Leaderboard

I might update my CV but one thing Rangers need is a strong internal audit function. I wrote a piece for Gersnet in our then regular column in the Seventy2 magazine about 10 years ago making this point. I'm sad to say that it is never more relevant. Ironically around 2 years after that, I got approached by a recruiter for the position as Head of Audit for Celtic! I politely declined, for obvious reasons, but it simply underlined just how far behind we were a decade ago in terms of good governance. As a for example, one thing I heard about the Copland Rd project is that at least one significant and local contractor, who are known club supporters, declined to tender for the work because the timescales that were required were unachievable. It seems the club/project team went and found a contractor who promised otherwise. A good internal auditor involved in monitoring the project would have challenged the decisions made by management and at the very least, shone a light on what was happening to the Board to enable the likes of Bennett to properly scrutinise what was going on, well before we got to the situation we are in now.

If John Bennett hadn't done the interview personally, and instead had left it to a more polished presenter, there would be a 10 page thread on here, and Lord knows what elsewhere, criticising him for hiding from the support and not speaking directly to us. He was damned if did and damned if he didn't. With respect the Forces is a very different animal to a football club director. I accept the point you make, but I think it would have been a mistake if Bennett hadn't fronted up. I don't know John Bennett, I've never met or even spoken to him so I don't what he's like. I agree he seems uncomfortable in front of a camera, however, most people are like that. That doesn't mean he doesn't know what he's doing. In my working life I've seen a number of highly capable, successful people, great communicators in their working day, turn to wood the moment a camera was put in front of them. It's not a skill that everyone possesses. It can be coached and improved, but if someone simply doesn't enjoy that it rarely comes across naturally. Sir David Murray loved a camera, he was a natural, he could ad-lib, change topic and sound like he was in complete control. We all know how that worked out. It's ironic but we increasingly live in a time where presentation matters more than substance. Where communication skills are valued over actual ability, where soundbites seem to be all that matters. The substance of what John Bennett said is worth analysis. Clearly all is not well at the club, that's very clear. That lies at the feet of the directors, no one else is responsible for that. To me the most important things he said was 'no matter what happens on the pitch, Clement is here for the season'. That'a bold statement for a Chairman to make. We've had three seasons in a row where our manager has changed in the Autumn. That's a failing of the Directors, I suspect if our form isn't what we all hope for there will be a lot of people shouting for change, it's a brave board that don't give the supporter's what they want.

Be off with you and your actual reasoned, informed opinion John.

They obviously think that you look like one

What! This is the Rangers Chairman, of course we care about what school he went to!!

How do you know he's not the man to get things done? I don't know John Bennett, but I can see he has a pretty impressive business record. He's a guy from Knightswood who rose to the top of his chosen profession. He must have something about him to have achieved that. Finance, particularly in the City Of London, is dominated by people who went to very expensive schools and had every advantage in life. To scale the heights he has against his background at least suggests he has significant drive and ability.

We wanted a center half we got one so what if he’s thirty if we get five good years from him he will more than pay his way

We do, that's fair, whatever he achieved before doesn't really matter now. As the Chairman I'm not sure how much day to day decision making he was involved in before becoming our acting CEO in June. I assume he was involved in the big decisions. So sacking Beale, I assume he was in agreement on. That was a big call, there must have been some voices saying 'give him the season'. I personally think that was the correct decision. Time will tell if Clement is the correct appointment. Ironically the work on the Copland Road stand. It must have been instigated by the board, when it must have been tempting to palm off our wheelchair support, again, and earmark that money for something else. Obviously the project management has been poor, but the project itself is something we as a support should be proud of, I think. I wasn't in favour of the museum. I didn't think it would work, but I was wrong, it's excellent. Sticking our ground over away tickets for Celtic might have seemed an easy decision to fans, but I imagine there was a lot of pressure at a high level being applied. Previous boards would have caved I think. Overall though I like that the board seems calm and focussed now. In the recent past it felt like we were only ever a few weeks away from someone suing us, or public fall-outs as well as high profile PR people making things worse rather than better. My sense is that's not what we have now, there seems to be some stability, with grown-ups making decisions.

