Comment on The Case for a New SFA. by The Rangers nil? Who missed the penalty?.
I really enjoyed the Perth get-together last night. Thanks are due to Ryan for the idea, BP for the organisation, and all in attendance for their contributions.
Several things emerged from the meeting, not least of all being the sterling work being done by BP, Tris and the mods, and the number of plates that have to be kept spinning.
I was thoroughly impressed, though not in the least bit surprised, by the amount of knowledge and expertise in evidence in the room, and the overwhelming commitment to affecting the way in which the sport that we all love is administered, regulated and policed. And that was only 20 of us. BP told us that the site is currently registering between 10,000 and 12,000 daily page views (130.000 on Liquidation Day!!). The potential is huge. Let’s hope they don’t all turn up at the next meeting, though!
P.S. At the start of the meeting I asked folk not to give updates on the Celtic match as I was intending watching it “as live” this morning. BP suggested that knowing the score beforehand might give me the option of not watching it at all. Oh how I wish I had listened to the man.
You asked for feedback. Should I PM you or post here?
The Case for a New SFA.
Some thoughts for the next meeting (and I sincerely hope that there will be a next meeting).
One of the reasons Ryan gave for having the evening (and certainly one of the reasons I wanted to attend) was that it would enable posters to put names to faces. Last night, my only mechanism for finding out who people were was to approach complete strangers with the line “Hi. I’m Rangers nil? – who missed the penalty? Who are you?”, immediately upon arrival. While I’m quite comfortable with that, I suspect that some might have been less so.
The original programme of “an hour of discussion, anecdote, and Q&A, followed by a few hours of chat and socialising/sparring” was reversed for some reason (catering restrictions?) but the programme as planned, starting with a quick-fire “What’s your pseudonym” introduction round would have meant that the many excellent contributors from the floor would have been identifiable.
While the wearing of name(pseudonym) badges might not have been universally popular, and wouldn’t have helped identify contributors from the floor, they would have been very useful during the mingling session, during which the tea/coffee/sandwiches (forget the soup) were available.
Retaining the originally planned running order would also have meant that those participants who had to leave early (I would liked to have had a few moments with the insolvency lawyer) wouldn’t have missed any of the “business”, and would have been available for at least some of the “chat”.
In my previous life I organised and ran training courses, so I would be happy to lend my expertise (that’s a laugh!), when the next session comes around.
Didn’t read your reply fully before posting. Ignore all of the above, with the exception of the offer of help next time.
The Vice Closes
New RTC Blog up.
Launch of SFSA Fans’ Survey
HighlanderJuly 21, 2017 at 08:07
Absolutely superb, Highlander.
If that doesn’t illicit a response, nothing will.
I’ve never been a fan of the “multiple copy & paste” complaints procedure. In my opinion a single, well written, thoughtfully constructed and respectfully presented correspondence from a genuinely concerned and passionate “customer” is more likely to get a response than a barrage of identical complaints.
If the “head honcho” of every SPFL club which has suggested that there should be nothing done about the decade(s) of systematic cheating, or hasn’t commented at all about the issue, were to receive this email from one of their fans it might generate some boardroom discussion or, better still, move them to elicit their own fans’ opinions and issue a statement.
If one fan from each of the clubs represented on this forum contacted his/her club using Highlander’s email as a template and then posted on here that they had done so (to prevent other fans of the same club from duplicating, and thus reducing its effect) it might produce a very positive result.
Clubs may not know that their fans are angry, or why? Highlander’s email explains it – in spades.
Good Try Mr. McKenzie
Sergio BiscuitsJanuary 26, 2017 at 14:59
THE RANGERS NIL? WHOMISSEDTHEPENALTY? JJ didn’t have to do much research, the article in question was posted on here yesterday, from PMGB’s twitter.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
JJ is scathing in his critisism of SFM, Sergio, and often forgets to acknowledge his sources.
I was being sarcastic.
Good Try Mr. McKenzie
I note, with interest, that John James’ latest offering leans heavily on an article in the Guardian from 2012. He is to be commended on his research.
End of the Road for King?
SmugasJanuary 20, 2017 at 11:08
If this link doesn’t work let me know and I’ll try a different format: