youngsy Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Could a Rangers fan explain why the supporters didn't try to pool their resources and buy the old club's assets? It would have cost £25-40 pfim (per fan in Manchester ). Also are there any moves to attempt it in the future, since they all seem to agree the board / major shareholders are mainly chancers or incompetent? Just interested (lol) Quite simply because we have a very fractured support where different support organisations,RST and RSA, are, at various times, at odds with each other in which support group should have dominance over such schemes. Tbh there is a very serious mistrust by supporters of certain support groups office bearers. There is a scheme at the moment, "Buy Rangers", (please no sarcasm about bye, bye Rangers) which over a period of time the scheme hopes to be able to purchase enough shares to have a significant voice on the board. Although we have a large support getting support to back such a scheme 100% is proving extremely hard. Maybe part of the problem is the size of support, many of whom would struggle to see the inside of Ibrox in any season. What we need is a figurehead who has no real connection to any support group but is well respected in his/her financial and business acumen. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Without Rangers, the top league of Scotland will only ever be one by one club and often by a considerable margin. How long before that scenario totally destroys Scottish football? Ok, a two horse race may not be ideal and fears of Armageddon so far seem unfounded but you seriously can't believe Scottish football will flourish without a strong Rangers at the forefront. Except you're forgetting that very few people who aren't OF fans care who wins it? Celtic 10-in-a-row means little different to them than Celtic and Rangers winning 5 apiece. Most non-OF fans would prefer a weak Rangers... easier to finish 2nd, more chances to beat them and mock. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BossHogg Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Quite simply because we have a very fractured support where different support organisations,RST and RSA, are, at various times, at odds with each other in which support group should have dominance over such schemes. Tbh there is a very serious mistrust by supporters of certain support groups office bearers. There is a scheme at the moment, "Buy Rangers", (please no sarcasm about bye, bye Rangers) which over a period of time the scheme hopes to be able to purchase enough shares to have a significant voice on the board. Although we have a large support getting support to back such a scheme 100% is proving extremely hard. Maybe part of the problem is the size of support, many of whom would struggle to see the inside of Ibrox in any season. What we need is a figurehead who has no real connection to any support group but is well respected in his/her financial and business acumen. The problem with the Rangers support is that there are too many wankks who think they are important and speak for "real rangers men" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Don Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Except you're forgetting that very few people who aren't OF fans care who wins it? Celtic 10-in-a-row means little different to them than Celtic and Rangers winning 5 apiece. Most non-OF fans would prefer a weak Rangers... easier to finish 2nd, more chances to beat them and mock. Or both just to GTF. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 I know it's not happened yet, but has any club in Scotland went into Administration whilst in the 3rd teir of the game? Could The Rangers be about to set a new record? Clydebank were in tier 3 when they entered into admin - but after being relegated from tier 2 (not promoted from tier 4). Plus Clachnacuddin. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Don Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Just to avoid any confusion, I suggest the new newco - not to be mistaken for or conflated with old newco or oldco - be referred to as the Ra. You'll be having Celtic fans chanting ''Down with The Ra'' 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Don Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 The problem with the Rangers support is that there are too many wankks who think they are important and speak for "real rangers men" Hmmm. Which category do the likes of Paul Murray, Dave King, McColl & Kennedy (aye whit happened to him) fall into? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L. Brilliant Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Fair play for replying. I honestly think that, while true, is used as an excuse to do nothing. Other clubs' fans have managed to unite, despite differences, with successful results. At the real heart of this inaction is a deluded sense of entitlement that other fanbases aren't hindered by. Lol! