Club 1872 Director's Resignation

I'd say they need to hear the voice of the supporters. If they don't want to give fans representative a place on the board, then at least initially as goodwill to this idea, they need to somehow give us a forum/platform/say so they can be as transparent as they promised they would be.
That has been my preferred option since the beginning of RF and still is
 
I don't involve myself in these threads and will not after this post.

I neither doubt his suitibility nor his credibility.

My only point is the irony in the point you raised earlier. You are often scathing of Trust attempts to get on the board but all i'm pointing out is that no one from the Trust is wearing the club tie now. I'd expect more modesty in your opinions on Trust ambitions.
 
That has been my preferred option since the beginning of RF and still is
Personally we don't need a board place, let's crack on to 25%+1 then we'll call the important shots anyway, I'd like to see c1872 get on with recruitment,and forget pressure groups asking it to intervene in every debate,members and shares equals influence.
 
I don't involve myself in these threads and will not after this post.

I neither doubt his suitibility nor his credibility.

My only point is the irony in the point you raised earlier. You are often scathing of Trust attempts to get on the board but all i'm pointing out is that no one from the Trust is wearing the club tie now. I'd expect more modesty in your opinions on Trust ambitions.
I have no idea what you are talking about, you don't get involved but here I am reading your post,
Where have I said anything against the trust? Maybe there is a good reason ' no one from the trust is wearing a club tie now'
A very good reason for that, The trust has been or is getting wound up,is it not.So I would think the trust ambition now lie with Club 1872.
Me ? less modesty, Is it now a crime to air your opinion ? Are you a member of the SNP?
 
Personally we don't need a board place, let's crack on to 25%+1 then we'll call the important shots anyway, I'd like to see c1872 get on with recruitment,and forget pressure groups asking it to intervene in every debate,members and shares equals influence.
I think it is a vanity project, fans get turned off, IMO, with the constant statements, If you want to make them,do it when it has an effect.
The RST for years were basically a pressure group and I know they had a couple of as they seen it successes,but in reality, nothing changed.
It.s only my opinion but let'ss concentrate on moving towards getting as many shares as possible because nothing wins an argument better than power.
 
Last edited:
I have no idea what you are talking about, you don't get involved but here I am reading your post,
Where have I said anything against the trust? Maybe there is a good reason ' no one from the trust is wearing a club tie now'
A very good reason for that, The trust has been or is getting wound up,is it not.So I would think the trust ambition now lie with Club 1872.
Me ? less modesty, Is it now a crime to air your opinion ? Are you a member of the SNP?

I'm more concerned with your attempts to find out Bears addresses.

Anyway, your boy got the gig not just through merit (I hear he interviewed not too bad), but because of his involvement in weasling the board in to C1872 - as you already know.
 
I'm more concerned with your attempts to find out Bears addresses.

Anyway, your boy got the gig not just through merit (I hear he interviewed not too bad), but because of his involvement in weasling the board in to C1872 - as you already know.

Simple fact is I now work for Rangers as I was the candidate chosen from a rigourous interview process. If you have any concerns regarding my performance then that is your right to voice them - and i’d be happy to discuss with you if that would help to allieviate the misinformation you have been told - such as both claims in the post above.

Equally it’s standard that all involved with our club are subject to such misinformation and it was an expected consequence of me taking the role. It’s a frustration that people use my position to criticise my family or try and withdraw their right to an opinion.
 
I have cancelled my membership and monthly donation as a result of this lack of representation of fans wishes and cosying to the board.

I can understand why a lot of people have decided to do that, because it’s clear to even ferverant supporters of Club 1872 that it isn’t doing what we thought and hoped it would do.

However, I would implore everyone to maintain their membership. I genuinely believe every single Rangers fan should be a member of it. That we managed to get to a stage where we have a single fans group and a significant share holding is miraculous.

