Jump to content

 

 

amms

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,807

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by amms

  1. amms
    I'm with Nevin on this, there is no 'Old Firm' anymore. The 'Old Firm' symbolised the symbiotic nature of the two clubs, both benefited from the other and as such we both had conjoined interests and tended to look out for each other at a directorial level. Commercially we voted together and relied on each other for support against other clubs, the league and the SFA. That's not the case now, that commonality of purpose no longer exists, there's no 'Old Firm' anymore, just two big clubs from the same city.
  2. amms
    I love that Lawell felt the need to respond, I guess Ally touched a nerve.
  3. amms
    Brilliant, I laughed out loud at that. You'll fit in just fine here.
  4. amms
    Why is hosting two finals better than hosting two semi finals? Surely the cost to 'hire' the ground for the day is the same no matter what the occasion. Surely the host club gets a flat fee for the use of their ground and all other revenues; TV, food concessions, corporate, programmes etc belong to the organising authority? I could be wrong on that maybe the host does get a cut of other revenues. Also is Parkhead more expensive to use than Ibrox seeing as it has the potential to sell more tickets?
  5. amms
    Rolling Stone magazine has an article this week entitled "Marx Was Right: Five Surprising Ways Karl Marx Predicted 2014". Being an American magazine Rolling Stone is taking a risk with this because for many in America being labeled a Marxist is career suicide, the phrase is so loaded as to be used purely as an insult now. Yet the article points out that for many people capitalism doesn't work very well and one of the 'people' it doesn't work for is us, the Rangers support. The opposition to 'fan ownership' puzzles me. I suppose for those under 30 brought up on a diet of Sir David's largesse, of the rise of the mega-clubs like Man Utd, Barca, Real Madrid and now Chelsea, Man city and PSG and the creation of the G14 organisation then money is everything, only those with the deepest pockets can succeed. That's how football works, isn't it? But I'm 43, I watched clubs like Nottingham Forest, Malmo, Red Star Belgrade and Brugge contest the European Cup Final, I know that football isn't all about money and the club with the most money doesn't have to always win. Football has changed though, and today the club with the most money usually does win, in every league we're now seeing that. TV rights, sponsorship, endorsements and countless other 'income streams' help fuel this. Add in megalomaniacs from Russia or Malaysia or much nearer to home and the clubs run with some sort of fiscal responsibility are left behind, derided even. But here's the thing, it's unsustainable, Marx predicted this and he was right. All of these business bubbles burst eventually and this one will too. They are "chaotic by nature" and one which is as unrestricted as football currently is will crash and burn eventually, nothing is surer. Have a look at some of the ticket prices being charged in the EPL this season. Have a look at the debt being carried by football clubs all around Europe. Tell me that's sustainable, tell me that someone bigger will come along and pick up the cheque. Yeah right, go read an economics book or two. We're the guys who'll be picking up the 'cheque'. I'm not a Marxist. Professionally, when I'm not wasting my time on football forums I help grow those capitalist bubbles and i've seen a few of them get too big and go pop now. Too many of us judge 'success' on how much profit a company makes, not on how good its product or services are, how well it treats its employees and customers and how well it's prepared for the future. Time and again we fall for this, short term gain over long term stability seems to be what we desire. So look at football clubs. History tells us they can disappear, no matter how unlikely that might seem, they can and do. It happens when people no longer care about them, so it is in the interests of all football clubs to ensure people keep caring. The best way to ensure that is to involve people in them. If football supporters become nothing more than 'customers' then eventually we'll start to behave like customers. As anathema as this might sound it is starting to happen now. Already English sides (and they and the already bankrupt Spanish sides are the driving force behind this) are seeing more and more of their tickets being sold to 'football tourists' rather than supporters. London clubs in particular are seeing this phenomenon but it is also happening in Manchester too. That's helping to drive the price of tickets up and force 'supporters' out. That the concept of fan involvement seems alien to us is puzzling to me. But then how many of us are actually involved in anything outside of our work or family these days? How many of us are on the PTA of their children's school, how many of us are involved in youth organisations on a voluntary basis, how many of are in trade unions or are members of political parties or help out at the local bowling club? Tell you what I bet it's a hell of a lot fewer than did in the 70s and 80s. The whole concept of taking responsibility for our community assets has been diluted now. My father was born in an Ayrshire mining village which consisted of three rows of houses, it was tiny. Yet it had a Junior football team an amateur football team, three Friendly Societies, a quoiting club, an ambulance corps, a juvenile football club, a brass band, a dramatic society, and a phonetics class. Today, in the Glasgow area I live in my daughter's Brownie group can't find enough volunteers to staff their troop. Don't get me wrong there's no shortage of parents who want their daughters to join, just a shortage of parents who are willing to give up any of their time to help out. This is the same. Too many of us want someone else to run Rangers. Too many of us want someone else to carry that burden, hopefully someone very rich too. We can blame factionalism in our support, unhappiness with how the RST has been run, personalities involved in various groups or find reasons to explain how fan ownership can't work. But then we can't complain when things go to hell. Can we really complain about the people running our club if we aren't willing to do it ourselves? How do we judge success? What do we want from Rangers? Do we care what the share price is? The football bubble will burst, nothing is surer, economics tell us this if we care to look. When it does there will be casualties, the clubs who are stable both fiscally and politically will be the most likely to survive that. So I'd argue it is in our best long term interests to own our club, to have a say in how it is run, to be keeping a watchful eye on things. Remember, no one else cares, nobody else gives a damn about our club, only us. Why entrust it to people who don't share our values or dreams?
