the organisation and as such will have listened to your advice but, as any 'descision maker' has a right to do he has chossen to go another path, probably after taking counsel from other interested parties. (Although even I am not above offering advice to him and WS - I am a fan after all!! but I respect his right to disagree with me)

Yes we all want to win the league - and win it every year, with world class players who have been reared at Murrray Park, who only want to play for Rangers. But thats all any fan wants, and the reality of it is it aint that easy. Football is (stating the blindly obvious) competitive and today more than ever money talks at the highest level. There is little that he has not done that SDM can do about the disaprity that TV money has brought to the football. Yes he has made mistakes, but then who hasn't but over the piece he has done more correct things that wrong. I have faith in the man and in Walter to get us the league back and remain 'competitive' for years to come, but realistic enough to know that we can NOT win every competition every year.

With respect to your tesco analogy customers always have a choice, it aint as easy as a footballl fan to switch allegience but you can with draw your custom. But because, in a large part, of SDM, Ibrox is nearly full every game and there is still tremendous demand to watch Rangers - before his tenure that was not always the case. He must have done, and be doing something right because when we were really bad before, in the 80's, the crowds were awful!

David Holmes and Souness were responsible for the crowds returning in the 80s, not SDM.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

I have one BIG critisism of the RST statement - it comes across as just a list of moans and gripes. What fan doesn't want better - christ I know fans of Man. U who think they are hard done by, Some Chelsea fans the same - perhaps 'We deserve better' should just be the motto of football fans everywhere.

Me, I look at Murray, his character, what he has put into the club both emotionally and financially; I look at the potential alternates and I say 'I would rather trust this man with Rangers, than some unknown' - Now what can I do to help? Me I will help by supporting him, Walter and the team to the best of my ability by defending them against some of the more outlandish 'statements' on here. Are they above critisism, No. Are they the best for the job? IMHO - yes! Experienced, Proven and Loyal. They will do for me.

The RST have given the Chairman advice privately many a time. If you don't believe me, ask the ex-RST Board members on here.

He's ignored the lot, constantly stating he knows best. He did so again in his response today.

So we are simply saying 'okay - if you are the best man for the job and you know best, here's what we are unhappy about; sort it.'

It's a bit of a weird relationship. If we are simply 'customers', then name me another business who hear complaints from customers and say 'what would you do to make it better?'

If you are upset with Tesco, do they ask you how to resolve your own complaint?

I am sure the RST have offered SDM advice many a time - but he is the senior 'descision maker' in the organisation and as such will have listened to your advice but, as any 'descision maker' has a right to do he has chossen to go another path, probably after taking counsel from other interested parties. (Although even I am not above offering advice to him and WS - I am a fan after all!! but I respect his right to disagree with me)

Yes we all want to win the league - and win it every year, with world class players who have been reared at Murrray Park, who only want to play for Rangers. But thats all any fan wants, and the reality of it is it aint that easy. Football is (stating the blindly obvious) competitive and today more than ever money talks at the highest level. There is little that he has not done that SDM can do about the disaprity that TV money has brought to the football. Yes he has made mistakes, but then who hasn't but over the piece he has done more correct things that wrong. I have faith in the man and in Walter to get us the league back and remain 'competitive' for years to come, but realistic enough to know that we can NOT win every competition every year.

With respect to your tesco analogy customers always have a choice, it aint as easy as a footballl fan to switch allegience but you can with draw your custom. But because, in a large part, of SDM, Ibrox is nearly full every game and there is still tremendous demand to watch Rangers - before his tenure that was not always the case. He must have done, and be doing something right because when we were really bad before, in the 80's, the crowds were awful!

David Holmes and Souness were responsible for the crowds returning in the 80s, not SDM.

I agree they started it - but SDM was the one who took it to just short of 50k every week for 20 years now (alowing for the fact we expanded twice) - You dont keep that number coming back year after year without doing something right!

[samNewton 0]

I have been reading the episodes of the last few days with great interest and personally, i am pleased that a couple of the Board members of the RST are taking the time to listen to the viewpoints expressed on RM.

