UCF2008

Maybe we should chase the lot of them then. Why stop with the coaching staff though when our captain Jig and POTY Lee Wallace are probably on the same sort of money as the manager? Can we afford them? How about the man who calculated we could afford this who took home 500k last season?

The way I see it Edinburgh already has two of the biggest clubs in Scotland and I can't see how losing one of them can be good for the game. I see your point that they might then be able to compete with Rangers and Celtic for the title, but who's to say that in twenty years time one or both of them won't be able to do that anyway The merger you suggest is like the 'objective' opinion of a neutral looking at Rangers and Celtic and saying 'They might just be able to compete properly at CL level if they put all that baggage behind them and formed one big club. Scotland can either have two wee clubs or one big club.'

I've just finished reading the related article on the BBC website and it's just about as unapologetic as you would expect from them and their twisted mindset.

'Ambitious' club or not I think, if true, it gives us an indication of what Nacho's salary expectations are.

Like I said Frankie, if contracts were honoured for staff who TUPE'd and taking this into account an excessive wage budget was calculated and provided for rebuilding the squad, then it's not Ally who's to blame. I believe that responsibility would land squarely at the feet of the four men who occupied the board room at the time and in particular the finance director who remains at the club.

Exactly. We don't know what Ally or any of the coaching staff or players are currently on. All we have is the word of a lying, shit stirring former (as in sacked) employee of the club to go by. What I would point out is that up until August last year we were still an SPL club. We don't know what was and wasn't negotiated in contracts once we were forced to start from the bottom. If contracts were kept as they were for staff who TUPE'd across and Ally was then handed a player budget which was completely overkill for the level we were playing, then I know who I blame and it's not Ally.

I think you're maybe being a little optimistic with the worst case scenario there Gribz. It looks as though they're going to have a hard enough time surviving till the start of the season nevermind speculating where they'll be come the end of it. Their process of finding a buyer is different from ours in that they don't have the same unknowns to deal with as we had. Their debt to the taxman is at least real and should be managable if a sale can be negotiated but the situation with UBIG and UKIO is complicated (not least because it's in the hands of foreign courts) and could equally help or hinder them.

I have to admit to having some sympathy for them. I understand what some folk are saying here and agree they've brought this on themselves. I don't hold a grudge against the fans though. They were whipped up into a frenzy by a carefully orchestrated media witch hunt and only reacted like all the other fans in Scottish football who were salivating at the thought of our demise. It was a mob mentality thing - Kill the monster!! I don't blame them for that. They only did what you'd expect them to. First and foremost I blame the governing bodies for delegating the decision on our future to the clubs when they knew full well that fan pressure would decide. Secondly, I blame the club chairmen not only for accepting but voting to be given that responsibility.

I think I read a quote from them the other day which stated that for the time being Hearts were more valuable to the UBIG creditors as a going concern. From that I'd guess the newco route would be their least preferred option. Selling the stadium and land would give them the biggest return, but time isn't on their side. It'll be interesting to see how KPMG approach this.

How do I know?. It's not like I've got all the answers From my own position the best I can offer is an opinion here on an internet forum. One view amongst thousands if you look at the bigger picture. Pretty insignificant really, but it will be my opinion. I don't pick sides.

We may well seem that way at times. That's perfectly understandable and also unfortunate. I think as a support we're generally a little too quick to pass judgement on people who become involved with our club whether it's in the boardroom, playing staff, coaching staff or in the media. If they have a public persona it doesn't take us fans long to form an opinion of them. That's always been the case and those opinions are more often than not divided. In recent times as you would expect considering what's happened these views have become a little more extreme than usual. This is great for discussion forums, football phone-ins and selling rags. Not so great for identifying and weeding out those who really are bad for the club though. Caution means nothing if we're prepared to give any old chancer the benefit of the doubt right up until he's outed as a liar or conman in the media.

I'd say it's probably a reasonable amount less than the going rate. You only need to look at the EBT's for Advocaat - £1.5m, Eck - £1.7m & PLG - £200k and then figure in that their basic was probably at least what Ally's on never mind bonuses.

One of the reasons I can think of is a reluctance from supervising adults to organise games for the kids these days. In this country at least I think it's become too much of a liability to take responsibility for large groups of youngsters. Even teachers are less involved in extra curricular activities these days.

