Gaffer

The issue with the PR and media is important, but we don't need a seat on the board to address that. We need to lobby the board, present a proposal to fix it and perhaps even offer to fund it in part.

Why don't we just go down a radical route here and say that we apply the accent test. They say imitations is a form of respect so why not allow anyone with (or who develops) the Scottish accent to play for us? If someone really wants to be regarded Scottish, they should speak like us. I find it strange when people with other accents are interviewed in a Scotland strip. It doesn't make sense and I'd propose that we draw the line there. It solves lots of problems. If someone is born here but speaks with an English, German, Indian, or French accent, do they really want to be Scottish? I'd suggest not, and are therefore unlikely to play with the passion we need from them. Equally, if a German or Spaniard (Albertz or Novo for example) arrive and develop their love of the country so much that they start to speak like us, why not allow them to play for us. They'd play for the jersey. Of course, they cannot have represented any other country at any other level. That's just strange too. We then open up our potential to attract players like Morelos and Candeias too. I'm sure we could convince them to play for us, and if they agree just start teaching them the lingo. Problem solved! You're welcome Mr McLeish.

I don't even know what an ordinary fan is. It would be interesting to see if anyone on here feels they could represent that cohort, and if so, what they think the ordinary fan wants. It's difficult to articulate without steering into areas where we have material disagreements. I couldn't represent the people on here. I'm reasonably sensible, fairly articulate, and a Rangers fan with opinions, but other than addressing the issues in the media, what do I agree on that the majority on here do too? I keep coming back to this. What do we agree on? We want Rangers to be the best team in Scotland again. Of that there is no doubt, but that's easy. The question is how do we go about it and how would I accurately articulate the views of the Gersnet members? If we even struggle to explain that, what hope do we have of finding someone to represent the views of a larger supporters group? I think it's naive or arrogant for someone to think they can represent us in decisions. You can argue that politics operates that way, and I'd suggest that's a perfectly good example of why the representative model doesn't work. It can for specific lobbying points, but that's all.

I agree and this is what I've been asking almost since this thread began. What is it that our rep can offer the board? I have no idea who the Club 1872 directors are, but I've seen nothing from that organisation which suggests they could offer any additional skills or expertise. Can anyone correct me on this? Equally, our shareholding is insignificant and any value is outdone by the threat of sensitive information being leaked. If I was on the football club's board, I wouldn't want a fan rep on it. I would however welcome input from any organisations which could sensibly represent a section of the fans on relevant subjects. Equally, I'd welcome lobbyists or special interest groups for particular issues coming in to participate in specific agenda items of a board where relevant. The issue of buying shares in the company was appealing to me because if we could reach specific thresholds, the board would then require the fans (or members) support to execute certain parts of their strategy, and thereby provide some degree of protection. However, what I'm seeing now is a push for Club 1872 to use this shareholding to force a position on the board, but to do what? I'm still not satisfied that my views would/could be represented and yet I'd be funding someone's personal opinions to be expressed as if they were my own too. That's not sitting well with me right now. This makes me question the motives. Rather than Club 1872 go asking for a seat on the board, why not start from within the membership to see what agendas we want advanced, or what skills and expertise we could offer the club? It all seems a bit amateurish to me, but not knowing any of the characters involved, or how these things work, I may be a lone voice, or certainly in a minority. I'll be watching how this unfolds carefully, because I won't continue my funding if my purpose for doing so is outweighed by my concerns about the way I which it's being done.

We either need some form of fan protection, or we just need people in charge who have the right motives. The problem we have with the former is that not enough fans are willing/able to contribute to the share purchase so we will always be at the mercy of those with money.

I thoroughly enjoyed that game. I love seeing the older players back again, and I was surprised at myself for feeling pleased at McCoist getting his hat trick. Maybe afterall, I do still think of him fondly for all he did for us. What a marvellous opportunity for some of the young players to play with these guys. Mols, Buffel, Seb, and Mendes can all still do a job, and Waterreus could be our backup goalie still. He hasn't changed a bit. Barry Ferguson and Albertz hasn't changed much either. I was just willing Albertz to score one of his trademark shots and he came close twice. Roberts and McCoist have been enjoying life a bit too much. They looked huge from what I could see, and when they say a player covered every inch of the field, Roberts' belly nearly did. It was great fun, although I get quite emotional when I see the players with Fernando. It was so obvious they are all still close and they feel for him. Great day. Great cause. Some great memories came flooding back too when I saw the players.

