Frankie

The two need not be exclusive of each other. Yes, we've done well in Europe and many of the games in the last five years will live long in the memory but, ultimately, we're still failing and must find improvement domestically as, without that, we'll arguably fall further behind Celtic. A balance has to be found and that will not be easy.

It's a fascinating opposite of recent years and I do agree the sheer number of games we play now affects our ability to compete and home and abroad. All the more reason for a modern football operation that is geared for 60+ games a season: a manager able to be tactically diverse for two very different challenges, a sporting director able to offer the platform for rotating 28 first team players, a scout able to provide athletic, mentally strong targets with a board able to insist on a model that ensures continuity throughout. Much easier said than done - in fact, few achieve it - but it has to be the target and anything less will just see us fall further back. I hope this is what the 49rs group have identified in their belief Rangers are an investment worthy of their time and money.

As for other aspects of the debate, of course there have been some small relative successes over the last ten years with our ongoing ability to compete in the Europa League something we can appreciate. However, given our lack of domestic silverware in the same period, I'm of the opinion our Europa League form is in spite of the club being run poorly rather than any defined strategy. There have been too many bad decisions to suggest otherwise. Yes, the Gerrard appointment worked fairly well and to win our 55th title as Celtic went for their 10th in a row in an unbeaten league season cannot be under-estimated. Unfortunately, some of the decisions subsequent to that have been poor - from manager choice, to the way the football department was operated to a clearly dreadful transfer strategy (incoming and outgoings) right through to CapEx mistakes so anyone claiming the board have done a good job are not looking at the broader picture. Now, like most folk, I don't think any of this was done with bad intentions - in fact, I'm sure the opposite is true - but, nevertheless, the club has been too inconsistently run to offer consistency on the field. Again, there have been positives - the commercial side has improved, I like NEH as an investment and I hope they've attracted a suitable buyer to secure a more successful future but, overall there has not been enough demonstrably good work to suggest anything other than failure for the incumbents. Ergo, as Celtic do overtake us on and off the field, then we absolutely have been dethroned as Scotland's most successful club on the field and as the Establishment club off it.