Quite why David Leggat is consistently attacking Vanguard Bears is a mystery. Vanguard Bears have considered radio silence on his rants, but have decided that all smears, lies and false assertions about our site and our members will be challenged. Firstly, the headline:

"What promises were made to the neutrals?"

The answer to that is simple. None, and none were sought.

VB have consistently remained neutral for a simple reason – it allows us to be an objective voice that questions both "sides" in the boardroom battle. That is precisely where "we" are just now. The first phase, i.e. the questioning of the current board, is far from complete, and it is our feeling that some issues raised as a consequence of the meeting need to be clarified. This process of clarification has started.

In addition, we would also like to speak to the new board members to gain an understanding of their plans for the future.

We are also still pursuing the possibility of a Q&A with Paul Murray via a third party to which we received a request for questions to be vetted and sent in, advance, by email, our initial response was to conclude this was a refusal to engage, however we are now reviewing this position.

There are some issues within Mr Leggat's piece that we would like to clarify, and we will state now that the implied threats within his piece have been noted.

• The choice of venue for our meeting with Brian Stickbridge was a mutual one, at VBs suggestion. Our reasoning is fairly simple, we have nothing to hide and choosing a public place supports our approach to be out in the open. If we had wished a secret venue we would have chosen one
• We requested the meeting, as we wished to question Mr Stockbridge
• We have had no communication or dialogue with Jack Irvine whatsoever, and have stated this in a previous response to Mr Leggat
• We stated to Mr Stockbridge that we have issues with Jack Irvine being Rangers P.R. Spokesman
• There were no promises made of support to Mr Stockbridge. After all, we have a neutral position. If we "supported" any one side, we would have made that absolutely clear across our front page, and on our Social media pages
• There were no promises of rewards, nor any asked for. Our view on the AGM and how it pans out is simple – We hope that whoever "wins" will act in the best interests of Rangers football club, and in the interests of supporters. It's not rocket science, and there should be no conspiracy theory
• We have zero interest in VB being represented within the club.

When our questions to Stockbridge have been exhausted, and an assessment made, then we will "go public". To do so now, before we have satisfied ourselves that we can make an accurate assessment would be unprofessional.

If the Supporters Trust have been unsuccessful in securing (another) meeting (see below) with the current board, we'd suggest that less personal attacks, smears and name calling by senior members and bloggers supportive of the Murray/McColl camp might be a prudent approach.

We hope that the current board meet with other supporters groups, although we note the RST DID meet Brian Stockbridge and former CEO Craig Mather in October, perhaps Mr Leggat has forgotten that meeting?

Blogger Bill McMurdo was not present at the meeting with Vanguard Bears and club representatives; he was not invited, and is not a member of our site. For clarity, we should also state we have not had any dialogue with McMurdo either.

Rangers fans can be assured that as a genuinely objective body of supporters, Vanguard Bears have no agenda to "either side" of the boardroom battle, and can therefore be trusted by all Rangers supporters to simply seek and communicate the truth.