I will start with the campaign itself. There is without a doubt a great many Rangers supporters who feel angered and dismayed with the way Rangers Football Club is being run nowadays, and this campaign at least gives some direction to that anger. A focal point. In my own oppinion i believe that allof the criticisms listed in the campaign are valid and all are contributing to the current climate of the club, from on-field inconsistency, to disenfranchised supporters and questionable financial decisions at the top. But i do feel that the RST have once again left themselves open to criticism through the lack of alternatives, suggestions and constructive arguments provided in the original statement.

As much as i feel that David Murray's reaction to the supporters who are supporting this campaign was nothing short of a disgrace, there is no doubt in my mind that the original statement allowed him to dodge the issues and dismiss them as reactionary. If the RST had provided alternatives to the current way the club is being run the he would have been under much more pressure to engage in some form of dialogue, even if it was just through the media and not personally.

Without doubt there are massive financial problems at the club, otherwise we would not have our Chairman and manager publicly stating that at least one top player will have to be transfered before February. The loyalty that the Rangers support has shown over the last 20 years of Murray's stewardship has been taken for granted. The money which we pour into the club year after year is not being spent wisely by either those in charge and therefore the support is well within our right to ask questions. We do not deserve to be patronised and belittled through comments such as; "they are hardly captains of industry themselves". It smacks of the arrogance and apathy towards the views of the Rangers support which Murray has time and again displayed. One really does wonder if the Rangers support will ever gain the respect it deserves from this man.

On another note I must take Mr Edgar to task on an issue that has cropped-up in this thread. When asked about why the RST membership was not consulted on the issue you stated that it was "impractical to canvass the opinion of every RST member on everything we do". As an RST member i can unequivocally say that i have not recieved one e-mail asking about my thoughts on ANY RST issue in the last year, nor have i recieved a copy of the Blue Spirit newsletter since the former Webmaster resigned. To me that is unacceptable. Any Board member you ask will tell you that the RST Board represent the views of their members, but how can they claim this if they have no idea what oppinions their membership holds? Do you agree that communication between Board members and the wider membership is not good enough and accounts for the high number of members not renewing every year? I'm not having a dig at you i would just really like an explanation for this.

I think the RST has admitted to communication problems and is trying to sort this out ASAP.

In cases like this, I don't believe it is practicable or necessary to canvass opinion. The RST has previously taken far more controversial decisions without canvassing opinion. However, it has come under pressure from those who say that its line vis a vis the club is far too 'soft'.

How unreasonable is it to urge the club to do better when it is palpably lagging behind its rival in nearly every area of activity and when its chairman has made alarming statements (in coded language, of course) to the effect that this situation is likely to continue?

I take the view that the RST would be failing in its duty to its members if it didn't raise concerns about the way the club has been run and is being run.

I sense that the main objective of the campaign is first and foremost to raise awareness of the gravity of the situation facing Rangers and that this has been achieved. It has received much coverage on TV and radio and in newspapers. Would the Scottish media have kicked off a debate if left to its own devices? I rather think not. Hopefully, the support will now focus a little more attention on events during this transfer window and whether they may hamper - yet again - another title challenge.

I don't believe it was necessary to offer 'solutions' to Rangers' problems, although many follow naturally from the areas identified. While regrettable, it is also not very practical in the modern media world to present a case in more than a few sentences on a sheet of A4 paper. Journalists are not looking for a detailed analysis.

If a company is failing due to mistakes, then its owner must surely look at the staff he employs, especially in key positions. If he interferes with decision-making then he must examine his own role.

Significantly, in his somewhat intemperate response to the RST statement, Sir David Murray said that he was fed up apologising for his mistakes.

Why doesn't he learn from them?

[MosesMcNeil 1,664]

As an RST member i can unequivocally say that i have not recieved one e-mail asking about my thoughts on ANY RST issue in the last year, nor have i recieved a copy of the Blue Spirit newsletter since the former Webmaster resigned.

Ditto.

Any RST claim to represent the membership without regularly canvassing member opinion is devoid of credibility.

The Rangers support needs powerful, articulate, professional representation. If Murray is inclined to make damning statements about the RST, I'd have hoped that bitching back (as per the OP) would be the last way to respond.

It reminded me of the tawdry, he said/she said spats when the RST appeared to be hell-bent on self-destruction over the past year or so.

