Tannochsidebear

Fair enough. For every bus at an away ground you probably need about 10 cars to equate the numbers. The recent match at Pittodrie is one example. There must have been about 30 buses in the bus park beside the ground. That equates to around 1500 tickets out of the 2200 we get. Like you, I would be keen to see the splits, but it is unlikely this would ever become available information. I obviously have no facts to back up how many CCCS members are like the ones I mentioned. But if there are about a dozen or so examples of it on our bus with 50 members, and this is replicated around other buses which I can think of no reason why it would not be the case, then that is why I came to the conclusion I did. For further example, our RSC has 50 members. After work commitments etc, probably around 40 will go to any particular game. From that number around 10-15 will get tickets from the CCCS directly. The RSC will get perhaps another 10 from their allocation. This means the rest are made up from CCCS members not intending to go to the game, and passing their tickets on to us.

Firstly, on your point re Murray. That is of course a bit part of the problem with the current way of thinking at the club. DM thinks supporters are a total nuisance, and RSC's probably the worst of the lot (apart from the RST of course). This thinking has to change. Yes there are still some buses who leave far too early and get too tanked up, fine if you can handle it but we all know that is not always the case, especially with the younger bears, and it is those same ones that always seem to forget what songs are "acceptable" these days! The tarring with the same brush effect is certainly in use here. As for a fighting fund for RSC's, that is part of what I was meaning in my article when I mentioned the annual fundraiser. With the club's help, each RSC could run an event with the proceeds split between the club and the RSC. If the club donated some prizes (signed shirt, pair of tickets etc) for a raffle/auction at the event, the event could surely raise enough for both aprties to get a worthwhile turn out of it. I am sure your RSC already does some fundraisers throughout the season, so therefore I am sure you could see the benefit of getting some prizes donated by the club, and perhaps a player appearance for a photoshoot with our latest trophy. The current thinking is poles apart from where it should be, and I am not sure if there is the will to change at the moment if I am being honest, but that is not to say we just shrug our shoulders and do nothing.

The problem with the CCCS is that there are very few guys like yourself that really really want the tickets for your Kilmarnocks and Motherwells. I believe that a large number of ST holders only tick the box in the hope of getting a celtic ticket. There are a lot of members of my RSC that get their pals to tick the CCCS box and we take any tickets they get. We also have members who are always offered tickets for unglamorous games from ST holders who fall into the above category. I quick look at the number of buses at any away ground and a quick calculation of the number of tickets allocated to Rangers for that game will tell you that a very large percentage of bears still use the buses to travel to the games. I have every respect for bears like yourself who prefer to use their own transport to go to the games for any variety of reasons, and of course we must look after them as well, but I feel that while the RSC's are the large majority of travelling fans, they should be put to the forefront of the thinking at the club. Would any of the perks mentioned in my article make you consider rejoining a RSC? What would make you rejoin? Is it just down to the buses running in your area and the people running them?

It is difficult to see a future role for the Association. Like you, I have every respect for John, and he does a thankless task keeping things going. The Association did come to the fore earlier this season when the 5% issue came to the fore. They went to several SPL clubs and arranged to buy tickets for their member clubs without them having to buy coupons in the paper etc. As the Association holds a database of every member's details in every member club, it was able to provide enough comfort to the clubs (Hibs & Hearts especailly), to get full allocations for their members. The fact that the Association was not part of RFC was a major factor in the other clubs dealing with them, as they would not deal with Bain or the Assembly due to them feeling agreived about the 5% issue. So in certain circumstances, the Association can be quite useful, hence the reason for the remaining clubs still paying their dues and remaining members. But a long term future is unlikely as long as the Assembly is the big daddy within the club.

Your not serious are you Gordy? Have you seen nothing of Murray this last decade? He is as interested in the lies printed about Rangers and Rangers supporters as he is worried about going to the cashline hoping he has money left in his account. Now when anything negative is printed about him personally, that is when you see a full and active PR offensive, but only in those circumstances I am afraid. There has been nothing recently to suggest this is likely to change in the forseeable future.

It really could be that simple couldn't it. If the filth that print these acts of pure fiction knew that their words would be checked for accuracy and any lies would result in retractions being saught and for continual errors, banning orders in place, together with complaints to their bosses and if necessary the PCC, it would soon become too much hastle for them to try to get away with lies, and wouls ensure that only accurate stories are run. If we have done something wrong, we can have no complaints if we are criticised for it. But these acts of pure fiction could be so easily stopped if the will was there from someone at the club. All we have ever asked for is fair treatment, nothing more, nothing less.

