Club deny Lee Wallace (and Simon Lappin) rumours

[Frankie 8,150]

http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/7426-no-contact-about-wallace

 

Interesting to note Simon Lappin is NOT on trial...

 

 

ALLY McCOIST says there has been no contact from Brighton and Hove Albion enquiring about Lee Wallace’s availability and has stressed he doesn’t want to lose him.

 

There was intense speculation last night the Scotland full-back could leave Rangers, with the English Championship side claimed to be interested in him.

 

Whether they are or not, nobody at Ibrox has heard from The Seagulls and McCoist would like it to stay that way.

 

Two bids for the former Hearts player from Nottingham Forest were rejected by Gers in January.

 

The player himself has also expressed his desire to stay at Ibrox for the long term as he bids to help them right through the divisions back into the top flight of Scottish football.

 

Wallace was a key performer for the Light Blues last season as they won the League One title by 39 points.

 

Although he only scored three goals against Stenhousemuir, Forfar and Stranraer, his play on the left flank made him one of the most offensive members of McCoist’s team.

 

That was recognised when he won the Player of the Year and Players’ Player of the Year awards at the club’s end-of-season dinner.

 

Wallace was also given PFA Scotland’s League One Player of the Year prize a year after he had claimed the Third Division version.

 

McCoist recognises what a significant role the 26-year-old plays and is in no mood to let him move on elsewhere.

 

The manager, who also dismissed claims former Norwich player Simon Lappin is on trial, said: “Lee is a very important player to us.

 

“We’ve had absolutely no contact from Brighton and Hove Albion at all and no, I don’t expect him to go.

 

“I’d be hopeful as manager of the club that we can keep our best players and Lee certainly falls into that category.”

[Rangersitis 0]

The review was nothing more than a continuation of the bullshit that has been fed to a gullible support in order to keep them placated while the money flies out the back door.

 

Even now, after everything that has gone on, there are still those happy to give them the benefit of the doubt.

[Zappa 0]

Exactly.

 

I've seen nothing from the club to suggest a bright future. Nothing.

 

I'm not saying there aren't people working hard and trying their best - but at almost every level the results seem mediocre at best. Since when did that become good enough for our fans?

 

There definitely ARE people working hard and trying their best at the club, but you're completely right.

 

The club is a shambles from top to bottom with widespread neglect that seems to have stricken almost every department like a disease.

 

Some parts of the stadium become more dilapidated and decrepit with every passing day as old paint either flakes off or gets dirtier, rust eats in and broken windows are left broken.

 

Overall the club isn't even getting a lot of the basics right.

 

The club website isn't being maintained properly or in a timely manner. Our first team squad on the website still shows a goalkeeper who played for Hearts on Sunday, while it doesn't show our own goalkeeper who was on the bench or any of our new signings who were on the pitch. The plc website isn't maintained properly or in a timely manner either. These might seem like trivial points, but they're simple basics which are being neglected and that neglect appears to run throughout the club, from top to bottom.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

They might not have enough cash spare to pay for an EGM.

 

They tried that excuse before and Andy smillie offered to pay.

[der Berliner 3,245]

I asked two questions in my last post which you seem to have missed.

 

1. Don't you think eight months is long enough to identify affordable staff?

 

Yes. Wanting people and getting them are two different things though. As I aluded to with the player transfer remark.

 

2. Don't you think eight months is long enough to identify the club's financial challenges and offer clear guidance out of such?

 

No doubt. Same again though. Wanting to change things is one thing, being able to or being let to another. You can have all the right plans in place, if you lack the finances or the people, what can you do? At this moment and time? I for one doubt though that they will go public with any plans they have about investement et al, unless it is done and dusted. I reckon any chairman or CEO would handle it the same way. It#s not that King runs about telling everyone what he's doing right now or is actually planning to do - be it at Rangers or any of his companies?

 

Now, of course I'm not suggesting running a football club is easy. Far from it. However, I think it should be easier than some make out. Yes, there will (or should) be difficult decisions to make (such as making people redundant) but these are the decisions that make the club more viable going forward. A clear roadmap and fan engagement alongside such actions would also help people buy into a new future. This is what should have happened in 2012 and certainly in the period since; more so when we consider the £70m spent over the last two years.

 

What can the currrent board do about this then? The had that fan survey - roundly ridiculed by the opposing fan organisations. They started a (finance-wise) rather low-key membership scheme and look for supporters' input. First time in recent history that this has happened. Yet again, roundly ridiculed by certain factions. So why not hand out some answers what you would do in their stead - just for the sake of the debate. No 70m rewind, take the board and their status quo as it stands right now.

 

None of that has been offered. Instead we have a general 120 day review that says nothing a few people on here could have put together in, I'd guess, a few weeks. Add to that the lack of progress in the four months since, then that's the lack of inspiration I'm talking about.

 

What are you looking for? A weekly business report? Just asking.

 

Just to be clear, none of the above has anything to do with Dave King so let's not deflect onto him when discussing such issues. The club is the club is the club. And it's failing yet we want to make excuses for people getting rich off the back of it. Pull the other one.