I mentioned his background simply to illustrate what he'd achieved in his chosen field. The role of a Chairman is to focus and lead the board. From the outside it feels like he's done that quite well. Important decisions have been made, the previous leaks and briefings seem to have stopped, the board seem to be in agreement on direction. That might sound straightforward but it often isn't. Reading above it sounds like you're judging him on his stand-in role as acting CEO following Bisgrove's departure. I don't think that's a job he wants full-time, I understand he's stepping in until someone new is appointed. You're correct, he's not what we need as CEO, but I think he fully agrees with you on that. I'm not sure how much blame can be laid at his door over the Copland stand problems, but as Chair he must take his fair share of the blame.

I think there are aspects of recent years that are quite positive. It wasn't for everyone but I like NEH and the improvements across the commercial side; driven by the board and their appointment of Bisgrove. I think their rolling programme of stadium improvements alongside maintaining a successful team is a good one even if the direct success (indirectly we've had some) isn't enough in terms of titles. Ultimately though, we're judged on performance on the park and that's where the board have struggled under both Douglas Park and John Bennett. Inconsistent messages about Sporting Directors (hired, fired, not replaced) and player trading models (JB interviewed confirming this was now in place in 2002 then saying it was 'fabled' this week) doesn't help along with either poor selection of managers or not enough backing. John Bennett isn't daft and is very capable. However, he's now responsible for all this and must deliver improvement. I don't doubt he's trying his very best (and investing millions of his own money can't be sniffed at) but that doesn't make him the right man for the job. As a somewhat symbolic chairman at a distance, perhaps that's fine. But that means a proper board of experienced directors working day-to-day for the club's benefit, headed by a CEO with a proven record. We're well, well short on that front and I'd suggest the latter is as important as signing player A or B this week.

Although some posters go over the top with continual and repetitive negativity, what has Bennett done at Rangers that you (or anyone?) has been impressed by? We have to judge him on what he does at Rangers.

Given the concerns about our defence, exacerbated by pre-season form, I'm keen on us bringing in an experienced CB, to add some stability. During the two first halves against Birmingham City and Union Berlin, it felt like the opposition could score at will.

Well, it's temporary, he's covering the position while we recruit a replacement. It's also quite normal for directors to 'work' on behalf of their clubs, even non-execs. For someone like Bennett, an already wealthy man, this isn't a job in the normal sense. Being a director of a football club you've supported your entire life is very different from being a director of a standard commercial organisation. I think it's fair to question Bennett's ability, it's a far from ideal scenario, but under the circumstances I'm not sure there was a better option. Questioning his dedication is unfair I feel. If he's still doing the job in a few months time then questions need asked.

Found the bloke, dubbed 'the greatest player you never saw'.

Even with this (welcome) signing there's still plenty room for a rant 😀

RVP probably the best footballing robin I can think of. Anyone else got any?

Never fear. Rangers are red hot on contract matters. There will be watertight completion delay clause with cast iron damages quantification. There you are - Rangers legal, red hot, watertight and cast iron.

What our clubs needs is someone along the lines of Fergus McCann I remember lots of our fans ridiculing him as the wee man in the bunnet with beady eyes but to give him his due he eventually got it right and laid solid foundations for them to build upon and as for this stand extension the club should have had a professional project manager on board from the planning stage maybe someday we will get the right pegs in the right holes.

I'd say two, in fairness. 😁

Tackling seems mediocre. 11th percentile in defensive 3rd, 53rd percentile overall. Past three seasons have been around that level, two seasons before were lower with the lowest being the 8th percentile overall. Dribblers tackled numbers are low across seasons, both in terms of instance (25th percentile) and success (7th percentile). Again suggests he isn’t a particularly strong/aggressive defender. Blocks numbers on the lower side but inconsistent across seasons. They are a top 5 side so it may be due to that, would have to compare other defenders. Interceptions generally low. Aerials aren’t great either. He gets involved a lot which is good, but his success rate is mixed. Percentiles for success rate over five seasons are 49th, 25th, 83th, 56th and 83th. A couple of good seasons there but safe to say he isn’t particularly dominant in the air. Playing for a top 5 team could possibly explain some of the lower numbers.

