PhilLeotardo

Someone from Nolan Partners asked him to apply.

Pathetic. Both sides of this dispute are acting like little boys which perhaps tells us why the RST has failed.

So far on this thread I've been told Murray's "investment" should have won more titles in the past ten years, Hemdani would have changed things against Kaunas and Walter Smith has basically invented the stories about our perilous financial situation. I've tried to be nice but I'm sorry to say those are some of the most retarded comments made about Rangers in recent times. I'm out.

huh ? I couldn't. Could you ? All I see is a bloke put in place by the bank taking a terrible gamble on our future and pulling the emotion strings of our current manager. You obviously call it as you see it No he wasn't, he was appointed by Rangers Football Club. Unless you have the remotest shred of evidence that the bank were involved in his appointment...? This thread is ridiculous, the same people who are saying Muir has done nothing have predicted a fire sale in each and every transfer window since the financial news was revealed. A fire-sale which hasn't happened. Coincidentally, at the same time as a well-known and respected business turnaround specialist has been on the board leading our recovery from financial trouble. If you can't see what he's done for Rangers, it's because you don't want to see it. Sorry but I just don`t see what he has done and no- one else can say either because we don`t know. But sorry to say I`ve NEVER said there was going to be a fire sale. All smoke and mirrors for me I`m afraid. Smith has a new contract now because Muir is there ! tosh ! Was it not the same Smith that was slating the Directors when he couldn`t get in a loan deal. Nothing has changed since Muir has arrived apart from more players going. more money saved ( no rocket science just cost cutting which most sane minded fan could do ) Smith is staying on because he knew we weren`t in the dire position that was being told by the press. he used the situation to put pressure on celtic by encouraging the notion that we would be shut down and falling apart knowing fine well we were not. He hid the fact that he had spent over £18M only 18 months earlier and that he had the most expensive 11 on the park . He played a game he couldn`t lose. If he wins the league its a miracle , if he loses the league its because we are skint . truth is we should have expected to win the league on what he had spent 18 months earlier. To surmise, Smith has manufactured the situation to make himself look good. Christ almighty.

So if Hemdani played instead of Dailly the rest of the team who grossly underperformed would have improved? Doubt it. Unless you're privy to some information about Smith specifically asking for Velicka's signing to be made a priority and Davis' to be put on the back-burner your point is baseless. The teams in both legs were more than capable of defeating Kaunas.

And I don't know how many times you're going to completely ignore what was originally said. I'll remind you again. It was stated that Murray has invested enough money to expect more success in the past decade. I've pointed out that no external finance has been invested, his only action has been to move debt. Your stance must therefore be that moving £50M should have allowed McLeish to win another title or two. If that is your stance then you're mad. If that's not your stance then why bother responding to the issue in the first place? If you're not going to respond specifically to the points I've made then don't bother responding at all because you make a habit of changing the subject and frankly I won't waste my time reading the random ramblings of wee boys who think they're smart arses.

Bearing in mind what was said originally, how does eliminating part of a debt accrued over a number of years previous help bring more success in the present day which was circa 2004? Oh, and the sentence where you're questioning my intelligence, it should be 'too' not 'to'.

Explain the difference between moving £50M from one company to another and spending £50M on players, scouting, facilities, coaches, youth football etc.? Sorry, if you can't immediately see the difference then I don't think anyone will be able to explain it to you.

Just to recap, the initial comment I responded to was that Murray had ploughed enough into the Club to have been more successful in the past decade. Whatever way you want to spin it, moving debt to another branch of his business isn't ploughing money into the Club and is by no means a gesture which should have brought more success. In that respect, there very much is a difference as far as Rangers are concerned.

£30M of debt is not a sustainable figure for a Club operating within the restrictions of the SPL.

There is a bit of a difference between moving £50M to another company, money which is still owed I hasten to add, and putting £50M into the Club to spend.

That is a fair point but where was the logic in working hard and going through barren seasons to eliminate the debt while talking of five-year plans only to tear them up and accumulate unsustainable levels of debt once again?

I can only presume this is a joke. In the past decade Murray has ploughed next to nothing into the Club. There was the £50M share issue which removed a significant chunk of the debt he had run up but any other money spent has came from transfer fees, money the Club has earned or money borrowed from the bank which we are now paying back with interest. Basically, the only person who can be blamed for the mess we're in is Murray.

In fact, many seen this response and series of quotes/newspaper stories as an "answer" to another supporter gripe (don't we complain a lot!) which was that Smith never plays youth. We can't have it both ways... Our lack of players is the fault of David Murray.

Whether you or anyone else think we need it is irrelevant. You can't budget for something you might have. At the last count we were down by seven senior players compared to the start of last season. Allegedly we have £5M to work with us for transfers and wages. That is ridiculous. Dermot Desmond isn't ploughing money into Celtic, they are being funded by their revenue and the question is why are they outperforming us quite significantly in this area. I'll settle for on-field victories over accounting victories every day of the week but there is only so long sporting success can continue while competing with a wage bill which is at best 50% of your biggest rivals.