What really is the problem?

[Glowingmonkeyhead 62]

The reaction to Whyte's leaked papers and stories to the press and media are way over the top with anyone who is not in Rangers corner creaming themselves over the idea that this is the greatest conspiracy since Watergate.

If you step back and look at all the facts (some which are very dubious) then please point out to me what has been done that upsets the SFA, media and opposition fans so much?

• Green had dealings with Whyte. Wll given Whyte owned Rangers shares and held the keys to Ibrox this would have to have happened.
  
• Green set up Sevco 5088 to agree exclusivity deal to buy Rangers assets in the event of a CVA being agreed. Green duped Whyte into thinking he could be part of this deal as Whyte would not play ball and drop his ridiculous demands.
  
• Only Director of Sevco 5088 is Charles Green. Whytes papers are being submitted 11 months after the company was set-up and 3 months after it has been set up to be striken off but even then what does that matter when Sevco 5088 never purchased Rangers assets.
  
• When Rangers were liquidated Green set up Sevco Scotland and bought the Rangers assets with Whyte not involved.
  
• What has the SFA got to do with any of it? nothing as Sevco Scotland only got its licence to take part 3 days before the Ramsdens cup game so does it matter who was involved in Sevco Scotland before that date.
  

As a Rangers fan I am delighted the board has set up this internal investigation and hopefully it will take away any doubt and leave no stones unturned so as to give no more fuel to our enemies who continue to pour scorn and doubt over our great club.

Is Charles Green the right man to take us forward? Im not to sure as his racist comments last weeks were in very poor taste even though I dont think he is a racist. I have enjoyed having him stand up against our detractors but now we need to move on with a more reconciliatory person as the head of the club whos language is less confrontational. So thanks Charles we could not have done it without you but please stand down, take your rewards and you will always have a special place in the hearts of the Rangers fans.

With Walter, Ally, Ian Hart and Malcolm Murray we have good people looking after the interests of our club.

[Bertent 2,081]

I completely disagree.

[Glowingmonkeyhead 62]

Tell me why you disagree? I would like to know

[teneriferanger 26]

I completely disagree.

please tell me why.

[Bears r us 30,907]

I think Charles has done so much good it would be a mistake to force him out, I would go as far as to say it would be fucking madness. IMO.

[simplythebest 11,453]

So a guy saves the club, works hard for us, defends us yet we just dispose of him like a piece of rubbish after less than a year?

[Bertent 2,081]

Tell me why you disagree? I would like to know

I have formed a different opinion. The reasons behind this are many and have been discussed ad nauseum, but they are unlikely to change entrenched attitudes, so I was simply registering that we dont all share your opinion.

[trublusince1982 768]

would keep green but remove him from the football side, not happy with the wage bill, getting rid of the scouting network etc. Happy with the experience we have in the rest of the board with Walter and Malcolm Murray that they should be the ones to take the footballing side forward, leaving Green to concentrate on raising the turnover.

[Glowingmonkeyhead 62]

So a guy saves the club, works hard for us, defends us yet we just dispose of him like a piece of rubbish after less than a year?

Not saying that at all. However I think he may not be the best man for us going forward and he has always said he is in it for the money so he could leave now with a good profit on his investment and be a Rangers legend

[st1965 14]

Remember what happened with the HMRC case - guilty before innocent!!! The press are doing it again and we have people in our own camp agreeing with them! These people need to stop buying the second rate papers. Lets wait on the outcome of the independent enquiry and then pass judgement. Otherwise, stop allowing the dubious press in this country brain wash us as well as the easily led from the other side of the city!!!

[Glowingmonkeyhead 62]

I have formed a different opinion. The reasons behind this are many and have been discussed ad nauseum, but they are unlikely to change entrenched attitudes, so I was simply registering that we dont all share your opinion.

Thats like a politicians answer. You dont agree but you dont have anything to add? I have stated my position but you disagree and wont say why? Strange!

[Bad Robot 21,452]

Tell me why you disagree? I would like to know

You answer this question in your own first sentence i.e. the reaction is over the top. I believe that any fans wanting rid of CG is also an over reaction.

