simplythebest 0 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 I can't really say I'm all that bothered about Irvine doing the Muirhead interview. I just find the whole thing completely bizarre, but at the end of the day, there's far more important things for our fans to be concerned about at the moment. This Irvine Q&A just adds to an increasingly long list of reasons why our Club's board of directors shouldn't be employing Irvine or his company and also adds to an increasing list of reasons why our Club's board of directors are completely incompetent and need to be removed ASAP. For me it shows Irvine needs removed asap. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewarty 1,876 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Let's look at four possible reasons for this interview: 1. Deflects from boardroom matters Don't buy this as it just makes the board look increasingly incompetent by supposedly renewing this contract. If anything this increases pressure on the board. 2. Positive PR for the board Taking that to it's logical conclusion, the board sack MediaHouse giving them some much-needed fan approval. Seems a rather expensive way of going about PR. 3. Irvine character flaw Guy is after as much publicity as possible and is dining out on the attention. This doesn't make sense to me as the guy has barely uttered one word in the seven years previous to his association with Rangers. Why change now? 4. An ultimatum to the RFC board Reeling from the adverse publicity over the leaked Greig comments, the RFC board and Easdales attempt to relieve MH of their contract. By speaking to a Celtic fansite (and praising other 'influential anti-RFC bloggers') Irvine lays down a marker by saying, these are the people he goes to with the variety of info he's gleaned during his time working for RFC. I'm still none the wiser as, even if we think '4' is the most likely explanation, it still doesn't make sense to thumb your nose so publicly at a company who pays your wages. # 1 & 2 I'd agree don't make sense. And I can't see #4 being true either. Threaten the board with leaking of information then he will quickly find himself in court, I'd fancy. And his business would be in ruins. I'm inclined to think more along the lines of #3 based on current information. Irvine has not previously been a big part of the story, or at least not in a way that is gaining mainstream attention. When the spotlight is focusing on you, you can often react in ways that you might otherwise say are out of character. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 For me it shows Irvine needs removed asap. Has anyone asked the club why he has done this and how he can expect to continue in his role after doing things like this? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgacus 8 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 His claim that there were "huge sectarian issues" will have been music to Muirhead's ears. It's a complete exaggeration of the scale of the issue back then. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
54andcounting 0 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 His claim that there were "huge sectarian issues" will have been music to Muirhead's ears. It's a complete exaggeration of the scale of the issue back then. ...but then again, it's Scotzine - maybe those were not his words, in fact why believe any of it? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,261 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 ...but then again, it's Scotzine - maybe those were not his words, in fact why believe any of it? In fact why have an interview with Scotzine in the first place ? does Irvine not know who Scotzine are ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 I'm not sure about that but to further fuel your early morning X-Files diet MediaHouse came into being through the takeover of Celtic by McCan and Dempsey, that was their first job and propelled them forward. So who knows! But I still think this is an old man misreading the landscape. We're being played like a fiddle but we're dancing to a different tune than the one than the fiddler is playing. Toxic Jack has set up his own lynching and what better advert is there for prospective clients than falling own your own sword for your client. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 Toxic Jack has set up his own lynching and what better advert is there for prospective clients than falling own your own sword for your client. How about doing a quietly effective job? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc 280 Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 Lets just settle for "effective". There's been precious little evidence of that over the years. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
54andcounting 0 Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 In fact why have an interview with Scotzine in the first place ? does Irvine not know who Scotzine are ? I got pulled up on here (think it was Calscot) and quite rightly for posting an article with a link to Scotzine about 6 months ago. It's possible JI didn't know about the anti-Rangers stuff. 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.