Jump to content

Another perception on recent claims by contacts/boss


Shipyard Blues

Recommended Posts

Walter Smith "We had adequate cover in that area and felt it was best for the player and ourselves, especially as the player has World Cup hopes" or words to that effect.

So do we believe Smith only when it suits us or take his word as gospel here too?

The sale of Mendes doesn't even begin to justify the claims made of what was going to happen without new owners? The RST/FF were clearly only interested in pushing their own agenda there. Or does the sale of a player missing for most of the season with injury constitute a firesale and save us going out of business?

Smith also said the sale of Mendes would allow us room to manoeuvre in the transfer market. This never transpired and as far as I'm aware the only explanation that has been given for this is that Muir kiboshed it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Walter Smith "We had adequate cover in that area and felt it was best for the player and ourselves, especially as the player has World Cup hopes" or words to that effect.

So do we believe Smith only when it suits us or take his word as gospel here too?

The sale of Mendes doesn't even begin to justify the claims made of what was going to happen without new owners? The RST/FF were clearly only interested in pushing their own agenda there. Or does the sale of a player missing for most of the season with injury constitute a firesale and save us going out of business?

Smith also said the sale of Mendes would allow us room to manoeuvre in the transfer market. This never transpired and as far as I'm aware the only explanation that has been given for this is that Muir kiboshed it.

Given by whom ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's also not pretend he is the devil incarnate.

Interesting article.

I await one of the authors of RM's weekend articles coming along to clear this mess up.

I'm not pretending about anything mate and I certainly didn't refer to anyone as the devil or any other name.

Unfortunately, there are some who prefer to post malicious lies about fellow bears as well as resort to the lowest kind of name-calling. It's bad enough that any bear would take part in such pointless and counter-productive nonsense but when we have the editor of the biggest fanzine and website doing the above simply because contacts may disagree with his website's opinion on Muir is more than disappointing. Add in his responsibilities as an experienced and influential Trust board member - not to mention his participation in Assembly activities; then it should worry everyone - no matter what our site of choice is.

Of course none of us are perfect and we've all made mistakes when we write. Football supporting is an emotional past-time and logic doesn't always help form our opinions. I think that's why we seen Boss apologise last year when he perhaps made a bit too much of his Duffy concerns. Was that apology taken in good faith? No, it was handed back with interest about some more unsubstantiated hearsay regarding Duffy's alleged business decisions since then.

So when you make your valid points about some posters on RM placing an unreasonable over-attention on FF, please temper it with the realisation that the same unhealthy exaggeration is evident from those who we're supposed to be able to place our trust in to represent us.

As I said elsewhere, a few people (on both sides of the fence) need to take a step back and really ask themselves what they're hoping to achieve by continuing this obtuse and churlish obsession with each other. Meanwhile, the rest of us - the majority who are reasonable and are confused about which information to believe - are losing patience with all concerned. Even worse, our club remains as far from solving its long term future because the very people who do have the talent and imagination to build something new would prefer to hit each other with their handbags.

A shambles in every sense of the word.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank for the heady underestimation. Been there from the start in various guises FYI.

Even if I take that at face value it just means you fall into one of the above categories. It's even more loathsome that you choose to ignore his putrid behaviour or say it's none of your business.

I see he criticised my comments on his spokesman. Bit rich coming from someone who couldn't propose his spokesman to join his Lodge as due to his choice of former partner he wouldn't be allowed to join.

The man is a cancer in the Rangers support and the RST.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Walter Smith "We had adequate cover in that area and felt it was best for the player and ourselves, especially as the player has World Cup hopes" or words to that effect.

So do we believe Smith only when it suits us or take his word as gospel here too?

The sale of Mendes doesn't even begin to justify the claims made of what was going to happen without new owners? The RST/FF were clearly only interested in pushing their own agenda there. Or does the sale of a player missing for most of the season with injury constitute a firesale and save us going out of business?

Smith also said the sale of Mendes would allow us room to manoeuvre in the transfer market. This never transpired and as far as I'm aware the only explanation that has been given for this is that Muir kiboshed it.

Given by whom ?

It was widely reported. Smith's comments after the St Johnstone game were a reference to it and several newspaper and media outlets covered it in the preceding and proceeding days, some more explicit than others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's also not pretend he is the devil incarnate.

Interesting article.

I await one of the authors of RM's weekend articles coming along to clear this mess up.

