D'Artagnan
-
Posts
1,590 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Everything posted by D'Artagnan
-
Entered in error
-
If you are referring to Rangers Media - I suggest you really need to get out more.
-
What are you referring to ?
-
“The dark eleventh hour Draws on and sees us sold To every evil power We fought against of old. Rebellion, rapine hate Oppression, wrong and greed Are loosed to rule our fate” I don’t think regular readers of this blog would describe me as what the media refer to as a “pop-pom cheerleader” of the various factions vying for control of our club. I’ve never seen the attraction nor sense of writing a blog to further the endeavours of rich businessmen who can afford their own PR machines. I’ve been highly critical of Dave King’s strategy to gain control of our club, and I stand by such criticism to this day. When I wrote my open letter to him, I envisaged King riding in like the 7th cavalry, scooping up shares to gain control of our club. Thereby uniting a fractured support, and thus enabling us to get behind our club where together we could build a stable future for her. What we got of course was something completely different which has only served to exacerbate such fractures. Furthermore, contrary to some reports, Mike Ashley is not the devil incarnate. He is a powerful, ruthless and opportunistic businessman who appears to maximise to his full potential, the misfortune and weakness of others. Sentiment does not appear to come into it – just ask the employees of USC. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/mike-ashley-wields-his-iron-fist-once-more-at-usc-9994171.html Alarmingly, our football club appears to be the latest victim of Mr Ashley’s growing business empire and he has been assisted in this to the full by a thoroughly incompetent, self-serving and shambolic Rangers board. Having comprehensively failed to balance the housekeeping budget they have then compounded the problem by rejecting all offers of outside investment thus leaving our club on the equivalent of a life support machine – relying on short term cash infusions where only the good grace and will of the donors prevented us from going under, as this shambles of a board failed to meet the repayments within the agreed time period. While the Man who would be King issued sound bite statements to the press, Ashley continued to increase his powerbase within our club, but of course every power grab carried a considerable financial caveat. Our retail, our historical assets, even our very trademark were considered fair game. Where there were dissenting voices within our boardroom, people who dared to highlight that such deals were not in the best interests of our club – Ashley eradicated them. Messrs Wallace, Nash & Crighton – RIP. A number of leaked e-mails demonstrated that the remnants of the Rangers board appeared to be more concerned about preserving their places on the board rather than pursuing the best financial deal for the club. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/11247379/Sandy-Easdales-true-role-in-Rangers-takeover-talks-thrown-into-question-by-release-of-emails.html Further confirmation of this was provided courtesy of Colin Kingsnorth of Laxey, who clearly felt it was appropriate to call time on this acquiescing of power to the Ashley Empire. http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11788/9626770/scottish-championship-laxey-partners-sell-rangers-shares The consequence of course, is that we now have a Rangers board dominated by Ashley men. These are the same men who control the destiny of our retail, our historical assets (with the exception of Ibrox – for now) our very trademark. I will ask you a simple question. When it comes to a crucial vote in our boardroom whose interests will these men move to protect – Rangers or Sports Direct? The situation is beyond dire but it is still salvageable. Dave King has called for an EGM which will present us with the opportunity to replace the current board. I’m not being melodramatic when I say the destiny and future of our club is in the hand of shareholders. Furthermore I will not mislead you. I’m convinced Dave King does not have the financial muscle which the Ashley Empire has at its disposal. If we vote to remove the current board and replace it with a Dave King one, I believe our club will be on its knees for a longer period. But I’d much rather be on my knees under my own strength, striving and aspiring to restore this club to its former glory with every part of the body working together to achieve that aim, than be on my knees bended in servitude and reliant on the quick fix solutions of others at a cost which threaten to take away my very soul, my very heritage and my identity, What answer from the North? A resounding “Thanks, but No thanks Mr Ashley”
-
Celtic fans band together for new club Gers advert
D'Artagnan replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
I would go a step further GS... No sensible newspaper would clearly breach ASA regs. http://www.asa.org.uk/About-ASA/About-regulation.aspx -
Do it yersel !
-
I think we can at least agree on the last part - we all want the club saved.
-
I think you should re-read what I wrote and what you have written. If you feel that what I have proposed is a Utopian notion - then fair enough we will have to agree to differ. I take it you will not be attending the next protest seeing as you clearly disagree with peaceful protests ?