[Non_Sucumbi 876]

Agreed up to the bit about getting rid of Green. He can still take us forward and leave on his own terms when we are back in the CL. By that time I would envisage an upturn in the club share price.

Are people willing trying to force CG out so that the 'Rangers-men with money' can get the club on the cheap??

I also agree that no stone should be left un-turned but I would also like to see the mandate being broadened to include an investigation into the Whyte takeover from Murray.

[simplythebest 11,453]

Not saying that at all. However I think he may not be the best man for us going forward and he has always said he is in it for the money so he could leave now with a good profit on his investment and be a Rangers legend

But unless Charles himself wants an early exit then that's basically what we'd be doing.

[MosesMcNeil 1,664]

Charles Green is a suit. That's all he ever was and ever will be to me.

He'll never have a special place in my heart. Not least because he'll be off with a wallet full of cash before you know it - to be replaced by another suit.

I've also pretty much had it with the forelock-tugging, obsequious gratitude to the man and how he 'saved us'. If it hadn't been Green that bought us - it would have been someone else.

I support The Rangers and no one else.

[Bertent 2,081]

Thats like a politicians answer. You dont agree but you dont have anything to add? I have stated my position but you disagree and wont say why? Strange!

Unlike a politician I am not seeking office or remuneration, I have plenty I could add, Im choosing not to, because as stated, Im not going to change your entrenched attitude even though I have taken time to inform myself and form my opinion accordingly.

See post above for underpinning of my stand.

[Non_Sucumbi 876]

If it hadn't been Green that bought us - it would have been someone else.

I support The Rangers and no one else.

Who?? There was hardly a frenzy of potential buyers willing to invest in the club. We had a few people talking but they had nae money.

Agree with your last sentence

[JimmyCR1 1,523]

It's redicilous, it's to do with the fact everyone outside the club want to see us fail, this is how they get their kicks in life is seeing bad stories come out against us. They should try going and supporting their own club rather than constantly obsessing with us.

[trublusince1982 768]

You answer this question in your own first sentence i.e. the reaction is over the top. I believe that any fans wanting rid of CG is also an over reaction.

don't think anyone wants to get rid of him because they think whyte is involved, do they? Do you think the wage budget will be enough to get back dominating Scottish football when we are back in the top division? Keeping in mind we will run at about 33% of turnover while the tims will run at 65% of a pretty much comparable turnover, leaving us with either a much smaller squad or unable to attract the same calibre of player. Unless of course we double their turnover and make around £70m, but would you accept making double the money of them to only invest the same amount into the squad? Do you not mind that we are not replacing Neil Murray? That his role has been deemed defunct? Do you have any clues as to how we are going to source players? Don't really understand how disagreeing with the way Green is going forward with the club can be deemed as an over reaction.

[boss 1,941]

A useful summary of events by the OP. I don't necessarily agree with his conclusion re CG, but then nor do I have unfettered faith in CG either. Who knows if he will ultimately be good or bad? He may still have something to offer.

[dan_ger 1,454]

Unlike a politician I am not seeking office or remuneration, I have plenty I could add, Im choosing not to, because as stated, Im not going to change your entrenched attitude even though I have taken time to inform myself and form my opinion accordingly.

See post above for underpinning of my stand.

You're claiming to be informed without showing any evidence of it. A bit weak, if you had strong evidence it may well change peoples opinions.

[StornowayBlue 630]

Bang on Moses. Life goes on. Many people are holding CG as the only man to come forward and that the only other alternative was extinction. I do not believe for a second that that would have been the case, such is the way of our people. The only reason that CG and Sevco got any exclusivity is because they were tied in with CW, who had some sway over D&P. This was manipulated my Whyte, but he had to step away a bit and then he got shafted himself. Bomber could have offered 20M and D&P would have said no. The true saviours of the club are Us, The People.

[Allanger 625]

Sad that we find ourselves in this situation of having to have an internal investigation.

There will hardly have been a takeover of any company that did not involve some discrete

shenanigans.

What has sickened me is the daily discrediting headlines from our media.

We are under forensic investigation from those who want to harm the club

and as they say "mud sticks"

[Bertent 2,081]

You're claiming to be informed without showing any evidence of it. A bit weak, if you had strong evidence it may well change peoples opinions.

