bmck

thought it was quite telling when he said "its a sad day" - those kind of senteces tend to end "when we would do something like this" but it didnt. i think he realised he had a line to toe. as a captain you have to be gutted when you sell your best players, especially players that dont want to leave. nothing has more clearly stated the level of our current ambition. yet every fan i have spoken to not online things its a great deal. so who knows. was also quite funny when he said "i didnae mean it" like a wee boy gettting told off.

I for one think that in the past, Rangers have made many financial mistakes, and can assure you, if this was my money at stake, I'd want to cash in on the 10M rather than risk the play getting crocked. It's just too good to refuse and equivalent to about two or three years of player transfer fee budgets.

 

I can't have seen us turn down that kind of money even during NIAR. The player is going to get a huge pay rise and if he does as well as predicted could move to a bigger club in a few years for an even bigger fee. He'll be able to show what he can do as a first pick for a reasonably big Premiership club and also have a better choice of house and nightlife than Manchester.

 

We overspent in the summer and either pay it back by hardly spending in the next few years, or keep a good budget by decent player sales. It all makes sense to me.

the question isnt whether it makes good financial sense, but whether it was the right thing to do.

asprilla was phenomenal.

i think the problem is that murray has been a charismatic and succesful leader. charismatic and succesful leaders tend to polarise opinion - they dont drift in & out of power they tend to take it or lose it in whirlwinds of histrionics, they are despotised or sainted. what it tends to be impossible to do is to discuss charismatic and succesful leaders sensibly - there is too much hope & fear bound up with their will. if i can finally get some effing sleep i think a discussion of murray, and the general difficulty of having thoughtful, charitable and critical discussions about murray, would make a good article for the site. im sure i am not the only one who has felt compelled to portray murray more badly than i feel simply for some contrast to what i feel is too rosy a picture. this divisive tendency, though, just makes things worse. hmm. anyway.

how could he afford to buy us a drink with all of his own money he is eternally pouring into the club?

true, most fans only care about the football side and where we are in the table/cups, even when they know all is not well inside. they don't want to know and/or aren't interested in the running of the club at all.

 

I was the sort of the same when I was younger :box: going to the games but as we were winning mostly all the time it seemed less important then if that makes sense, or maybe I was never sober to consider even thinking about it

When the club is 4 points clear in the league, most fans would express incredulity at any criticism of the club. Even when we were finishing third in the league many fans would not criticise the chairman.

 

Unfortunately not enough fans care that while progress on the park may be positive, several issues remain off it that are negative and remain unaddressed despite constant neglect.

well, thats the point isnt it. as soon as you criticise one aspect of murrays management of the club you immediately get labelled as a rabid murray hater, thinks he is a tyrant, or whatever. murray has made plenty of good decisions lately like the ones calscot mentioned - but that doesnt make him immune from criticism, and it doesnt make you some sort of extremist to point it out.

I agree but it must be hard to talk to a tyrant like SDM

dont think anyone is saying he is a tyrant m8 - this is the problem, you cant criticise at all otherwise you get labelled an extremist who thinks he is evil or something.

Fair point Frankie. Which puts even more emphasis on the RST to highlight the inherent problems at our once great club !

It just repulses me that the powers that be think the regular punter is so blind and/or stupid to not see through it.

Most Rangers fans only look at the SPL table mate.

 

SDM knows that.

reading the website it looks like they are trying to hype this: biggest fee for a scottish player, massive move etc. as if its some great piece of news. smiths "everyone agrees it is a great fee for a fullback" rung ominous to me, and it seems as if this is going to be the party line.

Of course it's his problem per se.

 

But we all know it's not as simple as that. And I'm a shareholder so it is my problem as well...

 

Further, I don't buy into the sharing issue, so while I may understand the debt responsibility sue, by analysing and criticising I'm pushing the attention back to Murray.

 

Or at least I'm trying to...

Sorry I'm confused...

 

Yes, MIH absorbed �£50million from underwriting the share-issue in 2005 but the rest of the debt is the clubs...

 

The last year's accounts told us we have losses of �£5 million per annum with net debt at �£16 million and with �£22 million long term debt in the background.

 

That has everything to do with us.

it absolutely doesnt frankie. david murray OWNS rangers, just like you or i own a car, or a house. if he has run into arrears, then its ultimately his problem. now i know you are talking pragmatically - but this idea that the customers should be the ones caring about the companys debt is just wrongheaded. but he has essentially palmed off his responsibility onto the supporters with cute phrases like "everyone knows the current realities", but they arent *our* realities. they are his. constantly pointing to the debt he created as a reason why X,Y & Z are happening, and not only expecting us to *tolerate* but support him in it is ridiculous. we absolutely did NOT have to sell Alan Hutton - anyone painting a reality other than "David Murray/Walter Smith just wanted the money" is just buying into the whole cunningly handed down language. the fact that we didnt have to sell alan hutton can be demonstrated from the impossibility of knowing when all our financial plans were made, the financial plans that dont see us shut down, how much alan hutton would be worth. my original comments werent aimed at your analysis of the situation, which is correct, but really just an affirmation of the ridiculousness of it. i can accept we are in dire financial straights, i can accept that rangers will always be more than a product to me: but if alan hutton is to be sold then the high heid yins should be coming out grovelling to the fans for doing it, not just matter of factly stating it and expecting everyone just to get on with it.

people seem to forget this is NOT our debt. this is david murrays debt. as fans it is none of our concern. its like caring about someone elses credit card bill. im dismayed.

i dont care about celtic, i am just so gutted we are selling one of the few players who seems to desperately wants to play for us. our ambitions have been systematically lowered and we have no avenue of response: other than perhaps the rst. are the rst going to say anything about all this do you think frankie?

^ with judicious editing even mladnoveic looked great, but some of this says he certainly has talent. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJNYfGNqTRE&feature=related

^ agreed. "we all agree that 8 million is a fantastic offer for a fullback" smith said.

i think this whole idea that we would force (sorry, strongly encourage) someone who wants to play for us out the door is more damaging for the club as a whole than any effect it will immediately have on the team.

cheers del

:box:

 

Coming from the man who contradicted himself about 4 times re: Gow the other night!

a mans less of a man if he cant change his mind about things:D

thats a decent argument. but one of the reasons we havent seen him in a strong midfield is because he is so constantly injured. and both arteta and buffel have played in a midfield with ferguson, so they weren that bad.

i have always liked buffel as a player - i always tend towards players with craft & imagination. that said, johnny is right. buffel has had plenty of chances with us, and the one constant in that time has been his lack of constancy. i would honestly rather see gow in that kind of role.

IMO we couldn't have a better manager than WS to come in when he did,I said so at the time.And the reason for that is we neede stability,which he has done.Now, when it comes to tactics and team selections he comes in for a bit of criticism,but I believe in stability and I am happy with the way we are,on the field,just now and believe we will get better, so he gets my backing as we have came on loads since his return.My worry is off the park,where are we going SDM ?.

100% agreed.

alan gow was fantastic from the highlights. before we signed him he had the most assists in the league - and you can see why. even if for parts of the game he looked jaded, his craft had concrete results, twice setting up goals. he's exactly the sort of player we need in the final third. and he's only young - he's hardly going to be the finished article yet.