If Club 1872 isn’t doing what you want it to do, the only way to change that is to be a member and try to influence it. I am not happy at all how close it is to the board, but the way to change that is to vote out those people and to try and influence the group to be more direct in its dealings. It’s clear the pally act hasn’t gotten us where we want to be, so it’s time for a different tact.

All I can add is that cancelling your membership will get you nowhere. There isn’t going to be another serious group with as much power as we have with Club 1872. If we need to ride out dissatisfactions for a year then it’s a pill you need to swallow until you get the attempt to change it. Ultimately you are still contributing to the 25% +1 model and I can’t see how anyone could say that would be a bad thing. The politics, at times, need to be swept aside for the bigger picture.
 
I'm more concerned with your attempts to find out Bears addresses.

Anyway, your boy got the gig not just through merit (I hear he interviewed not too bad), but because of his involvement in weasling the board in to C1872 - as you already know.
You as thick of the rest on the other fans forum? and as usual hiding behind a key board.
I will explain my actions and you can get an adult to explain to you

I was brought up in an era that had decent standards where no one made fun of anyone with disabilities, especially a child.
These 'people ' mocked a young kid and I and I'm sure thousands of others with a Presbyterian upbringing was disgusted with their behaviour and not only putting it on a public platform but the admins of that forum leaving it up. I believe if these morons wanted to voice their opinion to the world, let them have the guts to put their own name to it and not let The Rangers Family be besmirched by them.
Now and I'm sure am adult will explain this nice and slow to you, what if these clowns worked with or came into contact with kids ? Your kids, would you be happy with that ?

RF members overwhelming voted for the merger, so away back to your forum that prides itself on everyone is allowed an opinon on anything unless his name is Marshall
 
Last edited:
I'm more concerned with your attempts to find out Bears addresses.

Anyway, your boy got the gig not just through merit (I hear he interviewed not too bad), but because of his involvement in weasling the board in to C1872 - as you already know.
Totally out of order.
 
RF members overwhelming voted for the merger, so away back to your forum that prides itself on everyone is allowed an opinon on anything unless his name is Marshall

I was one of those who voted against. Yes, it could be said there was an overwhelming majority that voted for it, but from memory I think only around 1600 or so out of over 10k members actually bothered to vote.

Had people actually bothered their arses then the result could have been remarkably different.

The apathy towards it was shocking to be honest.
 
Leave it out Bears.

Not a thread for personal sniping.

@bluestreak , I think C1872 SHOULD be involved in supporter initiatives most definitely.

That is why I joined.

The directorship don't get to pick and choose which projects they get behind or not (regardless of their personal preferences) it's the membership that decide that.

Two massively supported initiatives are Safe Standing and BROOMIE4BEARS.

The 1st has been balloted, the 2nd has not. They should survey their membership for the Broomie for Bears most definitely.

Then pressurise the Board to consider it.

Just my opinion.
 
I was one of those who voted against. Yes, it could be said there was an overwhelming majority that voted for it, but from memory I think only around 1600 or so out of over 10k members actually bothered to vote.

Had people actually bothered their arses then the result could have been remarkably different.

The apathy towards it was shocking to be honest.
I agree, something as important as that should have had a 75% of the members needed, to vote for change
 
Leave it out Bears.

Not a thread for personal sniping.

@bluestreak , I think C1872 SHOULD be involved in supporter initiatives most definitely.

That is why I joined.

The directorship don't get to pick and choose which projects they get behind or not (regardless of their personal preferences) it's the membership that decide that.

Two massively supported initiatives are Safe Standing and BROOMIE4BEARS.

The 1st has been balloted, the 2nd has not. They should survey their membership for the Broomie for Bears most definitely.

Then pressurise the Board to consider it.

Just my opinion.
The OMOV is enshrined in the rules but when we are asked about something, there should be an option, or it is a loaded question
 
Leave it out Bears.

Not a thread for personal sniping.

@bluestreak , I think C1872 SHOULD be involved in supporter initiatives most definitely.

That is why I joined.

The directorship don't get to pick and choose which projects they get behind or not (regardless of their personal preferences) it's the membership that decide that.

