calscot

I still think we just need to countermand those emails with - "Sorry for the misunderstanding, you have to pay the loan back. Any time in the next 200 years will do." Without a signed contract the emails are pretty flimsy evidence of a de facto contract. Would anyone want to fight in court over the cancellation of an implied contract by email before you signed the real contract? You wouldn't think you had the slightest chance, would you?

PS SDM is not completely blamed for the bad times. He's being blamed for recklessly using a dodgy and aggressive tax avoidance scheme that even if found legal will have led to putting the club on life support and near death.

No it's not. Please see post #22. It's totally illogical.

I'll even extend this. The team would probably take the disqualification on the chin BUT still point the finger of blame at the guy who assaulted the ref. What is wrong with that?

Let me put it this way, you can't win a football match without the rest of the team, but you can lose it without them. So if one of your players assaults the ref and the team is disqualified, it's the teams fault? Or if you think it's the player's fault that means you must think that if you win a game then that player did it single handedly? Where is your logic?

Your mind works in mysterious ways...

I still don't get you. Why would we point the finger at the club when it was SDM's doing? It doesn't make sense. If you're CEO brings your company down due to personal dealings and you lose your job - do you blame the company or the CEO? If a player does something really stupid and arrogant to lose you a game do you blame yourself and the rest of the team? Or do you point the finger? After all you win and lose as a team right? The point is WE are part of Rangers, we're on the inside, how are we to blame? What has business law got to do with it? To me it's a very weird view. Rangers as a business HAS been punished and most fans accept it. You're also jumping the gun - it's not even established that SDM did anything wrong with the EBTs. The situation we're in came from the unethical threats from the HMRC who are totally complicit if SDM IS guilty. Even CW mostly did what he did due to the impossible position HMRC put us in BEFORE the result of the case. I really, really can't see how we should all take the blame for the actions of individuals under the same banner as us. And I really don't know which bit we're not taking it on the chin.

The point you miss is that the business has taken it - in what way hasn't it? The problem is the extra non-business sanctions. Did the chemical company get banned from hiring staff over 18 for a year? Were they fined for bringing the game into disrepute? Just what is your point that I'm missing?

No suitable choice in the poll for me. Waste of time... :fish:

So if your garden is not rosy you should lie down and take a beating from anyone who inclines to do so? Weird attitude.

PS Does anyone remember when promotion to the SPL was rigged so that Aberdeen weren't relegated? Falkirk were not allowed to share a stadium while they built a new one as that would have meant Aberdeen's relegation. The second team in the division was also not allowed up despite their stadium being suitable. They decided to cancel the relegation instead. Was the SPL rigged in their favour?

I think the funny thing is that that could easily put them into administration and then liquidation, meaning they'd need a newco to continue existing - which of course they would want to go straight back into the SPL. I don't think they do irony...

You are not making any sense whatsoever to me. People are pointing the finger at SDM and Whyte among others who ran the club - but you are saying the club itself is responsible. That's a weird one. Are you saying the club is some kind of intelligent lifeform that has the capacity of free will and was actually running itself independently of SDM, CW and others? Really, what are you on about? I think the problem is that you and our detractors have whacky ideas about what the club actually is. Who is trying to change business law? Where is there in business law about the sanctions the SFA have given us and the sanctions that the SPL want to give us? Please show me. I believe they are nowhere - they are sporting sanctions. So which is it - business or sport? You and our detractors need to make your minds up. The problem we are having is that on the one hand we're being punished as a company and then on the other we're being punished as a sporting entity. Surely one has to mitigate the other and vice versa? The reason there is finger pointing is that the main stakeholders in the club have done nothing significantly wrong relevant to the crisis. The finger pointing is there because there is a lack of fairness in how many things have been applied. SDM started the ball rolling with overspending and EBT's, the tax men compounded it with incompetence and intransigence, the bank wanted to get out and forced us to sell to the first person who came along, Ticketus immorally and secretly funded the take over and Whyte did what he could to exploit the situation. Then the SFA, SPL and other clubs decide to weigh in with their boots on the situation. There are plenty of other villains in the mix but I fail to see where the club itself is to blame. To me it shows a complete lack of understanding of what has gone on combined with some kind of conceived collective blame for the acts of individuals. You're trying to pretend you have more knowledge about business than you do and are falling at the first hurdle of common sense. And I also resent you outrageously painting everyone with the same brush regarding the outcry from us if was anyone else. For me that is not even close to being true. I like to think I weigh up all the circumstances and make a fair judgement. Obviously you do not. If it was Celtic in our position I would not be anything like how they have been to us. Not even a little bit. Basically I find your blog lacking in understanding and completely insulting.

The side we played against Malmo was also a lot weaker than the UEFA final run team. It was also a lot weaker than the team that put in an excellent run in the SPL at the beginning of the season. The point is that you can't use the results of one of our best team in years to compare with a Zagreb team that stumbled into the CL. The circumstances of the Malmo loss was similar to the Kaunas loss but in addition we had the shortest close season in history while Malmo were in the middle of their season. Not only that, IIRC we looked the better quality side but didn't apply it on the park and at times were unlucky - as happens in cup games. I doubt even our best team of last season would have achieved 7 points in that group - and I believe our best team when on form to be a level above that of Zagreb and Malmo. Unfortunately during the qualifiers we neither had our best team nor our best form. That's fatal in a cup competition. So the first question is: is Ally culpable for that? For me, I think his culpability is limited by the circumstances which reminded me of how a manager can go on one of the best European runs in the club's history to out on its arse to Kaunas due to poor circumstances. The second question is: are the European results, despite the circumstances, weighty enough to replace McCoist at a time when our club is in turmoil, not in Europe and with a signing ban? A sub-question is: can we afford it and afford to get someone better in? I see Europe as a bonus and while we adopt our current season timing, qualifying will be a lottery. I base a manager worthiness on his league form and in that sense I think Ally was more than passable under the circumstances. I believe that without the off field problems the league would have gone to the wire which is the best we can expect from a Rangers manager. That is ignoring the fact he had a cheaper, smaller squad than Celtic and was not able to sign his first choice targets. On the sub question: I don't think we can afford it and can't think of anyone better who would be realistic. The third question is: do you you think McCoist did enough under the exceptional circumstances of last season to be given a proper chance to see if he can be a managerial success? I think he did exceptionally well under the circumstances and deserves a shot where he has a level playing field with our rivals. If he fails badly at that then fair enough, time to go. Some bits I agree, some I disagree and some in between...

Since Celtic paid the tax voluntarily, that seems to suggest they are admitting knowingly having a double contract and should receive a retrospective 3-0 defeat for every game he played - no? In contrast, Rangers had EBTs which they believed were not contracts and so didn't require tax. BTW It seems to me that if Rangers call in all the loans we're off the hook. We could just ask all the recipients for repayment at a rate of £1 per week until it is paid off. That makes them loans and not contracts. A bunch of emails sent now would supersede any current evidence would it not? They could "clarify" that the loans definitely need to be repaid. If that's all the evidence they have, that is surely all we need to do to counter it. Anyway I can't see how we can trust the BBC's claims that they have evidence. In their previous programme they claimed they had evidence that Ticketus owned season tickets for FOUR years. Now they've published evidence that it was THREE years. What happened to their previous evidence? They obviously just wing it and then publish when they actually get something concrete. So if they are not publishing, they have previous for talking shit.

I don't think it's fair to use the word gullible. What choice did the fans have? Rather than gullible, given that he was thrust upon us, I think a load gave him a fair crack at the whip. It's still difficult to think of a way things could be so much better as we still have that gorilla to deal with. AJ gave us nothing concrete and it smacked of sour grapes - especially for a man who was involved in the previous board that many feel are to blame for the mess we ended up in. AJ easily had the knowledge and skills to get our attention but he failed badly there. Most of the stuff he comes out with now still sounds like it comes from his own agenda rather than anything that is supportive of Rangers.

I don't think anyone is arguing with you that our UEFA final team was better at getting results than the Zagreb team (although I bet you didn't like the way they did it). However, the first game after the final, we went out to Kaunas. Shows that the seven points is hardly something that can be used as a comparison. We also probably agree that our team, when match fit and on form, would probably have achieved more points in that group than Zagreb. However, our team was not at its best for many reasons, quite a few of which were out of Ally's control, some were just bad luck. In those circumstances, a team like Malmo are of a high enough level to have a great chance to get a result against us - as do Kaunas, as do St Johnstone.

What a weird and ironic reply. I think you seem to refuse to see the posts in front of you or have big trouble understanding them. I have said many times, I base my opinions of managers based on results but with mitigation as to external circumstances. Under the circumstances Ally receives pass marks for last season from me. I have explained why in great detail. I used the same criteria to judge Eck and PLG and eventually found them below the required standard. I try to be objective, reasonable and fair. I don't think I could personally do a better job than those managers, but I think there are a few affordable and approachable managers out there that would do a better job than Eck's final season and PLG half season. Walter Smith pretty much proved it. I can't say the same for last season and no-one has been able to suggest anyone plausible. If Ally eventually shows he's not up to the job under the circumstances then I will happily see him replaced. For the moment he has kudos in the bank for his success as assistant manager and doing a fair job last season under the circumstances. I'll say for about the fourth time or fifth if you will listen, I don't judge a new manager for his first season in Europe - especially under the circumstances of last season. Where is YOUR consistency? Your fairness or even your reasoning? All we get from you is pub teams and yes, I refuse to see that as it's untrue. I don't expect you to understand this as you NEVER seem to get the point. Again, please re-read my posts. You seem to be struggling with understanding them. Where did I say I'd support Ally no matter what? I've said the opposite countless times. I base it on results plus circumstances. Over the piece, he passed. Have you ever played football? Do you judge yourself on a couple of below par performances in the first couple of games season no matter the circumstances? Even if you play reasonably well for most of the rest of the season? How many times do I have to repeat myself before you understand anything? Sorry but you are obviously a complete troll who comes up with the same old crap every time without actually listening to any of the answers. Please read my messages again and try to understand them before repeating the same old nonsense. They normally get the sack when their results are below the expectations of the board. Sometimes the board's expectations are realistic. It sounds like you would have sacked Alex Ferguson after his first season. Like many other managers, Ally did enough in exceptional circumstances for the board to give him more time. What ARE you on about? Ok just keep making it up. I don't know who you are actually arguing with, but it's certainly not anything I've actually said. I've tried to have reasonable debate with you but I can't get any sense form you. I feel you need to think about what exactly you want to get from this board...

I really can't be bothered discussing silly season targets while we have a transfer embargo in place... It seems a bit pointless.

Maybe Zagreb played lovely football... Your point is a bit erroneous none the less.

I have not excluded that from the debate - in fact it is you that has by talking about some pub teams we didn't play. I have merely pointed out that a couple of unlucky losses under trying circumstances at the start of a rookie manager's tenure is probably not a complete statistical sample to predict the future. An example of this is that even a ton of games in Walter's first full season in his second term that went brilliantly, was not enough to predict that we'd be out on our arse to Kaunas the very next season. Cup games are unpredictable and one season's results not a good predictor of the next season's results. There is a surfeit of corroborating evidence in almost every club in the world's history. I'm sorry, it seems Ally's extensive European experience as a player is less relevant than your "pub team" opinion... However, the main point was, you said something like he would "never do anything in Europe" when the fact is, he already had. You're the only person rewriting history by saying incorrectly and disparagingly that we lost to pub teams, just because you don't like the manager or are unable to give others a fair chance or judgement. I'll say again, you cannot predict how well a manager will do in Europe in the future (especially given a more normal run up and season) based on one seasons' European cup tie results.

I disagree - the problem was that anyone and everyone was having a go at him, but without actually giving any details. It all just looked like mud slinging - and on hind sight still does. Where were all the details about Whyte we know about now?

I think it's also a fair supposition that we SHOULD have beaten Zagreb - we were the seeded team but didn't get through. They struck lucky against us by playing us at the right time when we were not really up to the task. I'm not saying we would have been a lot better in the group, but once we got our season rolling we were a far, far better team than either of the two that played in that qualifying tie.

You're very good at selective thinking aren't you? Where are his results as a player and assistant manager? Weren't we talking about him not "doing anything in Europe"? I think it's pretty narrow minded to selectively pick his first season as manager where he wasn't given a level playing field. If managers were normally sacked for a couple of bad games at the beginning of their first season, we would probably have had over 100 managers rather than just 13.

This kind of makes my point. Maybe we were better prepared but Jock's record in Europe wasn't great most seasons. Here's the list of teams he went out to: 73 Borussia Mönchengladbach R2 74 Didn't qualify 75 AS Saint-�tienne R2 76 FC Zurich R1 77 FC Twente Enschede R1 83 Porto R2 84 Inter R2 85 Osasuna R1 Some "teams we should have beaten" there - especially as he took over Rangers at a time when we were a very successful European side who had just won the Cup Winners Cup. As I keep saying, our European record has more blips than War and Peace transmitted in morse code. However, this doesn't mean Jock was a rubbish manager - you don't judge a manager by one season in Europe, especially his first one, especially when it's an incredibly early start, especially when some of your players are not yet fit, especially when you haven't been given the resources to replenish your squad, especially when your team is a bit unlucky and especially when you have a couple of players who lose the plot. It's a blemish on McCoist's record but it's not as bad as some make out and there are mitigating circumstances which I would say suggests he deserves another chance. If only his critics were as hard on themselves for their lack of success as they are on Rangers managers. I'm not saying Ally is a great manager or is immune to criticism but the flack he is receiving is well over the top and incredibly glib (pub teams ffs). He doesn't deserve the sack yet. He's been more successful in Europe in his career than I would bet the vast majority on here have been at pretty much anything, so at least give the guy a modicum of respect when you do criticise. In any case, the most important thing for a Rangers manager is the SPL, which is why PLG had to go despite a decent European run. Ally was far superior there despite a hell of a lot more difficulties.