Search the Community

THE treble-winning manager insists Ally McCoist is building for bigger challenges in the future and cannot afford to lose his best players. ALEX McLEISH has pleaded with the re-elected Rangers board not to dismantle Ally McCoist’s squad as a quick fix to their cash problems. Light Blues chief executive Graham Wallace admitted at Thursday’s agm that a “rigorous review of our football squad” could take place as the club looks to cut costs despite a £22million share issue a year ago. The Gers money men are also trying to find finance amid fears they could run out of cash by April and McLeish knows only too well how cashing in on players is sometimes the easiest option. But the former treble-winning boss is well aware from his own time at Ibrox that there’s only one outcome when you flog your best assets on the park – and he doesn’t want to see McCoist suffer. Rangers fans fear top performer Lee Wallace could be targeted in the January window with the club’s financial position making them vulnerable to cash offers. The latest set of annual accounts showed McCoist’s playing budget of £8m was £2m less than the overall costs for non-playing staff with a string of directors and executives coining it in and some receiving bumper pay-offs as the coffers have been all but emptied. McLeish knows the current Rangers squad is a cut above their League One rivals but insists McCoist is building for bigger challenges ahead and facing Celtic again in the top flight. Eck told Record Sport: “When a club is looking to raise cash the easy option is just to sell your biggest playing assets. “I hope they don’t sell players as a quick fix because it would set back Ally’s building plans. “Lee Wallace is the one people are talking about as being of the biggest value. Now, Ally might have enough cover to get away with losing Lee Wallace now but what about in two years if they are in the Premiership? “That is what the Rangers board have to be aiming towards – backing the manager to build a team capable of challenging in the top flight. “Lee Wallace is a great player and I’m sure he would be great for Coisty in the next level. “Let the new board back Ally McCoist. There’s top businessmen in there with the Easdales and Graham Wallace so they’ve got to make sure Rangers get back to the top level. “Ally has done the job. I went to five or six games last season and it wasn’t pretty stuff but he got the guys over the line. “He’s made it more attractive this season, albeit they’ve won games late in the second half, and that’s probably due to the great coaching and training and top class people at Murray Park. “But it’s also because of the quality so they shouldn’t lose that. I saw Jon Daly in his first game against Brechin City at Ibrox and he missed four sitters and people were writing him off. “I said to myself, ‘He will score a barrowload for Rangers’ and he’s proving that already. “It’s now of huge importance that Ally gets the chance to work with his players and build a team that will be able to get to the top flight and challenge Celtic again in the long term.” McLeish lost key players during his time at Rangers when the club needed cash and his reputation suffered in a trophyless season before David Murray backed him with cash again and he paid the then owner back with the title. That’s why Eck believes it’s simple – provide a manager with quality players and you will reap the rewards. The 54-year-old said: “I know how difficult it is as a manager when you lose your best players. “I joked the other day about the agm after my first full season in charge and we’d won the treble. One shareholder said, ‘Alex, you walk on water’ and I said, ‘I hope you’re saying that next year’. “But we lost a lot of quality – Barry Ferguson, Claudio Caniggia, Arthur Numan left, we sold Lorenzo Amoruso and Neil McCann and Ronald de Boer’s knee was causing problems. “There’s only one way you’re quality is going to go when you lose your best players and that’s down the way – and to be fair the next season after we lost players David Murray backed me. “We secured two fantastic Bosmans early on in Jean-Alain Boumsong and Dado Prso and we ended up winning the League and Cup double. “I’m not saying you don’t need a manager but when I asked Arsene Wenger what made a great manager he said ‘Great players’. “That’s true and it’s true at every level. The current Rangers squad might not be Barcelona-level players but they are a cut above the level they’re playing at now and they’re the guys who will get Coisty to the next division. “It won’t be easy next season in the Championship and if he starts to lose that quality then he’ll get criticised just like I did and suddenly you think you’re hopeless but that’s not the case. “Coisty knows the game inside out but he needs players. I’d hope the likes of the Easdale brothers would back Coisty big time.” http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/former-rangers-boss-alex-mcleish-2947887

I wrote the above paragraph a few weeks ago in an article which was published in the inaugural launch of WATP magazine. Much of course has changed during that time with the coming and going of the AGM, and the confirmation of our board of directors. Even as a fence sitter throughout all of this, I cannot hide my inward disappointment that Brian Stockbridge remains on the board. But perhaps in that regard I am being unfair to Mr Stockbridge as I don’t have in my possession the information which allows me to make an informed choice. I don’t know for instance whether he, in his role as financial director, was merely rubber stamping the overly generous bonuses previous board members had arranged for themselves, nor for instance what part, (as has been claimed in this overloaded propaganda war) nominee Malcolm Murray had in the setting of such bonuses. That will always be the case of course so long as the Rangers support remains dis-empowered and disenfranchised from the systems and processes I alluded to several weeks ago. But the system and process which determines the make up of the Rangers board has spoken, and furthermore it has spoken in a way which is democratic. We may not all like the results it has delivered but that, I’m afraid, is life. Of course, we can attempt to usurp that democratic process. and there has already been talk of boycotts with regard to season tickets and club merchandise, and I have no doubt such action will make those who clearly wield power – institutional investors – sit up and take notice. Notwithstanding the damage such boycotts would cause to our club, perhaps we should also consider the damage such action would cause to democratic process and what kind of “notice” would be initiated within institutional investors ? If the democratic process to elect a board is usurped by way of boycotts, a refusal to accept the decisions that process has delivered, do you think this will instil confidence in any future investment in the club from others ? Ask yourself this – would you invest heavily in an institution where your majority shareholding and the decisions you make relative to that investment, through proper process, can be overturned by the militant actions of others with a lesser shareholding ? I don’t like where our club sits at present, nor do I have complete confidence in those who are charged with taking us out of our current predicament and to another place. But given the choice between giving them a chance as opposed to damaging both club and destroying confidence in that democratic process – then I know which one I will choose. Season Ticket renewed.

