Search the Community

http://www.gersnet.co.uk/index.php/latest-news/209-is-it-time-to-move-on It’s been a long time coming but finally the Rangers AGM arrived and at last we have some clarity on just how well supported the incumbent board is. In fact, the result was pretty conclusive – certainly for most of the Directors up for reappointment while those externally up for nomination struggled to achieve as much support. Therefore, whilst the issue of backing may not be as straightforward as it seems, no-one can deny it should now be time to move on and allow the club some space to consolidate its position. Such an abeyance of hostilities is essential for two main reasons: one, to give the ‘new’ board some time to deliver on their promises, and, two, to hopefully ensure the support doesn’t rip itself apart after a quite ludicrous period of belligerent disagreement between so-called rival factions of fans. So where are we now? Yesterday’s AGM statement to the London Stock Exchange revealed a short term ‘120 day strategic focus’ for the board on a range of important matters: including a detailed business review and attempts to re-engage with the fans to better capture our opinions. Along with other strategies highlighted in the statement, the aims are impressive and I doubt many fans would challenge them. However, we’ve heard similar buzz-words and phrases before – from Sir David Murray, Craig Whyte and Charles Green – all of whom failed to take the business forward during this modern era of austerity. What can this mandated ‘new board’ do differently? Let’s start with its make-up. Despite the institutional confidence placed upon most of the nominated incumbents yesterday, the scenes at the AGM were quite frankly incredible with specific focus on Finance Director Brian Stockbridge. It seems clear now that not only do thousands of fans have an issue with his position but also the vast bulk of the 1600 shareholders present yesterday. Moreover, the fact over 30% of other investors do not consider him re-electable arguably makes his position untenable on its own. However, add in his flawed performance and questionable behaviour of the last year then if the board is serious about trust, transparency and staff ‘pride’ in Rangers then Stockbridge must be moved on. Anything else would cast serious doubt on those that wish to lead the club back to success. Of course the rest of the board, other than Graham Wallace, don’t convince either. Neither Easdale brother speaks well or commands the respect of the support while new chairman David Somers appears inconsistent in his approach – one day signing his name to daft and inflammatory ‘open letters’, while the next saying he has no problem with people he previously labelled as selfish ‘fanatics’. It seems clear Mr Somers needs to familiarise himself with the high profile nature of the Rangers chairmanship and quick. Fortunately, new CEO Graham Wallace has been more measured in his approach so it’s not a surprise to see him warmly received by all so far. Mr Wallace can and should use this to his advantage by acting as a conduit to both investors and fans in the months ahead. With the above in mind, it seems obvious the board will need strengthened if the club’s 120 day plan is to be successful. I’m not sure adding either Murray to the mix will help but I’d hope Scott Murdoch and the impressive Alex Wilson are considered given Cenkos already gave their approval to their applications earlier in the year. That would go some way to bringing everyone around the same table ahead of the April finances ‘D’ Day. Speaking of which, obviously Dave King should be another who must be consulted with, even if his past and recent performance remains worthy of debate. I’m sure there are others out there who could add the right mix of independent business talent and Rangers-mindedness to improve the board. One such name I’ve heard mentioned is John McClure of Unicorn Asset Management who own(ed) upwards of 400,000 pre-IPO shares in the club. No matter who joins this board, the pressure will be high to deliver on their statement of yesterday. However, they do deserve time to implement the changes promised – just how much time may be reliant on their ongoing performance. For example, the issue of Jack Irvine’s retention cannot be kicked into the long grass. Moving on from the board the next important issue is that of the fans. The way many people (mostly online) have turned on each other over the last 6 months has been nothing short of remarkable. It seems polite disagreement cannot happen nowadays with insult and abuse being preferred instead. This has to stop and stop now. If not, our club will be easy pickings for those who wish to use it in a way to benefit themselves only. It also offers an easy excuse for the club not to engage with the fans as it should. Of course it doesn’t help that our fan groups seem so badly advised while struggling generally as well. I don’t blame the Trust, Assembly or Association for believing in the likes of successful businessman Jim McColl but jumping into his camp with both feet meant any sort of negotiation with the board was always going to be difficult. Add in their collective failure to achieve widespread support within the fan-base (via active membership more than anything else) then it’s debatable just how important the club will see them in the future. This is a great shame when we examine fine initiatives such as BuyRangers but perhaps something new can arise from embers of the existing groups? Hearts and Dunfermline fans have shown the way in this respect so we should be looking to them for inspiration. I’d certainly suggest each fan group outlines its own 120 day plan to show they’re capable of improvement. Only then may the club (and most importantly more fans) feel engagement with them is worthwhile. All in all despite yesterday’s conclusive AGM vote, uncertainty remains and that should be a concern for us all – the club director, the investor and the ‘ordinary’ fan. Indeed, financing the club is the biggest issue ahead and this can only be achieved by everyone working together for the greater good. We can all make sacrifices in that regard so I’d urge all involved to examine their contribution and ask if the betterment of Rangers is really their aim. If it’s not, then yesterday’s farcical AGM scenes will only be the start of more stormy waters ahead. That cannot be allowed to happen. Thus, in the spirit of Christmas and New Year, this is an opportunity to offer goodwill to others and start afresh in 2014. In that regard I’d like to wish all my fellow fans a happy holiday season and all the very best for the next year. Rest and be merry as, for the boardroom and the fan groups at least, the clock is ticking: 120 days and counting!

