D'Artagnan
-
Posts
1,590 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Everything posted by D'Artagnan
-
I think Rab we need to look at this material from the perspective of "conclusive proof". We all suspected HM were involved in far more than "low level intelligence gathering" - but if any of us were asked to prove it we may have struggled. Furthermore as can be seen from the e-mails, something again we have not seen before, clearly decisions were being made by unknown persons, outwith the normal course of business ie meetings etc to inflict further damage/punishment on our club.
-
High time Ian we utilised RFFF money to employ professionals to pursue the guilty & for lobby purposes.
-
Club deny Lee Wallace (and Simon Lappin) rumours
D'Artagnan replied to Waltersgotstyle's topic in Rangers Chat
Rumours elsewhere JTP of a tunnel bust up after Sundays result involving management and players. -
http://www.vanguardbears.co.uk/ More revelations
-
My concern Zap is that most of what I have written is not actually based on todays result - and sadly, I think most of us would agree with your reasoning about temporarily at least, re-defining expectations. But our manager is responsible for the long term footballing strategy and I dont think that looks positive at all, and thats down to a combination of his signings and team selections. We have had numerous opportunities to blood youngsters and give them a step up and chance to see what they can do - was winning the league unbeaten last season really so important ? Id much rather once that league had been sown up we had introduced more of our youngsters where we could have given them an extended run of games in the 1st team. We have our brightest talent Macleod playing wide out of position, whilst the likes of McKay, who is a wide player, was loaned out last season ? Where is the logic in that ? There comes a point, particularly against lower opposition when it not only about churning out results - but having a fluidity and pattern to our play which augurs well for the future. That sadly has been lacking for too long.
-
I'd tried to temper my bewilderment at our close season signings by reflecting on the often used mantra that "there is no substitute for experience". But having a manager with a propensity for playing just one out and out striker it seemed reasonable to question the wisdom of signing 2 ageing, albeit proven strikers, taking our total to 5. I suppose in some ways the fact we played with 2 up front today is a positive improvement - cherish it, its probably the only positive you will find in this article. With young Charlie Telfer exiting Ibrox and directing barbed comments at our manager's apparent unwillingness to blood youngsters, the departure of goalkeeper Scott Gallagher and the re-signing of the veteran and occasionally calamitous, Steve Simonsen does little to suggest that youth is to be the favoured option. One wonders how young Nicky Clark feels his development will fare as the least favoured option behind Boyd, Miller, Daly and given today's personnel selection, even Shiels. Why is this important ? Well if we do manage to successfully negotiate the championship, and I appreciate after today some are saying that's a pretty big "if"; rather than return to the top league with the nucleus of a young team we will instead be replacing ageing players in key positions. "Professors" of football often speak about the "spine" of a team - goalkeeper, centre back and striker. Of our current spine I see only Cammy Bell offering any kind of continuity in this regard. Which of course means new blood, a settling in period and that's before we find the readies for such an overhaul. Without wishing to induce further panic it's probably worth asking the question if there will even be the money for such an overhaul ? So what does all this experience get you for your money? Well not a lot judging by today's performance. You could forgive a schoolboy team for switching off after scoring and giving yourself a lifeline but a team brimming with seasoned pros? Furthermore how can it be that Nicky Law and Ian Black despite having countless games together under their belt, give the appearance they have never played with one another before? The booing of the formers man of the match award should serve as a warning to all at Ibrox that whilst we may be loyal we are certainly not gullible. Kenny Miller did what we have come to expect him to do, and were it not for the detrimental effect to Nicky Clark's development and the fact he is a short term rather than a long term answer, you would see this as a beneficial signing for the season, particularly if young Clark was paired alongside him. Kris Boyd I'm not so sure of. He somehow managed to look even less mobile than 1st time around, so much so, I half expected Police Scotland to bring the game to a halt and announce they had found Clyde, the missing Games statue. The progress and improvement of Lewis Macleod and Fraser Aird has been deeply satisfying for us blue legions, the former in particular showing particular potential. Could a few others have benefited from an extended run in first team football ? Some will remember Dick Advocatt recognising the potential of a young Barry Ferguson and building a team around him, sadly that will not happen so long as young Macleod finds himself played out of position on the wing We need to stop making excuses for Ally. Yes he has had to endure challenges no other Rangers manager has had to contend with but that really does not excuse signings which are devoid of long term vision, as well as tactics, team selections and substitutions which have us all bewildered. There was a moment today when the cameras panned to John Greig sitting in the stands, and on seeing his image on the screens applause echoed around the ground. John is a Rangers legend on and off the park. Unfortunately he was not a very good manager. I fear history may be repeating itself.
