Hildy
-
Posts
1,747 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by Hildy
-
Indulge me here, chaps. Let's just imagine that the good guys win the day. We are probably tight to be pessimistic because false dawns are commonplace, but let's just think about it for a second. The coaching staff have already been moved around and Ally is labouring away in his greenhouse - but he is still on the books. Would the new broom sweep in and pay him off, would it let him see out his contract to the very end, or would he be brought back to the club to be given a more active position? What price Ally being the new director of football - if the good guys win the day?
-
One thing about ourselves that we should all recognise: whether it is Paul Murray, Mark Dingwall or Chris Graham - when people speak out about Rangers matters publicly, they attract a level of hatred from within the support that crushes sound judgement. A hatred of them becomes greater than a love of the club.
-
A game of chess is being played out here and this looks like a clever move. If it is rejected, even more fans will stop going, anger will increase and hostility to the current board will reach a new level. I think it is a good thing the crowds have plummeted. The world can see what most of us already know - Rangers is not going to return to full health under this board. Defining change is not just desirable at Rangers - it is vital.
-
Rarely is there good news where Rangers is concerned, but this resembles something close to it. Of course Ashley will have to respond now, so bad news probably isn't too far away. Once he decides what is best for Sports Direct, we'll hear what happens next. Well done, SFA. We don't often get to say that.
-
'If not' isn't an option. Any new owner with genuine ambition would not have given the Rangers gig to someone who has never been a manager before. Any new owner wanting to see Rangers succeeding at a good level would be doing whatever it took to make sure Rangers were promoted this season, preferably in the automatic spot, but the job has been given to an underling, and when there is so much at stake, this is not the action of an ambitious new owner. This is an appointment that has taken less than five minutes to think up. If the club isn't going to demonstrate ambition, the fans can hardly be blamed for staying away. We're being laughed at by the rest of Scottish football. They cannot believe that the club is in the care of a regime so utterly clueless.
-
McDowall: "There's not a whole load I can change because everything Ally was doing was with my backing." Not even one game in, and he comes out with this. How utterly depressing.
-
Ashley wants us to be successful in Europe so much that he has allowed a complete novice to be appointed as manager at a time when automatic promotion can still be achieved. None of us would have appointed McDowall to the position because we are desperate for the club to be successful - a lot more than Ashley seems to be.
-
As soon as we had two FO models, the situation became needlessly complex. My enthusiasm for fan ownership remains unabated but even so, I chose not to sign up to RF. I prefer the football trust movement which seems to have been accepted and trusted across the football community, so that's where my money goes - to the RST's BuyRangers scheme. If fan ownership is eventually achieved, I'd like to see Rangers being member-owned - not shareholder-owned. I'd happily allow different tiers of membership, but one member - one vote would be the deal. Millionaires and modest-incomed people would have an equal say at election time. It would be useful if a model was created to demonstrate this. I would like to see the day when Rangers has no shareholders - just members with one vote each. Leaders? 'He doesn't speak for me!' Isn't that what we hear when a fan leader tries to put forward a point of view. Chris Graham and Mark Dingwall probably get more abuse from Rangers fans than from Celtic fans. Finding someone who fits the bill isn't easy when the Rangers support effectively sees itself as a proletariat that knows its place - on the outside looking in. Those who step forward are sometimes detested immediately for having the audacity to do so. 'He's no' a better fan than me'. Culturally, Rangers fans have been subjects and not citizens for too long and it's not going to be easy to change this, but we have to try.
-
If Dave King arrived, it would be an improvement on what we have now - no argument there - but it would not be a long term solution and after a period of time we could end up where we are now with the club in inappropriate hands. The sugar daddy desire is fairly widespread within the support but it is a recipe for disaster.There's no point in sugar coating this - it is the wrong way to proceed. If Dave King arrived, I'd hope that the RST would approach him about selling the club to the support over a period of years.
-
What percentage of the support is actually trying to make Rangers fan-owned? Whatever it is, it's not that big. In other words, despite all that has happened, there is no groundswell of support to make the one change that will stop the rot - for good. We are the battered wife who takes beating after beating without ever trying to get it stopped. Instead, our fans want another sugar daddy, which could mean dubious ownership for the next 142 years - if we last that long - and they talk about 'fighting' to save the club? When people are prepared to stand back and let the club fall into poisonous hands, they are not fighting for it. They are walking away from the responsibility of owning and protecting it. I suspect that some of those who have chucked it have done so because they have been sickened by our dysfunctionality, our eagerness to rally behind dubious incomers, our failure to identify and address our problems, and our knee-jerk antipathy towards anyone within the support who has the temerity to try and speak out. We lack leadership because we despise anyone who tries to speak out on our behalf, but we have a sizeable element who will bow down before every top table empty suit out of a fundamentally flawed sense of loyalty. The AGM yesterday was an abomination, a farce, an embarrassment and an utter disgrace. No wonder thousands have walked away. They have walked away from a club that has abandoned them.