[BlueIsTheColour 35]

I have been reading the episodes of the last few days with great interest and personally, i am pleased that a couple of the Board members of the RST are taking the time to listen to the viewpoints expressed on RM.

I will start with the campaign itself. There is without a doubt a great many Rangers supporters who feel angered and dismayed with the way Rangers Football Club is being run nowadays, and this campaign at least gives some direction to that anger. A focal point. In my own oppinion i believe that allof the criticisms listed in the campaign are valid and all are contributing to the current climate of the club, from on-field inconsistency, to disenfranchised supporters and questionable financial decisions at the top. But i do feel that the RST have once again left themselves open to criticism through the lack of alternatives, suggestions and constructive arguments provided in the original statement.

As much as i feel that David Murray's reaction to the supporters who are supporting this campaign was nothing short of a disgrace, there is no doubt in my mind that the original statement allowed him to dodge the issues and dismiss them as reactionary. If the RST had provided alternatives to the current way the club is being run the he would have been under much more pressure to engage in some form of dialogue, even if it was just through the media and not personally.

Without doubt there are massive financial problems at the club, otherwise we would not have our Chairman and manager publicly stating that at least one top player will have to be transfered before February. The loyalty that the Rangers support has shown over the last 20 years of Murray's stewardship has been taken for granted. The money which we pour into the club year after year is not being spent wisely by either those in charge and therefore the support is well within our right to ask questions. We do not deserve to be patronised and belittled through comments such as; "they are hardly captains of industry themselves". It smacks of the arrogance and apathy towards the views of the Rangers support which Murray has time and again displayed. One really does wonder if the Rangers support will ever gain the respect it deserves from this man.

On another note I must take Mr Edgar to task on an issue that has cropped-up in this thread. When asked about why the RST membership was not consulted on the issue you stated that it was "impractical to canvass the opinion of every RST member on everything we do". As an RST member i can unequivocally say that i have not recieved one e-mail asking about my thoughts on ANY RST issue in the last year, nor have i recieved a copy of the Blue Spirit newsletter since the former Webmaster resigned. To me that is unacceptable. Any Board member you ask will tell you that the RST Board represent the views of their members, but how can they claim this if they have no idea what oppinions their membership holds? Do you agree that communication between Board members and the wider membership is not good enough and accounts for the high number of members not renewing every year? I'm not having a dig at you i would just really like an explanation for this.

I think the RST has admitted to communication problems and is trying to sort this out ASAP.

In cases like this, I don't believe it is practicable or necessary to canvass opinion. The RST has previously taken far more controversial decisions without canvassing opinion. However, it has come under pressure from those who say that its line vis a vis the club is far too 'soft'.

How unreasonable is it to urge the club to do better when it is palpably lagging behind its rival in nearly every area of activity and when its chairman has made alarming statements (in coded language, of course) to the effect that this situation is likely to continue?

I take the view that the RST would be failing in its duty to its members if it didn't raise concerns about the way the club has been run and is being run.

I sense that the main objective of the campaign is first and foremost to raise awareness of the gravity of the situation facing Rangers and that this has been achieved. It has received much coverage on TV and radio and in newspapers. Would the Scottish media have kicked off a debate if left to its own devices? I rather think not. Hopefully, the support will now focus a little more attention on events during this transfer window and whether they may hamper - yet again - another title challenge.

I don't believe it was necessary to offer 'solutions' to Rangers' problems, although many follow naturally from the areas identified. While regrettable, it is also not very practical in the modern media world to present a case in more than a few sentences on a sheet of A4 paper. Journalists are not looking for a detailed analysis.

If a company is failing due to mistakes, then its owner must surely look at the staff he employs, especially in key positions. If he interferes with decision-making then he must examine his own role.

Significantly, in his somewhat intemperate response to the RST statement, Sir David Murray said that he was fed up apologising for his mistakes.

Why doesn't he learn from them?

With regards to your first line, i'm sorry mate but we have heard the same regurgitated line regarding the lack of communication within the RST for too long now. It has been getting resolved "Asap" for around a year now. Hardly "Asap" in all honesty, is it? I am of the oppinion that the RST are neglecting their membership and it is only doing themselves harm with members becoming polarised from the Board.