Hear me out, as I'm sure plenty will disagree. We probably have as much of a fragmented support after the AGM as we had before, if not more. So, like at any negotiating table the way to start trying to bring the factions at war together is to look for a common ground. I haven't seen one faction of our support yet who doesn't support Graham Wallace. Could he be key to bringing a common cause amongst all the support? To me the worry at the moment with Graham Wallace is: Has he been used as a temporary placement to placate investors ahead of the AGM? Will he have real autonomy when he tries to implement measures (and sackings) he sees fit? Will the incumbents care too much if they bump Wallace, now that they have won their battle? Do the present board have autonomy themselves, or are they puppets for someone else, who doesn't have to face the public if Wallace gets pushed out for rocking the boat? What about the fans getting behind an ultimatum of ' We trust Wallace. We will refrain from any boycotts on one condition - nothing happens to Wallace for x amount of time' We of course would have to put our trust in Wallace that he will be true to himself and push for changes he feels are necessary (and also trust that he has not been 'bought'), but in truth I think we feel that anyway. What we gain is protecting against him having been used as a pawn for an AGM result, unless of course they are going to be so blatant that was the case. Then they deserve the backlash that would come. Couldn't we unite behind that?

Luca Gasparotto to Stirling Albion Calum Gallacher to East Stirling

http://t.co/akFr5PEKH3 Rangers chairman David Somers believes the "majority" of the Light Blues' support trust the board despite the stormy scenes at the club's annual general meeting at Ibrox on Thursday and recent fans' protests. The Rangers board were booed on to the stage at the AGM but emerged triumphant after all five directors were re-elected and their four opponents failed in their bid to be appointed. Under-fire finance director Brian Stockbridge, who received a particularly rough ride from those who attended the AGM, received 65.3 per cent backing from shareholders while his four colleagues, Norman Crighton, James Easdale and chief executive Graham Wallace, who subsequently won over most of the body of the meeting, all secured more than three-quarters of the support. The four so-called requisitioners - former Rangers oldco director Paul Murray, former chairman Malcolm Murray, Alex Wilson and Scott Murdoch - all polled close to 30 per cent of votes to scupper their hopes. However, despite a clear mandate from shareholders, the fall-out from the meeting had Gers supporters and fans' representatives talking about boycotts and refusing to renew season tickets amid general disgruntlement. Asked if he accepted there was a lack of trust in the board from the fans, Somers told Press Association Sport: "Just at the beginning (of the AGM) there were boos but the rest of the meeting was very orderly. "I was pleased that I got a nice round of applause after my speech which I thought was very generous of them. "I thought the questions were fair and overall, I thought the mood of the meeting was very positive. "Hopefully it cleared the air and we can build on that and take the club forward in terms of stability. "I think there is trust from the majority of the fans but having looked at the dark corporate history of the club, I understand why, for some of the fans' groups, there is some distrust. It is our job to build up the trust but it will take time. "And actually, if we look at the result of the AGM, you can see quite clearly that were massive support for the board. "It is also interesting to see that the requisitioners didn't have the level of support from the fans that they were saying they had got - we can see that from the numbers." Somers, whose position was made permanent last month after he was given the chairmanship on an interim period, dismissed the fans' red card display at the last home game against Ayr United. In the 18th and 72nd minutes of the match, the majority of the 45,227 crowd held up cards which had written on them 'get out of our club' and 'vote out the current board'. "I wasn't at that particular one but I have had several emails from people who said they were led to believe that the red card display was about apartheid so there seems to be some confusion among the fans as to what they were displaying," said Somers. "But we have taken on board that we have got to engage with the fans, the supporters groups and we have plans to do just that." Indeed, one of the biggest gripes of Paul Murray and the fans' representatives in the acrimonious lead-up to the AGM was the failure of the board to enter into dialogue with supporters. Somers, who revealed he had been appointed to the chairman's post by Stockbridge and Easdale after being recommended by club advisors Daniel Stewart, explained his reticence. "A lot of it has been time-related," he said. "I have only been on the board four weeks, Graham has only been on the board three weeks. "I spent the first two weeks interviewing nine or 10 CEOs and also interviewing a bunch of non-executive directors and that took up quite a bit of time. "We knew the AGM was important so it meant we went round all the institutional shareholder groups and said, 'Here we are and this is what we plan to do' and we were using up time that should have been used in normal circumstances for the fan groups. "I think we reassured the fans (at the AGM) that we have to engage much more with them than we have been doing. "Some (meetings) have already taken place. Graham has already had two or three meetings." Somers, however, admits there are no plans to invite a fans' representative on to the board. "I think a fan on the board would be a very singular situation," he said. "We are looking to set up a mechanism by which we can engage more democratically with the fans and get more fan representation. "That is something that we will be talking with the fans groups about. "There are various options. One option is to have a fan advisory board where we have a number of supporter groups on it. " Somers also confirmed that there were no plans to invite any of the requisitioners on to the board. He said: "Not at the moment, no. The shareholders have made their decision so we have to respect what the shareholders have said." A "final statement" released to Press Association Sport on behalf of the requisitioners read: "Now that the dust has settled after yesterday's result we thought it was important to make a few final comments. "First and foremost, we would like to thank everyone who voted for us, particularly the fans whose overwhelming support has galvanised us throughout this process. "Secondly, we think it is important that yesterday's result is put in context. The reality is that Brian Stockbridge's vote and our vote was determined by a very small number of shareholders. "Four shareholders, Easdale proxy, Laxey, Mike Ashley and Zeus Capital control almost 50 per cent of the shares. Obviously none of them voted for us and all of them voted for Brian Stockbridge. "We therefore achieved 60 per cent support from the remainder of the shareholders whilst Brian Stockbridge achieved 30 per cent. "That said it was a democratic vote and we stand by the result. "We are proud of our campaign. We have brought all of the issues to the fore and we have exposed the mismanagement of the club. "This has brought positive board change particularly in the shape of Graham Wallace. "We now hope that he is given the authority to make his mark without outside influences. "Finally we wish Ally and the team continued success in the future." Copyright PA Sport 2013, All Rights Reserved