Two massively supported initiatives are Safe Standing and BROOMIE4BEARS.

The 1st has been balloted, the 2nd has not. They should survey their membership for the Broomie for Bears most definitely.

Then pressurise the Board to consider it.

Just my opinion.

Hi GG,

Regarding both being balloted - the latter initiative had a survey done online and it was indicated that I would be sent the results - this hasn’t been the case as yet.

Safe standing had a survey with over 2300 verified people suggesting they would like to move there with the majority being ST holders.
 
You as thick of the rest on the other fans forum? and as usual hiding behind a key board.
I will explain my actions and you can get your carer to explain to you

I was brought up in an era that had decent standards where no one made fun of anyone with disabilities, especially a child.
These 'people ' mocked a young kid and I and I'm sure thousands of others with a Presbyterian upbringing was disgusted with their behaviour and not only putting it on a public platform but the admins of that forum leaving it up. I believe if these morons wanted to voice their opinion to the world, let them have the guts to put their own name to it and not let The Rangers Family be besmirched by them.
Now and I'm sure your carer will explain this nice and slow to you, what if these clowns worked with or came into contact with kids ? Your kids, would you be happy with that ?

RF members overwhelming voted for the merger, so away back to your forum that prides itself on everyone is allowed an opinon on anything unless his name is Marshall
Your first paragraph nullifies the idea that you have decent standards.
Snide remarks like that do you no favours.
 
Yes @Greg Marshall mate aware of that. Part of @Papasmurf action plan was to have a mass leaflet drop to add weight to the numbers surveyed.

This was initially sanctioned by SR however lately he wasn't to supportive of it.

Papasmurf has patiently been waiting for the promised further discussion however this has as yet not happened, obviously there are distractions at the moment :) and he gets that.

Assuming you have followed the debate on line, then I susoect that you and I both know (and C1872) that regardless of the volume of Bears surveyed on the matter, that the proportion of supporters in favour of the action plan is pretty significant.

SR confirmed that the Board were considering putting out a marketing survey and it wasn't known whether that action plan would form part of it.

Hopefully it will - especially when you consider the strength of support that has already been shown to favour change.
 
Still no need for the snide remarks.Hard at times ,i know but you are no shrinking violet,that's for sure.:D
I would be quite happy to sit down and have a discussion with any Rangers fan, as you say, I am not a shrinking violet:rolleyes: but it is all the lies and nonsense I can't be bothered with.
It was once said of me by a person I have known all my adult life that
' if you don't know Robert, he is very easy to dislike, but when you actually get to know him, it's hard not to like him.'
I'll settle for that
 
Your first paragraph nullifies the idea that you have decent standards.
Snide remarks like that do you no favours.
You are right and I have amended my post, my apologies to anyone offended by the terms I used.
Would still be happy to sit down and talk to any Rangers fan
 
Yes @Greg Marshall mate aware of that. Part of @Papasmurf action plan was to have a mass leaflet drop to add weight to the numbers surveyed.

This was initially sanctioned by SR however lately he wasn't to supportive of it.

Papasmurf has patiently been waiting for the promised further discussion however this has as yet not happened, obviously there are distractions at the moment :) and he gets that.

Assuming you have followed the debate on line, then I susoect that you and I both know (and C1872) that regardless of the volume of Bears surveyed on the matter, that the proportion of supporters in favour of the action plan is pretty significant.

SR confirmed that the Board were considering putting out a marketing survey and it wasn't known whether that action plan would form part of it.

Hopefully it will - especially when you consider the strength of support that has already been shown to favour change.

Hi. GG,

I’m well aware of discussions between Stewart and PS. Leaflet drops would need to be approved at a pre-ops (today is the final one for a match at Ibrox this season) on the club footprint but outwith there is no issues.

