Rangersitis

You look to be rather good at Sense Motive too?

I'm sure that it was very witty, but I have no idea what you are talking about.

It might be the only way they can reduce the Club's staffing costs rapidly without having to pay out millions in pay-offs and redundancy packages.

They could have reduced the staffing costs on day one if they were so minded. They didn't do so as it was just another way of keeping everyone sweet while the big con was put into place.

Hiding in plain sight.

Regarding the administration rumours: They could potentially be very worrying, although they could also be a ruse to cause panic and boost ST sales.

Or a softening up process.

Flogging the family silver wouldn't look so bad after leaked administration warnings.

I really don't see how admin would be that great an advantage to those running things. They have gone to a lot of trouble to engineer everything up to this point and would have envisaged that there would come a time where resistance from the support would see the start of the endgame. I now expect to see a sale and leaseback agreement for Murray Park. They will milk every last penny before moving on to their next venture.

Don't look too happy Lewis....

He just found out that they don't do the red and black tops.

Not even debatable for me. Mols wins in a landslide for me. Could do it all. Negri could score goals but Mols could do that and a whole lot more.

 

Mols, truly world class and could have become one of, if not the, best striker in the world at the time had he not had that injury.

Wasn't he nearing thirty when he signed from Utrecht? That wouldn't have happened had he had been world class. He had a special talent, but come on.

No contest between Mols or Negri.

 

Mols was far better then Negri, who had a good half season then went awol.

 

Mols is a legend and Negri, albeit decent, is not a patch on Mols.

They are both cult figures, albeit for different reasons, but the 'legend' tag is used far too freely. Neither player managed to score fifty goals for the club.

Am I the only football supporter who detests football?

 

By Alex Proud

8:44AM BST 02 Jun 2014

 

Alex Proud is a loyal Arsenal supporter, but still finds football the grubbiest, most disgusting business in the world outside arms trading

 

I can’t believe I’ve started to enjoy Rugby Union more than football.

 

This sentence will likely lose me a lot of friends - and make me persona non grata in Islington (much as I am in Shoreditch). Also, I doubt I’ll replace the football friends I’ve lost with new rugby mates as, from what I’ve seen, the stereotype of beefy, braying hoorays is pretty much on the money.

 

On the surface of things, it’s an odd time for me to be questioning my feelings about the beautiful game. A few weeks back, my beloved Arsenal won the FA Cup for the first time in nearly a decade. I got caught up in the victory parade with my kids – and it made me think of quite how much of my life football has touched.

 

I’ve been a lifelong fan and a season ticket holder since the mid '90s. My younger brother and I followed our team around Europe, watched some of the world’s best football, cheered, wept and made some great friends. What’s more, during this period, English football has been reborn. We’ve built soaring new stadiums, cathedrals to sport; we’ve finally eradicated the ugly stain of hooliganism; and, with our new found wealth, we’ve imported some of the world’s greatest players.

 

So, why my beef? What reason could I possibly have for converting to a game popularly associated with people who still go by university drinking club names like “Pickles” and “Squealer”?

 

Well, I’ll kick off with an admission. Rugby and I aren’t exactly strangers. Look at my physique – does it scream centre forward to you? No, I played rugby to university level. For a while, I even thought that loud, doltish songs, stripping in public, lighting farts in bars and all the other things that pass for rugby culture were, if not exactly clever, at least less stupid than they are.

 

In short, I was a big, beery, beefy rugby t--t. But then I moved to London and reinvented myself by dropping the word “rugby” from this description. I also discovered football. Living in north London, we’d wake up hungover on Saturdays and buy tickets to watch on the terraces. At first it was just something we did, but, addictive personality that I am, I was soon a dedicated football fan.

 

Strangely, one of the things I loved the most was the lack of class. It was intoxicating: once your fellow supporters decided you were a true Gooner, no one cared where you came from or what you did: football and Arsenal came first. As an idealistic young adult this sort of stuff really mattered (and it still does). I know I’m hardly the first middle class boy to find a kind of authenticity and community in being a football fan, but just because it’s a bit of cliché doesn’t make it any less real.