There are initiatives like this which, fair enough, may not have been practical to canvass the membership but on previous issues such as the resignations last year there was a distinct silence from the Board and the members were not consulted on how the organisation should move forward. The fact that not one newsletter has been distrinuted since the resignations confirms this.

Now back to the campaign itself, i take on board what you say regarding the launch statement. But i still feel that if alternative proposals were put forward along with each grievance then it would have looked alot more objective and less of a rant, so to speak. I think the media would have presented it as the Rangers support offering Mr Murray a 17-point plan to rectify what the RST believe are the major flaws withing the club. Instead, as i said earlier, Murray has just been allowed to sidestep the valid criticisms which have been put forward. He basically said that we, as supporters, can protest all we want but we don't know how to run a club.

Now, had we given suggestions on how he could improve in the areas the statement was critical of then Murray would not have had the chance to make such comments.

Like you have correctly stated, the man has told us countless times that he is annoyed at having to apolagise for every mistake he makes. But the fact that he still makes those same mistakes repeatedly tells us that his apolagies are meaningless. Either he doesn't recognise that he is making these mistakes, which i highly doubt, or he knows fine and well but is too stubborn and arrogant to adopt a new strategy or admit to failing.

These are very troubled times but we need a united support on this one. Starting this campaign was easy, getting the support of large organisations such as the RSA along with fan groups like the Blue Order is what will be difficult. And to me it seems impossible as the RSA are refusing to back the campaign.

[samNewton 0]

As an RST member i can unequivocally say that i have not recieved one e-mail asking about my thoughts on ANY RST issue in the last year, nor have i recieved a copy of the Blue Spirit newsletter since the former Webmaster resigned.

Ditto.

Any RST claim to represent the membership without regularly canvassing member opinion is devoid of credibility.

The Rangers support needs powerful, articulate, professional representation. If Murray is inclined to make damning statements about the RST, I'd have hoped that bitching back (as per the OP) would be the last way to respond.

It reminded me of the tawdry, he said/she said spats when the RST appeared to be hell-bent on self-destruction over the pat year or so.

A group like the RST is only ever going to be as strong as the support wants it to be.

Criticism of the RST's perceived failings essentially amounts to criticism of the support as a whole.

If you think those involved at present aren't doing well enough or moving in the direction that you want, then is pefectly possible to put a motion forward at an AGM or stand for election yourself.

Or set up your own group.

[outlaw69uk 123]

Brissy-How can you claim to have the backing of the 5000 members of the RST in this matter then if you haven't asked for their opinion. Fair enough they elected you but it doesn't mean they agree with everything.

Spot on. Fair enough you can't canvas every member on every decision but one as important and high profile as this should have the backing of a majority of the trust. Smacks of a power trip.

You can mate, haha, outlook, send to group, add voting buttons, "yes", "no", "abstain", outlook adds them up for you, can be done in 10 mins! but, apparently the guys were "comfortable in how this was handled" this time?

I agree, they are elected, and shouldnt need to consult on everything, but, this was meant to be something big, significant, and, in the national press, so, it SHOULD have been run past members to garner opinion, and, the release shouldnt have been rushed out as it was, more thought should have been put into it, in my opinion of course.

I may not be a member, but, they were portrayed in the press as representative of Rangers supporters, so, by implication, everyone has been portrayed as agreeing with this.

There does need to be a change at our club, however, I think we also need to be far far cleverer when it comes to the wording of releases/statements. They should be made/worded in a manner whereby WE are in control of the conversation/discussion, and they also need to have some constructive ideas/suggestions in them. WE need to control the campaign, and, give opponents of it nowhere to go but the way we want. There are 2 types of approach, essentially carrot and stick. We have used the stick approach this time, the result not being a favourable one, although it has got some fans all happy since it was basically telling Murray he was shit.

[MosesMcNeil 1,664]

A group like the RST is only ever going to be as strong as the support wants it to be.

Criticism of the RST's perceived failings essentially amounts to criticism of the support as a whole.

If you think those involved at present aren't doing well enough or moving in the direction that you want, then is pefectly possible to put a motion forward at an AGM or stand for election yourself.

