amms
-
Posts
1,807 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by amms
-
Malky MacKay, in the name of fuck, this must be some sort of wind up. This is ex-Celtic player Malky MacKay or are their two gormless looking wankers getting sacked by far Eastern gambling tycoons? I'm sorry, I'll never be able to see him as anyone other than that dick falling on his arse as Laudrup runs away from him. I don't think I could handle an ex-Yahoo managing us. I'd rather give Ally a contract for life than have one of them managing us. Where's your pride men!!!
-
Can I point out for the record that Craig Houston isn't "guilty" of anything. There has been no trial, no evidence has been presented, no jury selected and no verdict delivered. Mr Easedale feels he has been libelled, that doesn't mean he has been, that's for others to decide, not him. It's also worth pointing out that libel is a very tricky thing to prosecute in Scotland, juries are rarely sympathetic to the more powerful party, that's just human nature. Go ask the News of The World and Tommy Sheridan. What's punitive here is the use of the threat of legal action. You'll get no legal aid help so it's the very high and very real costs of lawyers that's the first issue here. Being threatened in that way if you won't sign a gagging order is disgraceful, how anyone can attempt to justify that baffles me. Mr Easedale is a long time resident of the West of Scotland, he must have known what becoming a director of Rangers brings profile wise, it's a Faustian Pact and he's being very badly advised just now.
-
I've never understood why people think so highly of Davies, is record is fairly ordinary by any measurement. Another thing about Davies is he's got a thin skin, he fell out with just about all the media at Forest, if he struggles to with the media scrutiny there he's got no chance at Rangers.
-
Excellent D'Art. Loved your headline too.
-
Let me understand this. They claim to be frightened for their safety visiting Glasgow, so they want more tickets. Really? Is that so more of them can be frightened for their safety, so more fans can be put in danger by those big bad angry Rangers fans who might shout bad words at them. I mean if you are so frightened that you don't want to bring your children along then why do you want more tickets? I'm sure there's logic somewhere, but I'm fucked if I can find it. Of course maybe it's just more made up shite from a club that have specialised in made up shite in recent years.
-
Richard Wilson BBC - 5 Question on Rangers Future
amms replied to chilledbear's topic in Rangers Chat
Well a certain PR professional has gone now. Wilson always seemed balanced in his Herald work, albeit their sports editor isn't an obsessive Rangers hater. I'm hoping the recent recruitment of Wilson and English to BBC Scotland Sport is a sign that they want to improve their journalism and provide more cerebral and balanced work. It's not inconceivable that someone at the BBC has realised that disenfranchising the largest support in the country isn't in their remit. Time will tell. -
For the SFA to have made a public statement that demonstrates one of their member clubs is lying and rabble rousing is a huge step. The SFA must have exhausted every other avenue before deciding this course of action, it simply isn't in their interests to go to war with Dundee Utd. That alone tells you all you need to know about what a mess Thompson's words are. Thompson clearly isn't an idiot, which makes his stance and public utterances on this all the more sinister.
-
Well that sounds really far fetched, just where do they get the ideas for these programmes from.
-
Someone has to call for Stephen Thompson's resignation over this. He clearly knew what his club had been offered and then requested, he then publicly lied about it. He's their Chairman, he's supposed to lead by example. That's a disgrace.
-
I'm not sure what you expected him to achieve at that meeting. No one will be renewing their season ticket before the 120 day report anyway, if it's less than satisfactory then people have a decision to make, if it's a work of business genius then we're no worse off and people will renew with glee. In between times the board know some people are watching very carefully. Game on surely.
-
Hah! Brilliant, I laughed out loud at that.
-
I think his lawyers might be bigger than theirs somehow. I think this is about giving them just enough rope to hang themselves.
-
That's interesting, why do you read it that way? He's now got a month to sort out how to create the season ticket trust mechanism. If the big reveal from Wallace at the end of the 120 days proves to be a damp squib then the pressure is all back on the board. If Wallace reveals a search for new funding via a share offer then King is ideally placed to take that up. King is playing his hand very well here, he's not spent a penny yet, the club are running out of options and nothing can really change between now and mid-April anyway. Whatever the 120 day review brings it can't involve Ibrox or Murray Park being sold/leased which was always a possibility and it can't involve decimating the playing budget or else the whole 'competing with Celtic and in Europe' is also seen to be nonsense. Got to say I think King is playing this pretty well.
-
It's a very carefully worded statement and it took three days to compose. That in itself is telling.
-
The Meeting Between S Easdale and SOS at Full Time
amms replied to chilledbear's topic in Rangers Chat
I find dB perplexing on this. Germany has the strictest personal privacy laws in Europe and is at the forefront of preventing personal data being collected for any reason. You can have your own view on whether you think Mr Houston did libel Easedale, you can have your own view on whether Easedale should resort to law on this. What can't be defended is using private information for personal gain. It shows that Easedale either views the club as 'his' and can't distinguish between the two thinking it part of his personal fiefdom or else we've a Director so ignorant of basic law you have to question his suitability for the role. Either scenario is very concerning. -
Whilst this is good news and to be welcomed remember Media House and Jack Irvine were only ever hired hands. They were employed to do a job and despite what many people think they are very good at what they do. Never lose site of that fact, Irvine only ever did what he was asked too. As for why they've left it might be that their unpopularity made them an easy sacrificial lamb, it equally might be they've achieved whatever it was they were tasked with doing.
