ascender

I'm guessing all that's happened is we've officially asked United how much their valuation of the player is and over the next few days will either open negotiations or not. The Houston comment I saw could be taken either of two ways depending how you want to spin it.

On one hand it could be used to infer the price was too expensive because we're skint. On the other it could actually just mean that we think he's over-priced.

Not sure if it would make any difference assuming we have the money to do a deal as Cuellar's comments today are pretty clear that he'd jump at a chance to come back to Ibrox.

I see Spurs have signed Friedel, so maybe there is something in the story about Villa being interested in McGregor.

For all this interest, have we ever received an actual bid for McGregor? Its been how many years now that we've heard there's x number of EPL clubs interested in signing him and its all come to nothing. Which is puzzling as he'd be a steal by EPL money standards, even if they paid what he was actually worth by SPL standards.

Re Bougherra, if Bartley is available for 1.5M, then I'd be looking to sell Boogie and buy Bartley, simple as that. I think its a no brainer to be honest.

I got emailed some of the Burley comments and I have to say that I thought it was a pi$$ take at first as he really doesn't mince his words. I guess he did have the balls to say those things after all, so well done to him.

I don't think there can be any doubt that games are still being played, I guess the question is to what end and by who?

It'll be interesting to see how the support reacts to Whyte if this is the case. Obviously SDM could do no wrong in the eyes of a large percentage of our support, so I wonder how they'll react to Whyte if this turns out to be true?

But I thought that one of the sticking points in the deal going through was Whyte providing proof of monies to invest in the playing squad? OK, so he's bought the club, he can do what he wants, but if there was no legal assurances put in place that he would invest money, then that hold-up would be pointless.

Its the same nonsense as before the takeover went through imo, there's so many conflicting rumours/sources/vague quotes that we've no idea what's going on and if you subscribe to one version of events, there's quickly something else thrown up that blows it out of the water.

I wonder if we'll sell Bougherra and use the funds for Bartley?

I don't think his wages would necessarily be a problem. If he's homesick and Ally wanted him, then I'm sure something could be worked out. The bigger issue for me would be how much his club would ask for him and whether it would be a good move given his age and some of his previous injury problems.

As far as why he left, i thought it was down to the length of the contract on offer from us, but to be honest given the financial problems and uncertainty surrounding the club at the time, who knows what went on.

Posted on the official site this morning.

RANGERS' majority shareholder Craig Whyte today issued the following statement regarding changes to the board at Rangers FC:

 

"It is a huge privilege and honour to have become the majority shareholder at Rangers Football Club.

 

"My commitment to take the Club forward is unwavering and like all Rangers supporters I want to build on the tremendous success achieved by the team in recent years.

 

"It is not uncommon to bring fresh thinking to an organisation in an effort to deliver greater success and that is the fundamental reason that changes have been made to the composition of the Board.

 

"Further Board appointments will be announced in due course. It would be inappropriate for me to comment on the suspensions of the Chief Executive and Finance Director at this time.

 

"I have been disappointed by some comments regarding the takeover made by former Board members who are clearly reluctant to embrace change.

 

"I believe most Rangers supporters understand that, as a result of the takeover, the Club's debt to the Lloyds Banking Group has been cleared and I have repeatedly stated to the Board my intentions to invest in the team.

 

"I have had discussions with Ally McCoist regarding his ambition to secure players already playing for the Club and also to bring new faces to the squad. These discussions will resume when Ally returns to Ibrox this week.

 

"These are exciting times for Rangers and the Club's supporters. This past season's achievements were truly great and I am determined to continue that success for Rangers and our supporters around the world."

The 28-year-old had an injury-hit time at the Stadium of Light

Get him signed!

So if he really is concerned, why doesn't he just come out and say exactly what's on his mind instead of more double talk, childish comments and vague sound-bites?

Looks like Whyte is finally getting down to serious work at the club then.

Had to laugh when i started reading this post as I knew exactly where it was going. This is really basic stuff isn't it? I mean, even I know what Jordans do and how these off the shelf companies work.

It was the one at Ibrox a couple of weeks ago. He made a couple of sliding challenges or maybe one from behind and one sliding in when the hearts player had cleared the ball. Both pretty pointless. And a couple of times when high balls were going in to him he went down looking for a pen after minimal contact. Nothing was given for those ones either way.

I just remember at the time thinking he was lucky to still be on to score when he did. Its not a big thing, but that's exactly the sort of stuff that could cost us in bigger matches and just seemed unnecessary. We won so its not a big deal, but he still needs to mature a bit.