Three members of the Rangers board have lodged complaints to the police after violent threats were made against them. Rangers chairman Sandy Easdale, his brother James and Brian Stockbridge all received threats on a fans website. One image on the website, which cannot be named, contained a picture of Stockbridge with the caption stating "where is Lee Harvey Oswald when we need him". Another posting advocates "torching" McGill's Buses, which are owned by the Easdale brothers. Stockbridge, the Rangers financial director, was one of the five board members re-elected at Thursday's annual general meeting. Solicitors have asked police to investigate violent threats made against him and the Easdales. http://t.co/mPyqWbn2OR

By Chris Graham The votes are in, the results are known and the status quo remains. The nominee directors have apparently failed to convince enough of the large institutional investors that change is needed and we now face at least an immediate future with the men who had already been appointed to the board. There is no question that the appointment of Graham Wallace has been a major factor in the board being successful en masse. Had the EGM gone ahead it is very likely that none of the old board would have survived. To suggest that Wallace's credibility has rubbed off on them would be a major understatement, but with that vote of confidence comes a large responsibility and it is a responsibility that he should be well aware of given the extremely hostile reception the board received from shareholders who attended yesterday's AGM. http://www.therangersstandard.co.uk/index.php/articles/current-affairs/302-over-to-you-mr-wallace

Our Chief Executive said yesterday we would have to cut back with our spending which has been too high since we began life in the bottom tier last season. With the club allegedly losing £1 million I'm just wondering how these costs will be cut. I know Ally has said he would take a substantial paycut and I'd imagine the rest of the backroom staff will be doing the same but the only other way I can see Wallace making the cuts required is to sell our best players (Wallace, MacLeod) or get rid of the high earners at the club.

