ranger_syntax
-
Posts
10,811 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
16
Everything posted by ranger_syntax
-
That's true, but given our recent history I'm happy to take a chance with the other options available.
-
Point 3 is a good way to rule out many deals that will not be the best.
-
Point 3 If everything is above board then it is fine. The problem is that it is much easier to draw a line where the constitution suggests. In the absence of this safeguard we will be treated to months, or even years, of debate about our directors and the deals that club makes. Potential investors (the correct kind) may even be encouraged by a rule like this.
-
Perhaps, like the U.S.A. constitution, it could be amended under certain circumstances. For example overwhelming support among season ticket holders.
-
Are you related to a director?
-
I want most of the points on that list. I'm prepared to accept the points that I don't particularly want.
-
Scottish Cup Draw Rangers v Dunfermline or Ayr
ranger_syntax replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
I'm hoping for Ayr too since I don't want us to get a kicking more often than is absolutely necessary. -
Any constituent should be discouraged from voting for someone who acts in such a way.
-
I'm not so sure about this.
-
It's best not to worry about what website someone uses and just think about the points he makes.
-
I had a fair bit of sympathy for the point about Lawell. But like the point about 'bastardised anthems' I think it is a case of mistaken priorities. The club is not going to be in a position to do anything if it is being run poorly. The point about the R.S.T. is frustrating to listen to. The chap pointed out that he thought the R.S.T. was impotent and that we should only have one group then crowned it with a dig about certain individuals standing aside. I don't take this line of argument seriously as I think it has multiple obvious problems. Firstly if there are members of the R.S.T. who think certain individuals should stand aside then those members have a chance to do so each year yet they don't. Secondly all fans have an opportunity to try and set up a potent organisation yet this does not happen. Third there is no real way to prevent groups of fans organising themselves in order to pursue various interests. Fourth there is no real barrier to Rangers supporters from different groups working together where common cause exists. When someone mentions the idea of one group we should ask them what shape it should take and why they are not setting it up.
-
Too bad, I thought he might get a chance to play regularly if/when Ian Black gets suspended. It looks like he's running out of opportunities to prove himself.
-
Craig obviously thinks that it is only football clubs that talk rubbish in order to play to the gallery. What a remarkable lack of self awareness.
-
I would include Whyte. He did sell the Arsenal shares although admittedly they are valued in a different way, and on a different scale, to assets like Ibrox, Edmiston House et cetera. My argument is not that Craig Whyte and Sir David Murray sold off assets therefore our current board will do the same. It is that such people, primarily motivated by financial interests, will decide to keep or sell assets based on those interests. I think that this means that if Rangers run out of cash there will be no barrier to the sale of assets to provide working capital. As I say, I don't trust the current board, I think that they will act in such a way if the time comes.
-
Again, if elected officials choose to support them then I don't see the problem. Does the chairman of the R.S.T. only have a mandate to speak to investors but not to support other like minded individuals who do? I expect not. Also the people who run the R.S.T, for example, are volunteers and spare time is limited.
-
I know and I think it's a good question to ask at first. But as I say, in the absence of proof I think we should move on the next question. Besides, unless it actually happened I'm sceptical about the possibility of the issue being resolved by means of proof.
-
Do you have a source for these numbers that you could share with us? Or is this just from personal experience?
-
To an extent yes, but this is a really slight objection. If the democratically elected leaders decide to support what S.O.S. are doing then there is little difference.
-
Recent owners have sold off assets. This is what these people do. In the absence of proof in either direction we should ask ourselves if we trust the current board not to do something similar. I don't trust the current board.
-
Do we really? It seems quite clear to me who he is representing.
-
I think that the manager is making the correct decision. I'm not happy though. Going to midweek matches is rubbish in comparison to Saturday at 3pm.
-
Rangers already have a football 'philosophy'. It's called winning. Tactics, and personnel, are adapted to achieve this goal. I'd like to know if those of you who argue for a football 'philosophy' think that it entails the following points: 1. A particular style of play should be maintained even at the expense of winning. 2. Playing the same formation each week. 3. Playing the senior team formation throughout the youth teams.
-
Dunfermline’s darkest hour as liquidation looms
ranger_syntax replied to ian1964's topic in General Football Chat
Pars United have agreed a CVA deal. Fan ownership is a reality for some. http://news.stv.tv/scotland/243985-dunfermline-athletic-exit-administration-as-pars-united-complete-cva/ -
What do you base this claim on? Why do you think that King would bring Bain back? Is there any way to transfer the thread over there?
-
Nacho Novo still waiting for a call from Rangers
ranger_syntax replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
I'm not sure what you base that on. From what I've seen so far I think he looks good and should be getting more time on the pitch. Regarding Gribz's comparison to Alan Gow, it might turn out to be the case. I'd rather take a chance on Clark than watch, what will probably be, Novo in decline.