It would be best to arrange that soon then, or get them to start writing it down, because they're getting to an age where they'll start to forget stuff. ?????

I agree. I think Moult is a good player, but not what we need to push for a title. We either need to go for better players than him, or younger players with potential to be much better. I'd not seen much of McBurnie, but I'll look out more for him now because in that showing again st Costa Rica, I thought he looked quite promising.

There are lots of things we disagree on, but that's normal. It's never so bad if we all agree we want the same thing, but just disagree on how best to achieve it. I think that applies to every Rangers fan. We all want our team to e successful again, but we do disagree on the how. We disagree on managers, players, formations, tactics, board members, stadium improvements priorities, but there are some things I think we do agree on. I think we agree that the situation with the media needs to be addressed, and I think we agree that youth development is the future of our club. I think we also agree that it's important we protect our club from those that have ulterior motives to owning it, other than building a successful team again. Thats why for me, the fan group(s) have to stick to the objectives and priorities we can agree on, otherwise it won't work.

I think that's a really interesting point and it's something I've been thinking about since this thread started. There are just too many challenges facing us having a seat on the board. One of the main ones for me is still the confidentiality angle. I can't imagine any of the directors or shareholders being happy at the prospect of a rep feeling obliged to disclose (or rather leak) information of a sensitive nature to satisfy the demands of the membership, especially if they want to be voted in again. However that side, as you say, we need to think about where we can add value. And if we can agree on that, perhaps that's where we focus our intention instead. The issue is, can we agree on that? Buying shares seems like an objective we can all get behind. But what other shared objectives could we have? - Addressing the media imbalance? This to me is a real contender because it's something I believe we are all in agreement about and something that can be done separately from the club. - Lobbying for a better match day experience? Football aside, there is lots that could be done to improve the experience for us. The 'entertainment' pre match is almost non existent, and the food is absolutely shocking. Even if I'm hungry I can't bring myself to eat anything in the stadium these days. Then there's the facilities for the disabled. I then started to think about other shared objectives and realised there's perhaps something even more important that we could do. Since the future of our club is likely to be youth development, is this something we could focus on? I was thinking of something along the lines of: - Regional Rangers football academies (funded by Club 1872 in part or in full); - Obviously an exclusive deal with the club to have first options on the players; - A standard sell on clause which means that Club 1872 then gets some money reinvested from sales of these players to further expand the network; and - Reduced or free tickets for youngsters to attend matchdays at Ibrox to encourage the next generation. I'm a business guy so I always think about sustainability, partnerships, investment and returns, and this seems like it's at least worth considering. It would mean that we could operate independently of the football club, but maintain a strong working relationship with them, meaning we could offer a respected opinion on developments in the club. It would also open the door for future investment into Club 1872 meaning that it could eventually become self funding. One of my fears is that we lose the next generation so we need to be thinking of ways we can attract youngsters in the same way we were as kids. If Club 1872 wants to make a material difference to the future of Rangers, why not focus on the young bears? I'd pay for that.

Thanks Gonzo. So when the board members are up for election, do they talk about their priorities (their manifesto if you like)? I haven't seen anything like that published so I wasn't sure if it was just a case of them selling their skills and expertise rather than what they would do if given a seat on the football club's board.

It just goes to show that the theory is probably correct .... if you give enough monkeys a keyboard, eventually theyll create the works of Shakespeare. Ok, so this isn't a literary work of art but for once I agree with part of it. He won't be our next manager, because we won't ask him to be. The problem is that my sentence wouldn't have filled much space on their page so they have to pad it out a lot. Are there many easier jobs in the world than a made-up-stories writer at these rags?

