For whom the bell tolls

[Soulsonic5791 408]

What chance a good manager? Their appointment track record isn't exactly reassuring.

 

And for what it's worth, I'm not sure that it is the case anymore that if the playing side is going well, other aspects of how the club is run being marginalised to the same extent that it has in the relatively recent past.

Edited March 18, 2018 by Soulsonic5791

[D'Artagnan 173]

1 minute ago, ranger_syntax said:

Have you done any succession planning for the board?

Do you think it is my job ?

[ranger_syntax 4,422]

3 minutes ago, D'Artagnan said:

Do you think it is my job ?

I doubt it.

 

We can leave that aside for a moment though.

 

Have you done any succession planning for the board?

[D'Artagnan 173]

Just now, ranger_syntax said:

I doubt it.

 

We can leave that aside for a moment though.

 

Have you done any succession planning for the board?

And I'll ask you again.

 

Do you think it is a supporter's job to undertake succession planning obo a board who have pledged to do so ?

[MacK1950 2,399]

In what manner can we get a good manager,there is no top manager available and any that are considered to be so, may be after being sacked for not getting their team to where directors/fans want them to be.Thus we have the situation of appointing someone who has failed elsewhere or remaining with the status quo as i don't see the sense in going for someone untried at our level.Therefore it might make sense to stick with Murty.

[ranger_syntax 4,422]

1 minute ago, D'Artagnan said:

And I'll ask you again.

 

Do you think it is a supporter's job to undertake succession planning obo a board who have pledged to do so ?

In general if a supporter holds a significant number of shares then I suppose it is.

 

In particular I doubt it.  (see above for my recent post on this topic)

[D'Artagnan 173]

2 minutes ago, ranger_syntax said:

In general if a supporter holds a significant number of shares then I suppose it is.

 

In particular I doubt it.  (see above for my recent post on this topic)

You will have to forgive me Syntax but Im clearly missing the point here.

 

Why woud supporters, whether they be shareholders or otherwise, be responsible for fulfilling the committments made by the Rangers board ?

[Soulsonic5791 408]

2 minutes ago, MacK1950 said:

In what manner can we get a good manager,there is no top manager available and any that are considered to be so, may be after being sacked for not getting their team to where directors/fans want them to be.Thus we have the situation of appointing someone who has failed elsewhere or remaining with the status quo as i don't see the sense in going for someone untried at our level.Therefore it might make sense to stick with Murty.

Cold hard cash might prove to be a useful instrument in attracting and securing a proven manager. Remuneration and a realistic player transfer budget are essential in that respect. The question is 'are the board willing to countenance spending some?'

 

I suspect I already know the answer to that but I'll open it to the floor...

[ranger_syntax 4,422]

2 minutes ago, D'Artagnan said:

You will have to forgive me Syntax but Im clearly missing the point here.

 

Why woud supporters, whether they be shareholders or otherwise, be responsible for fulfilling the committments made by the Rangers board ?

You suggest that the honeymoon period, for the board, should be over and criticism should follow.

 

This, I think, implies that board members should be replaced.

 

Perhaps so, but if one is to agitate for this then shouldn't one have replacements in mind?

[Gaffer 1,665]

1 hour ago, D'Artagnan said:

Does it not alarm you that the current chairman of our club embarked on a course of action which a regulatory body and the court of session deemed improper, despite the clear warning from George Letham ?

 

Similarly are you not concerned that the man who has pledged to underwrite future losses at our club appears to be in default with an order from the Takeover Panel, reinforced by a court of session ruling, with no sign of resolution ?

 

After 68 days of failing to appoint a manager, embarrassing ourselves with an undignified statement regarding the sole target they had identified, we appointed the youth coach as interim manager as replacement for the disasterous appointment they had previously appointed - and yet the board feel they are immune to any sort of criticism despite assuring fans they would ensure there was succession planning after Warburton ?

To your first point, no.  It doesn't alarm me at all.  It appears that he's taken action that he saw fit.  It's a private matter for him.

 

To your second point, again no it doesn't concern me at all.  King's point was latterly that he doesn't have the funds as it's all within his trust.  That's perfectly normal and I don't understand why there's any scaremongering about that.  He has to resolve that and is once again a private matter.

 

The board does warrant criticism for appointments, etc, but as I said it would not have been an issue at all had we won last Sunday.  The team out there should have won, as I'm sure you'll agree.  Had that happened, we would have been joyous with a feeling of great optimism.  It just seems that there are people like you with ready to roll headlines anytime something negative happens.  What would you have done with your post had we won against them?  Would you have merely put in on ice until the inevitable next difficult period arose?

 

I appreciate people reviewing the actions of the board and keeping them honest, but it just seems there are some very unreasonable and hysterical reactions sometimes and I'm suspicious of the motives.