Daily Record Back Page

[Frankie 8,136]

The fans have been badly advised from the outset so it's difficult to attribute blame to ourselves when we (or the vast, vast majority at least) just want to support our club and attend Ibrox each week.

 

We have to remember that throughout this mess the fan groups haven't been great, our business expert peers haven't been great (Malcolm Murray anyone) and our club peers (Walter and Ally) have hardly covered themselves in glory either.

 

This is where we are now in that the fans don't trust the club, they don't trust their peers and they certainly don't trust each other. The problem is changing that and, so far at least, I don't see many efforts to do so.

 

I can't remember much about Celts for Change but they seemed much better organised. I hoped the Hilton meeting of last year was us making steps towards such cohesion but instead guys like King seem to be moving back the way. Responsibility and leadership seem very hard virtues to find at the moment.

 

It's going to be a long summer in our winter of discontent.

[Bluedell 5,329]

when he said green was threatening to turn the club to dust. when he said we were in real danger etc.

 

So you only trusted John Brown on certain things but not on others? How were you able to tell what things to trust him on?

 

The benefit of hindsight is a wonderful thing.

[Frankie 8,136]

Clearly Brown risking his reputation told us something was worthy of our scrutiny (Goram was also backing Bomber at the time - as were a few other ex-players IIRC).

 

Unfortunately, he (and his advisers) were unable to provide genuine evidence for his claims and this lack of clarity and amateur-hour strategy was just other tangent which the Rangers support didn't want to follow. They were tired of the bad news and just wanted to try and start again. That was maybe wrong of us (and Ally for accepting cheap shares) but it's hard to blame fans for wanting to be fans. And it's hard to blame a manager for wanting to manage.

 

Two years and £70m later we've clearly lost patience in such amateurism - now evident at the club. It will be very difficult for anyone to regain our trust but the most worrying aspect is that there doesn't seem to be much effort (from anyone involved) to do so.

[Zappa 0]

They say that it's aswell that Ally is there on the 'inside' but the reallity is that he's been of more use to the custodians than the support. For the support he's been like a 'comfort blanket' that in reallity doesn't exist.

 

I think Green & co would have shafted us to an even greater extent in the negotiations with the SFA & SPL if it hadn't been for the presence of Ally McCoist at the meetings. Putting his foot down on the subject of Titles and silverware is a bit more than a comfort blanket and I'm sure that's not the only area where Ally helped the club in a big way that summer. We shouldn't forget that Green & co were refusing to acknowledge the authorities at one point and weren't even going to employ a lawyer to defend the court case against us, so the RFFF had to foot the bill for it. There's bound to be other stuff we don't know about too.

[Zappa 0]

We have to remember that throughout this mess the fan groups haven't been great, our business expert peers haven't been great (Malcolm Murray anyone) and our club peers (Walter and Ally) have hardly covered themselves in glory either.

 

I don't think there's any doubting that Malcolm Murray got it dreadfully wrong at times according to the reports we heard. Despite all of his expertise, experience & contacts, I just don't think he was the right man for the job. Bad jokes and and aura of arrogance are not what's required at important negotiating tables when you're in a weakened position.

[Frankie 8,136]

I don't think there's any doubting that Malcolm Murray got it dreadfully wrong at times according to the reports we heard. Despite all of his expertise, experience & contacts, I just don't think he was the right man for the job. Bad jokes and and aura of arrogance are not what's required at important negotiating tables when you're in a weakened position.

 

I don't know the guy but apparently he was as successful as Green in sourcing IPO backing so clearly there was positive aspects to his employment as well as the negative.

 

However, there's also no doubt - willing or not - he was part of a regime that mismanaged the club and thus his reputation is tarnished. This makes his supposed involvement with King less than palatable for me.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

So you only trusted John Brown on certain things but not on others? How were you able to tell what things to trust him on?

 

The benefit of hindsight is a wonderful thing.

 

so if someone isn't 100% right we should ignore what he was right about?

[the gunslinger 3,366]

malcolm murray hes been fighting hard against green since practically day one. he made green half his wages then ousted him from the board.

 

unfortunately his success has been limited because green has control of many shares.

[Zappa 0]

I don't know the guy but apparently he was as successful as Green in sourcing IPO backing so clearly there was positive aspects to his employment as well as the negative.

 

I think that's the main reason Green & co brought him in because he was well connected and respected in certain quarters of 'the city', so he was able to source investors and land Cenkos as Nomad & Broker. In fairness though, once he'd landed Cenkos, then getting investors on board would have been easier for him and in fact, some may even have been sourced by Cenkos themselves.

 

However, there's also no doubt - willing or not - he was part of a regime that mismanaged the club and thus his reputation is tarnished. This makes his supposed involvement with King less than palatable for me.

 

His finger just wasn't on the pulse of what was really going on because he was left out of the loop by Green & co unless they needed him for something. That's the impression I got anyway and it's backed up by some of his own comments and stuff leaked to Jackson during the first boardroom war.

[craig 5,195]

so if someone isn't 100% right we should ignore what he was right about?

 

No, it doesnt. But you have made an attempt to suggest that you believed Bomber in only the items that he was right about.

 

Any of us could throw shit at a wall and some of it will stick, but your "Ally could have listened to Bomber" statement was an attempt to suggest McCoist should have known better.

 

The reality is that you probably either believed Bomber with most of his stuff or disbelieved most of it - but you are passing off, with hindsight, that McCoist should have known which pieces to believe and which pieces to ignore.

 

Again, Bluedell was right, you were using hindsight to selectively pick which pieces of the Bomber tirades should have been listened to.

 

Plenty, and I mean PLENTY, of fans were dismissing Bomber as a raging alcoholic who shouldnt be listened to in any type of fashion.

 

Yet, with the lucury of hindsight again, you are suggesting McCoist got it horribly wrong to ignore Bomber.