Sons of Struth?

[simplythebest 0]

Can only disagree, as it stands I trust Mather even though he's not perfect like everyone else.

[Bluedell 5,329]

Can only disagree, as it stands I trust Mather even though he's not perfect like everyone else.

 

 

Out of interest, what is it he's done to earn your trust?

 

After all that's gone on in the past few years, it will take a lot for me to trust ANY Rangers director.

[simplythebest 0]

Out of interest, what is it he's done to earn your trust?

 

After all that's gone on in the past few years, it will take a lot for me to trust ANY Rangers director.

 

Trust may be a strong word, but I don't not trust him if you get my meaning. He needs scrutiny as everyone does but many have simply made their minds up that he's bad.

 

I think he's a genuine guy who wants to make a proper go of this job. He's gone above and beyond in the transfer market, that may seem unimportant to some in the grand scheme but it was clearly very important to McCoist. I also think he's handled situations like the BBC well and probably in a more measured way than Green (although I also approved of his defenses of the club.

 

There's questions over the finances and depending on what comes out it could very well change my opinion of Mather, but he only became CEO in Mayish and Stockbridge is the finance director so he clearly can't be totally blamed either.

 

Can't really defend things like the Irvine stuff, only say that the recent situation is a mess with neither side handling it all brilliantly. I would like to see Mather given a chance in his role without all this disruption and drama.

[craig 5,195]

Trust may be a strong word, but I don't not trust him if you get my meaning. He needs scrutiny as everyone does but many have simply made their minds up that he's bad.

 

I think he's a genuine guy who wants to make a proper go of this job. He's gone above and beyond in the transfer market, that may seem unimportant to some in the grand scheme but it was clearly very important to McCoist. I also think he's handled situations like the BBC well and probably in a more measured way than Green (although I also approved of his defenses of the club.

 

There's questions over the finances and depending on what comes out it could very well change my opinion of Mather, but he only became CEO in Mayish and Stockbridge is the finance director so he clearly can't be totally blamed either.

 

Can't really defend things like the Irvine stuff, only say that the recent situation is a mess with neither side handling it all brilliantly. I would like to see Mather given a chance in his role without all this disruption and drama.

 

"above and beyond in the transfer market"..... be very, very careful what you wish for - it was this same "above and beyond in the transfer market" which started our fiscal, downward spiral.

 

I am not as bothered with handling the BBC as I am with our fiscal, strategic, long-term visions of how the club will be self-sustaining without European football. We have far bigger fish to fry than dealing with the morons at BBC.

 

Right now we have no Chairman... that means the most senior person at the club is the CEO, Mather. Guess what... the buck stops with him - he cannot plead ignorance if the IPO monies have been flushed down the toilet.

 

I say this as someone that is neither pro nor anti Craig Mather.

[Zappa 0]

Can only disagree, as it stands I trust Mather even though he's not perfect like everyone else.

 

That's interesting because I've seen you saying elsewhere that you're not reading specific articles because you don't need to.

 

I think your words were something along the lines of "haven't read the article and I don't need to, the theme of it is predictable".

 

So I'm wondering what would make you suitably informed on everything that's going on and whether or not to trust Mather and others on the board if you don't bother reading relevant articles because you think you don't need to?

[simplythebest 0]

That's interesting because I've seen you saying elsewhere that you're not reading specific articles because you don't need to.

 

I think your words were something along the lines of "haven't read the article and I don't need to, the theme of it is predictable".

 

So I'm wondering what would make you suitably informed on everything that's going on and whether or not to trust Mather and others on the board if you don't bother reading relevant articles because you think you don't need to?

That article was about the Easdales i'm sure

[Zappa 0]

That article was about the Easdales i'm sure

 

Yes, the same guys who've gotten seats on our board of directors, even although they only have a small shareholding.

 

James Easdale got voted onto both the board of the holding company RIFC and the club board too even although he only had half a percent shareholding.

 

Was that with the help of Mather's vote?

 

Did Mather vote for James's brother Sandy to be appointed to the club's board?

[simplythebest 0]

Yes, the same guys who've gotten seats on our board of directors, even although they only have a small shareholding.

 

James Easdale got voted onto both the board of the holding company RIFC and the club board too even although he only had half a percent shareholding.

 

Was that with the help of Mather's vote?

 

Did Mather vote for James's brother Sandy to be appointed to the club's board?

Didn't Paul Murray even say they're are entitled to representation now? No expert on these things but they seem to be legitimately be buying shares.

 

I likely will read the article eventually, was venting a bit because there's blogger overkill going on right now.

[Zappa 0]

Didn't Paul Murray even say they're are entitled to representation now? No expert on these things but they seem to be legitimately be buying shares.

 

I likely will read the article eventually, was venting a bit because there's blogger overkill going on right now.

 

The Paul Murray comments regarding the Easdales are a red herring which is being taken literally and used in a pedantic manner, when in actual fact I think he was probably just being diplomatic when asked about it on Sportsound. I would have been extremely surprised if Paul Murray had started slating the Easdales and said James Easdale shouldn't be on the board because he would just have made himself look bad, especially when the requisition didn't call for the removal of James Easdale.

 

The comments from Walter & Ally in support of Mather are being used too literally as well. They have given him words of support to be diplomatic, but Walter was perfectly clear when he resigned as Chairman, that he wanted the fans to back the requisition which clearly included Mather's removal.

[simplythebest 0]

The Paul Murray comments regarding the Easdales are a red herring which is being taken literally and used in a pedantic manner, when in actual fact I think he was probably just being diplomatic when asked about it on Sportsound. I would have been extremely surprised if Paul Murray had started slating the Easdales and said James Easdale shouldn't be on the board because he would just have made himself look bad, especially when the requisition didn't call for the removal of James Easdale.

 

The comments from Walter & Ally in support of Mather are being used too literally as well. They have given him words of support to be diplomatic, but Walter was perfectly clear when he resigned as Chairman, that he wanted the fans to back the requisition which clearly included Mather's removal.

 

Come on Zappa, it was a bit more than diplomacy, they both made a point of mentioning Mather specifically. As i've said a few times Mather can be retained while still changing the boardroom about.