 

I was also astounded by the depth of passion for the game. Some of my fellow fans were supporters as their dads and granddads had been – they were born Gooners. In many places football teams were the cornerstones of communities, a force as strong as the church had once been, and a lot more fun at the weekends. Even the people who ran the clubs felt part of it: they were usually local businessmen who rarely made much money (and often lost quite a lot).

 

Of course, there was a downside to this Nick Hornby-esque idyll: many of the clubs were badly run and in dire need of investment. Indeed, even the most unreconstructed fans sort of knew that things couldn’t go on as they were. Football desperately needed modernising. But I doubt what any of those involved had in mind was the cabal of oligarchs, sheiks and arms-length Americans who now call the shots in the Premier League.

 

It’s weird, quaint even, to reflect on how much the clubs once cared about their local fans and how profitability was rarely a serious concern. Now the Premier League has only two real goals. The first is to make stacks of money for the clubs’ owners. The second is to make stacks of money for Sky and line the pockets of Rupert Murdoch, a man who has probably done more than anyone else alive to coarsen and degrade Britain’s culture.

 

These people care little for community and supporters. They show the whole notion of “stakeholders” as the sham for which it is. Speak to any football club marketing executive and within a sentence or two, they’ll probably start calling the fans “units” or a “revenue stream.” To be fair, these executives are just doing their jobs which is to keep their clubs in the Premier League, right where the money is – and for most clubs this is the only thing that really matters.

 

OK, you might say, but football isn’t like food or shelter. However, football fans aren’t like people shopping in B&Q either. For starters, they contribute far more than just their custom to the company in question – and secondly, football is highly addictive and there is no “substitute good” for your team. So football fans are a bit like mutual building society customers – who are buying a kind of wholesome crack, not mortgages. Unlike building societies, though, there’s no recognition of the supporters’ contribution. In fact the attitude is more: “Thanks to you we’re worth a billion pounds. Now we’re going to flog off the stadium, pay ourselves £10m bonuses and raise the price of your season ticket by 19%.”

 

The FA and the Premier League don’t care about any of this either. The reason they don’t care is they’re in on it too. Like so many sporting bodies, they’re been so close to the big money for so long that they’ve absorbed its values by osmosis. It’s a sweet deal for both sides. For the officials it means a gravy-train lifestyle that they could never afford if they did their jobs with integrity. For the average oligarch, handing out sinecures to former officials is a very, very minor cost of doing business. Of course, it’s all legal and above board while being entirely repugnant by any normal standard of decency or humanity.

 

The UK government don’t care either. Can you imagine either of our two major parties standing up for the interests of millions of their own citizens ahead of that single American citizen of convenience, Rupert Keith Murdoch?

 

All those involved in this putrefying circus of corruption should hang their heads in shame, but they don’t really know what that is any more, so instead they just prattle on about the what’s best for sport and the realities of modern business. Which leads to things like the World Cup in Qatar. Modern football is probably the grubbiest, most disgusting business in the world outside arms trading (and at least arms traders don’t claim they do it all for the fans).

 

Even the better foreign owners still feel a bit wrong. Abramovich is here to make sure his kids go to right schools and he has a bolthole if Putin turns nasty. The Emiratis have too much money, so when they leave their dull, dusty oil-rich desert kingdoms and get bored of partying and escorts and drugs, they want to buy something a bit glam. The Yanks are businessmen who are astonished at how quickly our sports bodies and elected officials will drop to their knees for any foreigner with money.

 

The fans get no say in any of this. Yet they are the bedrock of the clubs’ billion dollar balance sheets. These are the people who go to watch “their” club in the sleet and snow. These are the people who put up with the start times dictated by Sky (and pay for Sky subscriptions). These are the people who pay the inflation-busting ticket prices and buy the rip-off, ever-changing kids’ strip. They make English football the best in world.

