RANGERRAB

Not for me. If we've learned one thing these last three years it is that recruiting players from Scottish clubs is risky because the standard of Scottish football is poor & can make mediocre players look a lot better than they really are. Anyway I don't see how we can be looking at players when we don't even know who our manager will be next season

What was unacceptable was how long it took to remove Boyd from the starting XI. Yet he is still coming on as a sub like happened on Thursday.He should not be in the first team squad IMO.Miller too. What sort of message does that send out to the likes of young Hardie & Gallagher other than that they've no chance of getting a game. If I were them I'd be thinking of getting out to go somewhere else.

I think we'd have to show a bit more ambition than that with all due respect

Had McCall not played for Rangers would he have been considered for interim manager ? I realise the incoming board had to act quickly to remove KMcD but McCall should not get beyond this season IMO. I simply do not see what he has got to offer judging by his past management record

After Sunday regardless of what happens it is the Manager's position which needs to be sorted out first of all. The board simply cannot get this appointment wrong. FWIW I'm not in favour of Stuart McCall being retained. I do not believe he is what we should be looking for. Dont forget too that pre-season training for next season can only be about four weeks away. I'd expect that a new manager will be in place by then.

We need a complete new squad of better calibre players and a new manager with a sound tactical knowledge of the modern game and who, preferably, has numerous contacts in the game to recruit these better players.

Sitting on the bench or in the stand earning tens of thousands p.w. ? Can't see the board being too keen on that idea

Seriously, you would keep most of the players we've got ?

Did you not think that when Vuckic,Ferguson and Walsh were on the park the game was a whole lot different? We had players who could create & wanted to take opponents on. But up front we are simply not at the races if Boyd and Miller play.They are both well past their best and everyone can see it

Agree but unfortunately he has shown by his tactics and team selection he is not for us. That awful 4-4-2 he keeps going back to is driving me insane.

Maybe now someone will investigate how Rhegan got his job ?? I mean working with Liewell at Coors and John Reid's son working at the selection firm Nolan Partners had absolutely nothing to do with it didn't it?

When the 10 clubs voted Rangers out the SPL in 2012 a direct consequence of that decision was that they all had to cut their budgets. Now Motherwell could be about to pay the price for that. St Mirren & hibz already have

What's his best position then ? I don't see hibz often but when they've played against us I've seen Allan play left MF and I don't think he's a naturally left-sided MF player although I stand to be corrected on this. Ok so he's SPFL Championship POTY but so what? Not exactly an achievement is it? I also don't think he has a great return of goals either. I wouldn't like to see us pay any money for a player who in reality isn't really any better than anything we've already got. And give him a three or four year contract then discover he's not as good as we'd hoped halfway thro' it. And who's to say young Walsh or someone else won't be a better player than him in a year or two?

Can you tell us more then ? Who could we sign from Twente? IMO for starters we need a RB, a left sided MF player and pace up front.

We need to look outside of Scotland for any signings from other clubs from now on. The standard of player we require simply isn't available in Scotland and I include Scott Allan in that

They've not been open & transparent though have they? Recall Llambias statement at the airport: 1) no NOMAD 2) No funds. He's not got 1) wrong so far has he? as for 2) we've still to find out.

And I'm getting concerned at what has ( & hasn't happened) in the couple of months since

I'm not defending the previous board. They had to go but I'm starting to ask questions of the new board. FWIW I do believe there's a better chance of openness & transparency as a PLC regardless of the old board

Really ? So why weren't they appointed then ? Had the old board behaved like this they'd have been slaughtered. But this standard seems acceptable to some who will accept anything as long as there's 'rangers men' in the boardroom.

Forced what issue ? De-listing ? You're missing my point - They said they'd a NOMAD lined up. They clearly didn't

So you think it was perfectly acceptable what they did? FWIW I believe we'd have a better chance of getting the promised openness & transparency as a listed PLC rather than one that isn't.

Didn't they say they'd one lined up following the EGM ? And I do not recall de-listing being mentioned pre-EGM either

You don't think these are relevant questions which need answered ? As a shareholder I want them answered. I was under the impression a NOMAD was in place after the EGM.

He has one year left on his contract so, in theory, we could get him for nothing by signing a pre-contract in january.

Perhaps. But for every Telfer there will be dozens who don't make it.