Without wanting to piss on anyone's chips, much as he's had a great few last games he still has some learning to do. Against Hearts at Ibrox he could quite easily have been sent off for a couple of rash and needless challenges and for going down under minimal to no contact looking for pens.

He does seem to be maturing, but until the last few matches of the season I still had him down as a liability to be honest and one who only occasionally looked like he knew what to do with a football. But then at times he looks incredibly composed and can finish some very difficult chances. Very confusing.

Agreed. However,the current wage structure is/was in place due to our financial restraints,I'm merely asking if that wage structure would/could rise but still working within our means?.

Im sure it could be, but would it be enough for AM? We'd probably have to double the ceiling on it to get the sort of figures he might get with any EPL club. Plus if we raise it for him, how many more will think they deserve the same next season maybe?

Easy to say that and I agree to an extent, but McGregor is the longest serving Rangers player and deserves to be paid accordingly given his talent and contribution.

If its about the money, we simply can't afford to pay him what he could get at any of the EPL clubs for example. So its maybe not a difficult decision for him after all. His new contract should reflect his form and that would be putting him on the max wage we can offer in terms of basics & bonuses.

If he wants to stay and win trophies here, he's not going to be making a bad living, certainly enough to retire on. But if he does want to make megabucks, then he'll have to leave. Similarly if he wants a new challenge then that's fair enough.

I know what you're saying, but if you break the wage structure for one person, where do you draw the line? It might be fine short term, but apart from the resentment from other players, what happens if we have three or 4 guys who have a storming season next year and are all looking for parity? Whyte agrees they're also key players, bumps their wages and then what, who will be next to ask?

There's also the problem that some other players who get big wage bumps may not be as consistent performers as AM. So when their form dips, we could be left with guys on big wages who we can't sell and who don't want to move on?

I guess its as much about drawing a line in the sand as a club in terms of our ambition and how we're going to be run as it is individual cases. If a player comes here, stays for a 3/4 years and uses us as a stepping stone to another league then that's fine. They know for their time here they'll be on a decent wage, challenging for trophies, playing in Europe and in front of big crowds every second week. I still think that's all worth something tangible to many footballers. Some might even stay on past that if its not all about the money for example. But players should know that because of the league we're playing in, we can't try and compete on wages with EPL clubs.

I'm rambling now, but i'd hate to see some of the good work with the wage structure (albeit done under very trying circumstances over the last 3/4 years) thrown out the window. I suspect one reason Whyte took us over now is that we have made inroads towards being run within our means which gives him a solid base to work with. Given modest transfer fees, a better scouting system and some of the youth players coming through, it could be a really bright future for the club without having to break the bank.

Unfortunately this is all being portrayed as a very simple issue by many media outlets when its anything but. They've lumped in all the abuse, attacks and death threats as being one and the same, the result being Lennon appears to be the victim of sectarian abuse & hate.

Its far too complex an issue to report like that, but they're simply not going to let that get in the way of a good headline. Which doesn't do Rangers fans any favours at all regardless of the facts of the case.

Death threats aside, I can't believe Celtic's complete lack of responsibility for how their staff have behaved this season. What exactly did they hope to achieve and what did they think would happen????

I'd love him to stay for a while yet but that sort of money is just too good to turn down. Regardless of how much money Whyte has for McCoist, that sort of cash could make a big difference to the health of the club whether it goes to players or something else behind the scenes.

Will the current wage structure still be in place now the take over has been done??

I'd hope so. Otherwise you have the risk that we start down that slippery slope again financially, not to mention if you make exceptions for certain players which will do nothing for squad harmony.

If he doesn't fit within our current wage structure then I guess he has to go.

Will love to hear how the hearts fans blame this on the ref and the sfa. They look like they haven't got a clue about how to be organised and put up any sort of resistance against another team.

I've love for Hearts to win tonight, preferably by a stick-on penalty in the 95th minute.

But I genuinely cannae see Celtic dropping points tonight so think it'll go to the last round of games.

I think Healy has actually looked pretty good and sharp in the limited time he's had, so wouldn't be disappointed if he was our backup option up front.

I'd let Lafferty go, the lad may be a trier, but he's still too much of a liability in my book.

I thought Wylde has done well and Fleck needs either a run in the team in his preferred position or maybe a season on loan somewhere.

Foster is another one who came in for some stick early on but did put in some good performances in big games. I guess a lot will depend on how McCoist sees the back four next season and where Whittaker will play, not to mention Broadfoot.

Edu has looked a bit better, but if we got an offer from someone I think we should let him go. The money and wages would be better spent on other areas of the team when we have Ness & Hutton as well.