Keith Jackson - The Tanks Roll In

[craig 5,199]

It's bizarre that Laxey are the largest shareholder yet Ashley holds all the aces. Why would Laxey allow this to take place?

 

Waiting for an offer from Ashley so they can bail out ???

[stewarty 2,025]

That's possible, but there are issues with Ashley holding more than 10%, not that this will stop him.

[Zappa 0]

Maybe so but on the face of it King has been playing the game from a weak position while allowing Ashley to strengthen his.

 

Laxey's position isn't a surprise - I've said for weeks they'll vote differently depending on what way the wind is blowing.

 

In fairness, I think King's £16m offer would have been accepted if we weren't being run in circumstances where that Easdale/GreenCo block has so much control and jumped into bed with Ashley.

 

On a sidenote, the cynic in me is thinking that our media department appointing a Geordie reporter/journo recently might not have been a coincidence after all....

[Rangersitis 0]

On a sidenote, the cynic in me is thinking that our media department appointing a Geordie reporter/journo recently might not have been a coincidence after all....

 

Cry havoc, and let slip the dogs of war.

[Zappa 0]

Cry havoc, and let slip the dogs of war.

 

Lol.

 

I should have stayed on course and not been sidetracked on that one because my original point was basically just:

 

"Well, well now. We've hired a Geordie reporter! Coincidence?"

[der Berliner 3,743]

First you say they were watching on, then when pulled up on it, you say that they weren't watching on.

 

Bizarre behaviour, and not for the first time.

 

Nitpicking on the use of a phrase that can be and is being utilized in various ways. Desperate. Whatever King and Murray did, Letham included, was essentially "watching on" while the club was being manhandled by various people. The end result was very much the same as if they had done nothing at all.

[SteveC 150]

In fairness, I think King's £16m offer would have been accepted if we weren't being run in circumstances where that Easdale/GreenCo block has so much control and jumped into bed with Ashley.

 

On a sidenote, the cynic in me is thinking that our media department appointing a Geordie reporter/journo recently might not have been a coincidence after all....

 

 

Is that the reporter that thinks TLB, the schum fans and their ground are "class acts"?

[SteveC 150]

The HH holding would have given King the ability to make his own resolutions and stopped Ashley from making his.

 

It was a key step in terms of this year's AGM dance.

 

One thing is for sure, Ashley is the man leading....

 

He's the only creature on the floor. No one else is standing far less dancing

[Hildy 0]

We've had fan groups and individual posters going to extraordinary lengths to explain how Rangers has been in untrustworthy hands; how the club employs people to spin news stories, how it has had financial difficulties, how inaccurate statements have come from the club, and how some of the leading figures at Rangers have been financially over-rewarded.

 

This is fine. It is also very welcome, but what good does it do when most of the club's critics have spent hours analysing what was wrong - but not recommending a course of action to make things better? It is easy to snipe from the sidelines, but even when this is clearly justified, if nothing is on offer other than to warn people against certain individuals and particular investors, it does not necessarily follow that the situation is going to improve.

 

At least some of those who will back Ashley will do so because alternative ways forward were rarely heard. Essentially, if they want to keep supporting Rangers, they will force themselves to believe in Ashley simply because he appears to be the main man.

 

It was one thing to highlight incompetence, greed and dishonesty, but what is a Rangers fan supposed to do with this information? In politics, people are asked not to put their trust in certain candidates, but they are offered an alternative.

 

What alternative did a Rangers fan have if he was persuaded not to trust Murray, Whyte, Green, the current lot and now Ashley? What did those critics of the club in recent years expect ordinary Rangers fans to do when everyone was flagged up as inappropriate?

 

It was right to criticise those not suitable for the positions they were in at Rangers, but when the criticism goes on endlessly and with hardly any alternatives on offer, it begins to fall on deaf ears.

 

Ashley is the wrong answer for Rangers, but ordinary fans will accept him because critics never agreed on a better alternative. The infatuation with 'bad guy' analysis became all-consuming.

[Rangersitis 0]

Nitpicking on the use of a phrase that can be and is being utilized in various ways. Desperate. Whatever King and Murray did, Letham included, was essentially "watching on" while the club was being manhandled by various people. The end result was very much the same as if they had done nothing at all.

 

Now you're back to your original assessment.