-
Yes with regards to Whyte I got it absolutley wrong - a fact I am conscious of even to this day - the part I have difficulty with is that I was "shouting down" others on messageboards who disagreed. I think those who know me are well aware that kind of conduct is not my style. My style has always been to do my level best to defend the club & support - I dont really think this article which asks those inside the club to do so - is any great deviation from the norm.
-
Id take it a stage further SB - I believe we would have more credibility to run the club - and I dont say that as a soundbite - I genuinely believe that. I really wish we would take charge of our own destiny and stop waiting for others to do so only to be disappointed. I see now that "Scattergun Charlie" has thrown his tuppence worth in - if he gets anywhere near our boardroom - thats it for me.
-
You tell me - you seem to have your own version of events. But tell you what go back and check my blogs - you will find I was speaking out against Green whilst others were lauding him.
-
Electioneering ? Oh dear this site just hit a new low.
-
And pray tell....when and where did this happen ? Cos I'll tell you emphatically now - you are lying.
-
I sometimes wonder if the news HMRC intend to appeal the latest dismissal of their vendetta against Rangers causes any ripples in the Ibrox boardroom. After all it was another time, another regime with legal culpability squarely on the shoulders of Sir David Murray and his legal advisers. But not for us who are the Rangers support. For us it is part of a journey from hell, a journey which is not yet complete, with the scars and wounds endured on that journey show little sign of healing. Why is it that those who aspire to power within our club don't seem to feel the pain of such scars ? For years under the tenure of Sir David Murray many of us warned about the dangers of the “dignified silence” strategy. As lies were written and broadcast about both club and support Sir David Murray responded to our concerns with “If a newspaper offends you – don’t buy it” Our club and support have become the easy picking for hate filled individuals who appear to think that carrying an NUJ card offers them considerable immunity from lies, deceit and hate filled articles, many written without research or based in fact, or more concern, deliberately omitting facts in order to damage to our club. Why is it the defence of our club has been left to individual bloggers or groups such as Vanguard Bears, The RST or The Rangers Standard who appear to have the energy and passion to respond to unfair articles or decisions against our club ? Why is that same energy and passion not emanating from inside our club ? Have we honestly learned nothing in the last few years ? Its time those inside Ibrox, whoever that might be, became pro-active rather than occasionally reactive. If you are privileged enough to wear a Rangers blazer and tie – then that should be akin to a suit of armour - stand prepared to champion this club against all attacks. Jim McColl's alternative board missed a considerable trick at their question and session at the Hilton when asked about defending the club. Their fudged answer showed little desire or forethought, and was as bereft of ideas as those they sought to depose. Why cant these people get it ?? This issue is of vast importance to the Rangers support. We live, eat and breathe this club and every attack on her is borne personally by every single one of us. It's hard to understand why our club pays for PR, when we appear to be getting trodden on day in day out by the same individuals and organisations, operating with apparent impunity. Jim Traynor's “Gentlemen be very careful” is a dark and distant memory full of empty threats. In fact words without action appear to have exacerbated the problem. For all the criticism I have penned over the years about Charles Green, I will concede one point – at least he “got it”. He realised that defending this club, albeit his reasons were part of bigger plan and not altruistic, was a sure fire of winning over the support. How can it be a stranger can walk into our midst and grasp such a crucial point which our own seem to continually miss ? The well meaning articles by Rangers bloggers, Rangers Supporters Groups and Rangers websites however well intentioned and passionate, do not carry the same authority as statements or action coming from within the club itself. Furthermore it's not our job – its your job, those of you who are privileged enough to wear a club blazer and tie, or aspire to do so in the future. This support has proven itself time and time again in the face of considerable adversity, with its willingness to protect and safeguard this club. We have done as much as we can. For those with both responsibility and authority – its time for you to step up and play.
