Rangers Protests ââ?¬â?? "Donald Muir, the Saviour Within"? - article by Boss

[boss 0]

The article certainly is

 

Where in the article do I "proclaim Muir as the hero who kept the squad together"?

[Dr Preston Burke 0]

Obviously you didn't use the word hero, i was being facetious, but i don't buy into the belief that because we didn't sell Bougherra, Boyd, or Davis in January, Muir is "the saviour within". We signed nobody, no-one has signed new contracts despite the fact we have 15 players in the last 6 to 18 months of their contracts, and it was a month where no English teams pushed the boat out. Let's just see how determined we are to reject bids come July

Edited February 14, 2010 by Dr Preston Burke

[maineflyer 0]

Muir is on the Board, why doesn't he talk to us? Rangers are not a normal business, he should comunicate with the Support. The impression is he is being told keep quiet.

 

Sorry but that is the respomsibility of the chairman. Why would you expect Muir in particular to do the communicating?

[craig 5,195]

Depends IMO regarding who would make the public statements. Often a Chairman only makes public statements at AGM time. More often is the case that the CEO is the public face of a company when it comes to media concerns.

[chilledbear 16]

Sorry but that is the respomsibility of the chairman. Why would you expect Muir in particular to do the communicating?

 

 

If you were constantly under attack, would you not want to answer/explain. It's a Football Club not Stalanist Russia.

[Bluedell 5,329]

Where did I say he was? Read what I wrote, not what you think I wrote or what you think I should have written. In a parallel universe, we'd do a lot worse than appoint Muir as Chief Executive.

"Donald Muir is the best Chief Executive that Rangers never had" certainly implies that he is acting as a CEO in all but name.

 

I wrote it, so of course I'm sure about it.

 

You really shouldn't believe all of the disinformation that is being spread.

 

 

You really shouldn't believe all of the disinformation that is being spread.

 

So stuff that you get told is 100% accurate but everyone else's isn't.

 

Lol - no turnaround specialist is going to care too much about how he is viewed. He wouldn't be very good at his job if he did! Muir has a job to do - if he upsets folk along the way, then such is life.

So the fact that a director of our club does not care about the support does not matter? It should not be his prime consideration, but it should be something that I would expect any club director to deal with.

 

No it doesn't. You keep repeating that but can come up with no piece of evidence to support it. Those of us that believe it have the audited Accounts, AJ's statement at the AGM, and the absence of a January firesale to back us up.

The evidence was AJ saying it at the AGM. Quotes like "we meet the constraints of the plan that we have agreed to adopt" mean that there is more to it than just repaying �£1m pa. That was the case last year and we did not have a business plan. The business plan obviously places restriction on what can and can't be done on top of the �£1m repayment.

 

Just a wee bit worried, perhaps unneccesarily, that some will be vituperative and divisive. A bit more openness wouldn't have gone amiss. Isn't that what is being requested of the Club?

A valid concern (I'm sure I share the same conerns), but in fairness banners tend to lose their effectiveness if revealed beforehand. All will be revealed today so it's hardly in keeping with what the club has been accused of.

 

 

Ask him. Frustration?

Frustration? Could be, but an equally (or arguably more) valid argument is that it suggests a contradiction of your viewpoint.

[ascender 352]

Not sure if anyone saw Charlie Brooker's Newswipe a few weeks back, but there was a piece in it about how the press in the UK love to use un-named "sources" in stories. This leaves the reporters open to being manipulated by the source to suit their own agenda and when the facts come out, there's no-one to be found.

 

Some of the facts of what's going on at Ibrox just now are out there in the form of our financial figures. You then have clear statements by some of those involved like Lloyds, who chose to state the Muir was not their man. We also have some words from WS, which were clearly designed to throw the cat in amongst the pigeons so to speak, but without actually telling us anything specific.

 

Then, we have the "sources" who are feeding information to people who post on internet forums. These sources seem to be connected with various people connected with the club, the bank or potential buyers. The information they release is dissected in great detail online, but usually there's a pretty quick reaction posted to it, either agreeing or disagreeing with the sentiment/facts. Pretty soon, the original poster is being lauded as the absolute bringer of truth & justice, or the assembled mob are scrambling for their pitchforks.

 

Quite a few things are worrying about this, but seeing as its being discussed on forums, we shouldn't be surprised with how its playing out.

 

Firstly, who is deciding that one source of information is to be trusted in what they're telling us? Regardless of previous form, a couple of sources have said that we shouldn't believe all we hear, as there's a lot of mis-information being spread, on purpose. So what do we believe? All of it? Some of it? None of it? Or none of it from certain posters, but some of it from others?

