Rangers forced to steer new course

[disgruntled_bear 157]

What now for Rangers? A period of prolonged suffering and second prizes, if they are not careful. Sir David Murray, who once famously pledged to spend a tenner for every Celtic fiver, is now enduring the bitter taste of his own medicine.

On the very day Rangers' frail financial health was exposed by the willingness to ship the club's leading goalscorer, Kris Boyd, to the Coca-Cola Championship, Celtic conveniently let slip news of a £25m renewal of their five-year sponsorship deal with Nike, which does not kick in until next year, incidentally.

If Peter Lawwell, the Celtic chief executive, has learned anything about the spiteful little world of Scottish football it is how to maximise the impact of Old Firm one-upmanship. Wednesday's "sweetie" to a paper accused of Murray poodledom did not so much rub salt into Rangers' wound as pour a vat of Saxa into an ugly and festering sore. It was also fair game.

Rangers are hurting and, with Celtic in prime position to record four titles in a row, Lawwell has now become an even more important figure than Gordon Strachan.

Historically, Celtic have done just enough to stay ahead of their rivals. Their bank balance is regarded as a badge of honour. Investment at the right time, namely the next two transfer windows, could conceivably secure Celtic's dominance for the foreseeable future. The only question is: are Dermot Desmond, Lawwell and the rest of the plc board prepared to build from a position of strength, or be content to stay within the current parameters?

That question will have repercussions on the current manager's longevity. At a time when Celtic should be vigorously pursuing the availability of James McCarthy, Steven Fletcher or any other target, they are instead serving up a roll-call of trialists for the manager to assess, out of courtesy, before politely declining. Rangers' best hope of future prosperity is Celtic's procrastination.

This week, Strachan commented on the narrowing of the gap between the Old Firm and the rest of the Clydesdale Bank Premier League.

It is more the result of diminishing quality at the top end than the evolution of the also-rans.

Rangers have now lost their form player in each of the last three transfer windows. The first two could be forgiven purely on account of the profit margins. Selling Alan Hutton to Tottenham Hotspur for £9m was irresistible business, one the Londoners have already begun to regret. Receiving £7.8m for Carlos Cuellar represented a three-fold profit on the Spaniard, who has yet to fully establish himself at Aston Villa.

Boyd's almost certain departure is very different. David Gold, the Birmingham City chairman, has been expressing his surprise - and delight - that Rangers, a team that not so long ago could compete with the Premiership big boys in wages if not quite transfer fees, are prepared to sell their top goalscorer mid-season for such a modest fee. The reality is that Walter Smith was instructed to raise £3m as a matter of urgency.

The reason is unclear but hardly requires forensic examination.

As Lloyds TSB prepare to merge with HBOS, overdraft facilities are under strict review. Rangers are carrying a debt of around £25m and football clubs are no longer immune, far less considered a special case in the banking world.

It is premature to suggest Rangers have raised the white flag on another championship by allowing Boyd, with 20 goals to his name, to leave. None the less, a truer assessment of their ambition will be discovered in 25 days, when the shutters come down on another transfer window.

Rangers, in the short-term, do not need to sell Madjid Bougherra, Allan McGregor or Barry Ferguson. That is not to say they won't. Remarkably, the captain is the less secure of the three remaining assets.

He has made a lethargic return from ankle surgery, turns 31 this month and is the club's highest earner. He has 18 months left on his current contract and persistent attempts to renegotiate and commit the remainder of his career to the club have fallen on deaf ears.

Rangers will simply not offer the same terms to a dwindling force. They will never again receive an offer in excess of £2.5m for him, either.

Ferguson, for all his talent, has become as much a hindrance as a help to the team. He has pushed Steven Davis, a younger and more dynamic option, out of position.

He does not complement the more skilful and imaginative Pedro Mendes. He is also believed to demotivate rather than inspire some of his less experienced team-mates.

With all this in mind, could Rangers in their current state refuse Newcastle United's offer, which will be forthcoming the moment Murray gives them the nod?

The Ibrox chairman was insistent yesterday that the club have not promoted his sale and would be reluctant to lose their captain.

Smith is doubtless wearying of the regular flogging of Rangers' best players and must now be suffering a sense of deja vu, since his one shot at the Premiership, with Everton, was rent asunder by savage financial surgery.

