Anchorman
-
Posts
2,407 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by Anchorman
-
Can anyone tell me who 'Merlin' is?
-
Excellent article Frankie. Very useful as, not being affiliated to any faction, I was getting completely lost (and bored) by the list of acronyms and disagreements. Unfortunately I feel that the comment in bold above is even more regular now and it's getting worse.
-
I agree with what you say about the factions among the support, but if you think King or Murray etc are to blame for that then you are way off the mark.
-
You seem to be hanging on to this notion that people are 'mature' if they agree or 'infantile' if they disagree, which to be honest is a bit annoying (I am not against fan ownership BTW). Anyway good luck with your dream, but in the meantime I will hang my hat on something\someone tangible that has a chance of happening some time in the foreseeable future i.e. Dave King.
-
You choose to ignore the core content of my previous response i.e nothing to do with King's money, more to do with 'can anyone get rid of this board?'. And you choose to continue your 'pie in the sky' stuff like - "it will do more good if we sort out this mess by ourselves." Go ahead mate - tell me how we do that - PLEASE! How do we get the current board to listen to us and change? Tell me - PLEASE! Until you can tell me - then people like Dave King are the only hope.. Tell me what this actually means and how achievable it is? - "If the fans can't harmonise their efforts and work maturely and constructively to put Rangers on safe ground, we really have to ask ourselves if we deserve to have a club that has given us so much pleasure over so many years." It is very poetic but it is just words mate .
-
My comment about Dave King being my last hope is nothing whatsoever to do with wanting "a rich man who is prepared to chuck a few pounds in our direction". He is my 'last hope' that a way can be found to get rid of a board who seem hell bent on staying put regardless and bleeding us dry. I also wanted the McCollco bid to succeed. If Dave King fails to do it prey tell what "responsible adult approach" you reckon will make a blind bit of difference in getting change at a board level and what you would do to "make Rangers great again"? I repeat - I see Dave King as our last hope. I certainly don't see fans "behaving like adults" changing much. Pie in the sky mate.
-
I actually can't. He's my last hope.
-
Accumulate what exactly?
-
Totally agree. I barely hear a word otherwise at games now. Something has got to give. As for the argument that a competitive race towards the league title will make it more appealing - make no mistake about it - if we are not winning that league by a clear margin next year it will be down to us playing badly again, not other sides getting impressive consistent form. We have already shown on one of the very few occasions we played decent this year, when we humped Dunfermline, what the gulf in class should be.
-
I agree it's a level up, but the point I'm making is that it's not appealing enough that people are going be rushing to buy STs to see it, which is what BH suggested. There is only so much you can 'big up' Hearts and Dunfermline (two sides who have firmly hit the grubber in recent times).
-
I think you are 'over-sellling' that one a tad!
-
Ah well - so much for that!!
-
The OP was meant to be more of a poll rather than yet another thread on the ST and King debate - so apologies for creating another thread on the same debate (with the same old arguments). We all know what Dave King has suggested (as a last resort I might add) re STs. We all know what our brand of football is already starting to do to 'bums on seats'. I was just asking a straightforward question - which one could potentially lose more punters next year? (Oh and BTW BH - punters clamoring for tickets next year to watch the 'biggest show in town' is utter bollocks. Don't give up your day job to go into sales. More punters than ever are asking themselves 'do I want to sit and watch yet another season of that dross?')
-
Genuine question because I think Dave King could get blamed for something he is not totally responsible for. I honestly believe, after speaking to hundreds of other fans, that they have had enough of the complete and utter dross being served up on the park. Nothing to do with boardroom stuff.
-
The negative tone of that leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Notice they don't dwell too much on "“The one bit of positive news we’ve had is our doc was fairly encouraged by the test results we’ve had." I have high hopes the boy will be back at his best.
