Malcolm Murray - Open letter

[Tumshie RFC 0]

More boardroom struggles over the next year I suspect. Our off the field struggles are just an embarrasment.

[chilledbear 16]

As a director, he's bound by a level of confidentiality and also collective responsibility. There may be circumstances whereby a director may wish to ignore that and reveal what was going on, but in doing so would damage their own future boardroom credibility.

 

Murray obviously doesn't to go that far and therefore the letter is a waste of time. Inference and innuendo helps nobody. He should either have the balls to say what he wants to say or just shut up.

 

Agree with this, just added to the confusion.

 

I suppose the question we have to ask is, why would any Company replace someone with his experience with Easdale.

[amms 0]

Agree with this, just added to the confusion.

 

I suppose the question we have to ask is, why would any Company replace someone with his experience with Easdale.[/QUOTE]

 

Word.

 

That's exactly the question that should be asked. Supporters have been far to quick to take up positions on this based on I'm not sure what (messageboard enmities perhaps?).

Who runs the club is hugely important, it astounds me the entire support doesn't ask that simple question no matter who they like or dislike in our board? How does this change make Rangers stronger?

There might be a strategy here, he might be a piece in a bigger jigsaw, but it's unclear what that is. It shouldn't be beyond the board to explain to the support what they are trying to achieve.

[reaper 0]

MM spat the dummy but didn't spit it out of the pram.

[der Berliner 3,761]

Who runs the club is hugely important, it astounds me the entire support doesn't ask that simple question no matter who they like or dislike in our board?

 

Matter of fact ... I assume the entire support ask themselves this questions, but don't get any answers. All you get, both from the board and people on boards "in the know" is innuendo, half-facts, and half-info.

 

The thing is, Walter has never been a man to make strong statements or talk about the club's interna, as opposed to various people we have had since and including Whyte. I do not expect him to make somesuch now. I would hope that Mather et al will speak up at some point ... who writes the "Club Statements" anyway?

 

As for MM ... I salute him for saving "my" club with his own money (whether he got it back or not). The rest of his tenure went by as quietly as McClelland's or Walter's so far. I can't remember anything being said about what he actually did at/for the club elsewhere.

 

You would love to hear McCoist's and Smith's opinion about the boardroom changes, of course. Alas, in a month time we'll most likely hear a bit more about that at the club's AGM.

[Zappa 0]

Matter of fact ... I assume the entire support ask themselves this questions, but don't get any answers. All you get, both from the board and people on boards "in the know" is innuendo, half-facts, and half-info.

 

You always seem to be sneaking in complaints about the quality of information on messageboards. If they're not up to your standards, just don't use them! Simples!

[der Berliner 3,761]

You always seem to be sneaking in complaints about the quality of information on messageboards. If they're not up to your standards, just don't use them! Simples!

 

I used the plural (i.e., boards) here. Anyway, it was just an open "complaint". Of course everyone can use or ignore stuff to his/her heart's content. That doesn't make the fact go away that we are more often than not only served half-truth et al.

[UCF2008 0]

Matter of fact ... I assume the entire support ask themselves this questions, but don't get any answers. All you get, both from the board and people on boards "in the know" is innuendo, half-facts, and half-info.

 

And yet more than half of the scaremongering innuendo has become hard fact over the past couple of years. I don't know about you, but for me that makes me less dismissive of these half-truths.

[calscot 0]

You always seem to be sneaking in complaints about the quality of information on messageboards. If they're not up to your standards, just don't use them! Simples!

 

I don't think he's complaining about the quality of the information per se, it's the fact that many fans are accused of inaction and not heeding the warnings - or of just not being perpetually outraged, when in actuality there is not enough reliable and concrete information to give a clear understanding of what's happening behind the scenes or indeed, to make a plan of action...

[UCF2008 0]

I don't think he's complaining about the quality of the information per se, it's the fact that many fans are accused of inaction and not heeding the warnings - or of just not being perpetually outraged, when in actuality there is not enough reliable and concrete information to give a clear understanding of what's happening behind the scenes or indeed, to make a plan of action...

 

That's a fair enough point. The only problem is that by the time it's set in stone it's usually a little bit too late to do anything about it. Assuming 'anything' could be done in the first place.