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

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Can you answer Hildy's question. how many were defaulted into membership via season ticket purchase and how many paid to become members?

If you don't know the answer can you raise it at the next meeting?

 

I've already said I don't know the answer but I'm happy to ask the question.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

I think you need to realise that hardly anyone voted in this whole thing. A tiny fraction of the 23k, maybe, but I wouldn't get too high and mighty about a vote that hardly anyone really cared for or participated in.

 

Is this all about you, or Rangers fans best interests, BH ?? Genuine question.

 

The best way that I can answer that is by quoting from the statement I published here on 21 September.

 

I have followed Rangers for more than 50 years and watched them play in 21 countries in Europe; but I have never been more proud than being elected to this position. It is a truly humbling experience. I will do my level best to justify the confidence that has been placed in me. Whilst I have been elected in the “Fans who attend away games” category and certainly will represent their interests, I will play my part in presenting issues and concerns to the Club from the wider fanbase. I am determined to ensure that it is a valuable source of two-way communication between fans and the Club.

 

I have derived a great deal of pleasure and not a few heartaches from following Rangers throughout my life and I genuinely want to put something back for the benefit of fans and the Club I love.

 

I stood for election because I thought that I had the relevant knowledge and experience to do the job, knowing full well that I would get a lot of brickbats. I assume I was elected on the strength of my CV compared with the other candidates in my category. However, I must admit that I have been a bit overwhelmed by some of the criticism. Nonetheless I have tried to answer just about all the points that have been raised.

 

I'm not sure what else I can say or do.

[Stimpy 0]

BH, after reading this thread, the feedback across the online community and taking a lot of justified flack will you now propose to scrap the proposal that the club only speaks to TRFB? Surely you have realised that this is nonsense and will only further divide the support.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

I don't recall candidates being put forward to hold the board to account so I think it would be unfair if fans who tried to do just that were marginalised. I also think TRFB will have shot themselves in the foot if an agreement is made that fan groups should be ignored. If the board were to come out and say "from now on we will only be repying to queries put forward by TRFB" then fair enough but I'd be a little peeved if I was told "from now on we will only be replying to queries put forward by TRFB because the TRFB voted on it and it was their decision."

 

Your basic premise is correct:

 

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 (abbreviated for list)

 

(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.

 

Nothing that I have said about the directors future communication policy takes anything away from that at all; and furthermore it is a decision for the directors not the RFB.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

BH, after reading this thread, the feedback across the online community and taking a lot of justified flack will you now propose to scrap the proposal that the club only speaks to TRFB? Surely you have realised that this is nonsense and will only further divide the support.

 

If you have read through the thread you will know that I have never made any such suggestion.

[Stimpy 0]

If you have read through the thread you will know that I have never made any such suggestion.

 

You've stated that the RFB will discuss the proposal further.

 

So, I'm not asking who proposed it, I'm asking will you stand against it and propose to drop the idea?

[buster. 5,267]

BH, you seem to have missed these questions (below).

If you simply don't want to answer them, then that's fine.

 

Originally Posted by Frankie

So you agree that some groups/people shouldn't be meeting with the club but won't be saying which ones?

 

Why?

 

Originally Posted by BrahimHemdani

Because I do not know the mechanics of every group or indeed any group of which I am not a member and am not prepared to go on hearsay.

 

I have stated that I support the principal I am not going any further than that.

 

Are you the man to force the issue of Transparency at Ibrox ?

 

Do you consider moves to marginalise groups looking for such would be a good first step ?

 

If you don't know the mechanics of the groups how could you be part of a move to force them anywhere ?

[Tannochsidebear 2,429]

BH, after reading this thread, the feedback across the online community and taking a lot of justified flack will you now propose to scrap the proposal that the club only speaks to TRFB? Surely you have realised that this is nonsense and will only further divide the support.

 

I agree with that, and would enhance it further by saying that, at the earliest possible opportunity, the RFB arranges meetings with the main fans groups like the RST and Association, to discuss mutually relevant topics for debate with the club, and seek a way of working together when the need arises, while being completely independant of each other and free to continue to do their own body of work for their members.

 

The RFB should be mindful that both the RST and Association's members have actually went out of their way to be members of those organisations, which are both fully democratic with regular meetings and elections, not co-opted into membership by purchase of a ST. If there has even been 200 people who bought the £25 package to enable them to vote in this I will be absolutely stunned, which means the RFB is actually the least democratically elected board of the three.

[Stimpy 0]

I agree with that, and would enhance it further by saying that, at the earliest possible opportunity, the RFB arranges meetings with the main fans groups like the RST and Association, to discuss mutually relevant topics for debate with the club, and seek a way of working together when the need arises, while being completely independant of each other and free to continue to do their own body of work for their members.

 

The RFB should be mindful that both the RST and Association's members have actually went out of their way to be members of those organisations, which are both fully democratic with regular meetings and elections, not co-opted into membership by purchase of a ST. If there has even been 200 people who bought the £25 package to enable them to vote in this I will be absolutely stunned, which means the RFB is actually the least democratically elected board of the three.

 

This could the most important post in this thread. Great advice and will help bridge gaps.

[Rangersitis 0]

You've stated that the RFB will discuss the proposal further.

 

So, I'm not asking who proposed it, I'm asking will you stand against it and propose to drop the idea?

 

He has already stated that he agrees with the proposal. To now turn back on that, in the face of criticism on Gersnet, would only succeed in him alienating the wee ragers over on RM. Mr Harris has made his bed on this particular issue.