http://www.gersnet.co.uk/index.php/latest-news/209-is-it-time-to-move-on It’s been a long time coming but finally the Rangers AGM arrived and at last we have some clarity on just how well supported the incumbent board is. In fact, the result was pretty conclusive – certainly for most of the Directors up for reappointment while those externally up for nomination struggled to achieve as much support. Therefore, whilst the issue of backing may not be as straightforward as it seems, no-one can deny it should now be time to move on and allow the club some space to consolidate its position. Such an abeyance of hostilities is essential for two main reasons: one, to give the ‘new’ board some time to deliver on their promises, and, two, to hopefully ensure the support doesn’t rip itself apart after a quite ludicrous period of belligerent disagreement between so-called rival factions of fans. So where are we now? Yesterday’s AGM statement to the London Stock Exchange revealed a short term ‘120 day strategic focus’ for the board on a range of important matters: including a detailed business review and attempts to re-engage with the fans to better capture our opinions. Along with other strategies highlighted in the statement, the aims are impressive and I doubt many fans would challenge them. However, we’ve heard similar buzz-words and phrases before – from Sir David Murray, Craig Whyte and Charles Green – all of whom failed to take the business forward during this modern era of austerity. What can this mandated ‘new board’ do differently? Let’s start with its make-up. Despite the institutional confidence placed upon most of the nominated incumbents yesterday, the scenes at the AGM were quite frankly incredible with specific focus on Finance Director Brian Stockbridge. It seems clear now that not only do thousands of fans have an issue with his position but also the vast bulk of the 1600 shareholders present yesterday. Moreover, the fact over 30% of other investors do not consider him re-electable arguably makes his position untenable on its own. However, add in his flawed performance and questionable behaviour of the last year then if the board is serious about trust, transparency and staff ‘pride’ in Rangers then Stockbridge must be moved on. Anything else would cast serious doubt on those that wish to lead the club back to success. Of course the rest of the board, other than Graham Wallace, don’t convince either. Neither Easdale brother speaks well or commands the respect of the support while new chairman David Somers appears inconsistent in his approach – one day signing his name to daft and inflammatory ‘open letters’, while the next saying he has no problem with people he previously labelled as selfish ‘fanatics’. It seems clear Mr Somers needs to familiarise himself with the high profile nature of the Rangers chairmanship and quick. Fortunately, new CEO Graham Wallace has been more measured in his approach so it’s not a surprise to see him warmly received by all so far. Mr Wallace can and should use this to his advantage by acting as a conduit to both investors and fans in the months ahead. With the above in mind, it seems obvious the board will need strengthened if the club’s 120 day plan is to be successful. I’m not sure adding either Murray to the mix will help but I’d hope Scott Murdoch and the impressive Alex Wilson are considered given Cenkos already gave their approval to their applications earlier in the year. That would go some way to bringing everyone around the same table ahead of the April finances ‘D’ Day. Speaking of which, obviously Dave King should be another who must be consulted with, even if his past and recent performance remains worthy of debate. I’m sure there are others out there who could add the right mix of independent business talent and Rangers-mindedness to improve the board. One such name I’ve heard mentioned is John McClure of Unicorn Asset Management who own(ed) upwards of 400,000 pre-IPO shares in the club. No matter who joins this board, the pressure will be high to deliver on their statement of yesterday. However, they do deserve time to implement the changes promised – just how much time may be reliant on their ongoing performance. For example, the issue of Jack Irvine’s retention cannot be kicked into the long grass. Moving on from the board the next important issue is that of the fans. The way many people (mostly online) have turned on each other over the last 6 months has been nothing short of remarkable. It seems polite disagreement cannot happen nowadays with insult and abuse being preferred instead. This has to stop and stop now. If not, our club will be easy pickings for those who wish to use it in a way to benefit themselves only. It also offers an easy excuse for the club not to engage with the fans as it should. Of course it doesn’t help that our fan groups seem so badly advised while struggling generally as well. I don’t blame the Trust, Assembly or Association for believing in the likes of successful businessman Jim McColl but jumping into his camp with both feet meant any sort of negotiation with the board was always going to be difficult. Add in their collective failure to achieve widespread support within the fan-base (via active membership more than anything else) then it’s debatable just how important the club will see them in the future. This is a great shame when we examine fine initiatives such as BuyRangers but perhaps something new can arise from embers of the existing groups? Hearts and Dunfermline fans have shown the way in this respect so we should be looking to them for inspiration. I’d certainly suggest each fan group outlines its own 120 day plan to show they’re capable of improvement. Only then may the club (and most importantly more fans) feel engagement with them is worthwhile. All in all despite yesterday’s conclusive AGM vote, uncertainty remains and that should be a concern for us all – the club director, the investor and the ‘ordinary’ fan. Indeed, financing the club is the biggest issue ahead and this can only be achieved by everyone working together for the greater good. We can all make sacrifices in that regard so I’d urge all involved to examine their contribution and ask if the betterment of Rangers is really their aim. If it’s not, then yesterday’s farcical AGM scenes will only be the start of more stormy waters ahead. That cannot be allowed to happen. Thus, in the spirit of Christmas and New Year, this is an opportunity to offer goodwill to others and start afresh in 2014. In that regard I’d like to wish all my fellow fans a happy holiday season and all the very best for the next year. Rest and be merry as, for the boardroom and the fan groups at least, the clock is ticking: 120 days and counting!

One small point I would like to bring up , after it was raised a few times int the AGM thread , our dear rivals over in the east have to date had 4 share issues , they also have long term loans to both the co-op and GCC of over £35 million quid . However I do appreciate that they are miles ahead of us in bringing in and selling players , yet some of these we could have had before them had we not been paralysed by the EBT debacle , so we can get back to something like a decent selling club . All is not rosey over there

Annual General Meeting statement

Not going myself so am hoping a few lads I trust to tweet accurately will keep us informed through the meeting. The Rangers board have already arrived ahead of the 10.30am start.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22037966 Hopefully this will herald a bigger sportlight on the shady goings on in the east of the city by CFC, GCC et all...

From PA Sport http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/football-king-murray-help-gers-board-151342908--sow.html