 

Yet the clubs couldn’t care less about them. Will they take out Wonga loans to buy their kids the latest merchandise? Will they skip holidays or even meals to pay for Sky’s latest, greatest package? Will they remortgage for next year’s season ticket? Who cares. Even if they can’t there’s so much money from national and international TV rights that it just doesn’t matter. You can bleed your old, hardcore fans dry and still be certain of next year’s revenues.

 

I say it doesn’t matter – and it doesn’t. Not in the short term, and perhaps not in the medium term (which are the only terms UK business really thinks in). But in the long term it will. In 20 years, when the gleaming modern stadiums are all corporate boxes, middle class arrivistes and empty seats, only then will football discover the downside of the Faustian pact it struck. The atmosphere will go, the community will go, attendances will plummet, TV audiences will dwindle and the clubs won’t be worth anything. Perhaps when England drops out of the World Cup first round, we’ll finally notice, but by then it’ll be too late.

 

Of course, the solutions are right on our doorstep. Three of the world’s top five clubs (Barca, Real Madrid and Bayern Munich) are community owned; and it is notable that they rose in value last year, while Man U (also top five) fell. These clubs have safe standing terraces (and rather fewer corporate boxes); they have cheaper tickets and better atmospheres. Their leagues are run for the national team and finances are regulated so clubs don’t go bankrupt. Unlike us, they even grow most of their own talent.

 

As for the endemic corruption, and behind the scenes dealing, well there’s too much money in football to ever get rid of this. But we might start try shining a light on it. Football attracts more coverage than politics so it would be nice to see the various papers and broadcasters grow a pair and start meaningfully exposing (and campaigning against) the rotten state of football. Obviously the Murdoch press isn’t going to go here, but there are plenty of people who could – and who could get the fans behind them. Enough public outrage and football would have to change.

 

Sadly I’m not sure any of this will happen. The corruption too entrenched and the fans are so used to their abusive, exploitative relationships with the teams that they love, that they just keep on going back for more, insisting this time it will be different. So I’m going to continue with my rugby experiment. Rugby cares about fans and families. It’s well run and this professionalism means the international game is probably more exciting than football now. What’s more, England actually win.

 

Of course, I know it’s not the winning that matters, it’s the taking part that counts. But with football these days, the only way that taking part really counts is towards a multinational’s bottom line.

I don't agree with everything that he says, Barcelona and Real are far from the perfect model, but it is a depressing view of what the future holds, and for some of us, it is borne out by the present and the recent past.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/10864778/Am-I-the-only-football-supporter-who-detests-football.html

Rangers must rate him if they offered him a new contract!,which he declined to make his move.

Shhhhh.

Jimmy Smith.

As truly heart breaking as Charlie Telfer's decision is for Bears, it is the frightening reality of our club's situation.

 

.............. and Graham Wallace says?

Whatever he's told to say.

What ?

 

That's exactly what I'm saying. Are you on the wind up?

You don't know what you are saying.

Gothenburg won the UEFA Cup with a team of part-time professional players. Sir Tom Finney became one of the finest players to pull on an England shirt while moonlighting as a plumber in the family firm. Even modern day players have outside interests such as modelling, doing endorsement deals, and attending corporate events at the behest of sponsors.

For someone who no longer has any connection to the club, he's a busy boy.

Fanzines as an alternative to match day programmes ? Fans groups raising money to buy shares ?

 

Come on ...thats hardly valid comparisons.

I was merely pointing out that the 'blue pound' is routinely spent on unofficial products which ride on the back of the club's name. Those vendors' date=' many of them supporters themselves, are not accused of the same thing that you have laid at the door of the two lads who got this latest venture off the ground.

Why would that be?

And of course that collateral damage I referred to is manifesting itself not only in a season ticket boycott, but also in the form of a “protest shirt” whose purpose is to deliberately prevent incoming revenue from the sale of club merchandise.