To be fair GG, I’m sure PS can lay out the time line of emails to responses and I believe they had a conversation not long ago (possibly last home game). I myself have received little contact in regard to the movement from PS and as I stated I was informed I would be contacted with the results of the survey as I was keen to see the results. I praised PS when I met him for following the correct procedure after the initial confusion with having to pay for the results for the survey but we have to ensure that the correct procedure is followed through.

I think it’s vital that fans have a voice and use the routes available for discussion with the club - and there are many.

The important thing imo is to not do they club v the fans angle as in my experience it’s a fallacy. The both parties are inextricably linked and rely on each other - the club’s success is the supporters and that is what we are striving toward
 
I think it is a vanity project, fans get turned off, IMO, with the constant statements, If you want to make them,do it when it has an effect.
The RST for years were basically a pressure group and I know they had a couple of as they seen it successes,but in reality, nothing changed.
It.s only my opinion but let'ss concentrate on moving towards getting as many shares as possible because nothing wins an argument better than power.

Till the shares get diluted I guess.
I prefer the RST model as it's more about holding boards to account and not buying into everything they say.
 
And we wonder why each incarnation of a Rangers fans group goes tits up time and time again !! :D

They don't.

Despite the hysteria most punters don't know and don't care about who said what when - they regard comings and goings like they do when they hear of splits and arguments in churches, political parties, lodges, the Women's Guild, etc.
 
I'm more concerned with your attempts to find out Bears addresses.

Anyway, your boy got the gig not just through merit (I hear he interviewed not too bad), but because of his involvement in weasling the board in to C1872 - as you already know.
tenor.gif
 
They don't.

Despite the hysteria most punters don't know and don't care about who said what when - they regard comings and goings like they do when they hear of splits and arguments in churches, political parties, lodges, the Women's Guild, etc.
Possibly. But ask many punters why they've not signed up to Club1872 and it's not uncommon to hear things like "ach, no - these guys are always chopping and changing and there's always internal arguments and fall outs etc. I cannae be bothered wae that pish".

You can deny it if you want - and that could be part of the problem - but that is a common perception. And surely you can see why this is a significant part of the reason for low numbers in such a large fanbase ?
 
Leave it out Bears.

Not a thread for personal sniping.

@bluestreak , I think C1872 SHOULD be involved in supporter initiatives most definitely.

That is why I joined.

The directorship don't get to pick and choose which projects they get behind or not (regardless of their personal preferences) it's the membership that decide that.

Two massively supported initiatives are Safe Standing and BROOMIE4BEARS.

The 1st has been balloted, the 2nd has not. They should survey their membership for the Broomie for Bears most definitely.

Then pressurise the Board to consider it.

Just my opinion.
Fine GG but when we are a fully fledged fans group with 25%+1 this overrides all, I have horrible dreams that new investment will wipe out our %holding.
 
Possibly. But ask many punters why they've not signed up to Club1872 and it's not uncommon to hear things like "ach, no - these guys are always chopping and changing and there's always internal arguments and fall outs etc. I cannae be bothered wae that pish".

You can deny it if you want - and that could be part of the problem - but that is a common perception. And surely you can see why this is a significant part of the reason for low numbers in such a large fanbase ?

I don't think outside of a handful of forums it has much effect on the support in general or the membership of the organisation - or in the past organisations.

I actually think in the circumstances the numbers have held up well - people only join groups during moments of crisis - as soon as things calm down recruitment grinds to a halt.
 
Fine GG but when we are a fully fledged fans group with 25%+1 this overrides all, I have horrible dreams that new investment will wipe out our %holding.

Yes. That's what DK is expecting as well.

I'm sure the directors have battled hard on this issue.... just how do we increase membership when, as GS says.... we aren't under immediate threat?
 
I don't think outside of a handful of forums it has much effect on the support in general or the membership of the organisation - or in the past organisations.

I actually think in the circumstances the numbers have held up well - people only join groups during moments of crisis - as soon as things calm down recruitment grinds to a halt.
Fair points mate. All I can say from my point of view is that many people I speak with just have little interest in getting involved, mainly due to what is perceived as regular problems and issues which seem to have been around over a long period of time. I think faith in this kind of set up working effectively and reaching genuine objectives is relatively low.
 