Or set up your own group.

How does criticising the RST amount to criticising the whole support? That's an absolutely ridiculous assertion. Despite what you might think, the RST is (currently) far from representing the support as a whole. I hope that's an issue being positively addressed by the RST .

There is no need for calls to the RST to raise it's game to be taken personally, can't you tell that what is wanted is for the RST to be the very best - it started out with the greatest of intentions (enough to make me join in a heartbeat) and has, by your own admission, lost it's way in some regards - you mentioned poor communication above for example.

I'd really rather not see a collection of splintered groups attempting to represent the support at large - I would to see the RST embody a professional approach fit to represent us.

[outlaw69uk 123]

I have been reading the episodes of the last few days with great interest and personally, i am pleased that a couple of the Board members of the RST are taking the time to listen to the viewpoints expressed on RM.

I will start with the campaign itself. There is without a doubt a great many Rangers supporters who feel angered and dismayed with the way Rangers Football Club is being run nowadays, and this campaign at least gives some direction to that anger. A focal point. In my own oppinion i believe that allof the criticisms listed in the campaign are valid and all are contributing to the current climate of the club, from on-field inconsistency, to disenfranchised supporters and questionable financial decisions at the top. But i do feel that the RST have once again left themselves open to criticism through the lack of alternatives, suggestions and constructive arguments provided in the original statement.

As much as i feel that David Murray's reaction to the supporters who are supporting this campaign was nothing short of a disgrace, there is no doubt in my mind that the original statement allowed him to dodge the issues and dismiss them as reactionary. If the RST had provided alternatives to the current way the club is being run the he would have been under much more pressure to engage in some form of dialogue, even if it was just through the media and not personally.

Without doubt there are massive financial problems at the club, otherwise we would not have our Chairman and manager publicly stating that at least one top player will have to be transfered before February. The loyalty that the Rangers support has shown over the last 20 years of Murray's stewardship has been taken for granted. The money which we pour into the club year after year is not being spent wisely by either those in charge and therefore the support is well within our right to ask questions. We do not deserve to be patronised and belittled through comments such as; "they are hardly captains of industry themselves". It smacks of the arrogance and apathy towards the views of the Rangers support which Murray has time and again displayed. One really does wonder if the Rangers support will ever gain the respect it deserves from this man.

On another note I must take Mr Edgar to task on an issue that has cropped-up in this thread. When asked about why the RST membership was not consulted on the issue you stated that it was "impractical to canvass the opinion of every RST member on everything we do". As an RST member i can unequivocally say that i have not recieved one e-mail asking about my thoughts on ANY RST issue in the last year, nor have i recieved a copy of the Blue Spirit newsletter since the former Webmaster resigned. To me that is unacceptable. Any Board member you ask will tell you that the RST Board represent the views of their members, but how can they claim this if they have no idea what oppinions their membership holds? Do you agree that communication between Board members and the wider membership is not good enough and accounts for the high number of members not renewing every year? I'm not having a dig at you i would just really like an explanation for this.

Great post, although I would say that since it seems to mirror my own views. Particularily the highlighted part. It was more of a display of anger and unhappiness (all valid), but, lacked the required suggestions to make this into a debate, with the hope of achieving something. I have dealt with Bain in the past (I was the BT account manager for Ranger some years back), and, have no doubt that when it comes to debate and discussion, someone with decent intelligence could wipe the floor with him. Murray, for all peoples perceptions of him, is successful in business, and, discussions/statements need to be far cleverer than the one released.

[BlueIsTheColour 35]

As an RST member i can unequivocally say that i have not recieved one e-mail asking about my thoughts on ANY RST issue in the last year, nor have i recieved a copy of the Blue Spirit newsletter since the former Webmaster resigned.

Ditto.

Any RST claim to represent the membership without regularly canvassing member opinion is devoid of credibility.

The Rangers support needs powerful, articulate, professional representation. If Murray is inclined to make damning statements about the RST, I'd have hoped that bitching back (as per the OP) would be the last way to respond.

It reminded me of the tawdry, he said/she said spats when the RST appeared to be hell-bent on self-destruction over the pat year or so.

