buster.
-
Posts
14,226 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
111
Everything posted by buster.
-
-
Croatia did ok, little more. They didn't have the quality up front to take full advantage of their 'moments'. Their 'moments' were restricted and this against a poorish Brazil who didn't get into 4th gear. If Mexico are any good they'll finish in front of the Croats.
-
Have to go and feed the horses some caviar.
-
I think the Brazilian people have every right to protest and personally would like to see them be successful. ie. peacefully protest and disrupt the WC enough to bring more attention to their plight and embarrass their government into action. Also putting further momentum in worldwide anti-FIFA feeling that leads to real change. The corporate and corrupt are getting out of control and a major worldwide event is just the place to remind them that it's not going to be as easy as they thought.
-
Here it is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVEX9S9D8qc If that's a penalty my name is Charles Green and if that really looked like a penalty to the ref then his name is Mr Magoo.
-
GW: If you want me to go along with what others who have a tendancy to bullshit say, you'll have to pay me 600K+ salary. DS: Couldn't do that, wouldn't go down well but we could perhaps do something that has precedent at Ibrox. GW: What's that ? DS: Pay you half of that in salary then the other half via a bonus that we can design to be assured. GW: Sounds good, I'll bring up my 'empty corporatespeak dictionary'.
-
"penalty apart" That was enough to swing the game at a moment when Brazil didn't look like scoring. In this position a ref. can't blatantly whistle for 90 minutes for one team and when for Brazil he'll probably not need to at all in the majority of occasions if the team play well. But if 'bent' / 'influenced', blowing for a non-existant penalty in the last quarter when it's 1-1 is pretty much what you'd expect. You might aswell say that 'X' wasn't hurt apart from the bullet that went between his eyes
-
At Rangers they give their CEO a 100% bonus for his time if it sees both the share price and ST numbers cut in half.
-
Probability is that Brazil will play Spain or Holland in the next round. I can't see the hosts being allowed to go out at that stage. Not any old hosts, we're talking Brazil in a country that is simmering with rage and if the host nation goes out early then you'd probably find protest numbers grow by a large percentage.
-
People take their own economic decisions and make their choices. However and IMO, funding the executive board is like giving tacit approval to a process that will have Rangers join the list of Coventry, Leeds, Portsmouth.... The alternative isn't clear or painless but we'd at least have a chance to build a solid and honest base, allbeit we might need to take a step or two backwards first.
-
Even South Korea (host nation) made the sem-finals in 2002 and their best player was the man in black. This WC gives off similar vibes.
-
Be careful with Brazil,........they do have a very influential player who dresses in black.
-
They may plan to get to the autumn and look to raise equity as per business review but:- - would need 75% vote at an EGM. - would be using monies raised for working capital in good part. - would be a very difficult sell
-
Seem to be saying no need for the widely reported share issue of 43.4M shares to existing shareholders. Also saying that further cutbacks on the business review proposals to be implemented. What other plans will they have to make up what is a significant shortfall ? Auchenhowie ? What this may point to is sp.ivs not wanting to buy more shares but perhaps using the family silver instead.
-
Summer transfer window: Official ins/outs and transfer rumours
buster. replied to Zappa's topic in Rangers Chat
As for wages, I think that at this point, the overal numbers for ins and outs will be fairly even. -
I agree regards getting the message over, allbeit there were limitations on how direct it could be. There are other contributory reasons, both through mistakes and ongoing strategy from the 'other side'. It's been hungry corporate sharks with executive power and professional spin against a relatively amateur & disorganised effort. However, you play the ball from it lies and look forward. I currently see the support needing to hold the executive board to account for a variety of reasons.........and a board who misleads, lies and ignores them and depends on breaking the resolve of the large 'middle rump' who didn't renew.
