Frankie 8,182 Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 Itâ??s Sunday morning and Iâ??ve just woken up with a strange familiar feeling. Thankfully itâ??s not February 2nd and Cher isnâ??t on the radio but as the usual thoughts start to form about events over the last few days, I definitely start to think itâ??s Groundhog Day. Why is that? Most importantly, we donâ??t know who is running the club yet again. Is it still the recently departed â??majorityâ?? shareholder Charles Green? Is it his business partner Imran Ahmad and his selection of investors? Can it really be chairman Malcolm Murray and the rest of the board? And does Craig Mather have the experience and profile for the Chief Executive position? No-one seems to know. Add in Craig Whyteâ??s very public claim to the clubâ??s assets then it suddenly feels like 2012 once more. Next the team have just been beaten at home after another disjointed and inconsistent display. Yet again, weâ??re outfought in front of 35,000+ home fans by a so-called smaller team who seem just as (if not more) capable than us in many areas. They take better set-pieces, they work harder as a team and look every inch the better side for long periods. Granted, we may well have comfortably won the Third Division but thereâ??s not much for supporters to lay their hat on when asked to see the positives of the season. A few individual players aside, the team have been poor and arguably only external circumstances have ensured criticism has remained fairly mild. How long will that patience last? Moving onto the supporters, one good aspect of spring 2012 was that many fans united to raise money for the club, protest against illegal embargos and attempted to ask the right questions of the then linked buyers. Even if, at that time, many felt there was still little obvious strategy to deliver meaningful supporters representation on the board going forward. Fast forward to spring 2013 and the status quo persists: sure we still have the Working Group and (the largely defunct) RFFF meeting from time to time but there doesnâ??t seem much for the ordinary fan to get their teeth into. The Assembly have all but disappeared and the Trust continues to struggle to persuade bears theyâ??re the independent answer â?? even if their BuyRangers vehicle was an impressive bit of work. Unfortunately though, as it stands, 38,000 season ticket holders and many more company shareholders are under-represented in a formal sense. That, in my opinion, is nothing short of a scandal. With all the above in mind, the story really started to turn into a farce as I travelled back from the game yesterday evening. Paul Murray (a former director of the club and leading member of the Blue Knights) appeared on Radio Scotland. On the surface his performance was pretty good and, despite his many critics, the points he made were valid and well worth highlighting. He was right to demand any commission was wide-ranging and he was correct to suggest far too many people were being economical with the truth. Unfortunately, is Paul Murray really the right person to be talking about cleansing the club when heâ??s had such a primary (and arguably flawed) part over the last five years? Iâ??ll leave that for others to decide but if Paul really wants to be CEO as he suggested last night then perhaps he should be more open about his influence on recent events? Was it really a coincidence that he mentioned he could only trust two people at the club? Indeed, itâ??s that aspect of this saga that has the most familiarity. Opposing sides of the debate briefing against each other in the media, rumours about A v B behind the scenes and increasing talk of ownership bids as part of what effectively may be a coup d'état to secure the ownership of Rangers. Does this really mean we have a Jim McColl led bid to buy a majority shareholding in the club or, given the failures of the many who tried to buy last year, is this another inappropriate strategy in trying to increase influence in the boardroom for Rangers men? Once again, the rank and file Rangers supporters canâ??t know for sure. Weâ??re all told this and that is happening and the grape-vine is heavy with rumour and sources but, if weâ??re honest, thereâ??s nothing to really believe in as fans. Add in the variety of other obvious problems above then not only is it indeed Groundhog Day but this vicious circle is a nightmare that we may not be awakening from any time soon. Thus, as we approach another season book renewal period, we look to the future with hope rather than expectation. One year down the line from the â??saleâ?? of the club, thatâ??s nothing short of unacceptable. Anyone involved in the club (or wanting to be involved) would do well to note our frustration. In the meantime, Iâ??m away back to sleep â?? wake me up when itâ??s all over! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 I despair at where we are right now after being so hopeful most of this was over last year. As i've said elsewhere I think we should have tried to maintain stability unless/until irrefutable, smoking gun evidence made that impossible. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinker 887 Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 I despair at where we are right now after being so hopeful most of this was over last year. As i've said elsewhere I think we should have tried to maintain stability unless/until irrefutable, smoking gun evidence made that impossible. I don't think keeping the status quo necessarily equates to stability. You could argue long and hard about CG's merits, but I don't think anyone would say he was really a stabiizing influence on the club. In fact, he constantly made waves and caused controversy. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 I don't think keeping the status quo necessarily equates to stability. You could argue long and hard about CG's merits, but I don't think anyone would say he was really a stabiizing influence on the club. In fact, he constantly made waves and caused controversy. Forget some of his media blunders and all these past accusations. What was unstable about the actual job he was doing for the club in the present? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 Forget some of his media blunders and all these past accusations. What was unstable about the actual job he was doing for the club in the present? trying to sack two of the 3 managers? sacking a player? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 trying to sack two of the 3 managers? sacking a player? I thought you agreed our football side needed changed. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 I thought you agreed our football side needed changed. not like that. any other way practically infact. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinker 887 Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 Forget some of his media blunders and all these past accusations. What was unstable about the actual job he was doing for the club in the present? Why would I forget his media blunders? They're a pretty major problem. When it comes to making statments on behalf of the club, he's the loosest of canons. And I'd rather the accusations regarding his past dealings with Whyte could be easily dismissed and proven to be untrue. It's easy to blame a vindictive media for this, but CG did his best to keep these out of sight - he's responsible for a good part of the murkiness surrounding the whole affair. Call me naive but IMO the CEO of Rangers ought to be squeaky clean. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 some times people are convicted of murder based wholly on circumstantial evidence. no gun is ever found. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 Also plenty get cleared on that basis. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.