Attitude to SDM

[maineflyer 0]

so, you're arguing that there isn't a single good thing murray's done?

 

still too hard to take seriously. i can hardly wait till murray moves on, because we need a new injection of life, but i'm always suspicious of people who can see only bad in everything. i'm very, very sure you were loving the substantial part of 9iarow that was under murray's tenure, just like the rest of us. i bet you were at the 9inarow party like the rest of us.

 

nah, i can hardly wait till murray goes, but scapegoating's never really worked out that well, so you can go on all you like - scapegoating, and inconsistent scapegoating, is not something i can support. people who think every problem can be attributed to one person tend to be wrong.

I bask in your suspicion.

[Guest Arnold]

nah, i can hardly wait till murray goes, but scapegoating's never really worked out that well, so you can go on all you like - scapegoating, and inconsistent scapegoating, is not something i can support. people who think every problem can be attributed to one person tend to be wrong.

 

I don't believe anyone is saying every problem is attributed to Murray here. Walter Smith and the players are taking the blame for the state of the team but the state of the club itself can be put down more to Murray than anyone else.

 

He has always failed to move the club forward off the pitch aside from building a training ground at Advocaat's insistence. In 20 years of Murray, we have no proper scouting system, no proper youth system and we are a PR disaster. Murray also took us to the brink of bankruptcy with �£80 million debt that was taking the club out of business due to his rash overspending. Think of the cash we've had put into the club by individuals and by the support over that 20 years and just imagine what �£20 million or so (when we had it) could have done in terms of setting up a world class scouting network or a state of the art youth academy. We would be light years ahead of anyone in Scotland by now.

 

Being honest, the support are also guilty of allowing the club to be dragged down. Around �£40 million of debt was questioned at an AGM a few years ago and Murray dismissed with with a stroke of his hand to a round of applause from many. We're guilty of not asking the right questions early on and not pressuing the club at the right time before we fell into this mess.

 

So while the manager must take the lion's share of blame for the team, when the club is owned by one man then he must take the blame for the mess we're in, and we are an utter disaster at the moment.

[Guest Arnold]

Smoke and mirrors are used on a regular basis by C****c and they are never used by Rangers. I wish this to continue. They will tell a tale too often and will fall over themselves.

 

This is a difficult one but I agree with you. I don't want Rangers to turn into media nazis and to suppress all criticism. I want open, honest and balanced media coverage on football matters.

 

However, when you're sharing a city with a club that will stoop to any level, such as using the death of a former player to postpone a game, how do you gain parity without lowering yourself to their level?

[Bluedell 5,329]

Oh let me see, there must be a reason there somewhere. How about the day he nailed his colours to the mast and announced to the whole world that celtic supporters are more loyal than Rangers supporters? Or allowing celtic fans and others to use TBB tune while banning Rangers fans from doing the same thing? Or his inability to find and attract a credible manager since Souness left (think about it)?

 

The club used to own the Albion, the shops, the catering - where did these assets go? Edmiston House, sold for a song. The ludicrous deal with JJB, allowing the once-mighty merchandising operation to go to the dogs. The complete lack of any scouting operation. Total unwillingness to counteract media-based attacks on the club and its fans. Propping up season ticket sales with duplicitous announcements year after year - casino anyone, the Ibrox resort?

 

Interesting to hear you defend his 1990's record as outstanding. You might want to remember thatw e were successful and had turned the ship around before Murray darkened our door. Holmes and Souness were the real catalysts for change. The foundations of NIAR were already largely in place - by 1997 the club had been allowed to grind to a standstill and from a position of strength we had to completely rebuild - and after doing so at huge financial cost and with celtic in disarray, we again allowed supremacy to slip through our fingers.

 

He inherited a successful club and turned it into the shambles we see today. The stadium is a mess, the ticket office a disaster, the stewards treat Rangers fans like dirt, we are clubbed and beaten at away games in Europe and the club says it served us right! At every turn this liar who owns us reminds us of NIAR as if it was his to flaunt. But he's obviously fooled enough of you to keep him sweet.

So PLG wasn't a credible manager when Murray brought him to the club?