Yet it is worth noting that he has spent in excess of £25m gross since returning two years ago, no small amount considering the club's constraints.

There is also a counter-argument to the hysterical reaction to Boyd's impending departure, one that will not wash among the supporters if another title challenge evaporates in the coming months. It is this: Rangers are simply undertaking some overdue good housekeeping and preparing for another, more enduring strategy.

Smith spent £3.4m on Kyle Lafferty, a 21-year-old striker who has been unable to play in his preferred position since arriving from Burnley. He will never be as prolific as Boyd but he has pace, height and touch; the kind of all-rounder that could work in tandem with Kenny Miller if he can show the mental dexterity to succeed in the unforgiving environment he finds himself in.

Smith also has Maurice Edu, the young American who has apparently impressed in training but been unable to show his aggression and athleticism with Ferguson blocking his path.

What was the point in signing these players, at significant cost, if the manager had no intention of playing them? Smith has referred to them as long-term projects but it is unlikely the manager would be willing to hang around if Rangers do not win the title.

The club are at a crossroads.

The record of development of talent from Murray Park has been dismal. John Fleck and Jordan McMillan occupy the bench by default and the current reserve team has been virtually written off.

Selling Boyd is a financial decision with significant football implications. Unable to compete in the upper tiers of the transfer market, they are now relying on allegiance and affection. Lafferty and Davis, Northern Ireland internationalists with an affinity for the club, could yet be joined by Jonny Tuffey and David Healy. Rumours persist that Sir Alex Ferguson will lend a hand, with the offer of a loan player to replenish any weak areas.

There is no shame in admitting to financial difficulties in times of recession. There is, though, a world of difference between economising and giving up the ghost. The remaining weeks of the transfer window will determine which it is to be.

http://www.theherald.co.uk/sport/headlines..._new_course.php

[ZeGowse 13]

I could accept all this if it meant that younger players were goin to be given a chance, maybe improve the longevity and future of the club. However we all know that under Smith this will never happen! So pissed off right now!!!

[Brackley Bluenose 4,479]

unbeliebavbly annoying to know that we have qulaity kids who are surely no worse than what we have in the first team. Furman, McMillan, Aaron, Fleck, all these boys are good enough and it's so frustrating that numpties like whittaker and adam get in there in front of them!

[brissybear 50]

Some of that was depressing, some of that was inspiring.

Could Edu, Davis, mendes and say Aaron be our new dream midfield?

Anyway, DG, i do enjoy you keeping me up to date with all these articles being stuck down under.

[ZeGowse 13]

unbeliebavbly annoying to know that we have qulaity kids who are surely no worse than what we have in the first team. Furman, McMillan, Aaron, Fleck, all these boys are good enough and it's so frustrating that numpties like whittaker and adam get in there in front of them!

[disgruntled_bear 157]

Some of that was depressing, some of that was inspiring.

Could Edu, Davis, mendes and say Aaron be our new dream midfield?

Anyway, DG, i do enjoy you keeping me up to date with all these articles being stuck down under.

Nae bother, need to keep our overseas bears upto date :beer2:

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

What a dreadful article.

It does prove that the recession has hit Scottish football. but certainly not at Ibrox. It's the journalists who are under threat and they all need to exploit every single non story, as proven by them all running with this "bank demands £3m" tosh.

Whilst it's undeniably hard to get new credit, Rangers have an existing agreement that cannot be touched and interest rates are historically low. Such basic and publicly available financial facts have been totally ignored.

We have 28 players. Boyd is one who, despite an impressive scoring record against Accies and Caley, isn't doing enough in the big games or when we're struggling. I'd rather have hard working player who score in bigger games, like Novo and Miller.

It just makes sense to trim your excesses as the recession kicks in and the fans reconsider their expenditure, but there has been no demand to reduce Rangers debt from anyone at any bank. It's just combined football and financial sense. We should be grateful that the club is being run responsibly and professionally.

Furthermore, we'll still win the league. We are better than Celtic in most key areas.

[Frankie 505]

Oleg:

This morning it's been revealed that HBOS/Lloyds are calling in overdrafts from private customers by charging them for the facility.