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Don Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Without Rangers, the top league of Scotland will only ever be one by one club and often by a considerable margin. How long before that scenario totally destroys Scottish football? Ok, a two horse race may not be ideal and fears of Armageddon so far seem unfounded but you seriously can't believe Scottish football will flourish without a strong Rangers at the forefront. I think we should just leave it as it is for now. Perhaps Celtic will get their wee invite to go somewhere else or perhaps - in the absence of their other half - they will be forced to downsize just enough, to allow others to bridge that yawning gap and hey ho, who knows. What most certainly should not happen, is any more bending of (or just making up new ones) the rules, to allow that stinking blight on our nation's rep to continue as it has regardless. Let them take whatever the proper consequences should be this time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted January 17, 2014 Author Share Posted January 17, 2014 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunlop Don Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 (edited) you seriously can't believe Scottish football will flourish without a strong Rangers at the forefront. That is the myth endlessly peddled by the MSM and fellow orcs. It simply isn't true. This season's premier league has been one of the most enjoyable and competitive for years (including higher attendances btw). Scottish football would be far better off if Sevco never made it back to the top league. Edited January 17, 2014 by Dunlop Don 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour Skinner Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 You'll be having Celtic fans chanting ''Down with The Ra''Effectively killing 2 birds with one stone 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Fair play for replying. I honestly think that, while true, is used as an excuse to do nothing. Other clubs' fans have managed to unite, despite differences, with successful results. At the real heart of this inaction is a deluded sense of entitlement that other fanbases aren't hindered by. Lol! It's not used as an excuse to do nothing, I've already stated that we have a scheme implemented to buy as many shares as possible over a period of time. So where is the inaction?. We are doing something but if the current board don't want to sell no one, not the support or anyone else can change anything in this respect. As for stating "a deluded sense of entitlement", that is nonsense, there are many Rangers fans who know exactly where the club is at the moment and don't see any sense of entitlement in being at the top of the game in Scotland, we realise the club has a long road ahead. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Hmmm. Which category do the likes of Paul Murray, Dave King, McColl & Kennedy (aye whit happened to him) fall into? I think he was meaning supporters who are office bearers in the support groups. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scary Bear Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 It's not used as an excuse to do nothing, I've already stated that we have a scheme implemented to buy as many shares as possible over a period of time. So where is the inaction?. We are doing something but if the current board don't want to sell no one, not the support or anyone else can change anything in this respect. As for stating "a deluded sense of entitlement", that is nonsense, there are many Rangers fans who know exactly where the club is at the moment and don't see any sense of entitlement in being at the top of the game in Scotland, we realise the club has a long road ahead. Point being, the time to galvanise for action would have been when the shit hit the fan last time, probably before the admin, or at least when you went into admin last time around. Then when the crunch came and the club was being liquidated you could have done something about it, rather than relying on shifty 'businessmen'. Better late than never with the current scheme. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Don Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 I think he was meaning supporters who are office bearers in the support groups. No shit big man Still a valid question though 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nofixedability Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Don't mind a bit of banter but the personal insult from someone who doesn't know me, shows you up a bit. How would you feel if I told you my wee brother was a halfwit? he's not btw but you would feel bad wouldn't you? Halfwit = 50% too much credit imho. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 No shit big man Still a valid question though Dave King, Rangers man. Apache Don, frustrated Rangers man. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
effeffsee_the2nd Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 givin enough time celtics power and influence will dwindle. each year goes by they wont be able to atract the players for the scottish league, they wont get into the champions league every year and their crowds will tail off probably to the levels seen in the early 90s. so then what? if another team is to win the league ( which presumable will happen eventualy) they dont have to beat celtic all 4 games, they just need to be consistent enough to win most of their other games. the only thing holding them all back atm is that they (the other 11) cant keep a good team together for more than a season without selling. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Without Rangers, the top league of Scotland will only ever be one by one club and often by a considerable margin. How long before that scenario totally destroys Scottish football? Ok, a two horse race may not be ideal and fears of Armageddon so far seem unfounded but you seriously can't believe Scottish football will flourish without a strong Rangers at the forefront. Right enough, it makes a HUGE difference to us diddies who wins the two horse race. 0 Quote Link to comment 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.