Search the Community

According to Le Manager. Link: http://www.sportinglife.com/football/news/story_get.cgi?STORY_NAME=soccer/06/11/24/SOCCER_Rangers_Nightlead.html&TEAMHD=soccer :sigh:

Suppose it could be worse. Link: http://www.sportinglife.com/football/overseas/france/news/story_get.cgi?STORY_NAME=soccer/06/11/22/SOCCER_Rangers.html&TEAMHD=france

Having watched Sellik V Manure last night, one thing struck me when comparing it to the Rangers V Hearts match last Sunday. Nobody could deny that both games were dire adverts for the game. On Sunday, it looked to me like only one team were interested in playing football and that was Rangers. We got our deserved result and won. What surprised me was the Press reaction to that game. Rangers were on a real 'low' . We'd been panned following dreadful domestic displays. BUT.........had anyone said only 3 or 4 weeks ago that we'd beat Hearts on their home ground, they would rightfully have been accused of mixing up ambition and ability. BUT........we DID win and went into 2nd place in the League. Something thought beyond our capabilities if the media were to be believed. What did we get from the Press ? Scorn and derision about the abilities of BOTH teams. Several papers carried articles on how poor both were and how they would never survive outside of Scotland. [Forget the 'sectarian singing' stories, that's for another arguement]. Last night, the mhanks got a result. I'm not interested in whether they deserved it [they didny btw]. My point is, will the same Press make ANY comment on just how poor a game that was last night ? Aside from how "Rooney/Saha/Ronaldo/whoever didny turn up" will anybody point out that viewers in Germany, France, Italy , etc must've been switching off in their millions at just how bad that game was in a footballing sense ? Don't bother answering..............I know what the answer is.

Frankie, i dont know what you think of this, but there seems to be a lot of confusion between pro-murray and anti-murray groups (surely represented in the RST's members) as to exactly how much murray has put in and taken out of rangers. there's loads of speculation, loads of strong feeling - but very little in the way of fact. would it be worthwhile for the rst to get in a forensic accountant just to clear the whole issue up, with a view to safeguarding murray's name or whatever? something that was clear and factual so there would be no more debate between rival factions who think murray is our saviour and those who think he's the anti-christ. has he single handedly given us all his money, or has he turned a profit from rangers? this would clear all that up.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/r/rangers/6172216.stm Hardly a surprise seeing as he hasn't featured of late