-
i have no problem them being criticised over certain issues BD - particularly when it is qualified and justified. However being critical of anti-board initiatives does not equate to support for the board. Plenty in the anti-board camp have been critical over some of the recent initiatives, even on here, that does not equate to support for the current board. What I have difficulty equating is that a planned series of exposures of information demonstrating the level of scheming and corruption against our club can be subjected to the suggestion that is merely an attempt to deflect news away from the current board. All I can advise you to do is watch this space and draw your own conclusions regarding the accuracy and motivation behind such an allegation, in the light of what will be subsequently revealed.
-
It will come out in due course. I suspect it will be worth waiting for.
-
I have nothing to do with the new information which has become available to VB - nor have I had sight of it. They will release their information in the manner they see fit. What is disappointing is that the thread to discuss the first of the releases has turned into something of a smear campaign against them, with allegations being made which are at odds with the facts, and are characterised by allegations without substance with little appreciation of the time and effort which went into cultivating the source of the information.
-
And the same could be said for you of course.
-
So thats allegedly supporting the board - despite a recent statement indicating they found the board's answers in the Q & A unsatisfactory. Attention seeking - despite the fact they have clearly managed to get hold of information and documentation not seen previously which will show the level of corruption and scheming against our club Having released this information - they are only doing so to deflect from bad news for the board. Quite simply no wonder our club is such an easy target.
-
So should we add attention seeking to your earlier erroneous claims of supporting the board ?
-
It has been cd but on a a no. of sites where it was once promulgated it has now been deleted ie http://www.scribd.com/deleted/164607084 I think it is good for it to be re-circulated for those who have not had the opportunity to read it in full, or like me need to refresh their memory as to its contents. Also if there is to be a considerable expose` I would hope it would be set out in chronological order from start to finish - that to me would be the thorough and conscientious way to do so, even if it means a refresh of information which has already been circulated previously.
-
So you missed their statement when they said they were dissatisfied with the answers provided by the board at their Q & A ?
-
Allow me to confirm - you are mistaken.
-
Ive no idea when or even if Rab - though the Police will certainly be looking to identify them. The complaint I lodged (with what was at the time Strathclyde Police ) made reference to ALL instances of breach of confidentiality - BBC Scotland and the RTC. The response I received assured me this was already subject of a criminal enquiry (Courtesy of SDM's complaint via Lord Watson)
-
I dont think he is much of a football fan Zap - but in fairness he has been excellent up to now. Perhaps he sees some political capital in this.