............for an end to Ibrox civil war whoever wins power 18 Dec 2013 08:37 JOHNSTON has allies in both camps ahead of tomorrow's agm vote at Ibrox and has warned all involved that tomorrow's meeting "is of enormous importance to the very future of the club". AT half-past 10 tomorrow morning Ibrox Stadium will host perhaps the most monumental showdown in all its red-bricked history. A shareholders meeting which will determine the shape of its future. In total, 14 resolutions will be put to the vote. One or two of them should be perfectly straightforward. The rest promise to be anything but, even if unconfirmed reports have suggested strongly that the outcome of many of the hottest topics may already have been determined. Late last night Ibrox spin doctors were briefing that the board were looking at a landslide win given the results of the proxies which have already been counted in London. But even so, Rangers fans and shareholders will still storm in through the turnstiles tomorrow to have their say. Nine of the tabled resolutions will decide the identities of the men who will form the Rangers board as this ravaged club looks to recover from two-and-a-half years of turmoil. Up for re-election back into the eye of this firestorm will stand chairman David Somers, chief executive Graham Wallace, financial director Brian Stockbridge and non-execs James Easdale and Norman Crighton. Still hoping to be voted in from the frying pan are the current regime’s nemeses – Paul and Malcolm Murray, Scott Murdoch and Alex Wilson. On the face of it this potential collision of the two sides in this civil war is a recipe for disaster. But former chairman Alastair Johnston, who boasts friends and allies in both camps, will hunker down some 3000 miles away across the pond and hope for just one resolution to come out of this explosive showdown. Peace in our time and an end to the sustained period of internal distrust and financial distress. Johnston told Record Sport last night: “This agm is of enormous importance to the very future of the club. “It’s extremely important there is some sort of resolution that allows Rangers to go forward. I don’t know the current board and I don’t know some of the guys on the other side. “But I know Paul Murray very well and he has the club’s interest at heart. That’s never been in doubt. “I also know Graham Wallace because he worked with us at IMG and was a good guy. I have no doubts about his integrity or any shackles he might have to previous regimes. I have no problem about that. “But I do hope for everyone’s sake we finally get a board which operates with more transparency. Otherwise the directors are only going to be asking for more trouble in terms of the fans’ distrust and dissatisfaction. “All we want is to know the people in that boardroom are in there for the right reasons. Perhaps after this agm we will finally be able to move forward because all these warring factions have fractured the club. “After this agm we should know who is responsible for making decisions and showing true governance – no matter which way the voting goes. The fans and shareholders will have to live or die by the decisions they make.” Two others, resolutions nine and 10, might not look like much on paper. Shareholders and fans will first be asked to “authorise the directors to allot relevant securities”. And then they will vote on the next proposal “to enable the directors to allot shares for cash without first offering them to existing shareholders”. But even if the wording is corporate governance at its most dull and dreary, they too could be of huge significance. In fact, at a glance they appear key to the current regime’s plan to raise enough cash to avoid the devastation and humiliation of administration II. But there are also fears that, if passed, these resolutions could amount to a get-rich-quick scheme for individuals, selected by the board, who could snap up millions of shares at a penny a time – and then offload them at the full market value. A deal which could see cash sums multiplied overnight, earning investors profits of around 3500 per cent. At a meeting with the Rangers Supporters Trust in October, Stockbridge and the club’s then chief executive Craig Mather attempted to explain resolutions nine and 10. According to official minutes published after this meeting, Stockbridge insisted it was all “fairly standard” and would give the club the ability to issue between five and 10 per cent more shares. In turn, this would create flexibility for the board to raise up to £3m, pretty much at the drop of a hat. It was put to Stockbridge and Mather by the fans that lawyers who had examined these resolutions were “astounded by them”. Also, the supporters suggested that it appears the resolutions would give the board the green light to allot as many as 21.7m new shares (33 per cent of the total). In response, Mather insisted the board would address proportionality in any share issue. It was then suggested by the fans that resolution nine would “allow directors and employees among others to make a directors loan which is converted into equity at a nominal value of 1p per share” and that “nominated individuals can therefore acquire 6.6m shares for an investment of £66,000”. A bemused Stockbridge claimed to not understand what the fuss was about but did then promise to have the resolutions reworded to clear up any confusion. But the wording has remained the same ever since. And Johnston admitted last night to being seriously concerned with a lack of clarity where these two proposals are concerned. He said: “The board has to be more transparent with why these motions are being presented and what their intentions are. I would hope they are held to account over the finer details of resolutions nine and 10. I would have my own concerns about these resolutions and would want answers. “The fans and shareholders all have a legitimate right to ask questions at Thursday’s agm. “If they are not allowed to ask questions or are not satisfied with the answers then they cannot vote in favour. “Asking for a full explanation of resolutions nine and 10 is important because this needs to be discussed and debated in an open forum.” http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-agm-former-chairman-alastair-2938611

BBC stating that board have won a no others will be elected.

Should any of the requisitioner's getting votted onto the board on Thursday, At what time on Friday do we expect an announcement as to who is behind Blue Pitch & Margarita??? Personally, I ain't holding my breath. The identities of these 2 groups will only be published they the groups themselves consent to it. If the board were to release the full names of those involved without consent, that could have SERIOUS consequences with future investors & trust issues.