-
I partly understand that but think that the matter at hand concerns current the executive board and the support. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- One thing I'd mention regards your post is that past efforts by those you mention have come up short for a variety of reasons. Included within them is a lack of support from the fans. Their strategies have often depended on the fans coming together to help force the issue. If the fans continue to fund on the ongoing situation they will reap what they sow. They have been doing so for years and we see what the harvests look like today. Now the fans could say that this wasn't made black and white, mixed messages, that communications were greyish at times and they'd be right but there comes a time when thinking people should get a idea of what is going-on. The problem now is that we're in so deep we're looking at relative misery at best. It'd be fair to say that we've failed pretty much at all levels and that there is no-one willing to dig 'extremely deep' to have the sp.ivs leave the building in the straightforward manner. Now you have a business/club that will divvy up money between the football club and 'others'.....and one that will lose it's training ground and eventually stadium along the way. One (TRFC), that will fade away if it continues in the same vien.
-
Aswell as the control over purse strings you talk about........ If the executive board manage to establish more 'control' and with it have enough supporting to pass the 75% mark then they can look to an EGM and then an equity fund-raising issue that would include giving the sp.ivs an opportunity to award themselves cut-price shares and push down the overal average paid between the current proposal and a post EGM (successful).
-
Taking King out of it for a moment, the UoF independently seek real engagement, answers and transparency from the executive board. It would seem something that is in the interests of the support in general and is the actual tangible matter in which the support can actually play a part. There is much more of an urgent and timely onus on the actual executive board to be transparent rather than someone who may or may not play a part in the future.
-
Martin Williams of The Herald and Bill McMurdo are examples of the above. Levels of corporate governance at Ibrox are in the gutter apart of course when it comes to not saying anything to the fans. Mr.Wallace brings us plastic intiatives regards communication & engagement whilst refusing to engage on anything meaningful. Mr.Wallace tells us everything is fine when there is a disconect with a large number of the support (revenue stream) and frantic meetings are held to try and agree on a stance that will present a stable image. Mr.Easdale, a convicted fraudster that some say is like a 'shadow director' of RIFC, tells us things are 'fragile', watches the share price tumble and buys a large block of shares before it recovers. (Note that the co-incidental doorstep interview used one of Irvines BBC conduits, Lamont who happened to have a cameraman with him) Mr.Toxic buzzes around like a fly around shite. A look at his client list of the past reveals a rogues gallery who prey on the vulnerable (an MO that Merlin (in his guise as preacher) isn't a stranger to). Restricting it to Rangers you have the remits coming from SDM, CW, CG&Co, Easdale&Co. Now you have the club/Easdale misleading the support about Irvine. When Irvine is involved, you can be sure no good will come to the club, as per his long involvement has helped facilitate the chain of events that have brought us to where we are today.
-
From the The Daily Mail, 20/8/2013........ "In a statement, Jack Irvine - spokesman for The Easdale family - said: 'Charles Green has given first refusal of his shares to Sandy Easdale as he promised. Sandy may take all or some of the shareholding depending on the strategic requirements of other potential investors.'" Full article at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2397944/Charles-Green-stand-Rangers-role-sell-shares.html
-
The board has it's priorities. 'Spin before you Scout'
-
Merlin Launches New Rangers Supporters Club - Loyal And True
buster. replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
Confuse, Divide and Control to order. This stems from those in and around the board. -
Wishing for objective and quality reporting from the redtops is futile and anyone doing so should know they are wasting their time. Is it not a greater shame and importance that we can't believe a word that comes out of the Rangers boardroom ? And regards transparency, are the VB ready to expand on issues they discussed with the board a few weeks ago ?
-
It has been mentioned that Ally's 'wagecut' was or was probably a wage deferral. Forlan was central to this discussion and IIRC was of the opinion that deferral most likely. This could mean it getting increasingly difficult (financially) for the board to terminate Ally's contract. More if's and but's. However, if the footballing strategy mapped out in the business review is to be seriously implemented, I can't reconcile it with Ally and his staff staying.