Graham Wallace says all the right things. There is no bluster to the man, no desire to trade insults with those who object to the performance of some on his board. In all of this Rangers farrago he is the one person who has risen above the cheap shots and gone on with his business in a pretty dignified manner. Of course, Wallace has only been in the door five minutes. The temptation is to say ‘Just give him time’ and he’ll soon be scrapping like everybody else, but he seems more professional than that, more believable in the role of a redeemer. The faith in Wallace is based on a proven track record in football and also on some of the things he has said in his few short weeks at Rangers. Clearly, he has resonated with institutional investors and ordinary supporters alike because his 85.5 per cent approval rating in the vote yesterday was the highest of anybody seeking election or re-election. In the door less than a month, though. That can’t be forgotten. So far, so good but so much yet to do. Wallace made some promises yesterday. He said the club would start proper engagement with the fans and he’ll need to be true to his word or else he’ll quickly find that those who support him now will quickly tire of him. He said the vote at the agm gave the board a “clear mandate” but, in truth, it didn’t. The board received a mandate from the institutional investors not from the rank and file, not from the people who sit in the stadium every second week. There is a difference. A big difference. He spoke of yesterday being a “watershed moment”. Again, he’ll need to prove himself on that one. He asked for all those with Rangers’ best interests at heart “to stand behind us, to support us, to engage us, to give us the opportunity to demonstrate that we can take the club back to where we all aspire it to be.” That’s a leap of faith that many supporters won’t make just for the sake of it. They’ll need evidence it’s a leap worth making. Talk is cheap. The requisitioners found that out yesterday. All the talk in the world didn’t get them anywhere close to making a fight of it with the board. So when Wallace speaks of dialogue with the fans and an engagement process with “leading international organisations” that want to be associated with Rangers it all sounds very nice, but seeing is believing. Too many empty promises have been made for too long for too many people to swallow the vision of a bright new tomorrow. To be fair to Wallace, there was more to his remarks than a mere rallying call. There was some substance and some honesty. Yesterday, for instance, he said something extremely interesting about the finances at the club and the way in which some of the numbers are unsustainable. The chief executive said that Rangers’ “cost structure is currently too high for the top division never mind the lower leagues.” That comment stood out because it was such an un-Rangers thing to say. Not too long ago Walter Smith, speaking as a former chairman and a doyen of the club, said that financial freewheeling was part of the Rangers DNA, that the money they spent on players and a manager was part of what Rangers were and that even though it defied logic, that’s the way it has always been. The fatalistic attitude was delivered deadpan, as if there was nothing anybody at Rangers could do about the frightening cash-burn. Not being a ‘Rangers man’ might help Wallace bring some fiscal normality to his beleaguered institution. He is not held hostage by its past. He sees a club that is living beyond its means and he’s not afraid to incur the anger of people in admitting it. Of course, he could have extended his argument a little further. He could have pointed a finger at some of those people responsible for continuing this “cost structure”. One of them was sitting close by on the podium at the agm – Brian Stockbridge, the finance director. Stockbridge has overseen shocking waste in his own brief time at the club and yet he is made of Teflon. The supporters barrack him, the requisitioners shout about his position being untenable, there has been all manner of attacks on his integrity and his professionalism and yet he is still there. Wallace could have sent a message to the disaffected supporters by sacking Stockbridge, the number one subject of the fans’ ire. He hasn’t done so, but his language was interesting when asked if he would. “It would be grossly premature and inappropriate to be talking about dismissing anybody when I have been in the building less than a month,” he said. “My style is to assess what we have got and what we need... I have no hesitation and no difficulty in making difficult decisions but I think those decisions need to be made on the basis of my assessment of the facts rather than somebody else’s view.” No blind show of faith, no ringing endorsement, no circling of the wagons. Measured and non-committal. It portrays a person who will carry out his own audit and draw his own conclusions about the performance of people at the club. For Rangers’ sake you hope he is given full authority to do so. There is a fear – and we won’t know the legitimacy of it for a while – that Wallace, in his attempt to bring real change and proper corporate governance, will find himself out-gunned by some of those around him on the board and some of the investors these board-members represent. The fans are inclined to believe in him, the requisitioners were always glad to accept him, but what is the tag of unanimous respect if he is not given the freedom to do the job as he feels it needs to be done? In the autumn, Dave King arrived into town and had meetings with key people at Rangers and it’s safe to say that he wasn’t bowled over by the enthusiasm of some of those in power at Ibrox. This was pre-Wallace. King has many issues with his conviction in South Africa on tax charges and the hoops he would have to jump through with the SFA and the AIM in order to get the clearance he would need to take up a place on the Rangers board, but possibly the greatest problem he may face is not from the SFA (who would be virtually powerless to stop him getting on the plc board) or the AIM (who King says should not be an issue) but from factions on the Rangers board itself. King would bring money that Wallace says the club needs, but he would want power and that is something that others might be wholly unwilling to give up. Such is the politics of Rangers. Wallace may find out about that soon enough. Will he have the autonomy to do what he says needs to be done or will he be stifled, as others were stifled before him? He will need business savvy and political cunning to do this job. Watershed moment? It’s too early to be making such a definitive conclusion, but it’s the end of the requisitioners, that is for sure. Their motives were right but their execution was flawed, right from the start, and they got a real pasting yesterday. They continue to believe that the club is heading for the rocks in financial terms and they are not alone in that. Stockbridge, himself, said that they may have just £1m left in the bank come April, by which time they will be making appeals to the support to buy their season tickets. If Stockbridge is one of the men doing the appealing – if – then it will be interesting to hear the fans’ response. They say time heals all. With Stockbridge and the Rangers supporters, you have to wonder. There will surely be a period of calm now, maybe before a storm in the spring when money is needed and King returns bearing riches, albeit with conditions. Wallace is a man that people can rally around if he’s as good as his word. A starting point would be to engage with the fans rather than antagonising them in the way that Jack Irvine, the communications man, has done for too long. Yesterday was the end of the requisitioners but not the end of the saga. This has been no fairytale and only an innocent would believe that it is definitely going to have a happy ever after. In Wallace, though, there is hope and expectation and a whole heap of pressure not just to build bridges with fans but to bring commonsense back to Ibrox where for too long the economics of the madman have been in place. All he will need is fiscal brilliance, diplomatic genius and the persuasive powers of a master politician. Apart from that, the task of restoring Rangers should be easy. http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/tom-english-rangers-chief-must-now-walk-the-walk-1-3240246

ALEX SMITH believes Scotland’s football authorities are failing both Hearts and their manager, Gary Locke, by denying them a chance to rebuild. Chairman of the Managers and Coaches Association, Smith stressed Locke is in an impossible position at Tynecastle and is suffering by enduring such pressure so early in his managerial career. Hearts’ descent into administration last June triggered an immediate SPFL registration embargo and a 15-point deduction for the new league season. That left Locke effectively with hands tied and mouth gagged. Experienced players had left on freedom of contract and the manager, having only been appointed in March, found himself with a squad full of under-21 players to fight against relegation. Locke will be unable to replenish his squad during the January transfer window as Hearts will still be in administration well into next year. They are currently 14 points adrift at the bottom of the Scottish Premiership. Smith feels the punishments meted out to Hearts have gone on too long and are having a detrimental effect on Locke’s early days in management. He blames previous directors and disgraced former owner Vladimir Romanov for the club’s demise. Now 73, Smith admitted that, throughout his time in football, he couldn’t recall a manager in a more harrowing position than Locke. “I’ve never known a manager to be in a more difficult situation,” he told the Evening News. “Here we have a young manager in the first few months of his career, managing a club like Hearts, but not able to bring in players. Then there’s the 15-point deduction. I just think it’s ridiculous. “It’s ridiculous that we’re making a top club like Hearts suffer like this because of the poor management of other people. They did things in a way that was running that club towards a multiple crash. “The authorities are making it worse with the sanctions and denying Hearts the right to try and get out of this trouble. They did it with Rangers, another massive club. They didn’t just take action against them, they almost slit their throat. We need these two clubs and we need them in our top league. We don’t need them in the lower leagues.” Locke has pledged to fight on in the hope that Hearts can reel in teams such as Ross County and Kilmarnock at the bottom of the table and avoid relegation. Time is not on their side. Many feel one positive from slipping into the Championship would be the breathing space accorded the Riccarton youth academy graduates to develop as footballers. Smith points out that life in the second tier is likely to be fraught with just as many problems. “Gary would be entitled to expect the chance to take Hearts back up if they did end up relegated, but football nowadays doesn’t always work like that, does it? Hearts could go down into the Championship. Rangers and Dunfermline could come up [from League One]. “Then you might have three out of the four chasing promotion this season possibly still there. It’s going to be some league. The pressure next year would be exactly the same, only the sympathy vote won’t be there. It will be expectation levels there instead. Either way, it’s going to be difficult.” Smith called Locke to offer a pep talk in the wake of Hearts’ 7-0 Scottish Cup defeat by Celtic earlier this month. He will do the same again before Hearts head to Parkhead on league business this weekend. “I feel for him. If he’s feeling like a chat he just has to phone any of the more experienced managers in the game and he’ll get any amount of their time,” explained Smith. “I’ll give him another call this week sometime. He really just has to keep going. It will only take winning a couple of games and he will see an opportunity to turn things round. He can’t lose sight of the fact Hearts are a massive club with a massive support. If there is any sign of a revival, Gary will have everybody 100 per cent behind him. “That’s not always the case when you have to please 15,000 people at your home games. One or two people will just see the jerseys on the field, regardless of who is in them, and assume that because they’re Hearts, they should automatically be winning games. “The majority of Hearts supporters know the situation. The young kids are good players, all they need is that wee glimmer of a chance. If they come onto a run and start getting points, the fans will be right behind them. A lot of people now go to games, sit down and expect to be entertained. Gary will have the siege support and he’ll realise he has to harness that. “There’s no doubt we’re getting a false impression of what he can do at the moment. He can’t bring in players. He’s just to get on working with the young players he has. They’re all very talented, but if things start going the wrong way, it affects them all as a group. You need a few stabilisers in the team to steady them. “That’s why guys like Ryan Stevenson and Jamie Hamill are so important. They’ve been lumbered with this responsibility, which even for them is massive. They have to take on the responsibility of going out and winning games of football. How do you do that? “There is a great art to winning games. The first thing is you don’t lose bad goals, so you need a strong back line and a good goalkeeper. If you do lose a goal, you keep the ball till you get an opportunity to get back into the game. “The key is not to lose a second, so your defence and goalkeeper need to keep you in the game when you’re under pressure.” http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/authorities-have-given-hearts-boss-impossible-task-1-3237607