I'm not pretending about anything mate and I certainly didn't refer to anyone as the devil or any other name.

Unfortunately, there are some who prefer to post malicious lies about fellow bears as well as resort to the lowest kind of name-calling. It's bad enough that any bear would take part in such pointless and counter-productive nonsense but when we have the editor of the biggest fanzine and website doing the above simply because contacts may disagree with his website's opinion on Muir is more than disappointing. Add in his responsibilities as an experienced and influential Trust board member - not to mention his participation in Assembly activities; then it should worry everyone - no matter what our site of choice is.

Of course none of us are perfect and we've all made mistakes when we write. Football supporting is an emotional past-time and logic doesn't always help form our opinions. I think that's why we seen Boss apologise last year when he perhaps made a bit too much of his Duffy concerns. Was that apology taken in good faith? No, it was handed back with interest about some more unsubstantiated hearsay regarding Duffy's alleged business decisions since then.

So when you make your valid points about some posters on RM placing an unreasonable over-attention on FF, please temper it with the realisation that the same unhealthy exaggeration is evident from those who we're supposed to be able to place our trust in to represent us.

As I said elsewhere, a few people (on both sides of the fence) need to take a step back and really ask themselves what they're hoping to achieve by continuing this obtuse and churlish obsession with each other. Meanwhile, the rest of us - the majority who are reasonable and are confused about which information to believe - are losing patience with all concerned. Even worse, our club remains as far from solving its long term future because the very people who do have the talent and imagination to build something new would prefer to hit each other with their handbags.

A shambles in every sense of the word.

Excellent post mate.

Tried to post on various different occasions tonight that this is bigger than anyone and the protest (which are NOTHING to do with ANY site) will continue regardless of mud being slung in various places. Aside from being called a 'Dingwall defender' 'lapdog' 'lickspittle' it fell on deaf ears.

Contacts was at the meeting during the week. Why he has apparently has a different interpretation of it than the majority of other people present is something he could perhaps enlighten us with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's also not pretend he is the devil incarnate.

Interesting article.

I await one of the authors of RM's weekend articles coming along to clear this mess up.

I'm not pretending about anything mate and I certainly didn't refer to anyone as the devil or any other name.

Unfortunately, there are some who prefer to post malicious lies about fellow bears as well as resort to the lowest kind of name-calling. It's bad enough that any bear would take part in such pointless and counter-productive nonsense but when we have the editor of the biggest fanzine and website doing the above simply because contacts may disagree with his website's opinion on Muir is more than disappointing. Add in his responsibilities as an experienced and influential Trust board member - not to mention his participation in Assembly activities; then it should worry everyone - no matter what our site of choice is.

Of course none of us are perfect and we've all made mistakes when we write. Football supporting is an emotional past-time and logic doesn't always help form our opinions. I think that's why we seen Boss apologise last year when he perhaps made a bit too much of his Duffy concerns. Was that apology taken in good faith? No, it was handed back with interest about some more unsubstantiated hearsay regarding Duffy's alleged business decisions since then.

So when you make your valid points about some posters on RM placing an unreasonable over-attention on FF, please temper it with the realisation that the same unhealthy exaggeration is evident from those who we're supposed to be able to place our trust in to represent us.

As I said elsewhere, a few people (on both sides of the fence) need to take a step back and really ask themselves what they're hoping to achieve by continuing this obtuse and churlish obsession with each other. Meanwhile, the rest of us - the majority who are reasonable and are confused about which information to believe - are losing patience with all concerned. Even worse, our club remains as far from solving its long term future because the very people who do have the talent and imagination to build something new would prefer to hit each other with their handbags.

A shambles in every sense of the word.

The post of this thread. :clap:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Walter Smith "We had adequate cover in that area and felt it was best for the player and ourselves, especially as the player has World Cup hopes" or words to that effect.

So do we believe Smith only when it suits us or take his word as gospel here too?

The sale of Mendes doesn't even begin to justify the claims made of what was going to happen without new owners? The RST/FF were clearly only interested in pushing their own agenda there. Or does the sale of a player missing for most of the season with injury constitute a firesale and save us going out of business?

Smith also said the sale of Mendes would allow us room to manoeuvre in the transfer market. This never transpired and as far as I'm aware the only explanation that has been given for this is that Muir kiboshed it.

Given by whom ?