A group like the RST is only ever going to be as strong as the support wants it to be.

Criticism of the RST's perceived failings essentially amounts to criticism of the support as a whole.

If you think those involved at present aren't doing well enough or moving in the direction that you want, then is pefectly possible to put a motion forward at an AGM or stand for election yourself.

Or set up your own group.

See that is the problem with the Rangers support. That attitude of not liking what the main organisation is doing so form a splinter group.

That is most certainly not that answer, and infact, is the reason for so much division among the support. Too many supporters are puting their bruised egos and personal squabbles ahead of the bigger picture. David Murray loves nothing more than seeing us argue amongst ourselves and form new organisations with low credibility or threat to him.

Divide and conquer.

It is about time that all of the Supporters's representatives and fan groups got together and ironed-out any problems they may have with each other on either a personal or idealogical level. Then begin to construct ways for the support to become more unified and staunch. You see it at clubs like Barcelona, Red Star Belgrade, Shalke and even Manchester United to an extent. The supporters have a universal and united group which they have chosen (not like the RSA) to represent their views to the club. If that organisation is not happy then the club know that the support as a whole is not happy and therefore there is immediate pressure for them to listen to the concerns of the representatives.

The Rangers support really need to become more saavy when dealing with each other and the club itself.

[samNewton 0]

Now back to the campaign itself, i take on board what you say regarding the launch statement. But i still feel that if alternative proposals were put forward along with each grievance then it would have looked alot more objective and less of a rant, so to speak. I think the media would have presented it as the Rangers support offering Mr Murray a 17-point plan to rectify what the RST believe are the major flaws withing the club. Instead, as i said earlier, Murray has just been allowed to sidestep the valid criticisms which have been put forward. He basically said that we, as supporters, can protest all we want but we don't know how to run a club.

Now, had we given suggestions on how the could improve in the areas the statement was critical of then Murray would not have had the chance to make such comments.

Like you have correctly stated, the man has told us countless times that he is annoyed at having to apolagise for every mistake he makes. But the fact that he still makes those same mistakes repeatedly tells us that his apolagies are meaningless. Either he doesn't recognise that he is making these mistakes, which i highly doubt, or he knows fine and well but is too stubborn and arrogant to adopt a new strategy or admit to failing.

These are very troubled times but we need a united support on this one. Starting this campaign was easy, getting the support of large oganisations such as the RSA along with fan groups like the Blue Order is what will be difficult. And to me it seems impossible as the RSA are refusing to back the campaign.

My view is that no matter what the RST came out with it would be criticised. Such is the nature of messageboard debate.

I think this is primarily nit-picking because the main objective has been achieved.

We have to accept that no campaign, initiative, statement or whatever is going to meet with universal approval. Everyone has their own preferences regarding what they'd want emphasised.

The RSA was set up by the club. It is a contrived umbrella organisation bought and paid for by the club.

Why should its views determine or influence what other supporters groups do?

Jim Templeton, its former head, was scathing about the club when he stepped down a few months ago.

[TannochsideBear 355]

As an RST member i can unequivocally say that i have not recieved one e-mail asking about my thoughts on ANY RST issue in the last year, nor have i recieved a copy of the Blue Spirit newsletter since the former Webmaster resigned. To me that is unacceptable. Any Board member you ask will tell you that the RST Board represent the views of their members, but how can they claim this if they have no idea what oppinions their membership holds?

In an ideal world they would be able to canvass all members on every issue. But with all of them having jobs and families to do as well as this, the time is just not there to do thes things all the time.

Have you attended the EGM/AGM's of the RST. The answers are all given out there at the meetings, where you can discuss it for as long as you want and propose any issue or idea or point you wish to raise. It then goes to a show of hands from all attending and either carried or rejected as a majority of members.

The RST (and I know because I asked and they told me) get an awful lot of correspondence in their inbox and mailbox from members asking direct questions and proposing ideas all the time. It is from these messages from their membership that they can see patterns of support for a particular course of action. If they get 100 emails asking them to support a particular course of action and only a couple saying they should not, it is clear that the majority of members who can be bothered to contact them feel a certain way.

If you cannot be bothered to contact the body of which you are a member to try to move policy in a specific direction, how can you possibly moan about that decision if it was taken after receiving numerous requests for that course of action to be taken?