http://news.stv.tv/west-central/256830-rangers-supporters-trust-suspend-spokesperson-over-improper-conduct/

http://www.gersnet.co.uk/index.php/match-analysis/208-final-mock-agm-results-and-analysis Within this article, you can find the final results of our mock AGM which concentrated on the meeting resolutions related to the appointment of various directors – both existing and potential. While I’d like to reiterate that the poll was not a serious piece of scientific analysis, the results are nonetheless very interesting. In many ways, the outcome is actually broadly along the lines I expected – showing uncertainty for elements of the current board and reasonable support for those nominated to join it. However, it’s especially thought provoking to note a lack of genuine support for the new chairman (possibly as a result of an unnecessarily petty ‘open letter’ of earlier this month). If you compare this with the results for Graham Wallace (whose comments have been much more measured) then it does show how important it is to retain a positive outlook in the media. By way of balance, there appears to be a distinct lack of backing for previous chairman Malcolm Murray with four out of ten voters unimpressed with his nomination. Was it a mistake to offer himself back up for election? Generally though, the incumbents have a lack of obvious support from our voters with Brian Stockbridge especially having only one in ten people able to vote in favour of his reappointment as Finance Director. Even the so-far anonymous Norman Crighton struggles to poll convincingly as voters remain undecided on his contribution. On the other hand, the requisitioners appear to have a solid base to approach Thursday’s AGM with most of their nominations having clear backing from the 1300-1500 total voters. It certainly appears that many fans appreciated their efforts to communicate directly with them in Glasgow last month. That has resulted in around three quarters of voters supporting Paul Murray, Scott Murdoch and Alex Wilson’s nominations. It should also be noted that a similar private poll of RST members has results consonant with this open one, though even more in favour of boardroom change. Thus, I think it’s fair to say many Rangers fans remain cynical about those in charge of the club. However, clearly a fair number of people appear less than enthused about Murray et al. Of course, while these polls are worth exploring, fans only make up for around 12% of the whole when it comes to the actual AGM vote with institutional and major individual investors holding the real power for Thursday’s vote. Indeed, yesterday’s Times suggested this was a foregone conclusion with the existing regime likely to be supported by the majority; although the article was unclear with respect to specific nominees so some change may still happen. Whatever does transpire it’s clear from this poll and recent protests that large numbers of Rangers fans (and indeed investors) remain far from convinced the club is being run well enough to secure its future. That should be worthy of serious consideration by all and I’m glad this AGM is being belatedly held to ensure some democratic process in that sense. However, this also means, no matter the result, the club needs some respite going forward to consolidate its position. With that in mind, I think it’s reliant on all involved to consider a minimum three month moratorium on the issue of boardroom change. For example, we’re told that April will be a low point in the club’s finances so any attempt to destabilise the club further ahead of this period would be extremely detrimental to its future viability. Tacit threats of non-engagement such as boycotts of merchandise and/or season tickets are unlikely to be widely supported so should not be made lightly. Instead, the fan groups discussing such actions would be much better served concentrating on how they can lobby more effectively rather than considering suicidal scare tactics. There’s no doubt genuine change in our supporters organisations is as desperately needed as anything else. On the other hand, neither should any moratorium be seen as an opportunity for the club to continue to hide from its responsibilities. No matter how the board is constituted after Thursday, all involved have to openly discuss the club’s short, medium and long-term future with the fans and potential investors. Both Paul Murray and Sandy Easdale claim they have finance ready to be invested once stability is achieved but how can fans/investors be assured they’re not throwing good money after bad with the share price already halved from last year’s IPO? All in all, lots of rhetoric and spin aside, I don’t know any Rangers fan not concerned about the club’s future. It doesn’t matter if you want to give the Somers administration support or want Paul Murray to ‘cleanse’ the club; fans just want the chance to talk about football again. Indeed, apathy and fatigue may actually present the biggest barrier to all going forward – the team may be winning on the park but unless we see a dramatic change in the way the club approaches a range of issues, we may just be stumbling towards mediocrity instead of climbing purposely back to the pinnacle of the Scottish game. In that sense, Thursday’s AGM may provide some short term relief from all the pain of the last few months but the only way the club (and the fans) can really move forward is via leadership, communication and mutual trust. Can we construct a recognisable path forward in 2014 or will we continue to dig our own grave? Mock AGM Results Somers 1417 votes cast Yes 20% No 75% Undecided 5% Wallace 1370 votes cast Yes 62% No 16% Undecided 22% Stockbridge 1413 votes cast Yes 12% No 86% Undecided 2% Crighton 1347 votes cast Yes 18% No 40% Undecided 42% Easdale 1203 votes cast Yes 21% No 72% Undecided 7% P Murray 1373 votes cast Yes 71% No 27% Undecided 3% M Murray 1361 votes cast Yes 59% No 34% Undecided 7% Murdoch 1338 votes cast Yes 76% No 17% Undecided 7% Wilson 1331 votes cast Yes 76% No 17% Undecided 7%

Being reported on Twitter(I know) that Keevins stated this on RC tonight. Anyone confirm? If true what will he be saying, back board, buy ST, give us your money?

Rangers chief executive Graham Wallace says that he would have no problem working with any of the four boardroom hopefuls who are seeking election at the club’s annual general meeting. Former chairman Malcolm Murray and allies Paul Murray, Scott Murdoch and Alex Wilson have been seeking support for their appointments and the removal of current board members, especially finance director Brian Stockbridge. Recently-appointed chairman David Somers spoke scathingly of the quartet on Saturday but Wallace was more conciliatory as he seeks the stability required to move the club forward. Wallace, who was appointed on November 20, told Sky Sports News: “If the requisitioners, any one of them, were to be voted on to the board, that’s the will of the shareholders. Should that be the will of the shareholders, as a professional businessman, I would be absolutely willing to work with whoever is appointed.” Next Thursday’s meeting comes after a long campaign for change by the Murrays, which included successful court action in October to force the postponement of the AGM and a vote on their potential appointments. That victory sparked several departures and Wallace, Somers and Norman Crighton have since joined Stockbridge and James Easdale on the PLC board. Wallace, a former chief operating officer at Manchester City, is hoping the vote draws a line under the upheaval. “The club needs stability, it needs the platform to move forward,” said the Dumfries-born businessman, who refuted rumours that former chief executive Charles Green or former owner Craig Whyte may be involved in running the club. “There has been a lot of conversations on the relative merits of particular campaigns and particular areas of interest to individuals. What I’m concerned about is having the stability and opportunity to be able to take the club forward. We need to have that mandate to move the club forward. We will have a wide range of supporters engaging with us in the run-up to the AGM. They want to know the club is in good hands, they want to know that the people in the boardroom have the interests of Rangers at heart. And I can categorically give them that assurance sitting from the CEO’s chair. My focus is 100 per cent to drive this club forward.” Paul Murray has previously acknowledged the attributes of Wallace and had no problem with his appointment, but he urged shareholders to vote for him and his allies to bring trust to the Ibrox boardroom. Murray, who was a director of oldco Rangers before being removed by Whyte following his takeover in May 2011, said: “We are not saying that the whole board has to be ousted. We want the best board to take the club forward. I think the most important thing after the last two and a half years is trust and transparency. People have to trust the people on the board and that has actually broken down in the last two and a half years. “We have a couple of individuals on the board who have been there for most of the last 12 months and we have made our views clear on them in terms of the lack of stewardship and financial mismanagement. “There have been three new directors appointed in the last month and we think, certainly Graham Wallace, looks like a credible individual. “We have to ask the question: who appointed these individuals and why would they want to join the board at this time?” http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/wallace-willing-to-work-with-rangers-hopefuls-1-3231793