-
Good point about the under 21 role. Your original post got me thinking and so when I checked I was surprised how much time McCoist had spent away from Smith, that was the point I was trying to make. You're quite right that he's been with him more than any other individual and he must have had a big influence on him. In McCoist's autobiography, from memory, he cites John Brogan as having the biggest influence on his playing career. In total I reckon McCoist was managed by Alex Stuart and Alex Rennie at St Johnstone, Alan Durban at Sunderland, John Grieg, Jock Wallace, Graeme Souness, Walter Smith with us and Bobby Williamson at Kilmarnock. For Scotland he played under Andy Roxburgh and Craig Brown however I think it was Alex Ferguson, who was interim manager after the death of Jock Stein until after the 86 World Cup, who gave him his first cap. I imagine all of them had/have influenced McCoist in different ways but I agree that Smith will probably have been the biggest influence.
-
Actually that's not strictly true. McCoist played professional football for 21 years, starting in 1979 and retiring in 2001. Smith was his manager for seven of those years and was assistant to Souness for a further five years. The other 11 years McCoist had a variety of managers plus his managers at international level. He also worked with Smith at Scotland and again with us as an assistant manager. I agree Smith has probably been the most influential person in his professional life but it's inaccurate to overplay that. McCoist had been a professional for seven years before he encountered Smith as a coach, those early ones in particular must have been formative in many ways. One thing Smith was always able to manage at Rangers was a strong team spirit. We rarely lost without it looking like it hurt, I'm not sure you can say that about this current Rangers side.
-
From what I can see Ian Murray is doing a great job at Dumbarton, arguably a much better job than McInnes when comparing resources. I'd venture he's currently the outstanding young manager in the country.
-
You have to accept that a percentage of people aren't in a financial position to support this, that's the case whenever a scheme is launched. Those people can't be reached no matter what, you have to concentrate on those that can. I probably disagree that it needs backed by ex-players, I'm not sure they actually bring much to the party. In my opinion the best thing they can do is invest in a good PR company, they need to raise their profile and explain their scheme to the many disparate strands of our support. I'd be interested to know what success looks like for RF or Buy Rangers in terms of numbers.
-
The big difference between Gersave's launch and now is the state of the club. Then Rangers were an all conquering, star laden, trophy winning machine, many supporters were openly supportive of Murray and saw no reason for change. Things are different today, most supporters can see all is not well and change is needed. When the audience are more receptive to the message there's a much better chance of success.
-
Word. I went on Follow Follow for the first time since June 2012 tonight, that's one depressing thread. I can't get over how people talk to each other there. The vitriol over what seems to be fairly trivial stuff just baffles me.
-
More compromising than this? That seems pretty unequivocal to me. Look it's your business how you feel and how you express that, I'm just explaining how that comes across, but at the end of the day it's none of my business and I'm probably wiser staying out of it.
-
I don't think you've understood the point I was trying to make, perhaps I didn't make it very well. I've no issue with you disagreeing with BH, there's not a poster on this board who hasn't disagreed with him at some point, I've expressed a few unpopular views myself in the past that people have disagreed with, that comes with the territory. My point was regarding the language and tone you used to express that disagreement. His sentence annoyed you which is fair enough, I've no problem with that, but there is a way of seeking clarification or expressing your annoyance that shouldn't result in posts that read like Dickensian blood oaths. I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, I'm simply pointing out that it felt like a disproportionate response to the original statement. Highly emotive and personal statements which involve defiant public vows are unhelpful because your point, which might be valid, is then lost in a sea of recrimination, counter post and heightened tension. You might feel your point is important, you might even be correct, but everyone else looking on reads pages of posts where personal issues seem to be far more important than the ultimate aim of rescuing our club. My point is that is to the detriment of your stated aim, you won't attract people to you, you'll do the opposite.
-
You've made posts on Gersnet recently I've fully agreed with, they were insightful, honest and progressive in my opinion. But the line I've highlighted above saddens me. It's that kind of hyperbolic, emotive, angry posting that puts so many of us off getting involved with groups like the RST. Why would you think posting something like that on a public forum was a good idea? If any form of fan power is going to work it can't be personal, it can't and won't work if angry promises are uttered publicly the first time someone hears something they disagree with. Had you typed 'I'm unhappy with that implication BH, could you check that or indeed reconsider it?' you'd have achieved so much more at no cost to yourself. I'm still undecided about Rangers First, I like the concept, the timing is good and I'm in favour of their aims, I'm watching with interest. But if joining means I'll become embroiled in a public turf war where fellow Rangers supporters will be more obstructive than fans of other clubs then I'll think twice about it. It's what had kept me away from the RST and from Buy Rangers in the past and keeps me away today. You are clearly thoughtful where our club is concerned, so consider the power your words carry when posted publicly. Those ones did you a great disservice.