Frankie
-
Posts
268,712 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
179
Everything posted by Frankie
-
Wouldn't read anything into either of the above I'm afraid.
-
Sporting Lisbon agree ââ??¬1.5m deal for Pedro Mendes
Frankie replied to Frankie's topic in Rangers Chat
Problem is Mendes and McCulloch are different types of players - one being the creative influence and the other a spoiler. As such, we're not going to ever play Mendes and Davis centrally so the latter (if he stays!) will play more often alongside Thomson, Edu or McCulloch to complement their styles. With all the spoilers fit and playing well, McCulloch should be the least likely to play but neither Thomson or Edu have proved their fitness so big Lee will stay in the team for the time being - Hamilton in the SPL next week notwithstanding as he's suspended. -
I'd be surprised if the Rangers game goes ahead at the weekend...
-
Sporting Lisbon agree ââ??¬1.5m deal for Pedro Mendes
Frankie replied to Frankie's topic in Rangers Chat
Welcome to the forums mate! Your point about his international prospects is a valid one. I doubt he'd play every week when he returns to fitness here (Davis and one of Thomson, Edu and McCulloch) are more likely so he may see this as an opportunity to move home without ruining his reputation with our fans. -
Sporting Lisbon agree ââ??¬1.5m deal for Pedro Mendes
Frankie replied to Frankie's topic in Rangers Chat
At the club AGM last month the chairman and Bain suggested we didn't need to sell any players and were in a position to 'trade' our way through the transfer window if we needed to bring in new players and/or deliver new contracts. I took that to mean we can't buy players unless we sell. If we sell Mendes for �£1.5-2million then that will help pay for a new contract for Boyd which I'd be happy enough about depending on the long term fitness of Thomson and Edu as well as the long-term future of Steven Davis. -
Three years on, Smith vision blocked by bank�s handcuffs
Frankie replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
That is a very good point actually... Not sure if Walter was totally to blame - after all some of the funds for other players weren't released until after that loss; representing a huge financial gamble (which paid off in part when we won the SPL) - but Smith would do well to acknowledge his own faults when looking to apportion blame for our inability to buy new players now. I think most of us can agree we're playing pretty well right now but it is vital we don't lose any players if we're to keep a squad capable of retaining the title. -
Chick Dung used to do it but was given a lifetime ban for attacking one of the other members... :devil:
-
Mr Thompson is getting himself quite the reputation...
-
I don't disagree mate. However, without �£10-15million of cash flow and with no credible buyer on the horizon, the scenario of having to sell our best players would only become worse without season ticket money. In principle I understand MF's position but I'm only saying it is a dangerous strategy far from guaranteeing change, never mind the future of the club per se. If it could be organised properly by someone then perhaps it could work but who would that person (or persons) be? I think it's pretty clear somebody in the background is pulling the strings of Darrell King, the RST and Graham Duffy. Not to the extent of a boycott to lower the price but via other action - such as media coverage, ownership schemes and director challenges. That isn't working all that well so I'm not confident a boycott is the option yet. And if I'm not - someone well aware of the problems our club faces - what would someone not interested in the political side be thinking.
-
# So you didn't boycott during that even worse period? :box: I think we both know thousands didn't boycott Ibrox because of principles against the regime during the 80s. They just didn't go because they just didn't want to watch a crap team. The same will happen if Rangers go through a similar spell of non-success and/or worse in the future. The vast majority of the non-hardcore would just expect another Souness (then Murray). We're seeing that right now.
-
MF: We both know that owner is a gambler and is stubborn enough to dice with any proposed boycott (bluff or not). Further, as Ascender has intimated, and is plainly clear through fan inaction during more recent poorer periods at the club, our absent owner retains large-scale support so any boycott is not going to happen. It is that simple.
-
When the club are topping the league and unbeaten against Celtic for over a year in the league, then the vast majority of fans are happy so any boycott will always be under-subscribed for it to have any genuine affect. Add in constant smoke and mirrors (not just from SDM either) about the club's finances and a lack of leadership throughout the club and fanbase then it isn't any surprise that people are weak-kneed when it comes to the very future of the club. How would you work a boycott where you remove the only constant income the club has in the absence of a buyer? The only leverage you're applying there is the rope to your own neck. IMHO of course... Should the fans do more to invoke change? Yes. But there is a lot of room between ineffective hand-wringing and dangerous boycotts.
-
Season ticket income is hugely important to the club so of course inferring tens of thousands of people won't renew could affect the decision-making from those who make them. However it is also a very dangerous ploy which could makes things worse instead of better. Remove 20,000 x �£500 from our income then the savings have to come from elsewhere as SDM or Lloyds won't absorb the loss. Given we've still to see anyone step forward and say they will underwrite any debt we have in order to buy the club then that means we'd be in serious trouble. That is probably why fans who are otherwise concerned and frustrated about certain issues wouldn't go as far as removing their financial commitment to the club.
-
I'd have thought it makes perfect business sense to re-sign Boyd for the increased wage he wants. The lad is still young, in the best form of his life and doesn't suffer from many injuries (touch wood) so would retain a high transfer value if the club did require to sell players in the summer or beyond. Selling him now for �£1.5million isn't the kind of sum that will suddenly scare the wolves away. And it certainly won't improve our chances of retaining the league title.
-
I don't anyone denies an apathy exists in our support which seems extremely difficult to overcome when we want invoke changes. Even so, one can see that amongst shareholders at AGMs there does exist a reasonable number of active fans interested in the kind of 'political' off the field issues we often read about online. The Donald Muir issue also showed that such strong feeling isn't restricted to the internet and supporters can make their voice heard (even if that issue was always a losing one). Unfortunately, there appear to be no obvious solutions for tapping into this offline percentage of fans to increase awareness of the club's future with regard to other issues which we feel should be changes. Moreover, the existing shareholding of SDM/Lloyds remains an ever bigger obstacle to enforce that change. It's not a case of stamping our feet and getting what we want.
-
Problem is his contract runs out in May so any offer right now would be minimal...
-
I think the Trust got on reasonably well with the club in the past but obviously not with a great deal of success when it comes to genuine achievements unfortunately. That relationship doesn't seem to be quite as strong now (achievements or not) but I'm reasonably happy someone is trying to pressurise the club into keeping Boyd.
-
I don't think the Trust have a cosy relationship with the Rangers board. They called for Muir not to be re-elected and have criticised the new chairman (albeit on unofficial forums). As others have suggested sitting on the fence (publicly at least) is probably not doing them any favours generally. The one problem I do have is that if the Trust did somehow end up as part of a consortium buying the club then they could no more guarantee the future of Boyd than the present administration.
-
Like I say, they didn't mention boycotts though.
-
And on that bombshell, the Daily Express is reporting that Boyd has been offered a 'king's ransom' to stay at the club.
-
Can we stop the off-topic stuff please. People are entitled to different opinions on here so if you disagree, challenge them. By the same token if people don't take an honest position in debates admin will challenge them.
-
I don't think Edgar mentioned season ticket boycotts to be fair... Yes, he rightly indicated some fans would consider their position in that regard but didn't suggest anything would be organised by anyone either. I'm also unsure why their alleged intentions to buy the club is directly related or contradictory to this matter.
-
I don't disagree but worth taking part hopefully. Have also emailed the guy asking for them to widen the debate.
-
Urge everyone to take part in this...
-
Isn't Miller free for the Scottish Cup game this weekend but then banned again for the league game next Saturday? McCulloch will also be suspended for that SPL match.