I know this has been commented on but I was just looking through the accounts there and noticed something so thought I would go back to it.**During the meeting a week past on Thursday, Scott Murdoch said, and I quote: “Im no mathematician but let me just read a piece out of the Annual Rangers accounts, ah yes it’s a horrible picture of Brian Stockbridge but eh basically….(some turnover figures)….the overall staff costs, this when Brian Stockbridge was the CFO, the Financial Director in all of this, the overall staff costs were £17.9 million quid, of which importantly, the player salaries are only £7.8m. So, roughly £10m was Directors remuneration and bonuses and payments at that time in this last 13 months and that’s FACT” Now, immediately following this, there were many of us who pointed out it was a lie straight away as he had clearly forgotten about all the staff needed to run an operation the size of Rangers but there were counter arguments that these people are paid peanuts and we should forget all about them. It only struck me when reading the accounts again just how wrong he actually was. Lets take a look: http://www.rangers.c...lReport2013.pdf Page 34 – Item 7. Directors Emoluments Brian Stockbridge - £409k Charles Green - £933k Malcolm Murray - £52k Craig Mather - £59k Walter Smith - £50k Ian Hart - £28k Bryan Smart – £28k Phillip Cartmel - £29k James Easdale - £0 Total pay including, salaries, fees, severance payments, bonus, Benefits in Kind was £1.589m Now lets add Imran Ahmad in who wasn’t a Director as stated by Mr Murdoch but was probably in the firing line.**He took home £303k Finally, there were a number of Related Party transactions which although im not sure where they appeared, I will include them as “Directors pay” for this exercise.**Total = £394k So in total the “Directors remuneration, bonuses and other payments” totalled £2.6m, NOT £10m which also includes a non director and I have added “On costs” as well to the total. Before anyone asks, the £7.8m was “first team playing squad” and therefore did not include all the coaching staff, of which we know the first team coaches and manager alone took around £1.5m, and all the youth players.**If the “category” was called Football Staff, the figure would have been in excess of £11m. Add to this the £2.6m Directors package, NOT £10 MILLION SCOTT, and that leaves about £4m for the 150 non playing staff. Mr Murdoch most definitely got one vital thing 100% spot on though.**He is certainly no mathematician. When will the lying stop ?

How much money has been pocketed by so called board members since Craig Whytes takeover it is an astonishing ammount of money we are talking about close on £100 million pounds has went through the club and what have Rangers football club got for it, well come April we have £1 million pounds left, Now i ask you another question what has Craig Whyte got for it, What has Craig Mather got for it, What has Imran Ahmed got for it, What has Charles Green got for it, What has Brian Stockbridge got for it, What have the Easdales got for it? What will Jack Irvine get for it? Back this board at the clubs Expense as you will need to look yourself in the mirror every morning.

AS a listed company, the members of the Rangers Board have to be very careful and professional in the way in which we communicate information. This is clearly not the case for the requisitioners, who can make all sorts of wild and spurious allegations. My concern is that these unprofessional, wild allegations are being used just like bogey men were used when I was a child. But in this case, they are being used to frighten our supporters and shareholders. So, within the bounds of what I can say, I would like to put some of these bogey men to rest. Firstly, I read wild accusations that I may not be independent. This is usually accompanied by a list of names from the club’s past. Let me say categorically, that until I joined the Board a mere 4 weeks ago yesterday, I had never heard of Charles Green, Imran Ahmad, Craig Whyte, or any of the other characters in Rangers’ history. To my knowledge, I have never met them, nor had business dealings with them. Nor would I recognise them if I passed them on a street. When I was approached to join the Board, the Company had only two directors and the immediate priority was to preserve the AIM Listing. Surely it is naïve to think that there is any way the Nominated Adviser could have allowed anyone not totally independent to take on this position at that time? I have now read over two years of board minutes and they make very depressing reading in terms of the scale of their lack of professionalism and worse. The minutes make it clear, in my mind, that the boards of recent years have been totally unfit to run this club. The mystery to me is why people should now be considering that members of these boards, which presided over the problems we face today, should be considered for re-election. Although I have learned one lesson, which is that if you shout long enough and loud enough in the media, you may be able to reinvent yourself. Recent inaccurate and, in fact, completely untrue allegations have included a new bogey man about Jack Irvine's contract. I have looked at this and can say that he has a normal contract, with no bonuses attached and the figures quoted by Mr Scott Murdoch are utter nonsense. Let me also say that Graham Wallace and I are beginning a complete review of every contract that is in place. You can imagine that this is going to take weeks and then more time where contracts need to be changed. I have been on board four weeks yesterday and Graham less than that, but we have already begun this critical process. One area, where we are conscious that we need to focus, is in improving our communication and engagement with all Rangers supporters. We have already commenced work to identify what is required to fully engage with our fan base and we will be bringing forward some significant proposals in the near future. The Board is fully behind improving the communication and engagement with the fans. Another bogey man relates to the club's finances. We have said publicly a number of times that any talk of the club going into administration is completely untrue. Yes, we will need to make decisions to improve cash flows and strengthen the business, but these will be the right decisions at the right time. Another new bogey man thrown about by the Gang of Four is the suggestion that we might be thinking of selling Ibrox. We are not thinking about this. Where do the requisitioners get these ideas from? I promise you we have no intention of a sale. Brian Stockbridge suffers most from the lies thrown around by the people in the process of reinventing themselves. Even the requisitoners must understand that finance directors are members of boards and their actions are largely dictated by the board. Reading the minutes of the last two years or more, I see that Mr Murray was involved at board level for long periods covering contract and financial negotiations. It is not that Finance Directors make mistakes, rather that boards make mistakes, or worse. Without Brian, the club would, in my opinion, have been de-listed months ago and ironically the club should owe him a debt of gratitude for holding things together. Going forward, his new CEO, Graham Wallace, needs time to evaluate the whole structure within the business and the people within it. This will be true for Brian as for everyone else. For the good of the club, for the good of the supporters and for the good of the shareholders, I sincerely hope that the shareholders will get behind the existing board and vote for us. In addition, I encourage shareholders to vote against the four requisitioners. Firstly, because some of them were members or chairman of boards which failed this club in the past. Secondly, we need a Board selected from the best available people. Not just from fanatics who put their own personal interest ahead of the greater good of the club. If these people were to join the board they would be taking up positions which should be held in future by the best, professional people with Rangers true best interests at heart and not having their involvement driven by their own personal self interest. Best regards, David Somers http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/5759-an-open-letter-from-the-chairman