http://www.gersnet.co.uk/index.php/match-analysis/208-final-mock-agm-results-and-analysis Within this article, you can find the final results of our mock AGM which concentrated on the meeting resolutions related to the appointment of various directors – both existing and potential. While I’d like to reiterate that the poll was not a serious piece of scientific analysis, the results are nonetheless very interesting. In many ways, the outcome is actually broadly along the lines I expected – showing uncertainty for elements of the current board and reasonable support for those nominated to join it. However, it’s especially thought provoking to note a lack of genuine support for the new chairman (possibly as a result of an unnecessarily petty ‘open letter’ of earlier this month). If you compare this with the results for Graham Wallace (whose comments have been much more measured) then it does show how important it is to retain a positive outlook in the media. By way of balance, there appears to be a distinct lack of backing for previous chairman Malcolm Murray with four out of ten voters unimpressed with his nomination. Was it a mistake to offer himself back up for election? Generally though, the incumbents have a lack of obvious support from our voters with Brian Stockbridge especially having only one in ten people able to vote in favour of his reappointment as Finance Director. Even the so-far anonymous Norman Crighton struggles to poll convincingly as voters remain undecided on his contribution. On the other hand, the requisitioners appear to have a solid base to approach Thursday’s AGM with most of their nominations having clear backing from the 1300-1500 total voters. It certainly appears that many fans appreciated their efforts to communicate directly with them in Glasgow last month. That has resulted in around three quarters of voters supporting Paul Murray, Scott Murdoch and Alex Wilson’s nominations. It should also be noted that a similar private poll of RST members has results consonant with this open one, though even more in favour of boardroom change. Thus, I think it’s fair to say many Rangers fans remain cynical about those in charge of the club. However, clearly a fair number of people appear less than enthused about Murray et al. Of course, while these polls are worth exploring, fans only make up for around 12% of the whole when it comes to the actual AGM vote with institutional and major individual investors holding the real power for Thursday’s vote. Indeed, yesterday’s Times suggested this was a foregone conclusion with the existing regime likely to be supported by the majority; although the article was unclear with respect to specific nominees so some change may still happen. Whatever does transpire it’s clear from this poll and recent protests that large numbers of Rangers fans (and indeed investors) remain far from convinced the club is being run well enough to secure its future. That should be worthy of serious consideration by all and I’m glad this AGM is being belatedly held to ensure some democratic process in that sense. However, this also means, no matter the result, the club needs some respite going forward to consolidate its position. With that in mind, I think it’s reliant on all involved to consider a minimum three month moratorium on the issue of boardroom change. For example, we’re told that April will be a low point in the club’s finances so any attempt to destabilise the club further ahead of this period would be extremely detrimental to its future viability. Tacit threats of non-engagement such as boycotts of merchandise and/or season tickets are unlikely to be widely supported so should not be made lightly. Instead, the fan groups discussing such actions would be much better served concentrating on how they can lobby more effectively rather than considering suicidal scare tactics. There’s no doubt genuine change in our supporters organisations is as desperately needed as anything else. On the other hand, neither should any moratorium be seen as an opportunity for the club to continue to hide from its responsibilities. No matter how the board is constituted after Thursday, all involved have to openly discuss the club’s short, medium and long-term future with the fans and potential investors. Both Paul Murray and Sandy Easdale claim they have finance ready to be invested once stability is achieved but how can fans/investors be assured they’re not throwing good money after bad with the share price already halved from last year’s IPO? All in all, lots of rhetoric and spin aside, I don’t know any Rangers fan not concerned about the club’s future. It doesn’t matter if you want to give the Somers administration support or want Paul Murray to ‘cleanse’ the club; fans just want the chance to talk about football again. Indeed, apathy and fatigue may actually present the biggest barrier to all going forward – the team may be winning on the park but unless we see a dramatic change in the way the club approaches a range of issues, we may just be stumbling towards mediocrity instead of climbing purposely back to the pinnacle of the Scottish game. In that sense, Thursday’s AGM may provide some short term relief from all the pain of the last few months but the only way the club (and the fans) can really move forward is via leadership, communication and mutual trust. Can we construct a recognisable path forward in 2014 or will we continue to dig our own grave? Mock AGM Results Somers 1417 votes cast Yes 20% No 75% Undecided 5% Wallace 1370 votes cast Yes 62% No 16% Undecided 22% Stockbridge 1413 votes cast Yes 12% No 86% Undecided 2% Crighton 1347 votes cast Yes 18% No 40% Undecided 42% Easdale 1203 votes cast Yes 21% No 72% Undecided 7% P Murray 1373 votes cast Yes 71% No 27% Undecided 3% M Murray 1361 votes cast Yes 59% No 34% Undecided 7% Murdoch 1338 votes cast Yes 76% No 17% Undecided 7% Wilson 1331 votes cast Yes 76% No 17% Undecided 7%

Former Rangers vice-chairman Donald Findlay has backed calls for boardroom change at Thursday's annual meeting. The present regime will be challenged by a group of disgruntled shareholders in the culmination of a long battle for control of the League One club. Cowdenbeath chairman Findlay said: "The squabbling has gone on too long. "It's time to clear the whole lot out and only have people in who want to take the club forward and who do not want to take a penny out of it." “If you sit on the board of Rangers, you should not be taking a penny out of it, even if it's just to buy a blazer” Donald Findlay Cowdenbeath chairman Sandy Easdale - brother of plc director James and the new chairman of the club's football board - stressed last week that he does not take a wage from the club. But finance director Brian Stockbridge is paid an annual salary of more than £200,000, while former chief executive Charles Green earned £933,000 during his 13 months at the helm. Stockbridge has handed back a £200,000 bonus awarded to him after the club won the Scottish Third Division title last season. However, QC Findlay said: "If you sit on the board of Rangers, you should not be taking a penny out of it, even if it's just to buy a blazer. "They need to get people in there who have the best interests of the club at heart and who are capable of running Rangers in the way Rangers should be run. "Someone who is the club's internal accountant should be paid the commercial rate if you are going to get the right guy. Of course he should. Rangers finance director Brian Stockbridge Stockbridge is a survivor of Charles Green's terms as chief executive "But, frankly, the notion that a financial director should be given a £200,000 bonus for winning the Third Division is ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous. And that tells me that whoever made that decision should not be running Rangers Football Club." Findlay insists he does not know personally any of the disgruntled shareholders who will seek election to the board - former director Paul Murray, former chairman Malcolm Murray, Scott Murdoch and Alex Wilson. "But the AGM has to ensure that the people who come in are prepared to speak publicly, to be scrutinised by the supporters or anyone else that wants to scrutinise them, to put in all their time and effort to put Rangers Football Club back where it should be and to say that they will not take a penny from the club, neither now nor in the future," said Findlay. "If someone has a job then you pay them the going rate. But, as for the directors, they should not be taking a penny out of that club as far as I'm concerned." Rangers raised £22.2m when the club was listed on the London Stock Exchange in December. However, they posted a £14.4m loss during the 13-month period to June and Stockbridge has already gone on the record to admit that the Glasgow club could be down to their last £1m by April. "The way the club was floated was mucked up from the beginning," said Findlay. "The wrong people did it, the wrong people invested, the wrong people are now in charge. "The people responsible for what Rangers Football Club has done to itself and the embarrassment and distress it has caused its supporters should be ashamed of themselves and should not be allowed anywhere near it. "These people do not own Rangers - it does not belong to any one person. "They may be in charge for the time being, but the club belongs to the people who support it. They are the only ones who matter, nobody else." http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/25409741

Graham Wallace Interview in the Daily Mail Some interesting stuff in there. Certainly a much better read than a recent effort by the new Chairman.

