BrahimHemdani 1 Posted November 5, 2014 Author Share Posted November 5, 2014 I was approached by a prominent individual on the way to the match last night and asked to comment on a rumour that I had proposed that RSC's should not receive any ticket allocation for away matches. I was happy to tell him and wish to state publicly that there is not truth whatsoever in this rumour. I have not been asked to make any such proposal, I have not made any such proposal myself, nor would it be my place to do so. I have been approached by the Secretary of a small RSC in connection with nil allocation for certain fixtures and I am pursuing that matter through the appropriate channels. I have also suggested to that Club and the RSA that I would need to be sure that if I was to approach the Club on the wider issue then the view that I was representing was agreed by the RSC's in general. I have previously offered to attend any RSA/RSC Meeting at which this type of thing is discussed. I trust this clarifies my stance on this matter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 The RFB didn't set that out the Club did and the RFB will have to work within that and other parameters. Do you see why people are suspicious of the club's motives for setting up this body? That statement above shows that they want to limit discussions with supporters, with access only made available to the fan board, one which they may well have loaded with people who are more sympathetic to their way of thinking. If those elected really do want this to be regarded as an independent group, then the first vote should have been for the above stipulations to be scrapped, not reinforced. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,465 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 I'm not sure where you got that from, BD, but the suggestion that was supported at the meeting would not restrict the directors from speaking to any elected group. I still don't get the use of the word elected or why the point was raise and supported. The fact that irt was lessens the credibility of the RFB in my eyes, I'm afraid. However, I would respectfully point you to the first objective of "The Fans Board (which is to) provide a platform for supporters to communicate directly with key Club staff in a structured manner" The RFB didn't set that out the Club did and the RFB will have to work within that and other parameters. The RFB should now be deciding what they need to do themselves and not be dictated to be the directors of the club or blindly accepting what they say. You are allowing them a get-out clause for ignoring supporters who approach them directly. Also the RFB "may, at its discretion, allow any person (who is not an Elected Representative) who they reasonably consider appropriate, to attend and speak at any meeting of RFB; for the avoidance of doubt, any such person who is invited to attend an RFB meeting shall not be entitled to vote on any matter to be determined by RFB." So whilst the Elected Members may not always have the skills and experience necessary to deal with certain issues, they can call on any person who they feel would be so qualified. They may be able to do this but will they actually do this? Given their attitude already I have some doubts as to how much this will be used, and access is still being controlled by yourselves. It's fine for the RFB to be the main source of contact, but it should not be the only source of contact, and given the way that the RFB meekly appear to have agreed to this does not auger well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted November 5, 2014 Author Share Posted November 5, 2014 Do you see why people are suspicious of the club's motives for setting up this body? That statement above shows that they want to limit discussions with supporters, with access only made available to the fan board, one which they may well have loaded with people who are more sympathetic to their way of thinking. If those elected really do want this to be regarded as an independent group, then the first vote should have been for the above stipulations to be scrapped, not reinforced. Yes, of course I see that and I didn't like the phrase "in a structured manner" myself; because it could be interpreted in a lot of different ways, most of which won't be helpful to the RFB. The Fans Board hasn't been "loaded" with anyone, unless you are suggesting that The Nominations Committee was influenced by the Club and the elections were rigged? The Constitution stipulates: 3.Objects The RFB’s objects are: (a) To provide the Members with a voice and communication channel directly to the Club in respect of the direction of the Club including, but not limited to: (i) the matchday experience; (ii) supporter engagement; (iii) Membership; (iv) local community support projects; and (v) any matters that affect the Club’s supporters’ experiences. (b) To improve communication between the Club and Members; to represent the views of the Club’s supporters; to encourage and assist the Club; and to take proper account of the interest and views of the supporters of the Club. © To provide the Members with an open forum in order that all Members can express their opinions in a clear and structured manner to the Club. (d) To represent and communicate on behalf of the greatest possible cross section of Members. The RFB can propose amendments but they have to be approved by the Club: 23.Alterations to the constitution 23.1 The Club shall have reserved to it the exclusive right to amend the constitution at any time. Any amended constitution must be publicised by the Club on fansboard.rangers.co.uk and http://www.rangers.co.uk. 23.2 RFB shall have the power to make a recommendation to the Club (on the basis of a majority vote of RFB) to amend the constitution. The Club shall be obliged to consider said suggested alteration to the Constitution. It is my understanding that the RFB intend to establish a sub committee to review the Constitution and I have no doubt that aspect will be prominent in the discussions since it is fundamental to how the representatives and the board as a whole will operate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted November 5, 2014 Author Share Posted November 5, 2014 I still don't get the use of the word elected or why the point was raise and supported. The fact that irt was lessens the credibility of the RFB in my eyes, I'm afraid. The RFB should now be deciding what they need to do themselves and not be dictated to be the directors of the club or blindly accepting what they say. You are allowing them a get-out clause for ignoring supporters who approach them directly. They may be able to do this but will they actually do this? Given their attitude already I have some doubts as to how much this will be used, and access is still being controlled by yourselves. It's fine for the RFB to be the main source of contact, but it should not be the only source of contact, and given the way that the RFB meekly appear to have agreed to this does not auger well. On your first point I think we'll have to agree to disagree. On your second point, please see my answer to #162. On the third point, it is unlike you to prejudge. Essentially the RFB has the power to call in expert help if it feels the need, much like many committees can co-opt for skills they do not have, except this would be on an ad hoc basis. On your last point, we seem to be more or less in agreement. I don't see anything that prevents a supporter or group going direct to the Club; but I've already had one such instance where the matter has been referred back to me! So some protocols do need to be established. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEARGER 1,829 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 BH as away fans rep will you be attending all away games? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted November 5, 2014 Author Share Posted November 5, 2014 BH as away fans rep will you be attending all away games? That's a good question. As things stand at the moment, I attend all the away games that I get a ticket for (other than if I'm on holiday for example) and I do not get priority. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 The Fans Board hasn't been "loaded" with anyone, unless you are suggesting that The Nominations Committee was influenced by the Club and the elections were rigged? Both are distinct possibilities, although engineered sounds far less vulgar than rigged. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted November 5, 2014 Author Share Posted November 5, 2014 Both are distinct possibilities, although engineered sounds far less vulgar than rigged. The Rev MacQuarrie was adamant that the NC were not influenced by the Club in any way and the company that dealt with the email election was independent. As someone who was elected through this process I find your unsubstantiated comment very disappointing. If you have evidence of malfeasance I suggest you bring it forward post haste. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 The Rev MacQuarrie was adamant that the NC were not influenced by the Club in any way and the company that dealt with the email election was independent. As someone who was elected through this process I find your unsubstantiated comment very disappointing. If you have evidence of malfeasance I suggest you bring it forward post haste. Were the applications sent to the NC directly, or via the club? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts