calscot
-
Posts
11,722 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by calscot
-
You talk like Rangers are generally a lower league club. The higher league is irrelevant - kids will always be leaving Rangers for more game time. If you don't understand why then maybe the problem is closer to home.
-
So will that mean that we have great youth coaching or bad? It always seems to be that if a player goes on to do well it's because our coaching was bad and where he goes is much better. If a player goes on to do badly it's because our coaches ruined him. I've no idea what our coaching is really like but the arguments against them are definitely worse than the worst imaginable coaching. It's also petty and tedious. The thing is, few players go on to careers that eclipse their time at Rangers and there are hundreds that didn't make it at Murray Park. Do we want them all back?
-
When it comes to business and ranking all the players in this game with the board, the fans and the pundits, I think it seems obvious that King has the portfolio to show he's number one. He's demonstrated he knows the strategies more than anyone so you'd have to be daft to assume he doesn't have a very cunning plan. There are plenty of obvious reasons not to put money up yet with my wedge betting on the fact he's trying to push the current, major share holders into a corner while keeping the share price very low, giving him a lot of leverage if he ever gets the opportunity to buy them out for a reasonable sum. However, he's entering a new arena where he not only needs to play a political game to win hearts and minds and all that, he's actually using the emotions and trust of fans to move his pawns around the board. He's putting distrust of the current board into the mindset of those who matter most, but you have to wonder if he's forgetting that to replace them, he needs to perform moves to instil plenty of trust in himself. It does seem time for him to think about starting to lead from the front like Wallace at Stirling Bridge, rather than sipping gin 35 miles behind the trenches like the top generals during The Great War. The latter doesn't work so long for free thinking volunteers who are not prepared to be cannon fodder. He's set the stage, sent out the warm-up man, the audience is primed, and he now needs to take his entrance before the mob grow restless and his time comes and goes, followed by howls of derision and maybe some rotten fruit and veg. Nobody likes an anti-climax.
-
I was expecting some ultra-light finery that appears invisible to those who are disloyal - much like the Emperor's new 120 day review...
-
Really??? I keep asking for examples and have had a deafening silence. Kind of strange you also didn't even include one specific example. Personally, I don't know of any Scottish team out of the other 41 that are a good example of the footballing outlook that seems to be the new cult religion of complete faith and no evidence. As I keep saying, the strange thing is that there are a load of teams in Scotland playing no better football than us - and yet they fans continue to turn up despite the fact that in the league they don't win more than 9 times out of 10 and never lose.
-
With all the doom and gloom on our chances next season, is it not usual to think that a team that completely cake walks the league at one level with supernormal results, should perhaps have a good chance of competing in the level above? Of course there is a difference between competing and guaranteeing promotion, but while it is difficult to quantify our level against those of the Championship with the likes of Hearts, there is little evidence to suggest we will struggle. Hearts will not be in a better position than ourselves, squad and resources wise. I think it mostly depends on how the SPL level players we have and our manager perform at the level above. I personally would prefer to strengthen the squad but can't see the cause for the extreme pessimism.
-
People keep asking, "What exactly have the current board done wrong?" when the answers are there for those in the know. I think their misdemeanours need to be publicised while their honesty, integrity and indeed competence are under question.
-
Would a covenant cover this?
-
I think the last time anyone made an offer for a large tranche of shares they were quoted 70p a share... Now we have a lot of block shareholders and a board that front them that seem to be into Rangers to make a healthy profit. They have already come across as nefariously skimming off a lot of money from an income that is not covering cost. But the share price is down and they know it is artificially low and will eventually recover, especially when Rangers are again playing in Europe - we have the potential to be more than a £15m club! There is no way they have yet made the amount they want to from the club and there is no good reason to sell except for silly money. It's all very well to talk about King buying a controlling interest in the club for £8m but even ignoring the difficulty of implementation and stock market rules, no-one is selling half the shares for that price. There is no way that King can work with these people any more than Walter Smith could. They are all about making money out of the club where as I suspect King, while not wanting to throw his money away (ie would probably want his shares to keep their original value), has the interests of the club at heart. The speculators don't want King in control as they will not make their target income due to football and the club coming first. This is an all or nothing deal and as mentioned, that's a hostile takeover. I'm sure DK is pretty knowledgeable about this kind of business, and also knows about the club. I believe he's using the fans to put pressure on the shareholders to show them that their money is at risk and it's best to work out an exit strategy with a lower profit than anticipated, rather than face a possible loss. There is nothing for him to gain by investing in shares right now, and it doesn't seem to fit his game plan as I think he wants to drive the share price down to cause the financial guys to lose their nerve. Hopefully the endgame is in sight as the fans are also losing their nerve and their patience.
-
If you're more savvy than King and care about Rangers - what's stopping you putting up £5m and getting control of the club?
-
Julias Ceasar said. "If you must break the law, do it to seize power: in all other cases observe it." I think we can interpret that here with "breaking the law" to withholding season ticket money and "seize power" to effect board change.
-
A more liberal look at the board and recent campaigning
calscot replied to der Berliner's topic in Rangers Chat
Don't know about elsewhere, but on here, I can't think of that much that has been thrown at the board that has been very inaccurate or even unjustified. The old board/new board defence is poor as there has been no boardroom coup - totally the opposite. Like Trigger's broom, it still feels like the same old board with a continuous legacy time-line. -
A more liberal look at the board and recent campaigning
calscot replied to der Berliner's topic in Rangers Chat
Do the players get a bonus for relegation? It seems the board get the equivalent and even in their very own words they have been rewarded for incompetence - but that is supposed to be fair? I can't see how you can accuse people of bias and then write an incredibly biased article in reply. There is a saying "stupid is as stupid does" which pretty much means no matter how intelligent you think you are, if you do stupid stuff you are stupid. Basically, you are defined by what you do. The stigma aimed by the fans at the Rangers board has been well and truly earned - and now officially endorsed by the current CEO. -
Sorry, read the first two lines and really couldn't be bothered reading on. If you have a good point to make then make it well, instead of using Timmy-esque propaganda tactics. It's like reading the huge number of comments on a Rangers article in the Scotsman with all the Sevco crap.
-
Absolutely nothing.
-
The fact that the not a word of the 120 review can be seen after 120 days sums up the mentality of the board and its supporters... It's the "Emperor's new review" and you seem to be falling for it...
-
You know, I'll admit I've never been to Australia, but the stats say that pretty much everyone drives on the left; however, I once had a disagreement with someone who told me, "I lived in Australia for two years and I KNOW they drive on the right." I shook my head an left them to their delusion. Out of 37 games against League One opposition, McCoist has won 35 and drawn 2 - the facts speak for themsevles. You can attend every game and rewatch watch them on telly as many times as you like, but to say the other managers have Ally "sussed" (without some major qualification) does not make any more sense than "Aussies drive on the right". I don't have to watch a single second of a game to know that. BTW Just to settle this "you don't watch games" crap - I live in the South of England, getting to Ibrox is not easy for me and many other supporters - I did take in the Newcastle game when I was up which was pretty enjoyable. I used to have Setanta and watch all the live games, the highlights of the non-live ones and also Rangers TV almost every evening. That was £100-120 a year. I would now have to pay Sky and BT about £600 a year for a lot less Rangers content and refuse to be ripped off. I did watch the repeat of the games on Rangers TV for a while but 90 minutes after midnight isn't easy and I often fell asleep before the end and watching every minute is not the same the next day. I have been crying out for 20-30 minute highlights but it doesn't seem to be happening. I now watch the odd game on Alba and some on dodgy streams - but the latter have become so excruciating painful with low quality picture, stuttering, buffering and a plethora of annoying popup adverts, I find it easy to go out and go for a cycle or something instead which at least keeps me fit and healthy. I also can't watch them delayed which is a shame when I'm busy. So, I also watch the short highlights that are available, read the reports and spend far too much time on here. I think that's enough to have an opinion as at least I think about it, use some objectivity instead of spouting absolute nonsense. As said, you can watch as much as you like but if you're clueless about what's actually going on, or just so biased you twist the reality, it doesn't make you an expert nor even your opinion very valuable.
-
Have you actually seen the league table? Yes, they really have him sussed... I'm starting to think Ally is not the man to take the team forward due to his lack of success on the big occasion, but the usual arguments against him like this, are just ludicrous and ridiculous. What is that all about?
-
Murray Park diet getting to Gallagher?
calscot replied to Ser Barristan Selmy's topic in Rangers Chat
What's wrong with Nandos food? (Not that I would choose to go there as I prefer something more gourmet when I eat out.) It's about as healthy as you get for an athlete if you discard the skin and swap the chips for a salad - or even just limit the number of chips and still have a salad. The chicken is low carb, low fat and high protein, and the sauce is low carb and fat too. I'd say it's one of the best places to eat out for keeping slim if you're on a tight budget. -
I don't see how he's changing his story, it seems pretty clear. He thinks Rangers need £30m of investment and if that can be raised by others then job done, if not he's prepared to put the money up himself - seems fair and logical. What don't people understand? Of course if he's investing that much, he will want control of how it is invested in the club, or pretty much control of the club - which again seems fair and logical.
-
Again, I think you're completely wrong here even on the basics. If there is a company that you buy the services for a year in an advance, and that company to most of the customers is being seen as run badly by a bunch of people who are at best unreliable and untruthful and at worst ****s, who are taking huge sums out of the company while the company is making extraordinary losses, the company have no credit worthiness with the banks and choose to accept an incredibly expensive loan which is still secured on assets (to certain vested interests who have friends on the board), the company has had doubts by the auditors about it being a going concern - with all that and promised review and plan to show how the company plan to go forward, would you spend your several hundred pounds for a years services, not knowing whether the company will survive, when their promised review is published late and one working day before the deadline for you to spend your money? In ANY other business, the answer would be no. The DIFFERENCE in football is that many will say yes despite it being objectively an incredibly poor decision. You really seem to have it backwards. Normal companies might not tell you their business, but those in Rangers position quickly disappear. Rangers are only surviving BECAUSE they are not a normal business, but that survival does have some conditions to be met. A better comparison would probably be crowd funding where the crowd want more info before investing - and if the company don't give them it, they don't get funded.
-
I think McCoist's problem is that he's got a habit of being unlucky. I really think he had to win this one as it was at "home" and especially after losing to Raith. If it wasn't for his poor track record in the cups then it could be seen as a glitch but although it was a reasonable couple of cup runs, he should have done better in one or two cup competitions since he took over, even considering the difficult circumstances. In the league, he's done about as good a job as could be expected, but apart from the first season, he hasn't had a real challenger to make winning the league difficult, and to measure him by. Basically he's had 10 chances to do something decent in a cup and not taken them, so despite the enormous mitigation, he's shows a lack of the x-factor to win stuff. He had better than a 1 in 10 chance of either winning a domestic cup or just progressing to one of the European league stages, and he has underperformed. However, I'm not sure if the board would sack him, or that he'd resign. The biggest problem in any case would be who to replace him with that could do a better job and start winning cups again - especially when Celtic are not the opposition? Those regularly put forward on here have not been winners or ever shown that they have what it takes, with credentials no better, or worse than McCoist - who has after all won stuff as an assistant. I can think of no-one that we could attract or afford who could do the job on the likely budget that will be available.
-
I think it's obvious that the 120 day review was nothing but a con trick used to defer criticism till after the fans had put their money in once again. They conned us with the delayed AGM and are repeating the tactic here. Wallace's credentials have well and truly been flushed down the toilet. The one thing we have is that with King behind us, administration II would be totally survivable and indeed allow us to rebuild the way it should have been done the first time.
-
You seem to label supporters "fans" or "customers" arbitrarily and contrarily as long as it supports your argument against King and supporting clearly underhand manipulation by the board. But I really don't think you understand the power of the customer. There is more to it than paying for something and receiving goods or service. As shown previously, Starbucks felt the need to bow to customer pressure to pay tax they were entitled to avoid. That says that Starbucks customers can demand more than a cup of coffee for their money. I'm sure if all the customers of Starbucks coordinated, and in a scenario where Starbucks had season tickets and promised a review on the tax issue, that the customers would want to see the result of the tax review before buying the season ticket. It is the same with any analogy you care to use. When enough customers coordinate and put on the pressure, the boards of companies have to think about bending to their will or going bust. The difference with a football club, which I shouldn't have to explain, is that the "customers" care greatly about whether the business goes bust, which gives power back to the board. But when the board is clearly systematically abusing that power to take advantage of the loyalty of the "customers" then it's time for the "customers" to use the all the power they have. A season ticket is a type of loan in a sense no matter how you try to confuse that, and fans don't have to lend the money. They can easily give the club the same money but do so on a fortnightly basis - but here again, the club have stick to hand when it comes to their seats. Although there must be thousands with not such a good seat that may not care so much and be enough have an impact. And the danger to the board there is that without the financial commitment, the fans might be persuaded to do something else on many of the match days...
-
Fine if you're debunking is pretty much saying, "the last time we played really well, we played really well". BTW did the opposition play well? That's a huge factor. I would guess they didn't.