"To win a crowd is no art; for that only untruth is needed, nonsense, and a little knowledge of human passions." - Kierkegaard Murray is clearly a master politician. Like most politicians, and men of his intelligence, he is no stranger to logic and rhetoric, and certainly is not ignorant in the art of manipulation of human passions. What he says, he says convincingly, and eloquently - saying all the right things, it would seem, at all the right times. You are left with the impression that to disagree with him is to have a petty minded grudge, or to have ill thought out your position. This isn't even a criticism - without these attributes Murray would not be the immensely succesful businessman that he is. Without these attributes I would suggest that we would have not enjoyed a great deal of the success we've had in years gone by. But these attributes immediately shift the burden on us to analytically consider what he says, so that we may be sure that we are not being hoodwinked. I've spoken to many fans who "have this feeling" that we're being done over, or think Murray is clearly at it, but who can't state clearly what the problem is. So, in the next few paragraphs I'm going to consider Murray's statements, and argument, on what I consider to be the main issue surrounding our team: the lack of quality players in the side. I just don't think a great deal of the players playing are good enough, and that no amount of formation tinkering is going to change that. This sentiment has been expressed by fans and the media in asking "is there going to be significant investment?". The rest of the post considers this in a little more detail. Murray, in response to questions of investment, answers along the lines: "Would you rather see us in millions of debt like last time, or would you prefer, as I suggest, we only spend what we earn?" This is intricate rhetorical craftmanship, and to properly unwrap it, it is helpful to be able to clearly, clearly state what is wrong here. To be able to say precisely where the misdirection lies. To this we turn to logical fallacies, formal and informal. 1. The bifurcation fallacy Now, I've crafted his response in the form of a question in order to highlight this point. I think I have fairly represented his argument, so can't really be said to be setting it up in a certain way to knock it down. Basically, the bifurcation fallacy asks you to accept one or two options, when there are more options available. They are often emotionally loaded, and are used by politicians quite a lot. For example, Tony Blair might say "Would you rather let Saddam kill innocent children than go to war with him?". Basically, it says that if we don't want to go to war, we want innocent children to die. But the question is crafted in such a way as to rule out other options that may equally stop Saddam killing inoccent children: assasinating him covertly, applying international diplomatic pressure, or a whole host of things. The point being, that the only two options the question presents are not the only two possible options. Bringing this back to Murray, he forces us into two options: either spending what we earn, or spiralling back into uncontrolable debts. He sets it up so that those who oppose his vision (spending only a percentage of our profits) wish to see the club in hopeless debt. But these are not the only two options - the economics of business must account for being able to reasonably speculate to accumulate. Even if it turns out that this is not feasible in our current condition, we should be shown how and why it isn't possible without having to accept on faith that some decent investment in the team is going to bankrupt us, by being forced under faulty logic. 2. The non-sequitur This is another way of stating the above, but Murray basically asks us to believe the following: 1. Spending causes debt 2. We should not be in debt 3. Therefore we should not spend The non-sequitur fallacy means, in latin, "doesn't follow". That is, we can believe 1 and 2 without neccesarily believing 3. A quick example of a valid argument would be: 1. If I'm human, I'm a mammal 2. I'm not a mammal 3. Therefore, I'm not a human This is valid, because 3 clearly follows from 1 and 2. There is no room for ambiguity. However, this is not so with (my outline of) David Murray's argument. Spending does indeed cause debt (well, overspending), and we, indeed, shouldn't want to be in debt. But these things do not necessarily combine to mean we shouldn't spend. Why? Because you can agree that spending causes debt and that it would be ideal not to be in debt, while still thinking that the best way forward is to spend. As above, this is common in business, and may best suit us (or may not). Conclusion I'm not saying that spending some hard cash to improve the team is the best way forward. I'm only saying that the rhetoric that comes from Murray is not air tight. He could very well be right on both accounts - perhaps only spending what we earn IS the only option other than steamrolling back in to debt, and perhaps in practice we SHOULDN'T spend. But the talk, the arguments themselves, the words that come out Murray's mouth are not enough to prove this. Without the supporting evidence and adaquate explanation of the facts and figures we are left with nothing but rhetoric that is persuasive to the passions (no rangers fan wants to see us so badly in debt), but logically unsound.

We are a group of Rangers supporters of all ages who want to actively encourage the home support at Ibrox to be more visual and vocal in their support of the team. In recent years the atmosphere at Ibrox on match days, with perhaps the exception of Old Firm games or big European matches, has been almost non existent. We want to see every Rangers supporter cheer on their team from kick-off until the final whistle blows. We want to hear traditional and new Rangers songs, and we want to see scarves, flags and banners held proudly aloft no matter the score. Mission Statement To introduce an enjoyable and fun atmosphere in the Family Section To encourage fans of all ages not to use foul language To make the family section an area families will choose to sit in first To support the team through good times and bad To support the team in every match from start till final whistle To make Ibrox more intimidating for away teams To use only traditional style Rangers songs and chants To uphold the traditions of Rangers and their support To encourage everyone to sing at all games and support the team as loudly and visually as possible To adhere to Rangers' "Pride over Prejudice" policy To Join Pm and Ill give you the Link

Was in the Sun today saying that the only reason Rangers fans reported him to the police was because Rangers fans because our team was crap... So, nothing to do with the inflamatory gestures, goading of the fans etc. Also, the article was quoted as saying Nil By Mouth would not comment as Boruc had not been charged with a sectarian offence. We've come to expect no less from that shower.