I know I will get Pelter's for posting this, but thought I may get the other side of the coins thoughts. It was taken from RM and put together by a poster called TheLawMan "I recently posted about the Murray myths around debt reduction and Break even Domestic policy however i see today he is still claiming he helped reduce debt. His fans appear to believe him as well, despite the facts disputing what he says. Anyway, i thought i would take things a little further and look at the facts and figures of the people we are being asked to vote for. I know this type of thing normally bores people but I would urge you to read through Murrays CV. First an in-depth look at Paul Murrays Directorships – Past and present. Source : http://companycheck....ector/907102823 Lets start with his current active Directorships: Delamore Holdings (2007 to present) ( -£5m Net worth) – A flower and plant wholesaler – Assets of £1.68m and Liabilities of £1.78m. Cash in bank depleted from £652k in 2008 to £184k in 2012 year end accounts. Points to note. 2012 was a £973k loss following on from a £733k loss in 2011 and a long term loan was taken out to repay short term commitments. R.Delamore Limited (2007 to present) (£1.4m Net Worth) – A flower and plant wholesaler – Assets of £1.5m and Liabilities of £1.45m. Cash in bank depleted from £652k in 2008 to £0.8k in 2012 year end accounts. – Points to note. Due to cash depletion and a Going Concern issue, the company took out a new £2.25m loan to repay other loans and made a £628k loss last year. MGI Investments Limited (2004 to present) ( -£64k Net Worth) – A Management Consultancy firm – Assets of £23k and liabilities of £90k. Cash in bank depleted from £91k in 2008 to £3.6k in 2012 year end accounts. Vicast Limited (2013 to present) – A Business and Domestic Software Company – No information as no accounts filed but should be noted that fellow Directors are Martin Bain, John McLelland and Jacqueline Gourlay. St Marys School, Melrose (2009 to present) – (£2.85m net worth) – Education – Assets of £99.6k and Liabilities of £91.2k. Cash in bank depleted from £85k in 2008 to £6.7k in 2012 year end accounts. In summary, he holds 5 active directorships(there is a duplicate listing for MGI on the website) with a total Net Worth of Minus £814,000. Assets of £3.3m and liabilities of £3.4m. Total Cash of £189k. Now lets look at Past Directorships. Urban Life Properties Limited (2003 to 2009) – Dissolved in 2009 RFC 2012 PLC (2007 to 2011) – In Liquidation Wireless Systems International (2000 – 2002 ) – Dissolved in 2004 Martin Currie European Partners and Martin Currie Investment Management Limited (2003 – 2004) – Dissolved in 2007. Paul Murray was brought on board as MD of this business to launch a new £200m private equity fund. He only managed to raise 10% of target and left the business in 2004 after Currie suspended the launch of the fund. 3i PLC (September 1999 to April 2000) – Still active and a huge business with a £80m deficit of Liabilities v Assets Scientia Ferovia Limited + Scientifics Group Service Limited + Harwell Scientifics + Atesta Trustees Limited + Atesta Holding Limited + Scientifics Limited (all 2005 to 2006) – All non trading. It isn’t rocket science but looking at the above list, his Executive Directorships have been an absolute failure. 3 Dissolved, 1 liquidated, 6 non trading and the only 1 of any note, he only lasted less than 7 months in, and that was 13 years ago. Add that to his current directorships and we really need to ask...... WHY PAUL MURRAY ?? Anyway, lets now look at the total current directorships of Paul Murray, Malcolm Murray, Scott Murdoch and Alex Wilson from the above source. 10 COMPANIES NET WORTH = Minus £27.3m ASSETS = £29.4m LIABILITES = £86.3m CASH in bank = £2.23 million Now lets look at the other half which is principally Somers and Easdale. 13 COMPANIES NET WORTH = £294.9m ASSETS = £3.5 billion LIABILITIES = £3.4 billion CASH in bank = £1.3 billion SUMMARY The current record of Paul Murray, Malcolm Murray and Scott Murdoch is dreadful. Liabilities running at 300% to assets, dissolved companies, liquidations, cash only going one way over last 5 years in all of their companies yet we are expected to believe they are the team to take us forward. Contrast that with Somers companies whose cash has multiplied by millions and hundreds of millions in his companies. Huge assets, huge network, just huge all round."

This is from a well known poster on FF, jeez if this is true! Nae wonder Stockbridge is fighting to keep others out. " What would you say if we only got a couple of pence per strip sold in the clubshop? And that we pay, yes we pay someone from a large sport retailer £20k a month to run our retail arm and has never been seen at Ibrox".

Easily our biggest problem position. Even more so than right back (which is our second biggest issue). Aird should never have been dropped. He wasn't fantastic in the last game. But he was significantly better than piss poor which is what Peralta usually provides. It may well be that it's not his fault as he's out of position and that's fine. But it doesn't change the fact that we have at least one other player who looks more effective there. Aird's performance in the previous game was significantly better than anything Peralta has shown up and again when he came on yesterday he added more than the Honduran. The only good thing I remember Peralta doing was one time he chased back with an attacker and won the ball back. I get really pissed off with people bashing the likes of Little more than his performances deserve but for me it is as clear as day, we are a better team with Aird (or one of the other options) playing instead of Peralta. I wouldn't be opposed to giving Peralta a few games at right back as I'm not convinced by Faure there either. We need to stop this habit of negative team selections though. The only reason I can think Peralta gets played is he is thought to be more solid, more defensively capable than an Aird or McKay. But if you watch him his positioning is poor, he isn't strong on the ball or in the challenge and he doesn't contribute fantastically to our defensive outlook. That's a myth. He was ridiculously easily bumped off the ball in the first half. Aird simply has to start next time out on recent performances. We look a much better, more balanced, creative and incisive team.

DONS chairman Stewart Milne today claimed he has “no regrets” over backing the decision to kick Rangers out of the top flight. The 11 remaining SPL clubs voted overwhelmingly to reject the newco Rangers application to join the league in the summer of 2012. The Light Blues are now sitting top of Scottish League One. The absence of Rangers has resulted in a drop in gate revenues for the clubs in the country’s top league. But Milne, pictured, insisted they had to do what was right to retain the integrity of Scottish football. He said: “The important thing is the right decision was made. We’ve had to live with the consequences of that. “It has hit us financially, but not to the scale some people were making out. We have no regrets.” http://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/sport/football/the-dons/no-regrets-for-dons-chief-milne-on-rangers-decision-1.158577?