  6. amms
    Rolling Stone magazine has an article this week entitled "Marx Was Right: Five Surprising Ways Karl Marx Predicted 2014". Being an American magazine Rolling Stone is taking a risk with this because for many in America being labeled a Marxist is career suicide, the phrase is so loaded as to be used purely as an insult now. Yet the article points out that for many people capitalism doesn't work very well and one of the 'people' it doesn't work for is us, the Rangers support. The opposition to 'fan ownership' puzzles me. I suppose for those under 30 brought up on a diet of Sir David's largesse, of the rise of the mega-clubs like Man Utd, Barca, Real Madrid and now Chelsea, Man city and PSG and the creation of the G14 organisation then money is everything, only those with the deepest pockets can succeed. That's how football works, isn't it? But I'm 43, I watched clubs like Nottingham Forest, Malmo, Red Star Belgrade and Brugge contest the European Cup Final, I know that football isn't all about money and the club with the most money doesn't have to always win. Football has changed though, and today the club with the most money usually does win, in every league we're now seeing that. TV rights, sponsorship, endorsements and countless other 'income streams' help fuel this. Add in megalomaniacs from Russia or Malaysia or much nearer to home and the clubs run with some sort of fiscal responsibility are left behind, derided even. But here's the thing, it's unsustainable, Marx predicted this and he was right. All of these business bubbles burst eventually and this one will too. They are "chaotic by nature" and one which is as unrestricted as football currently is will crash and burn eventually, nothing is surer. Have a look at some of the ticket prices being charged in the EPL this season. Have a look at the debt being carried by football clubs all around Europe. Tell me that's sustainable, tell me that someone bigger will come along and pick up the cheque. Yeah right, go read an economics book or two. We're the guys who'll be picking up the 'cheque'. I'm not a Marxist. Professionally, when I'm not wasting my time on football forums I help grow those capitalist bubbles and i've seen a few of them get too big and go pop now. Too many of us judge 'success' on how much profit a company makes, not on how good its product or services are, how well it treats its employees and customers and how well it's prepared for the future. Time and again we fall for this, short term gain over long term stability seems to be what we desire. So look at football clubs. History tells us they can disappear, no matter how unlikely that might seem, they can and do. It happens when people no longer care about them, so it is in the interests of all football clubs to ensure people keep caring. The best way to ensure that is to involve people in them. If football supporters become nothing more than 'customers' then eventually we'll start to behave like customers. As anathema as this might sound it is starting to happen now. Already English sides (and they and the already bankrupt Spanish sides are the driving force behind this) are seeing more and more of their tickets being sold to 'football tourists' rather than supporters. London clubs in particular are seeing this phenomenon but it is also happening in Manchester too. That's helping to drive the price of tickets up and force 'supporters' out. That the concept of fan involvement seems alien to us is puzzling to me. But then how many of us are actually involved in anything outside of our work or family these days? How many of us are on the PTA of their children's school, how many of us are involved in youth organisations on a voluntary basis, how many of are in trade unions or are members of political parties or help out at the local bowling club? Tell you what I bet it's a hell of a lot fewer than did in the 70s and 80s. The whole concept of taking responsibility for our community assets has been diluted now. My father was born in an Ayrshire mining village which consisted of three rows of houses, it was tiny. Yet it had a Junior football team an amateur football team, three Friendly Societies, a quoiting club, an ambulance corps, a juvenile football club, a brass band, a dramatic society, and a phonetics class. Today, in the Glasgow area I live in my daughter's Brownie group can't find enough volunteers to staff their troop. Don't get me wrong there's no shortage of parents who want their daughters to join, just a shortage of parents who are willing to give up any of their time to help out. This is the same. Too many of us want someone else to run Rangers. Too many of us want someone else to carry that burden, hopefully someone very rich too. We can blame factionalism in our support, unhappiness with how the RST has been run, personalities involved in various groups or find reasons to explain how fan ownership can't work. But then we can't complain when things go to hell. Can we really complain about the people running our club if we aren't willing to do it ourselves? How do we judge success? What do we want from Rangers? Do we care what the share price is? The football bubble will burst, nothing is surer, economics tell us this if we care to look. When it does there will be casualties, the clubs who are stable both fiscally and politically will be the most likely to survive that. So I'd argue it is in our best long term interests to own our club, to have a say in how it is run, to be keeping a watchful eye on things. Remember, no one else cares, nobody else gives a damn about our club, only us. Why entrust it to people who don't share our values or dreams?