It was widely reported. Smith's comments after the St Johnstone game were a reference to it and several newspaper and media outlets covered it in the preceding and proceeding days, some more explicit than others.

i meant about Muir....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost forgot but a salient point in this whole debate is that I believe the editor of FF posted the other day about he and a prominent TBO member were invited to meet Donald Muir but turned this down.

Why would they do that when they clearly have a lot of questions for the man?

Because they were asked to keep such a meeting secret or the contents private? Perhaps I suppose but similar meetings have occurred between the club and such people in the past. Eventually the information filters out even if the meeting is private or minuted generically.

However, if the offer was genuine, then why wait until contacts' posts his article before speaking about it? Surely Muir's alleged possible demand for secrecy would be the ideal stick to beat him with when supplying reasons for asking the support to buy into this (still reasonable) clarity request.

Found that a bit strange but the club's activities aren't the only ones that are as clear as mud. Many have a part to blame in the misinformation, rumour-mongering and name-calling we've seen of late. Ergo, if contacts is to be villified for posting about sources and releasing unsubstantiated info while changing his mind; then I'm sure Barry221 will be eager to right another piece (or 5) on other key figures in the debate.

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Walter Smith "We had adequate cover in that area and felt it was best for the player and ourselves, especially as the player has World Cup hopes" or words to that effect.

So do we believe Smith only when it suits us or take his word as gospel here too?

The sale of Mendes doesn't even begin to justify the claims made of what was going to happen without new owners? The RST/FF were clearly only interested in pushing their own agenda there. Or does the sale of a player missing for most of the season with injury constitute a firesale and save us going out of business?

Smith also said the sale of Mendes would allow us room to manoeuvre in the transfer market. This never transpired and as far as I'm aware the only explanation that has been given for this is that Muir kiboshed it.

Not saying it wasn't Muir but where did you hear that? That aside then do you agree that is Smith didn't want Mendes to go then the deal wouldn't have happened? Hardly a firesale.

I genuinely want to know what's happening but as several people have already stated, if Muir came out and told us 100% what his role was at the club the RST/FFwouldn't believe him.

Meanwhile SDM is sitting laughing without a hint of criticism, it might not be popular with some but if you want to be angry and protest at someone then why not him? Why is it the guy who was brought in to steady the ship?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not saying it wasn't Muir but where did you hear that? That aside then do you agree that is Smith didn't want Mendes to go then the deal wouldn't have happened? Hardly a firesale.

I genuinely want to know what's happening but as several people have already stated, if Muir came out and told us 100% what his role was at the club the RST/FFwouldn't believe him.

Meanwhile SDM is sitting laughing without a hint of criticism, it might not be popular with some but if you want to be angry and protest at someone then why not him? Why is it the guy who was brought in to steady the ship?

I'm not overly concerned with the word firesale but what does concern me is players leaving, wages coming off, fees coming in and the cash disappearing. Smith's reaction suggests he believes it was duplicitous. With that in mind, is it any wonder people are suspicious of Donald Muir? The alleged secret meeting only adds to this air of suspicion meanwhile Bears are sitting in the dark bickering with one another largely because of this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Contacts was at the meeting during the week. Why he has apparently has a different interpretation of it than the majority of other people present is something he could perhaps enlighten us with.

No idea if contacts is going to post in reply to the accusations aimed at him seemed obvious to me that Barry221 (or whoever wrote it) was being fed information from someone whose interests would be benefited by attempting to discredit contacts and the information he supplied. I doubt the people at the meeting would do that but I don't know these people.

I do know contacts though - and while he'll acknowledge I strongly disagree with some things he posts - I wouldn't question his honesty and I certainly wouldn't question his commitment as a Rangers fan.

Too many people throw insults around like confetti yet can't look the same people in the face when they see them in person.

EDIT - Seems I read the initial post wrongly so please discount the numbers present theory... :D:blush:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Contacts was at the meeting during the week. Why he has apparently has a different interpretation of it than the majority of other people present is something he could perhaps enlighten us with.

No idea if contacts is going to post in reply to the accusations aimed at him but seemed obvious to me that Barry221 (or whoever wrote it) was being fed information from someone whose interests would be benefited by attempting to discredit contacts and the information he supplied. I doubt the people at the meeting would do that but I don't know these people.

I do know contacts though - and while he'll acknowledge I strongly disagree with some things he posts - I wouldn't question his honesty and I certainly wouldn't question his commitment as a Rangers fan.

Too many people throw insults around like confetti yet can't look the same people in the face when they see them in person.

