Jump to content


Trust Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Days Won


rb_506 last won the day on February 4

rb_506 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

539 Legendary

About rb_506

  • Rank
    Squad Player

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. This doesn't make sense to me. They had £300, they spent £300 on a season ticket, it has therefore been written off already - you can't spend it twice even though the first thing you spent it on was latterly devalued.
  2. I'm now of the opinion that it doesn't matter who the board sign as manager, they are going to be wrong. There seems to be two clear choices, Robinson and Wright, and the fans are split already on which one we should go with, if they are even interested in the job. The chance of us taking on someone who could emulate what Steve Clarke did is minimal, so at some point in the months to come we are going to have fans pointing fingers and accusing the board of signing the wrong man, whether he saves us or not. Then we are going to accuse them of not reacting to what the fans think, or the opposite
  3. I think skydog has a point. No harm in starting a new initiative now that the first one achieved its goals. No re-brand needed for anything, that is definitely a bad idea, but a new initiative could work, provided you could just carry over the people currently signed up to TIK. We had the Fifty for the future initiative previously did we not?
  4. I think you have fan ownership mixed up with fan operated. I too was concerned about this, and remembered that clown of a club down south voting for who was in the team as well, so I asked about it and had it explained. Owning the majority of the shares in the club does not entitle fans to pick and choose the manager, it doesn't even give anyone any financial benefits (you need 75% for that to kick in). What it does give you is the right to veto any constitutional decisions, as opposed to operational. Non one could sell Rugby Park without the fans say so. No one could put us into administratio
  5. I'm going to totally disagree with you here. I see what you are saying but they've been building the trust since 2003, nearly 18 years, and you seriously think they should rip it up and start again because some small minded fans can't see the big picture and do what's best for the club? Here's what would happen, and I know this from similar experiences - 1) The same people would step up to the plate and do all the work involved again. 2) The small minded fans would find someone else or some other reason not to engage and we'd be right back where we started. All sad but all
  6. rb_506


    You realise how stupid this makes you look? Fair enough, you don't like the manager and want him changed. Attacking the board about stuff you admit to know absolutely nothing about just makes it look childish and vindictive. These are the people keeping our club afloat. Trying (and failing) to rip into them at every juncture is not very clever. You haven't a clue about the terms and conditions of the deal, or the situation surrounding it (players hold the cards these days) and yet you call it "pathetic", maybe you should looker to home to see what pathetic means.
  7. They've managed to keep us afloat during a international pandemic with almost zero cash coming in and no fans allowed to go to games. I suspect that without financial input from Billy Bowie and Phylis McLeish at this point in time we'd be in administration or a hairsbreadth away from it. The club secretary appears to have got a couple of things wrong in terms of the new covid regulations, which were literally only made up a few months ago, and went with the government legislation instead of what the SPL has deemed necessary, and we jump in accusing those who run the club of being unfit to do s
  8. If not kicking someone when they are down would make you raging then I think you might want to go and see someone about your mental health. I always considered you to be one of the more sensible people on here and always read your posts, but your attitude to this is way over the top and makes it sound like you have issues. If you seriously think that the answer is to be "ruthless" among all the chaos that is happening then I hope your conscience is ready to take a battering. Quoting that rules are rules etc. when we need to fight this thing together, not use it to our advantage, is embarrassin
  9. Sorry but I can't agree with you there. You'd be happy for sporting integrity to go out of the window just to give us some sort of advantage? I don't know about integrity but its not in the spirit of the game, its a long season and anyone who goes down probably deserves to go down...what kind of example does it set if we are willing to stoop to the same level as Livingston are for the sake of a few points? It's like hitting a boxer when he's down, you can do it and get away with it but its what you'll always be remembered for despite what else you've ever achieved. There's a worldwide pandemic
  10. I wasn't implying anything about you, I was remarking on society in general. That said, it would appear now that those publishing the names of the member of staff were totally wrong, not that they'll care. Once a scumbag always a scumbag - again not aimed at you AtW.
  11. OTT? Probably better shutting down for a short time and sorting it out then getting shut down permanently? The government have just introduced laws to fine anyone a grand for falsely reporting covid cases, it might seem like nothing to you but if someone was plastering false information about yourself about the place the could affect your job and your family you'd probably be raising merry hell about it, and quite rightly too. The "I'm alright Jack" philosophy seems to be prevalent in today's society. Maybe its just my age but to me this is more about what damage it could do to the victims tha
  12. Wild speculation about income on every front here and no consideration to the huge costs involved in running the club, operational costs could be double or triple what we are bringing in but you've allowed for none of that. Yes we do need some hope but it has to be tempered with a sense of reality. We'll be lucky to come out the other end of this with a club but that doesn't seem enough for some fans. Now is the time for prudence and steadying the ship, not speculating with money we do not have and gambling on revenue that we may never see. My heart bleeds for you that you've had to pay for yo
  13. How do you know if an untested manager will be any good if you don't give him time? Its an absolute fallacy that past records earn managers time, it earns them kudos, if they have a string of crap results then the fans want them gone no matter their reputation. I give you Mourinho, fantastic record, Man Utd fans wanted him gone, Spurs fans want him gone. Squirrel guy made that point for me, SAF had an amazing record and a mediocre run of results had the Man Utd fans on his back, it was patience by their board that gave him the time to settle and prosper. My opinion is not changing, expect
  14. No, I'm saying that the fans wanted them out and the board acted on it. I agree they were dubious appointments in the first place, but the fact remains that fan power ultimately got them sacked, rightly (for the most part) or wrongly. Consistency is key and our lack of it has been seriously detrimental to our form. Changing the manager all the time is bad.
  15. You talk about my comparison and then you throw Klopp in the mix! Managing Liverpool is a bit different from managing Kilmarnock - that's pretty much at the heart of my point. We are expecting too much. I also maintain that 15 games is no time to gauge a manager, completely contrary to your point, those without a track record should potentially be given longer because they have nothing to live up to. I say again, name me one person with nous in the professional game that thinks 15 games is enough to judge anyone? Calling bulls**t on the "data and metrics" as well. No one in their right mid wou