Daily Record Back Page

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Again, there were thousands upon thousands of bears who believed in Green. It shows the type of support we have when we dont make our own minds up on someone but rather blindly walk behind McCoist (or anyone else) just because he says so. Since when did McCoist become some kind of financial guru that we should listen to ?

 

Charles Green hoodwinked a great deal of bears. Just because McCoist was on the inside doesnt mean that he couldnt be hoodwinked too.

 

And he could also have fallen for Green's moonbeams - something Green was very adept at.

 

Any sensible manager would just have said. Not my department.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

McCoist was told what? John Brown talked crap and was busy going on about the title deeds when his agent was telling him he had inspected them.

 

I don't remember anyone coming up with proof about Green at that point. It was all rumour or speculation, while Green was making plans to bring in £20m+ into the club.

 

His agent saw the stamp duty receipt.

[Zappa 0]

Why has his shareholding suddenly become such an issue..it has been public knowledge for quite a while. Who is pushing this point - is it the board's PR people as part of a plan to discredit him and make it easier to get rid of him.

 

Spin doctors are great at sewing seeds and running interference to create distractions, but in fairness, there's quite a lot of fans who want rid of Ally for a whole bunch of reasons, so he might be getting it tight here from multiple angles and for multiple reasons.

[der Berliner 3,255]

Kettle. Pot. Black. Mr OCD...

 

What am I obsessed about then? What SBS came up with is essentially an anti-McCoist hate-feast at its finest, as it solely lists stuff that is negative and simply blocks out the realities at the day. If you start talking about it, on come the "excuses" remarks and whatnot. If people like that sort of view and debate, so be it. Likewise, people could go on - as intimated - about Arsene Wenger throwing away millions of pounds over the last decade with ONE FA Cup (this year's) to show for it. He sure faced up to very different opposition all along, but likewise he's had much more money to spend and a rather different transfer market to operate in. Did the Arsenal even play fantastic football all along? Well, the Gunners support will argue that. But hey, we talk only about Rangers here, the world out there can't be compared to us and our shortcomings ... only we are or McCoist is to blame. Well, that is a rather peculiar way to look at things.

[SteveC 150]

Read back over your posts degending the boards and owners of Rangers post David Murray. Or even just count them.

 

"Obsessed" hardly does it justice.

[The Real PapaBear 0]

Not sure why. But it's certainly why he needs to go. The only required reason.

 

I love super always will no matter what. Would love it if he's the new sir furious etc but I simply believe he's harming us every minute he's in charge.

 

"why" is because the great bulk of the support could be persuaded to get behind the idea of McCoist resigning as manager. I for one was prepared to give him until the end of next season, but if I'm being honest with myself, I don't truly believe he can turn into the manager we need.

However, if getting rid of Ally as manager is linked to some character assassination campaign, then count me out.

 

All this stuff about how Ally should have done this or not done that and refused penny shares is just mischief making and I'm more than a little convinced that there are hoopy forces at work here.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

"why" is because the great bulk of the support could be persuaded to get behind the idea of McCoist resigning as manager. I for one was prepared to give him until the end of next season, but if I'm being honest with myself, I don't truly believe he can turn into the manager we need.

However, if getting rid of Ally as manager is linked to some character assassination campaign, then count me out.

 

All this stuff about how Ally should have done this or not done that and refused penny shares is just mischief making and I'm more than a little convinced that there are hoopy forces at work here.

 

hoopy forces didn't take 1p shares.

 

i will give him another year as well but he won't improve. i am certain of that.

[Dragonfly Trumpeter 50]

Pre-IPO shares arent bartered, not from my experience. The company grants options to the employees at a stated price, there isnt any barter - though admittedly my experience isnt at the senior management levels - most companies would have a committee or formulaic process to determine how many options are granted to each individual (yes, I know that is unlikely with Green's group). But there wouldnt normally be a bargaining process for them.

 

In fact, the suggestion that McCoist should have held out for 3 or 4 times more would suggest that, by not doing so, he wasnt thinking solely about money.... wouldnt it ?

 

What relevance does it hold that Greenco were finished without McCoist giving his seal of approval ? How do you know, for fact, that in the period between McCoist refusing to endorse Greenco and him ultimately doing so there wasnt some kind of "sales pitch" from Green that convinced McCoist that Green was the right man ???

 

I find it mildly amusing that we are all using the benefit of hindsight to sully McCoist - when many (no, not all) of our fanbase were also hoodwinked by Green and, if reports can be believed, a shyster such as Craig Whyte was also conned by him too.

 

For the avoidance of doubt, I am by no means suggesting that McCoist didnt act in his own best financial interests - but I dont think it is necessarily as clear cut as you all are making out. I am merely playing devils advocate.

 

McCoist initially refused to endorse his new employers - at that point his own employment and salary were on the line. Why has nobody brought that into the equation. by initially refusing to endorse them he was putting his own job in danger - yet that is exactly what he did.... but a few short weeks later he was "selling his soul" to Charles Green for 30 pieces of silver..... funny how those two actions appear to be bipolar in nature. Yet only the one is being picked apart.

 

I also find it interesting that McCoist now wholly refuses to be drawn into those discussions about the club's owners and financial aspects of the club. Some will say because he got his financial rewards - others will say "once bitten, twice shy".

 

Considering McCoist's part and massive financial gains at huge cost to the fans IPO and ST expenditure, even he would not have had the brass neck to push his mate Chuck for more. No, he simply lay with the dogs and did exactly what Greenco did for the same ends - personal financial gain.

 

I should have made my sarcasm clear, but I honestly thought it was particularly obvious. I apologise.

 

McCoist has handled himself very badly in all of this, yet the stout defence he gets regardless of his actions and the damning evidence shows he is bullet proof.

 

Seems most people would let him shag their missus and offer to pay him for it. At least he does not lack experience or qualifications in that department, unlike when he accepted his current over paid gig

[Dragonfly Trumpeter 50]

"why" is because the great bulk of the support could be persuaded to get behind the idea of McCoist resigning as manager. I for one was prepared to give him until the end of next season, but if I'm being honest with myself, I don't truly believe he can turn into the manager we need.

However, if getting rid of Ally as manager is linked to some character assassination campaign, then count me out.

 

All this stuff about how Ally should have done this or not done that and refused penny shares is just mischief making and I'm more than a little convinced that there are hoopy forces at work here.

 

What hoopy forces then? And yes, I do know it is difficult to believe what McCoist has done.

 

So name your hoops please.

[calscot 0]

SBS itemises the major failures of recent times. A dire litany.

 

der Berliner asks if the same could be done for Arsene Wenger. I doubt it but have a go dB. Remember, getting Duffed by Bolton or Stoke is nowhere as bad as defeats by Peterhead or Annan, non-leaguers until recently.

 

I think you missed the point. You could do a similar list for almost any manager - especially ones that say "scraped a win". Only on a Rangers forum would the latter be a crime. Only here is it the manager's fault when your rivals to win their games in hand against other sides... Or when you're side loses a few games when the the club is in crisis and slips into administration and the players don't know if they will be paid.

 

However, start listing the wins and most other managers will pale compared to McCoist. Some "excuse" will be made by some for that though, as that's just too positive.

 

I see that you have to qualify Arsenal's failures with: "Bolton aren't as bad as Peterhead." I assure you that when we were at the top and no-where near Arsenal's present level of wealth, a loss against Bolton would have been for us. But again people don't seem to understand (or deliberately ignore) that: while Bolton aren't as bad as Peterhead, we're not quite as good or as well off as Arsenal at the moment...