Jump to content

 

 

Recommended Posts

Cast your mind back ten years to season 2000/2001.

 

Ronald de Boer signed from Barcelona; Tore Andre Flo signed for a transfer fee that will never be matched in Scotland; and a squad containing names such as Amoruso, van Bronckhorst and Klos - we could even afford to let Andrei Kanchelskis go on loan to the EPL and Man City for half a season.

 

This was the start of a new decade under the continuing custodianship of David Murray - where he summed up his personality and ambition at the time with one simple quote from 2000 - "For every five pounds Celtic spend, we will spend ten". Most Rangers fans everywhere were enjoying the regular spectacle of Murray lording it in the media. Indeed the word 'moonbeam' didn't exist in those days.

 

Speaking to Michael Grant in the Sunday Herald in late 2001, the loss of the league in 2000/01, coupled with rising debt hadn't affected the gallus 50 year old David Murray. In fact, he was as confident as ever in his club's future and given the success he'd help bring in during the 1990s, he had every right to be. Surely one season without the title wouldn't affect our operations ten years later?

 

After all, Murray spoke candidly of 'being guilty of looking for short-term fixes', 'not wanting to sell the club', and that while he felt a major football club would go out of business it 'wouldn't be Rangers'. Juxtapose such warranties with comments about tying players down on long term contracts and ring-fencing the club against future losses, most of us bought into the security offered by an owner who had helped bring back success to the club along with the vision of Holmes and Souness.

 

Unfortunately, less than a year later, we found out we were �£50+million in debt, Murray had stepped down as chairman and Alex McLeish was to preside over a 'short' period of 'downsizing'. "Not to worry," said new chair John McLelland at the 2002 AGM, "we won't lose sleep over it." With tax 'queries' originating from that period's wage-book casting their shadow over the club, to the ongoing saga over its ownership and declining ticket sales; one wonders if McLelland is sleeping well nowadays.

 

Of course, while it is easy to pick through old newspaper interviews and make anyone look bad, our present situation is something to worry about given the assurances given back then. Players are no longer 'locked away' on long term contracts, we are the ones bringing players IN on loan (from Aberdeen!) and it is Celtic spending the kind of money that was pocket change for us ten years back. The ever-loyal Rangers fan-base still has no long term vision to buy into.

 

Indeed, in 2001 Murray specifically alluded to the wider problems of a declining Scottish product and the Old Firm dominance being problematic for its future. Prophetic words but our club are as guilty as anyone in being over-reliant on TV money and selfishness. Why did we not heed our own warnings?

 

Furthermore, from Sir David Murray to John McLelland to Martin Bain; the same people are in charge of guiding the club through these same deep financial waters. Or at least, they appear in charge - with allegations of bank interference (the Lloyds Banking Group have an increasing stake in Murray's company, thus an increasing stake in Rangers' operations) still rife in the media and amongst the support.

 

The supporters - expected to part with their season ticket money again in a couple of months - have no idea of what's true and what isn't with mixed messages the only certainty in Rangers' dealings with us. Whether it be current chairman Alistair Johnston or even Walter Smith, we just don't know who is being straight with us.

 

Therefore, at some point, we have to ask ourselves who is in such a position to know the truth, to deliver genuine answers and to lead from the front. Well, only one man still owns Rangers and only one man has the power to make the decisions that truly affect our club's well-being. Yet he is missing in action, absent without leave and by failing to lead he only lends weight to the criticism he vigorously defends.

 

I'll conclude with another quote from that interview in 2001:

 

"If I have to raise some more money and dig in my pockets again I'm sure I'll find some shekels. I'm not frightened of any financial position because I know I've got the skill and the ability - and I'm not being big-headed - to get the club to where we want to be."

 

Again, it is easy to find fault with comments that were only truly relevant when they were said. But is it clear from Murray's own words that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

 

Sir David Murray will be 60 later this year. Will that represent an epiphany for a return to the front-line of a owner who once excited us all? Or will it be the final nail in the stewardship coffin of a once successful businessman whose interest in Rangers died as soon as it threatened the well-being of his personal wealth.

 

Where is our owner and what is the future of our club?

Edited by Frankie
Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to change the name to '' The Hollow Man ''

 

We'll all have our good and bad points with respect to SDM but as it stands much of his words have been hollow, so if he wants to be judged fairly, it is well past the time for him to be clear about his influence upon the club.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If David Murray's philosophy had been for every fiver Celtic spend we will spend 6 quid things might have gone a whole lot better :).

 

Murray has never shown himself to be the intelligent businessman he considers himself to be (and surely is?) at Rangers. We seem to have gone through continuous cycles in the 00's of over spending then under spending. I think something we could really have benefited from is a CEO capable of running the club efficiently. The word 'prudent' has no place at Ibrox. We should never have spent �£12m+ on Flo and we should never be forced to sign players on loan from Aberdeen either. We recently just appeared to be on solid financial ground then overspent again, largely on players of not very high calibre and low resale value.