That sentence really needs a comma. That's unfair on the support. Were you at Brechin or the Ramsden's Cup Final or did you fork out for the most expensive Champions League package, only to watch the team get skelped from all and sundry?

Agreed. It's this year's 'literally'.

Whether the club is an 'omnishambles' or not is a matter of opinion. Omni means all. So am omnishambles suggests all aspects of the club are a problem, which I don't think is the case but posters using that term perhaps don't mean it literally and are implying several or many aspects aren't operating as they should. Which is one reason I find the term's repeated usage rather tiresome. The stadium issue has pushed a few supporters over the edge, understandably.

Don't make inaccurate comments and I wouldn't need to correct you.

I'm pleased there are some good points being made above, as usually I get the sense there's a lot of projection involved: the team lost so the whole club's an 'omnishambles', which is just silly.

If we are in the market for someone who can run a football club we should also be looking for someone who can maximize our earnings from shirts etc a man like the chap we had years ago Freddie Fletcher

This isn't a job interview, I don't care what school he went to. He has been chairman since April of last year and he has made a horlicks of it. I recognise what he has achieved in his business career, that he chose to invest in Rangers at a time of need and that he has extended credit facilities to the club at lower than market rate. Great !! It is obvious that he is dedicated to what he is doing and he is giving everything towards the cause. All that said, he isn't the type of leader that the club need at this moment. The board need to bring in a particular type of CEO to do that job. Bennett has a good idea of what is needed but along with the board, he has to give this remit to a man who, with a fair wind and sufficient finance, is capable of delivering. Easy to say, but very difficult to find the right man and for that man to go to a gun fight with only a knife. I mentioned "a young David Holmes" earlier. He was given an automatic machine gun.

Age isn't the main driver, but for the last half of the season you could clearly see his legs weren't at the races.

Not sure about spending on a 30 year old cb unless it’s very cheap wages and he is brilliant.

Yeah, he has been on Twitter for years. I remember the Media picked up on his story of us signing van Persie years ago.

John Bennet's problem is communication - say what you mean, mean what you say. His dedication is not in question. I suspect he knows he has an issue with communication because we did not hear from him for a period just in excess of 18 months. When he did speak, he exhibited a lack of confidence. There was a halting insecurity, interrupted by recoveries littered with repetition and, a loss of foresight to consequences. Saying Rangers have been in difficulties before but did not fold was every Sub-Editors dream, he wrote their desired headlines. He recognises his communication problem, why has he not engaged with someone to do his presentation? I worked with a number of General officers who knew what they wanted but could not articulate their desires clearly. They knew it and brought in a Chief of Staff who could present the plan.

That's silly TBF. You can't prepare for Rangers. From the executive issues, to the stadium, to the funds for transfers, injuries, the fans...absolute nut house. Manager and player alike at Rangers, you recognize, accept, endure, hopefully win, and get up the road. If you're lucky, with a few fond memories. You can't fault Clement for being a normal human in an abnormal environment.

If the manager is unhappy with the support he received then can someone explain what he perhaps thought he was getting into? On the park we were an absolute shambles not seen since Murty days. We were bad under Gio but it was clear the players had chucked it for a while. With Beale it was more a case of no one knew what they were supposed to be doing. Finances for transfers? We haven’t really spent any money of note any season since we came back up, even after taking in about 30 million for Bassey and Aribo we spent around half. Then qualified for the CL and the supposed ‘pot of gold’ that comes with it only to not bring anyone else in much to Gio and the support’s frustrations. Board level? Well it’s been a litany of litigation failures, court loses, musical chairs in the board room, major shareholder fallouts. Fan group fallouts. Guys wanting to run a football club but not be seen as a public leader since King left. A rookie manager given free reign to waste an entire summer of funds on guys he signed on football manager 6 years ago with no overall strategy being defined by a then in place DOF who soon left but wasn’t replaced for quite some time. If clement was expecting something different I would ask of him and his agent, have you done your due diligence and research on this role? I always do before I take a job. It’s not quite the same thing but I’d argue just as important.