buster.

Worth remembering that the legal process can drag on and be unpredictable when thinking about timescales and the live cases (takeovers; 2011 & 2012) that will see some 'activity' next week and that may go on to have significant repercussions for our football club. Four years ago we were being told that the tax tribunal would come up with a judgement in the November sitting (2011) of the 'Big Tax Case, that would crystalise the amount the club would owe HMRC. It was taken for granted that HMRC were going to 'win'.

But neither do ROI and we've finished behind them after taking 4 points from them.

Golazo Ritchie !!!! Ya beautie,...great time to score.

Thanks Boabie ! What happens in courtrooms and possible appeals thereafter will have a huge bearing and no-one currently knows for sure how it will turn out or the timescales that will be involved.

I presume that you didn't have reason to disagree or qualify my assumptions from my previous reply to you. I think that the board have already done more than enough to feel entitled to more support and understanding from the fanbase,.......whilst the John James' of this world have done enough to merit an all together different type of response. At this point in time, to see both as options to vent anger/discontent,..... seems a little perverse.

I only wish such things existed ! Ashley is a loathsome individual whose business practises are repugnant.

All things considered, I can't agree with you. I see no reason why Waghorn can't be our main centre forward next season if he continues developing and improving within the right footballing enviroment allied to regular first team gametime.

I asked "who" rather than 'to what degree'. Now let's say you appear angry with both your partly identified and dubious strands of loaded information' whilst not completely ruling out that they may be right.............. I take from reading your posts on this thread, that you identify and put forward a third option (the RIFC board/DK) in somewhat couched or qualified terms. No-one is above 'vigilance' but some IMO are clearly deserving of more support and understanding within the difficult enviroment or minefield that they took over. If the points you make regards present day vigilance are as you described, "incidental" then surely in the absence of more significant issues you can give them the benefit of the doubt for now.................I'm guessing that may bring us back to what those you are angry with have said...........if it does, please say so in a clear and concise manner.

D'art.....still pending a consideresd response to some of your points in the above post but for the time being could you simply answer me who exactly you are angry with ?.......... as it very much looks as if you are subtley posing a similar question to readers. From your OP.......... “Anybody can become angry – that is easy, but to be angry with the right person and to the right degree and at the right time and for the right purpose, and in the right way – that is not within everybody’s power and is not easy.” (Aristotle)

It's like comparing a brillantly prepared but ordinary steak bought within a reduced budget, forced because of legal action by a customer after being poisoned by the out of date pot noodle. Goodnight !

Time for bed and I'll answer more fully tomorrow but how can you begin to compare boards in the question you pose, when their (underlying) motives were/are so obviously different ? That isn't even thinking about the 46,000K average home attendence, 100% league record and entertaining football.

Not until there is much more detail available and that fully answers the relevant questions in a satisfactory manner (Bluedell has asked some of them on the other thread). edit. Had there been a 'reserve judgement until more details are available' option,...I'd have gone for that instead of 'no'.

As Bluedell suggests, there are many questions that would need to be answered with a unified voice. Sounds a good idea and the general direction we want to be heading as a support but we need to know a lot more detail, see a reasonably settled politcal base and be happy with those who have pushed the idea and that their motives are simply the safeguarding and interests of the football club. Proceed with caution.

Zappa, I'm not an authority on such matters but I have a similar understanding as your goodself ! Forgive my sarcastic humour (obviously not very good ) aimed at our ex-nomads and Daniel Stewarts in particular. It's just that I find it somewhat ironic that some make so much noise about the lack of a NOMAD as if it had served us in the past as some great protection from sp!vs and the allegedly fraudulent.

But they aren't a NOMAD on the AIM market ! You have to think back and realise how much protection our NOMADS (especially Daniel Stewarts) afforded RIFC from any profiteers, less than honest operators or questionable levels of corporate governance. How I hark for those days when Paul Shackleton allowed me to sleep at night.