  7. amms
    I've no idea if they've someone specific in mind, it's not a football decision so possibly not. Replacing Ally with someone is easy enough though, there's always a McLeish or a Levien or a Houston or a McCall who'll jump at the chance. Getting rid of Ally is the tough bit.
  8. amms
    I actually don't believe they'll think twice about paying him off, then they can then point at him and say look at how much he 'stole' from the club afterwards too. But by smearing him and the players they can make his position untenable, they can severely up the pressure on him. Remember we're still unbeaten in the league and it's almost February, simply removing him would still be very unpopular with many of us. That can change though, views can be influenced particularly by skilled practitioners of that craft. I believe he's already 'toast' because the decision to go for him has clearly already been taken and the dogs have been let loose. I don't see how he comes back from that, no one else has so far.
  9. amms
    I used Barcelona to illustrate the point that in my opinion some of our supporters would be unhappy with the quality of football on display no matter what. Every club has supporters like that, it's an integral part of fandom and it's a supporter's prerogative. Last season supporters complained because we'd some poor results, we've not had many of them this season but some complain about the style of play. Fair enough, I've no real issue with that, we all see the games through our own prism of expectation and experience. Supporters will hold diametrically opposing views on players, managers, tactics and personalities, often based on nothing more than personal preference. That's football. I'm not criticising you, or anyone else for that, that's not the point that was being made. My point is that some supporters are unhappy with McCoist as manager and that unhappiness is unlikely to change in the next couple of months. Those supporters already predisposed to feeling McCoist is doing a bad job are the target for this current salvo of 'stories'. That's day one at marketing school mate, target your audience. Now you personally might be impervious to these subtleties but others won't be. Every story casting doubt on McCoist's integrity, his tactical acumen, his players fitness, their training schedule, where they stay before a match and whatever else they've got planned for us will increase the pressure on McCoist and make the previously unpalatable thought of removing him from Rangers a much easier thing to do because some supporters, and only you know if you are one of them, would support that action. We've a large section of our support who aren't as vocal in their criticism of McCoist as you are, but still aren't sure he's doing a great job. They might feel we should be playing a more fluent style of football, blooding more young players, starting MacLoed in central midfield etc. They aren't ready to turn on Ally yet though, they'll voice concern over the football but back him as a man and as someone to be trusted. I could be included in that category. No one is happy with the quality we watch, but some are willing to excuse it or at least accept it for now. So when questions suddenly arise over McCoist's honesty, his integrity, his commitment, his ability, his loyalty well some of us less inclined to publicly criticise him might start to waver on that. We might decide to stay silent and say nothing rather than defend him when he's being castigated by others. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but believe me when I tell you none of this is accidental. This is classic 'nudge theory' PR, where behaviour can be altered through positive reinforcement. A large number of us already harbour concerns over McCoist as a manager, further subtle and less subtle reinforcement of that will have an affect I guarantee it. Why it matters is what makes me concerned, angry even. I fully accept that your antipathy to McCoist is only based on football reasons, but as others have said that's not what this is about. People in power want McCoist removed and discredited and that does concern me. Because very few decisions taken by those in power have been to better the football club and I sincerely doubt this one is either. McCoist retains a position of influence and power in our club. He's an obstacle and a potential rally point for some people and they don't want that. As always ask yourself who benefits by McCoist being turned on by the support, who benefits by McCoist being removed from the club and who benefits by having a compliant 'outsider' in the managers chair? I'm too long in the tooth to believe this is anything to do with wanting a better side on the pitch and it frustrates me when others can't see that too.