As such it's not a drastic leap to assume the same is being applied to our credit facilities with them - obviously to a much higher level. Sure, the facility may not be in danger of being removed but if the charge is to increase, then if we couple that with our debt rising to £30million, then it's easy to conclude bank pressures are forcing the club to make available certain players. After all we have little other way of addressing our increasing debt problems?

The rest of the article discusses fairly well the subject and I'm glad at least one journalist is approaching the subject with a reasonable element of objectivity.

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

Oleg:

This morning it's been revealed that HBOS/Lloyds are calling in overdrafts from private customers by charging them for the facility.

As such it's not a drastic leap to assume the same is being applied to our credit facilities with them - obviously to a much higher level. Sure, the facility may not be in danger of being removed but if the charge is to increase, then if we couple that with our debt rising to £30million, then it's easy to conclude bank pressures are forcing the club to make available certain players. After all we have little other way of addressing our increasing debt problems?

The rest of the article discusses fairly well the subject and I'm glad at least one journalist is approaching the subject with a reasonable element of objectivity.

Don't try to shoehorn one description into another.

HBOS have categorically not said they want £3m from us in January, let alone done so with some for of ultimatum.

Interest rates are still low, but the banks are trying to get money from existing customers, as you said, but debtors are the banks' lifeline at the moment. They may well be increasing charges, but by the quoted £3m?

Do not confuse increased charges with an imaginary £3m demand with an ultimatum.

[Blue Stars Bearette 1]

unbeliebavbly annoying to know that we have qulaity kids who are surely no worse than what we have in the first team. Furman, McMillan, Aaron, Fleck, all these boys are good enough and it's so frustrating that numpties like whittaker and adam get in there in front of them!

exactly its very infuriating :angry2:

[samNewton 0]

What a dreadful article.

It does prove that the recession has hit Scottish football. but certainly not at Ibrox. It's the journalists who are under threat and they all need to exploit every single non story, as proven by them all running with this "bank demands £3m" tosh.

Whilst it's undeniably hard to get new credit, Rangers have an existing agreement that cannot be touched and interest rates are historically low. Such basic and publicly available financial facts have been totally ignored.

We have 28 players. Boyd is one who, despite an impressive scoring record against Accies and Caley, isn't doing enough in the big games or when we're struggling. I'd rather have hard working player who score in bigger games, like Novo and Miller.

It just makes sense to trim your excesses as the recession kicks in and the fans reconsider their expenditure, but there has been no demand to reduce Rangers debt from anyone at any bank. It's just combined football and financial sense. We should be grateful that the club is being run responsibly and professionally.

Furthermore, we'll still win the league. We are better than Celtic in most key areas.

Rarely have I read such complacent, ill-informed nonsense.

Celtic have won 4 from the last 5 titles and look odds-on favourites to make that 5 from 6.

Unlike us, they have practically zero debt and are not forced to sell players.

Murray talked yesterday about slashing the wage bill by one-third which would mean Celtic outspending us by a factor of 2 to 1.

Anyone who finds grounds for optimism in the current situation is an utter fool.

[Frankie 505]

Don't try to shoehorn one description into another.

HBOS have categorically not said they want £3m from us in January, let alone done so with some for of ultimatum.

Interest rates are still low, but the banks are trying to get money from existing customers, as you said, but debtors are the banks' lifeline at the moment. They may well be increasing charges, but by the quoted £3m?

Do not confuse increased charges with an imaginary £3m demand with an ultimatum.

I'm not shoe-horning anything. Just making valid comparisons with official current bank policy.

I don't actually think HBOS have commented on Rangers/MIH's position either way. Even so, I agree they would not be charging us £3million. I haven't suggested that anywhere of course.

However, they may have asked the club to ensure the debt does not reach a certain level in the summer so bringing in £3million may help us avoid that debt level and then the subsquent charges the bank may levy.

It is obvious the club is struggling financially - the chairman himself has alluded to this. Thus, the bank's involvement is largely irrelevant as the club themselves realise we need to reduce debt.

The problem people such as I have is not this realisation (that is understandable and agreeable) but the fact we're selling key players constantly to do this while making unnecessary mistakes elsewhere which are causing the debt in the first place.

Too many people are not looking past individuals here. This isn't about who is for sale, what person is making the mistakes or what the bank charges may be but the club's strategy resulting in minimal or no success.