 

The 00's have largely been a hellish time for Rangers fans. Since the end of the 02/03 season there has rarely been a Rangers team I've been truly content and proud of. Sure there has been some positives, notably reaching the final of the UEFA Cup but it has been a strange and often disastrous period.

 

If Martin O'Neil never left Celtic, god knows what gap there would be now.

 

What also hasn't helped our cause is the amount of atrocious signings made in the past 10 years, particularly by Alex McLeish. Although many didn't cost much they would still have taken a fair wage and some would have been compensated highly in their releases.

 

Murray will leave this club worse off than when he came, which surely says it all. For all the millions we've spent we still have a rather archaic infrastructure with no scouting network to speak of and questionable youth development. We actually appear now to have more promising youths than ever but they appear to only feature as a last ditch resort and then don't appear again for some time. John Fleck's career won't progress until he gets considerable first team football, surely he could have spent the last couple of seasons on loan at clubs in the lower English leagues instead of playing in the reserves and sitting on the bench

 

PS - At the end of the day the whole thing stinks with regard to the way we are run. We don't even know who run us. Transfers are constantly protracted affairs. Valuable assets end up leaving on bosmans or low fees near the end of their contracts. Our owner appears to have no interest. We don't know exactly how much tax we owe. Nobody seems remotely interested in buying us. We appear to be the most confused, complex, poorly run business this side of the Atlantic Ocean.

 

Maybe one day with the benefit of hindsight and historical accounts we will be able to know the truth - and one might guess it might reflect that Rangers was a tool to advance Murray's other businesses

Edited by Totti
Link to post
Share on other sites

The scouting system at Ibrox/Murray Park is something that consistently drives me insane. You see teams like Wigan bringing in players like Figueroa, Valencia, Palacios and Rodallega from the central American market then selling them on for a huge profit. Why don't we have people out there? Places like Mexico, Uruguay, Paraguay - think back to a few years back, Dundee brought in Caballero, Speroni and Juan Sara from South America. We have to get a scouting network out there, making contacts, building relationships with managers, agents, club owners. Think of PSV - they brought both Romario and Ronaldo to Europe, we have to be tapping into these markets. We've got the tradition, the history of success, the stadium, the training facilities yet we're stuck with Grampa Weir at centre half.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The scouting system at Ibrox/Murray Park is something that consistently drives me insane. You see teams like Wigan bringing in players like Figueroa, Valencia, Palacios and Rodallega from the central American market then selling them on for a huge profit. Why don't we have people out there? Places like Mexico, Uruguay, Paraguay - think back to a few years back, Dundee brought in Caballero, Speroni and Juan Sara from South America. We have to get a scouting network out there, making contacts, building relationships with managers, agents, club owners. Think of PSV - they brought both Romario and Ronaldo to Europe, we have to be tapping into these markets. We've got the tradition, the history of success, the stadium, the training facilities yet we're stuck with Grampa Weir at centre half.

It's probably to do with the fact we seem to have no strategic goals/objectives, only operational day to day ones. Getting a load of scouts might not dividends for a season or 2 so Murrays maybe not interested.

 

There's some article on the web thats a few years old that looked at Sevillas scouting network and how impressive it was. It also factored in the fact that scouts do not get high wages and it makes far more sense to have a load of scouts across the world than a couple of dud footballers who were signed because the scouting was poor...

Link to post
Share on other sites

The scouting system at Ibrox/Murray Park is something that consistently drives me insane. You see teams like Wigan bringing in players like Figueroa, Valencia, Palacios and Rodallega from the central American market then selling them on for a huge profit. Why don't we have people out there? Places like Mexico, Uruguay, Paraguay - think back to a few years back, Dundee brought in Caballero, Speroni and Juan Sara from South America. We have to get a scouting network out there, making contacts, building relationships with managers, agents, club owners. Think of PSV - they brought both Romario and Ronaldo to Europe, we have to be tapping into these markets. We've got the tradition, the history of success, the stadium, the training facilities yet we're stuck with Grampa Weir at centre half.

 

I agree generally that our scouting network could do with improvement. Howver, the trouble with looking at the likes of the South American market for players is our budget. Sure we can bring some of these players across but because we are not part of Europe's financial elite, we are unlikely to be realistically competing for the signatures of the really top talent. Instead we would then be scrabbling around for the lesser lights who will inevitably have a lower success ratio. As a result we would also need to invest comparitively quite significant sums in the scouting network itself so that any players we do try to bring across, we had done our homework on.

 

And it doesn't end there. Players from South American look to gain moves to Europe through complex ownership arrangements with agents. You can bet your last dollar that any deals we do to bring in such a player would only happen if we were cross an agent, or agents, palms with silver. And even then, you could see a number of them failing to settle into life in Scotland given the cultural differences and climate.

 

So you have to wonder, given the significant investment that would be required in scouting, administration, ongoing management, wages, signing on fees, agents fees, etc; to bring in some undoubtedly talented players but with high levels of risk attached, is it really worth it? I think I'd rather we focussed on developing home grown talent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.