@Robert Marshall I noted you mentioned the issue of a boardroom representative of the fans in your opinion being an amateur?

Surely the remit of a fans representative on the board is to ensure that all Rangers supporters are represented and issues raised are managed appropriately. The overall drive of the club at that level will come from the team of Directors etc. but it’s important to have a clear channel for ‘minuted’ transparency to the stakeholders (i.e. the fans) and to give the opportunity to influence the agenda for the benefit of the fans.

Their aim should be to promote the general feeling of what the fans want, need, the realisitic expectation and to feedback on the general mood offering suggestions and encouraging a culture of best practice and to support the board in improving the standards in tandem with what the fans want.

You don't necessarily need to be a profesisonal to do that, you need someone who is capable and willing to work with the SLO and others to meet, discuss, canvass and also weed out the nonsense before meeting with the board or and Exec group commissioned.

You could debate if it’s a C1872 member then they may have more of agenda for their members but what if it was just a capable fan whose only agenda is Rangers but without the degree?

@Greg Marshall without the full understanding of your role, is the above what you are involved with?
 
Football trusts and similar supporter representation groups still have a very long way to go in British football, particularly within the Rangers support.

What purpose do people want Club 1872 to serve? To be a militant organisation that shouts loudly? To be a representative organisation that has a voice at board level? The 2 aren't necessarily mutually exclusive but its a fine balancing act. Does it help the membership for Club 1872 to become board patsies? No. Does it help for them to become so disliked within the Rangers boardroom that the club stops talking to them? No.

Sometimes members of fans groups need to accept that you need to build a working relationship with the people who own and run the football club. Sometimes there's a need for commercial confidentiality. Its not ideal and in a perfect world there would be complete transparency and full disclosure from club to fans group to membership. In the real world that simply can't happen.

In my opinion Club 1872 exist to serve 2 roles - act as a vehicle for increasing fan ownership through collective share purchasing and act to represent the interests of the membership. The former is relatively straight forward. The latter relies on the membership having faith in it's elected office bearers and representatives and those people acting with integrity. Sometimes that falls short. Either the membership lose faith in the people elected to represent them or the office bearers become a little too cozy with the ownership group and senior management that they're trying to hold to account. If thats the case then the solution is clear - stand for office as an alternative and try to act in a way that you believe the previous reps didn't until such time as somebody loses faith in you and challenges your actions on behalf of the organisation.

The Rangers support has been distrusting of supporters representation for approaching 18 years now. The RST had it's critics. It had those within the organisation who wanted to go in a different direction. Unfortunately the membership didn't react in the correct way - proper debate and, if necessary, an election of new board members/reps to step up and take that work on. Fans sniped. Fans argued. Fans eventually ensured that the trust became marginalised as it was seen as a dysfunctional and unimportant group from those on the outside looking in. The same may well happen to Club 1872 and if it does then I'd place as big part of the blame on the membership of the organisation as on those running it.

These kind of groups only work with an engaged membership who are active. Club 1872 is only ever going to be as strong as it's membership. If members expect Club 1872 reps/board members to do all the work for them then it's doomed to fail. If the membership can't accept that a degree of confidentiality is needed in order to build the kind of constructive relationships that will see the group actually listened to within the club's senior management and ownership group then its on a one way trip to becoming a joke figure. Similarly if there is a creeping notion amongst some board members/reps that there's a chance to have a cozy relationship with the board at the expense of being an effective voice for the membership then its for the members to stand up and make their voices heard. In my entire time as a member of the RST I attended almost every AGM. The first meeting I went to was at a packed Partick borough hall. As time went on those meetings became smaller and smaller - first it was a packed Wee Rangers Club but as the years passed that became a busy WRC and then a half-empty WRC. Eventually it became a very quiet WRC with a handful of people from an organisation with a membership that at one point numbered in the thousands.