I urge each and every Rangers fan to go out and buy this paper today to read his hard hitting column.Outstanding today,and doesn't miss those at NBM,Celtic FC,Jack McConnell,St.Mirren and his own so called journalists over the shame of the non minutes silence last weekend,and the subsequent Anti-Protestant/British chanting of the Beasts.

http://www.hearts.vitalfootball.co.uk/article.asp?a=38596

I forgot he played for us. Link: http://www.sportinglife.com/football/news/story_get.cgi?STORY_NAME=soccer/06/11/18/SOCCER_Rangers_Le_Guen.html&TEAMHD=soccer

Looking at the fixture list we have now the perfect platform to go on a run until March. All the teams we would want at home we have at home with the exeption of possibly Aberdeen. I would expect a good Rangers team to beat Aberdeen at Pittodrie though. All the teams we would expect to beat away we have away. If we are going to show anything this season this is now the period to show it. Am i dreaming? SPLG December Sun 3 14:00 A Falkirk SPLG Sat 9 15:00 H Hibernian SPLG Thu 14 19:45 H Partizan UEFA Sun 17 12:30 H Celtic SPLG Sat 23 12:30 A Aberdeen SPLG Wed 27 20:00 A Inverness CT SPLG Sat 30 15:00 H St Mirren SPLG January Tue 2 15:00 A Motherwell SPLG Sat 13 15:00 H Dundee United SPLG Sun 21 14:00 A Dunfermline SPLG Sat 27 15:00 H Hearts SPLG February Sun 11 14:00 A Kilmarnock SPLG Sat 17 15:00 H Falkirk SPLG March Sun 4 14:00 A Hibernian SPLG Sun 11 15:00 A Celtic SPLG Sat 17 15:00 H Aberdeen SPL

Marvin Andrews is no longer praying for us... He said: "I'm not praying for Rangers; God has used me to do good things for Rangers but I am not there now." Coincidence???