GERS LATEST - Kirk Broadfoot to miss Cup tie against Forfar but could return to facce Killie on Saturday. Nacho Novo also out but Kyle Lafferty fit and ready. The above is an official club text message I received about 90 mins ago. It looks like KB's foot was just badly knocked and has settled down well. Incidentally, the same text service reported at 1130am this morning that KB would miss next 2 games minimum. Must have been a good physio session from 1130am to 1pm then!

I have been astonished at the amount of bears that think that was a good point at the piggery, and that the fact our enemy are in poor form means we should go on to win the league this season. A convincing victory might well have seen them implode and made it easier for us to win the league. But they have won the title the last 3 years by being able to go on lengthy runs of wins. The fact they have not done so, yet, this season, is the only reason we are still in touch with them. Like the first piggery game last season, we blew the chance to finish them off, and it came back to bite us when we ran out of steam at the death. I am trying to tell myself not to over-react and that this year will be different, but sooner or later they will hit a run of form, can we be confident of winning 3 or 4 successive away games while maintaining a winning home record. We have not won 4 SPL games in a row since September. Just a thought.

Such is the lack of quality of refereeing in this country just now, I actually thought he had the best game from a referee at CP in quite some time.

:thup:

I think it will be a close, fairly negative game like the Ibrox meeting in December, but with us coming out just on top by 1-0 or 2-1. I dont see us getting beaten, so a draw with them still to come to Ibrox would not be so bad.

It is absolutely ridiculous to even mention Fleck in the full international team at this stage in his career. You have to be careful with talented youngsters, and I cant see what harm it will do to give him a few games at U-21 level to see how he adapts to the very different game of international football. Scotland have no chance of qualifying under Burley anyway so give the guy a break and let him develop naturally. 3 games in the SPL ffs, really.

I really wish Walter would concentrate on playing our best 11 in our best formation. Unfortunately he has proven time and time again that when it comes to big games we are far more concerned with countering the opposition formation and tactics than letting them worry about us. Please, just for this once, tell yourself that they are in poor form and will be more worried about us than we need to be about them, and play an attacking formation to score goals. 5 in midfield with Boyd on the bench and I will scream.

Not quite sure what it is or the point of it, but I have just subscribed anyway!!

Yes, I will be going. Hoping for a similar result to my last visit.

Good. That should end the speculation linking him with us.

I am a fan of Ferguson but can see the cracks appearing in his play that is probably the effects of playing with injections and while injured for far too long on too many occasions and with plenty of centre midfield cover, it would be at least understandable and acceptable to let him go at this time. He must be the highest wage earner as well. I think that is a polite way of saying he may be finished at this level!!

Agree with a lot of what you say CammyF. I dont think the club is in danger of going out of business, but it probably could not be run worse. To let the club run up unmanageable debts once can be considered careless. Twice in a decade is sheer negligance.

Unfortunately, I think a lot of bears still cannot see any wrong in what Murray has done. Twice in a decade he has led us to the financial abyss where a full fire sale of players and talk of major downsizing is his only answer. This one sentence should be enough for anyone with any sense to see that he is not all he thinks he is, and that is without going into all the things other than the finances that he has failed us on. If all the websites, supporters groups etc got together as one and decided to hold a mass protest by not attending a home match, I reckon the attendance would be hit by about 6,000 max. Dont overestimate how many bears are on board and dont underestimate Murray's PR abilities when he is put under personal pressure and scrutiny. I have been firmly against Murray for several years now, but I would never boycott a match as a token of my displeasure against him. I dont have the answer, but the bear who comes up with the answer will be very popular indeed.

I said it often at the time, that we should have won the UEFA cup under Advocaat in the two seasons we dropped into it from the CL, but he totally arrogantly undervalued the competition, and I thought at the time it was our best chance I would see in my lifetime of winning a European trophy. I wish he employed the same underwhelmed attitude with his employers in 2008!!

I would like to know what qualifications Peat has for the job, apart from being next in line. What qualities has he shown at his club or in previous administrative positions to make him the top dog in our top sport earning top dough? Why do we not go out and get successful businessmen to come in with a big brush and sweep the whole place of its ancient procedures, and get some new ideas as to how to improve our lot, or new funding to help us compete both at club and international level, whilst providing coaching academies in every decent-sized town throughout the country with qualified coaches, proper facilities, and free for the kids. To assist and educate clubs as to how to get more than 500 punters through their doors for a league match. But no, as long as he gets to go away, first class all the way, with the squad and gets his mugshot in the papers every now and then, to hell with the rest of it.

FFS, I don't half go on a bit, I didn't realise I had written so much!! Sorry.