-
Have you not read Frankie's summation in the other thread ?
-
Actually the questions were directed at MB - not you - who was obliging enough to provide an answer, albeit we dont see eye to eye. Its alarming that you appear to be apportioning the blame on 2 employees rather than upon those who went beyond the remit and location of a peaceful protest. Its even more alarming that you cannot see the damage it is doing to those of us who are intent of holding peaceful protests. You mentioned public opinion in a previous post - what do you think is more likely to garner favour or sympathy & effect change - thousands upon thousands of Rangers supporters protesting peacefully and highlighting the avarice of Ashley and the sell out by our board or a handful of highly charged indivduals running around like an angry mob and engaging in conduct which leaves people injured ? My concern with upping the ante is where do you actually draw the line - in fact is there a line ? What happens if the next incident results in assaults or deliberate violence on others - is that acceptable ? My hope, is that a series of continuous protests, undertaken in a peaceful and responsible manner, and attended by thousands upon thousands of bears, highlighted positively via MSM, and the negative publicity it has for those concerned, will apply pressure on both Ashley and the board to reconsider their proposal.
-
So we have an organised protest which is well attended with exemplerary behaviour - where the point is clearly made as well as given plenty of air time etc by MSM. Then we have a few individuals taking it upon themselves to hold an unofficial protest in an area they are not entitled to be, and as a consequence 2 elderly employees of the club sustain injuries. Sorry Moody but quite simply it really is a no brainer.
-
Has it ever crossed your mind that possibly they were there in the course of their employment to prevent unauthorised entry ? Or do you seriously think the board are employing OAP'S as personal bodyguards ?
-
Honestly trublu are you hearing yourself ? For Gods sake man we are talking about 2 OAP's who work for our club
-
How about you tell us trublu what you are actually proposing in terms of upping the ante`from peaceful demonstrations and how such measures will unfold ?
-
I was unfortunate enough to have to chair a “debate” on my twitter timeline this weekend as two polarised views clashed on my timeline in response to one of my tweets. On one side we had someone who wished to lay the blame for the injuries sustained by our Ibrox employees squarely with the SOS, whilst the other expressed a desire to see a “more aggressive approach” to the nature of fans protests. Throughout the course of what was an unpleasant exchange between the two of them, it emerged that the proponent of the “more aggressive approach” was not a member of the UOF or SOS whilst the other was apportioning blame based solely on unconfirmed reports he had heard. It was a discussion which has been very much mirrored on Rangers message boards over the weekend. Some clearly saw Friday night’s events as an opportunity to tarnish the fans groups whilst others appear unwilling to accept that the behaviour of Rangers led to the injuries of the two elderly Rangers employees. Considering the incident which led to the injuries occurred both after and away from the location of the organised protest it seems unreasonable to link the unsavoury incident to the main protest where thousands of bears demonstrated in an emotional, exuberant yet exemplary peaceful manner. Those who maintain they saw no violence or assaults at the latter incident, may well be correct, but you cannot ignore the fact that as a consequence of whatever happened at Argyle House two elderly Rangers employees, George and Liz sustained injures. And that is not, and never will be, acceptable. I’m sure all of us in the Rangers support would wish them both a speedy recovery. I’ve been harping on for months now, almost like some PC Brigade acolyte, about some of the unhelpful derogatory and inflammatory language being used. If we claim as a support that such language dehumanises our support when it is directed against us, does the same argument not work the other way ? Or would anyone care to argue that terms such as “rats” is neither derogatory nor dehumanising ? What is clear from Friday is that those wishing to exercise their right to peaceful protest now goes way beyond the ranks of members of the UOF and SOS. This places an added responsibility on protest organisers to ensure that all participants are clear about both the nature and aims of such protest. The briefing message needs to be clear, consistent and unequivocal that all such demonstrations against the board are to be peaceful in nature. I am also firmly of the opinion that a “more aggressive approach” will be self-defeating. Our board are worthy of utter contempt for their actions, but that does not in any way, shape or form justify violence or threats of violence towards them. Supporters protesting in a peaceful and responsible manner against avarice, broken assurances and opportunistic businessmen playing Russian roulette with our club will capture the imagination – behaving in a manner befitting thugs wont. Furthermore it will turn away many bears who will just not entertain such behaviour. Protesting and demonstrating is one of the few immediate options available to us as a fan base, it is imperative we use it responsibly and do nothing which usurps either its effectiveness or ability to unite our fan base behind a common cause. The proposal which sees Ibrox being used as security against loan is very much a crossing of the Rubicon for the Ibrox support, and has galvanised and unified us as a fan base. Let’s not cross our own Rubicon in the way we protest against it.
