Jump to content

 

 

D'Artagnan

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,590

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

 Content Type 

Everything posted by D'Artagnan

  1. D'Artagnan
    No... I resort to requesting evidence to substantiate the false accusations you have made against me. Your "Viva Mike Ashley" is a further erroneous dig on your part - unless of course you would care to produce a blog or post from any forum where I expressed support for him. In fact let me save you trouble - you wont find one anywhere. What part of "I share the concerns you have expressed over Ashley" did you fail to understand ?
  2. D'Artagnan
    I think most people who know me know that I do not "attack" people. Stating your belief in someone does not equate to attacking others. Though given the various threads on Whyte on Rangers media will still be availabe - perhaps you would care to substantiate your allegation.
  3. D'Artagnan
    I'll ask you again in view of the fact you have failed to answer the question which I asked you... Are you suggesting I am deliberately lying to feed propaganda to the Rangers support ?
  4. D'Artagnan
    I "attacked" people who cast doubt on him ? Where and when was this ?
  5. D'Artagnan
    Are you suggesting I am deliberately lying to feed propaganda to the Rangers support ?
  6. D'Artagnan
    Whyte arrived with the suggestion he was from a Rangers family - whereas Green came in in from the cold with no connection whatsoever to the club. I wouldnt class that as a repeat performance.
  7. D'Artagnan
    Make sure to keep a full bottle of Johnnie Walker's beside you then as you watch those 9 In a Row DVD's, that way you will be able to dim the memory of the financial recklessness which accompanied NIAR and the subsequent mess which SDM's folly left us in. And spare yourself a dander at any of Spier's columns from the period with his outpouring of vitriol towards our club which was met with by the then owner "If a newspaper offends then dont buy it". They were hardly halcyon days either when we scratch beneath the veneer. Rather than view any pro-Ashley elements as merely a moronic giruy to the SOS or UOF I see it more as what Hildy has referred to in the past as the "sugar daddy" culture within our suppport, which has been a considerable achilles heel for our club. We seem incapable of exercising self-determination, yet we are clearly and unequivocally the one set of people which have the best interests of the club at heart - the last 2 years is more than ample proof of that. There are people on here, and elsewhere, who have lost faith in King - I have to say I can see why. He should have been far more vocal and visible as to what his intentions were, having started a revolt he has been conspicuous by his absence, and left others to take the flak of his vanishing act. Having raised the expectation amongst our support he should have at least managed that with statements or presence. I share the concerns you have expressed over Ashley, I hope the one lesson we have learned as support from the Green experience is that when a guy comes in with no history or connection to the club you can bet your bottom dollar that it wont be for the best interests of Rangers. But so long as we cling to that "sugar daddy" mentality our destiny will forever be in the hands of others rather than ourselves.
  8. D'Artagnan
    Rab Have a look in the Mike Ashey doubling his stake thread, and in particular this little gem of information.. We have almost acquiesced to his obvious -re-involvement at our club - it matters not to me if he is on Easdales pay roll, rather than the club's. How can we even afford any shred of credibility or trust to a board member who employs a guy who was a component part of the Whyte tenure ? Who saw it as acceptable practice to disclose from us fans the true nature of Whyte's character, who misled us over events which were transpiring at our club. In my opinion he is every bit as culpable as Whyte for what transpired. Ask yourself to whom is Irvine's first duty - Rangers or Easdale ? If the Easdales had one iota of respect for this club or its fans Irvine would be nowehere near our club.
  9. D'Artagnan
    Thats good then - there will be no surprises for either of us in that case.
  10. D'Artagnan
    Well considering none of us know....uness of course you have inside information ? Like perhaps how many subscribed to Dave King's trust fund ?
  11. D'Artagnan
    I dont disagree with any of the points you have raised Rab. But rather than use the word "fault" what I would say is rather than be anyone's fault it now becomes the board's responsibility to act on the failings you have highighted.
  12. D'Artagnan
    It’s been quite an exercise in the art of survival. A board who have misled shareholders at AGM, hidden the identity of investors, stand accused by a section of the press of lying over the withdrawal of credit/debit card facilities for season tickets, who, in their “comprehensive” 120 day review hid/omitted to divulge details of “the sale of the century” regarding stadium naming rights, have failed to answer satisfactorily structured questions from fans groups pertaining to the long term plans for the club, who have by unethical and unedifying association with known fugitives embarrassed the name of the club, the aforesaid which sees them, again, accused of misleading supporters regarding the nature of that meeting, have found in the last few days that there is one aspect of the club that even the most resourceful or duplicitous cannot hide from the fans – the state of the product on the park. There is even perhaps a warped sense of irony, that in the battle for our football club the ammunition or language is no longer anonymous investors, percentages or proxied shares but rather tactical ineptitude, poor performance, ill-discipline and unexplainable team selection. The current board cannot on this occasion use the convenient “get out clause” of laying the blame on previous regimes – this time it’s their call, and as thousands of bears demonstrated on Monday night as our team capitulated to Hibs, they will be held to account. In fact they already have been by thousands, the empty seats