amms

In the league table of people who have damaged our club Naismith isn't even in the top 50.

Yeah, this loyalty card we're playing with Naismith is hypocritical. We took him to our hearts because he's an exceptional player. We'd no option but to stick by him through his injuries. Had he come back a carthorse a large section of our support would have wanted him sold instantly. He's told us his view on our club, his view is informed by his experiences, I don't understand why we're not anxious to ask him why he's arrived at them instead of calling him all the cunts in the world for holding them.

I like to hear players speaking openly, even if I don't always like what I hear. He's one of the few players to have said anything in this whole debacle, I've no axe to grind with him for his viewpoint.

You've no idea what Naismith has fought for in this, have you?

He could have pandered, fed us more PR generated bullshit to appease the support, that's what it seems like you are saying. Instead he told us what he thinks and feels and he get's called an enemy of the club for it. We demand the truth, when we get it we complain it isn't our version of the truth.

That's a bizarre statement. You don't get to prescribe how other Rangers fans think, that's arrogant in the extreme. People will have differing views from you, they might be incorrect, but to describe them as 'enemies' is disgraceful. Get over yourself.

Okay, Steven Naismith is an enemy of Rangers, is that really what you are saying?

You and plenty others are already doing that. I guess they don't care what you think.

The news that some of our players have chosen to not have their contracts transferred over to the â??newcoâ?? Rangers hasn't come as much of a surprise to most of us. That 2 of the 4, Rhys McCabe and Steven Naismith, are self declared Rangers supporters has, not surprisingly, upset a lot of the support. However some of the vitriol aimed at Naismith in particular astonishes me. I look at this way. Naismith is a Rangers supporter, I know this for a fact. He's smarter than the average player, I'm not suggesting he's Einstein but he's not stupid. He also lives and socialises locally, he knows the support, he knows what we feel and think. He's been in touch with all of our senior players, manager and coaching staff on a regular basis. Taking all that into account he's made the decision to leave. It's clear he feels let down over the failure to achieve a CVA. Well, lots of us feel that way. With hindsight we can say it was always unlikely, but back in Feb and March that was our goal and the players did their bit to achieve it. Was Naismith lied by Duff &Phelps, did they know back then a CVA was impossible? It's also worth remembering he's 'in-the-loop', he's inside the gates, he knows how the various people involved in all this think, he knows what is really being said away from the PR generated spin we get fed. As, once again, sections in our support take up positions on our new owners, positions theyâ??ll defend to the death on messageboards at least, we find many in our support viewing all news through their current prescribed prism. That way you can see what you are looking for. Most importantly Naismithâ??s in touch with, and influenced by, our manager and coaches. He knows what they really think. His insight into what behind-closed-doors-deals are likely for the club and the reality of budgets going forward and playing level weâ??ll find ourselves at is far better than ours. He's the third local Rangers supporting player to leave after Wylde and McCabe, or at least announce they'll leave. He won't be the last. Are all local boys mercenary, only interested in filthy lucre, or simply better informed about the club than most of the support? Those saying he should have switched to 'newco' so we could get a transfer fee are being naive. There are clearly still doubts over 'newco Rangers' ability to pay salaries for a start. If he switches to 'newco' Green and his coterie of investors have a say in where Naismith goes. The infamous Paul Stretford being one who has been mentioned on numerous occasions. Weâ??ve still donâ??t know who a number of these people are. Those castigating Naismith's greed should also consider where any transfer fee for Naismith might end up. He's clearly concerned about that, why aren't we? Lastly, whatever might be said publicly, clearly our coaching staff has been unable to convince Naismith he has a future at Rangers, short or long term. The uncertainty over which league we'll play in clearly doesn't help, but equally the uncertainty over our coaching staff must also be a factor. Like the rest of us if all other things are even then you choose to work for people you like and respect. Naismith has chosen to leave. Naismith in particular has been criticised for inferring that â??Sevcoâ?? are not Rangers. Heâ??s not alone in thinking this. Emotion plays a huge part in football, indeed without it few of us would care about any of this. Naismith is not alone in thinking that a part of Rangers died when the CVA failed and a â??newcoâ?? was created. Rangers as an entity clearly didnâ??t die, but something did, something tangible, itâ??s unfair to castigate someone for feeling this way. Naismith will do well financially from this, very well. However to think that greed and disloyalty are the only factors here is naive. Our club remains a shambles, from top to bottom, that's what we should take from this, and that isnâ??t Steven Naismithâ??s fault.

I'm going to go out onto a limb here and guess it's because he thinks it? I've met others who think the same way.

Had I actually said any of that I would address it.