Now I have read the website for these shirts from top to bottom and at no point did I see anything which would give you any reason to state the above as their aim. Indeed, the profits raised are earmarked to be put into the club by way of any future share issue, i.e. new investment. This would also further the aims of fan ownership which you appear to be in favour of.

Which part of that don't you like?

You highlighted me saying we aren't playing professionals and said that was nonsense. What I said was perfectly valid bar the odd exception eg Dunfermline.

There is a difference between part-time and professional.

Even (for talking sake) if the Club gets a fiver a shirt, then a thousand shirts is only 50 grand.

That also assumes that every purchaser refuses to go for the official offering. That will not be the case.

No European nation has ever won it in The Americas, therefore it's only Brazil or Argentina that can triumph.

So we haven't been playing against part-timers for the past 2 seasons? What a strange comment.

If you read my post you will see that I refer to them being part-time players. If you look at what I was replying to you will realise that there was nothing at all strange about the comment.

If they are intrinsically linked or inter-connected how can we dismiss the effect when we cant even ascertain' date=' so far at any rate, the actual value the club receives from such sales ?[/quote']

 

It has nothing to do with unofficial shirts being sold, it is all to do with who is perceived to be behind the sale of them and which organisation will get the profit.

 

How many articles have you written about the numerous street vendors who stand outside grounds selling unofficial hats, flags and scarves that could affect the takings in the club shops? What about those flogging unofficial fanzines that could reduce the number of matchday programmes sold? What about all those fan groups who are raising money to buy shares in the club when that cash could be handed to a board of proven businessmen to aid them in their pursuit of players, scouts and PR men?

Correct, the football was particularly bad in Eck's later seasons and also under Walter. With Walter we were very poor in possession (bar the tail end of 10/11) but still generally achieved success. The football now though is taking it to a whole new level. It's completely unwatchable and I feel you would really struggle to find many other teams that are as boring to watch. When we play I find it increasingly hard to concentrate and find looking at my phone more interesting. It also has to be factored in that we are not even playing professionals any more. We should be looking like world beaters against such poor opposition.

 

This past season is the first time since I was about 5 years old that I have not gone to a match. That had nothing to do with the board and was simply down to the disgraceful football.

That is just nonsense, and is disrespectful to players who must fit their football around their need to earn a living outside the game.

It was explained to me in simple terms by a very clued up Bear, at the last home game. Which i will echo,

 

"There is a thread here to follow in our demise, it starts with Murray selling our club to the mercy of asset strippers, Whyte, who did as much damage as possible in a short time to rip out cash and moveable assets (Arsenal shares, PAYE and tax) Green then came in to strip us further before bolting, Merchandising contract, catering contracts etc, and to sell on the remaining big assets to hedge funds. Who then run the club with the board doing their bidding, whilst sucking us dry over a period before it ends with them selling or leaseback on the big assets Ibrox, Murray park, Albion car park, Edmiston House.

Sums it up perfectly.

Well surely if you are producing an alternative top which is to be bought in preference to the official shirt from the club store - then notwithstanding the amounts involved we are depriving the club of potential revenue ?

Perhaps you should ask yourself what has driven hundreds of people to take such drastic action.

Perhaps it's only a contributory factor, but to quote a recent post by Hildy:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is he not talking about people chucking forums as opposed to not going to games?

Was that the review that 5 months after joining GW told us that it might be an idea if we get a scouting network but thought it so important he brought in a spin-doctor instead ?

It shows just how bad they are in other areas when something as important as that is hardly worthy of a mention. He should get his jotters for that alone.

He has it right to a certain extent, but as long as those running the show see fans as customers and clubs as brands they are never going to understand why the Scottish game is in such massive decline.

They need to stop looking at what Manchester City and the EPL are doing as they are in a different stratosphere and concentrate on attracting back the type of fan who managed to fill Cappielow to capacity all those years ago. The ones who liked a pie and a pint - not a prawn sandwich and a G&T.

The customer is always right!