Beaujolais

This

Agreed, but Ayr's only tactic today seems to have been to kick us off the park and to stop football being played. You can either play them at their own game, and equal the physicality of the opposition (i'm not sure our support would like that), or you can play your own game and try and let quality eventually shine through.
It took some time, but it eventually happened.

Boss? Going bust by Christmas? This was much as expected, after Saturday demonstration they got them out pretty quick. Losing about 1.25m a month or 300,000 per week. But we have had to deal with a lot of shit. We have bought the edminson suite wifi etc. I am fairly happy with this report. But the manager and back room staff are on too much money, they should renegotiate their contracts, and the directors could do like wise.mJust until we are back at the top and we get more tv revenue etc which will pay for this. Directors lent the club money with no interest except Ahmed, This was expected, we knew we were losing 1m a month but as I said it has been a very difficult 13months. Now can we all please move on and support the club. What will be will be, that's why we have a agm.

We like to score very close together 3 goals in 5 mins Fri now 2 goals in 2 mins looking much much much better now

If this is true, it is indeed surprising, but not necessarily a bad move.
We do not know what is actually happening in the Boardroom. We have been fed rumours and certain facts that have turned out to be true, but sadly these have tended to be leaked. Perfect tactics for creating divisions.
I have not heard Walter Smith condemning Charles Green. Clearly there were concerns regarding allegations made against Charles Green that the Directors had a Duty of Care to organise an investigation. This occurred. The results of which have as yet been formally revealed. Clearly their is potential within those allegations to do the Club great damage both in terms of its reputation but possibly of more consequence in the short term to compromise the recent share offering. The Directors are in a no win situation- dammed if they do and condemned if they do not and it turns out there were procedural and legal wrong doings during that period.
So what is required from the Chairman?
A Chairman is merely the figure head for the Board of Directors. True they generally have the casting vote, but in most situations the principe of first amongst equals applies.
Therefore the main priority of the Chairman is to Manage and Lead the Directors of the Board. They do not need to be proficient in every department, but they do need to ensure they have Directors with the appropriate skills in place to achieve the goals of the board. I think it could be argued that Walter Smith has had many years experience in managing a team of individuals with differing roles, and in achieving the goals that that team has been asked to achieve.
However I must admit I would be very surprised if Walter Smith had agreed to take on such a role. I am not sure it is a position he would have been desperate to take. If he has done so, my thoughts are it is because he has concerns as to the direction or perhaps lack of direction in the boardroom as things stand.
The assumption that Walter Smith would not terminate the employment of anyone failing to perform also lacks credibility. There is no hard evidence to back this up. I am sure though that if Walter Smith was to be Chairman of the Board all employees would be expected to conduct themselves professionally and be reminded of the responsibilities to maintaining the reputation and associated high standards of performance expected at Rangers Football Club. Equally any employee struggling would be given a fair chance to get their act together.
Their is it would appear a power vacuum within Ibrox. This void need to be filled urgently by a candidate that investors, directors and supporters can unify around. I cannot think of a better candidate to fulfil this role as things stand.

If this is true, it is indeed surprising, but not necessarily a bad move.
We do not know what is actually happening in the Boardroom. We have been fed rumours and certain facts that have turned out to be true, but sadly these have tended to be leaked. Perfect tactics for creating divisions.
I have not heard Walter Smith condemning Charles Green. Clearly there were concerns regarding allegations made against Charles Green that the Directors had a Duty of Care to organise an investigation. This occurred. The results of which have as yet been formally revealed. Clearly their is potential within those allegations to do the Club great damage both in terms of its reputation but possibly of more consequence in the short term to compromise the recent share offering. The Directors are in a no win situation- dammed if they do and condemned if they do not and it turns out there were procedural and legal wrong doings during that period.
So what is required from the Chairman?
A Chairman is merely the figure head for the Board of Directors. True they generally have the casting vote, but in most situations the principe of first amongst equals applies.
Therefore the main priority of the Chairman is to Manage and Lead the Directors of the Board. They do not need to be proficient in every department, but they do need to ensure they have Directors with the appropriate skills in place to achieve the goals of the board. I think it could be argued that Walter Smith has had many years experience in managing a team of individuals with differing roles, and in achieving the goals that that team has been asked to achieve.
However I must admit I would be very surprised if Walter Smith had agreed to take on such a role. I am not sure it is a position he would have been desperate to take. If he has done so, my thoughts are it is because he has concerns as to the direction or perhaps lack of direction in the boardroom as things stand.
The assumption that Walter Smith would not terminate the employment of anyone failing to perform also lacks credibility. There is no hard evidence to back this up. I am sure though that if Walter Smith was to be Chairman of the Board all employees would be expected to conduct themselves professionally and be reminded of the responsibilities to maintaining the reputation and associated high standards of performance expected at Rangers Football Club. Equally any employee struggling would be given a fair chance to get their act together.
Their is it would appear a power vacuum within Ibrox. This void need to be filled urgently by a candidate that investors, directors and supporters can unify around. I cannot think of a better candidate to fulfil this role as things stand.

Bang on... There are many many assumptions we could jump to. Until the Club and CG actually confirm this, there is absolutely no point in leaping to any conclusions, especially when such conclusions are detrimental to other personnel within the Club, and likely to be incorrect. Blue on Blue is not we need just now. Nor should it be the Rangers way. Lets leave that sort of behaviour to the lies of Lieswell Milne etc.
If it is true, and for whatever reason, this supporter will be writing to CG to thank him for the fact we still have a Club and our home is still Ibrox.

Will wait for more information before I start pointing fingers and making accusations.

No fine has been issued to Rangers FC (the football club). What section (6) reads is that Rangers FC did not gain any sporting advantage from this and should not be punished or receive any penalty. Thus meaning the football club.
What has received a penalty and in this case a fine, is the former company.
I'd also like to point out how much this document states the Club is the exact same entity as it was 10, 20 and 30 years ago, as well as 140 years ago. This will prove tough reading for some In fact, a lot.

If these figure are correct or are even close, then they demonstrate how out of touch with reality of the world we live in now, and the gulf between levels of performance and players salaries. There is a culture within Ibrox that needs to change.