-
-
The point is though there was, and there will continue to be many fans at these protests who are not part of UOF or SOS, we need to ensure that the behaviour of all those who attend and protest does nothing to detract from what we are trying to achieve.
-
Quite simply Zappa it was utterly reprehensible - neither George or Liz deserve to be sustainging injuries as a consequence of fans behaviour, and such behaviour should warrant the unanimous condemnation of the Rangers support. Irrespective of the disdain for the board, there needs to be realisation that violence or evincing violence towards is them is totally unacceptable also. We should be discussing the success of thousands of fans uniting to protest against an incompetent and self serving board, not prevaricating on unedifying conduct which resulted in 2 eldery Rangers employees sustaining injuries. If we are to continue to bring pressure on this board & Ashley we need to do much better than we did on Friday.
-
Rangers: Dave King’s move faces taxing questions
D'Artagnan replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
Seems to work for Sandy Easdale... -
Rangers: Dave King’s move faces taxing questions
D'Artagnan replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
Im not convinced on the "fraud or corruption" that he would fail - Id say it was open to debate. I appreciate it may seem to be a bit of semantics, but I understand Kings recorded convictions pertain to breaches of the SA Income Tax regulations. Whether that would come under the umbrella of the SFA's "fraud" Im not sure. -
Rangers: Dave King’s move faces taxing questions
D'Artagnan replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
These are the benchmarks listed in the SFA Articles of Regulation. Ive screenshotted them rather than copy and paste due the layout of the articles themselves. -
Harsh ? I dont thinks so. Why would any Rangers fan co-operate or work with a board, who are incompetent, negligent and renege on their promises ? They are not, unlike the RFB, working on behalf of the club but working on the best deals for themselves. The set up and nature of this board relies on trust - this board (the Rangers Board not the RFB) by their actions have completely destroyed any sembelance of trust which remained.
-
With no disrespect to FS or the other individual members - the announcement yesterday by the board has destroyed any credibility the RFB had as a collective.
-
There will some of you reading this who, like me, are old enough to remember the Ibrox Disaster and the aftermath. They were indeed the darkest of times, and words cannot adequately convey what it was like to live through it. I can’t begin to imagine what it was like for those who lost loved ones, but I know how bad it was for those of us who knew some of those who perished. As a support we needed hope and Willie Waddell gave us that. He spoke of building a stadium which would stand as a testament, a memorial to those who perished that day – and he delivered. The wonderful stadium we have today is that legacy from yesteryear. I’m sure I’m not alone amongst our support who recognise our modern day Ibrox, not just as a stadium but a living memorial, a tribute to those who perished. Ibrox is not just a stadium, it is a beacon of hope, of remembrance, of inspiration to every one of us who cast a favourable eye towards her. Quite simply she is beyond price. Even during the aftermath of Whyte, the fact we had a stadium and a support like ours filled me with hope and optimism for the future, even during the blackest of news days, and of course, there were many of them. I could witter on all day about broken promises, broken assurances and cite examples, but what would be the point? If men cannot understand the significance of their actions today, or what Ibrox means to us, the fans, then I doubt they will lose much sleep over their broken promises. As I’ve warned for some time, those currently at the helm of our club are not fit for purpose. Furthermore they clearly know nothing about our club, nor care for our traditions, our values or our history. As a beacon which has served this support for generations is dimmed by the actions of imposters, perhaps it will prove to be the spark which brings unity and a unified sense of purpose to those who truly care about our club. “The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness can never extinguish it.”
-
I think you need to look at the nature of the statement Rab - saying "we didnt find any evidence of leaks from within HMRC" doesnt mean emphatically that they didnt come from there just that the enquiry failed to find any evidence to prove this. As Ibrox Boy correctly points out - Im quite sure any evidence of such would have vanished long ago.