I make no apoligies for requoting this great post from the Gub on FF. There may be many detractors of the way demonstrations are handled etc, and there is a fairly wide held belief that dismisses any kind of protest as the work of cranks, FF radicals etc etc. The fact is, it isnt. The following gives, for me, a perfectly correct valid and true summation of the last few weeks of the way the club has handled some affairs. It doesnt include the lack of defence of the support or the club from paper attacks (like the Papish Nazi park invader etc) but gives a flavour. It is based on facts and facts alone. People need to understand that these "cranks" that have been subjected to all sorts over the last few weeks, have been living and breathing these facts for quite a while...anyway, enough rambling from me... "How much lower can we actually go? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To say the last fortnight following the fortunes of our club has been something of a trial is to understate the point. First off a yahoo scumbag with a Hitler Youth t-shirt was allowed to run some 100 yards from his seat in the East Enclosure to the goal at the Broomloan end without so much as a ââ?¬Ë?Hey were do you think youââ?¬â?¢re going sunshine.ââ?¬â?¢ If nothing else it does highlight the quality of our security and the hired goon in charge of it. Then there was a defeat to the crap at the bottom of the table after getting a goal of a start. And of course the first time in our 134 year history that a side from a lower division knocked us out of a cup competition at home. Ouch, ouch and thrice ouch. However that is the good bits. Last Monday I was informed of the death of Bobby Shearer, a Rangers great. A true blue, 100% died, in the wool Ranger and lifelong bluenose. Sad as Mr Shearerââ?¬â?¢s passing was, it was common knowledge that he had been ill for a time. The people running our club however took a sad song and made it worse, much much worse. They caved in to west of Scotland yahooery and told us that there would be a minuteââ?¬â?¢s ââ?¬Ë?applauseââ?¬â?¢ at Ibrox before the League Cup tie that (last) Wednesday. Truly nauseating; ONE-HUNDRED AND THIRTY-FOUR years of tradition wiped out in a heartbeat. Itââ?¬â?¢s the way of the world the club told fans who mailed or phoned up to complain. One Rangers fan I know was told ON the Monday afternoon by a club spokesman after complaining, that the club came to the decision of a minuteââ?¬â?¢s applause after consulting with a few ââ?¬Ë?former captains.ââ?¬â?¢ How do I know this? Well, because I was in his company and he was actually on the phone and I saw his reaction as the conversation ended. Another good Rangers fan and respected poster I know got a hold of Sandy Jardine again on the Monday afternoon and was told by our former player that ââ?¬Ë?Traditions changeââ?¬â?¢. That is TWO different reasons/excuses given by the club on the same day. I have saved the worst for last. Again last Monday afternoon, another well kent and respected Rangers fan on this site got through to Sandy Jardine and he was told that the reason that there would not be a minuteââ?¬â?¢s silence was because (wait till you hear this one) Rangers fans reacted badly to Aberdeen fans when they booed the minuteââ?¬â?¢s silence for George Young at Ibrox back in January 1997. Rangers fans reacting badly to the actions of a motley shower of filth is the reason why the club were going to have a minuteââ?¬â?¢s applause for Bobby Shearer? You just couldnââ?¬â?¢t make it up. Not only was this excuse beyond the pale, it was lies pure and simple. If Rangers fans reacting to Dolly was a catalyst within the club back in 1997 to change our stance on minuteââ?¬â?¢s silences, then Why a minuteââ?¬â?¢s silence for Diana later in 1997? Why a minuteââ?¬â?¢s silence for the victims of Omagh in 1998? Why a minuteââ?¬â?¢s silence for Jim Baxter in 2001? Why a minuteââ?¬â?¢s silence for the victims of 9/11, also in 2001? Why a minuteââ?¬â?¢s silence for Bobby Murdoch on 2002? How many lies did we get last Monday? 1 ââ?¬â?? The former captains made the decision. 2 ââ?¬â?? Traditions change and aââ?¬â?¢ that 3 ââ?¬â?? It was Rangers fans fault for being unchuffed with Dolly Does anyone still want to argue that the minuteââ?¬â?¢s applause for Bobby Shearer was at the ââ?¬Ë?behestââ?¬â?¢ of his family? Last week, the club I love hit the gutter and looking up at the stars was and is not on the agenda. Letââ?¬â?¢s see now; Manipulating a family in mourning to make sure the managementââ?¬â?¢s pathetic cop out regards a minuteââ?¬â?¢s applause was bulldozed through last Wednesday The clubââ?¬â?¢s official website praising fans that were happy to wreak violence on fellow Rangers fans on Saturday The worst part of all of course is that there will be Rangers fans on here reading this that would rather wish and hope I was telling lies rather than confront the awful truth as to the levels David Murray and the incompetent shower of ne'erdowells he employs at Ibrox are dragging us down to. Yours, With a heavy, heavy heart."

Apparently going on loan to Cardiff from Man Utd. I'd love to see him at Rangers. Mind he was pictured in a gers top a few years ago

Any member of the Blue Order on this Site? Wondering about the letter that has apparently been published in the Rangers snooze deliberately branding the Blue Order as part of the group of "malcontents". seems a million miles away from what I KNOW to be the truth. Very sad and another (fck me how many) own goal from Rangers.

Nice to see the positive comments from Leitzi re McGregor. Still hard to call what PLG will do but I think McGregor deserves his chance