-
We are not talking football here as you know. It's cut-throat corporate conflict that is being played out in the public domain. If politics weren't played in the public domain 'spin doctors' wouldn't exist. Why would there be a need for them if your policies were all that counted? The fact is both sides are using 'spin doctors' to some extent. King's are easy to work out - a couple of journos e.g. Keith Jackson, and Jim Whyte on Sky TV. King's role is fairly straightforward i.e. I'm the saviour coming over the hill if you need me (which I don't think is far off the mark). The board's 'spin doctor' is not so easy to prove. Why not? Because they have to discredit people to stay in power. Theirs is a 'dirty' job - or as you put it - 'boogeyman'. They can't declare themselves so easily as they have slightly less morals than some. So I will ask you two simple questions: Do you honestly believe the board don't\didn't have a spin doctor\boogeyman? If you agree they do\did, then who, if not Irvine (and\or McMurdo)?
-
You only have to look at Youtube to see that the constabulary are pretty good at filming the fights with their CCTVs but not so good at preventing or stopping them. Guess who will be the ones to get 'lifted' in 'dear Auld Reekie'. Not the ones hiding their emerald and grey tops- that's for sure! Edinburgh and Aberdeen police always treat us like we fell off the bottom of their shoes. Always have done - right back to the days when Colin Stein won the league at Easter Road.
-
Strange when we don't even have a museum.
-
“Yes, it surprises me, it disappoints me at times, but I am not just talking about myself,” said Lennon. “There should be more British managers being looked at for Premier League jobs. This is not me being xenophobic, but I am glad Tim Sherwood has got a crack at Spurs. Oh Neil - you are going to let some of your fellow Dhims down with those comments, but nice that you are getting with the program. Why don't you try flying a 'British' flag from the roof of your stadium in case any 'would be suitors' pass by and don't realise there are any 'Brits' in there? Just a thought.
-
The Arabs are quite fond of their 'ululations' at times. Makes them feel important.
-
I would prefer us to treat their Arab 'ululations' as insignificant at times.
-
You see, I have an issue with how you word (2), (3) and (4). I detect a negative tone to your wording with regards to Mr King's motives. And if (1) is genuinely the case isn't that great for all of us? If we believe that (1) is the ideal outcome then why not at (2) "fan power will have won", instead of " King will claim"? At (3) - why is it "he will urge fans to invest" instead of "fans will have a level of confidence to invest"? For (4) - "the ST trust scheme will be abandoned (at least by him)" - I don't get that comment at all. King said last week it would be a last resort. Fans see it as a last resort. How about one element to the bet? King will not do anything that the fans don't agree with (apart from a certain element who don't like him from the outset ).
-
BH - how would you like a bet on that for charity? You obviously have a very low regard for Mr King the man (which I think you have alluded to in the past re his dealings with SARS etc) if you think he is going to sell out on the fans at the point where he can get his diluted share issue, potentially to the detriment of the overall good of the Club. I share the view that you have a defeatist attitude towards King, for your own reasons. He will not sell out for personal gain. He certainly doesn't need either the money nor the blazer.
-
FOLLOW-UP STATEMENT RE: DAVE KING- Union of Fans
Anchorman replied to Steve1872's topic in Rangers Chat
I will disagree with you on that one. I think maybe we are seeing the acronym UoF in different ways. You are seeing it as a 'limited' (no disrespect to any ) faction e.g. SoS, RST etc. I am taking it quite literally as a Union Of Rangers Fans everywhere. I may be an old romantic but make no mistake - we have the power to remove a board - with the will and 'union' of all fans. Don't doubt that! What's the alternative? Do you honestly think it would get to the stage that this support would say "I surrender - you win"? That is not an option for us. Never has been. Never will be. Not in the DNA!! -
FOLLOW-UP STATEMENT RE: DAVE KING- Union of Fans
Anchorman replied to Steve1872's topic in Rangers Chat
I don't think King is attempting to give them any more credibility. He is drawing comments out of them that force a bit more accountability. King carries a fair bit of kudos in the City. So there is a huge difference between the board failing to deliver what they have promised King to deliver, than the board not being transparent to the fans. The investors will be watching events closely I imagine. One or two of them may have other agendas but I don't believe they all have. King is doing a good job with limited powers (limited at the moment!).