And if you feel strongly enough about the whole issue and feel the current RST board is not doing things in the way you would wish them to on your behalf, you can go to the next meeting or AGM and vote them out. It is, if nothing else, democratic. I'll see you there. :biggrin:

[samNewton 0]

As an RST member i can unequivocally say that i have not recieved one e-mail asking about my thoughts on ANY RST issue in the last year, nor have i recieved a copy of the Blue Spirit newsletter since the former Webmaster resigned.

Ditto.

Any RST claim to represent the membership without regularly canvassing member opinion is devoid of credibility.

The Rangers support needs powerful, articulate, professional representation. If Murray is inclined to make damning statements about the RST, I'd have hoped that bitching back (as per the OP) would be the last way to respond.

It reminded me of the tawdry, he said/she said spats when the RST appeared to be hell-bent on self-destruction over the pat year or so.

A group like the RST is only ever going to be as strong as the support wants it to be.

Criticism of the RST's perceived failings essentially amounts to criticism of the support as a whole.

If you think those involved at present aren't doing well enough or moving in the direction that you want, then is pefectly possible to put a motion forward at an AGM or stand for election yourself.

Or set up your own group.

See that is the problem with the Rangers support. That attitude of not liking what the main organisation is doing so form a splinter group.

That is most certainly not that answer, and infact, is the reason for so much division among the support. Too many supporters are putting their bruised egos and personal squabbles ahead of the bigger picture. David Murray loves nothing more than seeing us argue amongst ourselves and form new organisations with low credibility or threat to him.

Divide and conquer.

It is about time that all of the Supporters's representatives and fan groups got together and ironed-out any problems they may have with each other on either a personal or idealogical level. Then begin to construct ways for the support to become more unified and staunch. You see it at clubs like Barcelona, Red Star Belgrade, Shalke and even Manchester United to an extent. The supporters have a universal and united group which they have chosen (not like the RSA) to represent their views to the club. If that organisation is not happy then the club know that the support as a whole is not happy and therefore there is immediate pressure for them to listen to the concerns of the representatives.

The Rangers support really need to become more saavy when dealing with each other and the club itself.

I notice you highlighted one part of my reply and ignored the others.

I think what I said was perfectly reasonable and logical and will leave it to others to decide.

I am all in favour of fans working together and think there are far too many divisions in the support.

Although these are sometimes inevitable due to peoples' opinions, there is undoubtedly an element arising from jealousy and personal hostility. This is regrettable.

[parkheadbear 0]

As an RST member i can unequivocally say that i have not recieved one e-mail asking about my thoughts on ANY RST issue in the last year, nor have i recieved a copy of the Blue Spirit newsletter since the former Webmaster resigned.

Ditto.

Any RST claim to represent the membership without regularly canvassing member opinion is devoid of credibility.

The Rangers support needs powerful, articulate, professional representation. If Murray is inclined to make damning statements about the RST, I'd have hoped that bitching back (as per the OP) would be the last way to respond.

It reminded me of the tawdry, he said/she said spats when the RST appeared to be hell-bent on self-destruction over the pat year or so.

A group like the RST is only ever going to be as strong as the support wants it to be.

Criticism of the RST's perceived failings essentially amounts to criticism of the support as a whole.

If you think those involved at present aren't doing well enough or moving in the direction that you want, then is pefectly possible to put a motion forward at an AGM or stand for election yourself.

Or set up your own group.

Are you in the RST mate? The reason I ask is because DavidRST has said similar to this and for me it is a rather petty statement. You are saying if you don't like I don't care and fuck off. I can visualise my 3 year old covering her ears while shouting ''nanananananananana' so she can't here me.

The board is put in place to make decisions and it is granted that their may be situations that the board may need to make a quick decision without consulting it members. It seems that all decisions are made by the board though and non by it's members. The RST are meant to be the shinning light in the Rangers support who are going to lead the way but frankly you treat your members with the same amount of disdain as Murray which we are furious about. Like Politicians you are elected to represent the people who put you in place not yourself but frankly you are acting more and more like politicians each time something like this comes up by not giving a fuck about the people who gave you power.