.............of how crucial Rangers' agm vote will be KEITH reckons the scenario which led to Rangers' League One clash with Stenhousemuir at Ochilview being postponed came at the perfect time for supporters to re-examine what has gone on at their club. AS reminders go, this one was perfectly timed. A league game called off because of an incident involving a burger van. A moment for Rangers fans to pause and reflect on the scale of the damage done to their club by a seemingly endless cast of pantomime villains over the past two-and-a-half years. Of how far these “custodians” have allowed this once mighty institution to fall. It’s not their fault, of course. How could they be expected to notice what was going on around them in their unrelenting rush to scoop up every last blue pound? These people have their priorities you know. As a result, at a time when Celtic were licking wounds inflicted upon them at the Nou Camp, Rangers suffered an altogether different kind of indignity at the weekend. Sidelined, for the first time in history, because a deep fat fryer on wheels crashed into a temporary stand. Such is life in the Wacky Races of Scotland’s lower leagues. But now – with the club’s long- awaited agm just days away – would seem like the ideal time for Rangers supporters to re-examine how on earth they got here in the first place. Perhaps to ensure history is not allowed to repeat itself. Paul Murray couldn’t have planned it any better had he pranged the van himself and made off into the streets of Stenhousemuir under the cover of darkness. If ever there was an episode that sums up the depth of this club’s current plight then this was surely it. In the grand scheme of things, Rangers have become little more than a farce. The Whytes, the Greens, the Ahmads, connections with men on Interpol’s most wanted list, the financial director’s home videos, the bonus culture and large pay-offs, the never-ending investigations and probes, the court cases, the missing millions, the endless spin and counter spin. This is what Rangers of today have become. Meanwhile, in a sporting context, they have reduced themselves to the kind of semi-irrelevance that can have a fixture knocked out by a cheeseburger and chips. Yet no matter how surreal or ridiculous this whole saga has become, in the boardroom battle all sides demand to be taken seriously. And with the shareholders about to shape the future of this club on Thursday, never has the situation required a more studied analysis. The latest offering from inside Ibrox came on Friday of last week when Sandy Easdale invited the BBC and STV round. “I’m no one’s puppet,” was the thrust of his message. But the truth is – with so many proxy votes to protect – he is actually representing the interests of others. In fact, it would seem absurd to expect anything else. Easdale has a duty to do what he is told by those who have entrusted him with their votes. With so much at stake, this is hardly the time or place for him to act like some kind of free spirit. The Easdales swear Charles Green is not involved in their decision making. But Green is in many ways the reason they are slap bang in the middle of this thing. Without him and his old allies at Margarita and Blue Pitch Holdings, the Easdales would hardly have enough votes to merit a say at all. There is another question which might trouble these voters as they prepare to go to the polls. How on earth can the Easdales, chairman David Somers and chief executive Graham Wallace support a financial director, Brian Stockbridge, whose own credibility has been shot to bits among the fans at least? And yet Somers would have these same supporters believe they owe Stockbridge a debt for helping to hold the club together? That they ought to look up to this man as some sort of saviour? That appraisal may come back to haunt him. He claimed also he would not know Green or Craig Whyte if he bumped into them in the street, which displays an alarming lack of knowledge about the main characters in this club’s decline. It may interest Somers to know his predecessor in the big chair, Walter Smith, will have been astonished by attempts to rewrite history. The truth is Stockbridge’s continued presence is one of the reasons Smith – a man who has given most of his adult life to Rangers – cannot bring himself to return to Ibrox, even as a spectator. Come to think of it, John Greig – the man voted the club’s greatest ever servant – has not been back either since being equally sickened by the behaviour of Whyte. Men such as Smith and Greig have been around this club for too long, they care about it too deeply, to accept it in its current form. They struggle to recognise this Rangers. Which is why both will hope their club changes for the better this Thursday. God knows, they can never have seen it any worse.

@scotDMsport: Ally McCoist sides with Rangers fans ahead of crucial vote. See tomorrow's Scottish Daily Mail

From The. Times. tom_farmery ‏@tom_farmery 12m Crunch time for #Rangers as AGM approaches. Read exclusively how the current board have Thursday's vote already won. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/busine...cle3949988.ece … tom_farmery ‏@tom_farmery 5m Story tells how S Easdale, Laxey Partners, Mike Ashley, Artemis and Richard Hughes of Zeus will back current board. Total of 54.67% #Rangers