Some of the vitriol aimed at Naismith in particular astonishes me. I look at this way. Naismith is a Rangers supporter, I know this for a fact. I also know he's smarter than the average player, I'm not suggesting he's Einstein but he's not stupid. He also lives and socialises locally, he knows the support, he knows what we feel and think. He's been in touch with all of our senior players, manager and coaching staff on a regular basis. Taking all that into account he's made the decision to leave. It's clear he feels let down over the failure to achieve a CVA. Well, lots of us feel that way. With hindsight we can say it was always unlikely, but back in Feb and March that was our goal and the players did their bit to achieve it. Was Naismith lied to then by D&P, did they know then a CVA was impossible? It's also worth remembering he's 'in-the-loop', he's inside the gates, he knows how the various people involved in all this think, he knows what is really being said and thought away from the PR fed spin we get to see. Most importantly he's in touch with and influenced by our manager and coaches. He knows what they really think, his insight into what behind closed doors deals are likely for the club and the reality of budgets and playing level is far better than ours. He's the third local Rangers supporting player to leave after Wylde and McCabe, or at least announce they'll leave. He won't be the last. Are all local boys mercenary, or simply better informed? Those saying he should have switched to 'newco' so we could have got a transfer fee are being naive. There are clearly still doubts over 'newscos' ability to pay salaries for a start. If he switches to 'newco' Green and his coterie of investors have a say in where Naismith goes. The infamous Paul Stretford being one who has been mentioned on numerous occasions. Those castigating Naismith's greed should also consider where any transfer fee for Naismith might end up. He's clearly concerned about that, why aren't we? Lastly, whatever might be said publicly clearly our coaching staff have been unable to convince Naismith he has a future at Rangers, short or long term. The uncertainty over which league we'll play in clearly doesn't help, but more importantly the uncertainty over our coaching staff must also be a factor. Naismith will do well financially from this, very well. However to think that greed and disloyalty are the only factors here is naive. Our club remains a shambles, from top to bottom, that's what we should take from this.

They don't actually but I know why you think he is. We expect too much of the players, good luck to them, all the best in future.

Has anyone ever 'gone native' more than Novo? He's a Spaniard playing in Poland and replies like a born and bred Glaswegian. You've got to love him despite everything.

It's a concern, logic would tell you someone like McCabe might see it as a genuine opportunity if Davis, Edu, Aluko move, which is likely. Then again he's young and maybe badly advised. Alternatively he may well know something we don't. Whatever reason it's more bad, bad news.

Jeez, in a fight between Duff and Phelps and the BBC who are you supposed to back! Let's hope they both lose.

Well perhaps. He probably see's Falkirk as being one of the favourites for promotion in a league that doesn't include Rangers. And as a number of similar sized SPL clubs might be on the ropes shortly he probably fancies Falkirk's chances of staying in the SPL if they can win promotion this coming season. As ever his statement is self interest not for the better of football. I'm not sure he deserves much criticism for that mind.

Their Sauchiehall Street shop loses money too, if they could get out the lease they would, they have tried. It's not something Murray gets credit for but getting out of the High Street was actually a good move in my opinion.

I'm loving the optimism of that statement. I'd have thought we'd be pretty happy to hang onto the Umbro deal currently, with uncertainty surrounding us we're not exactly top of the corporate deal list currently I assume. As an aside, apart for the insidious St Pauli has any club managed to secure better kit deals whilst being out of their top league? How did Juventus and Fiorentina do when relegated?

He's asking them to prove they took legal advice about the potential conflict of interest. Assuming they did then it's not a big story. I'm not sure what'll happen if they didn't.

Could a club trade without a 'company' of some description? It would be a brave owner that took a club to the SPL without at least some sort of limited liability status,no? Off the top of my head only Stirling Albion don't operate as either a limited company or PLC company in professional football in Scotland.

I just can't see this vote, of all votes, being kept secret, no chance. I think a few might hedge their bets, or indeed actually be undecided up until the actual time. However if enough clubs come out and say 'no' publicly beforehand the pressure on the other clubs will grow, indeed if more than required state 'no' publicly there is little to be gained by the other clubs by voting 'yes' anyway. I just can't see enough clubs voting 'yes' to our application.

My concern here is what's been promised, if anything, that makes these people so confident on their futures. Or maybe they just don't care.

The Aberdeen vote perhaps explains the boardroom machinations this week. The financial guys have been removed and whatever we think about Willie Miller he is a football man, perhaps his views on punishment were at odds with others in the club. I really hope we make the decision before it is made for us.

That's an interesting take on it. I suppose it's predicated on the SFA being minded to do that anyway. I'm not sure they are, if they are though they have the power and ammunition they need already. Our 'doing the right thing' seems unlikely to be the final straw for them, particularly as it seems the strength of feeling for other SPL clubs seems to be favouring a 'no' vote currently. If Dundee Utd and Hearts get into bother next season (and how can't they?) I'm not sure the finger of blame can be pointed at us for long. If it is we can always say 'do what we did, come down here too'. If the SFA kick us out then the search for a new homes begins, I'm not sure that's a terrible option either to be honest, in some ways preferable even.