  10. amms
    But a section of the support have already turned against McCoist because we're not playing like Barcelona with a team filled with youth academy protege. This is all aimed at them, they're open to these messages they've already decided McCoist's useless and is ruining our club. It will work too, a section of our support have absolutely no grasp of the machinations at play here, they'll keep being fed stories that McCoist is greedy, McCoist's a liar, McCoist is holding back the budget cuts, he's endangering the clubs very existence. This is strategic, the league is won so a bit of player unrest and a bad result or two won't affect the outcome but will add to the pressure slowly building on Ally. They've got 3 months or so to turn the support against McCoist and replace him with someone of their choosing before season ticket renewals are required. They'll probably succeed too, Irvine's fuckin good at this. Anyone who has followed the online Rangers support over the last couple of years will easily be able to plot where the fault lines in this story will run, McCoist is toast, it's just a matter of when and how badly they'll have to smear him first. Our club is difficult to love right now.
  11. amms
    So Brian Stockbridge types a 365 word email out on his phone at 10 to midnight? Really, he doesn't have a laptop or some other larger keyboard device that he'd use for something that length. He must have the texting thumbs of a 14 year old girl. I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest Ally's stance at the AGM is coming back to haunt him now. I'm sorry this is simply further evidence that the people in charge of our club have not changed, their methods have not changed and I imagine their aims haven't changed either. I guess Ally is the last big obstacle at the club, the last person with any authority and who isn't entirely in-tune with the board. I feel more despair now than at anytime since the administration.
  12. amms
    Well done, Jack's bonus is secure for another month.
  13. amms
    No? I just listened to them being castigated for not taking a pay cut by a former Scotland captain on national radio. Even on here I've seen posts suggesting the players are being selfish*, I can only imagine what the lunatic fringe who swallow Irvine's load every time he shoots it are saying on other messageboards. Give it time STB, there'll be stories soon enough about how much certain players earn coming to a paper near you soon. Edit - *Right on cue SBS supplies the evidence whilst I was replying.
  14. amms
    Yeah, well, the view from my high horse is considerably clearer than when your head is stuck in the sand. Green and Mather were just employees, very good. The answer's simple STB, but you might not find it palatable. Stop defending the people who own and who run our club, stop attacking those who oppose them. That's the answer, it's all you can do.
  15. amms
    For those among us who aren't accountants and struggle to grasp bullshit when they see it can I point out a couple of things. Nobody, and I mean nobody, will pay £100 million for a bus company that made a profit of £659,404. So that's your starting point for understanding that what you are reading is total nonsense. Secondly understand who the Easedales employ to manage their PR. Now Jack Irvine has many, many faults but trust me when I tell you he's very good at press manipulation. All of this is staged, this isn't paranoia this is a lifetime of working in that environment. The players are being set up to take the blame for our financial mismanagement. McCoist it's been reported, has taken a cut, the Easedales are going to plough £20 million in just as soon as they've got it, the new Chief Exec is cutting the costs, showing a firm hand, attracting investors. The bad guys are the players, refusing pay cuts, robbing the fans, putting the club in peril. It's cunning, it's really well deployed, but it is total bullshit and still some of us lap it up.
  16. amms
    Mitchell didn't join us until he was 18, he was at Manchester City as a youth and released by them. We were his 'elsewhere'. I think the fact Annan want to keep him tells us what his level is. Good luck to him but it wouldn't have made sense to offer him a new contract.
  17. amms
    There's no connection between being a great player and being a good coach. Goram was undoubtedly a great player but to suggest he should be at our club in a coaching capacity makes no sense at all. As has been said up thread the coaching of goalkeepers is one area we've excelled at for a generation now.
  18. amms
    The shares are very cheap so there's that attraction. If, as seems likely, we 'slash' a million off our playing staff salary our share price will probably go up because on paper it'll look like our club has brought costs under control, shown firm management blah blah blah. They only have to go up by a few pence for these people to make money. The fact the club will be weaker doesn't concern these types of fuckers, it's just a game to them. The wanker Ashley pulled a similar stroke this week with Debenhams shares, buying a percentage, making it public, and then selling them right away to score a few bob. That these things affect ordinary people's lives doesn't concern cunts like them. No wonder communism seemed so attractive at times.