(tu)

Link to post
Share on other sites

How the hell can Donald Muir be the "enemy" when he is trying to balance the books and keep the wolves from the door? :unsure:

This kind of sh*te is really wearing thin. :2gunsfiring_v1:

I for one will be in Walter`s corner who has always had Rangers best interests at heart rather than some businessman who walked in the doors two minutes ago.

If other wish to sleep walk into the demise of our club that is up to them, but if Muir is the new saviour, who will be crucified on this occasion?

Link to post
Share on other sites

How the hell can Donald Muir be the "enemy" when he is trying to balance the books and keep the wolves from the door? :unsure:

This kind of sh*te is really wearing thin. :2gunsfiring_v1:

Because he is allegedly balancing the books with scant regard for what is left on the pitch.

aye i know canae believe we let

shagger

boyd

bougherra

wilson

davis

lafferty

novo

miller

papac

thomson

all go, oh wait a minute.................................

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not saying it wasn't Muir but where did you hear that? That aside then do you agree that is Smith didn't want Mendes to go then the deal wouldn't have happened? Hardly a firesale.

I genuinely want to know what's happening but as several people have already stated, if Muir came out and told us 100% what his role was at the club the RST/FFwouldn't believe him.

Meanwhile SDM is sitting laughing without a hint of criticism, it might not be popular with some but if you want to be angry and protest at someone then why not him? Why is it the guy who was brought in to steady the ship?

I'm not overly concerned with the word firesale but what does concern me is players leaving, wages coming off, fees coming in and the cash disappearing. Smith's reaction suggests he believes it was duplicitous. With that in mind, is it any wonder people are suspicious of Donald Muir? The alleged secret meeting only adds to this air of suspicion meanwhile Bears are sitting in the dark bickering with one another largely because of this.

So what is the difference in contacts speaking to muir and someone like scgers or barrybaldy being fed information from someone else on the ibrox pay role ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

i think im missing something here are we not ALL rangers fans ??

and i thought WE are the people....not this forum that forum or that supporters clique or the other supporters clique

by that i mean these different groups within our support that look to me only interested in oneupmanship..

think its about time it was realised that WE ARE THE (ONE)PEOPLE..WE are 10points clear and

who gives a fuck about what muir,lloyds ,RST or any other headline grabbin attention seeking apprentice politician

thinks or says about our club..

WE ARE GLASGOW RANGERS FOOTBALL CLUB and always will be no matter what anyones views are.

OUR club will live on longer than us all so SUPPORT OUR CLUB not the views of idiots whatever they are ..

we aint going to the wall never will ,so lets put all these poxy views on the back burner cause theres fuck all any of us

can do to help the cause ,but by bickering we are making it worse .its time to be AS ONE ffs nothing else..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not saying it wasn't Muir but where did you hear that? That aside then do you agree that is Smith didn't want Mendes to go then the deal wouldn't have happened? Hardly a firesale.

I genuinely want to know what's happening but as several people have already stated, if Muir came out and told us 100% what his role was at the club the RST/FFwouldn't believe him.

Meanwhile SDM is sitting laughing without a hint of criticism, it might not be popular with some but if you want to be angry and protest at someone then why not him? Why is it the guy who was brought in to steady the ship?

I'm not overly concerned with the word firesale but what does concern me is players leaving, wages coming off, fees coming in and the cash disappearing. Smith's reaction suggests he believes it was duplicitous. With that in mind, is it any wonder people are suspicious of Donald Muir? The alleged secret meeting only adds to this air of suspicion meanwhile Bears are sitting in the dark bickering with one another largely because of this.

So what is the difference in contacts speaking to muir and someone like scgers or barrybaldy being fed information from someone else on the ibrox pay role ?

There is no difference. The problem, as I have repeatedly stated, is that the stories are conflicting meaning it is nigh on impossible to reach an informed conclusion without making a lot of assumptions and disregarding information along the way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

aye i know canae believe we let

shagger

boyd

bougherra

wilson

davis

lafferty

novo

miller

papac

thomson

all go, oh wait a minute.................................

The bottom line is this squad is a lot weaker than it was 18 or even 12 months ago. It was probably oversized but we are losing a lot of quality without replacing it and that is never a good thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Upcoming Events

    • 30 March 2024 15:00 Until 17:00
      0  
      Rangers v Hibernian
      Ibrox Stadium
      Scottish Premiership
×
×
  • Create New...