Yesterday brought another picture for the Ally McCoist photo album, another shot of the Rangers manager shaking hands with a suit and declaring his support for a guy, Graham Wallace, with a “good pedigree”. Without wishing to be unkind to Mr Wallace, whose CV is, indeed, highly impressive, we can, for now, file this photograph alongside McCoist shaking hands with the Easdale boys and, before them, Craig Mather and, before him, Malcolm Murray, and before him, Charles Green, and before that, Craig Whyte. It’s quite a collection. Wallace is going to have to forgive us our scepticism for the moment because too many men with “good pedigree” have been unveiled at Rangers over the last few years only to metamorphose into an embarrassment a little while after. McCoist has endorsed all of them and hasn’t got it right yet. It now appears that he’s throwing his weight behind the current board, saying on Friday that to do anything else at the forthcoming Annual General Meeting would be tantamount to career suicide. He followed that up by saying that he wasn’t just going to vote for the current board, as opposed to the requisitioners led by Jim McColl and Paul Murray, because of his own survival instinct but that he would do so because he felt it was in the best interests of the club. That phrase – as in, “I have the best interests of the club at heart” – has been bandied about Ibrox so often in recent years that it has now become almost as big a footballing cliche as “over the moon”, “game of two halves” and “sick as a parrot”. If it was true that all these boardroom people, from David Murray onwards, had “the best interests of Rangers at heart” then they wouldn’t have become such an epic shambles, now would they? McCoist, understandably, craves calm at Ibrox. He is fabulously well-rewarded for what he does but, still, these past few years haven’t been much fun for him. Giving his imprimatur to the current board is McCoist backing what he thinks is the winning horse, a symbol of his belief that the board will not be beaten at the AGM. A belief that they have become too powerful now to back against. That the decision last week by Isle of Man-based hedge fund Laxey Partners to buy more shares and then commit their support to the board, and not the requisitioners, was a key play in the battle for Rangers and that McColl and company are close to being a busted flush. McCoist has backed a few losers in this Rangers business over the last two years, but the smart money is riding on the board winning the big AGM vote in December. Rangers people are now entitled to ask about the strategy of the requisitioners. Little has been heard from McColl of late. Malcolm Murray gave it the cringe-making “No Surrender” routine in an interview he did with a fans’ group a few weeks ago, but where is the grand plan from these people? Telling the fans that they “can win the vote at the AGM simply because they must” is not exactly a gameplan. Malcolm Murray talks enigmatically about the level of support the requisitioners have from some unhappy and nervy institutional investors but won’t say from where it comes and what it amounts to. Sections of the Rangers support are busting a gut to try to bring about change to the board – change that is needed – but, all the while, what they are seeing is millions of Rangers shares being traded on the market and, seemingly, none of them being purchased by the McColls, the Murrays, the Kings – “the people with Rangers’ best interests at heart”. If this is a war, then the requisitioners appear to be fighting it with pop guns. If they want control of the club, then McColl and King combined have more than enough money to hoover up shares and put themselves in a strong position, but they haven’t done it. They have allowed the Easdales to do it. They have allowed Laxey to do it. They have allowed the opposition to strengthen their position, while the requisitioners have sat on their hands, vowing that they have major support from institutional investors. If they do, then they are going to win a famous victory. If they don’t, given all they have said, they are heading for a humiliating defeat. Let’s be honest, Rangers could have avoided all of this stuff years ago. Whyte was allowed in the door because no Rangers man would touch the club while the big tax case hung over it. The defence was that they’d have been mad to take it over while the big tax case horror show was still in play. Instead they stood back and allowed Whyte to finish a destruction job that David Murray had started. Later, Green was allowed in the door because the Blue Knights didn’t blow him out of the water, even though they had the financial wherewithal to do so. Yes, there are serious issues surrounding the performance of Duff & Phelps throughout that period, but the fact remains that Green was allowed in the door and, by the time McColl and Walter Smith and others made their move, it was far too little, far too late. Twice bitten. No, make that three times bitten. Still there is deep unrest, still there are mystery shareholders, still there is great uncertainty about the club’s finances and its future and still there is a lot of posturing from the requisitioners and, it would seem, not a lot of real action. McColl and King have the money to go to war and to win but they haven’t. It has reached a stage now where the Rangers manager has backed the board, partly because he has to, if he knows what’s good for him, and partly because he thinks he knows which way the wind is blowing in all of this. There’s been so much noise about Rangers men being concerned about the way the club is heading and yet there is a simple truth in all of this. If they are that fearful that the place is moving towards the rocks again, why have they not used their financial muscle to change the narrative – as Fergus McCann did when Celtic were about to go under? McCann arrived at Celtic, put his money down and did the deal to save the club. He didn’t talk, he executed. McCoist – like all managers – will have had cause at times to ask his players about hunger and whether they wanted victory more than their opponents. You could ask the same of the requisitioners. Not the supporters, who fight on in various ways, but the men who are in the lucky position in life to have the wealth to do the things they truly want to do. But do they want it enough? More and more, that seems to be becoming a rhetorical question.

Rangers' biggest shareholders will back the current board at next month's annual general meeting. Laxey Partners Limited increased their shareholding to 11.64% on Wednesday. Colin Kingsnorth, founder and director of the hedge fund, said: "I want to support stability so I think that means supporting all current directors. "Shareholder worries are the use of cash, transparency and corporate governance. The recent appointments seem to address that." Laxey's stance could prove crucial as the current board attempt to retain control, with another group of shareholders, including former director Paul Murray and former chairman Malcolm Murray, keen to oust them. With voting at the AGM expected to be close, the identity of the seller or sellers of the shares is also significant, depending on who they would have backed. But Kingsnorth told BBC Scotland: "I have no idea where the shares came from. I just bought them in the market." Asked if it was conceivable that Laxey could also vote the "requisitioners" - Paul Murray, Malcolm Murray, Alex Wilson and Scott Murdoch - onto the board at the AGM, Kingsnorth added: "Of course I could support the EGM people but I won't because their job is done. "They should claim some credit for forcing the club into action, but now it has I hope they accept that. "They would have supported (the new chief executive) Graham Wallace if he had joined them and I think they should be big enough to support him if the club supports him. "I doubt they will. A spurned chairman just wants to be loved again, but the club has moved on and I hope the new board drives it forward. They have the credibility, so why not. "The fact that cash has been spent badly seems fact, but what's the best thing to do now? "We'll get behind a professional board, make sure we never go into administration again, get the on-the-pitch stuff right." Source BBC ( need you ask )

RANGERS’ new chief exec is a former bigwig at English Premier League giants Manchester City, The Scottish Sun can reveal. Graham Wallace was chief operating officer at the 2012 champions until March. City sources said the 52-year-old Scot, will be unveiled by Gers next week after shaking hands on the deal with chairman David Somers last Wednesday. A source said: “There was a huge response to the advert for a chief executive but Wallace’s credentials blew away all the competition.” Chartered accountant Wallace, from Dumfries, saw off rivals including Dundee chief exec Scot Gardiner, who was also interviewed. He held top finance posts at a string of entertainment giants including MTV Networks Europe, Viacom, Nickelodeon, and IMG Media. Wallace, who lives in Buckinghamshire, was chief financial officer at Man City from 2009 to November 2010, then chief operating officer. He stepped down after the arrival of new chief executive Ferran Soriano, and has been doing consultancy work in the City of London since. The City source said: “He was waiting for the next top job and this is it. His skills and experience will help build Rangers’ global reach.” Wallace’s appointment is part of the current Ibrox regime’s attempt to shore up the board before a shareholders vote on who runs the club at Rangers’ AGM next month. Investment banker Norman Crighton, 47, was announced as a director yesterday.

Coming up on SSN. Sons of Struth ‏@SonsofStruth 28m You should tune in to skysports news if your a fan of SOS. Chris Graham ‏@ChrisGraham76 55s Rangers news coming up on Sky Sports.

Slightly confused here. The Scotland match is currently in the 85th minute but on Sky it's in the 81st?