What a difference a year makes. About 12-18 months ago, new legislation was introduced in Scotland which sought to finally, once and for all, get Rangers fans in particular to shut up about Ireland and the Pope both at and going to or from football matches. Don't believe any nonsense about other club's fans, it was aimed at Bluenoses because Bluenoses were and are seen as the primary offenders. I had and have no problem with this: I was sick of such songs and chants at Ibrox and, since my fellow fans didn't show much sign of packing it in themselves, I agreed that they needed the threat of the law to encourage them to stagger into the 20th century, let alone the 21st. The law proved very controversial, but until this week I remained behind it, because Rangers could only benefit from it, even if some individual fans suffered. I am pleased to say that such songs are down to the absolute bare minimum and will, with the right approach, wither and die within a generation. So, the law is a success? Alas, things have become rather muddied. The spotlight has shifted from us to Celtic's fans, due to their repeated singing and flag waving about IRA people, disrupting Glasgow city with marches, singing about Orange Bastard managers from Ajax and generally being obnoxious. Curiously, this focus has been greeted not with societal opprobrium and condemnation, and certainly not legislation, but a willingness to engage with the reasoning behind such displays, deep thinking articles and much intelligentsia driven discussion. Legitimate displays of heritage are suddenly to include singing about terrorists, which unless I am mistaken is specifically illegal under the laws brought in after 7/7 and 9/11. You can dress it up as political activism all you like, terrorism is always wrong. But we have people celebrating it. This is frankly disgusting. As a long serving hand wringer and hater of all Orange ties to Rangers, this willingness to engage with Celtic's terrorist celebrating wing dismays me. Not just because newspaper articles which stroke their metaphorical chin and hmm, hmm, about the rights and wrongs of glorifying murder turns any sane person's stomach, but because it whips the ground out from beneath the feet of those Bluenoses who have argued for the club's fans to drop its baggage. How can I argue that Rangers should drop loyalist links when the rest of the country is falling over itself to analyse Celtic's Irish links? Whether I like it or not, and I don't, I cannot deny that such loyalist links existed. How can I argue that UVF songs are disgusting when the rest of the country has re-classified the IRA as merely a misunderstood political movement, who seem to have let off a few firecrackers by mistake? I am not subtle enough to distinguish between one murder gang and another; if one is allowed, it seems all must be. How can I urge Bluenoses to look to the future when the media in this country are hell bent on grovelling before Celtic's past? If fan A's heritage is so bloody important, surely so is fan B's? The case against sectarianism has taken a huge leap backwards in this country in the last few weeks, and all because some attention has been shone on Celtic's bigots. They are not politically active, they are not the cultural heirs of Finn MacCool, they are a parasitic leech on Scottish football which will do nothing for it but plenty to hold it back. But hey, we want some atmosphere at Celtic park, so that's OK. I imagine thousands of fans will be queuing up to enjoy said atmosphere. Mr Graham Spiers, on BBC Radio Scotland last night, calmly discussed the alleged terrorism-informed Irish heritage of Celtic as displayed by the Green Brigade group of fans - what an insult to both Ireland and Celtic, incidentally - then sounded like he was foaming at the mouth when discussing Mr Paul Murray, the wannabe Rangers director. This man's moral compass is not just broken, it is absolutely shattered. What a dispiriting and dismaying vista. An arch critic of Rangers' sectarian links, Mr Spiers has been at the forefront of pushing for engagement with these deeply misunderstood and intelligent, earnest young men and women, the better to understand why pictures of a 14th century Scottish killer, a 20th century Irish killer, and the suggestion that either are appropriate for the future of 21st century Scotland (or even Ireland), have become visible. The fairly obvious answer - that neither will do, and rather than banging on about centuries past both countries would be better served by looking to the future - is discarded, in favour of agonised intellectual examinations of political disengagement. Anyone who thinks we will revive the electorate by adding some more Irish history to football - this is the serious premise being put forward, by the way - ought to be debarred from even commenting on it on grounds of incipient cretinism. The avalanche of people who have attempted to legitimise utterly inappropriate behaviour by football fans as political has been staggering, but that doesn't make them right! As a paid up online intellectual chin stroker myself, it kind of pains me to say that people who actually have to live with this sort of crap are the ones who have given the best response to it. Mr Tom English and Mr Keith Jackson have given these people short shrift: self-obsessed and self-indulgent has been their judgement, and I would agree. Mr English is Irish, and presumably has an educated understanding of Irish history; Mr Jackson, to judge from his accent, grew up in the environment in which the realities of Old Firm sectarianism are well understood - i.e., broadly meaningless insults between people who go to different schools. Mr Spiers, we know from his insistence on providing us with details of his youth, did not. I won't be dragged into sectarianism just because I am a Rangers fanatic - sectarianism is such a waste of time and energy which embarrasses my club. Granted, any time you have a religion you will have people who oppose it; but it's got nothing to do with football. I'll argue against any Bluenose who wants a debate about our baggage, and have done for a decade. But it just got harder to justify that position (which I will not abandon) thanks to the pussy-footing around in the media, and it's mighty hard to persuade your fellow Bluenose that he out of order when his opposite number in green is molly-coddled to this degree. People like Mr Spiers do the game and the country no favours by indulging one side of this coin while castigating the other. Let's get this absolutely clear - terrorism is always wrong; sectarianism is always wrong; bleating about it at the football is always wrong. It really is that simple. Pandering to bigots will not cleanse Scotland of bigotry, and re-branding bigotry as political activism is about as cowardly and gutless as it gets, allowing those who have spent decades berating one class of bigots to avoid confronting another lot on the grounds of freedom of speech. Mr Spiers recently contacted Gersnet to complain about nine inaccuracies in one of our articles. I would be delighted to hear from him if he could point out the inaccuracies in this one...I won't hold my breath.