 

Take the article by Boss for example. On some other forums, its dismissed out of hand, straight away, as being anti-Rangers, trying to divide the support and a load of old tosh. On what basis can anyone say that for sure? Its great to see the support getting united and vocal about something at long last, but we also need to be careful that we're not backing the wrong horse so to speak. There seems to be a groundswell of opinion which praises anything that backs up the current party line that Muir & Lloyds are "the enemy within". Anything else is dismissed out of hand. There's some points in the article by Boss that would appear to directly contradict what was generally held as "fact" about what would happen during the January transfer window for example. Not to mention the other postings made over the last couple of months promising that something was going to happen within x number of days/weeks, only to be met with deadly silence and a confused look when nothing at all happened.

 

Redford was right, it should just be treated as another "opinion piece", but so should all the other articles by journos and forum-posters alike until someone, somewhere, has the courage of their convictions and puts a name that actually means something to one of these "sources".

 

I'm at the point where I genuinely have no idea what the hell is going on or who to believe. Don't get me wrong, I think the situation is being handled terribly from the side of our board and Lloyds, although I firmly believe its our directors' responsibility to be speaking to the fans, not the bank. I just think we're being all too happy to be lead up whatever garden path suits our mood and that our "no-one like us, we don't care" attitude has the potential to cloud things for us.

 

Sorry, just another opinion piece to add to the pile

[maineflyer 0]

If you were constantly under attack, would you not want to answer/explain. It's a Football Club not Stalanist Russia.

 

I doubt very much if Donald Muir is feeling much pressure to do any explaining.

[maineflyer 0]

Not sure if anyone saw Charlie Brooker's Newswipe a few weeks back, but there was a piece in it about how the press in the UK love to use un-named "sources" in stories. This leaves the reporters open to being manipulated by the source to suit their own agenda and when the facts come out, there's no-one to be found.

 

Some of the facts of what's going on at Ibrox just now are out there in the form of our financial figures. You then have clear statements by some of those involved like Lloyds, who chose to state the Muir was not their man. We also have some words from WS, which were clearly designed to throw the cat in amongst the pigeons so to speak, but without actually telling us anything specific.

 

Then, we have the "sources" who are feeding information to people who post on internet forums. These sources seem to be connected with various people connected with the club, the bank or potential buyers. The information they release is dissected in great detail online, but usually there's a pretty quick reaction posted to it, either agreeing or disagreeing with the sentiment/facts. Pretty soon, the original poster is being lauded as the absolute bringer of truth & justice, or the assembled mob are scrambling for their pitchforks.

 

Quite a few things are worrying about this, but seeing as its being discussed on forums, we shouldn't be surprised with how its playing out.

 

Firstly, who is deciding that one source of information is to be trusted in what they're telling us? Regardless of previous form, a couple of sources have said that we shouldn't believe all we hear, as there's a lot of mis-information being spread, on purpose. So what do we believe? All of it? Some of it? None of it? Or none of it from certain posters, but some of it from others?

 

Take the article by Boss for example. On some other forums, its dismissed out of hand, straight away, as being anti-Rangers, trying to divide the support and a load of old tosh. On what basis can anyone say that for sure? Its great to see the support getting united and vocal about something at long last, but we also need to be careful that we're not backing the wrong horse so to speak. There seems to be a groundswell of opinion which praises anything that backs up the current party line that Muir & Lloyds are "the enemy within". Anything else is dismissed out of hand. There's some points in the article by Boss that would appear to directly contradict what was generally held as "fact" about what would happen during the January transfer window for example. Not to mention the other postings made over the last couple of months promising that something was going to happen within x number of days/weeks, only to be met with deadly silence and a confused look when nothing at all happened.

 

Redford was right, it should just be treated as another "opinion piece", but so should all the other articles by journos and forum-posters alike until someone, somewhere, has the courage of their convictions and puts a name that actually means something to one of these "sources".

 

I'm at the point where I genuinely have no idea what the hell is going on or who to believe. Don't get me wrong, I think the situation is being handled terribly from the side of our board and Lloyds, although I firmly believe its our directors' responsibility to be speaking to the fans, not the bank. I just think we're being all too happy to be lead up whatever garden path suits our mood and that our "no-one like us, we don't care" attitude has the potential to cloud things for us.

 

Sorry, just another opinion piece to add to the pile

 

Good read that. Just want to clarify that our directors have a responsibility in law to act in the best interests of the company and its shareholders. They only have a moral responsibility to take supporters into account and morals are hard things to tie down in business.

[OnlyOneAmoruso 0]

Outstandingly timed as always.

 

Pathetic.