rbr

This is an incredibly erroneous complaint which lacks any insight and nursing it will only bring you grief. Advocaat's spending put us 70M into debt - we basically couldn't afford it so how can it be surprising that when player prices have gone up 3 fold, and our financial standing in Europe has tumbled due to lack of TV money, that we have a "declining" squad?

 

You could max out your credit card on a holiday of a lifetime and in the subsequent years your quality of holiday will decline while you pay back the money and vow never to go back into so much debt again.

 

We can NEVER constructively compare any squad with that of Advocaat's. To make any real comparison to now you have to compare squads of times when money was difficult. Grossly overspending will always cause subsequent decline and sometimes the death of a club, it is not something to aspire to repeat.

Calscot whilst I agree in principle with your view our net spending under Advocatt was under �£20 million , it was the ridiculous contracts that Murray was handing out , many times against medical opinion I may add , that got us into trouble

Sevilla aren't a big spending club either, they made it where they are today because they have excellent infrastructure, with I think near 100 scouts all over the world. Compare that to us. Sevilla sell a player and have one waiting in the reserves or youth team. I really wish 10 years ago our board did one thing right and spent money on long term things like coaching, scouting etc.

 

At the same time though, nothing should come as a shock to anyone. We've been pish for years. We might have been winning trophies domestically last season but our performances showed the quality we have. Being played off the park by Falkirk in last year's Scottish Cup Final was a clear indicator of our level.

Totti I totally agree and unfortunately this has always been the case , I can remember back to the NIAR team when we had a truly reat squad but in europe we were continually humiliated by the likes of AEK , Grasshoppers ,Strasbourg , Levski Sofia , Auxerre , christ the list goes on and on

, yet if we beat Celtc on the saturday everyhing was brilliant

The important position to be addressed is the managerial position and staff, without the right appointments more money will be wasted.

The important position is the owner , but I fully accept your point , after everything that has come out these last few weeks though I cannot bring myself to give Smith grief , if he had walked god only knows where we may have been , and I am not one of his biggest fans

Well thank god that is over , some times you just have to call a spade a spade or in this case a poor side , a ......... poor side , but what could have been .

The reality is that investment in players is a necessity irrespective of which team you support , obviously Real Madrid dont really need players as badly as us but to attempt to get result's with this squad is just a pipe dream in my opinion .

We have a very good keeper , a 40 year old center half, and another who will probably be sold in January, two back's that have proved they can do a job when playing to a certain style of play , the midfield has been awful , Thomson was rushed back not just for Europe but domestically as well , Davies grafts without too much end result , McCulloch is well McCulloch and Mendes posted missing though that's maybe unfair after he got injured .

Up front our only real goalscorer isn't trusted whilst we rely on a guy who can run all day with no end result , we have no wingers therefore no width , therefore no supply to the striker .

BUT can we do better , well if we had a striker who can hold the ball up to allow the midfield to join the attack then maybe , if we had a midfield that was mobile enough to allow the defence to move closer and therefore further up the park to squeeze the game , and if that defence had the belief that they had a midfield that wasn't going to get played through at every opposition attack then maybe .

But a hell of a lot of chaanges must be made , first thing is to win this league at all costs , the midfield must be addressed , with creativity and width a necessity and a system of play to allow us to actually attack other teams and put them on the back foot , christ it isn't rocket science if you let a team pass and move without getting tackled you are in trouble , no teams like being turned and playing facing their own goal , we have done it in the past and it works.

Hopefully things will improve , that's about all I can hope for and I will accept any type of footall right now from now till may if we win this league

Guys, you could BOTH be right.

 

As wabash says the article attributes Duffy as saying King contacted him a month prior.

 

As your friend says rbr, Duffy contacted King on the Friday and the papers were held up.

 

Can you not see that you could both be right in this regard ?

Yes except King told my friend he has never spoken to Duffy nor knew who he was before he contacted him , and my mate is in a position that he would need to know that info before anything goes to print , like I say they took a gamble on a story but now believe they were getting used , by whom they dont know .

I will know more next week

That is not what the article says, or is King quite happy to publish an untruth, if so, what credence does that give the rest of his article.