I didnt realise I was on trial or prosecuting a case for having an opinion from that variant to the OP. also is it possible to have evidence in what is purely a subjective matter?

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

The reaction to Whyte's leaked papers and stories to the press and media are way over the top with anyone who is not in Rangers corner creaming themselves over the idea that this is the greatest conspiracy since Watergate.

If you step back and look at all the facts (some which are very dubious) then please point out to me what has been done that upsets the SFA, media and opposition fans so much?

• Green had dealings with Whyte. Wll given Whyte owned Rangers shares and held the keys to Ibrox this would have to have happened.
  
• Green set up Sevco 5088 to agree exclusivity deal to buy Rangers assets in the event of a CVA being agreed. Green duped Whyte into thinking he could be part of this deal as Whyte would not play ball and drop his ridiculous demands.
  
• Only Director of Sevco 5088 is Charles Green. Whytes papers are being submitted 11 months after the company was set-up and 3 months after it has been set up to be striken off but even then what does that matter when Sevco 5088 never purchased Rangers assets.
  
• When Rangers were liquidated Green set up Sevco Scotland and bought the Rangers assets with Whyte not involved.
  
• What has the SFA got to do with any of it? nothing as Sevco Scotland only got its licence to take part 3 days before the Ramsdens cup game so does it matter who was involved in Sevco Scotland before that date.
  

As a Rangers fan I am delighted the board has set up this internal investigation and hopefully it will take away any doubt and leave no stones unturned so as to give no more fuel to our enemies who continue to pour scorn and doubt over our great club.

Is Charles Green the right man to take us forward? Im not to sure as his racist comments last weeks were in very poor taste even though I dont think he is a racist. I have enjoyed having him stand up against our detractors but now we need to move on with a more reconciliatory person as the head of the club whos language is less confrontational. So thanks Charles we could not have done it without you but please stand down, take your rewards and you will always have a special place in the hearts of the Rangers fans.

With Walter, Ally, Ian Hart and Malcolm Murray we have good people looking after the interests of our club.

Taking your points one at a time:-

1. Agree was required to deal with Whyte during CVA proposal, so no issue here. Green could possibly have been a bit more honest about how often he had talked to Whyte, but can hardly blame him wanting to distance himself.

2. SevCo 5088 was set up for the purchase. The club would move here in the event of a CVA. In the event of the CVA failing, the club would be sold to a newly formed company. Only issue would be that the controllers of SevCo 5088 would need to authorise which company this was. Just need to clear up that Whyte did not have a legal claim to this.

3. AP01 forms can be retrospectively applied, even months late if evidence can be provided to back up that an agreement was made to appoint a director on a certain date. Theoretically, Whyte could have been a director when this was going on, but he needs to be able to prove it, which is very very unlikely. As much as the assets don't look like they ever sat in 5088, can we say for absolute certain that 5088 did not provide funding for the purchase? It's unlikely, but its easy enough for the club or investigation to confirm. Would also be good to find out why a spokesperson came out on the day of the sale and specifically said SevCo 5088 bought the assets and then transferred them to Sevco Scotland. If it was a mistake, then fine, but its a hell of a thing to get wrong.

4. Firstly Rangers were never liquidated, but that's nitpicking. I agree Whyte has no claim to SevCo Scotland, so was not involved in the purchase. He might, however unlikely, have a claim for damages against D&P and Greens consortium for damages.

5. So far the SFA have just asked for extra information, which I honestly don't think is an unreasonable request. They are the governing body for the sport in this country after all. If they start banding about threats of sanctions before understanding the facts, the this is where I will take issue. I also agree, that Craig Whyte is not a director of Rangers, that is clear.

I still fully back Green, and I think he will learn from his insensitive statement and also his stories of fantasy. These were somewhat needed at the time to stir up investment with the promise of untold riches to follow.

Green bought us, saved us, refused to fold to the demand of the surrender of titles, oversaw the successful IPO and finally seen us win a trophy 12 months after there was real doubt our club would exist. That should never be forgotten.

There are a few questions to be answered to put everyone's mind at ease and a few lessons to be learned as to how to deal with the fans in the future. As it stands, I can see nothing more than a successful future under Green.