  19. amms
    Yes, I did. I mentioned it because, in my opinion, it seems to be one of the stupid reasons people 'chose sides' instead of actually examining the facts that were staring them in the face. Did you. I thought we were talking about that section of our support who shamefully acted as cheerleaders for the people who've led us back to the abyss. You know, the ones that don't take responsibility for their words or actions. Wallace will do his master's bidding, that's how it usually works with employees. Again, you shouldn't need to be an accountant to understand that.
  20. amms
    The controlling shareholders are always the issue STB, fuxake keep up. For some of us this has nothing to do with whether or not we like the guy who owns Follow Follow. Why aren't the controlling shareholders your issue, that's what I still find bewildering. You really don't need to be an accountant to see that.
  21. amms
    It doesn't really matter what Wallace's CV is it's the same people who own the club and call the shots. The damage has been done, the lost money can't be reclaimed, this has fuck all to do with signing players. You made this about you, I didn't single anyone out. Fans aren't the last people to blame, some are blameless, some tried really hard to affect change, they are largely blameless. The rest though should take their share of blame. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. You just don't get it, do you. The people who led us to this point haven't gone away, they are still in control. It's the same remote, faceless, nameless people, with unknown motives who control our club. The fact is we're back at the brink again less than two years after the last time and we're still controlled by people who can't be trusted. You still seem to be okay with that, but then as you said yourself you're no accountant.
  22. amms
    The need for better fiscal management has been apparent for a lot longer than a few weeks ago. Yet some supporters not only backed those responsible but actively discouraged those opposed to them. The only shock is that the apparently competent Wallace is cack-handed too. That budgets signed off in the summer were so spectacularly wrong should concern all of us. Right, so because you're not qualified we should ignore your views in future as you won't take any responsibility for them anyway? You're the one who seems angry, I just pointed out that a large section of our support visibly encouraged the men who've led us to this point, again, and verbally attacked those who opposed them. I'm long past the anger stage and well into despair.
  23. amms
    "If it's that bad", did you really just type those words the day after our entire squad were asked to take a pay cut that's eight times the rate of inflation? You really don't take any responsibility for your own words, actions and opinions STB? That's a great philosophy for life. Shame on you.
  24. amms
    If you've been championing the board that have driven us to this point then yes, shame on you. If you spoke in defence of them because you didn't like the people speaking against them then double shame on you. I can't think of any other possible reason why a Rangers supporter could have backed this board, it was clear as day they were at best incompetent and at worst killing the club and lining their pockets. Following the club home and away doesn't absolve anyone of responsibility. Nothing has really changed from yesterday other than the public confirmation of what's been done to our club. Again.
  25. amms
    History tells us the succeeding years following an administration event are rarely good for a football club. Dundee and Livingston both suffered subsequent financial problems and Airdrie have never properly recovered. It could be argued Hibs and Motherwell prospered but Hibs were bought by a very wealthy supporter and Motherwell simply used administration to clear their debt, they had the same owner before and after. In England Wimbledon needed to vanish completely before being reborn, larger sides like Portsmouth and Coventry remain in precarious positions, Southampton and Leeds dropped to League 1. The total ineptitude of our board has been blatantly obvious to anyone with the slightest interest in looking. Once again our club is in a financial hole, it is unable to honour commitments it made, that is not the fault of the players, they are absolved of blame. At some point we the supporters are going to have to take a long hard look at ourselves though. Like most of us I watched months of in-fighting last year, people spending huge amounts of time and effort defending the directors of our club, criticising anyone who warned that all was not well and that change was needed. Shame on those who supported that board. Our supporters trust is inept yet it should be the most powerful trust in the UK, never has a club created the circumstances where a supporter's body could garner support than ours has in the last couple of years. When are people going to realise that change is needed there? Anyone who doesn't think our club is in serious peril, again, needs a reality check. That half way through a season, when we're top of the league, in one cup final and still in another, our budget is so wrong we're asking players to take pay cuts shows such fiscal vandalism as to warrant an enquiry. Well we were warned but many chose not to listen. The signs we'd seen before were there again but many chose to ignore them. Too many of us would rather abuse our own than face up to our responsibilities. I suppose we get what we deserve.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.