RSA Statement....

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Sharing the money more equally is cutely utopian, but a completely flawed concept which should not be endorsed by the fans. One of the fundamental aspects of the current prize money system is that it provides worthwhile competition throughout the league right until the end of the season because the difference between just one finishing place is an extremely large amount of money. Take away that financial incentive and you completely ruin the competitiveness of the competition.

 

On the contrary Zappa, it has precisely the opposite effect.

 

The competition is completely uncompetitve or at least it was up to this season.

 

The team finishing first gets almost four times (3.8) what the team finishing 12th gets. So via the allocation of central resources, the team finishing first is awarded a substantial resource advantage which gives it an advantage to win the league the following season. And that’s before we consider the even greater financial advantages to be secured by achieving some success in European competition.

 

The result has been that only two clubs have ever won the SPL and only three have ever been second (the same two as have been first and Hearts, though only once).

 

I don't see that as "worthwhile competition".

 

A more equitable distribution of the money will improve competition, just ask someone like Peter Houston what he could do with an extra £250,000 a year; I have, and his answer is that it would take them a round or two further in the European competitions and allow them to mount a more consistent challenge in the league.

Edited December 4, 2012 by BrahimHemdani
repeated word "times"

[Gribz 966]

If we drew a St Johnstone or an inverness id be thinking we would go but this is Dundee Utd, the biggest mouthers during our fallings. Plus as the OP statement says a club who have previous is screwing Rangers fans.

 

Even if its one game, we should refuse tickets straight away.

[Zappa 0]

On the contrary Zappa, it has precisely the opposite effect.

 

The competition is completely uncompetitve or at least it was up to this season.

 

The team finishing first gets almost four times (3.8) times what the team finishing 12th gets. So via the allocation of central resources, the team finishing first is awarded a substantial resource advantage which gives it an advantage to win the league the following season. And thatâ??s before we consider the even greater financial advantages to be secured by achieving some success in European competition.

 

The result has been that only two clubs have ever won the SPL and only three have ever been second (the same two as have been first and Hearts, though only once).

 

I don't see that as "worthwhile competition".

 

A more equitable distribution of the money will improve competition, just ask someone like Peter Houston what he could do with an extra £250,000 a year; I have, and his answer is that it would take them a round or two further in the European competitions and allow them to mount a more consistent challenge in the league.

 

I don't share your view on this then and don't agree with you.

 

Rangers and Celtic will always have far more money than the other clubs because of the size of the support for both clubs and the fact that revenue streams dwarf every other club by a significant amount. There's no doubt at all that the other clubs want more money, so I don't need to ask Peter Houston or anyone else about that because it's obvious and logical, but by evening out the prize money distribution I believe that the competitiveness will be eroded because finishing 9th or 10th (just for example) won't make a significant difference to a club's bank balance. That bank balance incentive needs to be there and I think it'll be a very big mistake to remove it.

[forlanssister 3,114]

There is a big difference between 'principle' and cold hard cash hitting the bottom line.

 

Stewart Milne just wrote off £3.7m and Aberdeen Asset Management another £2.25m. How much appetite do you think they will have for further losses in the interest of 'fairness'?

 

Converting loans into preference shares can hardly be construed as writing off debt.

 

It's just financial sleight of hand.

Edited December 4, 2012 by forlanssister

[calscot 0]

BH spelled it out and it has nothing to do with what happened to him 2009 he just put that in.

 

A boycott of this match issues insane. The gate money is shared for goodness sake!!!

 

Then donate 10 quid to club ffs and still save money but stand up for the club at the same time - or are you reluctant to give Rangers something for nothing but fine giving DU your money? The thing is that by going you will be severely letting down a great number of your fellow supporters; even if you disagree in principle why would you do that?

[Davie P 4]

Ultimately this is a personal decision and many supporters will end up taking their hard earned cash to Dundee Utd irrespective of a call for a boycott. The justification is that Rangers will still get a share of the gate receipts. My view on this is that Thompson was probably the head cheerleader for the punishments to be metted out to us. On that basis alone, I would not attend the game, but I would take the money that I would have spent on the trip to Dundee (travel costs, food, booze, ticket) and spend it at the Megastore! However, I fully respect the right of every individual to take the action that they believe to be appropriate.

[Bluedell 5,716]

See #22, I did not take part in a boycott of the rearranged 2009 match. A personal decision on a one off issue does not constitute a boycott.

 

 

So you boycotted it on a matter of principle. One person can boycott a game. You did.

[Guest TheMainEvent]

What if come January 29 the SPL strip us of trophies, do you still want to go to Tannadice a week later?

[Steve1872 4]

A spokesman for the Rangers Supporters Assembly has called on Charles Green to consult with fans over a proposed boycott of the club’s Scottish Cup tie with Dundee United.

The group have joined other fans’ bodies to call for fans not to attend the match at Tannadice, the first time the Ibrox side have faced SPL opposition away from home since they were denied entry to the top flight since the new company transferred the membership of the club in the summer.

Ross Blyth, spokesperson Rangers Supporters Assembly, told STV he hopes the Rangers chief executive will talk to fans over the move.

He said: “We’d like to speak to Charles Green over this. If he understands the fans’ feelings, which I’m sure he does we would like to think he would support us.

“We would hope Charles Green would consult us before a final decision is made.

“The dislike between Rangers and Dundee United fans has grown more than with any other club.”

He added: “The ill feel between the two club dates back to 2009 after postponed match at Tannadice. After initially telling Rangers fans tickets would be valid for the rescheduled fixture, they then recharged us.

“Then we’ve got what happened in the summer and the general attitude of chairman Stephen Thompson. He wanted Rangers to suffer.

“He wanted us to be hit financially yet wanted to benefit from Rangers via the television revenue.”

Asked whether an absence of away fans may have an effect on the Rangers team, Mr Blyth said: “I can see the reason behind supporting the team and knocking United out of the cup and making them suffer that way but you’ve got to understand the strong feelings and anger Rangers fans have towards Dundee United.”

[Dragonfly Trumpeter 50]

Well said Ross, solid and understandable reasoning for the Assmbly's decision. If someone gets jailed for attempting to murder you, you don't go and buy them a beer when they get out. Well, a number on here would obviously

 

Worth noting that Andy Kerr and Ross Blyth, president & vice of the RSA, are 2 guys amongst the small band of supporters who attend every single Rangers game, wherever we may be playing.

 

It will be as hard for them to miss this game as anybody.