IAN REDFORD reveals all about the stress and strains of his Ibrox career, the death of his younger brother and his experience as Darren Fletcher's agent in his new book FOOTBALL is a game of fate. A roller coaster of fortune. During my time at Rangers, Ally McCoist was enduring torture from the fans. It wasn’t his fault the club were struggling – but the fans seemed to be on a mission to destroy him. And things came to a head on March 17, 1984 when we played Dundee at Ibrox in a Scottish Cup quarter-final replay. We started well but Dundee pegged us back to 2-2. The crowd were getting impatient and I remember feeling the enormous pressure of expectation on the players. It got so bad for Ally that at one point the whole of the support began chanting, “ALLY, ALLY, GET TAE F***” And it got worse. First Robert Prytz was sent off then I stupidly saw red as well. We heard their winner from the dressing room. Afterwards, we all just sat in the huge communal bath together, no-one speaking a word. Suddenly Ally just broke down into tears, he was weeping openly. The weeks and months of constant pressure and abuse had driven him to the limits of his tolerance. He looked a broken man and I’m sure no one would have thought it possible for him to come back from such depths of seemingly utter despair. But fate intervened. If Prytz and myself hadn’t been suspended for the League Cup Final with Celtic the following week, I don’t think Jock Wallace would’ve selected Ally. He had no choice, though, and the rest is history. Ally scored all three in a famous 3–2 victory, the winner coming in extra-time from a rebounded penalty. Some things are just meant to be. But that’s the pressure of signing for Rangers – and the day I did back in 1980 was one I’ll never forget. I had only ever wanted to go to London from Dundee and play for Arsenal or Spurs but John Greig had offered a Scottish record £210,000. So I found myself at the top of the marble staircase shaking hands with him. I defy anyone to walk through the doors of Ibrox and not feel they are within the boundaries of a special club. But so many things about my move to Rangers weren’t right. Signing for them was an intimidating prospect for a country boy with low self-esteem. When it came to the finances I was at best naive and at worst plain stupid. I got £6000 to sign on, taxed, £150 a week, a four-year contract and never saw a penny of the transfer fee. I became Rangers’ biggest ever signing for practically nothing! I knew this was a struggling team I was joining. I was also just not fit enough to do myself justice and to handle the immediate pressure. My dad was no help because all he wanted was to see me playing for Rangers. That was his dream. He didn’t want me going to England. To be able to say I played 250 games for Rangers gives me an enormous sense of pride. But the timing was wrong. In that first year I didn’t really feel part of that dressing room. In training I had a major bust-up with Rangers’ most legendary hard man, Tam ‘Jaws’ Forsyth. He seemed at that time like a playground bully. We were playing fives on the ash park at our Albion training ground and I took the ball straight past Jaws. He was getting on a bit and didn’t appreciate anyone doing that to him. Next thing I knew was WHAM! I received a forearm smash. I just exploded in rage. Within seconds Big Tam and I were trading punches. We were separated but Tam wanted ‘afters’ and I was up for it because I was past caring. It turned out to be a defining moment because my team-mates no longer saw me as a big, soft, silver-spooned country boy. Coming from the Perthshire countryside, religious bigotry was new to me. Although I’m a Protestant, I would not consider myself a religious person. Early on at Rangers, I was targeted by a bigot at a party. He was goading me then punched me hard in the face without any warning. The next day at training, I was asked by someone what had happened and if I “wanted it taken care of”. The tension of sectarianism is inescapable when you play for either Rangers or Celtic and, like it or not, sectarianism is responsible for the unique atmosphere that surrounds the rivalry. A bigot is just a bigot – no matter what the colour of his scarf is. It’s naive to think it will all just go away. It never will. The wounds of history will ensure a portion of each new generation, no matter how small, will be indoctrinated in hatred. I was also shocked one night at a Supporters’ Player of the Year function when a fan asked for my autograph and wanted me to sign FTP alongside it. I told him “no way” and he began to rant that I wasn’t a true Rangers player. It was an isolated incident though. Generally speaking, the fans are wonderful and make you feel proud to be playing for the club. The best Old Firm game I played in came in the same week as a 3–0 defeat by Chesterfield in the Anglo-Scottish Cup. We took a slaughtering but playing Celtic was ideal because we had nowhere to hide. We thumped them 3–0 – it easily could’ve been six – and I was voted Man of the Match. But John Greig wasn’t able to find a formula consistent enough to win a title. My frustrations led to me feeling depressed and I was drinking to blot everything – but it solved nothing. It was a vicious downward spiral. Then at the end of 1981 – after beating Dundee United in a Scottish Cup Final replay following my missed penalty in the first game – we met them again in the League Cup Final. I was on the bench. Looking back, I can see that I was very depressed. In the second half United took the lead. I had begun to give up on playing any part in the match. So had my friend Billy ‘Bleeper’ MacKay, so we began to tuck into a box of chocolates that had been lying unopened in the back of the dugout. It was comfort eating! Suddenly, Greig shouted: “Bleeper! Get warmed up.” Meanwhile, I was still stuck in the dugout, feeling even more depressed. Then, with no more than five minutes remaining, John shouted: “Reddy, get your tracksuit off. You’re going on – NOW!” I nearly choked on the last remaining chocolate as I stumbled out of the dugout. I had been on the pitch no more than seconds when Davie Cooper equalised. Suddenly, from munching chocolates in depression, I had only one thing on my mind – scoring the winner. It all happened within a split second. As I controlled the ball, I was aware of a gap just inside the top left of the United goal. My first touch had been good but my second touch was even better. I knew in an instant. My lifelong dream came true. I had just scored the winner in the last seconds of a cup final! In front of me were all those Rangers fans who had witnessed that last-minute penalty miss. Like a maniac I was off and running. Had the stadium doors been open I would’ve needed a fiver to get back in! There were too few of these rare gems in my time at Ibrox but even to have experienced one moment such as this made everything worth it. *** My last appearance as a professional player was a cameo role in Raith Rovers’ remarkable League Cup triumph over Celtic in 1994. I was a sub and don’t remember much about the game – but was crapping myself when the tie went to penalties. As a former spot-kick taker it shouldn’t have fazed me but I didn’t relish it. It went to sudden death and it was Paul McStay’s turn, then mine. I wanted him to miss more than anything in the world. Sure enough, Paul obliged and it saved me the ordeal of another do-or-die Cup final penalty. My previous record was one taken, one missed! *** I remember being happy in my early childhood – but a couple of events ended up having a profound effect on my life. The first was the birth of my brother Douglas when I was five. When he was two Douglas was diagnosed with leukaemia and it was the beginning of a nightmare that makes me feel empty. My sister Jill and I were young and had no idea our little brother’s illness was life threatening. I would regularly say things like, ‘When will Dougie be better, mum?’ I never considered for a minute he might be dying. When he began going to school he was teased because he had lost his hair and was fat because of the chemotherapy and having to take steroids. I hated that. He loved playing football when he was well enough but I would never let him win. He would go running off crying to mum and she would come out and give me such a rollicking. I couldn’t understand why mum and dad seemed to go way over the top but the hurt and anger they were feeling made them protective of him. They kept a lot from us but the time they spent with Douglas at hospital with mum meant Jill and I had to fend for ourselves emotionally. Looking back, deep down, I must’ve resented it. We would sometimes talk about how Douglas was their favourite. The atmosphere at home was not what it had been before Douglas was born. I was subconsciously blaming Dougie for the way all our lives seemed to be changing. I was in my first year at Perth High School when Douglas died. I was playing football for the school on a cold Saturday morning in December 1972 and when we got home I was told he only had hours to live. I bolted from the kitchen, threw myself on the bed and sobbed my heart out. The emptiness I felt during that time haunts me to this day. It was a total, unforgettable nightmare. My life felt like it had just imploded with the shock of it all. Christmas followed just days after the funeral. Somehow mum found the strength to make the effort but dad made it clear he wanted no part of it. Every Christmas after that at home was a tense, anxious and depressing affair. For years it was taboo to even mention his name. Dougie died pretty much a stranger to me. I regret not being able to say sorry for resenting the attention he got and sorry for teasing him and hurting his feelings. But as a young child, I simply didn’t know. Over the years I have rationalised this and forgiven myself for my feelings then. The other big thing to happen was when I found I was stone deaf in my left ear. A specialist told me a nerve had been damaged and there was nothing they could do to save my hearing. He told me contact sports were no longer an option – I would end up completely deaf if I received any blow to the head. But there was no way he was going to stop me doing what I loved. *** After my playing career was finished, it seemed natural to get involved on the business side of football as an agent. One major talent I was involved with in his early years was Darren Fletcher. A French contact tipped me off that scouts were raving about his displays for Scotland schoolboys at a tournament in France. I was asked to get him to Lille and persuaded Darren and his dad to come with me to France to see the set-up. They were impressed but Alex Ferguson got wind of the interest and convinced them Darren’s future lay at Manchester United.