It has always been my opinion that Scottish football would be much better served if the SFA, SPL and SFL were combined to create one governing body for football in this small country. When we have second top tier teams attracting only a couple of thousand fans to the games, how can we possibly justify 3 fully administered and expensive organisations to run our game? For Rangers supporters, we have the same problem. Since 2003 we have had 3 active and polarised organisations. We cannot be best served by having 3 very separate, very different organisations all trying to get their message across to a 92% majority shareholder and his uninterested CEO. As an inactive member of all 3 organisations, I read the statements from Jim Templeton and John McMillan with great interest. It is clear that the differences between the 2 orgainsations these gentlemen represent (or represented in Jim's case) have if anything drifted even further apart, and the internal problems of the RST last summer show no greater unity or togetherness there. I thought there was hope when Jim and John both joined the board of the RST in 2007 that we were finally putting our differences behind us and getting a unified body to voice our concerns to the chairman. Unfortunately, and for reasons well documented elsewhere, this was not to be, and it seems that the 3 bodies are further apart now than ever. There are many things wrong with our Chairman's running of the club, our CEO's day to day running of the business side and contract negotiations, and us bears need a voice to challenge these wrongs and to seek clarity on matters we perhaps don't fully understand due to the lack of communications from the club. We need a platform for our good ideas to get aired at board level, we need to feel as if we belong again. There is not a chance in hell of any of this happening whilst there are 3 organisations running supporters interests. There is no chance of the RSA being able to do this as it's remit is to look after its' own member clubs, of which there are now unfortunately too few of. RSA meetings are also poorly attended for the number of members it represents, with the same selection of faces duly turning up, paying their dues and leaving again. It has made great strides and is to be congratulated for its efforts in obtaining tickets for member clubs this season directly from the opposition clubs after RFC's 5% debacle, and it's history and longevity is to be admired, but it does not tick all the boxes required in this era for supporter representation. The Assembly will never have the credibility amongst rank and file supporters because it is funded by the club and is seen as a nodding dog for the club, a soundbite to be used and abused by the board when it suits it. Despite having the largest membership of the 3 organisations, it probably has the fewest consistently active members of the 3 and that in itself is the saddest thing of all. Sure it can talk about having meetings worldwide etc, but day to day it has not done much to improve our lot, no doubt due to the fact that it was very well policed from within the club itself. Jim has recently left this post and his damning resignation statement made it crystal clear as to how much the Assembly can do to change genuine supporter representation and influence at board level. The RST looked to be the best bet for a while there. Since Malcolm McNiven took over the chair from Colin Glass, the objective of getting genuine supporter representation at board level looked to be getting much closer and culminated in the announcement at the 2007 AGM that it would be done within the year. Unfortunately, the RST imploded spectacularly in the spring/summer of 2008 with around half the active board leaving in a major split within the ranks. The new top table of the RST is not welcome at Murray's table and therefore it has to go back to being a vocal voice of the fans but without any chance of influence at board level. So where does this leave us, the Rangers fans, as we still have both concerns at the things that are being ran by the club, and creative talents and ideas as to how to improve things at the club that go unheard. We have a huge split between the club and it's supporters that is probably as bad as at any club in the footballing world, and for a club as successful as ours, that is quite an achievement. Sadly, for as many mistakes as the club have made, the supporters organisations have made just as many, and while all 3 have their place and certainly want to do the right thing, they are as guilty as the chairman of letting us, the rank and file supporters, down. I take my own share of the responsibility for the failures of the 3 organisations. I have been a member of the Association for nearly 20 years and been to only two of their meetings, despite being secretary of a registered member club of the Association for the last 10 years or so. I have been a member of the Assembly (by default admittedly) and have never asked them to do anything on my behalf, or offered to give them any assistance in helping my fellow members. I have been a member of the RST since the very first meeting in April 2003 at Partick Burgh Hall, have attended meetings and asked questions but never asked to join the board or help out to do something positive to help their cause. So can we have genuine supporter representation that is respected at board level? The answer for now is most certainly no, and will remain a firm no for the forseeable future, until we can unify our own organisations into a respected, independant from the club, popular with the rank and file, objectivised organisation with but one clear goal - to properly represent the general views of the Rangers supporter to the board of the club, and to get those views acted on for the common good where possible.

You have explained it very well Bluedell, thanks. I am glad that this has been set up in this way, and well done to those who gave interest free loans to help out with it. However the club should not have to beg and borrow to invest in youth development, it should be a major part of our investment in the football side of operations, and if we have to make do with a 25 man squad instead of 26 to pay for it, then so be it, the rewards should more than compensate. If only our manager had a little more faith in them to give them a chance, we might be happy to see the fruits of the system.

I hope you are right in this Bluedell as that is the only acceptable situation regarding our youth academy.