We were relatively powerless whilst we (as a support) remained so divided, thanks in part to the extensive and wide-ranging remit given to Mediahouse (MH). One apsect of this was preying on divisions and widening them, creating gaps for some, uncrossable in the short-term. The reason so much time, money and effort went on spin wasn't because "fan militancy" is ineffective......it was to keep it at a level that was relatively ineffective. A good example was the 'crisis management' employed by the then board in August 2013 after the Letter of Requisition (LoR) was delivered. What was vital for the respective motions in that LoR to stand a chance was loud and unequivical 'fan militancy' supporting it that persuaded the likes of eg. Laxey partners that this was where any successful future for the football club lay. Now that LoR failed for a number of reasons with the fundamental reason being that they were always behind the 'eight-ball' because of the 'crisis management' carried out by MH which helped confuse, raise doubts and split the support. This made the task very, very difficult and produced fisures within the management of the then requisitioners/institutions (who provided the mandate). What it required was a unified support giving backing to the requisitioners. Not because they all thought that X, Y and Z were the perfect people for the club going forward but that they recognised the need to get rid of a cancer or at least take it's power away and put in place people who could start a process to reclaim the club. What we got was groups like the SoS coming to the fore doing their bit BUT opposed by too many other groups/messageboards/bloggers. There wasn't a recognition or acceptence of what our major problem was at the time and the urgent need to force radical change as best we could............. For this I'd mention the protestors when you put up a thread about "heroes" but also like others to take on board lessons from their mistakes. The general situation required a general overview that goes beyond individual/group interests. We should have recognised that a process needs various steps, that without that first major hurdle being jumped we were flinging shite at the moon and some had to radically change their stance. -------------------------------- Back in the day when I mentioned calling chancers like Green, Whyte and Ashley out, I didn't do it for self-praise.......I did it to firstly show a track record to make people at least listen and plead that they made any effort that they could to help force the cancer out.

One thing that doesn't seem to be mentioned regards the way the team is set-up is the positive effect that it has had on the general supporter experience and cashflow for the football club at a time of need. Rarely does a new management team and squad deliver so quickly and in such a rounded way for a football club. You play what is front of you and at present we are in the Championship and set-up to win games of football by scoring more goals than the opposition (it's working) and to entertain (it's working). Regardless of what has been said regards Cups, our only real priority is to win the Championship and return to the top tier. At this point, the management team will look again at what is front of them and tailor the playing squad / set-up accordingly.

But the truth was it wasn't the whole fanbase, was it ? You can paint pretty pictures but as a fanbase we should look to learn from the last few years and be concious of the fact that we are not yet out of the woods or completely free from those who seek to damage us............. Not collectivelly slap each other on the back and say we did fine. That doesn't mean conflict of any kind or blaming X or Y. It means recognising the way the robbing bastards operated and how they fooled most of the fans, most of the time. I called CW out at the start and when he left I called upon the fans to learn lessons but not many were interested and when I called Green out from the beginning, most whilst wary at first, gradually came under his spell. I called out Mediahouse and the way they were used as the continuity bridge for the various regimes (including administrators) and the way they operated and the latter is what Bears have to be concious of going forward, spin and it's various forms. As it stands Ashley is still using spin when he or his advisors feel necessary. Fans should be aware. It's also fair to say Level5 will spin and whilst I trust the current regime, it does no harm to keep an eye on things and encourage straight dialogue between club and supporter, leaving PR advice for other areas.

Heroes ? As you say D'Art, those fans who stood up and took action against those regimes that didn't have the clubs interests in mind whatsoever can stand tall. Individuals like Paul Murray who called CW out in the springtime of 2011 and never rested until years later, the unwanted regime was gone from the boardroom. He did this whilst facing torrents of abuse from some. The SoS made a telling intervention and helped mobilised the wider support. All that said, the fight is not over as the damage done during these past few years still hangs over us.

With the current competition for places, Aird has a choice. He can knuckle down and try and improve his game/fitness/attitude to a point whereby it is difficult to ignore (whether at Auchenhowie or on loan) or he file himself under 'never made the most of themselves' and regret it for the rest of his days. At the moment there is a climate at Ibrox where hard work is rewarded and this helps encourage the effort. If his very best isn't good enough then ok, but he needs to at least give it his very best shot.