If fans want effective representation then it's time to buy into a proper fans group. If that's Club 1872 then so be it. The membership needs to become more active. It needs to hold it's board members and reps to account. Paying to be a member of Club 1872 does nothing unless you also give it your time and effort. The one thing that's guaranteed to end the group isn't the odd disagreement between board members, even if it leads to public spats and resignations like this. The one thing that will kill off meaningful supporter representation is apathy from the support at large and, in particular, the membership.

It's your group. They represent you. You need to make your voice heard.
Fair and balanced.
 
I don't know the timescale of informing companies house about change of directors status but the site still has the resigned director as 'active'.
 
Hi. GG,

I’m well aware of discussions between Stewart and PS. Leaflet drops would need to be approved at a pre-ops (today is the final one for a match at Ibrox this season) on the club footprint but outwith there is no issues.

To be fair GG, I’m sure PS can lay out the time line of emails to responses and I believe they had a conversation not long ago (possibly last home game). I myself have received little contact in regard to the movement from PS and as I stated I was informed I would be contacted with the results of the survey as I was keen to see the results. I praised PS when I met him for following the correct procedure after the initial confusion with having to pay for the results for the survey but we have to ensure that the correct procedure is followed through.

I think it’s vital that fans have a voice and use the routes available for discussion with the club - and there are many.

The important thing imo is to not do they club v the fans angle as in my experience it’s a fallacy. The both parties are inextricably linked and rely on each other - the club’s success is the supporters and that is what we are striving toward

Missed your response somehow Greg. Apologies.

Thanks for addressing my post and advice noted.

Edit: You'll be pleased to note that PS is not for turning. I'm sure you'll hear from him soon. The good thing (that this season has shown us) is that capacity changes can be implemented any time DURING the season.... ala hivs. :) :)

Keep up the good work Sir.
 
I would be quite happy to sit down and have a discussion with any Rangers fan, as you say, I am not a shrinking violet:rolleyes: but it is all the lies and nonsense I can't be bothered with.
It was once said of me by a person I have known all my adult life that
' if you don't know Robert, he is very easy to dislike, but when you actually get to know him, it's hard not to like him.'
I'll settle for that

I’d be happy to take you up on that offer. I’d also be delighted if your Son joined us as and got involved in that discussion as I tried numerous times to get him to do to no avail.
 
Fair points mate. All I can say from my point of view is that many people I speak with just have little interest in getting involved, mainly due to what is perceived as regular problems and issues which seem to have been around over a long period of time. I think faith in this kind of set up working effectively and reaching genuine objectives is relatively low.

Think this hits the nail on the head. Every time we have a chance of a coherent voice for fans it is spoiled by the same problems every time. Sad, could be really powerful instead weak and ineffective.
 
I've been studying this post and the comments as I am an original life member of Club 1872 and after doing a bit of research on the internet, I am of the opinion that with all the controversy surrounding the individuals concerned, Club 1872's going nowhere unless they get rid!

Only my opinion mind you.
 
I’m sure I’m like many others when I say the constant sniping and bitching of the Rangers support is boring and embarrassing. Most of us can’t be bothered with it and it’s why fan ownership is a pipe dream.

A guy I used to work with and socialised with is a VB and I’ve got to the stage with him that I don’t even engage when it comes to rangers. If someone says black he says white. I’m sure some of his points are valid although when he started ranting and raving towards Dave King because an email regarding season tickets was sent out just after Gerrard was appointed summed it up for me. Imagine trying to shift season books on the basis of a football legend coming to the club.

If people want to be part of C1872 let them, if they don’t no worries. Keep the bitching private. It’s embaressing.
 
I've been studying this post and the comments as I am an original life member of Club 1872 and after doing a bit of research on the internet, I am of the opinion that with all the controversy surrounding the individuals concerned, Club 1872's going nowhere unless they get rid!

Only my opinion mind you.

Oh really, and that's the first post you choose to start your FF posting career?

Sniff! Sniff!
 
Back
Top