I'm obviously not being very clear here. I know the board members are elected, but what do they stand for? What are their priorities? And how is the agenda of the rep decided? I'm looking for a practical answer here. I don't understand why some of the responses to this have been either pedantic or stating the bleeding obvious.

I appreciate the responses and the sentiment behind this, but how does one person represent the fans? aweebluesoandso had one of the only topics where I think we agree, namely the treatment of our club and fans. I get this and can understand why fan representation is important here, but does that require a seat on the board? Couldn't Club 1872 have made the point without a seat in the board? I seem to recall it did. ranger_syntax said that they represent thousands of donors. I get that, but to do what? I'm happy for someone to represent me in the acquisition of shares in the club, but I don't want anyone using my 'name' to advance their opinion on who should be manager, or whether Celtic fans should or shouldn't get a full allocation at Ibrox, or whether safe standing is more important than improving the quality of the food a team Ibrox, or whether the club should be selective in its share issues. No one asked me my opinion (unless I missed that, which is possible) so how can I be represented? And if there are 10 different opinions, how do we vote for which opinion is most representative? That's the part I don't understand. I completely understand D'Artagnan's point about safeguarding the club and that's why I pay my money. However, to what extent do we really safeguard the club if we can't maintain our shareholding? If so many of us are really that interested (or concerned now) about safeguarding the club, why do we find it so hard to find contributors. Surely the best way to safeguard it is to have enough of a shareholding to require that major financial decisions are made public. As far as I see it, the majority of the other decisions will be made confidentially (at least I'd hope they are to ensure competitive advantage), and therefore we won't know how our representative is performing or voting anyway.

I must admit that I don't know. I say that because unlike their fans, I don't watch our city rivals. Having said that, I get to see him each time we play them and I have to say I'm not impressed with their left back. Don't get me wrong, I think he's a really decent player but what's his value? He seems a decent defender and has some pace, but there has to be something extra to be regarded as something more than average. DJ is a decent defender (so in that regard they're on a par), however DJ has pace to burn and seems to me to be a dangerous attacking player too. Maybe their's just hasn't had the chance to prove it against us, but if he can't do it against us, what's the point? DJ on the other hand was ripping them apart (for 60 minutes, but let's not get back into that again) so he stands out more. I'd take DJ every day of the week. Their only player that I have rated in games against us is Armstrong, but I've no idea how he performs in their other games, and you know what, I don't care!!!

I've read the thread with interest so far. The way I see it is that Club 1872 has two options here. It can ask for a seat on the board because of its shareholding, or due to its importance as represtative of the club's supporters. If it's based on the value of the shareholding, King is quite right to ask it (us all) to invest in line with the others shareholders. That makes sense. If however Club 1872's claim for a seat is based on representing supporters, I see a problem. Does Club 1872 actually represent many of us? I pay my monthly dues, but that's to buy shares, not for them to represent me in any other capacity. I didn't sign up to that. I don't know what Club 1872 stands for, or what it would push for if given a seat on the board. Could we even agree on any major points to then allow someone to represent that opinion? We spend much of our time on here disagreeing about all of the important decisions regarding the manager, player priorities, stadium improvement priorities, other members on the board, managing the media, etc. Who can truly represent the fans? I have no idea how you even begin to do that. The problem I have is that a single person then has the power to advance their own opinions, based on their claim to represent the thousands. Also, the difficulty with a position on the board here is that the representative does not have a shared objective that would help in the boardroom. We all want to be successful again, but how do we achieve that? In normal situations in the business world, the rep is there to ensure that shareholder value is managed in line with the expectations. It's therefore clear how that rep can contribute to the debate, and actions. However, Club 1872 is not interested in 'shareholder value' as such, but more about the success of the club. So what would this rep actually be doing? What is their role in the boardroom? What skills and expertise do they offer the board? Equally, how could they possibly maintain the level of confidentiality required by a board? If they represent us, how do they provide assurances that they're doing this effectively if they can't tell us what's going on? If this person can't tell us, why even have one on the board? Why not just challenge the board via the AGM, or similar shareholder meeting? I know the business world, but fully accept I know little about representing fans in these organisations, so I don't understand the benefit to us in having a board position. It's maybe interesting for our representative to be on the board, but beyond that where's the value for anyone? I'm not saying it's a bad idea, necessarily. I'm just saying I really don't understand it. I contribute to Club 1872 but wouldn't attend a meeting unless critical. Do any others on here engage more with Club 1872 than I do, and if so, what has been discussed about the value of this seat on the board? I don't understand and would welcome the insight or opinions.