On the 10th of February, David Murray did a lot of talking. He talked of the future, and of how rosey things would be in the garden. During that interview, he uttered the following line : Quote: when we make the changes, and if people are not happy, then protest all you want Why then, now that things aren't so rosey, is he using every means at his disposal, to silence those who wish to criticise him ? Murray Pledges A 'Moonbeam' To Banish Long Dark Season Of Despair : Evening Times - Darrell King 10/02/06 Ibrox Crisis : Rangers chief broke his silence after fan protests forced him to declare his hand early. For a man who likes to think of Rangers as his family, clearly being attacked from those within his inner circle was just too much. The 300 fans who protested outside Ibrox after last week's Scottish Cup defeat to Hibs, and the dozen or so who unfurled a 'Murray Out' banner at Pittodrie before Wednesday night's defeat, may have been small in number. But David Murray sensed a major fall-out was on the way - something that may even have ended in damaging feuding or even acrimonious divorce. When the final whistle blew in Aberdeen, Rangers yet again on the end of a defeat, the Ibrox owner and chairman knew it was time to act. Today he has called for unity behind his decision to reveal that his embattled manager, Alex McLeish, will go at the end of the season. In his own inimitable style, Murray also rolled out the big guns - a new manager is more or less in place, huge investment is on the way to fund his rebuilding of this pitiful Rangers line-up and the club is making record amounts of cash. Like the head of the family calling everyone around the table, he has spoken. Now he wants the Rangers support to prepare themselves for what he will bring to that very table - and if they are not pleased, he says they can protest all they like. Murray said : "The fans have been very supportive, but they want to see direction. My job is to get to the bottom of our problems and get this sorted out. I will leave no stone unturned. I am working very hard with Martin Bain to bring all these deals together and bring the direction this club needs. Rangers should not be divided. Yes, we are annoyed, yes, we are upset at results - but we must stick together. That (protests) is not Rangers' way. I understand people have the right to stand outside and protest. But Rangers do things another way, not like that. That's why I meet the Trust, the Assembly, we do it by talking." "It is people's entitlement. It does not sway me, nor does it put me off - I will still do my job to the very best. I can understand 300 people getting bloody annoyed if they felt there wasn't a light at the end of the tunnel - but there is a massive moonbeam of success waiting for us. People must accept there are legal issues, stock exchange issues, timing factors - but this will happen. And when we make the changes, and if people are not happy, then protest all you want - but big plans are on the way for Rangers." Of course, it has taken the combination of the horrendous results and performances against Hibs and Aberdeen to prompt action from the chairman. Clearly, with an Old Firm game looming, he has attempted to throw a bucket of water over what was a simmering situation developing between the rightly frustrated fans and those they follow all over the land. Maybe Murray should have acted sooner. Maybe, looking at things now, it has strengthened the argument that McLeish should have been removed during the shocking run of results in the autumn and early winter months. But loyalty has always been Murray's closest friend. Now he wants his support to put more faith in the man who has been the custodian of their club for 18 years. There is no doubt that his stock is at an all-time low in the eyes of many, but these are not false statements - a new dawn is on the way. "We all have degrees in hindsight, " Murray conceded, "Perhaps I should have spoken after the transfer window. But, after not being able to win for 10 matches, we were undefeated in 10 matches, and sometimes it's best left alone. However, after the indifferent performances of the week, it had to be said. I had to let the fans know we have been working on plans for a long time. There is going to be a major financial input to the club, there is now going to be a new manager and a new structure. I am disappointed it's come to this as we are about to announce very strong financial figures. The club is on a great financial footing after having a difficult time - we are going through record turnover." ED

"We would not have been allowed to have become complacent. We had so many characters in the team. "I was speaking to a good friend on Sunday and we were discussing Johan Cruyff at Barcelona, when my brother was there, and he signed Hristo Stoichkov. "Not just as a player but also because he was a little bit crazy and Cruyff thought the dressing room was getting a bit too friendly. "That was the secret behind our success in the nine-in-a-row team at Rangers. "We had a backbone of Scottish players and they do not have that any more which a great shame. "We had Goram, Gough, McCall, Ferguson and McCoist. A lot of good Scottish players. "It is very difficult for the young players at Rangers at this moment. "If you come into a settled side with a lot of experienced players, it is a lot easier to settle in. "I watched Rangers on Saturday and was impressed by Steven Smith, he is a young promising player. "But, if you are looking at one of the younger players to be a leader on the park, that's wrong. "That is maybe the problem at the moment. Rangers have a lot of foreign players and they have to get used to the language, the way of life and football and that takes time. "There is a new manager as well and, while I think he'll come good, it will be a rollercoaster for the next couple of months." ------ a dig at barry ferguson perhaps? he has also supported david murray.

