Minutes of the First Meeting of the Rangers Fans Board held on 6 October 2014

[Frankie 8,562]

Can you imagine this board, resplendent in suits and Rangers ties, taking this manager to task on football matters?

 

Ally will politely say - show us your medals - and then be charming and entertaining as people thrill at meeting a legend.

 

If anybody from the board meets him, it should be someone who will probe him on his football philosophy, someone who will insist on detailed answers instead of bluster, and someone who won't be star-struck.

 

To be honest, though, it's not a good idea. When people get to meet and know the manager, they will probably find it harder to demand his sacking. I think it would be better if they introduced another rule for their constitution - members of the board should not be formally introduced to players and management.

 

The manager would have every right to counter any criticism but as long as ticket sales remain so low neither he or the directors can ignore it.

 

I'd like to think the reps would be above sycophancy when it came to such matters.

 

Why are we so keen to put ourselves down? One minute fan ownership is the only answer, the next we can't meet managers or players because we'll be charmed out of any constructive debate. Which is it?

[Hildy 0]

The manager would have every right to counter any criticism but as long as ticket sales remain so low neither he or the directors can ignore it.

 

I'd like to think the reps would be above sycophancy when it came to such matters.

 

Why are we so keen to put ourselves down? One minute fan ownership is the only answer, the next we can't meet managers or players because we'll be charmed out of any constructive debate. Which is it?

When you have fans in a boss's union, which is effectively what this fan board is, they are more likely to be there for the blazer and the status.

 

They will be more likely to be a pushover for a figure like McCoist.

 

Fan reps should be strong characters who do not wilt when they meet club legends.

 

Sycophant fans should never represent others on club boards. They are too easily swayed.

[MoodyBlue 0]

Doomed to failure - as many predicted from the outset.

[simplythebest 0]

And that is it in a nutshell.

 

Sad though it is.... on-field garbage is actually the least of our worries at the present time. Holding the Board accountable for off-field actions is our biggest concern - yet some just want that armchair manager chinwag with McCoist.

In your opinion it's the least of our worries, in the opinion of many supporters it's a very serious urgent worry.

 

I've never denied off field issues are important as well but I'm working under the assumption that the fans board are competent enough to deal with more than one issue at a similar time.

[Frankie 8,562]

When you have fans in a boss's union, which is effectively what this fan board is, they are more likely to be there for the blazer and the status.

 

They will be more likely to be a pushover for a figure like McCoist.

 

Fan reps should be strong characters who do not wilt when they meet club legends.

 

Sycophant fans should never represent others on club boards. They are too easily swayed.

 

Well, I think it's too early to judge these people as it stands.

 

You may well be right but in a general sense, no issue should be off the table as long as we have the right people involved. If it's the wrong people, their ability to challenge the manager on his playing style may well be the least of our worries.

[Rangersitis 0]

In your opinion it's the least of our worries, in the opinion of many supporters it's a very serious urgent worry.

 

I've never denied off field issues are important as well but I'm working under the assumption that the fans board are competent enough to deal with more than one issue at a similar time.

 

Matters involving the manager are ultimately the responsibility of the board. Getting McCoist in for a selfie session followed by tea and banter isn't what most would class as a priority. Even if it was all done professionally, he is hardly going to dramatically alter his whole footballing philosophy on the say so of a dozen supporters.

[simplythebest 0]

Matters involving the manager are ultimately the responsibility of the board. Getting McCoist in for a selfie session followed by tea and banter isn't what most would class as a priority. Even if it was all done professionally, he is hardly going to dramatically alter his whole footballing philosophy on the say so of a dozen supporters.

 

By the same token Ashley/Llambias are unlikely to alter their plans based on similar

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Was it a popular suggestion?

 

I would find it very strange if it was popular over there, although there always seems to be people who'd cut off their nose to spite their face if it meant they got to stick a long knife into the RST's back or get one over on the Trust in any way possible.

 

Getting back to the point though BH: I don't think your answer to the question was good enough and the minutes were extremely confusing on this particular point too, which is bizarre when you say you got a draft copy, suggested or requested amendments and presumably approved the minutes.

 

Specifically, that single section of the minutes reads:

 

AH: A question posed by RSA and another club:

 

• Why aren’t we having the Rangers Supporters Trust or other fans bodies represented on the RFB? (Clearly the question.)
  
• 
  
• It was a democratic process and open to everyone (Clearly the answer, but by who?)
  
• 
  
• Suggested that Rangers do not meet with other fans groups now that we have the RFB in place (By who? Completely unclear.)
  
• 
  
• Agreed to discuss with the Rangers Board of Directors as to what their plans should be going forward (Regarding what exactly? Again, completely unclear.)
  

 

Lastly BH, do you actually agree with that suggestion which was "raised on another forum" yourself?

 

I agree that the Minutes are confusing on this issue, personally I would not have used that format; but re-writing that section would have meant re-writing the whole thing in a different format and since I was the only person who put up ANY amendments I didn't want to slow the process further by suggesting a complete re-write.

 

The suggestion came from Rangers Media web site where it had widespread support; but again I would stress that as I understood it, it related to unelected bodies. I didn't put it forward as my proposal but, yes, I agree that now that there is an elected Fans Board in place Rangers should not meet unelected groups.

 

My understanding of the final point you have highlighted is that future channels of communication would be discussed with the directors.

 

As far as representation of other elected groups are concerned the question was raised by the RSA and individually by William (Monty) Mongomery.

 

The answer that I received from Rangers is that "the focus groups were strongly of the opinion that the election should be for individuals not representatives. It was open to any member or official of any group or association to put themselves forward for nomination and the subsequent election. The Nomination Committee, Chaired by Rev MacQuarrie, was independent of the Club, five of its members were selected by the independent company that arranged the focus groups and the election process also was independent of the Club."

 

I conveyed this answer to the persons concerned.

 

I trust this answers your valid points.

Edited November 5, 2014 by BrahimHemdani
Deleted repeated phrase.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Surely it wouldn't apply to the RST though as their board has been democratically elected?

 

It did not apply to the RST or any other elected group, as I understood the point that was being made.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

In your opinion it's the least of our worries, in the opinion of many supporters it's a very serious urgent worry.

 

I've never denied off field issues are important as well but I'm working under the assumption that the fans board are competent enough to deal with more than one issue at a similar time.

 

we will never get it right on the field while we have directors working to their best interests not the clubs.

 

never

 

that's what the i only care about the team people must come to realise. unfortunately that will take years of piss poor onfield performance for some.