Or tells his supporters that there's no way he can live on 30k a week. Remember that one?!?

I think that's why the past few years have been so difficult in particular for the bears that remember 1986 and the following NIAR years. We were signing some of the best players in the world (Butcher, Woods, Steven, Wilkins, Klos, Laudrup, Gazza, Thern, etc) and now we have players that can't get games for teams we have hardly heard of. I've tried to reset my expectations but find that very hard to do, if not impossible. All I'm asking for is that we uncover one gem of a player that can get us on the edge of our seats, or one strong defender who can lead the team with the character of a Gough/Butcher. Too much to ask for?

4 and 6 were the hardest going if I remember correctly. 4 was because it was just too easy and although Hateley and McCoist were great to watch, it was always one way traffic in those games. I seem to remember one game where the opposition (can't even remember who it was) didn't even make a single pass in our half of the pitch, never mind a shot at goal. Then 6 was dire because our players were dropping like flies with injuries. I seem to remember that it was the end of this season that Laudrup came in and just as well because there was no style to our play and we had no one worth watching. Laudrup revitalised my interest and will probably always be the best player I've seen at our club. What a player!!! 7 was really good and then 8 with Gazza, but strangely for me, 9 was poor. We got it over the line but it was such an a shame that the mood was dampened a little, mainly I think because we knew Smith was going along with lots of other players.

Or maybe get him on the show to tell us himself what he's up to. "A week in the life of ....", the SLO

Yes, I'm one of those fans I'm afraid. There was a period of about 2/3 years during the NIAR years where I just couldn't get excited about the majority of games I attended. It's perhaps strange but I'm enjoying it more now that we have a clear mission but with lots of risk involved. Back then the only doubt was about how many we'd win by. That's fun for a little while but not sustainable. I do however understand Gonzo's point above about stopping their winning run, and I could be convinced to sacrifice a couple of years of decent football to get 55.

Definitely! In all our successful periods we seem to have had a solid keeper and strong central defence pairing. It's no coincidence. Since we went down the divisions we've made not had anything strong enough to compete at the top level. We were optimistic about Alves but that's not turned out very well. Allen (in conjunction with whoever is the manager) has to get this right for us.

Suggested questions: - what is our best 11? - if we could only add one top quality player, what is the key position we need to fill/replace? - should we recruit players over 30? If so, have there been examples of success in the past? - If we win the cup, should Murty be the manager? - Now that possession, shots on target, etc are outdated measures of a team's success, what metrics should we use? (I'm sure Rousseau and a few others - including me - will enjoy that one, although not sure if that's subject is an acquired taste) - What is the most important attribute in a manager? - What transfer targets should we have? (Including any rumours) - what is the handball law - exactly (it annoys me that this is misquoted in many games) - why are there exceptions to every rule? - is Club 1872 doing a good job? - what are the big issues that the board needs to address? - if not King, who? - which of our current crop of youngsters can make it in OUR senior team? - based on our current team, what league and in what position would we be in if we played in England? I seem to remember the theme tune to "question of sport" contained the line .... "there are more questions than answers, and the more I find out, the less I know". That definitely applies to me, but I won't be offended if none of these are picked. Either way I can't wait to hear it. Good luck ?

I can understand you thinking there is something more to it than that, but I think the simplest explanations are always always the correct ones. I think a lot of managers are put off with a DoF in place. I was luke warm at best about the prospect of a DoF at the club, but I think we've seen there is value in it if we get the right person. Mark Allen seems to be doing a decent job so far, but it's still early days. If the only thing he does for us is keeps people like McInnes from the door then I think it was worth it for that alone.

I'm baffled too, but very thankful. If ever there was a dodged bullet, he was it. Imagine losing but also having to put up with that 'style' of play. No thanks!