BrahimHemdani 1 Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Actually they will as a proportion of the monthly contribution will go towards a group shareholding. The proposal that RF members voted on envisaged the RST mandating or transferring its shareholding to RF which was to become the shareholding entity going forward and the monies raised by RST were to be applied for other purposes. I don't see that the Board of RF could determine that part of what is currently a monthly donation could be applied for other purposes let alone delegate that decision to the Interim Board of another body. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,367 Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) As much as a good name may be agreeable for branding/recognition purposes, it's more important to sort out the raison d'être and make this clear to all members - existing or potential. To an outsider there still appears to be conflict between the organisations - e.g. RF and the RST whilst I'm not convinced the Association, Assembly and Fans Board committees will stand by with a smile and a wave as their positions/groups become defunct. Are we really to believe that is the case? With that in mind what exactly is trying to be achieved here? Is it a genuine amalgamation of all existing groups into one cohesive unit or is it just another umbrella - i.e. a new Assembly/Fans Board whereby the original groups remain active and thus separate? I think the former is arguably the best strategy but some may feel we still need an independent fan group external to any club organised/controlled one. If it's the latter umbrella option then aren't you just wasting your time if we already have two similar groups which have struggled to capture the imagination of fans? To end on a positive note, I think most fans want some sort of unified body speaking as one - whether that's formally part of the club or independent of it. However, there's still some debate as to how best this will work and exactly how far this merger will go. I've not really seen this question answered properly yet. Finally, if it is to be one name to bind and rule us all, then I'd opt for the Rangers Supporters Association as a first choice as there's history there we could/should be looking to save. If a new name is considered more agreeable then the Rangers Supporters Union may be self-explanatory. Edited January 25, 2016 by Frankie 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) The OP should be specifying clear information. We're being asked to put forward suggestions for something we have been given absolutely no information about. Edited January 25, 2016 by Ser Barristan Selmy 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTP 0 Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 The People 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,092 Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 As much as a good name may be agreeable for branding/recognition purposes, it's more important to sort out the raison d'être and make this clear to all members - existing or potential. To an outsider there still appears to be conflict between the organisations - e.g. RF and the RST whilst I'm not convinced the Association, Assembly and Fans Board committees will stand by with a smile and a wave as their positions/groups become defunct. Are we really to believe that is the case? With that in mind what exactly is trying to be achieved here? Is it a genuine amalgamation of all existing groups into one cohesive unit or is it just another umbrella - i.e. a new Assembly/Fans Board whereby the original groups remain active and thus separate? I think the former is arguably the best strategy but some may feel we still need an independent fan group external to any club organised/controlled one. If it's the latter umbrella option then aren't you just wasting your time if we already have two similar groups which have struggled to capture the imagination of fans? To end on a positive note, I think most fans want some sort of unified body speaking as one - whether that's formally part of the club or independent of it. However, there's still some debate as to how best this will work and exactly how far this merger will go. I've not really seen this question answered properly yet. Finally, if it is to be one name to bind and rule us all, then I'd opt for the Rangers Supporters Association as a first choice as there's history there we could/should be looking to save. If a new name is considered more agreeable then the Rangers Supporters Union may be self-explanatory. For all intents and purposes the Rangers Fans Board is dead and has been for some considerable time. Whilst 2 Fans Board members are involved with discussions I believe that is nothing more than a courtesy. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,367 Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 For all intents and purposes the Rangers Fans Board is dead and has been for some considerable time. Whilst 2 Fans Board members are involved with discussions I believe that is nothing more than a courtesy. Appreciate the clarification. Would imagine the same can be said for the Assembly and I'm not sure how well the Association has being doing of late. I'm genuinely interested in how all this is being consolidated. It's definitely for the best IMO but I'm just sceptical (cynical?) at how some will react to it - both now and in the future. What about NARSA and ORSA? Are they expected to fold their hand too or are they a constituent member which could pull their support? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno55 0 Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 The F.T.P Association obviously standing for the "From The Pavement" association :devil: The R.T.I.D B.E.A.R - bears eager and ready Bears eager aye ready?... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,974 Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Appreciate the clarification. Would imagine the same can be said for the Assembly and I'm not sure how well the Association has being doing of late. I'm genuinely interested in how all this is being consolidated. It's definitely for the best IMO but I'm just sceptical (cynical?) at how some will react to it - both now and in the future. What about NARSA and ORSA? Are they expected to fold their hand too or are they a constituent member which could pull their support? When there are varying views and/or objectives there will always be disagreement. However the base broad interest is surely to enjoy and take part within a resurgent and successful football club. That being said you'd expect any differences of opinion to be of a nature that would be resolvable, that any individuals involved would appreciate the importance of the overall objective and be able to compromise accordingly. ps. One thing that IMO shouldn't be compromised is the independence of any resulting group from the club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 When there are varying views and/or objectives there will always be disagreement.However the base broad interest is surely to enjoy and take part within a resurgent and successful football club. That being said you'd expect any differences of opinion to be of a nature that would be resolvable, that any individuals involved would appreciate the importance of the overall objective and be able to compromise accordingly. ps. One thing that IMO shouldn't be compromised is the independence of any resulting group from the club. It takes for people to check their ego at the door and see that the major benefactor in all of this will be the Club. United under one umbrella with a common goal should see us far stringer both as a support and as a Club. Whilst I have my doubts about some being able to leave their ego behind for the greater good I certainly hope that I am proven wrong as it will only be for the best. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,367 Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 When there are varying views and/or objectives there will always be disagreement.However the base broad interest is surely to enjoy and take part within a resurgent and successful football club. That being said you'd expect any differences of opinion to be of a nature that would be resolvable, that any individuals involved would appreciate the importance of the overall objective and be able to compromise accordingly. ps. One thing that IMO shouldn't be compromised is the independence of any resulting group from the club. That's a sensible outlook but, unfortunately, we've struggled to compromise in the last ten years or so - be it club to fan, fan to club and fan to fan. That's why we have the ridiculous situation of so many groups. I don't envy those negotiating and it's going to be fascinating to see what arises - particularly after the fact and further down the line. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.