UCF2008

I'll be perfectly happy with 33% if we can increase our turnover to the fanciful figures touted by BS & CG

Unlike our Emergency War League, Southern League and Glasgow League title wins the Div3 title does count towards Domestic League wins so that number is now 55, but we still have only 54 Scottish League Championship wins.

OK, first of all I want to make it clear that I'm not suggesting we need to make any changes at board room level. I'm remaining skeptical and sitting on the fence on that one for now. If and when Green either manages to win me over or lose my support altogether you'll be the first to know. We might see a new chairman soon anyway and again it's not a change I'm calling for, but if it does happen I don't see it as a position which holds any real power at the club while 'Charles' is in charge. Over the past 10 years we've had more chairmen than managers but only two of those have held the clubs destiny in their hands. The owner calls the shots. Not the chairman Most of the replace Ally talk seems completely unwarranted in my opinion. It's aimless and basically just change for the sake of change. The candidates suggested have been for the most part laughable.

Something about Rangers and what makes us tick - through all of our success there have been plenty of changes at board room level. Only a few have radically affected the club. What we do have throughout our history is a habit of sticking by our managers. We don't chop and change them as many clubs do. When I read comments on various threads suggesting managers we could bring in to replace Ally as a stop gap it really makes me cringe.

A neutral observer might wonder why McCoist has to answer this type of question. For the record I don't count it as number 55 and I doubt McCoist really does either. He probably just doesn't want to give the party poopers the time of day.

This part I completely agree with. Unfortunately these days many of our great minds don't fancy hanging around for much longer than it takes for them to get an education. I don't get this. Where is this coming from? Ironically in this respect Rangers need the union more than the union needs Rangers. In an independent Scotland who do you think would replace the monarchy? If you think the sectarianism issue is already skewed in it's political handling and press coverage, do you think that would improve for Rangers and us fans as citizens of an independent Scotland?

You'd be needing them unless you think they'd just hand back the oil rights as a parting gift.

First of all, I didn't say everything in Scotland is shit. Those are entirely your own words and not mine. As for your *facts* - Even assuming they're accurate (of which I have some doubts) how much % of these wonderous resources can Scotland actually stake a claim to?

Aside from going with the Euro should we gain independence we'd be reliant upon the three banks which hold the rights and facilities to produce Scottish currency, except one is owned by Lloyds, another by the UK government and the third by National Bank of Australia. That's before even going into where we would actually stand in terms of National debt.

I can assure you the information I have on that front was given some time ago by a reliable source. What information you can get on the issue now is sketchy to say the least, but since you name The Scotsman as being scottish media (which it still is ...for now) a quick look reveals Glasgow as having overtaken Edinburgh as a financial centre despite the both of them being in decline Glasgow beats Edinburgh as financial centre

Edinburgh used to be the financial capital of Europe. The financial crisis saw it demoted to 2nd spot behind London. We don't have a monetary system. The majority of business bigger than a corner shop in Scotland is owned or run by the English or 'others'. We have practically no industry to call our own. Our parliament has shown very little to earn confidence in their ability to sustain an economy never mind grow one. We have no media infrastructure... I could go on and on here. Our national identity is fast becoming something to cling on to as opposed to who we are. Getting back to football, Rangers and Celtic are both owned by foreign majority shareholders and like the SFA and SPL are run by English CEO's.

He's the type of character that you could make a spitting image puppet of and even with the best comedy writers it wouldn't be funnier than the genuine article. He's unintentionally hillarious. That's what I mean by calling him a muppet. Would the players be able to take him seriously? Possibly. Would the fans? First bad result and he'd be a laughing stock with no way back.

Of course not that's the whole point of the article. I don't have much time for politics in general but have always backed the union over the vague notion of independence. It's all fine and well to talk about them stealing our oil and over taxing, but when it comes down to it we're too intertwined with the English and have neither the infrastructure required to go it alone nor the money to build it. Strangely enough it's through my support of Rangers that I've recently felt an increasing lack of support in return from the union, but it's still better than the alternative.

A likeable enough muppet, but still a muppet nonetheless. If you think Ally's been easy pickings for the sack the manager brigade, just imagine what wee Jimmy would be like.

Goes with the territory. If he gets us into the championship inside two years he's got my vote though.

The press obsession over us is nothing new so is no excuse for referring to us in the way he did. He was also one of the outspoken ones both for and against us last Summer when he spoke about fairness and integrity only to change his tune when it came to whether we were voted into Div1 or 3. He trumpeted about how he voted in favour of us going into Div1. No surprise there. IMO he's as much a self serving scumbag as the rest of them and definitely not a Rangers fan.

Predictable response from Doncaster. Why break the rules to rush through the introduction of new ones? If the 1st Division clubs are in such dire need of finance right now why not just give them the extra money this season on the basis of the proposed changes being put in place for the season after next? Where's the money coming from? I doubt that TV money and sponsorship is dependent upon reconstruction unless it somehow involves fast tracking us so what's the difference?

"This is not about Rangers, Sevco, Old Rangers, New Rangers whatever" Seriously?? By trying to make sure they never get any Rangers fans through their gates again?

At the same time though, I would guess that if Murray's been doing his job properly, Ally and Green will already have most of what they need from him in terms of Summer targets.

Whatever the allegations are, they must be serious as I can't see suspending your chief scout at this point in the season being a decision that any CEO would take lightly.

I agree with what you're saying for the most part DB. We have to have realistic expectations of the standard of player we might attract and Sandaza isn't completely useless. However, we didn't just sign him because he was the best we could get at the time for Div3. We were trying to sign him for the SPL in the previous window afterall. Also, as much as our current situation will make it more difficult to bring in higher quality players, it shouldn't mean that we're only looking at the dross. If we can get players like Wallace and Templeton to play for us in Div3 then there's nothing to say we can't get even better players than them in. Every player will look at it differently.

We shouldn't have bought him full stop.

The quotes from the anonymous source seem to be written by someone with a better grasp of the English language than you'd generally expect from the players and coaching staff.

So we should build our team and style of play around Sandaza? Not very clever.

I wouldn't have signed him in the first place. Sandaza in the form of his life would be no better than what should be a 4th or 5th choice striker at Rangers, so to give him a contract of £10k a week in the final year was madness. We need to invest more in our youth and sign the type of players who'll compliment the young players we've already brought through. Ideally we want to be in the position where we'll only be bringing in about half a teams worth of higher quality players when we get back to the SPL as opposed to practically buying a full squad.