Farce by any name.

[wabashcannonball 0]

Which is where semantics come into play mate. Eck could have introduced his friend to his employer at any time during his time with the club, it would not make Murray a liar. As I say, the main arguement for the Muir Murray side is that Murray employed Muir in other business roles prior to Rangers. In fact he only did so for a short while.

 

 

If reports are right, Murray owes somewhere in the region of �£750nillion, Rangers make up a tiny portion of that. If the bank had wanted to put Muir into the workings of Murray's various companies they would have started with the biggest (which happened) and worked to the others (which happened)

 

It is to be remembered that as well as knowing Murray prior to his role with Rangers, Muir was very well known to Lloyds and had infact done work with them (not to mention a certain accountancy firm)

 

 

I cant (and infact dont) claim that Muir is definately a 'bank' man but for me there is enough there to question him on exactly who he works for. If it is Murray we need to worry, if it is the bank I think we need to worry.

 

 

The one thing I cant get away from is actually fairly simple. He knows there are concerns about his role, he knows there are allegations being made and innuendo being spread, yet despite calls from fans and from journalists he has refused to release a simple statement. That has alarm bells ringing for me, alarm bells that are only compounded when he meets small groups of fans in 'secret'. Why is he meeting some people and not others? why is he happy to ignore the calls of the people he has a responsibility towards?

 

Lot of "ifs" in there NL, which is understandable under the circumstances and misinformation culture surrounding the subject. However it is not Muir's remit to issue statements, that is for the office of the CEO or the absent and frankly impotent Chairman. To be honest I am more interested in WS either substantiating or withdrawing his statement about who is running the club, that was the catalyst for this whole ongoing subject, or is the word of WS sacrosanct above all others.

 

As for Muir being known to Lloyds and other big hitters in the financial world, that is no surprise at all considering his job, a big plus for the club rather than a minus.

Edited February 16, 2010 by wabashcannonball

[Guest Northampton_loyalist]

Lot of "ifs" in there NL, which is understandable under the circumstances and misinformation culture surrounding the subject. However it is not Muir's remit to issue statements, that is for the office of the CEO or the absent and frankly impotent Chairman. To be honest I am more interested in WS either substantiating or withdrawing his statement about who is running the club, that was the catalyst for this whole ongoing subject, or is the word of WS sacrosanct above all others.

 

I think the word of Smith strikes a chord with Rangers fans. He is a legend to the vast majoirty and as such his words carry more weight than yer average bear. With or without Smith saying that which he has people were growing concerned, his words gave a direction to that concern. I would also be wary of taking Murray's words at face value. People cant call him all the names going until he says something they agree with.

[Frankie 8,157]

There's no doubt Walter Smith is as much to blame as anyone for the current situation.

 

I don't know his motives (and I place more credence in his comments than anyone else's) but even he must realise he's not helping ease the frustration of the support.

 

Of course he could be being very clever - firstly creating pressure on the finance bods to give him lee-way with regards to personnel; and/or secondly, to create a bunkered down club thriving on the pressure from alleged 'much worse' futures.

[wabashcannonball 0]

I think the word of Smith strikes a chord with Rangers fans. He is a legend to the vast majority and as such his words carry more weight than yer average bear. With or without Smith saying that which he has people were growing concerned, his words gave a direction to that concern. I would also be wary of taking Murray's words at face value. People cant call him all the names going until he says something they agree with.

 

You misunderstand me, whither it is WS, SDM or Muir what is said is either factual or it isn't, there is no grey area WS categorically contradicted his chairman and stated the bank was in running the club. Now you either believe WS to be correct or you don't, if you think WS is correct and the Chairman and everyone else is "mistaken" you have painted yourself into a corner before you have even started to ask any pertinent questions.

[Guest Northampton_loyalist]

You misunderstand me, whither it is WS, SDM or Muir what is said is either factual or it isn't, there is no grey area WS categorically contradicted his chairman and stated the bank was in running the club. Now you either believe WS to be correct or you don't, if you think WS is correct and the Chairman and everyone else is "mistaken" you have painted yourself into a corner before you have even started to ask any pertinent questions.

 

or if you do what I do and stick to asking questions then you are fine

[wabashcannonball 0]

or if you do what I do and stick to asking questions then you are fine

 

Therein lies the rub, you have to ask the questions of the relevant parties, as I intoned in the OP, apparently that is not registering, it tends to help a cause if protest is made against the proper targets, as opposed to those imagined to be or directed as such by media frenzy.

Rangers survived before any of the protagonists in this drama appeared, and Rangers will survive long after they are gone.

[Guest Northampton_loyalist]

Therein lies the rub, you have to ask the questions of the relevant parties, as I intoned in the OP, apparently that is not registering, it tends to help a cause if protest is made against the proper targets, as opposed to those imagined to be or directed as such by media frenzy.

Rangers survived before any of the protagonists in this drama appeared, and Rangers will survive long after they are gone.

 

It is registering just fine mate. As much as you have your thoughts on who should be asked what, others can and do disagree.

[wabashcannonball 0]

Perhaps you can enlarge on the questions that you are asking, or have they been answered but not to your satisfaction, maybe I am to trusting , time will tell. Until the facts are known to your satisfaction, is it your intention to wash our perceived dirty linen in public, somewhat in my humble opinion a huge misjudgement. But as you say each to his own, I wish you well in your endeavours for the truth, what little I know of the machinations going on the truth is already there and the club is in safe hands.

[Guest Northampton_loyalist]

Perhaps you can enlarge on the questions that you are asking, or have they been answered but not to your satisfaction, maybe I am to trusting , time will tell. Until the facts are known to your satisfaction, is it your intention to wash our perceived dirty linen in public, somewhat in my humble opinion a huge misjudgement. But as you say each to his own, I wish you well in your endeavours for the truth, what little I know of the machinations going on the truth is already there and the club is in safe hands.

 

 

I am not involved in any protest organisation at this point. I played my small part and it is now others that carry that on. Im talking here as one fan to another.

[wabashcannonball 0]

I am not involved in any protest organisation at this point. I played my small part and it is now others that carry that on. Im talking here as one fan to another.

 

Must say I liked the reference to "if" where have I heard that before. http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=141874&view=findpost&p=1057707044