Gaffer

Really? I must have missed it then because I thought it was. Maybe you could post it so I can read its sinister tone again.

Or it reflects a sense of quiet confidence in our superiority. I wouldn't shout it from the rooftops, but it's for no other reason than it not being anyone else's business and certainly not a relevant subject for me to discuss outside my family and friends.

It's supposed to be entertainment and this is light hearted banter as far as I'm concerned. It's funny too! Well done whoever is running the official twitter account for increasing the exposure of this event even more. That's what we need. It's also great to see them making him eat his words in public. As for Humza, he's a Celtic fan who occasionally oversteps the mark in my opinion. I'd welcome Rangers fans who are politicians also having a bit of banter on line.

I can't get excited about new donors coming in. In fact, that worries me when I think about it. If someone is giving the club money, what are they getting in return? Football clubs are small time businesses that don't make money so they're not the sort of investments for serious investors. For this reason, I'd be very suspicious of someone offering funds to the club unless it's a fan who expects to lose a proportion of that "investment", if not all of it. If it's someone who wants to use the club to raise their profile then that's fine, but whatever the rationale, it needs to be clear and believable. This is why I don't understand fans demanding funds to be spent on the team that can't be repaid with income. That doesn't make sense and that's why we got into this situation in the first place. It's also why we had the banking crisis in 2007/8. The club needs to be rebuilt prudently, and that means not spending beyond our means. I hope that the board has promised Gerrard some money from the rights issue, because we need some money spent on 4 or 5 first eleven players. Anything beyond that is just too risky and I'd like to think we've learned our lessons. So, I'm hoping DK announces a share issue and nothing else on Monday. Then I'd be a happy bear and you should be too.

Steven Gerrard has captured the imagination of many of us, and I'm sure we all can't wait for him to get started properly. However, something has happened already where I live and I can't remember the last time I've witnessed it. I'm hearing the young kids talk about him and getting excited. My son shows very little emotion (just like many stroppy teenagers) and yet he too has been on to his pals talking about it (via PlayStation headset of course - no chance of using their phones to talk to each other). Thats why this appointment is more important than any of those previously. It's because we not only want this to work, but we need it to work out. I've often said on here that I'm very conscious of losing the younger generation of potential bears, and I could see it happening. I'm sure we all can. Morelos was an exciting player for the young kids to emulate and to pretend to be like when playing in the park. However Gerrard is a superstar to these kids and I'm sure many will now be pestering their parents to go and see him, despite him just standing in the touchline. I can imagine that for the first time kids will want the name of the manager on their replica shirts rather than one of the players' names. I think DK said what a lot of us were thinking and that is that we can't remember a bigger name coming to the Scottish game, not certainly in recent history. Now the world is taking about Rangers and all eyes will be on us. Gerrard will relish that attention I'm sure. We, the fans, will welcome that increased exposure. The board will enjoy the challenge of making the most of a world wide media frenzy. I now just wonder if the players are up to this challenge. It's time for those that can cope to step up to the plate. They have just a few games left to show that they want to be part of this exciting journey. I suspect that two or three of them maybe want to be, but just don't have that mental strength to handle it. If there's one person that will sort that out, it's Gerrard and ably backed up by McAllister. So, come on Rangers. Show us who in the team actually wants to be part of the most exciting phase in our rebuild. We are all watching closely. The world is watching closely. Get the win, afterall it's all about the win.

Message to the Rangers fans .... "Let's go". You said it Steven! I'm just gutted we have to wait 3 months now but at least it'll,give him plenty of time to sort out some of the chancers at the club.

How do you know it was unexpected? Directors leaving because they disagree??? If directors aren't disagreeing, the board isn't working. You just want to read more into this than there is. I'm surprised your default position is that something must be wrong.

Why not today? Why is this a PR blunder? [We've had a few of those but I can't see at all why this is.]. I think you just want to think there's been a disagreement. There's absolutely no basis for that at all.

Don't read the press! Rangers does not need to make sensible changes in a manner to suit the press. It does them to suit the objectives of the club. Clearly this made sense and it seems quite irrelevant to me about the time between resignations and new board members being appointed. You actually tend not to replace NEDs because a board can have as many as necessary, however you do remove NEDs who no longer have a purpose. That's not a negative reflection on them. In fact, it can be wholly positive that what they were asked to do has been done and now the next problem is the focus, which requires different skills.

I agree with you Gonzo, but wouldn't you be tempted to sing it just to see the reaction? I think I might be. ???

Excuse my ignorance, but who is Chris Graham and why is this an issue?