Listen mate I agree with you about the article in general , and definetly think Dffy if a walter mitty character , but I only post what I am told by friends if I believe them , do not believe me if you dont want to

Also King is only reporting what Duffy says , it isn't a court of law , and if you read through the rest of it there are plenty of contradictions

So what exactly is total bollox.

That Duffy was contacted by King

You will have to inform Darrell King that it is bollox, he wrote the article.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/spl/rangers/exclusive-graham-duffy-outlines-his-plans-for-a-supporter-led-takeover-of-rangers-football-club-1.989026

I know he wrote it , he also quotes Duffy's answers or would you prefer if he started changing his answers , also King is quite enjoying his moment of glory , they do enjoy a little bask do our journalist's or haven't you noticed

It's just that the hole we're in is a very big hole and all sorts of people are shovelling shit into it...... Murray, Lloyds, prospective buyers, fans organisations, the media almost en masse, certain political parties, catholic/republican activists who hate our existence ......... that's a lot of shit to wade through, so there's plenty of cause to feel depressed.

I think that is what is really getting me down , after all this time and debate , newspapers involved etc etc , we would have had some sort of concrete info about our situation but we still only cling onto speculation , even after yesterday nothing worth while came from it , ahhhh god bless red wine

I notice that Duffy claims King contacted him, not the other way round.

 

How many people have you spoken to regarding forming a consortium?

 

"I have been in discussions with a handful of individuals, some more than others, whose identities shall remain private. I wished for the discussions taking place and the individuals involved to be anonymous ââ?¬â?? including myself. When you contacted me a month ago, I stressed my desire to have the plan progressed further before going public. Unfortunately, someone who knows me personally breached a trust and gave my details to another member of the press, and I decided to go public last week."

That's total bolloks , I have it from a friend of over 20 years who is very very closely involved with this that it was the other way round , and that the call was recieved at 4pm on the friday , the whole os Saturday's Herald and Evening Times had to be redone to accomodate this and they didn't get to press till nearly 8pm , their normal time is just before 6 pm . if it had been the other way around ie King there would have been no rush .

The part about his friend is correct as I stated above .

fan ownership is all well and good as long as it is backed by a steady source of revenue , whether that is from TV , sponsorship or retail , unfortunately we have none of the later , again if I had been asked a few months ago I would and indeed have advocated fans owning the club but after reading and listening to more knowledgabe posters I can see this is a non starter , however there will be people still running with this for their own agenda , i a actually a bit depressed after yesterday as this process is going to take many many twists and turns

Things is though Frankie, a more astute and prepared individual would never have got himself in such a revealing spotlight. That he did and then seemed keen to engage is a game of "repel boarders" only diluted his credibility. No doubt he's a man of some ability in his own game but as athe man to resurrect Rangers he came up short in my opinion.

He was pushed into action because the NOTW were about to do a story on him , one of his " friends " had leaked the story , that's why he contacted Daryl King , also the papers involved now are of the opinion that they were in fact used , and aren't best pleased , but that's the gamble I suppose

I don't have an issue with it to be honest but in the case of kevinthomson8 what annoys me there is two-fold.

 

1. The "hit and run" nature of his posts and

2. The fact that every post about his rumours is a new thread.

 

Would much prefer that he tries to substantiate his rumours and would also much prefer he maintained them in the one thread.

 

It is like the transfer windows - often we see undoubted BS rumours but it can be fun to see them and then second-guess if we are the ones being stupid. I know in times gone by I would have doubted a rumour stating we were signing Laudrup or Gascoigne but the excitement of there being even a remote possibility of it happening made it worthwhile to see the rumour in print.

 

Times have changed obviously but I don't see the harm in it - some people will read it whilst those who find it boring could always just ignore it.

The other kind and these are the worst are the " spanner " types who come on just for the wind up , I think we may have another of his wee friends about just now as well.

The thing about them is they infest good debating threads and try and unrail them , however they are always easy to get though it usually takes a wee bit of time

Frankie,

 

I agree with a lot of that but I didn't think the Chairman's speech was a particularly confident one. He was hesitant many times, said the wrong word and had to correct himself. Martin Bain's was much slicker.

I dont particularily trust polished orators , Tony Blair anyone :)

It's more about what they say or rather dont say than the way it is put across , seriously you only need look back at Murray , he was great at AGM but shit at delivering on his promises

The Albion was widely believed to have been sold and leased-back IIRC, was it not?