I suppose this is blogger’s equivalent of the Samurai tradition of Seppuku – their unique suicide rite. At journalism college one of my course tutor’s used to invariably preach about the successful narrator knowing, and writing to the very heart and soul of their audience. This article will do quite the opposite and some may find the content uncomfortable, however I feel it asks a question which needs to be asked. The boardroom battle for control of our club has seen a thorough examination of the character and integrity (or alleged lack thereof) of the various candidates vying for control. It would be fair to say the Rangers support is well versed in the personal character strengths and weaknesses of the Murrays, the Easdales etc. The apparent weaknesses of the “other sides” candidates have been given maximum exposure during the ensuing debate, with the morality factor at times appearing as important as the size of the wallet they, or their backers, bring to our club. All is fair in love and war. Waiting in the wings is a man many Rangers fans would view as our club’s “Messiah” – Dave King. Almost as important as his money appears to be his ability to unite the fragmented factions within our support for he appears to have the unanimous backing of all. Perhaps the eventual winner in our boardroom battle will determined by which side, if any, Dave King decides to ally with. Such unanimous support for King has spared him the moral examination so many others have been subjected to in our boardroom struggle. With the exception of course of the Scottish Press. Let me make one thing clear – the Scottish Press have long surrendered the right to exercise moral judgement with regard to our club. They surrendered such a right long ago with their silence over 5 way agreements, their silence over unlawful transfer embargo’s imposed on our club and their desire to join with the haters in labelling us “cheats”and thus trampling over our right to a presumption of innocence until proven otherwise. This discussion is by invitation only, and those out with the Rangers support are not invited, cordially or otherwise. But it is nonetheless, a discussion which has to be had. Judge Southwoods assessment of Dave King in his tax battle with the South African authorities was damning. I’m sure most of you have read it, but to spare you the false morality of the Scottish press it can be found here : http://www.moneywebtax.co.za/moneywebtax/view/moneywebtax/en/page259?oid=56208&sn=Detail Are we satisfied as a support that the coat bearing glib and shameless will be discarded should Dave King return to Ibrox in any capacity ? Will an alleged disrespect for the truth be at odds with a support demanding transparency and clarity with regard to the governance of our club ? Or are the characteristics described by Judge Southwood exactly what are needed at our club in a battle where our enemies are not playing by the rules ? These are difficult questions but we will need to wrestle with them at some point. Failure to do so is just not an option.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/h...ibrox.22647991 FORMER Rangers chairman Malcolm Murray has called on new Ibrox chief David Somers to ensure democracy at next month's crunch annual general meeting. The chartered accountant and investment manager was appointed acting chairman of Rangers International Football Club plc last week and will oversee what is likely to be a stormy shareholder summit on December 19. Mr Murray, former Blue Knights leader Paul Murray and businessmen Alex Wilson and Scott Murdoch are bidding to win seats on the Ibrox board. They have the backing of fans after high-profile protests by supporters in recent weeks. Malcolm Murray said: "The worries [the fans have] are very valid but there is light at the end of the tunnel. The penny has dropped. "As a leading fan said to me this morning, it is as though a plague of locusts have descended on Ibrox in the last five years and they won't leave until they have picked all the flesh off us. "We won't allow that to happen, we can't. "The only ones that leave are the ones that go through the revolving doors with a very large cheque. That has got to stop. "That is why the AGM exists. We have got to hope that the new chairman is totally independent and will make sure that we have democracy to get that done. "The fans need the money put back in the club, that is not where it is going. We will make sure that happens in the future, when we win at the AGM." Rangers fans kept up the pressure on the current Ibrox hierarchy with a demonstration ahead of the team's Scottish League One victory over Airdrieonians on Saturday.

Forfar Athletic ‏@ForfarAthletic 18m Rangers v Forfar Athletic - 16.11.13 - Match Postponed Forfar Athletic are disappointed to announce that our... http://fb.me/14XKWq0cr Forfar Athletic are disappointed to announce that our visit to Ibrox to face Rangers on Saturday November 16th has been postponed. We had been advised yesterday that it was likely to go ahead and Rangers had forwarded tickets to us for sale. However following further international calls today for Rangers players the SPFL have advised us that the game will now be postponed and re-arranged for in all probability a midweek slot in December. Tuesday or Wednesday December 3rd/4th the most likely dates. It has to be emphasised that Forfar Athletic have no complaint with the Ibrox club on this issue, as they have attempted as best they could to feed us up to the minute information as it came to hand. Similarly Forfar Athletic have attempted to keep supporters fully informed over the past week as the scenario developed. ‘Loons’ officials realise that this news will come as a disappointment to supporters, some of whom were looking to make a weekend trip to Glasgow taking in the Friday night Scotland fixture as a bonus.

Thisis lifted from FF thread on a DR story running today re Paul Murray and the AGM, from someone who has read that story, emboldment mine: ============== "Christian Purslow still lined up to be new chief executive. New financial director is in place but no names are revealed. Murray stating he has a team ready to go to work. Murray and Mccoll's legal team have also secured the identities of the figures behind Blue pitch Holdings and Margarita Holdings, they will be revealed by tomorrow. ===============

BOARD OF RANGERS FC 1 #SACKTHEBOARD# 0 For those of us in the neutral enclosure, sitting atop a fence rather than allying with any particular faction, the weekend scoreline came as something of a shock result. A very much under strength Rangers Board managed to pull off a shock victory against their bitter rivals - #sacktheboard# The result was made all the more remarkable considering the Rangers board have “Toxic Jack” in the squad, a man whose propensity this season to cite Paul McConville and Andy Muirhead to support his arguments make him firm favourite for the “Own Goal Of The Season” award. But in what to date, has been a very ugly and bruising contest, the Rangers Board emerged as Saturdays victors with lone striker Sandy Easdale netting the winner with the following display of intricate mouthwork : “I have no desire to criticise any individual or group and believe the constant tit for tat that we have seen recently is damaging the club” Hallelujah !!! To borrow a well known beer commercial’s slogan.....”If only all statements were made this way” Many of us in the undecided camp are growing weary of the predictable tactics which make the long ball up the middle look like an intricate maze of passes taken from the drawing board. Unsubstantiated allegations based on little more than rumour and scaremongering – if you have evidence or the truth is it really too much to ask you share it with the rest of the Rangers support so that we can make informed choices ? The citing of bloggers who yesterday you ridiculed as having a lack of credibility but today you are championing because their argument suits yours – only demeans your own credibility The citing of well known anti-Rangers contributors to support your particular argument – need I say more ? Careful where you sow those magical beans Jack. The new forum user whose entire posting history is to provide links to journalists who support his/her argument. But perhaps worst of all is the level of personal vitriol being exchanged between Bears as freely as Barcelona exchange passes. As if it’s not bad enough one bloggers wife being brought into the fray, some even felt the Daily Record publishing a photo of our director’s house was justified. Furthermore it’s difficult to afford people victim status when they themselves are engaging in the type of conduct they are complaining about – in this regard the word “hypocritical” jumps out at me way before “snake oiled salesman” or “Thief”. But seeing as Tom English enlightened us all at the weekend with some parody perhaps it’s fitting we end on that note. Speaking to Easdale post match it was clear he had a point to prove. “I was delighted to get that winner. All week Chuck [Charles Green] has been winding me up, waving his honorary RST membership in front of me and declaring..." “Hey Sandy lad, have you got one of these babies yet?”