How can you expect people to join your Campaign when you post this type of crap but then again it has always been this way with the RST so how did I think it could possibly change.

EDITED BY Frankie - please refrain from unnecessary abuse.

[BlueIsTheColour 35]

As an RST member i can unequivocally say that i have not recieved one e-mail asking about my thoughts on ANY RST issue in the last year, nor have i recieved a copy of the Blue Spirit newsletter since the former Webmaster resigned. To me that is unacceptable. Any Board member you ask will tell you that the RST Board represent the views of their members, but how can they claim this if they have no idea what oppinions their membership holds?

In an ideal world they would be able to canvass all members on every issue. But with all of them having jobs and families to do as well as this, the time is just not there to do thes things all the time.

Have you attended the EGM/AGM's of the RST. The answers are all given out there at the meetings, where you can discuss it for as long as you want and propose any issue or idea or point you wish to raise. It then goes to a show of hands from all attending and either carried or rejected as a majority of members.

The RST (and I know because I asked and they told me) get an awful lot of correspondence in their inbox and mailbox from members asking direct questions and proposing ideas all the time. It is from these messages from their membership that they can see patterns of support for a particular course of action. If they get 100 emails asking them to support a particular course of action and only a couple saying they should not, it is clear that the majority of members who can be bothered to contact them feel a certain way.

If you cannot be bothered to contact the body of which you are a member to try to move policy in a specific direction, how can you possibly moan about that decision if it was taken after receiving numerous requests for that course of action to be taken?

And if you feel strongly enough about the whole issue and feel the current RST board is not doing things in the way you would wish them to on your behalf, you can go to the next meeting or AGM and vote them out. It is, if nothing else, democratic. I'll see you there. :biggrin:

I feel you are missing my point her mate. I am not saying that the RST are not democratic or have the best interests of the Rangers support at heart. I am also not saying that they should be canvassing the membership on every occasion where a statement is being realeased or decision is being taken.

What i am trying to explain is that there undoubtedly a communication breakdown between the Board and the membership which is damaging to the running of the RST and also it's credibility amongst the wider Rangers support. It is something which i would like to see sorted in order for the organisation to ensure the respect of current members (and to stop the declining renewals) and also to attract new members.

Unfortunately i was unable to attend the last AGM/EGM due to illness, which is a shame as i was looking forward to it. I will certainly be attending any future events though so, yes, i will no doubt see you there.

[Frankie 505]

A group like the RST is only ever going to be as strong as the support wants it to be.

Criticism of the RST's perceived failings essentially amounts to criticism of the support as a whole.

If you think those involved at present aren't doing well enough or moving in the direction that you want, then is pefectly possible to put a motion forward at an AGM or stand for election yourself.

Or set up your own group.

Come on Sam...

The RST member above is offering some constructive criticism and worries about how the Trust is run and the best you can do is complain about that and tell him to set up his own group.

That sounds mightily similar to what someone in Charlotte Sq is currently doing; ie overly defensive and rather dismissive.

Regarding this very important strategy as a whole, I think the fact the Trust have obviously changed their policy on how they deal with the club (in the last year it has steadily gone from ongoing dialogue, to attempting to gain a seat on the board, to strong criticism in the media), I'm surprised they haven't consulted their membership on this change of tact.

TB makes a valid point about some incoming communication perhaps indicating member opinion to a degree but if the RST does have 5000 members (I doubt that) then it's only fair they are all consulted about such a markedly different change in strategy. The fact they haven't been and the extremely valid worries about a lack of communication generally despite renewed efforts before the resignations means the RST should be a bit more appreciative of members' opinions like BiTC above.

Not everything should be done at annual meetings and not everything can be changed via standing for election.

[parkheadbear 0]

Not everything should be done at annual meetings and not everything can be changed via standing for election.

Exactly Frankie, no orgainisation that has a collective of football fans can be run like this personally. A tear is a long time in Football and over the course of a season many things change so you will never be able to get a collective view of what your members want from an Annual meeting. Anything less than a meeting once a month is crazy and the fact that we have a home tie this weeked would have been ideal opportunity for an emergancy meeting of members to gauge a view on what could possible be the route to take.