Why is it, when I sometimes click on like Rangers chatroom or lounge the whole board freezes...? Is this gersnets fault or is my own computer at fault...?

Firstly, I think itââ?¬â?¢s important that I should say that Iââ?¬â?¢d still consider myself reasonably neutral when it comes to the position and record of David Murray. Nevertheless, this Rangers fan has been rather vocal recently with regard to who it holds responsible for our clubs current woes and it was reasonably pleasing to see Murray return to the limelight last week and attempt to address our concerns. What too many people forget is that Murray isnââ?¬â?¢t daft. He may have made mistakes lately in several areas but heââ?¬â?¢s been clever in the way he covers his tracks. By waiting so long to speak out he essentially let his new management team shoulder the burden alone for the poor results. Not unreasonable given their errors but Iââ?¬â?¢m sure PLG and Yves Colleau would have preferred some backing a wee bit earlier. Next, we hear the chairman has personally visited the players and told them performances are unacceptable. Again, they could hardly complain at this censure but itââ?¬â?¢s further clever sleight of hand to remove the attention from the some annoyed fansââ?¬â?¢ focal point. Fridayââ?¬â?¢s interview then gave the chairman the opportunity to defend his position even more. Why should he be to blame? Heââ?¬â?¢s only ensuring we remain fiscally prudent; the club canââ?¬â?¢t afford to spend serious money any more; we need to stick together; heââ?¬â?¢s hurting just as much; he wonââ?¬â?¢t sell to any prospective buyer; heââ?¬â?¢s still the right man for the job. No admission of mistakes then ââ?¬â?? just a man absolving himself of blame and preserving his infallibility amongst the adoring majority. In some ways heââ?¬â?¢s correct ââ?¬â?? but in others he fails to answer the questions many fans still have. Of course we have to be careful in how we spend our money. After all it was the chairmanââ?¬â?¢s mistakes of years past that led (in part) to our downsizing in many areas. That was necessary but just because we need to be prudent with our money doesnââ?¬â?¢t mean we need to downsize our ambitions for the future. In addition by asking for patience until January (and next May) he has again bought time from fans that have already waited long enough for signs of improvement on and off the pitch. We canââ?¬â?¢t afford another 3rd place finish while he finds the right blend of fiscal responsibility and player capability. I do agree with the chairman in that we need to stick together. However, that goes both ways and defence from the regime has been sadly lacking as the fans (and club generally) still take flak from all sides. Our manager was even disgracefully called a ââ?¬Ë?hunââ?¬â?¢ in one tabloid yesterday without official comment from the club. Just as disappointing was a statement on our own official site giving credence to aggressive behaviour from a number of fans who ââ?¬Ë?overpoweredââ?¬â?¢ a small protest against the Murray administration which resulted in a banner being ripped and angry words being exchanged between the opposing groups. Itââ?¬â?¢s a shame that the Murray propaganda machine is so quick to applaud his backers acting so aggressively but is posted missing when his own manager is spat upon by Celtic fans or described in derogatory terms in newspapers. Unfortunately, while our club continues to under-achieve in so many areas, there will always be disagreement between the fans as to who is the cause of any problems. Murray is the easy answer but he's by no means the only cause and itââ?¬â?¢s difficult to directly blame him for lacklustre player performances and a manager struggling to adapt to a pacey and physical Premier League. As such, I'm unsure that direct ââ?¬Ë?Murray Must Goââ?¬â?¢ protests are the answer at this point in time. Yes, results have been poor and yes, current board strategy is questionable but until Murray finds a buyer, he's not going to be going anywhere any time soon. After all, he can hardly be sacked and with the club worth around Ã?£40-60million heââ?¬â?¢s not going to just walk away. In my opinion itââ?¬â?¢s best for the unhappy fans to channel their frustration into more positive avenues of protest so Iââ?¬â?¢d urge every fan to consider joining the Rangers Supportersââ?¬â?¢ Trust. Although they, like this article, are neither pro/anti-Murray they do care passionately about our club. Indeed, if it wasnââ?¬â?¢t for their pressurisation in midweek Murray wouldnââ?¬â?¢t have emerged from his Charlotte Square bunker and (albeit with the help of many other bears) we might not have seen an apology from ââ?¬Ë?The Sunââ?¬â?¢ regarding the Paul Le Guen fiasco. The RST certainly isnââ?¬â?¢t for everyone and thatââ?¬â?¢s perfectly fine. Not everyone agrees with their main ethos of fan participation/ownership while certain aspects of their strategy are not ââ?¬Ë?militantââ?¬â?¢ (or indeed ââ?¬Ë?too militantââ?¬â?¢) for some. What they do give though is genuine independent and democratic representation for Rangers fans. So much so, that the club now meets with them ahead of their own Assembly which simply doesnââ?¬â?¢t offer the same wide-ranging and positive resources of the Trust. The unique ââ?¬Ë?GerSaveââ?¬â?¢ initiative provides one way of raising new money for the club and has been backed by many fans and ex-players already. To conclude I think it is time the fans use the RST to channel their frustration while we find and fix our problems. Unfortunately, until one man admits his part in said problems and actually attempts to address this, along with the fans, further division may not be far away. If that does happen, the manager and the players wonââ?¬â?¢t be to blame and the spotlight will again return to the top of the tree.