 

I thought the Ibrox naming rights was a bit left-field so, yeah that seemed to put it to bed and be a crowd-pleaser. Having said that, no harm done and making a committment like that can't be criticised even if it wasn't necessarily a hot topic. Strange thing is, I reckon if we got a super-duper deal, most people would accept it and still call it Ibrox. Maybe they just realise it's not going to happen so no harm in saying it.

Exactly UCB , some of the biggest clubs in Europe are doing it but we are sticking our nose's up at a time when our management team and some of our ( and I say this reservedly) star players are either going out of contract or have no contract , it was pretty pityful from my point of view and I expected better from AJ

To be honest I still cannot believe we still get guys asking about the bloody albion car park and murray park , where do these people come from , I am not trying to come across all smart arsed but for god's sake , also the comment AJ made about Ibrox being not for sale naming wise , very clever and pandered to the crowd for I can never remember in the last few months this ever getting seriously or even stupidly proposed anywhere

Did they ever explain the method of counting the vots of the poll? Did they say if it was based on the nuber of shares or number of shareholders? I don't recall them explaining it.

The guy from computershare did mention quite a few times that proxy votes did count and then McLelland clicked and stated that even if the majority opposed the re-election the proxy vote ie Murray's would carry the day , he seemed to miss the point of opposing the motion and was way out of his depth , to be honest as they had met yesterday it was the one obvious thing they should have expected and planned for

If it had been handled better then the shambles that followed would have been avoided , I have no truck with John McLelland but his handling and the advice he was geting was bordering on farce at times and could have led to really ugly scenes as tempers were getting very frayed

Just to clarify, it was not a disciplinary committee and that word was not in the title.

sorry mate but I had many debates on FF with rst board members on this very question when it all transpired 18 months ago , this committee had the power to oversee and take disciplinary action as it saw fit , that was never denied , in fact it was acknowledged that it's primary role was to make sure the board members at the time did nothing that certain members didn't know about

Just turn up with your name address and shareholder reference number mate. A few of us will be meeting up beforehand if you want to join us

cheers Frankie just let me know when and where

We stated very clearly at the time why we resigned.

 

Since that time, as you know, I led a new project called STS and asked the Trust to get involved by email (a few of the resigned people also contributed). That tells you that I was more than prepared to leave the past in the past in order to achieve the aims I felt I still shared with the organisation.

 

I was ignored.

 

Since I resigned I've been referred to as 'spineless', 'stupid', 'jealous' and out to 'trash the trust' as part of a 'gang of 7' by senior RST Board members because I've done what any Rangers fan and interested RST observer/supporter would do and ask relevant questions and constructively criticise the organisation when necessary.

 

This has all happened while I've also helped the organisation behind the scenes with a few small issues and defended them strongly when they've been criticised unfairly across the community. I've also never been personal with anyone despite the strongest of provocations.

 

As such, I'll again let the casual neutral decide who wants to heal any rifts and who doesn't.

Frankie what they are doing is what all amangement now do , when asked questions they cannot answer they turn the tables and answer back with a question back making you out to be negative or any other decription you choose to make as long as it is anti them , my company actually send management on courses on how to do this , it's no wonder no one flies from Glasgow anymore oops

The fact is we are where we are and nothing will or can change the past , whilst I agree with maineflyer in that until we get a full expanation on why the current RST board took the decisions they did especially with regards " the special tasks and disciplinary committee " we will forever hold the current incumbents with suspicion , well I will anyway .

However nothing that anyone says on here will effect any change amongst the present RST board so best let sleeping dogs lie . More pertinant is how they conduct themselves in the present and the members such as UCB and oneamoruso help restore faith to a certain degree though I still do not fully understand where MD thinks he is going or if he expects to use the RST as a means to an end , only time will tell .

As much as I agree with your inital statement re truth and transparency I am afraid it will be smoke and mirrors , especially in the situation we find ourselves in at present . There is no way we will find anything of importance , in it's place we will get answer's hiding behind legal jargon to do with takeover panels etc .

Still i will attend . hopefully since I lost my attendance card with an open mind and forever hopeful , I just hope we dont get the socks or big screen questions

NO not a game the AGM

Say for example some dimwit happened to misplace their attendance card for tomorrows wee shin dig , how in the name of god would i sorry he get in .