stewarty

I didn't think the article was that bad. The headline was just clickbait, and seems it worked.

One might say that this is yet more evidence of Jum's questionable judgement. Even a cursory glance at the club's position on and off the field and the supporters he is attempting to reconcile with, must surely have shown that this was a fool's errand?

Fair point, Bluedell. We do need to get to the point of self-sufficiency to protect ourselves against such unforeseen circumstances. I'm not sure how we can get to that point without ridding ourselves of the spectre of Mike Ashley and the other strands of legal issues that are affecting our ability to move forward on various financial fronts. Additionally, I noted elsewhere that some of the club's detractors continue to be critical of king's supposed inability to get a NOMAD. Thus, conveniently ignoring that this is only a requirement of AIM and therefore no longer needed. The change of intention to maintain the listing is in my view a clear example of the board re-assessing previous intentions once they got their feet under the table. The noise from the previous regime and hangers on not only made it very difficult to maintain the listing (some might even say it was impossible), but also contributed significantly to some of the threads of questioning and messaging that led to some of the interviews mentioned. Apologies for the rambling response on my phone at work, but I guess I'm just saying we should be careful not to re-write history for the sake of some ill-informed noises...

I'm not convinced about this narrative that King was somehow hubristic in those initial interviews (pre and post regime change). He was asked direct questions about what he would be investing, and he gave answers. Had he not done so, he would be accused of being evasive and, no doubt, trying to hide something. Its also evident to me that as the new regime got their feet under the table, they've had to rethink their strategy and priorities to suit the circumstances. Ergo, I can sort of understand why King might be prepared to say that he didn't promise that he would be spending £30m. My recollection is that he gave a figure based on what he personally would be prepared to put in, working with others. He was also fairly guarded about specific investment timescales and where it would be spent, also being careful to say that we couldn't return to the previous days of overspending and carrying large losses. I will stand corrected if anyone has the videos/transcripts to hand. This does not replace the need to be sceptical and challenging of the new regime purely because they are Rangers men...

Radio Scotland's coverage has been jaded for some time, with only a small number of notable exceptions. Much like their attitude to the world's most successful club...

Good riddance. If anything, the sentence is pretty light.

Clearly there was a lot of thought put into both the questions and the answers - I wonder if it was done via email exchange? No matter, it was certainly an interesting read. I really liked Cosgrove when I was younger, and OTB was definitely a weekend highlight back in the day. I've grown less fond of late, and rarely listen - but that's probably just my jaded view of Radio Scotland in general terms.

hopefully something completely disproportionate and draconian

I've been called worse!

Cheers Bruce - nearly got the name right! I missed the first 5 minutes or so, but the above is a fair summation of the points that you raised. There were a few others, but the above captures the meat of things. I raised the question of term limits on the Club1872 Board Members. I tried to frame this in the context of some concerns raised during the meeting about the potential for the new board to be seen as "cosy" with the club/ club's board. However, as was answered fully, the intention is to hold annual elections for the new organisation's board so in the short term, if the membership felt that there were Board members who were perceived to be "too close" to the club's Board, they can vote in someone else. As I discussed a little with Greg afterwards, there is a balance to be struck in terms of volunteer Boards. Any fan group is going to be reliant on a core of willing and able volunteers who are prepared to put up with the flack that goes with it - a not insignificant undertaking. However, when you get a core of people willing to do this for a long period of time, you run the risk of the board becoming being introverted and stale. Regular fresh injections of new blood are desirable, however the situation that RF finds itself in now, with pretty much a completely new board just a year down the line, also creates problems. I feel there is a balance to be struck here, so my view is that I would like to see more detail from the working group on how the new Board would operate. However, to underline RBR's comments above, all of the questions asked were answered fully during the meeting. I'm confident that the new organisation is being developed and constituted with the best intentions and I would encourage everyone to get along on Thursday if they can, or to submit their queries to the email address provided. To that end, I also commented to Greg afterwards that perhaps this process is missing a further consultation and review step as the timescales are very tight considering the proposal was published last week and voting opens up next Monday. There are however reasons for this. As I understand it, there is a desire to capitalise on the team's good performances of late and to get things set up and running quickly so that we can start working with the club ahead of preparations for next season.

A predictable car crash. Said at the time that Ian Cathro was making a mistake moving there. Any news on whether he is going too? That said, he'll be a cheaper option than Benitez

Overall, I'm in support, although clearly a lot of the finer detail needs to be explored by all concerned. I certainly don't get any impression that the omission of disabled fan reps was by design, or reps for any other groups for that matter, so an early test of this proposal will be how the working groups react on this point. Will try to make it along on Sunday...

The noose is tightening. The sheer volume of enemies this guy has made is really quite something.

Nice finish. Any word on Thompson's loan being extended? He really would be better getting 8-9 competitive games under his belt

Fury really needs to stop posting on FF and focus on drafting statements full time.

Agreed. A cut and paste casualty.

Actually maybe not. The final part of the sentence wouldn't make sense with "ignore"

Yeah I think "ignore" might have been better than deny.

I think a review such as that after just two years is likely to need some considerable caveats attached before considering any of its conclusions. The first sentence of the piece above rings alarm bells also - 80% of a YouGov survey? Given pollster's margins of error and sometimes the bald facts that their methodologies can be materially questioned, I am inclined to ignore that analysis. I mean, how many folk who are on a YouGov polling list will get a phonecall of an evening, be asked about the OBA and say "aye" without having a clue what it was about, let alone whether it was working. As for the reductions in incidents, we need to see whether the trend continues or whether it was a natural change that could have occurred for other reasons, e.g. whether simply the increased police effort resulted in the reduction rather than the OBA itself. As was well opined at the time, there is legislation in place that was thought to adequately address any the offences that the OBA is alleged to have provided clarity over.

I'm content that this is a good idea. Yes a museum might have been preferable, but I'd fancy that might require significant more investment than would be in the fund. It would also add additional ongoing costs to the club as presumably the fund could not back the museum on an ongoing basis.

Exposure in more countries isn't a bad thing, except when you don't get anything tangible for giving away the rights. Yet another sign that Doncaster is out his depth.

Excellent post. But such obvious bias is ignored when his fellow journalists and beeb bosses simply circle the wagons. No wonder mainstream media is flailing so much, when justified criticism is ignored or denied.

Now that he's on the back foot, lets announce an EGM to have his voting rights removed...

I read something on twitter about talks having stalled, but not sure there's been anything official.

I'd be amazed if this wasn't a concern for the gaffer. I'd be looking to give some of our defensive cover options some bench/ sub time in the coming weeks.