-
The RST put the idea on the table over ten years ago but there was no need to chant 'Murray Out'. It would have been far better to sit with Murray and get him to buy into the idea. Ironically, when it was too late, Murray finally thought there was some merit in it. Almost every problem we have is to do with the ownership of Rangers, and yet there is almost no effort to address this. When things go wrong we insist on going on the march which highlights how impoverished we are when it comes to solving our problems. We protest but no-one is listening. It's far better to seek out constructive solutions but most would rather just take a chance and wait for a sugar daddy. That's why we are in this God-forsaken place.
-
My argument is that a club like Rangers can never be safe while it is available to be owned by a procession of random strangers. It could be lucky with ownership, or unlucky, and it is the latter which has come to pass. Even now, though, while people talk about fighting to save the club, they still want a sugar daddy to take that responsibility. We are not fighting to save the club at all. We are hoping that someone else will save it for us.
-
That's true, Rab. And aren't you one of the ones waiting on a sugar daddy?
-
To secure the club - forever - we have to own it. How many wanted fan ownership at Rangers? It was much easier to wish and hope for a sugar daddy - and we have paid a colossal price for our negligence. Buying a season ticket isn't an expression of fight and the march to Hampden was all that was left to do for a support that hadn't the foggiest idea how to address a situation that it never prepared for because it never saw it coming.
-
Rangers fans never fought for the club. They were happy to let it be owned by Mike Ashley or any random passer-by. They expected that new owners would always be good for the club and had to learn the hard way that it ain't necessarily so. To expect a support like that to 'fight' for a club they never wanted full responsibility for is quite unrealistic. The club lives on, which is important, but in the minds of a rather large and growing number, it is already dead. Perception, as they say, is everything.
-
Rangers fans never fought for the club. They were happy to let it be owned by Mike Ashley or any random passer-by. They expected that new owners would always be good for
-
The Rangers support is inclined to see everything in terms of bravado where loyalty is trumpeted, defeatism condemned and 'no surrender' lauded, but the world has changed. This is the language of caricature where everything is seen as a battle to fight and with military terms flying around as though they actually mean something. In the real and practical world, people make decisions more rationally and calmly, and rather than manning imaginary barricades, people look at the situation in the round and are guided by their best wisdom. That's why they will not actively support a club whose ownership is repugnant to them.
-
Nobody broke in. They bought the house. They can do what they like with the furniture.
-
Much of this boils down to self-respect. For some, Rangers will be backed no matter who is in charge. It's probably no exaggeration to say that they'd back the club if it was run by the Mafia. Loyalty is so strong that it becomes unquestioning and unhealthy. For others, a growing number, there is a realisation that the ownership of this club neither respects or values them. The club has changed so much that it gets to the stage where people feel that it is impossible to fully back it and retain self-respect. In society at large, Rangers is a toxic brand, but across its own fanbase now there is a realisation that the club has changed from being a focal and gethering point for a large number of Scots to being a vehicle for a soulless corporate giant that is widely known for using zero hours contracts. From a low point, the club has descended even further, and decent people are finding that Rangers has turned into something cheap and nasty, something they feel quite distant from. It is not only understandable that people are withdrawing support from it, it is right that they do so, and that's the saddest thing of all.
-
What does your ilk represent?
-
Quite some time ago in a discussion with friends, we were talking about Lee McCulloch and there was unanimous agreement that he'd end up on the coaching staff - jobs for the boys, we thought. We expected Ally to make the appointment, but it looks like he got there anyway. After today's news about the coaching staff, it's perhaps appropriate to use that well-worn phrase - rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic. Uninspiring, underwhelming and unimaginative.
-
Starting 'a new club' discussion from the AGM thread
Hildy replied to SteveC's topic in Rangers Chat
We already have division and it isn't going to end any time soon. Some continue to go while others have stopped altogether. -
Starting 'a new club' discussion from the AGM thread
Hildy replied to SteveC's topic in Rangers Chat
We have already lost a large number of fans and more will follow them. Give them a new project to buy into and some will sign up. It's either that or they will be lost for good if this nonsense continues. If a new club came along, those behind it would still be Rangers fans and they'll continue to support groups like the RST and its investment in Rangers because fan ownership is the only cure for this, but they'd actively back a new-born club before funding an established club whose integrity was severely in doubt. My priority is to see Rangers healthy again, but it may not happen in the foreseeable future. A new club, if nothing else, would send out a message, but it is extremely regrettable that it has come to this. -
Guys, a dreadful incident in Glasgow City Centre. Check news feeds.
-
Starting 'a new club' discussion from the AGM thread
Hildy replied to SteveC's topic in Rangers Chat
Nobody wants a saviour more than you, Rab, and this makes you typical of the Rangers support whose heads were turned long, long ago. I believe we should do things by ourselves. You want a David Murray or a Mike Ashley. Your head was turned before you had even heard of Dave King, but you are not alone.