It's about time we get noticed , By breaking up a shitey protest , and unfurling a flag , I was involved in both these great things done by the true fans http://www.rangers.premiumtv.co.uk/page/News/NewsDetail/0,,5~926711,00.html We are the people !

what exactly are you "backing" him to do? he's came out with a load of nice platitudes and resolved absolutely nothing. nothings changed from thursday night other than he's decided to grace us with his presence. we're still the worst rangers team since the 80s, we're still slowly but steadily selling off all our assets, we're still paying the same amount on season ticket money to have nothing invested in the team. so i'm at a loss. you're backing murray to do what exactly? it sure as hell isn't turn things around, because according to him there isn't a problem. so you're "backing" murray to maintain the same dire status quo. good for you, its exactly the same as do nothing at all - its hardly "backing" in the slightest. its like saying "i'm backing that statue not to move" - utterly pointless. but i'll say this -- those of you who have no complaints for murray had better not even begin to complain about the team on here.

This is a rant, basically. Simply put, why on God's green Earth are any Rangers' Football Club supporter calling for the head of Paul Le Guen? Everyone knows manager's are never given "time to settle" at Rangers.. but this is ridiclous. It's November for Christ's sake. I find it laughable that we spend an entire summer chasing Paul Le Guen, and we praise the high heavens out of Mr. Murray when he finally "get's his man", and no less than 4 months into a season, people are calling for him to resign and, even more laughabley, be sacked. Our support have such short-term minds it's untrue. Sir Alex Ferguson was one game away from being sacked at Manchester United in his early days.. but he was stuck by, and turned it around, and now look at him. I'm in no way comparing us to Manchester United, but what I'm saying is, even the big clubs need to give a manager time to get it right. Has Paul Le Guen made bad signings? Yes. Has Paul Le Guen got our tactics wrong in the SPL? Yes. Does any of this merit his sacking? Not a chance. We as a club have prided ourselves on never giving in to pressure and making knee-jerk reactions when it comes to managers. In our illustrious 133 year history, we have had a mere 13 managers. Now compare that to some of these clubs who go through 4 managers in one year, 4 managers in 4 years and what-not and it's not hard to see why our Club has been one of the most successful in the world. Stability should never be underestimated. I personally think Le Guen underestimated the SPL. A lesson he is now learning the hard way. We're all learning it. Maybe we as supporters underestimate the SPL, who knows. I'll sum this up. As furious as I am with matters on and off the pitch right now.. the sacking or resignation of Mr. Le Guen would do a lot more damage than good, and it's high time the supporters calling for his head learned that. End of rant.