I suppose our recent history means that many of our fans will think the worst when we see announcements like this, but the levels of madness on here are incredible. There can't be anyone on here who seriously believes that we don't need an injection of new blood on the board. I don't think the statement could have been any clearer in demonstrating that there's no issue here. Does anyone not believe that? We are expecting some changes which have been rumoured for a few months so it's no surprise we need to make room for some additions to the boardroom. Normally a change of NED is not a reflection of arguments, or disputes, but rather that the purpose for which that NED was required is no longer a priority for the business. I would assume that Murray contributed greatly to helping resolving our disputes with the previous regime. I'm sure he's looking forward to being able to watch the games as a supporter again. Thanks to both for their contribution, but again this is a non story. It really must be a slow news week.

Thanks Buster. I hadn't read that and got confused. That was the entire point from the last court case wasn't it? King said that he didn't have the money because it was in a trust. His request was to allow the trust to make the offer rather than him and that request was granted. So, this latest point is to ensure that the trust has the money before it makes the offer? That seems sensible and I don't get why there's so much interest in this from anyone. It's just procedure isn't it? Equally, I'd expect King to drag his heels on it to do it at a time that she convenient for him. This just gives him a gentle reminder doesn't it!?! What is this strange obsession by fans of other teams around this? I'm interested in reading stuff about Rangers that's either interesting or material. This is neither.

I really don't understand. What is the interdict element you're referring to? What are they prohibiting? Isn't this just reinforcement of the ToP's view? I'd do the same if I was in that organisation but I'm struggling to see why this court order is so material. Am I missing something?

To be fair to PC and GM though, I can't remember them over promising. They kept issuing the same line about closing the gap on Celtic. The problem is that it's our own fans that will set their own expectations (me included), DESPITE what the manager, board or players say.

In fact, it appears that playing at a high level means you don't have much of a knowledge of football, or the ability to articulate what you know. Just look at the successful managers out there. Very few were a great success as footballers. Equally, we see time and time again a successful footballer that fails in management. I just hope Steve G is the exception eh!?!

I'll be disgusted if that happens. For the sake of the future of the club, we need to stop being perceived as a club that allows its players to rule the manager. I feel so strongly about this that I'll not be attending the remaining games, and I'll write to our CEO about it. Surely the board has learned this lesson though and won't make the same mistake AGAIN!

No offence, but that's why I'm delighted you're not in charge ?? [You've now mentioned this a couple of times about McInnes picking the team for the Saturday. If that was seriously something that was happening then everyone involved is a disgrace, including McInnes, and I'm delighted he's nowhere near our club.]

Thank you Murty! You did your best and stepped in when the club needed you. I hope you remain at the club but if you go, I'm sure we all wish you the best of luck.

What makes you think Clarke would turn it down? If Gerrard turns it down, why is that a n embarrassment for the board? Would you rather they were less ambitious and only asked managers they knew would accept it? And you're right of course about getting a board out. The simplest way to get a board out is to become a major shareholder and vote them out. The reason we can't do that though is because these were the only people willing to put their money into our club. I keep repeating it, but I am sure I heard King say that he was only there because no one else stepped up. For all the noise many of our fans make about this, very few have been willing to do anything about it. Club 1872 has struggled to reach their one million investment target which says it all really. There are plenty of things I'd like this board to do differently as I've expressed many times, but I'd rather find out who the alternative is before I'd be wishing anyone out.

If you were offered the job of Rangers manager, would you turn it down? If so, I'm sure you and McInnes have your reasons, but it's an opportunity that anyone would grasp.

There's nothing anyone can say that will make the blindest difference. We've heard it all before. There is only one thing that makes a difference and that's a winning team on the park. The problem isn't that it's now unlikely to change until next season because these players are broken. The manager is broken too. The players and manager are much better than the results would indicate but they appear to be unable to bounce back from these setbacks. We need an announcement about the manager and investment. When that's done, we will still have plenty of arguments, debates and criticism of how things pear at the moment, but at least we can start to move on.

I didn't say they haven't been asked. I just said what I would expect to happen. They are smart business men so I'd expect them to ask these questions of any situation, football related or otherwise.

On the topic of this game, the night before the game I posted about the leaks coming from somewhere (and posted on FF) about our team selection. It turns out that once again this source was completely accurate in the team and squad selection for the game on Sunday. It's hard enough trying to beat them on a level playing field, but this is just sloping everything in their favour. As a matter of urgency, the board has to find this rat and kick them out of Ibrox. It's disgusting that one (or more) of our own officials/fans is sabotaging our efforts in this way. PC knew this was happening and he seemed to be sure he knew where it was coming from. Sort this out Rangers!!!!! This is the sort of behaviour that destroys trust in the dressing room and gives our enemies a significant advantage.

You are correct, but it's their job to assess the risks. If that's was me, I'd ask 3 simple questions. What difference can we expect by bringing in this player? What are you going to do to help mitigate the risk of [his alcohol abuse] (or whatever the issue is)? And what will we do if this doesn't work out? I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask these questions as a board. If a manager can't articulate the difference a particular player makes, he's not a manager.