 

You are quite correct to criticise Murray in a number of areas, but not everything he has done is that bad.

 

If he hadn't done the JJB deal, I'm sure you would now be criticising him for not maximising the club's revenue, so he is in a no-win situation there. There are well-documented downsides to the deal, but it's still a great deal financially for the club. Hardly ludicrous.

 

We do still own the catering. We have just sub-contracted it. Nothing wrong with that in theory. The quality isn't great (but most stadium catering isn't), but we don't have enough information to say whether it's a good deal overall or not.

 

There are a lot of areas that you have quite correctly highlighted where Murray deserves criticism, but he has also done some good things over the years.

 

The problematic thing is that we need him more than he needs us at the moment. We would struggle to survive without his guarantee of the revolving credit facility at the moment, and there isn't a queue of people with both the ability and the desire to take it over.

[pete 2,499]

This is a difficult one but I agree with you. I don't want Rangers to turn into media nazis and to suppress all criticism. I want open, honest and balanced media coverage on football matters.

 

However, when you're sharing a city with a club that will stoop to any level, such as using the death of a former player to postpone a game, how do you gain parity without lowering yourself to their level?

 

There's a good idea. We could knock off a player a week before a big game to get the Saturday postponed. It would also free up the wage bill.

Better wait to next season though as all our big games this year will be friendlies.

[maineflyer 0]

So PLG wasn't a credible manager when Murray brought him to the club?

No he wasn't and that's why he left. He might have been a credible manager before he came to Rangers but for whatever reason he could bring that credibility with him.

 

The facts are clear. The chairman's responsibility is to identify, appoint and resource a manager who will bring sustainable success on the field. In the case of PLG, Murray clearly failed to do this. What could be less ambiguous?

 

I'm not biting at this old chestnut of "you can't pin everything on Murray". No one is trying to do that. What I am prepared to do is pin his failings on him, unlike so many who can see no wrong in anything Murray does, I think he has generally been bad for Rangers and it's certainly getting worse.

 

Why shouldn't we be able to voice dissatisfaction with Murray where it's due, without being wrongly accused of blaming him for everything. It appears to me you are defending him against something that just isn't there.

[Yieldshields loyal 0]

2 out of the last 8 titles = 25%

 

Quite simply not good enough

[Wija 0]

This is a difficult one but I agree with you. I don't want Rangers to turn into media nazis and to suppress all criticism. I want open, honest and balanced media coverage on football matters.

 

However, when you're sharing a city with a club that will stoop to any level, such as using the death of a former player to postpone a game, how do you gain parity without lowering yourself to their level?

 

 

You turn the other cheek mate... simple as...

 

I would want SDM et al to defend the club to the hilt against the press etc, but do not want them to dive to the depths you speak of with the unwashed brigade from the east end.

 

I certainly never want our great club to lower its standards, not even to get oneupmanship on them, let them believe there own hype.

[maineflyer 0]

You turn the other cheek mate... simple as...

 

I would want SDM et al to defend the club to the hilt against the press etc, but do not want them to dive to the depths you speak of with the unwashed brigade from the east end.

 

I certainly never want our great club to lower its standards, not even to get oneupmanship on them, let them believe there own hype.

Perfect response. Couldn't say better than that. (that's sarcasm by the way)

[Guest Arnold]

You turn the other cheek mate... simple as...

 

I would want SDM et al to defend the club to the hilt against the press etc, but do not want them to dive to the depths you speak of with the unwashed brigade from the east end.

 

I certainly never want our great club to lower its standards, not even to get oneupmanship on them, let them believe there own hype.

 

It's tough. I think it's clear that turning the other cheek hasn't and currently isn't working. When you look at some of the things that have been written about our club (the support, especially) over the last ten years, it's frightening.

 

Across the city, a throw-away comment about a "bead-rattling hoopy the huddle hound" lost a bloke his job because of Celtic, Lawwell and the permanently offended crew.

 

I don't want Rangers to sink to the level of them but we need to do more. Even finding a balance when you know Celtic will stoop to gutter level would be incredibly hard.