providing ample supporting evidence on that one. I fear it will get worse, much worse before it gets better. There is nowhere, nowhere the board can hide from this one. Monday night was a culmination rather than a knee jerk, perhaps the saddest aspect of it all was that it came as no great surprise to anyone. The failings of management, signing policy, tactics and team selection have been the subject of message board forums, supporter’s bus conversations and pre-match blethers for months. It is not a time for emotive and unhelpful descriptive language, either positive or negative regarding Ally, but rather a regrettable acceptance and emotion free analysis that in the most important area – on the park – Ally is not capable of taking us to where we not only want, but also need to be. There was a moment on Monday night when the cacophony of anger from the Copland Road, directed towards Ally, saw him withdraw to the dugout. It was notable that Durranty was tasked with the verbal coaching from the touchline second half. The board should be thankful there was such a volume of noise, if they prevaricate any longer over what needs to be done, then perhaps next time we fail, it will be akin to the tree falling in the empty forest – there will only be an empty silence from the empty stands.
  13. D'Artagnan
    Its time like this that you wish you had never asked the original question. But to pick up some of the points raised - my original query stands - if you are pursuing a campaign for greater probity, integrity and transparency from our board then I believe it is detrimental to your cause to have a guy at the head who himself not himselgf a bastion of such qualities. Its akin to having a known adulterer leading a campaign for fidelty in marriage. SB your point about the e-mail simply being communication between various Rangers fans would carry more credibility had the various groups acknowledged their alignment to Murray prior to the release of that e-mail. I think their failure to do so was damaging to their credibility. And that is at the heart of my original question. Had the campaign being driven by a desire solely to increase honesty/integrity/transparency at boardroom level then I think that would have proven to be more inclusive of our entre support - particularly had it not aligned itself to any particular individual. What Rangers fan would not want that after all we have been through ? For those of us who sit outside both camps it has been amusing watching some of the arguments presented by either sides players - ie those suggesting Sandy Easdale was a "crook" and thus not fit to hold office whilst suggesting King is the way forward apparently cannot see the error of their argument. And vice versa of course. Im quite sure Bawburst from Rangers media knows Judge Southwood's comments verbatim. It would be much too generous to say over the last few months the current board have failed to provide evidence of transparency/probity/integrity - its a whole lot worse than that. Hildy is right when he says we as a support are still waiting for the "rich Rangers fan" to come in and save us - many were looking for King to make some kind of move and were disappointed when he didnt. There may be some considerable truth in the point which was raised re the covert King perhaps not being the ideal partner for a fans groups who appear to be highly visible - though his previous comments were perhaps an indication that he viewed them as too confrontational. Strangely enough, whilst disagreeing with the mo deployed, I find myself most at ease with Gunslinger's position - a desire to see change at boardroom level which ensures individuals being appointed who we can trust to run the club profesionally, with probity/integrity and transparency - for the benefit of the club.
  14. D'Artagnan
    Im coming at this from the angle of carrying along a united support in the effort to achieve greater transparency and probity at our club - rather than factional pro board/pro King elements. Im wondering if King, and his own personal baggage was detrimental to a campaign which sought to establish greater transparency/integrity/probity at the club.
  15. D'Artagnan
    Hildy or anyone else for that matter... On the subject of ill thought out strategy - do you think the UOF made a strategic error aligning so closely with King ?
  16. D'Artagnan
    Have you forgotten what you wrote just a few posts ago....?
  17. D'Artagnan
    So are they also part of the flock of "lambs" ?
  18. D'Artagnan
    Can I ask PLG because I am genuinely confused here : 1. Is this talk of boycott over and above the withholding of season ticket monies as per the UOF Trust Fund ? 2. If it is over and above the former, who, if anyone is it being organised by, or is it just individual supporters ?
  19. D'Artagnan
    So let me get a correct handle on this Rangersitis & GS. Are you saying that Ally is looking after No.1 even if it is to the long term detriment of our club ? And his only desire to see a full house at Ibrox is for financial benefit & nothing to do with the team's performance ?
  20. D'Artagnan
    You dont think that as manager of the team these comments are made obo the players rather than any overt political purpose ?
  21. D'Artagnan
    Ally is "bought & paid for" ?? So he is nothing more than a puppet for the current regime ? Is that what you are really saying GS ? As for the suggestion Im ignoring the other things - Im focussing on what he said wanted to see fans do - irrespective of if he understands it or not.
  22. D'Artagnan
    So when Ally says he would like to see a full stadium he is in effect, being a lamb ?
  23. D'Artagnan
    Or of course they could just be going to support the team, as per the manager's request.
  24. D'Artagnan
    May be a bit before your time. Note : I said "may be"
  25. D'Artagnan
    I didnt say it was the "root" problem Zap - it was just an indicative of the fractured nature of our support - furthermore, despite the fledgling nature of Rangers First - its clear there is considerable animosity towards it in some quarters, thus even a fresh inititiative appears not to be immune to our ongoing travails.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.