Grant K

To be fair, the meal was very nice!

Sadly it appears that positions are as entrenched here as they are on FF with everything black or white without appreciating that sometimes comments / observations may contain some merit. At present it is all conjecture regarding Ashley but certain issues appear a given. We were told that funding was available at the push of a button, well for whatever reason that button needs pushing and there appears to be a difficulty. The amount being sought is a sticking plaster not a solution as we need significant investment. The current situation would suggest that investors are not falling over themselves to put more funds into the current model. The frustration is we are so busy fighting ourselves that the real villains are still able to do us damage. It is obvious that we need unequivocal confirmation from the SFA that investment by Ashley will not be a stick to beat us with down the line. We also need to know the nature of the funding. IMO we don't want loan monies we want and need investment, equity on the Balance Sheet not a P&L cost. Ashley is a very successful business man and in the right circumstances we should welcome him but they need to be right and we need to fully understand the dynamics of any deal with him, he is not altruistic!

Worth mentioning that Dandy was a good inside forward who we wanted to turn into a centre forward. Playing people out of position is not a new thing at Rangers.

But the offer was made prior to the Laxley deal. Would you rather that we just went with the original overpriced over secured offering?

A question for the Nomad and perhaps Mr Wallace to answer.

Big DJ. Great scoring record while also playing part of his career at centre half.

I was there in those days, we arrived at ten to three parked across the road and were still in our seats before the game began. I saw some of the poorest players ever to pull on the jersey struggle against mediocre competition as we failed year in year out to present a credible challange for the title. We suffered from poor management at all levels men with no vision and no obvious ambition, however they never gambled with the future of the club or put us in a position where we were in danger of failing financially. When we lost we only on the park and there was always another week another game another competition. The position we found ourselves in two years ago was far worse than any defeat or any loss of titles/cups and frankly I find it difficult not to say I would gladly give up on some of the success of the recent past to have prevented the outcome. We have undergone two years of nightmares that appear never ending and in truth the light at the end of the tunnel is miles away at present. We remain potentially financially unstable and structurally flawed at all management levels and could face a further extended period trying to sort out the mess that hit us two years ago. No the success of the Murray years was not worth the final bill in my opinion.

There were some unedifying moments surrounding Brown and Symon neither of which could be considered to be high points in the history of our club. I don't remember a view of his time being as being great days or laying down a strong foundation, indeed until Malborough reappeared we suffered from poor unimagnative boards in my opinion. Our darkest hour brought forward an unlikely hero, also disliked by the fans, in Waddell who dragged us forward in terms of the stadium while the Board members floundered.

As ever a great read with all the right words in all the right places! My question would be is this based on knowledge or hope of redress in the future?

Just not good enough. The first season where we were within a whisker of a treble was effectively with the team he captained. He clearly did not fancy Gordon Smith or Davie Cooper and showed to much loyalty to those he did like. His signings where by and large awful, Gregor Stevens, Craig Patterson and Billy Urquhart being amongst the poorest players I have seen pull on the jersey. He did sign Jim Bett who later proved to be a thorn in our flesh but for some reason, probably personal he was unable to hold on to him. Add to this a poor decision to bring back Willie Johnston. Perhaps a more interesting question would have been the circumstances as to how he got the job and why Jock Wallace resigned. IMO Wallace was at his peak and it would have been interesting to know what his plans to take the club forward at that time were. Might also be interesting to understand the thinking of the then Board who I believe set us back a decade with their decision making.

Would this not be an action required by the trustees of the Foundation rather than the club?

A pile of tosh written by a man known for writing tosh. Nobody expected these players to stay, we knew we could not afford them and they have every right to be ambitious. But, we had every right to expect them to be assets and allow the club to get some value for them. It is quite correct to say they were opportunists, they got inflated signing on fees while the club obtained no value. For me they should be wiped from the history of our club completely and referred to as trialists. I do not have the words to describe my dislike and contempt of these traitors.

I'm no expert but they can't hide behind confidentiality when dealing with a shareholder who has lost value. They have a duty of care and appear to have failed in this at many levels. This could be the start of an unravelling that will cause a few people sleepless nights!