 

No-one is making excuses, so why bringing it up? I ask questions. As I said above, shelling out flak like their is no tomorrow on a sitting duck is rather simplistic. Trying to look at what is actually possible is another. Remarks about too high salaries and shadowy owners won't do. You read all the criticism and think: cool, people must have far better answers and plans and contacts at their fingertips to get the club going again. Know agents of upcoming talent with a burning desire to play for us (almost for free). If so, let's hear these ideas, plans et al.

 

I'm all for change at the top, ridding the club of leeches and undesirables. Yet as things stand, they won't go. So until they do, why not look at their situation as well, whether you like it or not? It's not that anyone slips into Wallace's pants because of that ...

[Zappa 0]

dB, you seem to miss the point that creating and implementing a plan to fix the club's problems is not our job, King's job or the job of anyone else other than the people running the club and getting paid extremely well for doing so.

 

Most of us do try to be as balanced and fair as possible in our criticism of the people running the club, but just because we ourselves haven't outlined a plan for the club's recovery and future doesn't mean we shouldn't be able to ask questions of those we expect to be creating and implementing the plans because it's their jobs.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

anyone want to tell me what wallace has done for his 250 or sok earned so far?

 

and especially what hes done tha scott gardiner or leanne dempster couldn't hae done for a fraction of the cost.

[der Berliner 3,245]

dB, you seem to miss the point that creating and implementing a plan to fix the club's problems is not our job, King's job or the job of anyone else other than the people running the club and getting paid extremely well for doing so.

 

Most of us do try to be as balanced and fair as possible in our criticism of the people running the club, but just because we ourselves haven't outlined a plan for the club's recovery and future doesn't mean we shouldn't be able to ask questions of those we expect to be creating and implementing the plans because it's their jobs.

 

I most surely did not miss that point Zappa. As I said, it is the easiest thing of all to be free of that "task" but give those who have it - no matter what they actually can do - flak to no end. For me, that's a too simplistic. I want the board et al gone like anyone else on here. They won't do that just because we want it. That is their and our status quo. Now, for all the demands we have and info we want, what can we realistically expect? (Again, what would a King tell us about his companies and plans?) Right now, quite a few - even on here - demand stuff from the board that is beyond reality, their reality. Simply drumming those demands up time and again is not only tiresome, but also reveals a certain inability to debate and actually look at what is possible where we are - divison- and countrywise. Others are more open to that view and kudos to those. But when I'm asking what people would do or would have done in the board's position or Wallace's stead - realistically, a reply like "it's not our job" does not suffice. It stops any debate dead in its tracks. And I'm not looking for world shaking stuff here either. That said, maybe people just don't want to talk about that anyway.

[Zappa 0]

I most surely did not miss that point Zappa. As I said, it is the easiest thing of all to be free of that "task" but give those who have it - no matter what they actually can do - flak to no end. For me, that's a too simplistic. I want the board et al gone like anyone else on here. They won't do that just because we want it. That is their and our status quo. Now, for all the demands we have and info we want, what can we realistically expect? (Again, what would a King tell us about his companies and plans?) Right now, quite a few - even on here - demand stuff from the board that is beyond reality, their reality. Simply drumming those demands up time and again is not only tiresome, but also reveals a certain inability to debate and actually look at what is possible where we are - divison- and countrywise. Others are more open to that view and kudos to those. But when I'm asking what people would do or would have done in the board's position or Wallace's stead - realistically, a reply like "it's not our job" does not suffice. It stops any debate dead in its tracks. And I'm not looking for world shaking stuff here either. That said, maybe people just don't want to talk about that anyway.

 

The fact of the matter is that Wallace & Nash released thier long-awaited 120(+) day business review at the end of April and almost 4 months later very little (if any) of the really important matters it claimed to plan to address have actually been addressed.

 

Extremely important issues like the club's scouting department appear to remain postponed and sitting on the back-burner nearly 4 months later while we're only a couple of weeks away from the close of the transfer window.

 

Asking for the extremely important things to be addressed in a timely manner is far from being 'too simplistic' it's absolutely imperative.

 

One of the real kicks in the teeth for our club is that Wallace and this board went out and hired another extremely expensive PR agent the very day before they released their business review.

 

PR guru: 24 April >>> Business Review: 25 April - We're still awaiting any worthwhile results or benefits from either.

 

Is it too much to ask for them to stop messing us around with business-speak jargon, PR propaganda and total nonsense and just start getting some basics right?

[Rangersitis 0]

I most surely did not miss that point Zappa. As I said, it is the easiest thing of all to be free of that "task" but give those who have it - no matter what they actually can do - flak to no end. For me, that's a too simplistic. I want the board et al gone like anyone else on here. They won't do that just because we want it. That is their and our status quo. Now, for all the demands we have and info we want, what can we realistically expect? (Again, what would a King tell us about his companies and plans?) Right now, quite a few - even on here - demand stuff from the board that is beyond reality, their reality. Simply drumming those demands up time and again is not only tiresome, but also reveals a certain inability to debate and actually look at what is possible where we are - divison- and countrywise. Others are more open to that view and kudos to those. But when I'm asking what people would do or would have done in the board's position or Wallace's stead - realistically, a reply like "it's not our job" does not suffice. It stops any debate dead in its tracks. And I'm not looking for world shaking stuff here either. That said, maybe people just don't want to talk about that anyway.

 

I agree that it is unrealistic to expect them to meet the demands of the support - they have shown us that they can't even meet the demands of the business view that they put together themselves!