Not the most unbiased of sources there, but the article's Green supporting author does make some valid points. The Rhebel will most likely put it down to a typo or blame the unreliability of the test, but the IQ blunder is hilarious. It seems quite obvious (to me at least) that this situation is pretty much like thenotsodailyCGpropegandablog article points out - Another mud slinging exercise from our board room. To be honest I've had enough of it. For me, the best solution to this problem would be to get shot of Stockbridge and Murray. Maybe then we could get back to hearing from the board only when they have something worthwhile to say.

I know it's ridiculous isn't it. You'd think we'd been subjected to the biggest witch hunt in Scottish football history the way some of us have been carrying on. Even our new CEO has caught the bug it seems when he talks about getting back at those who tried to harm the club. Madness. You and I both know we've only ourselves to blame. Everyone loves Rangers and to suggest anything else is simply paranoid

He's made some decent comments so far, but I'm surprised a man of his intelligence and background in business is playing it all out in the media like this. I'm also suspicious of the way the rhebel is giving him so much coverage when taking into account his relatively insignificant shareholding, both current and projected.

AFAIK there's nothing to stop us paying a fee to have a player made available on a free who we could then sign on a pre-contract. It would be a huge risk though as the pre-contract isn't worth the paper it's written on and the player would be free to sign for another club instead.

Considering the way the club treats the NARSA convention for self promotion I'd have thought it should be footing these bills. Not the fans or players. Give Jig a break. He's earned it.

It represents a major power shift in the game and while we're not part of it we'll be amongst 'the few'

I agree, but there would be no harm in listening to their proposal before deciding. This is something I would expect of the club, but it seems many on here including those I would consider the more reasonable minded among us have already made up their minds. I don't think there's any reason we should trust them. There is only the remote possibility that in this instance what's good for them is also good for Rangers. The club would need to be very careful in it's analysis of any offer to ensure they're not given an inch to shift the goalposts. Transparency would also be of utmost importance and the club would need to retain the right to communicate in full the details of these discussions with the support. I should add that as I've said previously on this I think those allies you mention should be well compensated in any fast tracking event - by the SPL. The local economies of the Div2 clubs could be compenstated by us over time by means of close season friendlies. As a reminder, the other two conditions I suggested were that we should given a clean slate. By this I mean a legally binding written guarantee of immunity from any historical club issues. The other condition was the reinstatement of our full membership and voting rights. The way I see it if these three principal conditions can be agreed upon then we can move forward with the discussions.

Would it not be better to focus on asking questions we don't already know the answers to though?

All very eloquently put but completely missing the point. Like you say initially before going off on more than one tangent, the discussion is whether we should accept being fast-tracked. Like I've said, there's no way we should unconditionally accept such an offer. As long as we can approach the subject with balance and fairness then I don't think we'd have any demands which could be considered unreasonable. I've said in other posts what I think those demands should be, but I only speak for myself and would never claim to speak for the club or support as a whole. If any offer is put to us, all I'm suggesting is that we should consider it. If there's room to negotiate then we should do so. In the end if the offer on the table is in our best interest then we should accept. Nothing more. It doesn't matter what motivates them to make the offer, it's what would motivate us to point blank refuse the mere notion of being fast tracked that concerns me.

Where did I say we owed them anything? Your opinion of a dignified stance on this differs from mine apparently. I don't see the dignity and honour of our great club best served by hate, spite, self-pity and self-harm. I'd prefer to think we're capable of rising above all that and make a valuable contribution to our sport now just as we have always done. Of course we should be thinking about number one first and foremost but the quicker we're back at the top the better it will be for us. What are we looking for here? Revenge? Bragging rights of how we worked our way up from the bottom? I don't expect us to be friendly towards the SPL any time soon, but we're going to have to work towards reconciliation at some point. I'm not saying we should bow to any of their demands. That should be a one-way street as far as I'm concerned. I'm not interested in gaining apologies or statements of guilt and remorse from them. I only want what's best for Rangers and if an amicable solution can be found to achieve that then I want to hear it.

It will largely depend on budget and luck in the transfer market. We'll definitely need to strengthen but not as much as many would suggest. How much weaker are we currently compared to our last SPL run-in? What players do we miss most? There's maybe only 4 or 5 who were a significantly higher quality of player than what we have atm. I don't expect it to take as long as 3-4 years. I don't see why not. If we aren't fast tracked then the only real difference I can see in recruitment terms a year from now will be our ability to pay a fee. Clark's a young player who knows his way to goal. Would we have signed him if we were in the SPL? Probably not, but that's got more to do with us not scouting the lower leagues than anything else. I'm not saying Clark's been brought in as a long term solution, but I'd like to think he'll be given a fair shot.

Fair point. That was then though. How hard would that pill be to swallow now?