-
Joe FItzpatrick MSP
-
Dear Mr Fitzpatrick, SUBJECT : RANGERS TAX CASE I refer to my previous correspondence to you regarding this matter and the various concerns I raised with you. I appreciate to date there has still been no conclusion to the ongoing Police Investigation into the criminal Breaches of Confidentiality which so characterised this HMRC investigation. Since we last exchanged correspondence the only significant development has been the dismissal by Lord Doherty at the Upper Tier Tribunal, of HMRC's appeal against the decision of the First Tier Tax Tribunal. It is as yet unknown whether HMRC intend to escalate this matter and launch a further appeal, despite the previous decisions of the First and Upper Tier Tribunals. However it is the conduct of HMRC during the course of this investigation which is a source of considerable anger and ongoing concern. As I previously informed you, many Rangers supporters and shareholders wrote to both HMRC and Government Minister's with ministerial responsibility regarding breaches of confidentiality regarding the Rangers Tax Case, only to receive responses from both HMRC and the HMRC Ministerial Correspondence Unit that they would not comment on “alleged breaches of confidential information”. The source of such “alleged breaches” was an award winning web blog – The Rangers Tax Case Blog- which ran for numerous months and regularly published confidential information which it sought to interpret courtesy of it's anonymous operator. BBC Scotland also produced an award winning documentary “The Men Who Sold The Jersey's” which was a consequence of numerous items of confidential information they had received, by as yet, unknown means. BBC Scotland also published on their website numerous items of confidential information pertaining to the Rangers Tax Case. An independent commission chaired by Lord Nimmo Smith subsequently concluded as follows : Meanwhile, BBC Scotland came, by unknown means, into possession of what they described as “dozens of secret emails, letters and documents”, which we understand were the productions before the Tax Tribunal. These formed the basis of a programme entitled “Rangers – The Men Who Sold the Jerseys”, which was broadcast on 23 May 2012. BBC Scotland also published copious material on its website. The published material included a table containing the names of Rangers players, coaches and staff who were beneficiaries of the MGMRT, and how much they received through that trust. It also listed the names of people where the BBC had seen evidence that they received side-letters. This event appears to have been the trigger for more activity in response to the SPL’s request. [section 98] Not only does Lord Nimmo Smith highlight the impact of these breaches of confidentiality and their subsequent exposure, but as can be seen, he suggests that the material passed to BBC Scotland was in actual fact evidence before the Tax Tribunal. Whilst it is dangerous to make any presumptions, I do not think it is unreasonable to presume that evidence removed from an evidential storage area, can only have been appropriated by theft. Furthermore as the Police Enquiry into the breaches of confidentiality only commenced after the conclusion of the First Tax Tribunal, following a complaint by Sir David Murray, it would suggest that this appropriation of evidence had up till that point gone unreported.. Whilst there are considerable parts of the jigsaw missing, based on the information which is available I would highlight the following areas of concern to you :- HMRC having seized evidence, in order to progress an investigation, totally ignored repeated concerns and complaints pertaining to breaches of confidentially. To suggest that documentaries produced by BBC Scotland and broadcast on national television equate to “alleged breaches of confidentiality” is simply unacceptable. One is left to speculate if they even bothered to cross reference the evidence they had seized and catalogued with the information which that was being released into the public domain. I would respectfully suggest to you if they have failed to do so – that would be tantamount to gross negligence. There is a considerable feeling amongst many shareholders that having highlighted breaches of confidentiality on numerous occasions, the response of HMRC was both dismissive and misleading, and displayed a complete abdication of their legal responsibility. Lord Nimmo Smith's conclusion that the material passed and subsequently used by BBC Scotland was evidence before the Tax Tribunal raises serious questions about the safe handling and storage of productions by HMRC. If the security of these productions was violated, on how many occasions did this happen ? How was this possible and what steps did HMRC take to report this apparent criminality ? Did they in fact report this appropriation of evidence and what was their legal responsibility to do so ? I’m sure you will appreciate the above concerns are only the tip of the iceberg and there are numerous other areas of concern as well as questions shareholders and supporters have. HMRC's failure to deal with previous complaints has resulted in an erosion of confidence in this organisation's ability to respond to concerns. The apparent, and further possible failings within a government investigative body should be a concern to everyone, even those outside the Rangers community. The concerns I have highlighted are particularly grave and warrant considerable in depth investigation and clarification, not only for the Rangers community, but to ensure all persons dealing with HMRC in the future can so with confidence. I would therefore ask you to raise these concerns amongst your peers within the Scottish Parliament, and for consideration to be given to a full government enquiry in order that these concerns can be investigated fully.